📖 Biblia online

Citește Biblia

Biblia audio Planuri audio structurate — ascultă Biblia zilnică

Ezra 1

¹ În cel dintâi an al lui Cir, împăratul Perşilor, ca să se împlinească cuvântul Domnului rostit prin gura lui Ieremia, Domnul a trezit duhul lui Cir, împăratul Perşilor, care a pus să se facă prin viu grai şi prin scris vestirea aceasta în toată împărăţia lui:

² Aşa vorbeşte Cir, împăratul Perşilor: ,,Domnul, Dumnezeul cerurilor mi-a dat toate împărăţiile pământului, şi mi-a poruncit să -I zidesc o casă la Ierusalim în Iuda.

³ Cine dintre voi este din poporul Lui? Dumnezeul lui să fie cu el, şi să se suie la Ierusalim în Iuda şi să zidească acolo Casa Domnului, Dumnezeului lui Israel! El este adevăratul Dumnezeu, care locuieşte la Ierusalim.

⁴ Ori unde locuiesc rămăşiţe din poporul Domnului, oamenii din locul acela să le dea argint, aur, avere, şi vite, pe lângă daruri de bunăvoie pentru Casa lui Dumnezeu, care este la Ierusalim!``

⁵ Capii de familie din Iuda şi Beniamin, preoţii şi Leviţii, şi anume toţi aceia al căror duh l-a trezit Dumnezeu, s-au sculat să meargă să zidească la Ierusalim Casa Domnului.

⁶ Şi toţi cei dimprejurul lor le-au dat lucruri de argint, de aur, avere, vite, şi lucruri scumpe, afară de toate darurile de bună voie.

⁷ Împăratul Cir a dat înapoi uneltele Casei Domnului, pe cari le luase Nebucadneţar din Ierusalim şi le pusese în casa dumnezeului său.

⁸ Cir, împăratul Perşilor, le-a scos prin Mitredat, vistiernicul, care le-a dat lui Şeşbaţar (Zorobabel), voevodul lui Iuda.

⁹ Iată-le numărul: treizeci de lighene de aur, o mie de lighene de argint, douăzeci şi nouă de cuţite,

¹⁰ treizeci de potire de aur, patrusute zece potire de argint de mâna a doua, şi o mie de alte unelte.

¹¹ Toate lucrurile de aur şi de argint erau în număr de cinci mii patru sute. Şeşbaţar a adus tot din Babilon la Ierusalim, împreună cu cei ce s-au întors din robie.

{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":41759,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Cyrus II","title_en":"Cyrus II","content_ro":"<h3>Cyrus II<\/h3>\nCyrus II, king of Persia (559–530 BC<\/span>), founded the great Persian Empire. His father was king of Persia, a small nation that was subject to Media, and his mother was the daughter of the king of the Medes. Cyrus conquered the Medes in 549 BC<\/span> and combined the two nations into one. He conquered Lydia in Asia Minor in 547 BC<\/span>, then turned to the east and brought Parthia and part of India into the Persian Empire. Finally, on October 29, 539 BC<\/span>, Cyrus conquered the city of Babylon and brought Babylonia into his empire (see Dan 5:30-31).<\/p>\nAfter conquering Babylon, Cyrus issued a decree that allowed the Jewish people to return home and rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. The part of this decree dealing with the Jews has been recorded in 2 Chronicles 36:22-23 and Ezra 1:1-4. This practice is confirmed by the Cyrus Cylinder, a barrel that was discovered at Babylon in 1879–82, which describes Cyrus’s policy regarding conquered peoples.<\/p>\nIsaiah named Cyrus as Judah’s future deliverer (Isa 44:28–45:13) and even called him the Lord’s anointed (Isa 45:1, Hebrew mashiakh,<\/span> “messiah”). Israel regarded Cyrus as called and empowered by God to free them. Cyrus was not the<\/em> Messiah, but what he did served as an example of what the Messiah, Jesus Christ, would later do in setting God’s people free from servitude.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezra 1:1-11; 3:7; 4:1-5; 5:6-17; 6:14-15; Isa 44:28–45:13; 48:14-16; Dan 6:28; 10:1<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Cyrus II<\/h3>\nCyrus II, king of Persia (559–530 BC<\/span>), founded the great Persian Empire. His father was king of Persia, a small nation that was subject to Media, and his mother was the daughter of the king of the Medes. Cyrus conquered the Medes in 549 BC<\/span> and combined the two nations into one. He conquered Lydia in Asia Minor in 547 BC<\/span>, then turned to the east and brought Parthia and part of India into the Persian Empire. Finally, on October 29, 539 BC<\/span>, Cyrus conquered the city of Babylon and brought Babylonia into his empire (see Dan 5:30-31).<\/p>\nAfter conquering Babylon, Cyrus issued a decree that allowed the Jewish people to return home and rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. The part of this decree dealing with the Jews has been recorded in 2 Chronicles 36:22-23 and Ezra 1:1-4. This practice is confirmed by the Cyrus Cylinder, a barrel that was discovered at Babylon in 1879–82, which describes Cyrus’s policy regarding conquered peoples.<\/p>\nIsaiah named Cyrus as Judah’s future deliverer (Isa 44:28–45:13) and even called him the Lord’s anointed (Isa 45:1, Hebrew mashiakh,<\/span> “messiah”). Israel regarded Cyrus as called and empowered by God to free them. Cyrus was not the<\/em> Messiah, but what he did served as an example of what the Messiah, Jesus Christ, would later do in setting God’s people free from servitude.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezra 1:1-11; 3:7; 4:1-5; 5:6-17; 6:14-15; Isa 44:28–45:13; 48:14-16; Dan 6:28; 10:1<\/p>","summary_ro":"Cyrus II Cyrus II, king of Persia (559–530 BC), founded the great Persian Empire. His father was king of Persia, a small nation that was subject to Media, and his mother was the daughter of the king of the Medes. Cyrus conquered the Medes in 549 BC and combined the two nations into one. He conquered Lydia in Asia Minor in 547 BC, then turned to the east and brought Parthia and part of India into the Persian Empire. Finally, on October 29, 539 BC, Cyrus conquered the city of Babylon and brough...","summary_en":"Cyrus II Cyrus II, king of Persia (559–530 BC), founded the great Persian Empire. His father was king of Persia, a small nation that was subject to Media, and his mother was the daughter of the king of the Medes. Cyrus conquered the Medes in 549 BC and combined the two nations into one. He conquered Lydia in Asia Minor in 547 BC, then turned to the east and brought Parthia and part of India into the Persian Empire. Finally, on October 29, 539 BC, Cyrus conquered the city of Babylon and brough...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":41794,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Medes and Persians","title_en":"The Medes and Persians","content_ro":"<h3>The Medes and Persians<\/h3>\nThe Medes (around 850–549 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nThe early Medes left no written records. According to an inscription from Shalmaneser III of Assyria (858–824 BC<\/span>), the Medes had settled around Ecbatana, their capital (modern Hamadan, Iran), by the mid-800s BC<\/span>. The Medes were renowned horse breeders, so Shalmaneser raided their territory to steal large herds of fine horses. The Medes were subject to the Assyrians until the late 600s, when they gained their independence as Assyria weakened.<\/p>\nThe Persians (around 700–549 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAround 700 BC<\/span>, a small kingdom of Persia was established under Achaemenes, who ruled around 700~675 BC<\/span>. His son Teispes (675~640 BC<\/span>) was under the domination of the Medes, who were gathering forces to overthrow Assyria. But trouble for the Medes later freed Teispes from their control. Cambyses (600~559 BC<\/span>), son of Cyrus I and grandson of Teispes, married the daughter of the Median king Astyages; their son was Cyrus II (559–530 BC<\/span>), who ascended the throne of Persia in 559 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe Medo-Persian Empire (549–331 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nCyrus II fought and defeated his grandfather, Astyages of Media, in 549 BC<\/span>. He made Ecbatana in Media his capital and set up his archives there (see Ezra 6:1-5). With a Persian father and Median mother, Cyrus II embodied the joining of Media and Persia.<\/p>\nCyrus exhibited an attitude of benevolence and generosity toward defeated enemies. A capable military leader, Cyrus invaded Asia Minor and defeated Croesus, king of Lydia, and brought the Greek cities of the area into subjection. In 539 BC<\/span>, he captured Babylon with virtually no resistance and decreed that exiled peoples could return to their homelands to rebuild their temples (see Ezra 1:1-4).<\/p>\nThe son of Cyrus, Cambyses II (529–522 BC<\/span>), conquered Egypt, but the empire nearly disintegrated when he committed suicide. Cambyses was succeeded by Darius I (521–486 BC<\/span>), the son of Hystaspes, satrap of Parthia. Darius, an energetic and efficient administrator, put down internal revolts and consolidated the empire into twenty provinces, each under a satrap or “protector of the kingdom,” with inspectors (“the ears of the king”) to check on the activities of the satraps. Darius changed the principal capital of Persia to Persepolis, where a tremendous palace complex was eventually constructed. Darius was a follower of Zoroaster and a worshiper of Ahura Mazda, the principal god of Zoroastrianism, as were Xerxes and Artaxerxes after him.<\/p>\nDuring the latter part of Darius’s reign, he suffered defeat at the hands of the Greeks at Marathon (491 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nDarius was succeeded by his son Khshayarsha, better known as Xerxes in Greek or as Ahasuerus in Hebrew. During his rule (486–465 BC<\/span>), the Persian fleet was defeated by the Greeks at Salamis (480 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe loss of the empire has been attributed to the cowardice of Darius III (336–330 BC<\/span>), whose armies were defeated by Alexander the Great at Issus in 333 BC<\/span> and ultimately at Gaugamela, near modern Erbil (Arbela) in 331 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nPersia and the Bible<\/p>\nThe earliest mention of Persia in Israel’s history is in Isaiah 44:28–45:13, a predictive prophecy that was given to Isaiah more than 150 years before Cyrus captured Babylon and decreed the return of the exiled Jews to Jerusalem. The rest of the biblical references to Persia occur in the later period of Old Testament history (Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther) and in the writings of the exilic and postexilic prophets (Daniel, Zephaniah, Haggai). Persia is portrayed in Scripture as a stern but usually benevolent master that generally let the Jews govern themselves and worship in their own way. Nevertheless, the fact that the postexilic community of Judea was under foreign rule was never far from their minds.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEzra 4:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Medes and Persians<\/h3>\nThe Medes (around 850–549 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nThe early Medes left no written records. According to an inscription from Shalmaneser III of Assyria (858–824 BC<\/span>), the Medes had settled around Ecbatana, their capital (modern Hamadan, Iran), by the mid-800s BC<\/span>. The Medes were renowned horse breeders, so Shalmaneser raided their territory to steal large herds of fine horses. The Medes were subject to the Assyrians until the late 600s, when they gained their independence as Assyria weakened.<\/p>\nThe Persians (around 700–549 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAround 700 BC<\/span>, a small kingdom of Persia was established under Achaemenes, who ruled around 700~675 BC<\/span>. His son Teispes (675~640 BC<\/span>) was under the domination of the Medes, who were gathering forces to overthrow Assyria. But trouble for the Medes later freed Teispes from their control. Cambyses (600~559 BC<\/span>), son of Cyrus I and grandson of Teispes, married the daughter of the Median king Astyages; their son was Cyrus II (559–530 BC<\/span>), who ascended the throne of Persia in 559 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe Medo-Persian Empire (549–331 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nCyrus II fought and defeated his grandfather, Astyages of Media, in 549 BC<\/span>. He made Ecbatana in Media his capital and set up his archives there (see Ezra 6:1-5). With a Persian father and Median mother, Cyrus II embodied the joining of Media and Persia.<\/p>\nCyrus exhibited an attitude of benevolence and generosity toward defeated enemies. A capable military leader, Cyrus invaded Asia Minor and defeated Croesus, king of Lydia, and brought the Greek cities of the area into subjection. In 539 BC<\/span>, he captured Babylon with virtually no resistance and decreed that exiled peoples could return to their homelands to rebuild their temples (see Ezra 1:1-4).<\/p>\nThe son of Cyrus, Cambyses II (529–522 BC<\/span>), conquered Egypt, but the empire nearly disintegrated when he committed suicide. Cambyses was succeeded by Darius I (521–486 BC<\/span>), the son of Hystaspes, satrap of Parthia. Darius, an energetic and efficient administrator, put down internal revolts and consolidated the empire into twenty provinces, each under a satrap or “protector of the kingdom,” with inspectors (“the ears of the king”) to check on the activities of the satraps. Darius changed the principal capital of Persia to Persepolis, where a tremendous palace complex was eventually constructed. Darius was a follower of Zoroaster and a worshiper of Ahura Mazda, the principal god of Zoroastrianism, as were Xerxes and Artaxerxes after him.<\/p>\nDuring the latter part of Darius’s reign, he suffered defeat at the hands of the Greeks at Marathon (491 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nDarius was succeeded by his son Khshayarsha, better known as Xerxes in Greek or as Ahasuerus in Hebrew. During his rule (486–465 BC<\/span>), the Persian fleet was defeated by the Greeks at Salamis (480 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe loss of the empire has been attributed to the cowardice of Darius III (336–330 BC<\/span>), whose armies were defeated by Alexander the Great at Issus in 333 BC<\/span> and ultimately at Gaugamela, near modern Erbil (Arbela) in 331 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nPersia and the Bible<\/p>\nThe earliest mention of Persia in Israel’s history is in Isaiah 44:28–45:13, a predictive prophecy that was given to Isaiah more than 150 years before Cyrus captured Babylon and decreed the return of the exiled Jews to Jerusalem. The rest of the biblical references to Persia occur in the later period of Old Testament history (Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther) and in the writings of the exilic and postexilic prophets (Daniel, Zephaniah, Haggai). Persia is portrayed in Scripture as a stern but usually benevolent master that generally let the Jews govern themselves and worship in their own way. Nevertheless, the fact that the postexilic community of Judea was under foreign rule was never far from their minds.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEzra 4:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Medes and Persians The Medes (around 850–549 BC) The early Medes left no written records. According to an inscription from Shalmaneser III of Assyria (858–824 BC), the Medes had settled around Ecbatana, their capital (modern Hamadan, Iran), by the mid-800s BC. The Medes were renowned horse breeders, so Shalmaneser raided their territory to steal large herds of fine horses. The Medes were subject to the Assyrians until the late 600s, when they gained their independence as Assyria weakened....","summary_en":"The Medes and Persians The Medes (around 850–549 BC) The early Medes left no written records. According to an inscription from Shalmaneser III of Assyria (858–824 BC), the Medes had settled around Ecbatana, their capital (modern Hamadan, Iran), by the mid-800s BC. The Medes were renowned horse breeders, so Shalmaneser raided their territory to steal large herds of fine horses. The Medes were subject to the Assyrians until the late 600s, when they gained their independence as Assyria weakened....","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":41810,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Esther","title_en":"Esther","content_ro":"<h3>Esther<\/h3>\nEsther was queen of Persia during the reign of Xerxes I (486–465 BC<\/span>). She was a woman of the Diaspora<\/em> (“scattering”), descended from Jews who had been scattered among the nations at the time of the Exile. Her family had not returned to the land of Judah, as some Jews had (see Ezra 1–2), but had chosen to stay in the land of Persia, like many others. Noting how important her cousin Mordecai was in the Persian government makes us guess that her family had grown rich and comfortable.<\/p>\nEsther was an orphan and was raised by her cousin Mordecai, who became a minor official in the Persian government in Susa. She became queen after King Xerxes became displeased with Queen Vashti for refusing to attend a banquet when commanded to do so (Esth 1:11-12).<\/p>\nAfter Esther’s coronation, she discreetly won Xerxes’ confidence by informing him of an assassination plot (2:21-23). This later enabled her to rescue her people from a massacre planned by Haman, a high official to the king. Through her wise advice and brave action, Esther exposed Haman, he was executed, and the Jewish people were rescued. The Jewish Festival of Purim was instituted to celebrate these events.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEsth 2:7-20; 4:4–5:8; 7:1–9:32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Esther<\/h3>\nEsther was queen of Persia during the reign of Xerxes I (486–465 BC<\/span>). She was a woman of the Diaspora<\/em> (“scattering”), descended from Jews who had been scattered among the nations at the time of the Exile. Her family had not returned to the land of Judah, as some Jews had (see Ezra 1–2), but had chosen to stay in the land of Persia, like many others. Noting how important her cousin Mordecai was in the Persian government makes us guess that her family had grown rich and comfortable.<\/p>\nEsther was an orphan and was raised by her cousin Mordecai, who became a minor official in the Persian government in Susa. She became queen after King Xerxes became displeased with Queen Vashti for refusing to attend a banquet when commanded to do so (Esth 1:11-12).<\/p>\nAfter Esther’s coronation, she discreetly won Xerxes’ confidence by informing him of an assassination plot (2:21-23). This later enabled her to rescue her people from a massacre planned by Haman, a high official to the king. Through her wise advice and brave action, Esther exposed Haman, he was executed, and the Jewish people were rescued. The Jewish Festival of Purim was instituted to celebrate these events.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEsth 2:7-20; 4:4–5:8; 7:1–9:32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Esther Esther was queen of Persia during the reign of Xerxes I (486–465 BC). She was a woman of the Diaspora (“scattering”), descended from Jews who had been scattered among the nations at the time of the Exile. Her family had not returned to the land of Judah, as some Jews had (see Ezra 1–2), but had chosen to stay in the land of Persia, like many others. Noting how important her cousin Mordecai was in the Persian government makes us guess that her family had grown rich and comfortable. Esth...","summary_en":"Esther Esther was queen of Persia during the reign of Xerxes I (486–465 BC). She was a woman of the Diaspora (“scattering”), descended from Jews who had been scattered among the nations at the time of the Exile. Her family had not returned to the land of Judah, as some Jews had (see Ezra 1–2), but had chosen to stay in the land of Persia, like many others. Noting how important her cousin Mordecai was in the Persian government makes us guess that her family had grown rich and comfortable. Esth...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69385,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Cyrus II","title_en":"Cyrus II","content_ro":"<h3>Cyrus II<\/h3>\nCyrus II, king of Persia (559–530 BC<\/span>), founded the great Persian Empire. His father was king of Persia, a small nation that was subject to Media, and his mother was the daughter of the king of the Medes. Cyrus conquered the Medes in 549 BC<\/span> and combined the two nations into one. He conquered Lydia in Asia Minor in 547 BC<\/span>, then turned to the east and brought Parthia and part of India into the Persian Empire. Finally, on October 29, 539 BC<\/span>, Cyrus conquered the city of Babylon and brought Babylonia into his empire (see Dan 5:30-31).<\/p>\nAfter conquering Babylon, Cyrus issued a decree that allowed the Jewish people to return home and rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. The part of this decree dealing with the Jews has been recorded in 2 Chronicles 36:22-23 and Ezra 1:1-4. This practice is confirmed by the Cyrus Cylinder, a barrel that was discovered at Babylon in 1879–82, which describes Cyrus’s policy regarding conquered peoples.<\/p>\nIsaiah named Cyrus as Judah’s future deliverer (Isa 44:28–45:13) and even called him the Lord’s anointed (Isa 45:1, Hebrew mashiakh,<\/span> “messiah”). Israel regarded Cyrus as called and empowered by God to free them. Cyrus was not the<\/em> Messiah, but what he did served as an example of what the Messiah, Jesus Christ, would later do in setting God’s people free from servitude.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezra 1:1-11; 3:7; 4:1-5; 5:6-17; 6:14-15; Isa 44:28–45:13; 48:14-16; Dan 6:28; 10:1<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Cyrus II<\/h3>\nCyrus II, king of Persia (559–530 BC<\/span>), founded the great Persian Empire. His father was king of Persia, a small nation that was subject to Media, and his mother was the daughter of the king of the Medes. Cyrus conquered the Medes in 549 BC<\/span> and combined the two nations into one. He conquered Lydia in Asia Minor in 547 BC<\/span>, then turned to the east and brought Parthia and part of India into the Persian Empire. Finally, on October 29, 539 BC<\/span>, Cyrus conquered the city of Babylon and brought Babylonia into his empire (see Dan 5:30-31).<\/p>\nAfter conquering Babylon, Cyrus issued a decree that allowed the Jewish people to return home and rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. The part of this decree dealing with the Jews has been recorded in 2 Chronicles 36:22-23 and Ezra 1:1-4. This practice is confirmed by the Cyrus Cylinder, a barrel that was discovered at Babylon in 1879–82, which describes Cyrus’s policy regarding conquered peoples.<\/p>\nIsaiah named Cyrus as Judah’s future deliverer (Isa 44:28–45:13) and even called him the Lord’s anointed (Isa 45:1, Hebrew mashiakh,<\/span> “messiah”). Israel regarded Cyrus as called and empowered by God to free them. Cyrus was not the<\/em> Messiah, but what he did served as an example of what the Messiah, Jesus Christ, would later do in setting God’s people free from servitude.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezra 1:1-11; 3:7; 4:1-5; 5:6-17; 6:14-15; Isa 44:28–45:13; 48:14-16; Dan 6:28; 10:1<\/p>","summary_ro":"Cyrus II Cyrus II, king of Persia (559–530 BC), founded the great Persian Empire. His father was king of Persia, a small nation that was subject to Media, and his mother was the daughter of the king of the Medes. Cyrus conquered the Medes in 549 BC and combined the two nations into one. He conquered Lydia in Asia Minor in 547 BC, then turned to the east and brought Parthia and part of India into the Persian Empire. Finally, on October 29, 539 BC, Cyrus conquered the city of Babylon and brough...","summary_en":"Cyrus II Cyrus II, king of Persia (559–530 BC), founded the great Persian Empire. His father was king of Persia, a small nation that was subject to Media, and his mother was the daughter of the king of the Medes. Cyrus conquered the Medes in 549 BC and combined the two nations into one. He conquered Lydia in Asia Minor in 547 BC, then turned to the east and brought Parthia and part of India into the Persian Empire. Finally, on October 29, 539 BC, Cyrus conquered the city of Babylon and brough...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69420,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Medes and Persians","title_en":"The Medes and Persians","content_ro":"<h3>The Medes and Persians<\/h3>\nThe Medes (around 850–549 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nThe early Medes left no written records. According to an inscription from Shalmaneser III of Assyria (858–824 BC<\/span>), the Medes had settled around Ecbatana, their capital (modern Hamadan, Iran), by the mid-800s BC<\/span>. The Medes were renowned horse breeders, so Shalmaneser raided their territory to steal large herds of fine horses. The Medes were subject to the Assyrians until the late 600s, when they gained their independence as Assyria weakened.<\/p>\nThe Persians (around 700–549 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAround 700 BC<\/span>, a small kingdom of Persia was established under Achaemenes, who ruled around 700~675 BC<\/span>. His son Teispes (675~640 BC<\/span>) was under the domination of the Medes, who were gathering forces to overthrow Assyria. But trouble for the Medes later freed Teispes from their control. Cambyses (600~559 BC<\/span>), son of Cyrus I and grandson of Teispes, married the daughter of the Median king Astyages; their son was Cyrus II (559–530 BC<\/span>), who ascended the throne of Persia in 559 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe Medo-Persian Empire (549–331 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nCyrus II fought and defeated his grandfather, Astyages of Media, in 549 BC<\/span>. He made Ecbatana in Media his capital and set up his archives there (see Ezra 6:1-5). With a Persian father and Median mother, Cyrus II embodied the joining of Media and Persia.<\/p>\nCyrus exhibited an attitude of benevolence and generosity toward defeated enemies. A capable military leader, Cyrus invaded Asia Minor and defeated Croesus, king of Lydia, and brought the Greek cities of the area into subjection. In 539 BC<\/span>, he captured Babylon with virtually no resistance and decreed that exiled peoples could return to their homelands to rebuild their temples (see Ezra 1:1-4).<\/p>\nThe son of Cyrus, Cambyses II (529–522 BC<\/span>), conquered Egypt, but the empire nearly disintegrated when he committed suicide. Cambyses was succeeded by Darius I (521–486 BC<\/span>), the son of Hystaspes, satrap of Parthia. Darius, an energetic and efficient administrator, put down internal revolts and consolidated the empire into twenty provinces, each under a satrap or “protector of the kingdom,” with inspectors (“the ears of the king”) to check on the activities of the satraps. Darius changed the principal capital of Persia to Persepolis, where a tremendous palace complex was eventually constructed. Darius was a follower of Zoroaster and a worshiper of Ahura Mazda, the principal god of Zoroastrianism, as were Xerxes and Artaxerxes after him.<\/p>\nDuring the latter part of Darius’s reign, he suffered defeat at the hands of the Greeks at Marathon (491 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nDarius was succeeded by his son Khshayarsha, better known as Xerxes in Greek or as Ahasuerus in Hebrew. During his rule (486–465 BC<\/span>), the Persian fleet was defeated by the Greeks at Salamis (480 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe loss of the empire has been attributed to the cowardice of Darius III (336–330 BC<\/span>), whose armies were defeated by Alexander the Great at Issus in 333 BC<\/span> and ultimately at Gaugamela, near modern Erbil (Arbela) in 331 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nPersia and the Bible<\/p>\nThe earliest mention of Persia in Israel’s history is in Isaiah 44:28–45:13, a predictive prophecy that was given to Isaiah more than 150 years before Cyrus captured Babylon and decreed the return of the exiled Jews to Jerusalem. The rest of the biblical references to Persia occur in the later period of Old Testament history (Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther) and in the writings of the exilic and postexilic prophets (Daniel, Zephaniah, Haggai). Persia is portrayed in Scripture as a stern but usually benevolent master that generally let the Jews govern themselves and worship in their own way. Nevertheless, the fact that the postexilic community of Judea was under foreign rule was never far from their minds.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEzra 4:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Medes and Persians<\/h3>\nThe Medes (around 850–549 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nThe early Medes left no written records. According to an inscription from Shalmaneser III of Assyria (858–824 BC<\/span>), the Medes had settled around Ecbatana, their capital (modern Hamadan, Iran), by the mid-800s BC<\/span>. The Medes were renowned horse breeders, so Shalmaneser raided their territory to steal large herds of fine horses. The Medes were subject to the Assyrians until the late 600s, when they gained their independence as Assyria weakened.<\/p>\nThe Persians (around 700–549 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAround 700 BC<\/span>, a small kingdom of Persia was established under Achaemenes, who ruled around 700~675 BC<\/span>. His son Teispes (675~640 BC<\/span>) was under the domination of the Medes, who were gathering forces to overthrow Assyria. But trouble for the Medes later freed Teispes from their control. Cambyses (600~559 BC<\/span>), son of Cyrus I and grandson of Teispes, married the daughter of the Median king Astyages; their son was Cyrus II (559–530 BC<\/span>), who ascended the throne of Persia in 559 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe Medo-Persian Empire (549–331 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nCyrus II fought and defeated his grandfather, Astyages of Media, in 549 BC<\/span>. He made Ecbatana in Media his capital and set up his archives there (see Ezra 6:1-5). With a Persian father and Median mother, Cyrus II embodied the joining of Media and Persia.<\/p>\nCyrus exhibited an attitude of benevolence and generosity toward defeated enemies. A capable military leader, Cyrus invaded Asia Minor and defeated Croesus, king of Lydia, and brought the Greek cities of the area into subjection. In 539 BC<\/span>, he captured Babylon with virtually no resistance and decreed that exiled peoples could return to their homelands to rebuild their temples (see Ezra 1:1-4).<\/p>\nThe son of Cyrus, Cambyses II (529–522 BC<\/span>), conquered Egypt, but the empire nearly disintegrated when he committed suicide. Cambyses was succeeded by Darius I (521–486 BC<\/span>), the son of Hystaspes, satrap of Parthia. Darius, an energetic and efficient administrator, put down internal revolts and consolidated the empire into twenty provinces, each under a satrap or “protector of the kingdom,” with inspectors (“the ears of the king”) to check on the activities of the satraps. Darius changed the principal capital of Persia to Persepolis, where a tremendous palace complex was eventually constructed. Darius was a follower of Zoroaster and a worshiper of Ahura Mazda, the principal god of Zoroastrianism, as were Xerxes and Artaxerxes after him.<\/p>\nDuring the latter part of Darius’s reign, he suffered defeat at the hands of the Greeks at Marathon (491 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nDarius was succeeded by his son Khshayarsha, better known as Xerxes in Greek or as Ahasuerus in Hebrew. During his rule (486–465 BC<\/span>), the Persian fleet was defeated by the Greeks at Salamis (480 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe loss of the empire has been attributed to the cowardice of Darius III (336–330 BC<\/span>), whose armies were defeated by Alexander the Great at Issus in 333 BC<\/span> and ultimately at Gaugamela, near modern Erbil (Arbela) in 331 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nPersia and the Bible<\/p>\nThe earliest mention of Persia in Israel’s history is in Isaiah 44:28–45:13, a predictive prophecy that was given to Isaiah more than 150 years before Cyrus captured Babylon and decreed the return of the exiled Jews to Jerusalem. The rest of the biblical references to Persia occur in the later period of Old Testament history (Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther) and in the writings of the exilic and postexilic prophets (Daniel, Zephaniah, Haggai). Persia is portrayed in Scripture as a stern but usually benevolent master that generally let the Jews govern themselves and worship in their own way. Nevertheless, the fact that the postexilic community of Judea was under foreign rule was never far from their minds.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEzra 4:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Medes and Persians The Medes (around 850–549 BC) The early Medes left no written records. According to an inscription from Shalmaneser III of Assyria (858–824 BC), the Medes had settled around Ecbatana, their capital (modern Hamadan, Iran), by the mid-800s BC. The Medes were renowned horse breeders, so Shalmaneser raided their territory to steal large herds of fine horses. The Medes were subject to the Assyrians until the late 600s, when they gained their independence as Assyria weakened....","summary_en":"The Medes and Persians The Medes (around 850–549 BC) The early Medes left no written records. According to an inscription from Shalmaneser III of Assyria (858–824 BC), the Medes had settled around Ecbatana, their capital (modern Hamadan, Iran), by the mid-800s BC. The Medes were renowned horse breeders, so Shalmaneser raided their territory to steal large herds of fine horses. The Medes were subject to the Assyrians until the late 600s, when they gained their independence as Assyria weakened....","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69436,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Esther","title_en":"Esther","content_ro":"<h3>Esther<\/h3>\nEsther was queen of Persia during the reign of Xerxes I (486–465 BC<\/span>). She was a woman of the Diaspora<\/em> (“scattering”), descended from Jews who had been scattered among the nations at the time of the Exile. Her family had not returned to the land of Judah, as some Jews had (see Ezra 1–2), but had chosen to stay in the land of Persia, like many others. Noting how important her cousin Mordecai was in the Persian government makes us guess that her family had grown rich and comfortable.<\/p>\nEsther was an orphan and was raised by her cousin Mordecai, who became a minor official in the Persian government in Susa. She became queen after King Xerxes became displeased with Queen Vashti for refusing to attend a banquet when commanded to do so (Esth 1:11-12).<\/p>\nAfter Esther’s coronation, she discreetly won Xerxes’ confidence by informing him of an assassination plot (2:21-23). This later enabled her to rescue her people from a massacre planned by Haman, a high official to the king. Through her wise advice and brave action, Esther exposed Haman, he was executed, and the Jewish people were rescued. The Jewish Festival of Purim was instituted to celebrate these events.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEsth 2:7-20; 4:4–5:8; 7:1–9:32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Esther<\/h3>\nEsther was queen of Persia during the reign of Xerxes I (486–465 BC<\/span>). She was a woman of the Diaspora<\/em> (“scattering”), descended from Jews who had been scattered among the nations at the time of the Exile. Her family had not returned to the land of Judah, as some Jews had (see Ezra 1–2), but had chosen to stay in the land of Persia, like many others. Noting how important her cousin Mordecai was in the Persian government makes us guess that her family had grown rich and comfortable.<\/p>\nEsther was an orphan and was raised by her cousin Mordecai, who became a minor official in the Persian government in Susa. She became queen after King Xerxes became displeased with Queen Vashti for refusing to attend a banquet when commanded to do so (Esth 1:11-12).<\/p>\nAfter Esther’s coronation, she discreetly won Xerxes’ confidence by informing him of an assassination plot (2:21-23). This later enabled her to rescue her people from a massacre planned by Haman, a high official to the king. Through her wise advice and brave action, Esther exposed Haman, he was executed, and the Jewish people were rescued. The Jewish Festival of Purim was instituted to celebrate these events.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEsth 2:7-20; 4:4–5:8; 7:1–9:32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Esther Esther was queen of Persia during the reign of Xerxes I (486–465 BC). She was a woman of the Diaspora (“scattering”), descended from Jews who had been scattered among the nations at the time of the Exile. Her family had not returned to the land of Judah, as some Jews had (see Ezra 1–2), but had chosen to stay in the land of Persia, like many others. Noting how important her cousin Mordecai was in the Persian government makes us guess that her family had grown rich and comfortable. Esth...","summary_en":"Esther Esther was queen of Persia during the reign of Xerxes I (486–465 BC). She was a woman of the Diaspora (“scattering”), descended from Jews who had been scattered among the nations at the time of the Exile. Her family had not returned to the land of Judah, as some Jews had (see Ezra 1–2), but had chosen to stay in the land of Persia, like many others. Noting how important her cousin Mordecai was in the Persian government makes us guess that her family had grown rich and comfortable. Esth...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97011,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Cyrus II","title_en":"Cyrus II","content_ro":"<h3>Cyrus II<\/h3>\nCyrus II, king of Persia (559–530 BC<\/span>), founded the great Persian Empire. His father was king of Persia, a small nation that was subject to Media, and his mother was the daughter of the king of the Medes. Cyrus conquered the Medes in 549 BC<\/span> and combined the two nations into one. He conquered Lydia in Asia Minor in 547 BC<\/span>, then turned to the east and brought Parthia and part of India into the Persian Empire. Finally, on October 29, 539 BC<\/span>, Cyrus conquered the city of Babylon and brought Babylonia into his empire (see Dan 5:30-31).<\/p>\nAfter conquering Babylon, Cyrus issued a decree that allowed the Jewish people to return home and rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. The part of this decree dealing with the Jews has been recorded in 2 Chronicles 36:22-23 and Ezra 1:1-4. This practice is confirmed by the Cyrus Cylinder, a barrel that was discovered at Babylon in 1879–82, which describes Cyrus’s policy regarding conquered peoples.<\/p>\nIsaiah named Cyrus as Judah’s future deliverer (Isa 44:28–45:13) and even called him the Lord’s anointed (Isa 45:1, Hebrew mashiakh,<\/span> “messiah”). Israel regarded Cyrus as called and empowered by God to free them. Cyrus was not the<\/em> Messiah, but what he did served as an example of what the Messiah, Jesus Christ, would later do in setting God’s people free from servitude.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezra 1:1-11; 3:7; 4:1-5; 5:6-17; 6:14-15; Isa 44:28–45:13; 48:14-16; Dan 6:28; 10:1<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Cyrus II<\/h3>\nCyrus II, king of Persia (559–530 BC<\/span>), founded the great Persian Empire. His father was king of Persia, a small nation that was subject to Media, and his mother was the daughter of the king of the Medes. Cyrus conquered the Medes in 549 BC<\/span> and combined the two nations into one. He conquered Lydia in Asia Minor in 547 BC<\/span>, then turned to the east and brought Parthia and part of India into the Persian Empire. Finally, on October 29, 539 BC<\/span>, Cyrus conquered the city of Babylon and brought Babylonia into his empire (see Dan 5:30-31).<\/p>\nAfter conquering Babylon, Cyrus issued a decree that allowed the Jewish people to return home and rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. The part of this decree dealing with the Jews has been recorded in 2 Chronicles 36:22-23 and Ezra 1:1-4. This practice is confirmed by the Cyrus Cylinder, a barrel that was discovered at Babylon in 1879–82, which describes Cyrus’s policy regarding conquered peoples.<\/p>\nIsaiah named Cyrus as Judah’s future deliverer (Isa 44:28–45:13) and even called him the Lord’s anointed (Isa 45:1, Hebrew mashiakh,<\/span> “messiah”). Israel regarded Cyrus as called and empowered by God to free them. Cyrus was not the<\/em> Messiah, but what he did served as an example of what the Messiah, Jesus Christ, would later do in setting God’s people free from servitude.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezra 1:1-11; 3:7; 4:1-5; 5:6-17; 6:14-15; Isa 44:28–45:13; 48:14-16; Dan 6:28; 10:1<\/p>","summary_ro":"Cyrus II Cyrus II, king of Persia (559–530 BC), founded the great Persian Empire. His father was king of Persia, a small nation that was subject to Media, and his mother was the daughter of the king of the Medes. Cyrus conquered the Medes in 549 BC and combined the two nations into one. He conquered Lydia in Asia Minor in 547 BC, then turned to the east and brought Parthia and part of India into the Persian Empire. Finally, on October 29, 539 BC, Cyrus conquered the city of Babylon and brough...","summary_en":"Cyrus II Cyrus II, king of Persia (559–530 BC), founded the great Persian Empire. His father was king of Persia, a small nation that was subject to Media, and his mother was the daughter of the king of the Medes. Cyrus conquered the Medes in 549 BC and combined the two nations into one. He conquered Lydia in Asia Minor in 547 BC, then turned to the east and brought Parthia and part of India into the Persian Empire. Finally, on October 29, 539 BC, Cyrus conquered the city of Babylon and brough...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97046,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Medes and Persians","title_en":"The Medes and Persians","content_ro":"<h3>The Medes and Persians<\/h3>\nThe Medes (around 850–549 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nThe early Medes left no written records. According to an inscription from Shalmaneser III of Assyria (858–824 BC<\/span>), the Medes had settled around Ecbatana, their capital (modern Hamadan, Iran), by the mid-800s BC<\/span>. The Medes were renowned horse breeders, so Shalmaneser raided their territory to steal large herds of fine horses. The Medes were subject to the Assyrians until the late 600s, when they gained their independence as Assyria weakened.<\/p>\nThe Persians (around 700–549 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAround 700 BC<\/span>, a small kingdom of Persia was established under Achaemenes, who ruled around 700~675 BC<\/span>. His son Teispes (675~640 BC<\/span>) was under the domination of the Medes, who were gathering forces to overthrow Assyria. But trouble for the Medes later freed Teispes from their control. Cambyses (600~559 BC<\/span>), son of Cyrus I and grandson of Teispes, married the daughter of the Median king Astyages; their son was Cyrus II (559–530 BC<\/span>), who ascended the throne of Persia in 559 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe Medo-Persian Empire (549–331 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nCyrus II fought and defeated his grandfather, Astyages of Media, in 549 BC<\/span>. He made Ecbatana in Media his capital and set up his archives there (see Ezra 6:1-5). With a Persian father and Median mother, Cyrus II embodied the joining of Media and Persia.<\/p>\nCyrus exhibited an attitude of benevolence and generosity toward defeated enemies. A capable military leader, Cyrus invaded Asia Minor and defeated Croesus, king of Lydia, and brought the Greek cities of the area into subjection. In 539 BC<\/span>, he captured Babylon with virtually no resistance and decreed that exiled peoples could return to their homelands to rebuild their temples (see Ezra 1:1-4).<\/p>\nThe son of Cyrus, Cambyses II (529–522 BC<\/span>), conquered Egypt, but the empire nearly disintegrated when he committed suicide. Cambyses was succeeded by Darius I (521–486 BC<\/span>), the son of Hystaspes, satrap of Parthia. Darius, an energetic and efficient administrator, put down internal revolts and consolidated the empire into twenty provinces, each under a satrap or “protector of the kingdom,” with inspectors (“the ears of the king”) to check on the activities of the satraps. Darius changed the principal capital of Persia to Persepolis, where a tremendous palace complex was eventually constructed. Darius was a follower of Zoroaster and a worshiper of Ahura Mazda, the principal god of Zoroastrianism, as were Xerxes and Artaxerxes after him.<\/p>\nDuring the latter part of Darius’s reign, he suffered defeat at the hands of the Greeks at Marathon (491 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nDarius was succeeded by his son Khshayarsha, better known as Xerxes in Greek or as Ahasuerus in Hebrew. During his rule (486–465 BC<\/span>), the Persian fleet was defeated by the Greeks at Salamis (480 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe loss of the empire has been attributed to the cowardice of Darius III (336–330 BC<\/span>), whose armies were defeated by Alexander the Great at Issus in 333 BC<\/span> and ultimately at Gaugamela, near modern Erbil (Arbela) in 331 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nPersia and the Bible<\/p>\nThe earliest mention of Persia in Israel’s history is in Isaiah 44:28–45:13, a predictive prophecy that was given to Isaiah more than 150 years before Cyrus captured Babylon and decreed the return of the exiled Jews to Jerusalem. The rest of the biblical references to Persia occur in the later period of Old Testament history (Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther) and in the writings of the exilic and postexilic prophets (Daniel, Zephaniah, Haggai). Persia is portrayed in Scripture as a stern but usually benevolent master that generally let the Jews govern themselves and worship in their own way. Nevertheless, the fact that the postexilic community of Judea was under foreign rule was never far from their minds.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEzra 4:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Medes and Persians<\/h3>\nThe Medes (around 850–549 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nThe early Medes left no written records. According to an inscription from Shalmaneser III of Assyria (858–824 BC<\/span>), the Medes had settled around Ecbatana, their capital (modern Hamadan, Iran), by the mid-800s BC<\/span>. The Medes were renowned horse breeders, so Shalmaneser raided their territory to steal large herds of fine horses. The Medes were subject to the Assyrians until the late 600s, when they gained their independence as Assyria weakened.<\/p>\nThe Persians (around 700–549 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAround 700 BC<\/span>, a small kingdom of Persia was established under Achaemenes, who ruled around 700~675 BC<\/span>. His son Teispes (675~640 BC<\/span>) was under the domination of the Medes, who were gathering forces to overthrow Assyria. But trouble for the Medes later freed Teispes from their control. Cambyses (600~559 BC<\/span>), son of Cyrus I and grandson of Teispes, married the daughter of the Median king Astyages; their son was Cyrus II (559–530 BC<\/span>), who ascended the throne of Persia in 559 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe Medo-Persian Empire (549–331 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nCyrus II fought and defeated his grandfather, Astyages of Media, in 549 BC<\/span>. He made Ecbatana in Media his capital and set up his archives there (see Ezra 6:1-5). With a Persian father and Median mother, Cyrus II embodied the joining of Media and Persia.<\/p>\nCyrus exhibited an attitude of benevolence and generosity toward defeated enemies. A capable military leader, Cyrus invaded Asia Minor and defeated Croesus, king of Lydia, and brought the Greek cities of the area into subjection. In 539 BC<\/span>, he captured Babylon with virtually no resistance and decreed that exiled peoples could return to their homelands to rebuild their temples (see Ezra 1:1-4).<\/p>\nThe son of Cyrus, Cambyses II (529–522 BC<\/span>), conquered Egypt, but the empire nearly disintegrated when he committed suicide. Cambyses was succeeded by Darius I (521–486 BC<\/span>), the son of Hystaspes, satrap of Parthia. Darius, an energetic and efficient administrator, put down internal revolts and consolidated the empire into twenty provinces, each under a satrap or “protector of the kingdom,” with inspectors (“the ears of the king”) to check on the activities of the satraps. Darius changed the principal capital of Persia to Persepolis, where a tremendous palace complex was eventually constructed. Darius was a follower of Zoroaster and a worshiper of Ahura Mazda, the principal god of Zoroastrianism, as were Xerxes and Artaxerxes after him.<\/p>\nDuring the latter part of Darius’s reign, he suffered defeat at the hands of the Greeks at Marathon (491 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nDarius was succeeded by his son Khshayarsha, better known as Xerxes in Greek or as Ahasuerus in Hebrew. During his rule (486–465 BC<\/span>), the Persian fleet was defeated by the Greeks at Salamis (480 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe loss of the empire has been attributed to the cowardice of Darius III (336–330 BC<\/span>), whose armies were defeated by Alexander the Great at Issus in 333 BC<\/span> and ultimately at Gaugamela, near modern Erbil (Arbela) in 331 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nPersia and the Bible<\/p>\nThe earliest mention of Persia in Israel’s history is in Isaiah 44:28–45:13, a predictive prophecy that was given to Isaiah more than 150 years before Cyrus captured Babylon and decreed the return of the exiled Jews to Jerusalem. The rest of the biblical references to Persia occur in the later period of Old Testament history (Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther) and in the writings of the exilic and postexilic prophets (Daniel, Zephaniah, Haggai). Persia is portrayed in Scripture as a stern but usually benevolent master that generally let the Jews govern themselves and worship in their own way. Nevertheless, the fact that the postexilic community of Judea was under foreign rule was never far from their minds.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEzra 4:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Medes and Persians The Medes (around 850–549 BC) The early Medes left no written records. According to an inscription from Shalmaneser III of Assyria (858–824 BC), the Medes had settled around Ecbatana, their capital (modern Hamadan, Iran), by the mid-800s BC. The Medes were renowned horse breeders, so Shalmaneser raided their territory to steal large herds of fine horses. The Medes were subject to the Assyrians until the late 600s, when they gained their independence as Assyria weakened....","summary_en":"The Medes and Persians The Medes (around 850–549 BC) The early Medes left no written records. According to an inscription from Shalmaneser III of Assyria (858–824 BC), the Medes had settled around Ecbatana, their capital (modern Hamadan, Iran), by the mid-800s BC. The Medes were renowned horse breeders, so Shalmaneser raided their territory to steal large herds of fine horses. The Medes were subject to the Assyrians until the late 600s, when they gained their independence as Assyria weakened....","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97062,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Esther","title_en":"Esther","content_ro":"<h3>Esther<\/h3>\nEsther was queen of Persia during the reign of Xerxes I (486–465 BC<\/span>). She was a woman of the Diaspora<\/em> (“scattering”), descended from Jews who had been scattered among the nations at the time of the Exile. Her family had not returned to the land of Judah, as some Jews had (see Ezra 1–2), but had chosen to stay in the land of Persia, like many others. Noting how important her cousin Mordecai was in the Persian government makes us guess that her family had grown rich and comfortable.<\/p>\nEsther was an orphan and was raised by her cousin Mordecai, who became a minor official in the Persian government in Susa. She became queen after King Xerxes became displeased with Queen Vashti for refusing to attend a banquet when commanded to do so (Esth 1:11-12).<\/p>\nAfter Esther’s coronation, she discreetly won Xerxes’ confidence by informing him of an assassination plot (2:21-23). This later enabled her to rescue her people from a massacre planned by Haman, a high official to the king. Through her wise advice and brave action, Esther exposed Haman, he was executed, and the Jewish people were rescued. The Jewish Festival of Purim was instituted to celebrate these events.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEsth 2:7-20; 4:4–5:8; 7:1–9:32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Esther<\/h3>\nEsther was queen of Persia during the reign of Xerxes I (486–465 BC<\/span>). She was a woman of the Diaspora<\/em> (“scattering”), descended from Jews who had been scattered among the nations at the time of the Exile. Her family had not returned to the land of Judah, as some Jews had (see Ezra 1–2), but had chosen to stay in the land of Persia, like many others. Noting how important her cousin Mordecai was in the Persian government makes us guess that her family had grown rich and comfortable.<\/p>\nEsther was an orphan and was raised by her cousin Mordecai, who became a minor official in the Persian government in Susa. She became queen after King Xerxes became displeased with Queen Vashti for refusing to attend a banquet when commanded to do so (Esth 1:11-12).<\/p>\nAfter Esther’s coronation, she discreetly won Xerxes’ confidence by informing him of an assassination plot (2:21-23). This later enabled her to rescue her people from a massacre planned by Haman, a high official to the king. Through her wise advice and brave action, Esther exposed Haman, he was executed, and the Jewish people were rescued. The Jewish Festival of Purim was instituted to celebrate these events.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEsth 2:7-20; 4:4–5:8; 7:1–9:32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Esther Esther was queen of Persia during the reign of Xerxes I (486–465 BC). She was a woman of the Diaspora (“scattering”), descended from Jews who had been scattered among the nations at the time of the Exile. Her family had not returned to the land of Judah, as some Jews had (see Ezra 1–2), but had chosen to stay in the land of Persia, like many others. Noting how important her cousin Mordecai was in the Persian government makes us guess that her family had grown rich and comfortable. Esth...","summary_en":"Esther Esther was queen of Persia during the reign of Xerxes I (486–465 BC). She was a woman of the Diaspora (“scattering”), descended from Jews who had been scattered among the nations at the time of the Exile. Her family had not returned to the land of Judah, as some Jews had (see Ezra 1–2), but had chosen to stay in the land of Persia, like many others. Noting how important her cousin Mordecai was in the Persian government makes us guess that her family had grown rich and comfortable. Esth...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124637,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Cyrus II","title_en":"Cyrus II","content_ro":"<h3>Cyrus II<\/h3>\nCyrus II, king of Persia (559–530 BC<\/span>), founded the great Persian Empire. His father was king of Persia, a small nation that was subject to Media, and his mother was the daughter of the king of the Medes. Cyrus conquered the Medes in 549 BC<\/span> and combined the two nations into one. He conquered Lydia in Asia Minor in 547 BC<\/span>, then turned to the east and brought Parthia and part of India into the Persian Empire. Finally, on October 29, 539 BC<\/span>, Cyrus conquered the city of Babylon and brought Babylonia into his empire (see Dan 5:30-31).<\/p>\nAfter conquering Babylon, Cyrus issued a decree that allowed the Jewish people to return home and rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. The part of this decree dealing with the Jews has been recorded in 2 Chronicles 36:22-23 and Ezra 1:1-4. This practice is confirmed by the Cyrus Cylinder, a barrel that was discovered at Babylon in 1879–82, which describes Cyrus’s policy regarding conquered peoples.<\/p>\nIsaiah named Cyrus as Judah’s future deliverer (Isa 44:28–45:13) and even called him the Lord’s anointed (Isa 45:1, Hebrew mashiakh,<\/span> “messiah”). Israel regarded Cyrus as called and empowered by God to free them. Cyrus was not the<\/em> Messiah, but what he did served as an example of what the Messiah, Jesus Christ, would later do in setting God’s people free from servitude.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezra 1:1-11; 3:7; 4:1-5; 5:6-17; 6:14-15; Isa 44:28–45:13; 48:14-16; Dan 6:28; 10:1<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Cyrus II<\/h3>\nCyrus II, king of Persia (559–530 BC<\/span>), founded the great Persian Empire. His father was king of Persia, a small nation that was subject to Media, and his mother was the daughter of the king of the Medes. Cyrus conquered the Medes in 549 BC<\/span> and combined the two nations into one. He conquered Lydia in Asia Minor in 547 BC<\/span>, then turned to the east and brought Parthia and part of India into the Persian Empire. Finally, on October 29, 539 BC<\/span>, Cyrus conquered the city of Babylon and brought Babylonia into his empire (see Dan 5:30-31).<\/p>\nAfter conquering Babylon, Cyrus issued a decree that allowed the Jewish people to return home and rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. The part of this decree dealing with the Jews has been recorded in 2 Chronicles 36:22-23 and Ezra 1:1-4. This practice is confirmed by the Cyrus Cylinder, a barrel that was discovered at Babylon in 1879–82, which describes Cyrus’s policy regarding conquered peoples.<\/p>\nIsaiah named Cyrus as Judah’s future deliverer (Isa 44:28–45:13) and even called him the Lord’s anointed (Isa 45:1, Hebrew mashiakh,<\/span> “messiah”). Israel regarded Cyrus as called and empowered by God to free them. Cyrus was not the<\/em> Messiah, but what he did served as an example of what the Messiah, Jesus Christ, would later do in setting God’s people free from servitude.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezra 1:1-11; 3:7; 4:1-5; 5:6-17; 6:14-15; Isa 44:28–45:13; 48:14-16; Dan 6:28; 10:1<\/p>","summary_ro":"Cyrus II Cyrus II, king of Persia (559–530 BC), founded the great Persian Empire. His father was king of Persia, a small nation that was subject to Media, and his mother was the daughter of the king of the Medes. Cyrus conquered the Medes in 549 BC and combined the two nations into one. He conquered Lydia in Asia Minor in 547 BC, then turned to the east and brought Parthia and part of India into the Persian Empire. Finally, on October 29, 539 BC, Cyrus conquered the city of Babylon and brough...","summary_en":"Cyrus II Cyrus II, king of Persia (559–530 BC), founded the great Persian Empire. His father was king of Persia, a small nation that was subject to Media, and his mother was the daughter of the king of the Medes. Cyrus conquered the Medes in 549 BC and combined the two nations into one. He conquered Lydia in Asia Minor in 547 BC, then turned to the east and brought Parthia and part of India into the Persian Empire. Finally, on October 29, 539 BC, Cyrus conquered the city of Babylon and brough...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124672,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Medes and Persians","title_en":"The Medes and Persians","content_ro":"<h3>The Medes and Persians<\/h3>\nThe Medes (around 850–549 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nThe early Medes left no written records. According to an inscription from Shalmaneser III of Assyria (858–824 BC<\/span>), the Medes had settled around Ecbatana, their capital (modern Hamadan, Iran), by the mid-800s BC<\/span>. The Medes were renowned horse breeders, so Shalmaneser raided their territory to steal large herds of fine horses. The Medes were subject to the Assyrians until the late 600s, when they gained their independence as Assyria weakened.<\/p>\nThe Persians (around 700–549 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAround 700 BC<\/span>, a small kingdom of Persia was established under Achaemenes, who ruled around 700~675 BC<\/span>. His son Teispes (675~640 BC<\/span>) was under the domination of the Medes, who were gathering forces to overthrow Assyria. But trouble for the Medes later freed Teispes from their control. Cambyses (600~559 BC<\/span>), son of Cyrus I and grandson of Teispes, married the daughter of the Median king Astyages; their son was Cyrus II (559–530 BC<\/span>), who ascended the throne of Persia in 559 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe Medo-Persian Empire (549–331 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nCyrus II fought and defeated his grandfather, Astyages of Media, in 549 BC<\/span>. He made Ecbatana in Media his capital and set up his archives there (see Ezra 6:1-5). With a Persian father and Median mother, Cyrus II embodied the joining of Media and Persia.<\/p>\nCyrus exhibited an attitude of benevolence and generosity toward defeated enemies. A capable military leader, Cyrus invaded Asia Minor and defeated Croesus, king of Lydia, and brought the Greek cities of the area into subjection. In 539 BC<\/span>, he captured Babylon with virtually no resistance and decreed that exiled peoples could return to their homelands to rebuild their temples (see Ezra 1:1-4).<\/p>\nThe son of Cyrus, Cambyses II (529–522 BC<\/span>), conquered Egypt, but the empire nearly disintegrated when he committed suicide. Cambyses was succeeded by Darius I (521–486 BC<\/span>), the son of Hystaspes, satrap of Parthia. Darius, an energetic and efficient administrator, put down internal revolts and consolidated the empire into twenty provinces, each under a satrap or “protector of the kingdom,” with inspectors (“the ears of the king”) to check on the activities of the satraps. Darius changed the principal capital of Persia to Persepolis, where a tremendous palace complex was eventually constructed. Darius was a follower of Zoroaster and a worshiper of Ahura Mazda, the principal god of Zoroastrianism, as were Xerxes and Artaxerxes after him.<\/p>\nDuring the latter part of Darius’s reign, he suffered defeat at the hands of the Greeks at Marathon (491 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nDarius was succeeded by his son Khshayarsha, better known as Xerxes in Greek or as Ahasuerus in Hebrew. During his rule (486–465 BC<\/span>), the Persian fleet was defeated by the Greeks at Salamis (480 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe loss of the empire has been attributed to the cowardice of Darius III (336–330 BC<\/span>), whose armies were defeated by Alexander the Great at Issus in 333 BC<\/span> and ultimately at Gaugamela, near modern Erbil (Arbela) in 331 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nPersia and the Bible<\/p>\nThe earliest mention of Persia in Israel’s history is in Isaiah 44:28–45:13, a predictive prophecy that was given to Isaiah more than 150 years before Cyrus captured Babylon and decreed the return of the exiled Jews to Jerusalem. The rest of the biblical references to Persia occur in the later period of Old Testament history (Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther) and in the writings of the exilic and postexilic prophets (Daniel, Zephaniah, Haggai). Persia is portrayed in Scripture as a stern but usually benevolent master that generally let the Jews govern themselves and worship in their own way. Nevertheless, the fact that the postexilic community of Judea was under foreign rule was never far from their minds.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEzra 4:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Medes and Persians<\/h3>\nThe Medes (around 850–549 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nThe early Medes left no written records. According to an inscription from Shalmaneser III of Assyria (858–824 BC<\/span>), the Medes had settled around Ecbatana, their capital (modern Hamadan, Iran), by the mid-800s BC<\/span>. The Medes were renowned horse breeders, so Shalmaneser raided their territory to steal large herds of fine horses. The Medes were subject to the Assyrians until the late 600s, when they gained their independence as Assyria weakened.<\/p>\nThe Persians (around 700–549 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAround 700 BC<\/span>, a small kingdom of Persia was established under Achaemenes, who ruled around 700~675 BC<\/span>. His son Teispes (675~640 BC<\/span>) was under the domination of the Medes, who were gathering forces to overthrow Assyria. But trouble for the Medes later freed Teispes from their control. Cambyses (600~559 BC<\/span>), son of Cyrus I and grandson of Teispes, married the daughter of the Median king Astyages; their son was Cyrus II (559–530 BC<\/span>), who ascended the throne of Persia in 559 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe Medo-Persian Empire (549–331 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nCyrus II fought and defeated his grandfather, Astyages of Media, in 549 BC<\/span>. He made Ecbatana in Media his capital and set up his archives there (see Ezra 6:1-5). With a Persian father and Median mother, Cyrus II embodied the joining of Media and Persia.<\/p>\nCyrus exhibited an attitude of benevolence and generosity toward defeated enemies. A capable military leader, Cyrus invaded Asia Minor and defeated Croesus, king of Lydia, and brought the Greek cities of the area into subjection. In 539 BC<\/span>, he captured Babylon with virtually no resistance and decreed that exiled peoples could return to their homelands to rebuild their temples (see Ezra 1:1-4).<\/p>\nThe son of Cyrus, Cambyses II (529–522 BC<\/span>), conquered Egypt, but the empire nearly disintegrated when he committed suicide. Cambyses was succeeded by Darius I (521–486 BC<\/span>), the son of Hystaspes, satrap of Parthia. Darius, an energetic and efficient administrator, put down internal revolts and consolidated the empire into twenty provinces, each under a satrap or “protector of the kingdom,” with inspectors (“the ears of the king”) to check on the activities of the satraps. Darius changed the principal capital of Persia to Persepolis, where a tremendous palace complex was eventually constructed. Darius was a follower of Zoroaster and a worshiper of Ahura Mazda, the principal god of Zoroastrianism, as were Xerxes and Artaxerxes after him.<\/p>\nDuring the latter part of Darius’s reign, he suffered defeat at the hands of the Greeks at Marathon (491 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nDarius was succeeded by his son Khshayarsha, better known as Xerxes in Greek or as Ahasuerus in Hebrew. During his rule (486–465 BC<\/span>), the Persian fleet was defeated by the Greeks at Salamis (480 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe loss of the empire has been attributed to the cowardice of Darius III (336–330 BC<\/span>), whose armies were defeated by Alexander the Great at Issus in 333 BC<\/span> and ultimately at Gaugamela, near modern Erbil (Arbela) in 331 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nPersia and the Bible<\/p>\nThe earliest mention of Persia in Israel’s history is in Isaiah 44:28–45:13, a predictive prophecy that was given to Isaiah more than 150 years before Cyrus captured Babylon and decreed the return of the exiled Jews to Jerusalem. The rest of the biblical references to Persia occur in the later period of Old Testament history (Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther) and in the writings of the exilic and postexilic prophets (Daniel, Zephaniah, Haggai). Persia is portrayed in Scripture as a stern but usually benevolent master that generally let the Jews govern themselves and worship in their own way. Nevertheless, the fact that the postexilic community of Judea was under foreign rule was never far from their minds.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEzra 4:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Medes and Persians The Medes (around 850–549 BC) The early Medes left no written records. According to an inscription from Shalmaneser III of Assyria (858–824 BC), the Medes had settled around Ecbatana, their capital (modern Hamadan, Iran), by the mid-800s BC. The Medes were renowned horse breeders, so Shalmaneser raided their territory to steal large herds of fine horses. The Medes were subject to the Assyrians until the late 600s, when they gained their independence as Assyria weakened....","summary_en":"The Medes and Persians The Medes (around 850–549 BC) The early Medes left no written records. According to an inscription from Shalmaneser III of Assyria (858–824 BC), the Medes had settled around Ecbatana, their capital (modern Hamadan, Iran), by the mid-800s BC. The Medes were renowned horse breeders, so Shalmaneser raided their territory to steal large herds of fine horses. The Medes were subject to the Assyrians until the late 600s, when they gained their independence as Assyria weakened....","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124688,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Esther","title_en":"Esther","content_ro":"<h3>Esther<\/h3>\nEsther was queen of Persia during the reign of Xerxes I (486–465 BC<\/span>). She was a woman of the Diaspora<\/em> (“scattering”), descended from Jews who had been scattered among the nations at the time of the Exile. Her family had not returned to the land of Judah, as some Jews had (see Ezra 1–2), but had chosen to stay in the land of Persia, like many others. Noting how important her cousin Mordecai was in the Persian government makes us guess that her family had grown rich and comfortable.<\/p>\nEsther was an orphan and was raised by her cousin Mordecai, who became a minor official in the Persian government in Susa. She became queen after King Xerxes became displeased with Queen Vashti for refusing to attend a banquet when commanded to do so (Esth 1:11-12).<\/p>\nAfter Esther’s coronation, she discreetly won Xerxes’ confidence by informing him of an assassination plot (2:21-23). This later enabled her to rescue her people from a massacre planned by Haman, a high official to the king. Through her wise advice and brave action, Esther exposed Haman, he was executed, and the Jewish people were rescued. The Jewish Festival of Purim was instituted to celebrate these events.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEsth 2:7-20; 4:4–5:8; 7:1–9:32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Esther<\/h3>\nEsther was queen of Persia during the reign of Xerxes I (486–465 BC<\/span>). She was a woman of the Diaspora<\/em> (“scattering”), descended from Jews who had been scattered among the nations at the time of the Exile. Her family had not returned to the land of Judah, as some Jews had (see Ezra 1–2), but had chosen to stay in the land of Persia, like many others. Noting how important her cousin Mordecai was in the Persian government makes us guess that her family had grown rich and comfortable.<\/p>\nEsther was an orphan and was raised by her cousin Mordecai, who became a minor official in the Persian government in Susa. She became queen after King Xerxes became displeased with Queen Vashti for refusing to attend a banquet when commanded to do so (Esth 1:11-12).<\/p>\nAfter Esther’s coronation, she discreetly won Xerxes’ confidence by informing him of an assassination plot (2:21-23). This later enabled her to rescue her people from a massacre planned by Haman, a high official to the king. Through her wise advice and brave action, Esther exposed Haman, he was executed, and the Jewish people were rescued. The Jewish Festival of Purim was instituted to celebrate these events.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEsth 2:7-20; 4:4–5:8; 7:1–9:32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Esther Esther was queen of Persia during the reign of Xerxes I (486–465 BC). She was a woman of the Diaspora (“scattering”), descended from Jews who had been scattered among the nations at the time of the Exile. Her family had not returned to the land of Judah, as some Jews had (see Ezra 1–2), but had chosen to stay in the land of Persia, like many others. Noting how important her cousin Mordecai was in the Persian government makes us guess that her family had grown rich and comfortable. Esth...","summary_en":"Esther Esther was queen of Persia during the reign of Xerxes I (486–465 BC). She was a woman of the Diaspora (“scattering”), descended from Jews who had been scattered among the nations at the time of the Exile. Her family had not returned to the land of Judah, as some Jews had (see Ezra 1–2), but had chosen to stay in the land of Persia, like many others. Noting how important her cousin Mordecai was in the Persian government makes us guess that her family had grown rich and comfortable. Esth...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":2320,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Apocrypha*","title_en":"Apocrypha*","content_ro":"<h3>APOCRYPHA*<\/h3>\nBooks excluded from the canon of Scripture.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Introduction<\/p>\n• Apocryphal Gospels<\/p>\n• Apocryphal Acts<\/p>\n• Apocryphal Epistles<\/p>\n• Apocalyptic Apocrypha<\/p>\n• Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings<\/p>\nIntroduction<\/p>\nThe writings of the Old and New Testaments tended to attract certain additional compositions in the form of books, parts of books, letters, “gospels,” apocalypses, and so on. Most of the authors wrote anonymously, but some presented their writings to the public under the name of a familiar OT figure or member of the Christian church. Several of these compositions formed a small but important part of the great body of Jewish literature that emerged during the period between the Old and New Testaments. Much of it was the result of religious and political ferment, for the Jews felt their faith and their very existence threatened, first by the pagan influences of Hellenistic Greek culture, then by the oppression of invading Roman forces.<\/p>\n\nMost of the apocryphal books are also pseudepigrapha—that is, they are books ascribed to a pseudonymous author. In other words, the main characteristic of these writings is the fictitious claim that the author of the book was a biblical person (Enoch, Abraham, Moses, Solomon, Bartholomew, Thomas, etc.) or that the revelation contained in the book was originally given to a biblical character (Adam and Eve, Isaiah). Generally, the pseudepigrapha show a strong interest in the apocalyptic: the creation of the world, the future of Israel and the nations, the glory of God and his angels, the messianic kingdom, and life after death. Many of the pseudepigrapha are Jewish writings that were never accepted by the Jewish or Christian communities. They were written about the time of the Apocrypha (c. 200 BC<\/span>–AD<\/span> 110), but by the nature of the contents of the pseudepigrapha, they were only recognized by certain groups. Since some of these books approximated counterparts in the canonical Scriptures, there is no doubt that in some circles their authority and inspiration were regarded as similar to that of the scriptural compositions venerated by the Jews and later by Christians.<\/p>\nOther religious writings from that period made no claim to be scriptural. Such compositions preserved the familiar traditions of both Judaism and primitive Christianity, although on occasion they enriched or embellished them by means of legends and unhistorical narratives. Because very few books of any kind were in circulation at that time, the Palestinians tended to read whatever literary material came into their possession. Although the Torah, or law of Moses, had always been recognized as the standard of theological orthodoxy for the Jews, narratives of endurance under persecution or accounts of the way that the enemies of God’s people received their just reward had an obvious attraction for those under the pressures of a pagan society.<\/p>\nIn the same way, although the Gospels and Epistles—along with the OT—comprised the basic canon or approved list of Scriptures for Christians, many additional narratives claimed the attention of Christ’s early followers. Those compositions often dealt with the supposed activities of Jesus and his followers, as well as with martyrdoms, revelations, and spiritual teachings. Some works contained material that was not only unhistorical but downright bizarre, but others reflected the spirit of Christ and the apostolic teachings to a certain extent. For the early Christians, as also for the Jews, the establishment of a formal canon of scriptural writings must have been prompted in part by a necessity to separate the record of revealed truth from other written forms of religious tradition as well as from actual heresy.<\/p>\nWritings that failed to gain acceptance into the OT and NT canons were described in the writings of some early Christian scholars by the term “apocrypha.” The Greek word means “hidden things,” and when applied to books it described those works that religious authorities wished to be concealed from the reading public. The reason was that such books were thought to contain mysterious or secret lore, meaningful only to the initiate and therefore unsuitable for the ordinary reader. But the word “apocrypha” was also applied in a less complimentary sense to works that deserved to be concealed. Such works contained harmful doctrines or false teachings calculated to unsettle or pervert rather than edify those who read them. The suppression of undesirable writings was comparatively easy at a time when only a few copies of any book were in circulation at a given time.<\/p>\nBy the end of the first century AD<\/span>, a clear distinction was being made in Jewish circles between writings that were suitable for use by the general public and esoteric works that were to be restricted to the knowledgeable and the initiated. Thus in 2 Esdras 14:1-6, the writer tells how Ezra was supposedly instructed by God to publish openly certain writings (among them the Torah), and keep others secret (that is, apocalyptic traditions dealing with the coming end of the age). In 2 Esdras 14:42-46 reference is made to 70 books, evidently noncanonical material, written after the 24 books of the Hebrew Canon.<\/p>\nUse of the term “apocrypha” to mean “noncanonical” goes back to the fifth century AD<\/span>, when Jerome urged that the books found in the Septuagint and in the Latin Bibles that did not occur in the canon of the Hebrew OT writings should be treated as apocryphal. They were not to be disregarded entirely, since they were part of the great contemporary outpouring of Jewish national literature. At the same time, they should not be used as sources for Christian doctrine but at best for supplementary reading of an uplifting or inspirational nature.<\/p>\nProtestant theologians generally have followed the tradition established by Jerome, regarding the OT apocrypha as the excess of the Septuagint canon over the Hebrew Scriptures. When the Hebrew Bible began to be translated into Greek in Egypt during the reign of Ptolemy II (285–246 BC<\/span>), the scholars concerned included a number of books that, while remaining outside the generally accepted list of Hebrew canonical writings, still had a bearing upon Jewish history and society. That procedure reflected contemporary attitudes in Palestine, where many people did not attempt to separate canonical writings from other forms of religious literature. The decision made by Jewish authorities about what to regard as canonical Scripture naturally had a bearing on what would constitute OT apocrypha.<\/p>\nTextual evidence represented by certain manuscripts and fragments from the Dead Sea caves makes it reasonably certain that the last of the canonical Hebrew writings had been completed several decades before the time Alexander the Great (356–323 BC<\/span>) began his conquests in the Near East. The process by which those compositions came to be accepted as canonical was more protracted, however. Only when they had been circulated, read, and assessed favorably by comparison with the spirituality of the Torah were they accorded general canonicity. Hence the distinction between the canonical and apocryphal writings came as much through usage and general consent on the part of orthodox Judaism as through any other manner. Earlier scholars suggested that the so-called Council of Jamnia, held in Palestine about AD<\/span> 100, was responsible for drawing up a list of OT books suitable for use by the faithful. However, subsequent studies have thrown considerable doubt upon the historicity of such a council, at the same time showing that the Jewish authorities of that period considered their noncanonical writings to be more of an obstacle than a help to devotion.<\/p>\nThe books the Jews regarded as being specifically outside the Canon, and therefore apocryphal, are as follows: 1 Esdras; 2 Esdras; Tobit; Judith; the additions to Esther; the Wisdom of Solomon; Ecclesiasticus; Baruch; the Letter of Jeremiah; the additions to the book of Daniel (the Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Young Men, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon); the Prayer of Manasseh; 1 Maccabees; and 2 Maccabees. Several Septuagint manuscripts included some pseudohistorical material under the titles of 3 and 4 Maccabees. Therefore, even the Apocrypha varied somewhat in content, depending upon the manuscript tradition being followed. Among early Christian scholars there was also some difference of opinion about the precise limits of canonical Hebrew Scripture, and hence of apocryphal material. A serious break with Hebrew and rabbinic tradition came with the writings of Augustine, who advanced the view that the books of the Apocrypha were of equal authority with the other writings of the canonical Hebrew and Christian Scriptures. A few dissenting voices were raised in support of Jerome’s position, but the views of Augustine were embraced by the Council of Trent (1546) and became official Roman Catholic teaching.<\/p>\nThe Roman Catholic Church includes the following works as part of the Deuterocanonical Scriptures: Tobit; Judith; the additions to Esther; the Wisdom of Solomon; Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus ben Sirach; Baruch; the additions to the book of Daniel (the Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Young Men, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon); 1 Maccabees; and 2 Maccabees. (Articles on each of these are interspersed throughout this dictionary.)<\/p>\nChristians of the NT period were already familiar with Jewish apocryphal works, including the apocalyptic speculations found in 2 Esdras. Therefore, it was hardly surprising that a similar body of literature should grow up around their own Scriptures when they began to be composed and circulated. NT apocrypha, however, like its OT counterpart, could be considered only in relationship to an established canon of scriptural writings. Since the earliest catalog of NT writings, the Muratorian Canon, was not compiled until about AD<\/span> 200, a considerable period of time elapsed before an official church statement could appear on what was to be considered NT apocrypha. In the meantime, a large assortment of materials of a predominantly religious nature appeared, purporting to be orthodox in nature and dealing with various aspects of historic Christianity. As events turned out, this apocryphal literature defeated the purposes it was intended to serve.<\/p>\nApocryphal Gospels<\/p>\nOne major class of apocrypha are the apocryphal gospels. These writings preserved stories about Christ and some teachings, but being mostly fanciful in nature they never became canonical. There are three broad classes:<\/p>\n1. A type similar to the synoptic Gospels, represented by the Gospel of Peter and the Gospel of the Egyptians, as well as papyrus fragments including Oxyrhynchus 840 and Papyrus Egerton 2. Other papyrus collections of sayings show affinities with the canonical Gospels.<\/p>\n<li>2. Gospels that disseminated Gnosticism, a second-century AD<\/span> heresy stressing philosophical knowledge (<\/em>gnosis<\/span>)<\/em> of the cosmos and man. They are often in the form of dialogues between Jesus and his disciples, such as the Coptic Gospel of Thomas, the Apocryphon of John, the Wisdom of Jesus Christ, and the Dialogue of the Redeemer. In this category also come those “gospels” attributed to the Twelve as a group, such as the Memoirs of the Apostles.<\/li>\n<li>3. Infancy gospels, purporting to supply otherwise unknown information of a legendary nature about Christ’s earliest years. Passion gospels also come into this category. These narratives were written to satisfy curiosity about Christ’s birth and childhood or to embellish the canonical accounts of his crucifixion and resurrection.<\/li>\nBecause of the scarcity of information about such matters as the childhood, adolescence, and early manhood of Jesus, the “infancy” gospels purport to supply the reader with what was meant to pass for historical fact. Much of the material, however, was entirely within the realm of fantasy and could never have been accepted as fact by any intelligent reader. For example, in the Gospel of Thomas the five-year-old Jesus is accused of breaking the Sabbath by making sparrows of clay beside a stream. When his father Joseph investigates the situation, Jesus claps his hands and the clay birds come to life and fly away chirping.<\/p>\n“Passion” gospels were written to embellish the canonical accounts of Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection. As supplements to Christian teaching, many of the apocryphal writings seemed to be proclaiming ideas that were actually outside the scope of NT doctrine. Attempts to fill in the “hidden years” of Christ’s life had no foundation whatever in the traditions of the Gospels. Works dealing with the last state of unbelievers were embellished in a manner that went far beyond anything stated in the NT. In some notable instances, as in the writings of various Gnostic sects, the authors set out deliberately to propagate heretical teachings they had accepted under the authority of some apostolic figure. The Gospel of Thomas, recovered around 1945 from Nag Hammadi (Chenoboskion) near the Nile River, is an example of an attempt to perpetuate curious sayings and dogmas by attributing them to Jesus, so that they would receive wide currency and acceptance.<\/p>\nApocryphal Acts<\/p>\nThere are also some apocryphal acts, which are purported to be accounts of apostolic achievements not recorded in Scripture. Such “acts” are the source of much tradition, such as Peter’s being crucified upside down and Thomas’s mission to India. The reliability of the traditions is questionable because the writings contain clearly unorthodox material. Yet small fragments of accurate information may be embedded in this mass of largely fictitious literature.<\/p>\nBecause of their often heretical character, the church consistently reacted against such books, sometimes even demanding that they be burned (for example, at the Nicene Council of 787). The Acts of John pictured Jesus talking to John on the Mt of Olives during the crucifixion, explaining that it was only a spectacle. In the Acts of Thomas, Jesus appeared in the form of Thomas, exhorting a newly married couple to dedicate themselves to virginity. Sexual abstinence was a dominant theme, reflecting Platonic ideas, which disparaged the physical body.<\/p>\nMany scholars date the earliest work, the Acts of John, before AD<\/span> 150. The major Acts (of John, Paul, Peter, Andrew, and Thomas) were probably written during the second and third centuries. These gave rise to other “acts” that were primarily miracle stories, written more to entertain than to teach.<\/p>\nApocryphal Epistles<\/p>\nA host of apocryphal works are classified as epistles. These generally pseudonymous works originated from many widely separated periods of time. Many other apocryphal works are apocalyptic in nature. These works are supplemented by material such as the Apostolic Constitutions and Canons. Added to these are the Gnostic compositions found at Nag Hammadi, which include works purporting to represent the teachings of Christ as well as “secret” instructions compiled by the Gnostic writers and a few apocryphal compositions.<\/p>\nApocalyptic Apocrypha<\/p>\nAnother group could be called apocalyptic apocrypha. The term “apocalypse” means “disclosure” or “revelation,” a term that was generally applied to Christian literature that resembled the Revelation of John, which designates itself an apocalypse in Revelation 1:1. The practice of writing under the name of an illustrious figure of the past, or pseudonymity, was a characteristic device used by most unknown authors of Jewish and Christian apocalypses (the Revelation of John is a striking exception). Jewish apocalypses were attributed to such ancient worthies as Adam, Enoch, Abraham, Moses, Ezra, and others. Similarly, Christian apocalypses written in the second century AD<\/span> and later were ascribed to such important early Christian figures as Peter, Thomas, James and others.<\/p>\nIn NT times there emerged in Judaism certain circles that developed an apocalyptic view of history. They provided such writings as the five parts of 1 Enoch, the Assumption of Moses, 2 Esdras, and the Apocalypse of Baruch. These books are of importance to NT study, for they provide a bridge between the OT and the NT concepts of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\nThe apocalypses were written to answer the problems of theodicy (the justice of God). After the days of Ezra, the law assumed a more important role in the life of the people than before. In prophetic times Israel again and again apostatized from the law and worshiped foreign gods. The primary message of the prophets was to challenge Israel to get right with God and to turn in repentance to keep the law. After Ezra and throughout NT times, Israel was obedient to the law as never before. The Jews abhorred idolatry and faithfully worshiped God. Still the kingdom did not come. Instead came the fearful persecution in the Maccabean times by Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the worldly rule of the Hasmoneans, Pompey and Roman hegemony, and in AD<\/span> 66–70, the siege and destruction of Jerusalem. Where was God? Why did he not deliver his faithful people? Why did the kingdom not come? The apocalypses were written to answer questions like these.<\/p>\nOne of the most important elements in apocalyptic religion is an explicit dualism, expressed as “this age” and “the age to come.” The prophets contrasted the present time with the future when the kingdom of God would be established. The apocalyptists radicalized this contrast. Twice we find fragments of this idiom in 1 Enoch. We meet the fully developed idiom in 2 Esdras and the Apocalypse of Baruch (late first century AD<\/span>). “The Most High has made not one age but two” (2 Esd 7:50); “the day of judgment shall be the end of this age and the beginning of the immortal age that is to come” (2 Esd 7:113); “this age the Most High has made for many but the age to come for few” (2 Esd 8:1; see also Apoc Bar 14:13; 15:7; Pirke Aboth<\/em> 4:1, 21-22; 6:4-7). Furthermore, the transition from this age to the age to come can be accomplished only by a cosmic act of God. In the apocryphal Assumption of Moses there is no messianic personage; it is God alone who comes to redeem Israel. In the Similitudes of Enoch the transition is accomplished with the coming of a heavenly, preexistent Son of Man. In 2 Esdras we find a conflation of the concepts of Davidic Messiah and the Son of Man.<\/p>\nApocalyptic differs from OT prophetic religion in that it is pessimistic about the present age. It would be wrong to describe the apocalypses as ultimately pessimistic, for their basic message is that in due time God will intervene and save his people. But for the present, as long as this age lasts, he has removed himself from intervening in Israel’s affairs. The present age is under the power of evil angelic and demonic forces and is irretrievably evil. God has abandoned this age to evil; salvation can be expected only in the age to come.<\/p>\nThe apocalyptists lost completely the tension between history and eschatology. They no longer expected any deliverance in this age. God had, in fact, become the God of the future, not of the present.<\/p>\nIn the dream-visions of Enoch (1 Enoch 83–90), God faithfully guided Israel throughout its history. Then God withdrew his personal leadership, forsook the temple, and surrendered his people to be torn and devoured. God “remained unmoved, though he saw it, and rejoiced that they were devoured and swallowed and robbed, and left them to be devoured in the hand of all the beasts” (1 Enoch 89:58). After the Babylonian captivity God was conceived to be inactive in history. History was surrendered to evil. All salvation was thrust into the future.<\/p>\nComparative studies have shown that the NT apocryphal writings preserve at best a series of debased traditions about the founder and teachings of early Christianity. At worst, the narratives are entirely devoid of historical value and in some respects are totally alien to NT spirituality. Even where they seem to support a tradition current in some part of the early church, the evidence they present is inferior to what can often be had from other sources. Sometimes the compositions are so trivial and inconsequential that it is difficult to account for their survival. Certain apocryphal writings did in fact become lost and are now known only in the form of quotations in larger works.<\/p>\nNevertheless, the NT apocryphal compositions are important in indicating what was attractive to the ordinary people of the day. For them an element of the romantic seemed necessary to supplement the body of received spiritual truth. Certain of the stories recounted were vivid and imaginative, and others, such as the apocalypses, provided a form of escapism from harsh temporal realities. No matter what their nature, the NT apocryphal writings exerted an influence out of all proportion to their fundamental worth.<\/p>\nSpecific Titles of Apocryphal Writings<\/p>\nAbdias, Apostolic History of<\/p>\nCollection of material drawn from canonical and apocryphal writings concerning the lives of the apostles, including Paul. Abdias, an early bishop of Babylon, was supposedly the author of this history that more probably was collated from a variety of sources in the sixth century AD<\/span> in France. This apocryphal “acts,” divided into 10 books, originally circulated in Greek as individual volumes that were collected into one when a Latin version was made. The content is generally regarded as folklore or legend but is of some value where no other source is available.<\/p>\nAbdias, a contemporary of the apostles, may have seen Christ and supposedly traveled extensively with Simon and Jude. There is no historical basis for considering Abdias as the author of the Hebrew text, or for believing that his disciple Eutropius translated it into Greek or that Africanus translated the Greek into Latin—although the preface to the Latin version makes those claims.<\/p>\nAbgarus, Letters of Christ and<\/p>\nApocryphal work comprising two short letters, one supposedly written by the Syrian king Abgar (Abgarus), the other supposedly a reply from Jesus. Eusebius claimed to have found the material in the archives of Abgar at Edessa and translated it from Syrian to Greek together with an account of the exploits of the disciple Thaddaeus.<\/p>\nAccording to the legend, Abgar, suffering from a severe disease, hears of the miracles of Jesus and sends a messenger with a letter asking Jesus to come heal him. At the same time he offers Jesus sanctuary from the dangerous opposition of the Jews in Jerusalem. In a written reply (later altered to an oral one to comply with the tradition that no writings of Jesus existed), Jesus declines the offer of sanctuary but promises that after his ascension he will comply with Abgar’s request for healing by sending a disciple to him. Thaddaeus, one of the Twelve, is dispatched to Edessa, the king is healed, and the community converts to Christianity. In a slightly different version in the Doctrina Addaei (about AD<\/span> 400), an oral reply is given, and the messenger returns with a portrait of Jesus that is displayed prominently in Abgar’s palace.<\/p>\nThe legend is essentially similar to that described in the Greek Acts of Thaddaeus (fifth or sixth century AD<\/span>), except that in the latter Ananias returns with a handkerchief on which is a miraculous imprint of the face of Christ.<\/p>\nAbraham, Apocalypse of<\/p>\nJewish document existing in old Slavonic texts that go back through Greek to a Hebrew or Aramaic original.<\/p>\nThe Apocalypse of Abraham begins with Abraham turning from idolatry. Incorporating old rabbinical traditions of Abraham’s youth, it describes his awakening to the call of God and his awareness that God was one and was holy. An angel named Jahoel, whose functions and powers are lifted from rabbinical lore, takes Abraham to the seventh heaven where he is shown things past and things yet to be. He sees the temptation of Adam and Eve through sexual sin, and the murder of Cain. Azazel, an evil being, plays Satan’s role. These details probably reflect a tradition that Abraham was the author of the first documents of the Bible. The revelation then turns to the future and shows the destruction of the temple, plagues upon the heathen, and the coming of the Messiah. It is probable that the composite document took final form in the last generation of the first century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nTrue to his character as revealed in Genesis, Abraham raises the question of evil and why God tolerates the rebellious Azazel. He receives the answer that evil has its origin in the free will of man. This apocalypse shows how faithful Jews struggled to understand the problem of evil during a time of great suffering in Judaism. It also illustrates the curious “doctrine of angels” of that period. Both Gnostic and Christian editing of the text has been noted by some scholars.<\/p>\nAbraham, Testament of<\/p>\nJewish apocryphal writing describing the death of Abraham. In the testament, when the angel Michael comes to take Abraham’s soul, Abraham refuses to die. Reluctant to insist on the old man’s death, Michael accedes to his request to see all creation before he dies. The angel transports Abraham by chariot into the heavens so that he can observe mankind. Abraham is so shocked at the perfidy of humanity that he curses the sinners, who die immediately. He then observes the judgment of a soul, and although angels take part in the trial he notes that the presiding judge is Abel. The merits and demerits of the soul seem equally balanced, but because of the intervention of Abraham, the judgment is favorable. Abraham then realizes the severity of his cursing of sinners, but the angel informs him that the premature death of those whom he had cursed was the means of atonement for their sins.<\/p>\nAfter his return to earth, Abraham again refuses to die. Death appears in all his horror and kills 7,000 servants of Abraham (who are subsequently raised to life), but the aged saint still will not die. Finally, Death grasps Abraham’s hand and the angels lift his spirit to the heavens.<\/p>\nThe account is found in several Greek manuscripts, the oldest perhaps dating from the 13th century AD<\/span>, as well as in Slavonic, Romanian, Arabic, Ethiopic, and Coptic. The original language was probably Hebrew, from the first century AD<\/span>, with the work possibly translated into Greek by a Christian. The testament also exists in a shorter version in which God comes to lift up the soul of Abraham during a dream. There is no attempt in the work to make a theological statement, but the portrayal of the angel Michael and of Death are typical of Jewish thought of the first century.<\/p>\nActs, Apocryphal<\/p>\nWritings purported to be accounts of apostolic achievements not recorded in Scripture.<\/p>\nActs of Pilate<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Pilate, Acts of (below).<\/p>\nAdam, Apocalypse of<\/p>\nOne of the best examples of Gnostic apocalyptic literature. In 1946, a farm worker discovered a number of ancient texts in a cave about 6 miles (10 kilometers) north of the Egyptian city of Nag Hammadi. The discovery included 13 codexes (predecessors of bound books) of Christian and non-Christian origin. The discovery was not immediately disclosed, so it was not until 1958 that a French scholar, Jean Doresse, revealed the existence of the Apocalypse of Adam to the public. The apocalypse is written in Coptic and stands as the last of five works in Codex V.<\/p>\nAlthough the author’s true identity is unknown, the subtitle spuriously attributes the book to Adam or Seth: “An Apocalypse that Adam revealed to his son Seth in the seven hundredth year.” Seth was often cast in the role of transmitter of truth by the writers of Gnostic literature (for example, the Gospel of the Egyptians, the Paraphrase of Shem).<\/p>\nThe earliest existing copy of the Apocalypse of Adam is dated around AD<\/span> 300 to 350, although it may have been written long before. Its frequent Gnostic references, its dependence on Jewish history, and its allusions to baptism have led some scholars to postulate an origin in the Jewish baptist sects of the first and second centuries. Parallels also exist between this work and third-century Manichean (a brand of Gnosticism) literature.<\/p>\nThe Apocalypse of Adam is of great importance to students of Christian origins. For many years scholars have debated whether the Gnostic religion was a heretical outgrowth of Christianity or whether it was a movement of independent origins. Some scholars have argued that the Apocalypse of Adam is an example of an early, independent Gnosticism. If this proves to be the case the debate will certainly be simplified.<\/p>\nIn addition to its introduction and conclusion, the Apocalypse of Adam may be divided into three parts: Adam’s summary of significant past events, predictions of attempts to eliminate mankind by the evil creator-god, and predictions about the coming of the Enlightener who will show his people the way to the true God.<\/p>\nThe apocalypse opens with Adam, supposedly on his deathbed, revealing the future secrets of the Gnostic people to Seth. These have been mystically communicated to him by three angelic beings. Adam bemoans his condition of perpetual slavery to the evil creator-god, brought about by the fall and mankind’s subsequent loss of gnosis<\/span> (knowledge). Typical of Gnostic literature, a sharp distinction is drawn between the evil creator-god who rules the earth and the true God of the universe, knowledge of whom brings authentic life. Adam predicts that the creator-god will jealously attempt to destroy mankind by a flood (the story of Noah) and by fire (the story of Sodom and Gomorrah) and thus keep mankind from knowledge of the true God. These attempts, however, will be foiled by the intervention of angelic beings sent from the God of truth. Finally, the true God will send the Enlightener who will teach gnosis<\/span> to mankind so that they might know him. The creator-god will try to defeat the Enlightener but will be able to harm only his physical body. With the message of the Enlightener prevailing, mankind will turn from the creator-god and seek the true God through gnosis<\/span>.<\/em><\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Gnosticism.<\/p>\nAdam, Apocryphal Books of<\/p>\nAccount of the life and death of Adam and Eve recorded in Latin, and in a Greek version known as the Apocalypse of Moses. Other minor versions of early Christian origin also exist. Like other apocryphal writings, the work is fanciful and of unknown authorship.<\/p>\nAccording to the Latin account, after their expulsion from Paradise Adam and Eve are hungry and unable to find food for seven days. In desperation a penitent Eve, assuming responsibility for tasting the forbidden fruit, suggests that Adam kill her. He refuses, and after a search they survive by eating animals’ food. Adam suggests that as a penance they should stand fasting in the river up to their necks for 40 days, he in the Tigris, she in the Jordan. After 18 days Satan comes to Eve in the guise of an angel, tells her that the Lord has accepted her penance, and persuades her to leave the river. Coming to the Tigris where Adam is, Eve realizes that it was Satan who had spoken to her. Satan then explains that the reason for his fall was his refusal to worship man, a lower being.<\/p>\nThe archangel Michael is then sent to Adam with seeds so that he can learn to till the land. In a dream Eve sees Cain kill Abel, and in an attempt to prevent the murder by separating the brothers, Cain is made a farmer and Abel a shepherd. Subsequently a third son, Seth, is born. Adam receives a message from God that he is to die because he has obeyed the word of his wife rather than the instructions of God. When Adam is later in pain and close to death, he explains to Seth that Satan had tempted Eve to eat the forbidden fruit and that she in turn had persuaded him to taste it. Seth and Eve journey to the gates of Paradise to plead with God for Adam’s life. On the way Seth is attacked and bitten by a snake. At Paradise, Michael explains to them that Adam must die. Seth observes the burial of Adam and Abel.<\/p>\nBefore Eve’s death the following week, she asks Seth to make a record of the lives of his parents on tablets of stone and clay, so that if the Lord shows his anger with the world by water, the clay will be dissolved and the stone remain; if by fire, the stone will be broken up and the clay baked hard. Eve also warns Seth to mourn for six days only and not on the Sabbath.<\/p>\nThe text of the Greek version is similar to that of the Latin, except that the Greek version includes a description of Adam’s resurrection (added later to the Latin) and a detailed account by Eve of her temptation and fall. The burial of Adam and the initial refusal of the earth to accept the body of the slain Abel are also elaborately described in the Greek account. Both versions are probably derived from Hebrew originals dating from the first century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nAhikar, Book of<\/p>\nNear Eastern folktale from the sixth or seventh century BC<\/span> showing the reward of ingratitude. According to the story, Ahikar, secretary of Sennacherib, king of Assyria, was renowned for his wisdom. Childless even though he had 60 wives, Ahikar adopted his sister’s son, Nadan, and reared him to be his successor in Sennacherib’s court. Ahikar diligently educated his adopted son, who nevertheless turned out to be bad and even forged documents to have his benefactor condemned to death. Ahikar was spared through his friendship with the executioner and was concealed until the wrath of the king cooled. Later, when Sennacherib had occasion to wish for his wisdom, Ahikar was brought on the scene, long-haired, disheveled, and with fingernails like eagles’ claws. Once again in the king’s favor, Ahikar sternly rebuked his unscrupulous nephew. In response to Ahikar’s rebuke, Nadan’s body swelled up and his stomach burst open.<\/p>\nAhikar’s story has interesting parallels with OT wisdom books and also with some of the parables of Jesus. References to Ahikar occur in the apocryphal book of Tobit, in the Greek philosopher Democritus, in the apocalyptic Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, as well as in the Koran. The story, originally in Aramaic, also survives in Syriac, Arabic, Armenian, Ethiopic, and Greek, though with considerable variations in the versions.<\/p>\nAkhmim Fragment<\/p>\nDocument found in a tomb in Akhmim in Egypt and containing the apocryphal Gospel of Peter. See<\/em> Peter, Preaching of (below).<\/p>\nAllogenes Supreme<\/p>\nGnostic work (“The Most High Stranger”), discovered in 1946 in an urn near Nag Hammadi (Egypt). The Neoplatonist historian Porphyry, as well as later Syriac Christian writings against heresy, mentioned the works of Allogenes (whose name means “foreigner” or “stranger”). Allogenes Supreme, a Gnostic “apocalypse” written in Coptic, contains an account of the creation of the higher world, exalting Barbelo, the celestial mother. The existing copy was made during the fourth century, but the original may date back to the second century.<\/p>\nAndrew, Acts of<\/p>\nApocryphal work describing purported miracles and the martyrdom in Greece of the apostle Andrew, Peter’s brother. Its theme is the virtue of turning away from materialism and the transitory values of the world to an asceticism associated with dedication of life to God. The earliest fragment available is in the Vatican. The original probably dated from the second century AD<\/span> and was probably long, verbose, and tedious. Feeling that it had merit, Gregory of Tours in the sixth century wrote a concise account of the miracles of Andrew from an original, now lost. The account of the martyrdom of Andrew probably circulated separately.<\/p>\nAmong the many miracles Gregory recorded was one concerning Exoos, a noble youth from Thessalonica, who, having heard of Andrew’s preaching and miracles, comes to him at Philippi, is converted, and remains with him. Finding bribery useless and refusing to listen to Andrew, the youth’s parents set fire to the house where the Christians are staying. As the flames roar, Exoos prays that the Lord will extinguish the fire and sprinkles it with water. Thereupon the flames die out. The parents and the crowd, claiming that the youth is now a sorcerer, climb ladders to enter the house and kill the inhabitants, but God blinds the intruders. Although it is night, a light shines out from the house, sight is restored to those who have been blinded, and all except the youth’s parents are converted. The parents die soon afterward, and Exoos remains with Andrew, spending his inheritance on the poor. Returning to Thessalonica, Exoos heals a man who has been paralyzed for 23 years, and subsequently Exoos and Andrew perform further miracles and preach to the people.<\/p>\nIn Patrae the maidservant of Maximilla, wife of the proconsul Aegeates, comes to Andrew and implores him to heal her mistress, whose fever is so severe that her husband is standing at her bedside threatening to kill himself with a sword the moment she dies. Telling the proconsul to put up his sword, Andrew takes Maximilla’s hand and the fever leaves her. Ordering food for her, Andrew then refuses Aegeates’ offer of 100 pieces of silver. After performing many miracles in the city, Andrew receives a message from Maximilla to come and heal the slave of the proconsul’s brother, Stratocles. The apostle restores the boy to health, and his master believes.<\/p>\nMaximilla, to the fury of her husband, spends considerable time listening to the preaching of Andrew and is also converted. She then refuses to sleep with her husband and one night even substitutes a servant for herself. Details of subsequent events are found in the account of the martyrdom. Aegeates, in anger, holds Andrew responsible for his wife’s alienation and has him arrested. After preaching from prison, Andrew is taken to be crucified by the seashore. When the Christian Stratocles sees Andrew being manhandled by the soldiers, he fights his way through, and he and Andrew walk together to the place of crucifixion. Aegeates, fearing his brother, orders the soldiers not to interfere. At the seashore the soldiers follow the proconsul’s command that Andrew be tied, not nailed, to the cross so that his death will be lingering and he will be eaten by dogs. After two days he is still speaking to people from the cross, and many come to Aegeates demanding Andrew’s release. Arriving at the scene, the proconsul sees that Andrew is indeed alive, and Aegeates approaches the apostle to release him. Andrew demands that he be allowed to die and meet his Lord. As they watch, Andrew dies and the onlookers weep as Maximilla and Stratocles take down his body from the cross. Maximilla remains apart from her husband and continues as a Christian.<\/p>\nAndrew, Story of<\/p>\nLegendary fragment existing only in the Coptic language. In the legend coming from the late second century AD<\/span>, a woman kills her child in the desert and gives the remains to a dog. She flees when the apostle Andrew and Philemon approach, but the dog tells what happened. Andrew prays and the child, being vomited forth, is restored to life and laughs and cries.<\/p>\nAndrew and Matthias, Acts of<\/p>\nLengthy document of highly questionable authenticity, probably dating from the late second century AD<\/span>. This book was one of many apocryphal “acts” intended to supplement the NT book of Acts by providing more information about the apostles. The fourth-century church historian Eusebius described this work and others like it as heretical, absurd, and spurious.<\/p>\nIn this story, the apostles cast lots to determine where each should go. Matthias (Matthew in some versions) is sent to the country of the man-eaters, where he soon requires rescue from a cannibal feast. The Lord then sends Andrew to save him. Andrew arrives in time to do so, and Matthias is then carried off by a cloud. Now alone, Andrew is arrested and tortured, being dragged through the city that he nearly destroys by calling forth water from a statue. Eventually, impressed by Andrew’s miracles, the people repent and release him. Andrew next draws a plan for a church, has it built, baptizes the people, and gives them the ordinances of the Lord.<\/p>\nAndrew and Paul, Acts of<\/p>\nFragmentary apocryphal story, existing only in Coptic fragments, about the arrival of the apostles Andrew and Paul by sea at a city. In the story, Paul, instructing Andrew to rescue him, visits the underworld. There he meets Judas, who explains that he worshiped Satan after Jesus had pardoned him for the betrayal. Andrew rescues Paul, who returns carrying a piece of wood. Although Andrew is asked to heal a child, some Jews are skeptical and the city gates remain closed to the apostles. Paul strikes the gates with his piece of wood, and the gates are swallowed up into the earth. Astonished at the miracle, 27,000 Jews are converted.<\/p>\nApostles, Epistle of the<\/p>\nLetter purporting to come from the 11 apostles to the churches “of the east and the west, of the north and the south, declaring and imparting to you that which concerns our Lord Jesus Christ.” Some believe that the epistle was written in Asia Minor about AD<\/span> 160; others think that it originated in Egypt. It is probably to be dated near the middle of the second century. In existence are a mutilated Coptic manuscript of the fourth or fifth century, a complete version in Ethiopic, and a fragment in Latin. The epistle was unknown until the discovery in 1895 of the Coptic manuscript.<\/p>\nAfter an introduction there is a declaration that “our Lord and Redeemer Jesus Christ is God the Son of God who was sent of God the Lord of the whole world.” Then follows a summary of a number of incidents from the Gospels, including a negative statement of the Golden Rule: “Love your enemies, and what you would not that man do to you, that do to no man.” Chapter 24 introduces the subject of the resurrection followed by a series of questions by the disciples with answers by Jesus. A prophecy of the conversion of Paul appears in chapter 31. In chapter 43 the five wise virgins are identified as “Faith and Love and Grace and Peace and Hope”; the names of the foolish are “Knowledge, Understanding (Perception), Obedience, Patience, and Compassion.” The question-and-answer format of a substantial part of the work is reminiscent of the style of some of the texts found in the Gnostic library at Nag Hammadi, especially the Apocryphon of John. However, warnings that Cerinthus and Simon (ch 7) are “enemies of our Lord Jesus Christ” make it clear that this is not a Gnostic document. The epistle contains numerous evidences of orthodox influence, along with clear indications of a departure from apostolic Christianity.<\/p>\nApostles, Gospel of the Twelve<\/p>\nOne of a large number of heretical “gospels” circulating in the earliest centuries of the Christian church along with the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. The Gospel of the Twelve Apostles was first mentioned by name in comments on Luke 1:1 by the Christian theologian Origen (c. AD<\/span> 185–254). Some scholars think it may have been the same as the Gospel of the Ebionites, quoted in a few early Christian writings. Nothing is known directly of the Gospel of the Twelve Apostles.<\/p>\nArabic Gospel of the Infancy<\/p>\nOne of several “gospels of the infancy” found in the apocryphal NT. This one from about the fifth century contains an account of the birth of Jesus, including the visits of the shepherds and the magi, the flight into Egypt, and miracles performed by Jesus as a boy. Details of the early period of Jesus’ life are given, about which the canonical Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) say nothing. An interesting facet of the miracle stories is the role in many of them of Mary, the mother of Jesus, in contrast to the record of the miracles in the canonical Gospels. The Arabic Gospel may have been written in Syriac and translated into Arabic. Some of its stories are also found in the Koran and other Islamic writings. Study of this apocryphal gospel reveals its sharp contrast with the canonical accounts, but it also indicates how much this and similar writings had to do with the growing veneration of the virgin Mary.<\/p>\nArabic History of Joseph the Carpenter<\/p>\nFourth-century AD<\/span> account of the life and death of Joseph—with information supposedly supplied by Jesus. According to this account, Joseph the carpenter becomes a widower after fathering four sons and two daughters (ch 2). He is entrusted with the care of Mary in his 90th year (ch 14). Thus, according to this account, the brothers and sisters of Jesus are Joseph’s children by a previous marriage. Joseph is said to have died at the age of 111 years. The document, which exists in both Arabic and Coptic versions, contains the statement that Mary “must look for the same end of life as other mortals” (ch 18). Hence, it has been dated as earlier than the fifth century, when the idea of the “assumption of Mary into heaven” was being promoted.<\/p>\nAristeas, Letter of<\/p>\nEarly account of the relationships between Judaism and Hellenism in Egypt during the period when the Hebrew OT was translated into Greek (the Septuagint). The author, Aristeas, who identifies himself as an Alexandrian court attendant under Ptolemy Philadelphus II (ruled 283–247 BC<\/span>), purports to give information about the translation procedures. The most probable date for the Letter of Aristeas (estimates vary from 200 BC<\/span> to AD<\/span> 50) is the end of the second century BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nAs part of his massive library project, King Ptolemy shows interest in the Jewish law. Aristeas uses the occasion to request the emancipation with remuneration of all Jewish slaves in the kingdom and King Ptolemy accedes to the request. The king asks that the high priest in Jerusalem select translators for the project. There follows a lengthy description of gifts sent to Eleazar, the high priest, with special emphasis upon an exquisite table. And then Aristeas describes the temple, the priests, the vestments of the high priest, and the defense system for the temple, followed by a brief description of Palestine and its environs.<\/p>\nIn the next section, the high priest talks with Aristeas and the translators before their departure to Alexandria. A summary of his speech includes a careful defense of the law from a philosophical viewpoint. The king gives a lavish banquet for the 72 translators (6 from each tribe) when they arrive in Alexandria. Each translator gives a brilliant answer to the king’s specific questions at the seven successive nights of celebration. The name of each translator and his question and answer are recorded. Then the work is completed on the island of Pharos in 72 days and is praised by the Alexandrian Jews and the king. The translators are dismissed with lavish gifts.<\/p>\nIn the epilogue, the author claims to have been an eyewitness to the events and maintains that his report is accurate. This is not believed by modern scholars. Its embellished and legendary quality was recognized in the fifth century BC<\/span>. Aristeas’s discussion of the translation procedure was obviously a convenient literary frame on which to hang a defense of Judaism to the heathen world. Religious liberalism and loyalty to basic Jewish beliefs were skillfully combined to plead for political toleration for the Jews. Many specifics of the Letter of Aristeas are questionable, but its basic picture of how the Septuagint translation came to be made is credible. See<\/em> the discussion of the Septuagint in Bible, Versions of the (Ancient).<\/p>\nArmenian Gospel of the Infancy<\/p>\nLegendary account of the infancy and boyhood of Jesus Christ, one of many apocryphal gospels intended to supplement the four NT Gospels by providing more details about Jesus’ early life. It was probably translated into Armenian from a Syriac original. Nestorian missionaries reportedly brought an “infancy gospel” into Armenia about AD<\/span> 590, but evidently not the Armenian Gospel in its present form.<\/p>\nSources for the Armenian Gospel included two books containing legendary material about Christ’s infancy, the Protevangelium of James and the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. The Armenian Gospel amplifies the material of these two texts considerably, making many novel additions to the life of Jesus. For example, Joseph searches for a midwife and meets Eve, who has come to witness the fulfillment of the promised Redeemer-seed (Gn 3:15). Later the magi bring the testament Adam gave to Seth. Jesus, accused of causing a child’s death, is cleared when the child is raised from the dead.<\/p>\nAscension of Isaiah<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Isaiah, Ascension of (below).<\/p>\nAscents of James<\/p>\nSee<\/em> James, Ascents of (below).<\/p>\nAsenath, Prayer of<\/p>\nJewish story about the wife of Joseph when he was in Egypt (Gn 41:45) and known by several titles—The Life and Confession of Asenath, The Book of Joseph and Asenath, and variations of the above. It was apparently very popular in the early and medieval Christian church. Latin, Syriac, Slavonic, Rumanian, and Ethiopic versions, in addition to 40 Armenian copies, have been found.<\/p>\nModern scholars tend to see the source of the novel in the Hellenistic Judaism prevalent in Egypt from 100 BC<\/span> to AD<\/span> 100. Asenath seems to serve as a model for any proselyte to Judaism. If that understanding is correct, the story gives valuable insight into the less legalistic attitudes of a sector of pre-Christian Judaism. Repentant realization of the hopelessness of one’s sinful condition and casting oneself upon the mercies of God play a large part in the story.<\/p>\nThe original was probably written in Greek and is divided into two major parts. Part I deals with Asenath’s pampered life prior to meeting Joseph, his initial rejection of her because of her idolatry, and her consequent repentance in ashes. Asenath calls upon God in prayer, and he sends an angel to her to announce her forgiveness and to say that her name is now written in the Book of Life. Joseph returns and marvels at Asenath’s new beauty, rejoicing at her conversion. With Pharaoh’s blessing they are married the next day.<\/p>\nPart II describes the period when Joseph’s father, Jacob, and his family have come to Egypt. Desiring Asenath, the elder son of Pharaoh tempts Joseph’s brothers Dan and Gad to help him kidnap her. The plan is foiled by Joseph’s other brothers, who then wish to kill Dan and Gad, but Asenath pleads successfully for their lives. Pharaoh leaves the crown to Joseph, who rules 40 years and then returns the reign to Pharaoh’s younger son.<\/p>\nAsher, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nAssumption of Moses<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Moses, Assumption of (below).<\/p>\nBarnabas, Acts of<\/p>\nDocument of one of several distinct cycles of tradition about Barnabas, the apostle Paul’s companion, this one linking him with Cyprus. This work, whose full title is The Journeyings and Martyrdom of Saint Barnabas the Apostle, was probably composed in Cyprus at the end of the fifth or the beginning of the sixth century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe book purports to be a first-person account written by John Mark. He claims to have left the apostles in Perga (cf. Acts 13:13) so he could sail to the West but was prevented. When he tried to rejoin them in Antioch, Paul prohibited him. Consequently, after some dispute, John Mark and Barnabas sailed for Cyprus. After preaching and healing many people, Barnabas encountered his old adversary, Bar-Jesus, who finally stirred up the Jews to capture him. Leading Barnabas out of the city of Salamis, they circled around him and burned him alive. John Mark and some other believers escaped with his ashes and buried them in a cave along with scriptures Barnabas had received from Matthew. John Mark then left for Alexandria to minister there.<\/p>\nBarnabas, Epistle of<\/p>\nThis anonymous letter addresses a question commonly asked throughout the early church: What should Christianity’s relationship be to Judaism? Clement of Alexandria quoted from this document frequently and ascribed it to “Barnabas, who himself also preached with the apostle [Paul].” Jerome believed the same. But the writer does not claim to be Barnabas, and the earliest claims of authorship come only from Alexandrian church leaders. The literary and interpretive style is entirely Alexandrian, so it is assumed that the epistle was written in Alexandria.<\/p>\nThe author of this epistle unequivocally denies any connection between Judaism and the gospel of Jesus Christ. At the same time, he does not say that the OT opposes the NT; rather, he sees Christianity everywhere in the Law and the Prophets. He holds that all the Judaistic rites and ceremonies are mystical pointers to Christ and that an evil angel has blinded the Jews from understanding this.<\/p>\nThe epistle mentions the destruction of Jerusalem, so it was not written before AD<\/span> 70. There was a second devastation of Jerusalem in AD<\/span> 132 that ended the revolt of Bar-Kochba. This defeat would have served the author’s purposes so well that he would surely have referred to it if he were writing after the event. Many scholars suggest that the letter was composed around 130, since this was a period of strong Jewish nationalism. This nationalism would have pressured many Jewish Christians to return to Judaism, and so the author of the Epistle of Barnabas wrote to defend Christianity against Judaism.<\/p>\nThe Epistle of Barnabas is composed of two parts. The first section (chs 1–17) contains allegorical interpretations of the OT. These highly spiritual and mystical interpretations are intended to oppose Jewish legalism and explain how the OT prophesied of Jesus Christ. The author concedes that righteous people, such as Moses, David, and the prophets, understood the true meaning of Mosaic law, but he contends that the rest of the nation of Israel had misconstrued God’s covenant. Therefore, the Jews lost their claim to the covenant’s blessings, which were transferred to the Christians instead. This allegorical style of interpretation was very popular among Alexandrian church leaders. The NT epistle of Hebrews also makes use of this type of interpretation. The author of the Epistle of Barnabas often quotes from the Septuagint, though the quotes are somewhat loosely recited.<\/p>\nA Latin version of the first section was all that was known of the Epistle of Barnabas until the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus in 1859. This codex contained the first known Greek version of the Epistle of Barnabas, which was appended to the books of the NT along with The Shepherd and the Didache. The Greek version contains a second section that begins, “Now let us pass on to quite a different sort of instruction.” This section contains moral precepts that contrast the way of darkness with the way of light, much of which seems to be transcribed from the “Two Ways” of the Didache. It has little connection with the first section. This has led many scholars to conclude that the second section was added by another writer at some later date.<\/p>\nBarnabas, Gospel of<\/p>\nLong Italian work actually written in the fourth century by a proselyte to Islam. He probably sought to capitalize on the mysterious mention of such a gospel in the Gelasian Decree, written not later than the sixth century AD<\/span>. To date, no other evidence of an authentic gospel by Barnabas has been uncovered, a fact that has led many scholars to doubt whether it ever existed.<\/p>\nBartholomew, Acts of<\/p>\nEarly Christian novel purporting to describe the last days and death of the apostle Bartholomew. The work is also known as The Martyrdom of the Holy and Glorious Apostle Bartholomew. It may date back to the fifth or sixth century AD<\/span> and was evidently well received, for copies exist in Latin, Greek, Armenian, and Ethiopic.<\/p>\nIn the Acts, Bartholomew goes to India, takes up residence in a pagan temple, and causes its false oracle to cease. Bartholomew then heals a demoniac, thus drawing the attention of King Polymius. Bartholomew also heals the king’s demon-possessed daughter. Next, he casts the false god out of the temple. After this display of power, many believe the gospel. The king’s brother, however, is enraged and has Bartholomew beaten and beheaded. His rash action is soon punished, for he is strangled to death by a demon. The good King Polymius becomes bishop and serves 20 years.<\/p>\nBartholomew, Apocalypse of<\/p>\nFragmentary Coptic texts that have some similarities to the apocryphal Gospel of Bartholomew. A few scholars have felt that two works were represented in these fragments, a gospel and also an apocalypse. Though this hypothesis has been generally abandoned, references to the debatable Apocalypse of Bartholomew still appear.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Bartholomew, Gospel of (below).<\/p>\nBartholomew, Book of the Resurrection of Christ by<\/p>\nApocryphal work existing only in Coptic and probably dating from the fifth or sixth century AD<\/span>. Like many similar writings of doubtful authenticity, it claims to supplement the accounts of Jesus found in the biblical Gospels. The book was supposedly addressed by Bartholomew to his son, Thaddaeus, who was warned in it not to let this book “come into the hand of any man who is an unbeliever and a heretic.” The book can hardly be regarded as a narrative; its aim is obviously the glorification of Bartholomew, who sees things that are hidden from others. The text contains many breaks; contradictions abound and a disregard of history is evident. Two different persons bury the body of Jesus: Joseph and Philogenes, father of a boy healed by Jesus. Mary, the mother of Jesus, is confused with Mary Magdalene. In the account of the Last Supper the author goes far beyond biblical statements about the bread and wine: “His Body was on the Table about which they were assembled; and they divided it. They saw the blood of Jesus pouring out as living blood down into the cup.” Imaginative details also embellish the account of the resurrection. Christ, for example, brings Adam back with him from hades. The story of doubting Thomas has been greatly amplified.<\/p>\nThe most complete text of the Book of the Resurrection is in the British Museum in London. Several other fragments exist, probably from an earlier version.<\/p>\nBartholomew, Gospel of<\/p>\nOne of many apocryphal gospels appearing after the second century under the name of some illustrious figure. The early church was aware not only of the existence of these writings but also of their fictitious character. In the fourth century the church historian Eusebius described them as heretical, spurious, absurd, and impious. Later a Gospel of Bartholomew was mentioned by name, along with several other Gnostic gospels, in the prologue of Jerome’s commentary on Matthew’s Gospel. However, there is no evidence that Jerome had seen such a book or that it actually existed.<\/p>\nA work called Questions of Bartholomew does exist in Greek, Latin, and Slavonic texts—the Greek dating possibly from the fifth or sixth century. Its text has Bartholomew asking Jesus where he went after the Crucifixion and Jesus telling him that he went into hades. Later Bartholomew is pictured as asking Mary to tell how she conceived the incomprehensible or bore him that cannot be carried. Mary warns him that if she began to tell them, fire would come forth from her mouth and consume all the world, but the apostle persists. As she tells the story of the angelic visitation and the Annunciation, fire comes from her mouth. The world is about to come to an end, but Jesus intervenes and places his hand over Mary’s mouth. The apostles also ask to see the bottomless pit and “the things which are in the heavens.” Bartholomew is shown the adversary of men, Beliar, restrained by 660 angels and bound with fiery chains. When Bartholomew treads upon his neck, Beliar explains that he had first been called Satanael and later Satan, describes the creation of the angels, and tells how he fell and how he was able to deceive Eve. Finally, Bartholomew is said to have asked Jesus about the greatest sin. Jesus replies that to say anything evil against a faithful worshiper of God is to sin against the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\nBaruch, Apocalypse of<\/p>\nTwo different pseudepigraphal works.<\/p>\n1. Pseudepigraphal Jewish document of 87 chapters, written in Hebrew and translated into Greek and from Greek into Syriac. Only a few lines of the Hebrew original still exist, quoted in rabbinic writings. The Syriac manuscript dates from the sixth or seventh century AD and is the only complete text. It shows evidence of multiple authorship and dependence on the book of 2 Esdras in the Apocrypha. Similarity of many expressions to those in the NT suggests that the original may have been composed in the last half of the first century or the first half of the second century.<\/p>\nThe text is in seven sections of unequal length containing both prose and poetic material. The subjects dealt with are the Messiah and his future kingdom, Israel’s past woes, and the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians. Theological questions such as sin and suffering, free will, the number of people to be saved by the Messiah, and the resurrection of the righteous are not always treated consistently within the text. Some passages paint an optimistic picture of Israel’s future; others are deeply pessimistic. In general the world is a scene of corruption for which no remedy exists. A new and spiritual world is at hand: “Whatever is now is nothing, but that which shall be is very great. For everything that is corruptible shall pass away, and everything that dies shall depart and all the present time, which is defiled with evils.” The alternating optimism and pessimism may reflect the changing fortunes of Judaism in the first and second centuries AD<\/span> or simply the outlook of the different authors. The message of hope is directed to those who keep the law of Moses: “For the righteous justly hope for the end, and without fear depart from this habitation, because they have with Thee a store of works preserved in treasuries.”<\/p>\nThe final section of the book is identified as “the epistle which Baruch, the son of Neriah, sent to the nine and a half tribes.” It was sent by being “bound to the neck of the eagle,” probably meaning that it was intended for the Jews scattered outside Palestine (the Diaspora).<\/p>\nBaruch was the prophet Jeremiah’s companion and secretary (Jer 36:4-8). His name was attached to a number of apocryphal and pseudepigraphal writings composed long after his death. The Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch is also called 2 Baruch to distinguish it clearly from the book of Baruch (1 Baruch) in the Apocrypha.<\/p>\n<li>2. Pseudepigraphal document of 17 chapters, also called the Greek Apocalypse of Baruch or 3 Baruch. It is preserved in Greek, Ethiopic, Armenian, and Slavonic manuscripts. It was first published in Venice in 1609 and then in 1868, although its existence was suggested by the early Christian theologian Origen. Like 2 Baruch, this apocalypse seems to be a composite document of the second century AD<\/span> but in contrast is a Christian document intended to warn unconverted Jews and to encourage Christians to be patient in dealing with them.<\/li>\nBasilides, Gospel of<\/p>\nPolemic commentary on the Gospels by a second-century Gnostic. Basilides’s writings remain only as allusions and fragments in later works by several church fathers. Basilides taught in Alexandria during the reign of the Roman emperor Hadrian (AD<\/span> 117–138). His teacher, Glaucias, claimed to be a firsthand interpreter of the apostle Peter. Basilides asserted that his Gnostic scheme emerged from Peter’s views on the relationship between God and Christ. He described God paradoxically as a nonexistent Being who “generated” three Sonships. Through successive ascents and enlightenments, the gospel of the supreme God (the Gospel of Light) eventually descended upon Jesus.<\/p>\nOrigen stated that “Basilides dared to write a gospel According to Basilides.” Clement of Alexandria and the writer of a fourth-century fragment, Acta Archelai, thought that Origen referred to an apocryphal gospel, the teaching of which was deduced from Irenaeus’s account. Today, more in line with Hippolytus’s understanding of Basilides, this work is regarded as merely a commentary on the Gospels. Basilides was probably not responsible for the magical rites and libertinism of the Basilidians, a Gnostic sect led by his son Isidore and continuing in Egypt to the end of the century.<\/p>\nBenjamin, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nBirth of Mary<\/p>\nAn early Gnostic writing. “The Gnostics have a book which they call the Birth (or Descent) of Mary, in which are horrible and deadly things.” So said the fourth-century bishop Ephiphanius in describing the Birth of Mary, a work that has not survived. The Birth of Mary claimed to reveal what Zechariah, father of John the Baptist, saw in the temple—namely, the Jewish god in the form of an ass. That Jews and Christians worshiped an ass-god was commonly held by their critics in those days. This blasphemous work should not be confused with the Gospel of the Birth of Mary, a fanciful but relatively harmless account of Mary’s birth, early life, and marriage to Joseph.<\/p>\n\nBirth of Mary, Gospel of the<\/p>\nCollection of legends purporting to tell Mary’s story from birth to King Herod’s slaughter of the children in Bethlehem. The earliest such manuscript is called Book of the Nativity of Mary or Gospel of James because it claimed to be written by James, half brother of Jesus. It was written by AD<\/span> 150, since Justin, an early Christian writer, named it in his Dialogues<\/em> (165). It was rediscovered for the West by Postel, who translated it from Greek into Latin (Protevangelium Jacobi,<\/em> 1552). Before it was lost, two major Latin revisions of it had been produced: Pseudo-Matthew and the Gospel of the Nativity of Mary, compiled around the sixth and ninth centuries respectively. These revisions amplified the Book of the Nativity of Mary with more fanciful legends and were the basis for the Golden Legends of James of Voragine (1230–1298), which in turn became instrumental in fostering veneration of Mary.<\/p>\nAccording to the Book of the Nativity of Mary, Mary is born to rich, barren parents (Joachim and Anna) through angelic response to their prayers. They dedicate Mary to the Lord. At six months Mary walks seven steps, so Anna makes her bedroom a sanctuary, allowing nothing unclean to enter, and vows that Mary will walk again only in the temple. At age three Mary is placed in the temple and receives food from an angel. On Mary’s twelfth birthday the high priest asks God what to do and is told to marry her to a widower. Elderly Joseph is chosen when a dove springs from his rod. Months later, Mary “gives birth” to Jesus in Bethlehem’s cave, through a light so bright that none can see; the light gradually withdraws and the Child appears at Mary’s breast. The Book of the Nativity of Mary closes with the magi and Herod’s slaughter of infants. Mary saves Jesus by wrapping him in swaddling clothes and laying him in a manger.<\/p>\nRecently another Greek fragment, this one from the Gospel of Mary, was found (see photo). The fragment is too little to tell us much about the content of this gospel.<\/p>\nBook of the Cock<\/p>\nApocryphal story preserved by the church of Ethiopia and still read there on the Thursday before Easter. According to the Book of the Cock, on the night of the Last Supper, Akrosina, wife of Simon the Pharisee, presents Jesus with a nicely prepared cock for dinner. After Judas leaves the room, Jesus touches the cock and it comes to life. He instructs it to follow Judas and to report his dealings. The cock returns and tells about the forthcoming betrayal, mentioning Paul of Tarsus as one of those involved. The disciples weep. Jesus sends the cock to the sky for a thousand years.<\/p>\nA similar story exists as a fragment in Sahidic Coptic. In the Coptic version the resurrection of the cock is a symbol of the resurrection of Christ.<\/p>\nCoptic Lives of the Virgin<\/p>\nApocryphal works concerning Mary, the mother of Jesus, in the Egyptian language of Coptic. See<\/em> Virgin, Life of the (below).<\/p>\nCorinthians, Third<\/p>\nApocryphal correspondence purporting to be between the apostle Paul and the Corinthian church. Written during the second century and known as 3 Corinthians, the work consists of three parts: an epistle allegedly from Stephanus of Corinth to Paul concerning two false apostles, Simon and Cleobius; a brief narrative telling of its delivery; and Paul’s reply and refutation of the false doctrine. The sequence of letters was originally part of the Acts of Paul, a longer apocryphal document, but circulated on its own as well—it even found its way into the text of the Armenian Bible. It pretends to explain the reference in 2 Corinthians 2:4 to a letter written in great distress.<\/p>\nAccording to an early church father, Tertullian (On Baptism),<\/em> the author of 3 Corinthians was a presbyter (church leader) of Asia who forged it out of love for Paul shortly after AD<\/span> 160. That presbyter’s removal from office indicates the stern attitude of the early Christians toward the writing of documents falsely claiming apostolic origin.<\/p>\nDan, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nDialogue of the Redeemer<\/p>\nChristian Gnostic document, also called the Dialogue of the Savior. The document was found in the ancient Nag Hammadi Library at the modern city of Nag Hammadi (Upper Egypt) in 1946. The Dialogue is a fictitious account of a conversation between Jesus and some of his disciples in which they discuss questions about the universe, humanity, the end times, and salvation. The manuscript is in poor condition. Its authorship and origin are unknown, though it was possibly written in Egypt during the second or third centuries AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nDiscourse of Theodosius<\/p>\nCoptic Boharic version of the Assumption of the Virgin and a main source for the Coptic form of that legend. See<\/em> Virgin, Assumption of the (below).<\/p>\nDoctrina Addaei<\/p>\nExpanded Syriac form of the Epistles of Christ and Abgarus, written about AD<\/span> 400. The Doctrina Addaei tells a story about the contacts between Abgar (Abgarus), king of Edessa, and Jesus Christ. King Abgar, suffering from an unspecified ailment, is said to have sent a messenger to Jesus bearing the king’s written request for healing along with an offer of sanctuary for Jesus in his kingdom. Jesus responds orally, promising to send one of his followers to Abgar after his own ascension to heaven. Abgar’s envoy also takes back a self-portrait of Jesus that becomes the pride of Edessa. Later Addai visits the kingdom, heals Abgar, and establishes Christianity there. See<\/em> Abgarus, Letters of Christ and (above).<\/p>\nEbionites, Gospel of the<\/p>\nGospel quoted by one early Christian writer, Epiphanius (fourth century), in a work against heresies. The Gospel of the Ebionites is possibly the same as the apocryphal Gospel of the Hebrews, although some scholars associate it with the Gospel of the Nazarenes. The Ebionites were vegetarians; Epiphanius’s citations stress the vegetarian diets of John the Baptist and Jesus.<\/p>\nEgyptians, Gospel of the<\/p>\nTwo apocryphal works with the same name.<\/p>\n1. Apocryphal second-century AD<\/span> Greek writing, mentioned by the early church writers, Clement and Origen. Used in Egypt, the composition seems to have contained and propagated Gnostic teachings, especially those advocated in Syria by Simon and Menander. According to these Gnostics, marriage, eating meat, and procreation were evil. Clement may have quoted from this writing to refute the beliefs of the Encratites, who broadly agreed with the Syrian Gnostics on those matters. The Gnostics’ depreciation of women was reflected in the quotations Clement used.<\/p>\n<li>2. Composition discovered in 1946 at Chenoboskion (Egypt) in the Nag Hammadi collection of Gnostic writing. The principal title of the work, described in the colophon as “Gospel of the Egyptians” was “Sacred Book of the Great Invisible Spirit.” This work dealt with emanations from “the primal spirit of the cosmos” and perhaps was a product of the Barbelo Gnostic sect.<\/li>\nEldad and Medad, Book of<\/p>\nPre-Christian pseudepigraphic composition containing the alleged prophecies of Eldad and Medad, two persons appointed as elders by Moses (Nm 11:26). Since the nature of their prophecy was not specified, it gave rise to a lost work that is quoted in the Shepherd of Hermas as follows: “The Lord is near to them who return to Him, as it is written in Eldad and Medad who prophesied to the people in the wilderness” (Vision II, ch 3). That is the only source of information concerning the lost book.<\/p>\nEugnostos, Letter of<\/p>\nGnostic work. Found near the modern city of Nag Hammadi, the Letter of Eugnostos was written in Coptic by a teacher to his disciple. Both author and date of composition are unknown. An early example of non-Christian Gnostic writing, it perhaps served as the basis for a Christian Gnostic composition, “The Wisdom of Jesus Christ.”<\/p>\nThe Letter of Eugnostos attempts to prove the existence of an invisible spiritual realm. It also stresses God’s remoteness from humanity.<\/p>\nEve, Gospel of<\/p>\nGnostic and apocalyptic writings, known solely through a citation by Epiphanius, a late fourth-century metropolitan of Cyprus. Epiphanius quoted the Gospel of Eve in a biting refutation of Gnostic and Origenistic teachings. Evidently a cult had formed around Eve as if her name implied revelation because the serpent had spoken to her in the Garden of Eden. Epiphanius’s quotation from the Gospel of Eve roughly translates: “I stood on a high mountain and saw a giant and a feeble man, and I heard a voice like thunder. ‘Come near me and listen,’ and he spoke to me saying, ‘I am you and you are me. Wherever you are, there I am. I am spread through all things, and any place you are able to retire into or take shelter in me; and, taking shelter in me, you take shelter in yourself.’ ”<\/p>\nEzekiel, Apocryphal<\/p>\nNoncanonical book of Ezekiel mentioned by Josephus, first-century Jewish historian. An apocryphal Ezekiel is cited in five early Christian writings and a recent archaeological discovery. Bishop Epiphanius (fourth century) cited an Ezekiel parable, in proof of the resurrection of the interdependent soul and body, about a blind man and a lame man collaborating to rob an orchard. Clement of Rome, writing to the Corinthians (AD 90?), and Clement of Alexandria in two of his writings (AD<\/span> 200?) have noncanonical Ezekiel quotations. An Ezekiel apocryphon is mentioned in the pseudo-Athanasian canon (purporting to list canonical books of the Bible) and is named in the stichometry (prose written in rhythmic phrases) of Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople (AD<\/span> 806–815). In 1940 Campbell Bonner published Greek papyrus fragments that confirm the existence of an apocryphal Ezekiel.<\/p>\nEzra, Fourth Book of<\/p>\nAlternate name for the apocryphal book 2 Esdras. See<\/em> Esdras, Second Book of.<\/p>\nGad, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nGenesis Apocryphon<\/p>\nName given to one of the seven large Dead Sea Scrolls recovered from the first Qumran cave in 1947. With three others it came into the possession of the Syrian archbishop of Jerusalem but could not be unrolled and photographed because it was badly preserved, having not been kept in an earthen jar like the others. Some small pieces were detached, however, and certain words on them indicated that it might be an apocryphal Aramaic work connected with the patriarch Enoch. Further scraps spoke of Lamech, however, thus the scroll was tentatively named for that ancient person.<\/p>\nEventually it was unrolled and found to be not only damaged but incomplete; the beginning and the end were missing. The inner portion had been best preserved, but considerable damage had been done to the text by the ink it had been written with. The scroll not only dealt with Enoch and Lamech but with other persons mentioned in the book of Genesis. It proved to be an Aramaic form of parts of Genesis dealing with the patriarchs, but it included legends and other materials presented in memoir style, not found in the Hebrew Bible. That style was popular among pious Jews at the beginning of the Christian era, thus its original has been dated to the first century BC<\/span>. The Qumran copy was probably made between 50 BC<\/span> and AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nThe literary characteristics of the scroll have presented some classification problems. Free expansion and inclusion of nonbiblical material led certain scholars to call the scroll a “targum” or commentary-expansion of the Genesis text. Others have regarded it as a “midrash” or sermonic account of the Hebrew narrative. The scroll contains both elements and is best regarded as an independent recounting of certain Genesis stories, enriched by the inclusion of imaginative material such as a description of the beauty of the patriarch Abraham’s wife Sarah; dreams; and accounts of plagues and journeys.<\/p>\nThe Aramaic Apocryphon somewhat antedates the one used in Palestine in the time of Christ. It contains some Hebraisms but is mostly written in good Aramaic, much of which parallels biblical Aramaic. The language of the scroll, however, is later than the period of old Aramaic (tenth to eighth centuries BC<\/span>) or official Aramaic (Assyrian and Persian periods), as the presence of certain grammatical forms indicate. Most scholars have described the language as middle Aramaic and have placed it between the Aramaic of Daniel and later western Aramaic. Those scholars generally assign a second-century BC<\/span> date to Daniel, but that conclusion needs to be modified because the Qumran material shows that no canonical work was composed later than about 350 BC<\/span>. On any evidence, the Aramaic of Daniel is earlier than that of the Apocryphon and seems to fit properly into the period when official Aramaic was the dominant form of the language. The Genesis Apocryphon presents no valid reasons for dating the Aramaic of Daniel or Ezra later than the sixth to fifth centuries BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nGospel of Thomas<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Thomas, Gospel of (below).<\/p>\nIsaiah, Ascension of<\/p>\nPseudepigraphal apocalyptic work widely known to the early Christians; also known as the Martyrdom of Isaiah, the Testament of Hezekiah, and the Vision of Isaiah. It was rediscovered when an Ethiopic version of part of the text was published in 1819. The full Ethiopic version is the only complete version in existence. A partial Latin text published in 1832 had actually been published in Venice over three centuries before. Slavonic and Coptic versions also exist. All may be traced back to two Greek versions of the third, fifth, and sixth centuries.<\/p>\nIt is not clear whether the original was a single composition or even whether the authorship was Christian or Jewish with later Christian editing. The final form may date from the latter part of the second century. It was known to Ambrose, Jerome, Origen, Tertullian, and possibly to Justyn Martyr. The contents fall under three heads:<\/p>\n1. The Martyrdom of Isaiah. This material consists of prophetic utterances, including the prophet’s prediction of his own death at the hands of King Manasseh of Judah. The document deals with the dark apostasy of the king, who, indwelt by Satan and following Beliar, leads his people into all manner of sin. Jerusalem, whose fall is prophesied, is called “Sodom” and its princes “Gomorrah.” In the form of a midrash (devotional sermon), this section dwells on Isaiah’s firm rejection of compromise or recantation. Isaiah’s martyrdom by being “sawn in two” is the portion with which the church fathers seem to have been familiar.<\/p>\n<li>2. The Testament of Hezekiah. This section is apocalyptic, a vision Isaiah passes on to his king. It speaks of the descent of “the Beloved,” a title used in this document for the Messiah. The vision covers the Messiah’s incarnation, life, death, resurrection, and ascension, then turns to the early history of the church and the apostasy that precedes the second coming of the Lord. The Antichrist is revealed as Beliar or Satan, who assumes human form and kills his mother (no doubt directed at the Roman emperor Nero, who murdered his mother, Agrippina). The whole section is based on Daniel and the biblical Apocalypse and was also influenced by Gnosticism. The conclusion of the vision (the Beloved’s victory, the two resurrections, and the final judgment) very closely parallels the consummation of all things in the NT book of Revelation.<\/li>\n<li>3. The Vision of Isaiah. This section resembles #2 even linguistically but shows more Gnostic influence: Isaiah is lifted to the dwelling place of the Trinity, the seventh heaven, and shown many mysteries of Christ. Because of this vision Manasseh kills the prophet. Gnostic doctrine, as propagated by Cerinthus at the end of the first century, is evident. Jesus, earthly born, becomes the host of the Christ, who leaves his earthly tenement at the Crucifixion.<\/li>\nHistorically, the value of the Ascension of Isaiah is to show the welter of conflicting opinion which, claiming authority and inspiration, besieged the minds of the early Christians.<\/p>\nIsaiah, Martyrdom of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Isaiah, Ascension of (above).<\/p>\nIssachar, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nJames, Apocalypse of<\/p>\nThere were two Gnostic apocalypses of James (designated “first” and “second”). The first, covering over 20 pages of text, purports to be a revelation given by the Lord, some of it before the Crucifixion and some after it, to James, his brother, who was also know as James the righteous. The two documents referred to as the Apocalypse of James are in Codex V of the Nag Hammadi literature discovered in 1945 in Egypt just west of the Nile River opposite the city of Chenoboskion and are distinct from the Apocryphon of James, which is included in NT apocryphal writings. The second apocalypse composed of 20 pages of Coptic text is purportedly a speech delivered by James the Just on the fifth step of the temple and contains many references to or echoes of canonical Scriptures. The work ends with the multitude casting James down from the temple and stoning him in a manner reminiscent of the martyrdom of Stephen.<\/p>\nJames, Ascents of<\/p>\nLost book mentioned only by Epiphanius (bishop of the Greek island of Salamis) in his fourth-century work Refutation of All the Heresies.<\/em> According to Epiphanius, the Ascents of James was used by the Ebionites, a rigidly ascetic sect of Jewish Christians. The book represented James, Jesus’ brother, as having spoken against the temple and sacrifices. It declared the apostle Paul to be a Greek who went to Jerusalem, sought to marry the high priest’s daughter, and to that end became a proselyte and was circumcised. When he did not win the young woman, he inveighed against the Sabbath, the Law, and circumcision.<\/p>\nIn a commentary on Galatians (1865), J. B. Lightfoot suggested that the book’s title referred to James’s ascents up the temple steps, from which he addressed the people. Lightfoot also suggested that James’s death was the grand climax of the ascents. According to a quote from the early Christian writer Hegesippus (as recorded in Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical History<\/em>), James was cast down to his death from the pinnacle of the temple.<\/p>\nJames, Protevangelium of<\/p>\nThis is an apocryphal “gospel” that tells of the token marriage and pregnancy of Mary and of Jesus’ birth, childhood, and adolescent years. This apocryphal writing was discovered in the 16th century by Guillaume Postel.<\/p>\nJob, Testament of<\/p>\nApocalyptic literature bearing resemblance to the biblical book of Job. The book was probably written in Greek in the second century AD<\/span>. Since it is devoid of Christian thought, it was likely written by a Jew.<\/p>\nIn chapters 1–45, Job is the speaker. He comes to understand that a nearby temple has been desecrated by there having been offered in it sacrifices to Satan. When Job destroys it, Satan threatens him. Job’s friends come to console him but their speeches are greatly abbreviated. Elihu is represented as Satan’s mouthpiece and earns God’s displeasure. But Job sacrifices for all three friends. He remarries and has seven sons and three daughters, who inherit his wealth. Chapters 46–51, in which Job’s brother is the speaker, conclude the narrative.<\/p>\nJohn the Baptist, Life of<\/p>\nA legendary account supposedly written by Serapion dealing with the early life of John the Baptist and especially with the death of his mother, Elizabeth. While Jesus was living with his parents in Egypt, Elizabeth dies on the same day as Herod the Great dies. John, who is but a small boy, does not know how to bury her. The clouds bring Jesus, Mary, and Salome who wash the body. The grave is dug by Michael and Gabriel, who also bring the souls of Zacharias and Simeon. John is then left to grow up in the desert under the care of the angels, while the clouds lift Jesus and Mary to Nazareth where they live.<\/p>\nJohn the Evangelist, Book of<\/p>\nThis writing was used most extensively by the Albigenses and was commonly regarded as stemming from the Bogomiles before them. It was written in the form of questions and answers propounded to have come from the apostle John while he leaned upon the breast of Jesus at the Last Supper. This pattern of questions and answers is found in other early Gnostic writings, especially the Gospel of Bartholomew.<\/p>\nThe writing contains Gnostic theology. It portrays a world created by Satan and not by God. Christ was not born of Mary but was an angel sent forth to the earth. He “entered in by the ear and came forth by the ear” of Mary. John the Baptist was sent by Satan, and his disciples (the Roman Catholic Church) are not the disciples of Christ. Baptism and apparently the Lord’s Supper are valueless.<\/p>\nThe writing is preserved only in Latin and in its present form is not earlier than the 12th century. A convenient English translation may be found in M. R. James, The Apocryphal NT<\/em> (1924).<\/p>\nJoseph, Prayer of<\/p>\nJewish apocalyptic work. The Prayer of Joseph won the commendation of Origen, an early church scholar, as a document “not to be despised.” Origen’s quotations provide almost the only surviving information about the work, so that its total content and significance are unclear. An ancient list of OT apocryphal and canonical writings puts the Prayer of Joseph third and mentions its length as 1,100 verses. Origen’s quotations concern mainly Joseph’s father, Jacob. Jacob exists in the form of an angel, bearing Jacob’s given name Israel. He is the speaker in the quoted fragments and foretells the fate of humankind. He describes how he met Uriel on a journey to Mesopotamia and how Uriel wrestled with him, claiming to be the greatest of the angels. The apocalyptic poet had in mind the story of Jacob’s mysterious wrestling at Jabbok (Gn 32:22-29) and passages such as Daniel 10:13. Because Jacob claims to be “the first born of all living beings” and therefore the chief of all angels, Uriel challenges him.<\/p>\nJoseph, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nJoseph the Carpenter, History of<\/p>\nDocument glorifying Jesus’ earthly father and promoting a cult of Joseph. Words in chapter 18 of the History of Joseph support a fourth-century date for it. There Jesus tells his mother, “You, too, must look for the same end of life as other mortals.” By the fifth century the doctrine of the “Assumption of the Virgin” was widely held.<\/p>\nThe document, derived from the Protevangelium of James, was contaminated by both Gnosticism and other religious beliefs of Egypt, the country in which it was written. It is extant in Coptic and Arabic and also in a fourth-century translation of the Coptic text.<\/p>\nThe History of Joseph the Carpenter claims to give an account of Joseph’s life and his model death at the age of 111. The story is allegedly told by Jesus to his disciples on the Mt of Olives. Joseph, a carpenter (Mt 13:55), is a widower well advanced in years when he marries Mary, who is only 12. (He had six children by an earlier marriage.) Joseph is buried according to the rites of the Egyptian Osiris cult after Jesus pronounces a eulogy.<\/p>\nJubilees, Book of<\/p>\nJubilees is a pseudepigraphal work from the last half of the second century BC<\/span> during the Maccabean period. It is an invaluable source for understanding the environment in the age prior to the launching of the Christian church. Jubilees stands with the Book of Enoch and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs as the most important Hebrew or Aramaic literature of the time. Like these it was translated into Greek and used by the church fathers. Most probably, Jubilees was written in Hebrew since it purported a Mosaic authorship and since its nationalistic Maccabean environment would demand it. Fragments of 10 manuscripts in Hebrew found at Qumran support the thesis that it was originally in that language.<\/p>\nThe work is referred to by later Greek writers following Hebrew sources as “Jubilees” and “the little (lesser) Genesis.” It is also entitled “The Apocalypse of Moses” and the “Testament of Moses.” In revised forms it has been called “The Book of Adam’s Daughters” and “The Life of Adam.”<\/p>\nComplete, fifty-chapter manuscripts exist in six Ethiopian texts of which the texts of the fifth and sixth centuries are best. The Latin text is valuable but partial and only a few fragments of the Greek version remain. The Hebrew fragments found at Qumran are of special importance since they are from the period of original writing. The Bibliotheque Nationale has “Ethiopien 51” and “Ethiopien 160.” The British Museum has Kufale,<\/em> or Liber Jubilaeorum,<\/em> and Enoch<\/em>.<\/em><\/p>\nThe author of Jubilees claims a direct revelational source for the teaching that he espouses. God had spoken to Moses in the Pentateuch in the “lesser law” in this “little book of Genesis.” At Sinai God communicated to Moses by the “Angel of the Presence” saying to the angel, “Write for Moses from the beginning of creation until my sanctuary has been built among them for all eternity” (1:27). This is supplementary to the “first law” (6:22).<\/p>\nFollowing a brief introduction Jubilees follows the text of Genesis and Exodus to 14:31. This midrashic treatment of the Pentateuchal material attempts to show that the patriarchy adhered to the law even prior to Moses. The author’s aim is to strengthen classical Judaism in the face of the serious intrusions of Hellenistic culture among Jewish peoples. In doing this the author does not hesitate in adding and subtracting from Pentateuchal history. The patriarchs are adorned in every way. Anything that showed their weaknesses and sins was removed and legendary content inserted to glorify these fathers. The patriarchs are the fountainheads of culture. Enoch invented writing; Noah, medicine; Abraham, plowing.<\/p>\nAppealing to Leviticus 25:8-12, the work emphasizes the importance of the number seven. History from Adam to Moses is arranged according to cycles of seven. This manner of compartmentalizing history into jubilee periods was revealed to Moses at Sinai and so has divine sanction and in fact is mandated. The philosophy of history that springs from this sees God acting sovereignly and uniquely in Israel in distinction to his relationship with the gentile world. The other nations are ruled by angels but not Israel, which is directly in God’s charge (Jubilees 15:31ff.).<\/p>\nThe polemic that Jubilees mounts against the lunar calendar (6:36-38) and its acceptance of the solar calendar is but another facet of the drive for a deep reform that will cleanse Israel. Israel is to be separated to God in every way with no intermingling in marriage or sitting at the table with Gentiles. There is a surprising stringency demanded in Sabbath keeping (50:1-13). The penalty of death is levied against those who travel, buy or sell, draw water, bear burdens, snare creatures, or have marital relations on the Sabbath. These go far beyond the biblical requirements and belong to that milieu that produced the Qumran community and the Essenes.<\/p>\nThe apocalyptic declaration of the Angel of Presence contains a clear but limited eschatological truth. Jubilees does contain the expectation of an immediate establishment of the messianic age. The entire emphasis, however, is such that ethical and cultural purposes are preeminent.<\/p>\nJudah, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nJudas Iscariot, Gospel of<\/p>\nVery old Gnostic writing probably produced by the Cainite sect. As it is not preserved for us today, we know it only through quotations in the writings of early Christians, especially Irenaeus. Thus, it must have been written before the middle of the second century AD<\/span>. It probably contained a body of secret doctrine purportedly revealed by Judas Iscariot, summarizing the truth of superior and perfect knowledge supposedly revealed to this sect of the Gnostics. The gospel sets forth the “mystery of the betrayal,” explaining how Judas through his treachery made the salvation of all mankind possible. This was accomplished by his forestalling the destruction of the truth proclaimed by Christ or by his thwarting the designs of the evil powers, the Archons, who wished to prevent the crucifixion of Christ because they knew it would destroy their evil power.<\/p>\nLentulus, Epistle of<\/p>\nLentulus, ostensibly a predecessor of Pontius Pilate, is said to have prepared a report to the Roman Senate known as the Letter (or Epistle) of Lentulus. In it he included a detailed description of Jesus: “tall and handsome, his countenance inspiring reverence along with love and fear, his hair dark, shining, curling, parted in the middle, his face with a delicate rudiness. . . .” The authenticity of the letter is extremely doubtful.<\/p>\nLevi, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nLives of Adam and Eve<\/p>\nA general title given to a noncanonical writing extant in Greek and Latin. The book is Jewish in nature, though there is a Christian flavor that causes most scholars to date the original work to the beginning of the Christian era. The content of the book is an expansion on the biblical story of Adam and Eve.<\/p>\nThe Greek version begins with the expulsion from Eden. In a dream, Eve sees the murder of Abel. After Adam had fallen ill Seth and Eve went to obtain oil from the tree of life. Michael the archangel met Seth and told him that Adam would die. Upon his death, he was ultimately taken to the third heaven. Seth witnessed how the angels interred his father and received instructions on how to bury his mother, who died a week after Adam.<\/p>\nThe Latin version gives additional information. After the expulsion from the Garden, Eve asked Adam to kill her but instead of that he suggested they both do an act of penitence. Adam went to stand in the Jordan for 40 days and Eve went to stand in the water of the Euphrates for 37 days. While there, she was again tempted by Satan, who was disguised as an angel of light but was eventually exposed by Adam. Satan now explained the reason for his hostility toward them: when the angels were commanded to worship the Lord, he refused to do obeisance to God and was consequently cast out of heaven.<\/p>\nMatthew, Martyrdom of<\/p>\nLoosely organized tale of Matthew’s martyrdom that borrows heavily from the “Acts of Andrew and Matthias” and assumes that Matthias was in fact Matthew. The document represents the low literary and theological impulse of the later apocryphal texts.<\/p>\nThe story begins when Matthew is commissioned by Jesus to plant a staff in Myrna, the city of man-eaters. Matthew does so, after exorcising the demon Asmodeus from the king’s wife and family. The staff becomes a tree overnight, Matthew preaches to the people, and they “become humanized.” But Asmodeus seeks revenge by directing the king to burn Matthew. The fire consumes golden idols and many soldiers, then turns into a dragon and chases the king, who begs Matthew for help. But Matthew dies.<\/p>\nA somewhat repentant but not yet converted king places the body of Matthew in an iron casket and sinks it secretly in the sea. The next day Matthew appears on the sea in the presence of two shining men and a “beautiful” child. The king is finally converted, baptized, and accepted into the church. Matthew appears to confer on the king his own name and to ordain him a priest and his family, deacons and deaconesses. Then Matthew ascends to heaven with two angels.<\/p>\nMedad, Book of Eldad and<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Eldad and Medad, Book of (above).<\/p>\nMoses, Assumption of<\/p>\nA Jewish legend that Moses was taken bodily into heaven without dying. Probably written between AD<\/span> 7 and 30, it may be a combination of two earlier works, and appears to borrow heavily from the book of Deuteronomy. The work was likely produced to provide a miraculous ending to Moses’ outstanding earthly life, attributing to him an experience similar to Elijah’s. But this Jewish legend is contrary to the OT account of Moses’ death (Dt 32:48-50; 34:5-7).<\/p>\n<h6>The Lost Assumption of Moses<\/h6>\nThree facts indicate that there once was an apocryphal book that contained the legend of the assumption of Moses: (1) early lists of apocryphal works mention a work by this title; (2) several church fathers refer to it; and (3) a few fragments in Greek have survived.<\/p>\nThe following items appeared in the work. God commissioned the archangel Michael to bury Moses’ body. Satan opposed Moses’ burial because he claimed authority over all matter and because Moses was a murderer. Michael countered Satan’s claims and charged him with tempting Eve in Eden. Joshua and Caleb then watched Moses’ assumption occur in a strange way. As they watched, they saw Moses’ dead body buried in the mountain, but they also saw Moses himself in the company of the angels. In effect Moses’ body died, but Moses himself did not.<\/p>\nThough often stated that Jude (v 9) was quoted from the Assumption of Moses, this is impossible to prove, simply because the relevant portions of that work have not survived. The most one can say is that several church fathers, including Clement of Alexandria (d. AD<\/span> 215) and Origen (c. 185–254), suggested that the Assumption of Moses was the source for the account in Jude 1:9. They had both works. We have only Jude, so we cannot check their conclusions. The matter is further complicated because there is another work (see next section) now called the Assumption of Moses. People often suppose that Jude 1:9 is a citation from that book. It is not.<\/p>\n<h6>The Extant Assumption of Moses<\/h6>\nThis work, perhaps written during Jesus’ lifetime, purports to be a description of Moses’ predictions to Joshua of the destiny of the nation of Israel. It is similar to other apocryphal, nonhistorical writings that were written under the names of great Jewish leaders.<\/p>\nIt was discovered quite by chance in 1861, in the Ambrosian Library in Milan, Italy. The manuscript, dated to the fifth century AD<\/span>, is a very poor copy of a Latin translation, perhaps derived from a Greek translation of a Hebrew original. The beginning and the ending are lost. There are numerous spelling mistakes, and there is no space between words. Not surprisingly, scholars have long disputed the reading, interpretation, and translation even of whole verses.<\/p>\nThe opening three lines have not survived, so the original title has been lost. When discovered, the work was assumed to be the long-lost Assumption of Moses, but this identification is now widely doubted. Even though the book is still called by this title, it is far more likely to be either the Testament of Moses (which is also mentioned, along with the Assumption of Moses, in early lists of apocryphal works) or a composite work resulting from the combination of the Testament and the Assumption into one work.<\/p>\nThere is only one reference to Moses’ assumption in the book, and it comes in connection with a mention of his death (10:12). Because the ending of the book is also lost, it is impossible to know the contents of the conclusion or to tell whether this one remaining reference to Moses’ assumption is original or whether it has been added by a scribe by mistake or by an editor combining two different works. It is clear, however, that the author of the surviving section believed that Moses expected to die (1:15; 10:12-14) and that Joshua assumed that he would (11:4-8).<\/p>\nThe work begins midsentence (three lines are missing) and dates Moses’ following speech to 2,500 years after Creation (1:2-5). Expecting to die, Moses summons Joshua, encourages him, and tells him that God created the world for his people (the Israelites), who will repent before the consummation at the end of the days (1:6-18).<\/p>\nThen Moses foretells Israel’s future. The people will inherit the land (Canaan) and be ruled by local magistrates, chiefs (judges?), and kings (2:1-3). The kingdom will divide, and the people will turn to idolatry (2:4-9). A king from the east (Nebuchadnezzar) will take two tribes into captivity for about 77 years, where they will recall Moses’ warnings (3:1-14; cf. Jer 25:11-12; Dt 28:15-68; 30:15-20). Someone (Daniel) will pray for deliverance (cf. Dn 9:4-19), and God will persuade a king (Cyrus) to send the exiles home (4:1-6; cf. Is 45:1-6; Ezr 1:1-4). Some exiles will return to their appointed place (Jerusalem) and rewall it but be unable to offer [proper] sacrifices (4:7-8; contrast Ezr 3:1-7). Others will remain in exile but will increase in population (4:9). This concludes the OT period and begins the intertestamental period (c. 400 to 1 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe widespread apostasy of the Seleucid period (c. 201–267 BC<\/span>) is described, with special reference to priests and judges (4:1-6). The Maccabees, who gained and maintained political independence from Syria (in 164 BC<\/span>) are not mentioned. Instead, the focus is on the kings (the Hasmoneans) who made themselves high priests (6:1). Next will come an insolent king (Herod the Great, 37–4 BC<\/span>), who will rule ruthlessly (6:2-7). Then a powerful king of the West will conquer the people, take some captive, crucify others, and burn part of the temple (6:8-9).<\/p>\nFrom this point on, the author, having reached his own period, had to guess at the future, so the predictions that he put in Moses’ mouth are general or obscure and often unfulfilled. The next rulers (Sadducees?) would be impious, treacherous, gluttons, deceitful, and worried about ritual uncleanness while living in luxury at the expense of the poor (7:1-10). An unprecedented time of wrath would follow, when a great king would persecute the Jews, torturing, imprisoning, and even crucifying them for practicing circumcision (8:1-5). During this persecution, one man, Taxo, a Levite with seven sons, would remain faithful to God and die rather than adopt Greek customs (8:1-7).<\/p>\nThe next section (10:1-10), an apocalyptic poem (ten stanzas, each with three lines), is the only apocalyptic section of the book. The Lord’s kingdom will appear, Satan will be no more, and the chief angel (Michael) will avenge Israel (10:1-2). “The Heavenly One will arise from His royal throne,” and there will be miraculous signs on the earth and in the sky; even the ocean will drain away (10:3-6). The Most High, the Eternal God, will appear and punish the Gentiles, destroying their idols (10:7). But Israel will be happy and exalted, rejoicing at seeing her enemies in Gehenna (hell) and thankfully praising her Creator (10:8-10). With Moses’ mention of his death and some consoling words for Joshua, the composition ends in an incomplete form.<\/p>\nThe book must have been written after Herod died and Varus had subdued a rebellion in Judea (4 BC<\/span>) and before the temple was destroyed (AD<\/span> 70). The book predicts that Herod’s sons will not rule as long as Herod himself did (34 years, 37–4 BC<\/span>). This prediction may be based on the fact that one son, Archelaus, was deposed after a 10-year reign (4 BC<\/span>–AD<\/span> 6). If so, the book was written after AD<\/span> 6. But two other sons (Philip and Antipas) actually ruled longer than their father. For the author not to know this requires that the book must have been written within 34 years of Herod’s death—in other words, before AD<\/span> 30. Therefore, the book was probably written sometime between AD<\/span> 6 and 30. This also means that the book reflects Jewish thinking during Jesus’ lifetime.<\/p>\nThe author was evidently a Palestinian Jew, but it is doubtful whether he was a member of any known major sect of the times. He hates Roman rule (8:1–10:10) without advocating revolt, as the Zealots and their predecessors did. His interest in the temple (2:8-9; 5:3; 6:9; 8:5) is not typical of an Essene. He condemns the Sadducean lifestyle (7:3-10). And his use of apocalyptic writing (10:1-10) is thought to have been unusual for a Pharisee.<\/p>\nNaphtali, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nNicodemus, Gospel of<\/p>\nAlternate title for the apocryphal work Acts of Pilate. See<\/em> Pilate, Acts of (below).<\/p>\nNoah, Book of<\/p>\nAllusion to the writing of Noah is made in the book of Jubilees where it is said “Noah wrote down all things in a book as we instructed him concerning every kind of medicine. Thus the evil spirits were precluded from (hurting) the sons of Noah” (10:13; see also 21:10). The book of Noah borrows heavily from the book of Enoch (see chs 6–11, 54–55, 60, 65–69, 106–110). The other sections relate to the Noachic flood and subjects about which Noah could be presumed to have knowledge. Unfortunately no separate manuscript of the book of Noah is known to be extant.<\/p>\nOdes of Solomon<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Solomon, Psalms of (below).<\/p>\nPatriarchs, Testaments of the Twelve<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nPaul, Acts of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Paul and Thecla, Acts of (below).<\/p>\nPaul, Acts of Andrew and<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Andrew and Paul, Acts of (above).<\/p>\nPaul and Thecla, Acts of<\/p>\nThe Acts of Paul and Thecla is one section of an apocryphal work known as the Acts of Paul. It was apparently written in the latter half of the second century AD<\/span> by a church elder who lived in Asia. According to Tertullian (On Baptism<\/em> 17.19-21), the motive for the writing was “love of Paul,” but the presbyter was removed from office for producing this document. It is not clear whether the reason for his deposition was that he made a false claim to apostolic authorship, or whether it was that the viewpoints expressed in the document were considered heretical.<\/p>\nThe story reads like a folktale. Paul arrives in Iconium after fleeing from Antioch. He is met by Onesiphorus, who welcomes Paul into his home. A group of people gather there to hear Paul’s message. Beside the window of a neighboring house, Thecla is seated. She cannot see Paul, but she listens intently to his message. Her mother, Thecleia, exclaims, “My daughter, like a spider, is bound by his words to the window, seized by a new craving and a terrible passion.” Paul is teaching that in order to “see God,” a person must live a life of abstinence from sexual activity.<\/p>\nThecla is engaged to be married, but she is so impressed with Paul’s teaching that she determines she will break her engagement to Thamyris. Thamyris, in distress, appeals to the governor of the city, who arrests and imprisons Paul. Thecla bribes the jailer with bracelets and a silver mirror and enters Paul’s cell. Again she is transfixed by his teaching. At the trial, Thecla is adamant in her refusal to marry Thamyris. Paul is banned from the city; Thecla is condemned to be burned to death. Miraculously her life is spared, and she is reunited with Paul and travels with him to Antioch.<\/p>\nIn Antioch, Thecla rebuffs the advances of a nobleman, Alexander, and for a second time is condemned to death. But the wild beasts who are to devour her in the public arena instead lick her feet and protect her. When she throws herself into a water cistern to effect her baptism, she is again spared death—a lightning flash kills the fish lurking in the water, and they float lifeless to the surface. Queen Tryphaena, who has befriended Thecla, faints with shock as repeated attempts are made to take Thecla’s life. Seeing this, Alexander finally begs the governor to set Thecla free.<\/p>\nFree once more, Thecla seeks Paul. She disguises herself as a man by putting on male attire. Arriving in Myra, she finds Paul and announces to him that she is returning to Iconium. Paul commands her to “teach the word of God.” After teaching for a while in Iconium, Thecla travels on to Seleucia.<\/p>\nThe remainder of Thecla’s life is not well documented. Some manuscripts record that Thecla, being afraid of the people of Seleucia, withdrew to a mountain and resided in a cave. There she lived an ascetic life, taught certain women who came to her, and carried out a ministry of healing. Later she departed to Rome, seeking Paul. Paul, however, was already dead. When Thecla herself died, at 90 years of age, she was buried not far from the tomb of her beloved master.<\/p>\nAlthough this work is considered apocryphal and is excluded from the NT canon, there are some early writers who held it in high regard. The Acts of Paul, of which this document forms a part, is mentioned by Origen and by Hippolytus with respect. Eusebius was of the opinion that the document was spurious, but he distinguished it from inferior heretical works. There are two instances where details of information have found their way from the Acts of Paul into early manuscripts of canonical books (2 Tm 3:11; 4:19). It is probable that the viewpoints indicated in this document reflected popular religious traditions widely held in the second century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nTertullian, however, argues that the document is quite out of harmony with Paul’s attitudes as expressed in the canonical material. In particular, he objects to the role assumed by a woman in the Acts of Paul and Thecla. Paul, Tertullian says, would never have permitted a woman to teach and to baptize (On Baptism<\/em> 17.21-23). The Acts of Paul and Thecla does differ from the Pauline stance, but not in the way indicated by Tertullian. The document depicts Paul as a proponent of the encratite viewpoint, teaching that celibacy is necessary for salvation. The canonical Paul taught that salvation is attained through faith alone, and that celibacy is a matter of special calling and certainly not the norm for every Christian (1 Cor 7:1-7). The Acts of Paul and Thecla suggests that a woman must assume male attire and must abstain from marriage if she is to exercise a leadership role. The canonical Paul instructed that a woman in a leadership position should dress as a woman (1 Cor 11:4-6), and he affirmed the ministerial function of married women (Rom 16:3). The Acts of Paul and Thecla emulates a woman whose motivating power was personal devotion to the apostle. The canonical writings suggest that Paul strongly discouraged such a show of personal allegiance to himself (1 Cor 1:12-17). Christ alone was to be the motivating influence in Christian service.<\/p>\nThe Acts of Paul and Thecla provides us with a unique description of the physical appearance of Paul: “a man small of stature, with a bald head and crooked legs, in good state of body, with eyebrows meeting and nose somewhat hooked, full of friendliness; for now he appeared like a man, and now he had the face of an angel.” This description is probably not reliable in any historical sense; more likely it pictures a typical Jew of the period. But because there is no other description preserved in early documents, this one has formed the basis for the many portraits of Paul that have come down through the centuries.<\/p>\nPaul, Apocalypse of<\/p>\nThis document, which originated in the late fourth century AD<\/span>, pretends to be a written account of some of the experiences that the apostle Paul had when he was caught up to the third heaven, or paradise, according to 2 Corinthians 12:2-4. The fact that Paul did not describe what he saw or heard during that revelatory vision excited the imagination of some unknown fourth-century Christian. Since the author describes with relish the tortures in hell experienced by a presbyter, bishop, and deacon (chs 34–36) and elsewhere approves of the devotion and piety of monks and nuns (chs 7–9) and of those who are virgins or chaste (ch 22), it is safe to conclude that he was a monk who disapproved of the insincere and hypocritical religiosity of his contemporaries, both laymen and clergy.<\/p>\nThis book, originally written in Greek, survives in relatively complete form in Latin. A partial indication of the great popularity of this piece of religious fiction is the fact that it was translated into Ethiopic, Coptic, and Syriac as well as Latin.<\/p>\nThe book is loosely structured in seven sections. The work begins with a short introductory section that attempts to explain why the book was unknown from the first to the fourth century (chs 1–2): during the consulate of (emperor) Theodosius Augustus the Younger and Cynegius (the document can thus be dated to AD<\/span> 388), a respectable but nameless person received a revelation through an angel. The man happened to be living in Tarsus in a house once occupied by St Paul himself. The angel told the man to break up the foundations and publish whatever he found. After being pummeled by the angel for disobedience, he finally broke the foundations only to discover a marble box that he immediately delivered to the emperor. The emperor opened the box and found the original version of the Apocalypse of Paul (which he copies) and a pair of shoes used by Paul on his missionary journeys. The substance of the mysterious document then follows.<\/p>\nIn chapters 3–6, Paul is said to have received a message from God announcing how all creation is subject to God with the exception of man himself. Chapters 7–10 relate how the guardian angels of each man and woman report every morning and evening to God concerning the deeds of those in their charge. Some are very good, while others are exceedingly wicked. In chapters 11–18, Paul is taken up in the Holy Spirit to the third heaven and asks to see the souls of the righteous and sinners as they leave the world. The angel accompanying Paul shows him a righteous man leaving the world, an ungodly man, and the soul of one who thought himself righteous but in fact was not.<\/p>\nChapters 19–30 describe Paul being lifted up to the third heaven (cf. 2 Cor 12:2-4), where he saw a golden gate flanked by golden pillars upon which were mounted golden tablets containing the names of the righteous. Upon entering paradise he was greeted by Enoch and Elijah and shown things that he could not reveal to others (ch 21; cf. 2 Cor 12:4). From there he was taken to the second heaven and then to the firmament encircled by Ocean (ch 21). There he saw the milk white waters of Lake Acherusia where the city of Christ was located. He was brought to the city in a golden boat while 3,000 angels sang a hymn. At the river of honey he met Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and other prophets (ch 25); at the river of milk he saw the infants slain by Herod (ch 26); at the river of wine he met Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Lot, and Job (ch 27); at the river of oil he met those completely dedicated to God (ch 28). At the center of the city, by a great altar, David sang the hallelujah to God.<\/p>\nPaul’s tour of hell is described in chapters 31–44; it is a place of sorrow and distress in which flows a river boiling with fire. In the river, some of the damned were immersed to the knees, others to the navel or lips, depending on the severity of their sins (ch 31). Chapters 34–36 describe the tortures of a presbyter, bishop, and deacon. Throughout this section the most ghastly tortures imaginable are described in detail with great relish. Finally, in chapter 44, Christ decrees that for Paul’s sake there will be no torture on Sundays henceforth.<\/p>\nPaul’s angelic travel guide then escorts him to paradise (chs 45–51), where the righteous of all ages are anxious to meet him. He meets the Virgin Mary (ch 46), Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as well as the 12 sons of Jacob (ch 47), Moses, who weeps for the unconverted Jews (ch 48), Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, each of whom describes his martyrdom, Lot and Job (ch 49), Noah (ch 50), Elijah, Elisha, Zechariah and his son, John the Baptist, and Adam (ch 51). The document either ended here or, in alternate versions, with Paul’s miraculous trip to the Mt of Olives where he and the other disciples received the divine commission.<\/p>\nThe document is filled with contradictions and inconsistencies and many of the translated versions do not agree with each other in all details. The chief importance of the document is in terms of its glimpses into the thinking of late fourth-century Christianity.<\/p>\nPaul, Passion of<\/p>\nA revised Latin version of the apocryphal Martyrdom of Paul, which was part of a larger body of texts called the Acts of Paul. The original Martyrdom is the story of Paul’s resuscitation of Patroclus, Nero’s cupbearer, who had fallen from a window and died during one of Paul’s sermons. Patroclus confesses his new loyalty to Christ before the stunned Nero, who moves quickly to round up all such “soldiers of the great king (Christ).” Paul is included in the purge. The Passion elaborates on the story to include a passage about Seneca’s admiration for Paul and his writings, portions of which Seneca allegedly read to Nero. Also, Paul on the way to his death borrows a kerchief from Plautilla, promising to return it. When the returning soldiers mock her, she shows them the bloodied kerchief.<\/p>\nPaul, Passion of Peter and<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Peter and Paul, Passion of (below).<\/p>\nPearl, Hymn of the<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Thomas, Acts of (below).<\/p>\nPeter and Paul, Passion of<\/p>\nThis writing comes to us in two forms, both of which are considered to have been written by Marcellus and date from the fifth century. The first form is essentially like the Acts of Peter and Paul. It lays emphasis upon Paul’s journey to Rome. The second gives more attention to the men’s residence in Rome with emphasis upon their stay in the home of a relative of Pontius Pilate. Both emphasize the close relationship between Peter and Paul and their continued and successful opposition to Simon Magus, who claims to be the Christ. Their death sentences are included in the writings but with only a brief account of their martyrdoms.<\/p>\nPeter, Gospel of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Akhmim Fragment (above).<\/p>\nPeter, Preaching of<\/p>\nThis document, which has survived only in fragments, appears to have been written early in the second century AD<\/span> in Egypt. While the title does not explicitly claim Petrine authorship, it was understood by Clement of Alexandria (late second century AD<\/span>) to have been an authentic composition by the apostle Peter (Stromata<\/em> 2.15.68). The majority of the fragments of the Preaching of Peter are preserved in the form of brief quotations in the writings of Clement of Alexandria.<\/p>\nThe fourth-century church historian Eusebius of Caesarea observed that the Preaching of Peter had not been accepted by any ancient authorities (Historia Ecclesiastica<\/em> 3.3.1-4), though he was probably not aware of its acceptance by Clement. Even though only fragments of the document have survived, they are important in that they reveal a transitional stage in the history of early Christian literature. During the first century, Christian literature, including all of the NT, was written for the consumption of other Christians. During the second century, Christian writers began to feel the need to defend their faith against the criticisms of their pagan and Jewish opponents. A new kind of Christian literature, the apology (meaning “defense”), began to appear in the early second century with the writings of the earliest Christian apologists Quadratus and Aristides. The Preaching of Peter represents a transition from the kind of apologetic writing found in the Acts of the Apostles, the sermons that that book contains, and the writings of the early apologists.<\/p>\nSince Clement quotes randomly from the Preaching of Peter, it is not possible to determine the order in which any of the quotations appeared in the original composition. Some of the major emphases of the document will appear from the following summaries of the quotations of Clement. Peter, according to Clement, called the Lord both “Law and Word” in the “Preaching” (Stromata<\/em> 1.29.182; 2.15.68). Mankind must recognize that one<\/em> God created the beginning of all things and has the power to bring all things to an end (Stromata<\/em> 6.5.39-41). The pagans, whom the author of the Preaching of Peter opposed, held that the universe was uncreated and eternal. God, the author contends, is invisible, incomprehensible, needs nothing, is inconceivable, everlasting, imperishable, and uncreated. This God must not be worshiped in the manner of the Greeks, for they have foolishly fashioned images of ordinary materials and worship them as gods. Further, they take animals that should be used for food and sacrifice them to these idols. The worship of the Jews should not be emulated either, for they revere angels, archangels, months, and the moon. If any of the nation of Israel should repent, they will find forgiveness (Stromata<\/em> 6.5.43). In one place the Preaching of Peter narrates how the Lord sent disciples to preach the gospel throughout the world after the resurrection (Stromata<\/em> 6.6.48), though the precise connection between this narrative and the preceding apologetic statements is not clear. It may be that the document began with a special version of the great commission. Elsewhere the document states that the OT prophets speak of Christ, sometimes in parables and enigmas, yet at other times very clearly and directly (Stromata<\/em> 6.15.128). In fact, the major events of the life of Christ, his coming, torture, crucifixion, death, resurrection, and ascension into heaven were predicted in detail by the prophets.<\/p>\nThe importance of the surviving fragments of the Preaching of Peter lies in the way in which they reveal how early second-century Christianity turned from a defensive to an offensive position in its proclamation of the gospel.<\/p>\nPeter, Slavonic Acts of<\/p>\nAn account of the later travels of Peter and his subsequent death in Rome preserved for us only in the Slavonic language. According to this account, a child (Jesus) comes to Peter and bids him to go to Rome. The angel Michael is captain of the ship taking them to Rome. After their arrival in Rome, Peter tells the child to catch some fish, whereupon he catches 12,000 in one hour. Then the child is sold to a Roman noble, Aravistus, for 50 pieces of gold. The child silences his teachers. After a vision of angels, the entire household is baptized. Nero arrests Peter, whereupon the child rebukes him. Many dead are raised, but the child sends them back to their graves to await the resurrection by Michael. Peter is crucified head downward. When the child reveals he is Jesus, the nails fall from Peter’s body, he prays for the forgiveness of his executioners, and then he dies. Such apocryphal versions of the acts of early church leaders are characteristically filled with fanciful acts of the apostles and their contact with the Christ.<\/p>\nPeter’s Letter to Philip<\/p>\nThis letter is part of the Christian Gnostic material discovered in 1947 at Nag Hammadi. It probably dates from the late second or early third century. The letter takes its name from a segment at the beginning of the tractate in which Peter claims to have sent the material to Philip. The letter is written in a dialogue form common in Gnostic literature. The body of the writing consists of a series of questions that are asked by the apostles of the risen Lord and the answers given by him. The questions provide a basis for the exposition of Gnostic philosophy about the structure of the world revealed by the Divine Light. That Light is the Christ, who is the heavenly Redeemer.<\/p>\nPilate, Acts of<\/p>\nThis document is an apocryphal passion gospel that reached its present form by the middle of the fourth century AD<\/span>. The first Christian writer to refer to the Acts of Pilate was Epiphanius, an ecclesiastical heresy hunter, who wrote a lengthy denunciation of various heresies in AD<\/span> 375, in which he definitely mentioned the Acts of Pilate (Heresies<\/em> 50.1). Much earlier, Justin Martyr had referred to Pilate’s report to Tiberius regarding the trial of Jesus (I Apology<\/em> 35; 48), but he does not seem to be referring to the Acts of Pilate. Toward the end of the second century AD<\/span>, a generation after Justin, Tertullian referred to an account sent from Pilate to the emperor Tiberius, yet this cannot be the Acts of Pilate, since Jesus supposedly performed many miracles before the procurator. Although it is not improbable that an earlier version of the Acts of Pilate antedated the fourth century, the present version must be dated to the middle of that century. The original language of the Acts of Pilate was Greek, and translations of it were made into Latin, Coptic, and Armenian. Eusebius, the fourth-century church historian and bishop of Caesarea, condemns what he regarded as a blasphemous account of Pilate, apparently a pagan document calculated to defame Christ (Historia Ecclesiastica,<\/em> 1.9.3; 9.5.1). The Christian Acts of Pilate was probably composed to counter the pagan document.<\/p>\nThe Acts of Pilate is a composite document consisting of two main parts. The first part (chs 1–16) purports to be a translation from Hebrew to Greek of an account written by Nicodemus about the events surrounding the passion of Jesus. The second part (chs 17–27), also called “Christ’s Descent into Hell,” vividly describes Christ’s descent into hades to liberate the righteous dead (an imaginative expansion of 1 Pt 3:19 which was itself transformed in the Apostles’ Creed into the phrase “he descended into hell”). After the 14th century AD<\/span>, the whole composition was commonly designated as the Gospel of Nicodemus because of the prominent place that character played in the document.<\/p>\nIn the prologue to the Acts of Pilate, a Roman soldier named Ananias claims to have found the Acts of Pilate in Hebrew and to have translated it into Greek in the 18th year of the reign of Emperor Flavius Theodosius (AD<\/span> 425). A quotation of the entire document follows: In the 15th year of Tiberius Caesar (AD<\/span> 29), Nicodemus wrote an account of the events that surrounded the passion, death, and resurrection of Jesus. The Jewish high priests accused Jesus of various religious crimes to Pilate and asked that he be tried. Though unwilling, Pilate sent for Jesus anyway, though in a most gracious manner. When Jesus arrived, the Roman standards bowed to him of their own accords (ch 1). In chapter 2 the Jewish charges against Jesus included: (1) that he was born of fornication, (2) that his birth meant the death of the children of Bethlehem, and (3) that Joseph and Mary fled to Egypt because they counted for nothing among the people of Israel. The charge of fornication was immediately refuted by 12 pious Jews who had witnessed the betrothal of Mary and Joseph. An interview between Pilate and Jesus (modeled after Jn 18:33-38) follows in chapter 3. The Jews charge Jesus with blaspheming God, and Pilate reluctantly turns Jesus over to them (ch 4). Nicodemus then stands up in the Jewish council and urges them to let Jesus go, for if he is not of God his movement will fail (cf. Acts 5:38-39), but the Jews oppose him (ch 5). Then three Jews healed by Jesus testify in his behalf (ch 6), followed by Bernice, the woman healed of the issue of blood (ch 7). The crowd proclaims Jesus a prophet (ch 8). When Pilate offers to release a prisoner, the Jews ask for Barabbas, and Pilate then washes his hands of the matter and has Jesus scourged and crucified with the two criminals, Dysmas and Gestas (ch 9). Jesus is mocked by the crowds, while one criminal (Gestas) is rebuked by the other (ch 10). Jesus’ death is accompanied by a darkening of the sun, which the Jews regard as a normal eclipse (ch 11). Joseph of Arimathea is then seized by the Jews and imprisoned; when they come to execute him he has vanished (ch 12). The guards report the appearance of the angel at the tomb, but are bribed by the Jews to keep silence (ch 12). Three Jews then come from Galilee: Phineas, a priest; Adas, a teacher; and Angaeus, a Levite. They report that they have witnessed the great commission and ascension of Jesus on Mt Malich (ch 14). Nicodemus suggests that the surrounding mountains be checked to see if some spirit has not taken Jesus up only to dash him on the rocks; the Jews find nothing except Joseph of Arimathea in his hometown (ch 15). Joseph is summoned to testify before the council and reveals how the risen Jesus had appeared to him when he was imprisoned and set him free (ch 15). The council decides, after hearing other witnesses, that if Jesus is still remembered after 50 years, the stories must be true (ch 16).<\/p>\nThe second document begins with an account of Joseph speaking to the council. Two brothers, he claims, had been raised at the same time as Jesus. The council summons them to give their stories (ch 17). While in hades, the brothers claimed, a great light appeared and Abraham and Isaiah became overjoyed (ch 18). Satan thought that Jesus could be restrained in hades (ch 20); but when the King of Glory arrived, the gates were broken down. Satan was handed over to the angels to be bound (ch 22) and was rebuked by hades for causing the ruin of his kingdom (ch 23). The King of Glory (Christ) then led Adam and the rest of the righteous dead out of hades (ch 24) and to paradise (ch 25), where even the repentant criminal was seen (ch 26). The two brothers claim that they have been sent by the angel Michael to preach the resurrection of Jesus to all mankind.<\/p>\nThe Acts of Pilate is a pastiche (collection) of quotations and allusions from the four canonical Gospels, mingled with imaginative and even fantastic additions. It is basically an apologetic document that attempts to defend the truth of the resurrection of Jesus against the counterclaims of pagan and Jewish adversaries. Unfortunately, it has an anti-Semitic tone that was to characterize Christian dramatizations of the events of Passion Week from the fourth century through the end of the Middle Ages.<\/p>\nPistis Sophia<\/p>\nA fourth-century Coptic manuscript (Codex Askewanus) that represents one of the chief Gnostic works extant today. The work, containing four chapters, derives its name from the heroine, Sophia, though only the first half of the work refers to her. This portion relates how Jesus, during the first 11 years after his resurrection, returned to teach his disciples the highest mystery of all: the Treasury of the Light. Jesus returned to the Mt of Olives where he is caught up through the aeons and on his journey comes to the thirteenth aeon where he finds Sophia. She is in sorrow because she has caught a glimpse of the Treasury of the Light but is deceived by Authades (the self-willed), who flashes a false brightness before her, causing her to fall into the hands of the powers of matter. She maintains her hope and faith, however, and after 12 prayers is delivered from Authades and chaos by Jesus who reinstates her at the lower limit of the thirteenth aeon.<\/p>\nThe work is in dialogue form—with Jesus answering questions asked by his disciples. The theme is thoroughly Gnostic in its view of salvation that comes by a hidden doctrine that brings illumination.<\/p>\nProtevangelium of James<\/p>\nSee<\/em> James, Protevangelium of (above).<\/p>\nPsalms of Solomon<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Solomon, Psalms of (below).<\/p>\nResurrection of Christ by Bartholomew, Book of the<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Bartholomew, Book of the Resurrection of Christ by (above).<\/p>\nReuben, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nSibylline Oracles<\/p>\nA pseudepigraphal writing comprising originally 15 books, 12 of which are extant in late Greek manuscripts. The word sibyl<\/em> is of Greek origin. It claimed to be an oracle of the gods and generally contained a message of a coming catastrophic event. Some Jews adopted and used this mode of writing for propagation purposes.<\/p>\nThe sibyls came from the beginning of the Maccabean period (165 BC<\/span>) and cover a period up to shortly after the destruction of the second temple (AD<\/span> 76). The authors, presumably writing in Alexandria, Egypt, stressed the unity and sovereignty of God. God controlled all events, whereas pagan deities were useless, unable to do anything. “But God is one, most exalted of all, who has made the heaven, the sun, the stars and the moon. . . . He has constituted man as the Divinely appointed ruler of all. You men . . . be ashamed of making gods” (book 2). God controls the history of the nations. The sibyls outline the history of 10 generations from the Assyrian kingdom to the destruction of the second temple and the great earthquake (book 4.47ff.). The third book also contains a section on the devastation and troubles to be experienced before the great judgment. It includes two messianic passages wherein the Messiah introduces an era of peace and prosperity for the faithful: “He will raise up his kingdom for all ages over men. . . . For nothing but peace shall come upon the land of the good” (lines 767, 780). The eternal state is to be reserved for the faithful who will be raised from the dead in a bodily form: “But all who are godly shall live again on earth, when God gives breath and life and grace to them the godly” (book 4.187-190), whereas the ungodly are to be thrown into hell, “And all who have sinned with deeds of impiety a heap of earth shall cover again, and murky Tartarus and the black recesses of hell” (lines 183-186).<\/p>\nThe express purpose of the authors of the sibyls was to demonstrate the reasonableness of the Jewish faith by casting their message in the form of the sibyl, introduced by the Greeks and appreciated by the Romans. In their emphasis on the God of Israel and their opposition to paganism, they nevertheless stand in the stream of the apocalyptic, the unveiling of God’s secrets of past and future. The sibyl as divine oracle was, thus, used as a literary form in order to convey a message to the non-Jewish world.<\/p>\nSilvanus, Teachings of<\/p>\nLiterary work of the Gnostics, attributed to Silvanus, the companion of Peter and Paul. It was discovered at Chenoboskion in Upper Egypt in 1946.<\/p>\nSimeon, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nSlavonic Acts of Peter<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Peter, Slavonic Acts of (above).<\/p>\nSolomon, Psalms of<\/p>\nThe Psalms of Solomon are a collection of 18 songs attributed to Solomon. They are considered pseudepigrapha. The psalms were probably written by one author, who lived during the middle of the first century BC<\/span> and wrote in Hebrew. The theological perspective of the author is Pharisaic in its views of the law, judgment, and the future of Israel. The Psalms of Solomon are derived from the canonical book of Psalms in their form and phraseology. One of the similarities in the form and phraseology is the emphasis on the antithesis between the righteous and the wicked. The wicked are the Gentiles who defile the holy things of the Lord (2:3) and apostate Jews who have fallen into sin (3:11, 13).<\/p>\nThe character of the sinner is that of the fool, as opposed to the wise man (cf. Wisdom Literature). The fool has no concern for the Lord (4:1); his speech and deeds betray his unrighteousness (4:2ff.). He is known by his lies, judgment of others, false oaths, his immorality, lawlessness, and selfish ambitions at the cost of others (cf. 12). The righteous are the wise, who fear the Lord (4:26). He is not dismayed by bad dreams or perilous times (6:4-5). He is provoked with zeal for the Lord’s righteousness, as he witnesses the desecration of the temple and the law (8:28). The Lord’s love of him is expressed in discipline, and he responds to the Lord’s rebuke with repentance for his sins. The author compares the righteous to the tree of life in Paradise. They are stable and will not be uprooted (14:2ff.). The wicked, on the other hand, will not be remembered in this life, and God will deal righteously with them by casting them into “Sheol and darkness and destruction” (14:6; 15:10).<\/p>\nThe author views God as the King who mightily rules over the nations (2:34ff.) with readiness to judge his enemies and the enemies of the righteous (2:38ff.; 4:9) and to vindicate the righteous (2:39). As the Lord’s care is demonstrated in his sustenance of nature (5:11-12), in his raising up kings, rulers, and nations (5:13), the author assures the reader that his care extends particularly to the poor and those who call upon him (5:2-3, 13). He is the hope of the righteous (8:37).<\/p>\nIn view of the foregoing belief in the righteous kingship of God and in his protection of the righteous, the psalms abound in the conviction that evil will be overcome by God’s intervention on behalf of the righteous. The particular context in which these psalms originated was Pompey’s entrance into Jerusalem and his desecration of the temple (63 BC<\/span>), and it was hoped that at the death of Pompey (48 BC<\/span>, cf. 2:30ff.) the messianic era might be introduced. Therefore, the author reminds God of the covenant made with David (17:5) and asks God’s forgiveness for Israel’s sins in the past. Israel has suffered gentile invasions and control as the result of God’s judgment (17:6). Since Pompey had died, the author prayed for the restoration of the theocracy under a Davidic king—“Behold, O Lord, and raise up unto them their king, the son of David. All the time in the which Thou seest, O God, that he may reign over Israel Thy servant” (17:23). By means of the Davidic Messiah the land will be purged of sinners, godless nations, and the righteous will be sanctified. The messianic rule extends only over the righteous remnant, who when restored to the land, will be divided into the 12 tribes; the Davidic Messiah will rule over the tribes and the other nations “in the wisdom of his righteousness” (17:29-31). The sojourner and the gentile nations will not share in the glory of the kingdom. Rather, their position will be that of servitude.<\/p>\nThe hope of the glorious future of Israel is the apocalyptic element in the psalms. They arose in a historical context, but they anticipate a radically new future. The psalmist pronounced a benediction on all those who would witness God’s judgment on the nations, the restoration of Israel, and the introduction of the messianic kingdom: “Blessed be they that shall be in those days, in that they shall see the good fortune of Israel which God shall bring to pass in the gathering together of the tribes. May the Lord hasten His mercy upon Israel! The Lord Himself is our king for ever and ever” (17:50-51).<\/p>\nSolomon, Testament of<\/p>\nThe Testament of Solomon is a second-century BC<\/span> pseudepigraphal writing. The writing claims that Solomon was the writer of the testament. It is extant in Semitic manuscripts, and in some Greek texts.<\/p>\nThe material is basically Christian with emphasis on the cross and the virgin birth but also contains Jewish material as well. The testament recounts how Solomon, by means of a ring given to him by the archangel Michael, is able to subdue and use the skills of demons to build his temple. After completing the temple, however, Solomon is led into idolatry on account of his lust for a Shunammite girl. His fall was taken by the author of the testament as an occasion to warn the readers of the power and shapes of the demons and the angels having power over them. The work is written in the form of a testament in order to let Solomon reflect (on his deathbed) how he succeeded and failed as a legacy to Israel.<\/p>\nTestaments of the Twelve Patriarchs<\/p>\nPart of the Jewish pseudepigrapha. This particular composition is called a “testament” because it represents the deathbed speeches of each of the sons of Jacob. The testaments start with Reuben’s speech to his sons and ends with Benjamin’s testament to his heirs. Each patriarch is represented as gathering his sons around him and relating the important events of his life. During the speech the patriarch warns against particular vices and attitudes and recommends certain virtues. The advice and warnings of each patriarch often include insight and predictions concerning sin and salvation for his children. The account of the patriarch’s life serves as a guide for the future of his descendants. At the end of the speech, each patriarch dies and is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\nIt would appear that the concept of “testament” finds its orientation in Joshua 23–24, where Joshua summons the elders, heads, judges, and officers of Israel (Jos 23:2; 24:1) and gives them a charge before his death. First Kings 2:1-12 portrays David giving Solomon deathbed advice to walk in God’s ways. The speeches of the patriarchs find further scriptural reference in Genesis chapter 49, where Jacob calls his sons together to hear about their future. At the end of the speech Jacob dies (Gn 49:33).<\/p>\nThe present textual form (Slavonic, Armenian, and Greek versions) probably came about sometime during the second or third century AD<\/span>. However, much of the material would appear to go back to the second or third century BC<\/span>. The general scholarly consensus is that an original text in a Semitic language (either Hebrew or Aramaic) was composed by an author or authors sometime in the third or second century before the common era. At some later period, Christian sections were added to the original text. For examples of the Christian sections see Testament of Simeon 6:7; Testament of Levi 10:2; Testament of Dan 6:9; Testament of Naphtali 4:5; Testament of Asher 7:3-4; Testament of Joseph 19:11; Testament of Benjamin 3:8; 9:2-4. It would appear that the testaments may have been reworked by a Jewish writer(s) and by other Christian writers over the centuries. Thus we have a Jewish document from about the third century before the common era that has undergone both Jewish and Christian redactions over a long period of time. These testaments became quite popular in the tenth century, with special interest being displayed in the prophecies of the patriarchs and their secret knowledge.<\/p>\nThe following is a summary of each of the testaments of the patriarchs. The excerpts are based on R. H. Charles’s Pseudepigrapha,<\/em> pp 282-367.<\/p>\n<h6>Reuben<\/h6>\nThe testament of Reuben is very much influenced by an overwhelming memory of defiling his father’s bed. This refers to Reuben taking his father’s concubine Bilhah while she was in a drunken stupor. Reuben has very strong opinions regarding what he considers to be negative attributes of women, and he warns his sons to be guarded in their relationship with women. His comments on women probably reflect the ill feelings that existed between himself and Jacob in regard to Bilhah. Reuben predicts that in the future his sons would be jealous of the sons of Levi but they would not be able to overthrow them. He admonishes his descendants to have respect and love for one another and to do truth to their neighbors. Reuben is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Simeon<\/h6>\nThe patriarch Simeon is presented as a strong warrior type. Reflecting the biblical account of Joseph being sold into slavery (Gn 37:25-28), Simeon testifies that he wanted to kill Joseph rather than sell him into slavery. As punishment for this attitude, God withered his right hand for seven days. Simeon warns his sons against envy, deceit, and fornication. He predicts that they will attempt to harm the sons of Levi but prophesies that the sons of Levi will remain superior. Simeon looked forward to a blissful era (6:4-7a), when the “Most High” would be blessed. Verse 7b is a Christian interpolation, “Because God has taken a body and eaten with men and saved men.” He admonishes his sons to obey the sons of Levi and Judah, for it would be from them that their salvation would be accomplished. He predicts that a high priest would come from Levi and a king would descend from the lines of Judah. Simeon concludes his testament by predicting that all Gentiles (an interpolation) and Israel would be saved.<\/p>\n<h6>Levi<\/h6>\nLevi’s deathbed testament is in the form of dreams that he relates to his sons. He predicts that from his descendants and those of Judah the Lord would “appear among men” to save every race of men (2:11). The descendants of Levi would be “as the sun to all the seed of Israel” (4:3b) and in one dream it is shown that the blessings of the priesthood would come to his sons (8:2-3). Levi predicts that a king would arise in Judah; this king would establish a new priesthood that ministers to both Jews and Gentiles. The tenth chapter has a Christian interpolation that because of ungodliness and transgression, the sons of Levi would wrong “the Savior of the world, Christ” (10:2) and that for this they would be scattered throughout the world. Chapter 13 has a number of wisdom themes with emphasis on the need to follow and obey the law. Chapter 16 introduces an eschatological prediction that the sons of Levi would go astray for 70 weeks. The following chapter gives a detailed account of the 70 weeks in which there would be a priesthood for each jubilee. The first priesthood would be great, and the priest’s relationship to God would be such that God would be addressed as father. The second priesthood would “be conceived in the sorrow of beloved ones” (17:3), but this priesthood will be glorified by all. The following five priesthoods would be characterized by sorrow, pain, hatred, and darkness. However, a new priesthood would eventually arise and peace will be brought to all the earth (18:4); sin shall come to an end (18:9), for this new priesthood shall have a spirit of understanding and sanctification resting upon him. The testament closes with an admonition to choose either the law of the Lord or the work of Beliar (variant of Belial). The sons pledge themselves to the law, and following Levi’s death they bury him at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Judah<\/h6>\nAt the beginning of the testament by Judah he tells his descendants that he had been promised by his father that he would be king. “And it came to pass, when I became a man, that my father blessed me, saying, You shall be a king, prospering in all things” (1:6). Judah reminisces about his early youth and his ability to conquer wild animals. He obeyed the commandments and did not give in to lust. He predicted that his descendants would fall into wickedness because of the love of money and the enticement of beautiful women (ch 17). In chapter 21 Judah predicts that the Lord would give the kingship to his descendants and the priesthood to the sons of Levi. Chapter 24 includes a Christian messianic redaction. It is predicted that from the star of Jacob one will arise that will be without sin and from it a rod of righteousness will grow to the Gentiles (24:6). The testament concludes with eschatological hope for the future when “they who are poor for the Lord’s sake shall be made rich and they who are put to death for the Lord’s sake shall awake to life” (25:4). Judah dies and is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Issachar<\/h6>\nThe last words of this patriarch are somewhat unique in that Issachar is depicted as being “upright” and without transgression (unlike many of his brothers). He predicts that the priesthood will come from Levi and the kingship will arise from the lineage of Judah. In chapter 6 Issachar predicts that his children will “cleave” after Beliar. If they recognize the mercy of God and follow Issachar’s exemplary life, “every spirit of Beliar will flee from them.” His final request is that he be buried at Hebron with his fathers.<\/p>\n<h6>Zebulun<\/h6>\nThe patriarch Zebulun begins his testament by characterizing himself as a “good gift” to his parents. He, like Issachar, indicates that he is not conscious of sinning “except in thought” (and if he has any iniquity it is only the sin of ignorance). Zebulun claims that he did not support the actions taken against Joseph, and he would have told his father about Joseph’s plight except that the other brothers agreed that if “anyone should declare the secret, he should be slain” (1:6). In 1:7 he declares that if it were not for him the other brothers would have killed Joseph. The brothers were so suspicious of Zebulun that they watched him until Joseph was sold. Verse 5:3 has a familiar theme that is found in the NT and in the rabbis: “Have compassion in your hearts, my children, because even as a man does to his neighbor, even so will the Lord do to him.” Zebulun believes that this lesson is demonstrated in practical terms. The sons of the other brothers were sickened and died on account of the action taken against Joseph (“because they showed no mercy in their hearts,” 5:5). The sons of Zebulun were preserved without sickness. He continues his wisdom teaching (8:3) by declaring that in the degree that a man has compassion upon his neighbor the Lord in the same degree will have mercy on him. Zebulun predicts the division between the northern and southern kingdoms and the eventual conquest of these kingdoms by the Gentiles. However, the people will repent and the Lord will bring them back to “the land” and Jerusalem (9:8). In chapter 10 Zebulun predicts that after his death he will “arise as a ruler in the midst of his sons” (10:2), and he promises reward for those who keep the laws and punishment for the ungodly. Zebulun dies at the end of his testament and is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Dan<\/h6>\nThe patriarch Dan laments his jealousy of Joseph and indicates that he was controlled by the spirit of Beliar. He reveals that he wanted to kill Joseph so that he could have the love of his father. Dan warns against the spirits of lying and anger, and he exhorts his descendants to love truth and long-suffering. He admonishes them to keep the commandments and “love the Lord through all your life and one another with a true heart” (5:3). Dan predicts that his sons will “in the last days” depart from the Lord and thus provoke the anger of the sons of Levi. They also will fight against the sons of Judah. His sons will not win against the sons of Levi and Judah because an angel of the Lord will guide them. Dan is represented as having read in the book of Enoch (a favorite reference for the patriarchs) that Satan and all the spirits of wickedness and pride will cause the sons of Levi, Judah, and Dan to sin. They will be taken into captivity where they will receive the plagues of Egypt and all the evils of the Gentiles. However, when they return to the Lord they will receive mercy and be given peace. The prediction is such that there would be one who would arise from the tribe of Judah and Levi who is called “the salvation of the Lord.” It would appear that the “one arising” would make war against Beliar and execute an “everlasting vengeance” against their enemies (5:10). Dan’s final warning is to beware of Satan and his spirits and to draw near to God and the angel “that intercedes for you” (6:2). The last section admonishes Dan’s sons to pass on to their children all that they have heard so that “the savior of the Gentiles may receive” them. There follows a Christian polemic about the savior being true, long-suffering, meek, and lowly (6:9). When Dan dies, he is buried near Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.<\/p>\n<h6>Naphtali<\/h6>\nNaphtali is said to be 130 years old when he gives his last words. He is depicted as being in good health, but the morning after a feast realizes that he is going to die. Thus he gathers his sons about him. Naphtali has a very strong sense of order that contributes to the makeup and actions of man as well as the universe. He views the “Gentile problem” as their forsaking the Lord and changing their order so that they obeyed the “stocks and stones.” The change of order was the problem at Sodom and it also caused the Flood.<\/p>\nNaphtali reads from the book of Enoch that his sons will depart from the Lord and walk “according to all lawlessness of the Gentiles” (4:1). He predicts that his descendants will be taken captive because of their sins and afterward a “few” will return to the Lord and he will bring them back to their land. After their return to the land, Naphtali predicts that his sons will forget the Lord and “become ungodly” with the result that they will be scattered all over the earth. They will remain in this state until the compassion of the Lord comes and a man working righteousness and mercy comes to them. Naphtali recounts two dreams that he had in his 40th year. In the first dream he saw the sun and moon stand still. Isaac told his grandsons to run and take hold of the sun and moon, each according to his strength. Levi took hold of the sun, and Judah seized the moon. Both of them were lifted up with the sun and moon. There appeared a bull in the dream with two great horns and eagle wings. The other sons attempted to seize this bull but could not. However, Joseph came and took hold of the bull and ascended “up with him on high” (5:7).<\/p>\nThere follows a prediction that the 12 tribes of Israel would be taken into captivity by the Assyrians, Medes, Persians, Chaldeans, and Syrians. The other dream saw a ship sailing on the sea of Jamnia without sailors or pilot. Written on the ship was the inscription “The ship of Jacob” (6:2). Jacob and his sons were on the ship, and when a storm arose Jacob departed from their presence. Eventually the ship breaks up from the pounding of the sea, and while Joseph sails off in a little boat the rest of the brothers are divided among nine planks with Levi and Judah sharing a plank. It would appear that by the prayers of Levi all the brothers eventually land safely on the shore. When Naphtali relates these dreams to his father, Jacob responds that all these things must be fulfilled.<\/p>\nNaphtali admonished his sons to be united to Levi and Judah for through them “shall salvation arise to Israel” (8:2). Also through Levi and Judah the righteous of the Gentiles shall be gathered. Naphtali died and was buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Gad<\/h6>\nThe patriarch Gad is represented as hating Joseph because Joseph had told his father that Gad and some of the other brothers were eating from the best of the flocks while tending them. During his testament Gad confesses his sin of hatred to his sons and warns them against harboring hatred because it only brings anguish: “For as love would quicken even the dead and would call back them that are condemned to die, so hatred would slay the living and those that had sinned venially it would not suffer to live” (4:6).<\/p>\nRepentance is understood to give knowledge to the soul and leads the mind to salvation. Gad encourages his sons to honor the lineage of Levi and Judah, for therein is found the salvation of Israel. He predicts that his sons will walk in all wickedness and corruption and ends on a somewhat pessimistic note by asking to be buried near his fathers. Gad is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Asher<\/h6>\nAsher is very conscious of good and evil spirits and the choice that man has to make between these two possibilities. Asher predicts that his descendants will act ungodly and not give heed to the law of God. Thus they will be delivered into the hands of their enemies and they will be scattered. They will exist in such a state until the “Most High” visits the earth “coming Himself [as man with men eating and drinking] . . . he shall save Israel and all the Gentiles” (7:3-4). This Christian interpolation is followed by a declaration that the Lord will gather them because of his mercy and for the sake of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. When Asher dies, he is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Joseph<\/h6>\nJoseph calls himself the “beloved of Israel,” (1:2) and although he has seen envy and death, he did not go astray. During his testament he tells of his ordeal of being sold into slavery. The verses in chapter one are set in parallelism with the first half of the verse telling the plight of Joseph and the second half exalting the security of the Lord: “I was sold into slavery, and the Lord of all made me free: I was taken into captivity, and his strong hand succoured me. I was beset with hunger and the Lord himself nourished me” (1:5). Joseph details his experiences in Egypt with eight chapters being given to the temptations of the Egyptian woman. However, Joseph resisted her advances and the Lord rewarded him for his convictions. He admonishes his sons to have the fear of the Lord in all their works because whoever does the law of the Lord will be loved by him. This is the key to his success. Joseph encourages his children to do well to anyone who would do evil to them and pray for their enemies. He gives his attitude toward his brothers as an example of such a virtue.<\/p>\nJoseph admonishes his sons to observe the commandments of the Lord and honor Levi and Judah for “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, who saves all the Gentiles and Israel” (19:11) shall arise from them. He predicts the enslavement in Egypt but also the eventual deliverance. He directs his sons to take his bones with them when they leave Egypt, and the testament indicates that Joseph was buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Benjamin<\/h6>\nThe last patriarch gives his testament when he is 125 years old. He encourages his children to love the Lord and keep his commandments. He urges them to follow the goodness of Joseph, for he did not want his brothers’ actions against him to be counted as sin. Benjamin predicts that in Joseph shall the prophecy be fulfilled “concerning the Lamb of God and Savior of the world, and that a blameless one shall be delivered up for lawless men, and a sinless one shall die for ungodly men in the blood of the covenant, for the salvation of the Gentiles and of Israel and shall destroy Beliar and his servants” (3:8). One can immediately see how the Christian interpolation would find easy access for a polemic in this testament. Joseph is depicted as suffering in innocence and without remorse. Likewise the Christian messiah would suffer and die for ungodly men.<\/p>\nBenjamin believes that there are evildoers among his sons; from his reading of the book of Enoch he predicts that they will commit “fornication with the fornication of Sodom” and only a few will survive (9:1). There would appear to be a remnant from each tribe as the 12 tribes and the Gentiles will gather at the last temple. Their salvation will be a result of the “Most High” sending his only “begotten prophet” (9:2), and he will be lifted up upon a tree and the veil of the temple shall be rent and the Spirit of God shall be passed on to the Gentiles. Benjamin admonishes his sons that if they walk in holiness according to the commandments of the Lord, all of Israel will be gathered to the Lord. When Benjamin dies, he is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\nFrom the brief account of each patriarch, it is apparent that the testaments were subject to both Jewish and Christian redaction and go beyond mere interpolation. The text reflects such characteristics as two messiahs, a double love commandment, ethical and theological teachings, as well as universal salvation. However, it is most difficult to place these features within a particular time period or even religion.<\/p>\nThaddeus, Acts of<\/p>\nA sixth-century version and extension of the fifth-century Syriac Doctrina Addaei, or Legend of Abgar. The Legend contains a purported exchange of letters between Abgar, king of Edessa (AD<\/span> 9–46), and Jesus. This exchange results in the sending of Thaddeus, one of Jesus’ apostles, to Edessa. While there, he performs numerous miracles including the healing of Abgar. The Acts has Abgar healed when Ananias, his messenger, returns prior to the arrival of Thaddeus. The Acts focuses on the activity of Thaddeus in establishing the church in Edessa.<\/p>\nThecla, Acts of Paul and<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Paul and Thecla, Acts of (above).<\/p>\nThomas, Acts of<\/p>\nThe Acts of Thomas is one of a cluster of acts of the apostles that have three common characteristics. They narrate the propagation of the gospel around the ancient world, promote the deeds and words of one of the apostles, and inevitably chronicle that apostle’s martyrdom. The oldest of these “acts narratives” are those of Paul, John, Andrew, Peter, and Thomas. Acts of Thomas, like the others, is a blend of Christian piety, the popular Hellenistic romances of the day, and Jewish haggadic-type moralistic teachings.<\/p>\nScholarly study of the Acts of Thomas suggests that it was probably written at the beginning of the third century. It was definitely written in Syriac first and probably by someone with strong tendencies toward the Gnostic heresy. It proved broadly popular among Gnostics, Manichees, and orthodox churches, so much so that it was quickly translated from the original Syriac into Arabic, Armenian, and several Greek translations. From these varied Greek versions, Coptic, Latin, and Ethiopic translations were made. Significant portions of the Coptic version were in turn retranslated back into Arabic, Ethiopic, and Greek, thus creating a most confusing textual tradition. Only one full early Syriac text survives, and it is considered less reliable than some of the extant Greek translations.<\/p>\nIn the critical English edition of the Acts of Thomas, that of A. F. J. Klijn published in 1962, the narrative is divided into the traditional acts (praxeis). There are 13 of these numbered in 170 sequential chapters that include the concluding martyrdom of the apostle. Various liturgical pieces, sermon fragments, and hymns are inserted, including two particularly famous hymns in the early church—that of the “Song of the Bride” in act 1 and that of the “Song of the Pearl” in act 9. The first six acts are not woven together by any particular theme, and they record that Thomas went on board ship to go to India (act 3), which would imply a south Indian ministry. Yet the text speaks of ministry to the north Indian king, Gundaphoro (act 4). However, acts 7 through 13 and the martyrdom are set in the south Indian kingdom of Mazdai and are obviously written by one hand. It is probable that the first six acts represent earlier materials placed into the whole by the writer of the last seven acts and the martyrdom. This document is the first-known mention of the traditions that Thomas ministered in India, was martyred there, and that his bones were returned to Edessa. Acts of Thomas is written, as are all the apocryphal acts of the apostles, on the assumption that the world was divided among the apostles for evangelization and that India fell to Thomas.<\/p>\nThomas is called Judas Thomas throughout these acts after the Syrian style of referring to that apostle. Thomas is spoken of as the twin of Jesus (the Didymus of the NT), as recipient of special divine revelations, and as being Jesus incarnate in the flesh again—in chapters 10, 11, 39, 47, and 48 of the Acts. Many historians think these are clear indications of Gnostic thought. Others think such ideas are expressions of Jesus’ adaptation to human perception and identification with his apostles—features often found in early Christian literature. There seems to be no question but that Gnostic or Manichee tendencies were gradually edited out of Greek and Latin texts by orthodox copyists.<\/p>\nOne quickly gets the feel for this narrative. The Acts of Thomas opens with Judas Thomas’s refusing to go to India. He is then sold as a slave—in parallel to Christ’s coming as a slave to redeem man. So Thomas reaches India as a carpenter (again the parallel with Jesus) and a builder of homes. He plays groomsman in a wedding at which miracles convince the flute player of Thomas’s role as apostle of God; so the king asks Thomas to pray for his daughter. Great stress is placed on purity in Thomas’s teaching, and this usually involves sexual abstinence as well. Finally, many are converted, including the king, and they form an assembly of believers in Sandaruk.<\/p>\nIn the second act the king, Gundophor, gives Thomas a large sum of money to build a palace. After surprising the king by tracing the palace on the ground in winter, Thomas builds him a palace in heaven by giving the money to the poor. The king imprisons and decides to kill Thomas for the supposed deception; but the king’s brother, Gad, dies and goes to heaven where he sees the palace and desires to buy it. Gad is then reunited with his body and tries to buy the palace from Gundophor, whereupon Gundophor learns that he cannot sell it, releases Thomas from prison, and advises Gad to arrange to have his own palace built in heaven. Thomas gives a great doxology (ch 25 of act 2), and the two brothers who have come to believe through all of this want to be baptized.<\/p>\nIn these miracle narratives and teachings, all the books of the NT seem to be echoed, though there are relatively few direct quotations. Favorite miracle passages such as Balaam’s talking donkey and Peter’s release from prison are reexperienced in Thomas’s life with vast embellishment. The talking ass enters a home and casts out a demon at Thomas’s command; Thomas causes great consternation by repeatedly passing in and out of the securely closed prison. Such miracles, sufferings, and conversions make up acts 3 through 13 and continue to the climax of Judas Thomas’s ministry. His martyrdom occurs (ch 168) at the hands of four soldiers with spears who have been ordered by the king of Mazdai to execute Thomas. He thereafter appears to his followers who have Thomas’s bones removed to Edessa. Meantime, the son of the king of Mazdai becomes sick unto death. Desperate, the king goes to Thomas’s tomb, thinking to get a relic to heal his son. Finding the body gone, he uses the very dust upon which Judas Thomas’s body rested, and his son is healed. Thereafter the king becomes a believer and joins the community of believers.<\/p>\nThomas, Gospel of<\/p>\nA noncanonical and heretical gospel of Gnostic origin that probably dates from the second or third century AD<\/span>. It is one of a large number of similar writings that flourished among early religious sects such as the Marcosians (a second-century group that built an elaborate sacramental system around numbers) and the Manicheans (a third-century dualistic heresy based on the primeval conflict between light and darkness). In fact, Cyril of Jerusalem, who died in AD<\/span> 386 says the Gospel of Thomas was written by “one of those wicked disciples of Mani” (the founder of Manichaeism). Along with the Protevangelium of James, it is one of the oldest and most widely known of the more than 50 apocryphal gospels that circulated within the churches during the period of their early growth and expansion.<\/p>\nThis Gospel of Thomas (sometimes referred to as an “infancy gospel”) should not be confused with the Coptic version that was unearthed in 1945 near Nag Hammadi in Upper Egypt. The latter is a collection of 114 “sayings of Jesus,” which shed a great deal of light on the influence of Gnosticism on Egyptian Christianity. They claim to be the “secret words” of Jesus transmitted by “Didymos Judas Thomas.” The Gospel of Thomas, with which this article deals, is composed of a series of childhood miracles of Jesus and is preserved for us in four versions—two in Greek (one quite a bit longer than the other), one in Latin, and one in Syriac.<\/p>\nThe Gospel of Thomas was apparently known as early as Hippolytus (AD<\/span> 155–235), who quotes it as saying, “He who seeks me will find me in children from seven years old; for there will I, who am hidden in the fourteenth aeon, be found.” Hippolytus claimed that it was used by the Naasenes (a Gnostic sect that worshiped the serpent) in support of their doctrine of the nature of the inward man. The quotation above is not found in the extant versions, but this is understandable because there is evidence from the Stichometry of Nicephorus (possibly fourth century) that an earlier version was over twice the length. The Gospel of Thomas was known both to Origen (c. AD<\/span> 185–254) and Eusebius (c. AD<\/span> 260–340). The latter classed it with the heretical writings and said it should be “rejected as altogether absurd and impious” (Historia Ecclesiastica<\/em> 3.25).<\/p>\nThe stories that make up the Gospel of Thomas emphasize the miraculous power and supernatural wisdom of the boy Jesus. Some scholars think they were originally fabricated by orthodox Christians in opposition to the Gnostic heresy that the “supernatural Christ” first came upon Jesus at the time of his baptism. It is much more likely, however, that they owe their origin to people’s curiosity about what the boy Jesus must have been like. Some of the tales may have come from pagan sources.<\/p>\nApart from three or four miracles, which could be classed as beneficial, the supernatural feats said to be performed by the boy Jesus were destructive. For example, when a certain child spoiled some pools made by Jesus, he was cursed by Jesus and totally withered up. Another boy who provoked Jesus by running into him “immediately . . . fell down and died.” A teacher who struck Jesus on the head was straightway cursed and fell to the ground. The French writer Renan referred to the Jesus of the Gospel of Thomas as “a vicious little guttersnipe.”<\/p>\nThroughout the gospel Jesus is presented as infinitely wise. He ridicules his teacher Zacchaeus saying, “You hypocrite, first, if you know it, teach the Alpha, and then we will believe you concerning the Beta.” After Zacchaeus berates himself for being so inferior to the one he intended to take as a disciple, Jesus laughs and announces, “I am come from above that I may curse them.” The text continues, “And no man after that dared to provoke him, lest he should curse him, and he should be maimed.”<\/p>\nOther miracles include making 12 live sparrows out of clay, smiting his accusers with blindness, raising a child from the dead, healing a foot cut in two by an ax, carrying water in a cloth garment, reaping an enormous harvest from one kernal of wheat, stretching a piece of wood to its proper length, and healing his brother James who had been bitten by a viper while gathering fagots (sticks to use as firewood). More miracles may be found in the longer Latin version.<\/p>\nIt comes as no surprise that the orthodox church has always rejected from its canon of sacred scripture the apocryphal Gospel of Thomas. It is, however, quoted in other later gospels of the same sort. For example, the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew from chapter 18 on is based upon the Gospel of Thomas. Along with other apocryphal materials, it has exercised a significant influence on Christian art and literature, especially from the tenth century forward. For example, the account of Jesus making the 12 sparrows from clay shows up in the Koran.<\/p>\nTruth, Gospel of<\/p>\nAround 1945 a group of Egyptian peasant farmers near modern Nag Hammadi inadvertently dug into a grave of the ancient village known as Shenesit-Chenoboskion and unearthed a jar containing 13 books (9 of which were largely complete) and 15 fragments of works. This find was the library of an ancient Gnostic sect and contained all or parts of 51 different Gnostic writings—all but two of which had never come into modern scholars’ hands before. Now called the Nag Hammadi or Chenoboskion texts, these works were the first modern find of original Gnostic literature. All are Coptic translations of earlier Greek originals.<\/p>\nCodex I (titled the Jung Codex because it now is owned by the Jung Institute in Vienna) is unique among the 13 works because it is in Sub-Achimimic Coptic, while the rest of the works are in the more usual Sahidic Coptic. Codex I contains five works, two of which are the enormously controversial Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Truth.<\/p>\nThe Gospel of Truth has no heading but rather draws its title from the incipit (first line of the text); it has no author; it contains no addressee. In fact, it is not a gospel at all, but rather a treatise expressive of Valentinian Gnosticism at its very earliest stage. Because the Gnosticism expressed in the Gospel of Truth is lacking all later-Valentinian mythological development and because it is stated simply and in almost orthodox Christian thought forms, the majority of modern scholars credit it to Valentinus himself, though no final proof of this has been discovered as yet. If Valentinus himself did not write this document, then it had to be someone in the immediate circle of his initial disciples.<\/p>\nValentinus was born in Egypt around AD<\/span> 100 to 110. He received a thorough education at Alexandria, became a Christian, and taught first in Egypt before moving to Rome around AD<\/span> 136, where he stayed until 154 or 155. Tertullian, in his work against heresy, seems to imply that Valentinus was twice expelled from the Roman church; he states that Valentinus was a brilliant and eloquent man who had hopes of becoming a bishop in Rome at one time. Valentinus attracted able followers who later expanded his teachings almost beyond recognition. But when he left Rome sometime after 154 or 155, he had made a final break with orthodoxy and was teaching a form of Gnostic heresy the product of which was the Gospel of Truth, written by himself or someone of his immediate circle. There is a surviving statement that Valentinus taught subsequently in Cyprus, and then he vanishes into the mists of history.<\/p>\nIrenaeus said the Gospel of Truth is no gospel, for it is unlike the four Gospels (Against Heresies<\/em> 3.2.9). Irenaeus was certainly correct, for the work is not a narrative. Nor does the Gospel of Truth contain any story about Jesus, any place name of any type, any date, or any mention of any person other than Jesus, who is only mentioned five times.<\/p>\nMore than 60 times, this brief work uses the notions of knowledge or needing to know. This knowledge is born from within as the soul returns to itself, finding there what Deity deposited in it—or perhaps better, finding there the residue of Deity still entrapped within it. Thus whoever has Gnosis has simply taken what is his and can know where he or she comes from and for where he or she is bound. Christ’s role was to present the “Book of the Living” or the “Living Book.” “Book” is understood, not as the gospel proclamation of the life and teachings of Jesus, but rather as the primordial gospel or truth that existed before creation. It was error and ignorance that rebelled against the Savior and nailed him to the tree. Implied in this, though not explicitly stated, is the Gnostic understanding that it was also divine error and ignorance out of which matter emerged or was created. Salvation for living beings entrapped in this matter comes with return to unalloyed Deity. The path of this return is Gnosis (knowledge). The Pleroma, the fullness of the Deity, went out into the depths of matter in search of the elect among beings by way of Jesus and the cross.<\/p>\nWhile these traits of Gnosticism are clear, this gospel is much closer to orthodoxy than most Gnostic Chenoboskion writings because it mentions only one Son of God, not several emanations; it does not split Jesus into a physical Jesus and a divine Christ; and most strikingly, Sophia, the usual central character in the Gnostic cosmic drama, does not appear at all. It is for these reasons among others that the Gospel of Truth is placed very close to Valentinus’s break with orthodoxy.<\/p>\nThe Gospel of Truth has assumed some degree of importance in NT studies beyond that warranted by its heretical content because it everywhere assumes our full NT canon. By some scholars’ counts, there are no less than 83 places where the Gospel of Truth echoes NT canonical books—in spite of the fact it does not cite a single saying of Jesus directly. Most particularly, it relies heavily on the book of Revelation and the Epistle to the Hebrews.<\/p>\nVirgin, Assumption of the<\/p>\nA widely circulated legend dealing with the death and translation of the Virgin Mary. None of the many versions is earlier than the fourth century. Most go back to Egypt. In the Coptic versions, Jesus himself appears to Mary before the apostles depart on their missionary labors; Jesus announces her coming death and translation. In the other form an angel makes the announcement. Mary requests the presence of all the apostles, who are miraculously brought on the clouds. Mary is transfigured, and many healings result from contact with her dead body. She is transported to heaven by Jesus shortly after her death.<\/p>\nThis legend itself took on a new interest and importance when in 1950 “The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin” was made a part of official Roman Catholic dogma.<\/p>\nVirgin, Life of the<\/p>\nThere are a number of accounts of the early life and existence of the Virgin Mary. Most of them come to us through Coptic texts. They tell of the birth of Mary to Joachim (also called Cleopas) and Anna, who had been taunted by friends for having no children. Mary was born after a vision of a white dove. In some accounts Mary was dedicated to the Lord and then committed to the care of a man, Joseph. While she was in the house weaving on the veil of the temple, angels would come to minister to her. The annunciation by Gabriel is given at great length. The birth of Jesus is described in detail while Joseph is searching for a midwife, Salome. Other accounts go on to describe tender scenes between Mary and the child Jesus. In some of these versions, there is a reckless identification of the Virgin Mary with all of the other Marys of the Gospels.<\/p>\nZebulun, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (above).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>APOCRYPHA*<\/h3>\nBooks excluded from the canon of Scripture.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Introduction<\/p>\n• Apocryphal Gospels<\/p>\n• Apocryphal Acts<\/p>\n• Apocryphal Epistles<\/p>\n• Apocalyptic Apocrypha<\/p>\n• Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings<\/p>\nIntroduction<\/p>\nThe writings of the Old and New Testaments tended to attract certain additional compositions in the form of books, parts of books, letters, “gospels,” apocalypses, and so on. Most of the authors wrote anonymously, but some presented their writings to the public under the name of a familiar OT figure or member of the Christian church. Several of these compositions formed a small but important part of the great body of Jewish literature that emerged during the period between the Old and New Testaments. Much of it was the result of religious and political ferment, for the Jews felt their faith and their very existence threatened, first by the pagan influences of Hellenistic Greek culture, then by the oppression of invading Roman forces.<\/p>\n\nMost of the apocryphal books are also pseudepigrapha—that is, they are books ascribed to a pseudonymous author. In other words, the main characteristic of these writings is the fictitious claim that the author of the book was a biblical person (Enoch, Abraham, Moses, Solomon, Bartholomew, Thomas, etc.) or that the revelation contained in the book was originally given to a biblical character (Adam and Eve, Isaiah). Generally, the pseudepigrapha show a strong interest in the apocalyptic: the creation of the world, the future of Israel and the nations, the glory of God and his angels, the messianic kingdom, and life after death. Many of the pseudepigrapha are Jewish writings that were never accepted by the Jewish or Christian communities. They were written about the time of the Apocrypha (c. 200 BC<\/span>–AD<\/span> 110), but by the nature of the contents of the pseudepigrapha, they were only recognized by certain groups. Since some of these books approximated counterparts in the canonical Scriptures, there is no doubt that in some circles their authority and inspiration were regarded as similar to that of the scriptural compositions venerated by the Jews and later by Christians.<\/p>\nOther religious writings from that period made no claim to be scriptural. Such compositions preserved the familiar traditions of both Judaism and primitive Christianity, although on occasion they enriched or embellished them by means of legends and unhistorical narratives. Because very few books of any kind were in circulation at that time, the Palestinians tended to read whatever literary material came into their possession. Although the Torah, or law of Moses, had always been recognized as the standard of theological orthodoxy for the Jews, narratives of endurance under persecution or accounts of the way that the enemies of God’s people received their just reward had an obvious attraction for those under the pressures of a pagan society.<\/p>\nIn the same way, although the Gospels and Epistles—along with the OT—comprised the basic canon or approved list of Scriptures for Christians, many additional narratives claimed the attention of Christ’s early followers. Those compositions often dealt with the supposed activities of Jesus and his followers, as well as with martyrdoms, revelations, and spiritual teachings. Some works contained material that was not only unhistorical but downright bizarre, but others reflected the spirit of Christ and the apostolic teachings to a certain extent. For the early Christians, as also for the Jews, the establishment of a formal canon of scriptural writings must have been prompted in part by a necessity to separate the record of revealed truth from other written forms of religious tradition as well as from actual heresy.<\/p>\nWritings that failed to gain acceptance into the OT and NT canons were described in the writings of some early Christian scholars by the term “apocrypha.” The Greek word means “hidden things,” and when applied to books it described those works that religious authorities wished to be concealed from the reading public. The reason was that such books were thought to contain mysterious or secret lore, meaningful only to the initiate and therefore unsuitable for the ordinary reader. But the word “apocrypha” was also applied in a less complimentary sense to works that deserved to be concealed. Such works contained harmful doctrines or false teachings calculated to unsettle or pervert rather than edify those who read them. The suppression of undesirable writings was comparatively easy at a time when only a few copies of any book were in circulation at a given time.<\/p>\nBy the end of the first century AD<\/span>, a clear distinction was being made in Jewish circles between writings that were suitable for use by the general public and esoteric works that were to be restricted to the knowledgeable and the initiated. Thus in 2 Esdras 14:1-6, the writer tells how Ezra was supposedly instructed by God to publish openly certain writings (among them the Torah), and keep others secret (that is, apocalyptic traditions dealing with the coming end of the age). In 2 Esdras 14:42-46 reference is made to 70 books, evidently noncanonical material, written after the 24 books of the Hebrew Canon.<\/p>\nUse of the term “apocrypha” to mean “noncanonical” goes back to the fifth century AD<\/span>, when Jerome urged that the books found in the Septuagint and in the Latin Bibles that did not occur in the canon of the Hebrew OT writings should be treated as apocryphal. They were not to be disregarded entirely, since they were part of the great contemporary outpouring of Jewish national literature. At the same time, they should not be used as sources for Christian doctrine but at best for supplementary reading of an uplifting or inspirational nature.<\/p>\nProtestant theologians generally have followed the tradition established by Jerome, regarding the OT apocrypha as the excess of the Septuagint canon over the Hebrew Scriptures. When the Hebrew Bible began to be translated into Greek in Egypt during the reign of Ptolemy II (285–246 BC<\/span>), the scholars concerned included a number of books that, while remaining outside the generally accepted list of Hebrew canonical writings, still had a bearing upon Jewish history and society. That procedure reflected contemporary attitudes in Palestine, where many people did not attempt to separate canonical writings from other forms of religious literature. The decision made by Jewish authorities about what to regard as canonical Scripture naturally had a bearing on what would constitute OT apocrypha.<\/p>\nTextual evidence represented by certain manuscripts and fragments from the Dead Sea caves makes it reasonably certain that the last of the canonical Hebrew writings had been completed several decades before the time Alexander the Great (356–323 BC<\/span>) began his conquests in the Near East. The process by which those compositions came to be accepted as canonical was more protracted, however. Only when they had been circulated, read, and assessed favorably by comparison with the spirituality of the Torah were they accorded general canonicity. Hence the distinction between the canonical and apocryphal writings came as much through usage and general consent on the part of orthodox Judaism as through any other manner. Earlier scholars suggested that the so-called Council of Jamnia, held in Palestine about AD<\/span> 100, was responsible for drawing up a list of OT books suitable for use by the faithful. However, subsequent studies have thrown considerable doubt upon the historicity of such a council, at the same time showing that the Jewish authorities of that period considered their noncanonical writings to be more of an obstacle than a help to devotion.<\/p>\nThe books the Jews regarded as being specifically outside the Canon, and therefore apocryphal, are as follows: 1 Esdras; 2 Esdras; Tobit; Judith; the additions to Esther; the Wisdom of Solomon; Ecclesiasticus; Baruch; the Letter of Jeremiah; the additions to the book of Daniel (the Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Young Men, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon); the Prayer of Manasseh; 1 Maccabees; and 2 Maccabees. Several Septuagint manuscripts included some pseudohistorical material under the titles of 3 and 4 Maccabees. Therefore, even the Apocrypha varied somewhat in content, depending upon the manuscript tradition being followed. Among early Christian scholars there was also some difference of opinion about the precise limits of canonical Hebrew Scripture, and hence of apocryphal material. A serious break with Hebrew and rabbinic tradition came with the writings of Augustine, who advanced the view that the books of the Apocrypha were of equal authority with the other writings of the canonical Hebrew and Christian Scriptures. A few dissenting voices were raised in support of Jerome’s position, but the views of Augustine were embraced by the Council of Trent (1546) and became official Roman Catholic teaching.<\/p>\nThe Roman Catholic Church includes the following works as part of the Deuterocanonical Scriptures: Tobit; Judith; the additions to Esther; the Wisdom of Solomon; Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus ben Sirach; Baruch; the additions to the book of Daniel (the Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Young Men, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon); 1 Maccabees; and 2 Maccabees. (Articles on each of these are interspersed throughout this dictionary.)<\/p>\nChristians of the NT period were already familiar with Jewish apocryphal works, including the apocalyptic speculations found in 2 Esdras. Therefore, it was hardly surprising that a similar body of literature should grow up around their own Scriptures when they began to be composed and circulated. NT apocrypha, however, like its OT counterpart, could be considered only in relationship to an established canon of scriptural writings. Since the earliest catalog of NT writings, the Muratorian Canon, was not compiled until about AD<\/span> 200, a considerable period of time elapsed before an official church statement could appear on what was to be considered NT apocrypha. In the meantime, a large assortment of materials of a predominantly religious nature appeared, purporting to be orthodox in nature and dealing with various aspects of historic Christianity. As events turned out, this apocryphal literature defeated the purposes it was intended to serve.<\/p>\nApocryphal Gospels<\/p>\nOne major class of apocrypha are the apocryphal gospels. These writings preserved stories about Christ and some teachings, but being mostly fanciful in nature they never became canonical. There are three broad classes:<\/p>\n1. A type similar to the synoptic Gospels, represented by the Gospel of Peter and the Gospel of the Egyptians, as well as papyrus fragments including Oxyrhynchus 840 and Papyrus Egerton 2. Other papyrus collections of sayings show affinities with the canonical Gospels.<\/p>\n<li>2. Gospels that disseminated Gnosticism, a second-century AD<\/span> heresy stressing philosophical knowledge (<\/em>gnosis<\/span>)<\/em> of the cosmos and man. They are often in the form of dialogues between Jesus and his disciples, such as the Coptic Gospel of Thomas, the Apocryphon of John, the Wisdom of Jesus Christ, and the Dialogue of the Redeemer. In this category also come those “gospels” attributed to the Twelve as a group, such as the Memoirs of the Apostles.<\/li>\n<li>3. Infancy gospels, purporting to supply otherwise unknown information of a legendary nature about Christ’s earliest years. Passion gospels also come into this category. These narratives were written to satisfy curiosity about Christ’s birth and childhood or to embellish the canonical accounts of his crucifixion and resurrection.<\/li>\nBecause of the scarcity of information about such matters as the childhood, adolescence, and early manhood of Jesus, the “infancy” gospels purport to supply the reader with what was meant to pass for historical fact. Much of the material, however, was entirely within the realm of fantasy and could never have been accepted as fact by any intelligent reader. For example, in the Gospel of Thomas the five-year-old Jesus is accused of breaking the Sabbath by making sparrows of clay beside a stream. When his father Joseph investigates the situation, Jesus claps his hands and the clay birds come to life and fly away chirping.<\/p>\n“Passion” gospels were written to embellish the canonical accounts of Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection. As supplements to Christian teaching, many of the apocryphal writings seemed to be proclaiming ideas that were actually outside the scope of NT doctrine. Attempts to fill in the “hidden years” of Christ’s life had no foundation whatever in the traditions of the Gospels. Works dealing with the last state of unbelievers were embellished in a manner that went far beyond anything stated in the NT. In some notable instances, as in the writings of various Gnostic sects, the authors set out deliberately to propagate heretical teachings they had accepted under the authority of some apostolic figure. The Gospel of Thomas, recovered around 1945 from Nag Hammadi (Chenoboskion) near the Nile River, is an example of an attempt to perpetuate curious sayings and dogmas by attributing them to Jesus, so that they would receive wide currency and acceptance.<\/p>\nApocryphal Acts<\/p>\nThere are also some apocryphal acts, which are purported to be accounts of apostolic achievements not recorded in Scripture. Such “acts” are the source of much tradition, such as Peter’s being crucified upside down and Thomas’s mission to India. The reliability of the traditions is questionable because the writings contain clearly unorthodox material. Yet small fragments of accurate information may be embedded in this mass of largely fictitious literature.<\/p>\nBecause of their often heretical character, the church consistently reacted against such books, sometimes even demanding that they be burned (for example, at the Nicene Council of 787). The Acts of John pictured Jesus talking to John on the Mt of Olives during the crucifixion, explaining that it was only a spectacle. In the Acts of Thomas, Jesus appeared in the form of Thomas, exhorting a newly married couple to dedicate themselves to virginity. Sexual abstinence was a dominant theme, reflecting Platonic ideas, which disparaged the physical body.<\/p>\nMany scholars date the earliest work, the Acts of John, before AD<\/span> 150. The major Acts (of John, Paul, Peter, Andrew, and Thomas) were probably written during the second and third centuries. These gave rise to other “acts” that were primarily miracle stories, written more to entertain than to teach.<\/p>\nApocryphal Epistles<\/p>\nA host of apocryphal works are classified as epistles. These generally pseudonymous works originated from many widely separated periods of time. Many other apocryphal works are apocalyptic in nature. These works are supplemented by material such as the Apostolic Constitutions and Canons. Added to these are the Gnostic compositions found at Nag Hammadi, which include works purporting to represent the teachings of Christ as well as “secret” instructions compiled by the Gnostic writers and a few apocryphal compositions.<\/p>\nApocalyptic Apocrypha<\/p>\nAnother group could be called apocalyptic apocrypha. The term “apocalypse” means “disclosure” or “revelation,” a term that was generally applied to Christian literature that resembled the Revelation of John, which designates itself an apocalypse in Revelation 1:1. The practice of writing under the name of an illustrious figure of the past, or pseudonymity, was a characteristic device used by most unknown authors of Jewish and Christian apocalypses (the Revelation of John is a striking exception). Jewish apocalypses were attributed to such ancient worthies as Adam, Enoch, Abraham, Moses, Ezra, and others. Similarly, Christian apocalypses written in the second century AD<\/span> and later were ascribed to such important early Christian figures as Peter, Thomas, James and others.<\/p>\nIn NT times there emerged in Judaism certain circles that developed an apocalyptic view of history. They provided such writings as the five parts of 1 Enoch, the Assumption of Moses, 2 Esdras, and the Apocalypse of Baruch. These books are of importance to NT study, for they provide a bridge between the OT and the NT concepts of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\nThe apocalypses were written to answer the problems of theodicy (the justice of God). After the days of Ezra, the law assumed a more important role in the life of the people than before. In prophetic times Israel again and again apostatized from the law and worshiped foreign gods. The primary message of the prophets was to challenge Israel to get right with God and to turn in repentance to keep the law. After Ezra and throughout NT times, Israel was obedient to the law as never before. The Jews abhorred idolatry and faithfully worshiped God. Still the kingdom did not come. Instead came the fearful persecution in the Maccabean times by Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the worldly rule of the Hasmoneans, Pompey and Roman hegemony, and in AD<\/span> 66–70, the siege and destruction of Jerusalem. Where was God? Why did he not deliver his faithful people? Why did the kingdom not come? The apocalypses were written to answer questions like these.<\/p>\nOne of the most important elements in apocalyptic religion is an explicit dualism, expressed as “this age” and “the age to come.” The prophets contrasted the present time with the future when the kingdom of God would be established. The apocalyptists radicalized this contrast. Twice we find fragments of this idiom in 1 Enoch. We meet the fully developed idiom in 2 Esdras and the Apocalypse of Baruch (late first century AD<\/span>). “The Most High has made not one age but two” (2 Esd 7:50); “the day of judgment shall be the end of this age and the beginning of the immortal age that is to come” (2 Esd 7:113); “this age the Most High has made for many but the age to come for few” (2 Esd 8:1; see also Apoc Bar 14:13; 15:7; Pirke Aboth<\/em> 4:1, 21-22; 6:4-7). Furthermore, the transition from this age to the age to come can be accomplished only by a cosmic act of God. In the apocryphal Assumption of Moses there is no messianic personage; it is God alone who comes to redeem Israel. In the Similitudes of Enoch the transition is accomplished with the coming of a heavenly, preexistent Son of Man. In 2 Esdras we find a conflation of the concepts of Davidic Messiah and the Son of Man.<\/p>\nApocalyptic differs from OT prophetic religion in that it is pessimistic about the present age. It would be wrong to describe the apocalypses as ultimately pessimistic, for their basic message is that in due time God will intervene and save his people. But for the present, as long as this age lasts, he has removed himself from intervening in Israel’s affairs. The present age is under the power of evil angelic and demonic forces and is irretrievably evil. God has abandoned this age to evil; salvation can be expected only in the age to come.<\/p>\nThe apocalyptists lost completely the tension between history and eschatology. They no longer expected any deliverance in this age. God had, in fact, become the God of the future, not of the present.<\/p>\nIn the dream-visions of Enoch (1 Enoch 83–90), God faithfully guided Israel throughout its history. Then God withdrew his personal leadership, forsook the temple, and surrendered his people to be torn and devoured. God “remained unmoved, though he saw it, and rejoiced that they were devoured and swallowed and robbed, and left them to be devoured in the hand of all the beasts” (1 Enoch 89:58). After the Babylonian captivity God was conceived to be inactive in history. History was surrendered to evil. All salvation was thrust into the future.<\/p>\nComparative studies have shown that the NT apocryphal writings preserve at best a series of debased traditions about the founder and teachings of early Christianity. At worst, the narratives are entirely devoid of historical value and in some respects are totally alien to NT spirituality. Even where they seem to support a tradition current in some part of the early church, the evidence they present is inferior to what can often be had from other sources. Sometimes the compositions are so trivial and inconsequential that it is difficult to account for their survival. Certain apocryphal writings did in fact become lost and are now known only in the form of quotations in larger works.<\/p>\nNevertheless, the NT apocryphal compositions are important in indicating what was attractive to the ordinary people of the day. For them an element of the romantic seemed necessary to supplement the body of received spiritual truth. Certain of the stories recounted were vivid and imaginative, and others, such as the apocalypses, provided a form of escapism from harsh temporal realities. No matter what their nature, the NT apocryphal writings exerted an influence out of all proportion to their fundamental worth.<\/p>\nSpecific Titles of Apocryphal Writings<\/p>\nAbdias, Apostolic History of<\/p>\nCollection of material drawn from canonical and apocryphal writings concerning the lives of the apostles, including Paul. Abdias, an early bishop of Babylon, was supposedly the author of this history that more probably was collated from a variety of sources in the sixth century AD<\/span> in France. This apocryphal “acts,” divided into 10 books, originally circulated in Greek as individual volumes that were collected into one when a Latin version was made. The content is generally regarded as folklore or legend but is of some value where no other source is available.<\/p>\nAbdias, a contemporary of the apostles, may have seen Christ and supposedly traveled extensively with Simon and Jude. There is no historical basis for considering Abdias as the author of the Hebrew text, or for believing that his disciple Eutropius translated it into Greek or that Africanus translated the Greek into Latin—although the preface to the Latin version makes those claims.<\/p>\nAbgarus, Letters of Christ and<\/p>\nApocryphal work comprising two short letters, one supposedly written by the Syrian king Abgar (Abgarus), the other supposedly a reply from Jesus. Eusebius claimed to have found the material in the archives of Abgar at Edessa and translated it from Syrian to Greek together with an account of the exploits of the disciple Thaddaeus.<\/p>\nAccording to the legend, Abgar, suffering from a severe disease, hears of the miracles of Jesus and sends a messenger with a letter asking Jesus to come heal him. At the same time he offers Jesus sanctuary from the dangerous opposition of the Jews in Jerusalem. In a written reply (later altered to an oral one to comply with the tradition that no writings of Jesus existed), Jesus declines the offer of sanctuary but promises that after his ascension he will comply with Abgar’s request for healing by sending a disciple to him. Thaddaeus, one of the Twelve, is dispatched to Edessa, the king is healed, and the community converts to Christianity. In a slightly different version in the Doctrina Addaei (about AD<\/span> 400), an oral reply is given, and the messenger returns with a portrait of Jesus that is displayed prominently in Abgar’s palace.<\/p>\nThe legend is essentially similar to that described in the Greek Acts of Thaddaeus (fifth or sixth century AD<\/span>), except that in the latter Ananias returns with a handkerchief on which is a miraculous imprint of the face of Christ.<\/p>\nAbraham, Apocalypse of<\/p>\nJewish document existing in old Slavonic texts that go back through Greek to a Hebrew or Aramaic original.<\/p>\nThe Apocalypse of Abraham begins with Abraham turning from idolatry. Incorporating old rabbinical traditions of Abraham’s youth, it describes his awakening to the call of God and his awareness that God was one and was holy. An angel named Jahoel, whose functions and powers are lifted from rabbinical lore, takes Abraham to the seventh heaven where he is shown things past and things yet to be. He sees the temptation of Adam and Eve through sexual sin, and the murder of Cain. Azazel, an evil being, plays Satan’s role. These details probably reflect a tradition that Abraham was the author of the first documents of the Bible. The revelation then turns to the future and shows the destruction of the temple, plagues upon the heathen, and the coming of the Messiah. It is probable that the composite document took final form in the last generation of the first century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nTrue to his character as revealed in Genesis, Abraham raises the question of evil and why God tolerates the rebellious Azazel. He receives the answer that evil has its origin in the free will of man. This apocalypse shows how faithful Jews struggled to understand the problem of evil during a time of great suffering in Judaism. It also illustrates the curious “doctrine of angels” of that period. Both Gnostic and Christian editing of the text has been noted by some scholars.<\/p>\nAbraham, Testament of<\/p>\nJewish apocryphal writing describing the death of Abraham. In the testament, when the angel Michael comes to take Abraham’s soul, Abraham refuses to die. Reluctant to insist on the old man’s death, Michael accedes to his request to see all creation before he dies. The angel transports Abraham by chariot into the heavens so that he can observe mankind. Abraham is so shocked at the perfidy of humanity that he curses the sinners, who die immediately. He then observes the judgment of a soul, and although angels take part in the trial he notes that the presiding judge is Abel. The merits and demerits of the soul seem equally balanced, but because of the intervention of Abraham, the judgment is favorable. Abraham then realizes the severity of his cursing of sinners, but the angel informs him that the premature death of those whom he had cursed was the means of atonement for their sins.<\/p>\nAfter his return to earth, Abraham again refuses to die. Death appears in all his horror and kills 7,000 servants of Abraham (who are subsequently raised to life), but the aged saint still will not die. Finally, Death grasps Abraham’s hand and the angels lift his spirit to the heavens.<\/p>\nThe account is found in several Greek manuscripts, the oldest perhaps dating from the 13th century AD<\/span>, as well as in Slavonic, Romanian, Arabic, Ethiopic, and Coptic. The original language was probably Hebrew, from the first century AD<\/span>, with the work possibly translated into Greek by a Christian. The testament also exists in a shorter version in which God comes to lift up the soul of Abraham during a dream. There is no attempt in the work to make a theological statement, but the portrayal of the angel Michael and of Death are typical of Jewish thought of the first century.<\/p>\nActs, Apocryphal<\/p>\nWritings purported to be accounts of apostolic achievements not recorded in Scripture.<\/p>\nActs of Pilate<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Pilate, Acts of (below).<\/p>\nAdam, Apocalypse of<\/p>\nOne of the best examples of Gnostic apocalyptic literature. In 1946, a farm worker discovered a number of ancient texts in a cave about 6 miles (10 kilometers) north of the Egyptian city of Nag Hammadi. The discovery included 13 codexes (predecessors of bound books) of Christian and non-Christian origin. The discovery was not immediately disclosed, so it was not until 1958 that a French scholar, Jean Doresse, revealed the existence of the Apocalypse of Adam to the public. The apocalypse is written in Coptic and stands as the last of five works in Codex V.<\/p>\nAlthough the author’s true identity is unknown, the subtitle spuriously attributes the book to Adam or Seth: “An Apocalypse that Adam revealed to his son Seth in the seven hundredth year.” Seth was often cast in the role of transmitter of truth by the writers of Gnostic literature (for example, the Gospel of the Egyptians, the Paraphrase of Shem).<\/p>\nThe earliest existing copy of the Apocalypse of Adam is dated around AD<\/span> 300 to 350, although it may have been written long before. Its frequent Gnostic references, its dependence on Jewish history, and its allusions to baptism have led some scholars to postulate an origin in the Jewish baptist sects of the first and second centuries. Parallels also exist between this work and third-century Manichean (a brand of Gnosticism) literature.<\/p>\nThe Apocalypse of Adam is of great importance to students of Christian origins. For many years scholars have debated whether the Gnostic religion was a heretical outgrowth of Christianity or whether it was a movement of independent origins. Some scholars have argued that the Apocalypse of Adam is an example of an early, independent Gnosticism. If this proves to be the case the debate will certainly be simplified.<\/p>\nIn addition to its introduction and conclusion, the Apocalypse of Adam may be divided into three parts: Adam’s summary of significant past events, predictions of attempts to eliminate mankind by the evil creator-god, and predictions about the coming of the Enlightener who will show his people the way to the true God.<\/p>\nThe apocalypse opens with Adam, supposedly on his deathbed, revealing the future secrets of the Gnostic people to Seth. These have been mystically communicated to him by three angelic beings. Adam bemoans his condition of perpetual slavery to the evil creator-god, brought about by the fall and mankind’s subsequent loss of gnosis<\/span> (knowledge). Typical of Gnostic literature, a sharp distinction is drawn between the evil creator-god who rules the earth and the true God of the universe, knowledge of whom brings authentic life. Adam predicts that the creator-god will jealously attempt to destroy mankind by a flood (the story of Noah) and by fire (the story of Sodom and Gomorrah) and thus keep mankind from knowledge of the true God. These attempts, however, will be foiled by the intervention of angelic beings sent from the God of truth. Finally, the true God will send the Enlightener who will teach gnosis<\/span> to mankind so that they might know him. The creator-god will try to defeat the Enlightener but will be able to harm only his physical body. With the message of the Enlightener prevailing, mankind will turn from the creator-god and seek the true God through gnosis<\/span>.<\/em><\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Gnosticism.<\/p>\nAdam, Apocryphal Books of<\/p>\nAccount of the life and death of Adam and Eve recorded in Latin, and in a Greek version known as the Apocalypse of Moses. Other minor versions of early Christian origin also exist. Like other apocryphal writings, the work is fanciful and of unknown authorship.<\/p>\nAccording to the Latin account, after their expulsion from Paradise Adam and Eve are hungry and unable to find food for seven days. In desperation a penitent Eve, assuming responsibility for tasting the forbidden fruit, suggests that Adam kill her. He refuses, and after a search they survive by eating animals’ food. Adam suggests that as a penance they should stand fasting in the river up to their necks for 40 days, he in the Tigris, she in the Jordan. After 18 days Satan comes to Eve in the guise of an angel, tells her that the Lord has accepted her penance, and persuades her to leave the river. Coming to the Tigris where Adam is, Eve realizes that it was Satan who had spoken to her. Satan then explains that the reason for his fall was his refusal to worship man, a lower being.<\/p>\nThe archangel Michael is then sent to Adam with seeds so that he can learn to till the land. In a dream Eve sees Cain kill Abel, and in an attempt to prevent the murder by separating the brothers, Cain is made a farmer and Abel a shepherd. Subsequently a third son, Seth, is born. Adam receives a message from God that he is to die because he has obeyed the word of his wife rather than the instructions of God. When Adam is later in pain and close to death, he explains to Seth that Satan had tempted Eve to eat the forbidden fruit and that she in turn had persuaded him to taste it. Seth and Eve journey to the gates of Paradise to plead with God for Adam’s life. On the way Seth is attacked and bitten by a snake. At Paradise, Michael explains to them that Adam must die. Seth observes the burial of Adam and Abel.<\/p>\nBefore Eve’s death the following week, she asks Seth to make a record of the lives of his parents on tablets of stone and clay, so that if the Lord shows his anger with the world by water, the clay will be dissolved and the stone remain; if by fire, the stone will be broken up and the clay baked hard. Eve also warns Seth to mourn for six days only and not on the Sabbath.<\/p>\nThe text of the Greek version is similar to that of the Latin, except that the Greek version includes a description of Adam’s resurrection (added later to the Latin) and a detailed account by Eve of her temptation and fall. The burial of Adam and the initial refusal of the earth to accept the body of the slain Abel are also elaborately described in the Greek account. Both versions are probably derived from Hebrew originals dating from the first century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nAhikar, Book of<\/p>\nNear Eastern folktale from the sixth or seventh century BC<\/span> showing the reward of ingratitude. According to the story, Ahikar, secretary of Sennacherib, king of Assyria, was renowned for his wisdom. Childless even though he had 60 wives, Ahikar adopted his sister’s son, Nadan, and reared him to be his successor in Sennacherib’s court. Ahikar diligently educated his adopted son, who nevertheless turned out to be bad and even forged documents to have his benefactor condemned to death. Ahikar was spared through his friendship with the executioner and was concealed until the wrath of the king cooled. Later, when Sennacherib had occasion to wish for his wisdom, Ahikar was brought on the scene, long-haired, disheveled, and with fingernails like eagles’ claws. Once again in the king’s favor, Ahikar sternly rebuked his unscrupulous nephew. In response to Ahikar’s rebuke, Nadan’s body swelled up and his stomach burst open.<\/p>\nAhikar’s story has interesting parallels with OT wisdom books and also with some of the parables of Jesus. References to Ahikar occur in the apocryphal book of Tobit, in the Greek philosopher Democritus, in the apocalyptic Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, as well as in the Koran. The story, originally in Aramaic, also survives in Syriac, Arabic, Armenian, Ethiopic, and Greek, though with considerable variations in the versions.<\/p>\nAkhmim Fragment<\/p>\nDocument found in a tomb in Akhmim in Egypt and containing the apocryphal Gospel of Peter. See<\/em> Peter, Preaching of (below).<\/p>\nAllogenes Supreme<\/p>\nGnostic work (“The Most High Stranger”), discovered in 1946 in an urn near Nag Hammadi (Egypt). The Neoplatonist historian Porphyry, as well as later Syriac Christian writings against heresy, mentioned the works of Allogenes (whose name means “foreigner” or “stranger”). Allogenes Supreme, a Gnostic “apocalypse” written in Coptic, contains an account of the creation of the higher world, exalting Barbelo, the celestial mother. The existing copy was made during the fourth century, but the original may date back to the second century.<\/p>\nAndrew, Acts of<\/p>\nApocryphal work describing purported miracles and the martyrdom in Greece of the apostle Andrew, Peter’s brother. Its theme is the virtue of turning away from materialism and the transitory values of the world to an asceticism associated with dedication of life to God. The earliest fragment available is in the Vatican. The original probably dated from the second century AD<\/span> and was probably long, verbose, and tedious. Feeling that it had merit, Gregory of Tours in the sixth century wrote a concise account of the miracles of Andrew from an original, now lost. The account of the martyrdom of Andrew probably circulated separately.<\/p>\nAmong the many miracles Gregory recorded was one concerning Exoos, a noble youth from Thessalonica, who, having heard of Andrew’s preaching and miracles, comes to him at Philippi, is converted, and remains with him. Finding bribery useless and refusing to listen to Andrew, the youth’s parents set fire to the house where the Christians are staying. As the flames roar, Exoos prays that the Lord will extinguish the fire and sprinkles it with water. Thereupon the flames die out. The parents and the crowd, claiming that the youth is now a sorcerer, climb ladders to enter the house and kill the inhabitants, but God blinds the intruders. Although it is night, a light shines out from the house, sight is restored to those who have been blinded, and all except the youth’s parents are converted. The parents die soon afterward, and Exoos remains with Andrew, spending his inheritance on the poor. Returning to Thessalonica, Exoos heals a man who has been paralyzed for 23 years, and subsequently Exoos and Andrew perform further miracles and preach to the people.<\/p>\nIn Patrae the maidservant of Maximilla, wife of the proconsul Aegeates, comes to Andrew and implores him to heal her mistress, whose fever is so severe that her husband is standing at her bedside threatening to kill himself with a sword the moment she dies. Telling the proconsul to put up his sword, Andrew takes Maximilla’s hand and the fever leaves her. Ordering food for her, Andrew then refuses Aegeates’ offer of 100 pieces of silver. After performing many miracles in the city, Andrew receives a message from Maximilla to come and heal the slave of the proconsul’s brother, Stratocles. The apostle restores the boy to health, and his master believes.<\/p>\nMaximilla, to the fury of her husband, spends considerable time listening to the preaching of Andrew and is also converted. She then refuses to sleep with her husband and one night even substitutes a servant for herself. Details of subsequent events are found in the account of the martyrdom. Aegeates, in anger, holds Andrew responsible for his wife’s alienation and has him arrested. After preaching from prison, Andrew is taken to be crucified by the seashore. When the Christian Stratocles sees Andrew being manhandled by the soldiers, he fights his way through, and he and Andrew walk together to the place of crucifixion. Aegeates, fearing his brother, orders the soldiers not to interfere. At the seashore the soldiers follow the proconsul’s command that Andrew be tied, not nailed, to the cross so that his death will be lingering and he will be eaten by dogs. After two days he is still speaking to people from the cross, and many come to Aegeates demanding Andrew’s release. Arriving at the scene, the proconsul sees that Andrew is indeed alive, and Aegeates approaches the apostle to release him. Andrew demands that he be allowed to die and meet his Lord. As they watch, Andrew dies and the onlookers weep as Maximilla and Stratocles take down his body from the cross. Maximilla remains apart from her husband and continues as a Christian.<\/p>\nAndrew, Story of<\/p>\nLegendary fragment existing only in the Coptic language. In the legend coming from the late second century AD<\/span>, a woman kills her child in the desert and gives the remains to a dog. She flees when the apostle Andrew and Philemon approach, but the dog tells what happened. Andrew prays and the child, being vomited forth, is restored to life and laughs and cries.<\/p>\nAndrew and Matthias, Acts of<\/p>\nLengthy document of highly questionable authenticity, probably dating from the late second century AD<\/span>. This book was one of many apocryphal “acts” intended to supplement the NT book of Acts by providing more information about the apostles. The fourth-century church historian Eusebius described this work and others like it as heretical, absurd, and spurious.<\/p>\nIn this story, the apostles cast lots to determine where each should go. Matthias (Matthew in some versions) is sent to the country of the man-eaters, where he soon requires rescue from a cannibal feast. The Lord then sends Andrew to save him. Andrew arrives in time to do so, and Matthias is then carried off by a cloud. Now alone, Andrew is arrested and tortured, being dragged through the city that he nearly destroys by calling forth water from a statue. Eventually, impressed by Andrew’s miracles, the people repent and release him. Andrew next draws a plan for a church, has it built, baptizes the people, and gives them the ordinances of the Lord.<\/p>\nAndrew and Paul, Acts of<\/p>\nFragmentary apocryphal story, existing only in Coptic fragments, about the arrival of the apostles Andrew and Paul by sea at a city. In the story, Paul, instructing Andrew to rescue him, visits the underworld. There he meets Judas, who explains that he worshiped Satan after Jesus had pardoned him for the betrayal. Andrew rescues Paul, who returns carrying a piece of wood. Although Andrew is asked to heal a child, some Jews are skeptical and the city gates remain closed to the apostles. Paul strikes the gates with his piece of wood, and the gates are swallowed up into the earth. Astonished at the miracle, 27,000 Jews are converted.<\/p>\nApostles, Epistle of the<\/p>\nLetter purporting to come from the 11 apostles to the churches “of the east and the west, of the north and the south, declaring and imparting to you that which concerns our Lord Jesus Christ.” Some believe that the epistle was written in Asia Minor about AD<\/span> 160; others think that it originated in Egypt. It is probably to be dated near the middle of the second century. In existence are a mutilated Coptic manuscript of the fourth or fifth century, a complete version in Ethiopic, and a fragment in Latin. The epistle was unknown until the discovery in 1895 of the Coptic manuscript.<\/p>\nAfter an introduction there is a declaration that “our Lord and Redeemer Jesus Christ is God the Son of God who was sent of God the Lord of the whole world.” Then follows a summary of a number of incidents from the Gospels, including a negative statement of the Golden Rule: “Love your enemies, and what you would not that man do to you, that do to no man.” Chapter 24 introduces the subject of the resurrection followed by a series of questions by the disciples with answers by Jesus. A prophecy of the conversion of Paul appears in chapter 31. In chapter 43 the five wise virgins are identified as “Faith and Love and Grace and Peace and Hope”; the names of the foolish are “Knowledge, Understanding (Perception), Obedience, Patience, and Compassion.” The question-and-answer format of a substantial part of the work is reminiscent of the style of some of the texts found in the Gnostic library at Nag Hammadi, especially the Apocryphon of John. However, warnings that Cerinthus and Simon (ch 7) are “enemies of our Lord Jesus Christ” make it clear that this is not a Gnostic document. The epistle contains numerous evidences of orthodox influence, along with clear indications of a departure from apostolic Christianity.<\/p>\nApostles, Gospel of the Twelve<\/p>\nOne of a large number of heretical “gospels” circulating in the earliest centuries of the Christian church along with the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. The Gospel of the Twelve Apostles was first mentioned by name in comments on Luke 1:1 by the Christian theologian Origen (c. AD<\/span> 185–254). Some scholars think it may have been the same as the Gospel of the Ebionites, quoted in a few early Christian writings. Nothing is known directly of the Gospel of the Twelve Apostles.<\/p>\nArabic Gospel of the Infancy<\/p>\nOne of several “gospels of the infancy” found in the apocryphal NT. This one from about the fifth century contains an account of the birth of Jesus, including the visits of the shepherds and the magi, the flight into Egypt, and miracles performed by Jesus as a boy. Details of the early period of Jesus’ life are given, about which the canonical Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) say nothing. An interesting facet of the miracle stories is the role in many of them of Mary, the mother of Jesus, in contrast to the record of the miracles in the canonical Gospels. The Arabic Gospel may have been written in Syriac and translated into Arabic. Some of its stories are also found in the Koran and other Islamic writings. Study of this apocryphal gospel reveals its sharp contrast with the canonical accounts, but it also indicates how much this and similar writings had to do with the growing veneration of the virgin Mary.<\/p>\nArabic History of Joseph the Carpenter<\/p>\nFourth-century AD<\/span> account of the life and death of Joseph—with information supposedly supplied by Jesus. According to this account, Joseph the carpenter becomes a widower after fathering four sons and two daughters (ch 2). He is entrusted with the care of Mary in his 90th year (ch 14). Thus, according to this account, the brothers and sisters of Jesus are Joseph’s children by a previous marriage. Joseph is said to have died at the age of 111 years. The document, which exists in both Arabic and Coptic versions, contains the statement that Mary “must look for the same end of life as other mortals” (ch 18). Hence, it has been dated as earlier than the fifth century, when the idea of the “assumption of Mary into heaven” was being promoted.<\/p>\nAristeas, Letter of<\/p>\nEarly account of the relationships between Judaism and Hellenism in Egypt during the period when the Hebrew OT was translated into Greek (the Septuagint). The author, Aristeas, who identifies himself as an Alexandrian court attendant under Ptolemy Philadelphus II (ruled 283–247 BC<\/span>), purports to give information about the translation procedures. The most probable date for the Letter of Aristeas (estimates vary from 200 BC<\/span> to AD<\/span> 50) is the end of the second century BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nAs part of his massive library project, King Ptolemy shows interest in the Jewish law. Aristeas uses the occasion to request the emancipation with remuneration of all Jewish slaves in the kingdom and King Ptolemy accedes to the request. The king asks that the high priest in Jerusalem select translators for the project. There follows a lengthy description of gifts sent to Eleazar, the high priest, with special emphasis upon an exquisite table. And then Aristeas describes the temple, the priests, the vestments of the high priest, and the defense system for the temple, followed by a brief description of Palestine and its environs.<\/p>\nIn the next section, the high priest talks with Aristeas and the translators before their departure to Alexandria. A summary of his speech includes a careful defense of the law from a philosophical viewpoint. The king gives a lavish banquet for the 72 translators (6 from each tribe) when they arrive in Alexandria. Each translator gives a brilliant answer to the king’s specific questions at the seven successive nights of celebration. The name of each translator and his question and answer are recorded. Then the work is completed on the island of Pharos in 72 days and is praised by the Alexandrian Jews and the king. The translators are dismissed with lavish gifts.<\/p>\nIn the epilogue, the author claims to have been an eyewitness to the events and maintains that his report is accurate. This is not believed by modern scholars. Its embellished and legendary quality was recognized in the fifth century BC<\/span>. Aristeas’s discussion of the translation procedure was obviously a convenient literary frame on which to hang a defense of Judaism to the heathen world. Religious liberalism and loyalty to basic Jewish beliefs were skillfully combined to plead for political toleration for the Jews. Many specifics of the Letter of Aristeas are questionable, but its basic picture of how the Septuagint translation came to be made is credible. See<\/em> the discussion of the Septuagint in Bible, Versions of the (Ancient).<\/p>\nArmenian Gospel of the Infancy<\/p>\nLegendary account of the infancy and boyhood of Jesus Christ, one of many apocryphal gospels intended to supplement the four NT Gospels by providing more details about Jesus’ early life. It was probably translated into Armenian from a Syriac original. Nestorian missionaries reportedly brought an “infancy gospel” into Armenia about AD<\/span> 590, but evidently not the Armenian Gospel in its present form.<\/p>\nSources for the Armenian Gospel included two books containing legendary material about Christ’s infancy, the Protevangelium of James and the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. The Armenian Gospel amplifies the material of these two texts considerably, making many novel additions to the life of Jesus. For example, Joseph searches for a midwife and meets Eve, who has come to witness the fulfillment of the promised Redeemer-seed (Gn 3:15). Later the magi bring the testament Adam gave to Seth. Jesus, accused of causing a child’s death, is cleared when the child is raised from the dead.<\/p>\nAscension of Isaiah<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Isaiah, Ascension of (below).<\/p>\nAscents of James<\/p>\nSee<\/em> James, Ascents of (below).<\/p>\nAsenath, Prayer of<\/p>\nJewish story about the wife of Joseph when he was in Egypt (Gn 41:45) and known by several titles—The Life and Confession of Asenath, The Book of Joseph and Asenath, and variations of the above. It was apparently very popular in the early and medieval Christian church. Latin, Syriac, Slavonic, Rumanian, and Ethiopic versions, in addition to 40 Armenian copies, have been found.<\/p>\nModern scholars tend to see the source of the novel in the Hellenistic Judaism prevalent in Egypt from 100 BC<\/span> to AD<\/span> 100. Asenath seems to serve as a model for any proselyte to Judaism. If that understanding is correct, the story gives valuable insight into the less legalistic attitudes of a sector of pre-Christian Judaism. Repentant realization of the hopelessness of one’s sinful condition and casting oneself upon the mercies of God play a large part in the story.<\/p>\nThe original was probably written in Greek and is divided into two major parts. Part I deals with Asenath’s pampered life prior to meeting Joseph, his initial rejection of her because of her idolatry, and her consequent repentance in ashes. Asenath calls upon God in prayer, and he sends an angel to her to announce her forgiveness and to say that her name is now written in the Book of Life. Joseph returns and marvels at Asenath’s new beauty, rejoicing at her conversion. With Pharaoh’s blessing they are married the next day.<\/p>\nPart II describes the period when Joseph’s father, Jacob, and his family have come to Egypt. Desiring Asenath, the elder son of Pharaoh tempts Joseph’s brothers Dan and Gad to help him kidnap her. The plan is foiled by Joseph’s other brothers, who then wish to kill Dan and Gad, but Asenath pleads successfully for their lives. Pharaoh leaves the crown to Joseph, who rules 40 years and then returns the reign to Pharaoh’s younger son.<\/p>\nAsher, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nAssumption of Moses<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Moses, Assumption of (below).<\/p>\nBarnabas, Acts of<\/p>\nDocument of one of several distinct cycles of tradition about Barnabas, the apostle Paul’s companion, this one linking him with Cyprus. This work, whose full title is The Journeyings and Martyrdom of Saint Barnabas the Apostle, was probably composed in Cyprus at the end of the fifth or the beginning of the sixth century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe book purports to be a first-person account written by John Mark. He claims to have left the apostles in Perga (cf. Acts 13:13) so he could sail to the West but was prevented. When he tried to rejoin them in Antioch, Paul prohibited him. Consequently, after some dispute, John Mark and Barnabas sailed for Cyprus. After preaching and healing many people, Barnabas encountered his old adversary, Bar-Jesus, who finally stirred up the Jews to capture him. Leading Barnabas out of the city of Salamis, they circled around him and burned him alive. John Mark and some other believers escaped with his ashes and buried them in a cave along with scriptures Barnabas had received from Matthew. John Mark then left for Alexandria to minister there.<\/p>\nBarnabas, Epistle of<\/p>\nThis anonymous letter addresses a question commonly asked throughout the early church: What should Christianity’s relationship be to Judaism? Clement of Alexandria quoted from this document frequently and ascribed it to “Barnabas, who himself also preached with the apostle [Paul].” Jerome believed the same. But the writer does not claim to be Barnabas, and the earliest claims of authorship come only from Alexandrian church leaders. The literary and interpretive style is entirely Alexandrian, so it is assumed that the epistle was written in Alexandria.<\/p>\nThe author of this epistle unequivocally denies any connection between Judaism and the gospel of Jesus Christ. At the same time, he does not say that the OT opposes the NT; rather, he sees Christianity everywhere in the Law and the Prophets. He holds that all the Judaistic rites and ceremonies are mystical pointers to Christ and that an evil angel has blinded the Jews from understanding this.<\/p>\nThe epistle mentions the destruction of Jerusalem, so it was not written before AD<\/span> 70. There was a second devastation of Jerusalem in AD<\/span> 132 that ended the revolt of Bar-Kochba. This defeat would have served the author’s purposes so well that he would surely have referred to it if he were writing after the event. Many scholars suggest that the letter was composed around 130, since this was a period of strong Jewish nationalism. This nationalism would have pressured many Jewish Christians to return to Judaism, and so the author of the Epistle of Barnabas wrote to defend Christianity against Judaism.<\/p>\nThe Epistle of Barnabas is composed of two parts. The first section (chs 1–17) contains allegorical interpretations of the OT. These highly spiritual and mystical interpretations are intended to oppose Jewish legalism and explain how the OT prophesied of Jesus Christ. The author concedes that righteous people, such as Moses, David, and the prophets, understood the true meaning of Mosaic law, but he contends that the rest of the nation of Israel had misconstrued God’s covenant. Therefore, the Jews lost their claim to the covenant’s blessings, which were transferred to the Christians instead. This allegorical style of interpretation was very popular among Alexandrian church leaders. The NT epistle of Hebrews also makes use of this type of interpretation. The author of the Epistle of Barnabas often quotes from the Septuagint, though the quotes are somewhat loosely recited.<\/p>\nA Latin version of the first section was all that was known of the Epistle of Barnabas until the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus in 1859. This codex contained the first known Greek version of the Epistle of Barnabas, which was appended to the books of the NT along with The Shepherd and the Didache. The Greek version contains a second section that begins, “Now let us pass on to quite a different sort of instruction.” This section contains moral precepts that contrast the way of darkness with the way of light, much of which seems to be transcribed from the “Two Ways” of the Didache. It has little connection with the first section. This has led many scholars to conclude that the second section was added by another writer at some later date.<\/p>\nBarnabas, Gospel of<\/p>\nLong Italian work actually written in the fourth century by a proselyte to Islam. He probably sought to capitalize on the mysterious mention of such a gospel in the Gelasian Decree, written not later than the sixth century AD<\/span>. To date, no other evidence of an authentic gospel by Barnabas has been uncovered, a fact that has led many scholars to doubt whether it ever existed.<\/p>\nBartholomew, Acts of<\/p>\nEarly Christian novel purporting to describe the last days and death of the apostle Bartholomew. The work is also known as The Martyrdom of the Holy and Glorious Apostle Bartholomew. It may date back to the fifth or sixth century AD<\/span> and was evidently well received, for copies exist in Latin, Greek, Armenian, and Ethiopic.<\/p>\nIn the Acts, Bartholomew goes to India, takes up residence in a pagan temple, and causes its false oracle to cease. Bartholomew then heals a demoniac, thus drawing the attention of King Polymius. Bartholomew also heals the king’s demon-possessed daughter. Next, he casts the false god out of the temple. After this display of power, many believe the gospel. The king’s brother, however, is enraged and has Bartholomew beaten and beheaded. His rash action is soon punished, for he is strangled to death by a demon. The good King Polymius becomes bishop and serves 20 years.<\/p>\nBartholomew, Apocalypse of<\/p>\nFragmentary Coptic texts that have some similarities to the apocryphal Gospel of Bartholomew. A few scholars have felt that two works were represented in these fragments, a gospel and also an apocalypse. Though this hypothesis has been generally abandoned, references to the debatable Apocalypse of Bartholomew still appear.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Bartholomew, Gospel of (below).<\/p>\nBartholomew, Book of the Resurrection of Christ by<\/p>\nApocryphal work existing only in Coptic and probably dating from the fifth or sixth century AD<\/span>. Like many similar writings of doubtful authenticity, it claims to supplement the accounts of Jesus found in the biblical Gospels. The book was supposedly addressed by Bartholomew to his son, Thaddaeus, who was warned in it not to let this book “come into the hand of any man who is an unbeliever and a heretic.” The book can hardly be regarded as a narrative; its aim is obviously the glorification of Bartholomew, who sees things that are hidden from others. The text contains many breaks; contradictions abound and a disregard of history is evident. Two different persons bury the body of Jesus: Joseph and Philogenes, father of a boy healed by Jesus. Mary, the mother of Jesus, is confused with Mary Magdalene. In the account of the Last Supper the author goes far beyond biblical statements about the bread and wine: “His Body was on the Table about which they were assembled; and they divided it. They saw the blood of Jesus pouring out as living blood down into the cup.” Imaginative details also embellish the account of the resurrection. Christ, for example, brings Adam back with him from hades. The story of doubting Thomas has been greatly amplified.<\/p>\nThe most complete text of the Book of the Resurrection is in the British Museum in London. Several other fragments exist, probably from an earlier version.<\/p>\nBartholomew, Gospel of<\/p>\nOne of many apocryphal gospels appearing after the second century under the name of some illustrious figure. The early church was aware not only of the existence of these writings but also of their fictitious character. In the fourth century the church historian Eusebius described them as heretical, spurious, absurd, and impious. Later a Gospel of Bartholomew was mentioned by name, along with several other Gnostic gospels, in the prologue of Jerome’s commentary on Matthew’s Gospel. However, there is no evidence that Jerome had seen such a book or that it actually existed.<\/p>\nA work called Questions of Bartholomew does exist in Greek, Latin, and Slavonic texts—the Greek dating possibly from the fifth or sixth century. Its text has Bartholomew asking Jesus where he went after the Crucifixion and Jesus telling him that he went into hades. Later Bartholomew is pictured as asking Mary to tell how she conceived the incomprehensible or bore him that cannot be carried. Mary warns him that if she began to tell them, fire would come forth from her mouth and consume all the world, but the apostle persists. As she tells the story of the angelic visitation and the Annunciation, fire comes from her mouth. The world is about to come to an end, but Jesus intervenes and places his hand over Mary’s mouth. The apostles also ask to see the bottomless pit and “the things which are in the heavens.” Bartholomew is shown the adversary of men, Beliar, restrained by 660 angels and bound with fiery chains. When Bartholomew treads upon his neck, Beliar explains that he had first been called Satanael and later Satan, describes the creation of the angels, and tells how he fell and how he was able to deceive Eve. Finally, Bartholomew is said to have asked Jesus about the greatest sin. Jesus replies that to say anything evil against a faithful worshiper of God is to sin against the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\nBaruch, Apocalypse of<\/p>\nTwo different pseudepigraphal works.<\/p>\n1. Pseudepigraphal Jewish document of 87 chapters, written in Hebrew and translated into Greek and from Greek into Syriac. Only a few lines of the Hebrew original still exist, quoted in rabbinic writings. The Syriac manuscript dates from the sixth or seventh century AD and is the only complete text. It shows evidence of multiple authorship and dependence on the book of 2 Esdras in the Apocrypha. Similarity of many expressions to those in the NT suggests that the original may have been composed in the last half of the first century or the first half of the second century.<\/p>\nThe text is in seven sections of unequal length containing both prose and poetic material. The subjects dealt with are the Messiah and his future kingdom, Israel’s past woes, and the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians. Theological questions such as sin and suffering, free will, the number of people to be saved by the Messiah, and the resurrection of the righteous are not always treated consistently within the text. Some passages paint an optimistic picture of Israel’s future; others are deeply pessimistic. In general the world is a scene of corruption for which no remedy exists. A new and spiritual world is at hand: “Whatever is now is nothing, but that which shall be is very great. For everything that is corruptible shall pass away, and everything that dies shall depart and all the present time, which is defiled with evils.” The alternating optimism and pessimism may reflect the changing fortunes of Judaism in the first and second centuries AD<\/span> or simply the outlook of the different authors. The message of hope is directed to those who keep the law of Moses: “For the righteous justly hope for the end, and without fear depart from this habitation, because they have with Thee a store of works preserved in treasuries.”<\/p>\nThe final section of the book is identified as “the epistle which Baruch, the son of Neriah, sent to the nine and a half tribes.” It was sent by being “bound to the neck of the eagle,” probably meaning that it was intended for the Jews scattered outside Palestine (the Diaspora).<\/p>\nBaruch was the prophet Jeremiah’s companion and secretary (Jer 36:4-8). His name was attached to a number of apocryphal and pseudepigraphal writings composed long after his death. The Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch is also called 2 Baruch to distinguish it clearly from the book of Baruch (1 Baruch) in the Apocrypha.<\/p>\n<li>2. Pseudepigraphal document of 17 chapters, also called the Greek Apocalypse of Baruch or 3 Baruch. It is preserved in Greek, Ethiopic, Armenian, and Slavonic manuscripts. It was first published in Venice in 1609 and then in 1868, although its existence was suggested by the early Christian theologian Origen. Like 2 Baruch, this apocalypse seems to be a composite document of the second century AD<\/span> but in contrast is a Christian document intended to warn unconverted Jews and to encourage Christians to be patient in dealing with them.<\/li>\nBasilides, Gospel of<\/p>\nPolemic commentary on the Gospels by a second-century Gnostic. Basilides’s writings remain only as allusions and fragments in later works by several church fathers. Basilides taught in Alexandria during the reign of the Roman emperor Hadrian (AD<\/span> 117–138). His teacher, Glaucias, claimed to be a firsthand interpreter of the apostle Peter. Basilides asserted that his Gnostic scheme emerged from Peter’s views on the relationship between God and Christ. He described God paradoxically as a nonexistent Being who “generated” three Sonships. Through successive ascents and enlightenments, the gospel of the supreme God (the Gospel of Light) eventually descended upon Jesus.<\/p>\nOrigen stated that “Basilides dared to write a gospel According to Basilides.” Clement of Alexandria and the writer of a fourth-century fragment, Acta Archelai, thought that Origen referred to an apocryphal gospel, the teaching of which was deduced from Irenaeus’s account. Today, more in line with Hippolytus’s understanding of Basilides, this work is regarded as merely a commentary on the Gospels. Basilides was probably not responsible for the magical rites and libertinism of the Basilidians, a Gnostic sect led by his son Isidore and continuing in Egypt to the end of the century.<\/p>\nBenjamin, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nBirth of Mary<\/p>\nAn early Gnostic writing. “The Gnostics have a book which they call the Birth (or Descent) of Mary, in which are horrible and deadly things.” So said the fourth-century bishop Ephiphanius in describing the Birth of Mary, a work that has not survived. The Birth of Mary claimed to reveal what Zechariah, father of John the Baptist, saw in the temple—namely, the Jewish god in the form of an ass. That Jews and Christians worshiped an ass-god was commonly held by their critics in those days. This blasphemous work should not be confused with the Gospel of the Birth of Mary, a fanciful but relatively harmless account of Mary’s birth, early life, and marriage to Joseph.<\/p>\n\nBirth of Mary, Gospel of the<\/p>\nCollection of legends purporting to tell Mary’s story from birth to King Herod’s slaughter of the children in Bethlehem. The earliest such manuscript is called Book of the Nativity of Mary or Gospel of James because it claimed to be written by James, half brother of Jesus. It was written by AD<\/span> 150, since Justin, an early Christian writer, named it in his Dialogues<\/em> (165). It was rediscovered for the West by Postel, who translated it from Greek into Latin (Protevangelium Jacobi,<\/em> 1552). Before it was lost, two major Latin revisions of it had been produced: Pseudo-Matthew and the Gospel of the Nativity of Mary, compiled around the sixth and ninth centuries respectively. These revisions amplified the Book of the Nativity of Mary with more fanciful legends and were the basis for the Golden Legends of James of Voragine (1230–1298), which in turn became instrumental in fostering veneration of Mary.<\/p>\nAccording to the Book of the Nativity of Mary, Mary is born to rich, barren parents (Joachim and Anna) through angelic response to their prayers. They dedicate Mary to the Lord. At six months Mary walks seven steps, so Anna makes her bedroom a sanctuary, allowing nothing unclean to enter, and vows that Mary will walk again only in the temple. At age three Mary is placed in the temple and receives food from an angel. On Mary’s twelfth birthday the high priest asks God what to do and is told to marry her to a widower. Elderly Joseph is chosen when a dove springs from his rod. Months later, Mary “gives birth” to Jesus in Bethlehem’s cave, through a light so bright that none can see; the light gradually withdraws and the Child appears at Mary’s breast. The Book of the Nativity of Mary closes with the magi and Herod’s slaughter of infants. Mary saves Jesus by wrapping him in swaddling clothes and laying him in a manger.<\/p>\nRecently another Greek fragment, this one from the Gospel of Mary, was found (see photo). The fragment is too little to tell us much about the content of this gospel.<\/p>\nBook of the Cock<\/p>\nApocryphal story preserved by the church of Ethiopia and still read there on the Thursday before Easter. According to the Book of the Cock, on the night of the Last Supper, Akrosina, wife of Simon the Pharisee, presents Jesus with a nicely prepared cock for dinner. After Judas leaves the room, Jesus touches the cock and it comes to life. He instructs it to follow Judas and to report his dealings. The cock returns and tells about the forthcoming betrayal, mentioning Paul of Tarsus as one of those involved. The disciples weep. Jesus sends the cock to the sky for a thousand years.<\/p>\nA similar story exists as a fragment in Sahidic Coptic. In the Coptic version the resurrection of the cock is a symbol of the resurrection of Christ.<\/p>\nCoptic Lives of the Virgin<\/p>\nApocryphal works concerning Mary, the mother of Jesus, in the Egyptian language of Coptic. See<\/em> Virgin, Life of the (below).<\/p>\nCorinthians, Third<\/p>\nApocryphal correspondence purporting to be between the apostle Paul and the Corinthian church. Written during the second century and known as 3 Corinthians, the work consists of three parts: an epistle allegedly from Stephanus of Corinth to Paul concerning two false apostles, Simon and Cleobius; a brief narrative telling of its delivery; and Paul’s reply and refutation of the false doctrine. The sequence of letters was originally part of the Acts of Paul, a longer apocryphal document, but circulated on its own as well—it even found its way into the text of the Armenian Bible. It pretends to explain the reference in 2 Corinthians 2:4 to a letter written in great distress.<\/p>\nAccording to an early church father, Tertullian (On Baptism),<\/em> the author of 3 Corinthians was a presbyter (church leader) of Asia who forged it out of love for Paul shortly after AD<\/span> 160. That presbyter’s removal from office indicates the stern attitude of the early Christians toward the writing of documents falsely claiming apostolic origin.<\/p>\nDan, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nDialogue of the Redeemer<\/p>\nChristian Gnostic document, also called the Dialogue of the Savior. The document was found in the ancient Nag Hammadi Library at the modern city of Nag Hammadi (Upper Egypt) in 1946. The Dialogue is a fictitious account of a conversation between Jesus and some of his disciples in which they discuss questions about the universe, humanity, the end times, and salvation. The manuscript is in poor condition. Its authorship and origin are unknown, though it was possibly written in Egypt during the second or third centuries AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nDiscourse of Theodosius<\/p>\nCoptic Boharic version of the Assumption of the Virgin and a main source for the Coptic form of that legend. See<\/em> Virgin, Assumption of the (below).<\/p>\nDoctrina Addaei<\/p>\nExpanded Syriac form of the Epistles of Christ and Abgarus, written about AD<\/span> 400. The Doctrina Addaei tells a story about the contacts between Abgar (Abgarus), king of Edessa, and Jesus Christ. King Abgar, suffering from an unspecified ailment, is said to have sent a messenger to Jesus bearing the king’s written request for healing along with an offer of sanctuary for Jesus in his kingdom. Jesus responds orally, promising to send one of his followers to Abgar after his own ascension to heaven. Abgar’s envoy also takes back a self-portrait of Jesus that becomes the pride of Edessa. Later Addai visits the kingdom, heals Abgar, and establishes Christianity there. See<\/em> Abgarus, Letters of Christ and (above).<\/p>\nEbionites, Gospel of the<\/p>\nGospel quoted by one early Christian writer, Epiphanius (fourth century), in a work against heresies. The Gospel of the Ebionites is possibly the same as the apocryphal Gospel of the Hebrews, although some scholars associate it with the Gospel of the Nazarenes. The Ebionites were vegetarians; Epiphanius’s citations stress the vegetarian diets of John the Baptist and Jesus.<\/p>\nEgyptians, Gospel of the<\/p>\nTwo apocryphal works with the same name.<\/p>\n1. Apocryphal second-century AD<\/span> Greek writing, mentioned by the early church writers, Clement and Origen. Used in Egypt, the composition seems to have contained and propagated Gnostic teachings, especially those advocated in Syria by Simon and Menander. According to these Gnostics, marriage, eating meat, and procreation were evil. Clement may have quoted from this writing to refute the beliefs of the Encratites, who broadly agreed with the Syrian Gnostics on those matters. The Gnostics’ depreciation of women was reflected in the quotations Clement used.<\/p>\n<li>2. Composition discovered in 1946 at Chenoboskion (Egypt) in the Nag Hammadi collection of Gnostic writing. The principal title of the work, described in the colophon as “Gospel of the Egyptians” was “Sacred Book of the Great Invisible Spirit.” This work dealt with emanations from “the primal spirit of the cosmos” and perhaps was a product of the Barbelo Gnostic sect.<\/li>\nEldad and Medad, Book of<\/p>\nPre-Christian pseudepigraphic composition containing the alleged prophecies of Eldad and Medad, two persons appointed as elders by Moses (Nm 11:26). Since the nature of their prophecy was not specified, it gave rise to a lost work that is quoted in the Shepherd of Hermas as follows: “The Lord is near to them who return to Him, as it is written in Eldad and Medad who prophesied to the people in the wilderness” (Vision II, ch 3). That is the only source of information concerning the lost book.<\/p>\nEugnostos, Letter of<\/p>\nGnostic work. Found near the modern city of Nag Hammadi, the Letter of Eugnostos was written in Coptic by a teacher to his disciple. Both author and date of composition are unknown. An early example of non-Christian Gnostic writing, it perhaps served as the basis for a Christian Gnostic composition, “The Wisdom of Jesus Christ.”<\/p>\nThe Letter of Eugnostos attempts to prove the existence of an invisible spiritual realm. It also stresses God’s remoteness from humanity.<\/p>\nEve, Gospel of<\/p>\nGnostic and apocalyptic writings, known solely through a citation by Epiphanius, a late fourth-century metropolitan of Cyprus. Epiphanius quoted the Gospel of Eve in a biting refutation of Gnostic and Origenistic teachings. Evidently a cult had formed around Eve as if her name implied revelation because the serpent had spoken to her in the Garden of Eden. Epiphanius’s quotation from the Gospel of Eve roughly translates: “I stood on a high mountain and saw a giant and a feeble man, and I heard a voice like thunder. ‘Come near me and listen,’ and he spoke to me saying, ‘I am you and you are me. Wherever you are, there I am. I am spread through all things, and any place you are able to retire into or take shelter in me; and, taking shelter in me, you take shelter in yourself.’ ”<\/p>\nEzekiel, Apocryphal<\/p>\nNoncanonical book of Ezekiel mentioned by Josephus, first-century Jewish historian. An apocryphal Ezekiel is cited in five early Christian writings and a recent archaeological discovery. Bishop Epiphanius (fourth century) cited an Ezekiel parable, in proof of the resurrection of the interdependent soul and body, about a blind man and a lame man collaborating to rob an orchard. Clement of Rome, writing to the Corinthians (AD 90?), and Clement of Alexandria in two of his writings (AD<\/span> 200?) have noncanonical Ezekiel quotations. An Ezekiel apocryphon is mentioned in the pseudo-Athanasian canon (purporting to list canonical books of the Bible) and is named in the stichometry (prose written in rhythmic phrases) of Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople (AD<\/span> 806–815). In 1940 Campbell Bonner published Greek papyrus fragments that confirm the existence of an apocryphal Ezekiel.<\/p>\nEzra, Fourth Book of<\/p>\nAlternate name for the apocryphal book 2 Esdras. See<\/em> Esdras, Second Book of.<\/p>\nGad, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nGenesis Apocryphon<\/p>\nName given to one of the seven large Dead Sea Scrolls recovered from the first Qumran cave in 1947. With three others it came into the possession of the Syrian archbishop of Jerusalem but could not be unrolled and photographed because it was badly preserved, having not been kept in an earthen jar like the others. Some small pieces were detached, however, and certain words on them indicated that it might be an apocryphal Aramaic work connected with the patriarch Enoch. Further scraps spoke of Lamech, however, thus the scroll was tentatively named for that ancient person.<\/p>\nEventually it was unrolled and found to be not only damaged but incomplete; the beginning and the end were missing. The inner portion had been best preserved, but considerable damage had been done to the text by the ink it had been written with. The scroll not only dealt with Enoch and Lamech but with other persons mentioned in the book of Genesis. It proved to be an Aramaic form of parts of Genesis dealing with the patriarchs, but it included legends and other materials presented in memoir style, not found in the Hebrew Bible. That style was popular among pious Jews at the beginning of the Christian era, thus its original has been dated to the first century BC<\/span>. The Qumran copy was probably made between 50 BC<\/span> and AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nThe literary characteristics of the scroll have presented some classification problems. Free expansion and inclusion of nonbiblical material led certain scholars to call the scroll a “targum” or commentary-expansion of the Genesis text. Others have regarded it as a “midrash” or sermonic account of the Hebrew narrative. The scroll contains both elements and is best regarded as an independent recounting of certain Genesis stories, enriched by the inclusion of imaginative material such as a description of the beauty of the patriarch Abraham’s wife Sarah; dreams; and accounts of plagues and journeys.<\/p>\nThe Aramaic Apocryphon somewhat antedates the one used in Palestine in the time of Christ. It contains some Hebraisms but is mostly written in good Aramaic, much of which parallels biblical Aramaic. The language of the scroll, however, is later than the period of old Aramaic (tenth to eighth centuries BC<\/span>) or official Aramaic (Assyrian and Persian periods), as the presence of certain grammatical forms indicate. Most scholars have described the language as middle Aramaic and have placed it between the Aramaic of Daniel and later western Aramaic. Those scholars generally assign a second-century BC<\/span> date to Daniel, but that conclusion needs to be modified because the Qumran material shows that no canonical work was composed later than about 350 BC<\/span>. On any evidence, the Aramaic of Daniel is earlier than that of the Apocryphon and seems to fit properly into the period when official Aramaic was the dominant form of the language. The Genesis Apocryphon presents no valid reasons for dating the Aramaic of Daniel or Ezra later than the sixth to fifth centuries BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nGospel of Thomas<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Thomas, Gospel of (below).<\/p>\nIsaiah, Ascension of<\/p>\nPseudepigraphal apocalyptic work widely known to the early Christians; also known as the Martyrdom of Isaiah, the Testament of Hezekiah, and the Vision of Isaiah. It was rediscovered when an Ethiopic version of part of the text was published in 1819. The full Ethiopic version is the only complete version in existence. A partial Latin text published in 1832 had actually been published in Venice over three centuries before. Slavonic and Coptic versions also exist. All may be traced back to two Greek versions of the third, fifth, and sixth centuries.<\/p>\nIt is not clear whether the original was a single composition or even whether the authorship was Christian or Jewish with later Christian editing. The final form may date from the latter part of the second century. It was known to Ambrose, Jerome, Origen, Tertullian, and possibly to Justyn Martyr. The contents fall under three heads:<\/p>\n1. The Martyrdom of Isaiah. This material consists of prophetic utterances, including the prophet’s prediction of his own death at the hands of King Manasseh of Judah. The document deals with the dark apostasy of the king, who, indwelt by Satan and following Beliar, leads his people into all manner of sin. Jerusalem, whose fall is prophesied, is called “Sodom” and its princes “Gomorrah.” In the form of a midrash (devotional sermon), this section dwells on Isaiah’s firm rejection of compromise or recantation. Isaiah’s martyrdom by being “sawn in two” is the portion with which the church fathers seem to have been familiar.<\/p>\n<li>2. The Testament of Hezekiah. This section is apocalyptic, a vision Isaiah passes on to his king. It speaks of the descent of “the Beloved,” a title used in this document for the Messiah. The vision covers the Messiah’s incarnation, life, death, resurrection, and ascension, then turns to the early history of the church and the apostasy that precedes the second coming of the Lord. The Antichrist is revealed as Beliar or Satan, who assumes human form and kills his mother (no doubt directed at the Roman emperor Nero, who murdered his mother, Agrippina). The whole section is based on Daniel and the biblical Apocalypse and was also influenced by Gnosticism. The conclusion of the vision (the Beloved’s victory, the two resurrections, and the final judgment) very closely parallels the consummation of all things in the NT book of Revelation.<\/li>\n<li>3. The Vision of Isaiah. This section resembles #2 even linguistically but shows more Gnostic influence: Isaiah is lifted to the dwelling place of the Trinity, the seventh heaven, and shown many mysteries of Christ. Because of this vision Manasseh kills the prophet. Gnostic doctrine, as propagated by Cerinthus at the end of the first century, is evident. Jesus, earthly born, becomes the host of the Christ, who leaves his earthly tenement at the Crucifixion.<\/li>\nHistorically, the value of the Ascension of Isaiah is to show the welter of conflicting opinion which, claiming authority and inspiration, besieged the minds of the early Christians.<\/p>\nIsaiah, Martyrdom of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Isaiah, Ascension of (above).<\/p>\nIssachar, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nJames, Apocalypse of<\/p>\nThere were two Gnostic apocalypses of James (designated “first” and “second”). The first, covering over 20 pages of text, purports to be a revelation given by the Lord, some of it before the Crucifixion and some after it, to James, his brother, who was also know as James the righteous. The two documents referred to as the Apocalypse of James are in Codex V of the Nag Hammadi literature discovered in 1945 in Egypt just west of the Nile River opposite the city of Chenoboskion and are distinct from the Apocryphon of James, which is included in NT apocryphal writings. The second apocalypse composed of 20 pages of Coptic text is purportedly a speech delivered by James the Just on the fifth step of the temple and contains many references to or echoes of canonical Scriptures. The work ends with the multitude casting James down from the temple and stoning him in a manner reminiscent of the martyrdom of Stephen.<\/p>\nJames, Ascents of<\/p>\nLost book mentioned only by Epiphanius (bishop of the Greek island of Salamis) in his fourth-century work Refutation of All the Heresies.<\/em> According to Epiphanius, the Ascents of James was used by the Ebionites, a rigidly ascetic sect of Jewish Christians. The book represented James, Jesus’ brother, as having spoken against the temple and sacrifices. It declared the apostle Paul to be a Greek who went to Jerusalem, sought to marry the high priest’s daughter, and to that end became a proselyte and was circumcised. When he did not win the young woman, he inveighed against the Sabbath, the Law, and circumcision.<\/p>\nIn a commentary on Galatians (1865), J. B. Lightfoot suggested that the book’s title referred to James’s ascents up the temple steps, from which he addressed the people. Lightfoot also suggested that James’s death was the grand climax of the ascents. According to a quote from the early Christian writer Hegesippus (as recorded in Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical History<\/em>), James was cast down to his death from the pinnacle of the temple.<\/p>\nJames, Protevangelium of<\/p>\nThis is an apocryphal “gospel” that tells of the token marriage and pregnancy of Mary and of Jesus’ birth, childhood, and adolescent years. This apocryphal writing was discovered in the 16th century by Guillaume Postel.<\/p>\nJob, Testament of<\/p>\nApocalyptic literature bearing resemblance to the biblical book of Job. The book was probably written in Greek in the second century AD<\/span>. Since it is devoid of Christian thought, it was likely written by a Jew.<\/p>\nIn chapters 1–45, Job is the speaker. He comes to understand that a nearby temple has been desecrated by there having been offered in it sacrifices to Satan. When Job destroys it, Satan threatens him. Job’s friends come to console him but their speeches are greatly abbreviated. Elihu is represented as Satan’s mouthpiece and earns God’s displeasure. But Job sacrifices for all three friends. He remarries and has seven sons and three daughters, who inherit his wealth. Chapters 46–51, in which Job’s brother is the speaker, conclude the narrative.<\/p>\nJohn the Baptist, Life of<\/p>\nA legendary account supposedly written by Serapion dealing with the early life of John the Baptist and especially with the death of his mother, Elizabeth. While Jesus was living with his parents in Egypt, Elizabeth dies on the same day as Herod the Great dies. John, who is but a small boy, does not know how to bury her. The clouds bring Jesus, Mary, and Salome who wash the body. The grave is dug by Michael and Gabriel, who also bring the souls of Zacharias and Simeon. John is then left to grow up in the desert under the care of the angels, while the clouds lift Jesus and Mary to Nazareth where they live.<\/p>\nJohn the Evangelist, Book of<\/p>\nThis writing was used most extensively by the Albigenses and was commonly regarded as stemming from the Bogomiles before them. It was written in the form of questions and answers propounded to have come from the apostle John while he leaned upon the breast of Jesus at the Last Supper. This pattern of questions and answers is found in other early Gnostic writings, especially the Gospel of Bartholomew.<\/p>\nThe writing contains Gnostic theology. It portrays a world created by Satan and not by God. Christ was not born of Mary but was an angel sent forth to the earth. He “entered in by the ear and came forth by the ear” of Mary. John the Baptist was sent by Satan, and his disciples (the Roman Catholic Church) are not the disciples of Christ. Baptism and apparently the Lord’s Supper are valueless.<\/p>\nThe writing is preserved only in Latin and in its present form is not earlier than the 12th century. A convenient English translation may be found in M. R. James, The Apocryphal NT<\/em> (1924).<\/p>\nJoseph, Prayer of<\/p>\nJewish apocalyptic work. The Prayer of Joseph won the commendation of Origen, an early church scholar, as a document “not to be despised.” Origen’s quotations provide almost the only surviving information about the work, so that its total content and significance are unclear. An ancient list of OT apocryphal and canonical writings puts the Prayer of Joseph third and mentions its length as 1,100 verses. Origen’s quotations concern mainly Joseph’s father, Jacob. Jacob exists in the form of an angel, bearing Jacob’s given name Israel. He is the speaker in the quoted fragments and foretells the fate of humankind. He describes how he met Uriel on a journey to Mesopotamia and how Uriel wrestled with him, claiming to be the greatest of the angels. The apocalyptic poet had in mind the story of Jacob’s mysterious wrestling at Jabbok (Gn 32:22-29) and passages such as Daniel 10:13. Because Jacob claims to be “the first born of all living beings” and therefore the chief of all angels, Uriel challenges him.<\/p>\nJoseph, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nJoseph the Carpenter, History of<\/p>\nDocument glorifying Jesus’ earthly father and promoting a cult of Joseph. Words in chapter 18 of the History of Joseph support a fourth-century date for it. There Jesus tells his mother, “You, too, must look for the same end of life as other mortals.” By the fifth century the doctrine of the “Assumption of the Virgin” was widely held.<\/p>\nThe document, derived from the Protevangelium of James, was contaminated by both Gnosticism and other religious beliefs of Egypt, the country in which it was written. It is extant in Coptic and Arabic and also in a fourth-century translation of the Coptic text.<\/p>\nThe History of Joseph the Carpenter claims to give an account of Joseph’s life and his model death at the age of 111. The story is allegedly told by Jesus to his disciples on the Mt of Olives. Joseph, a carpenter (Mt 13:55), is a widower well advanced in years when he marries Mary, who is only 12. (He had six children by an earlier marriage.) Joseph is buried according to the rites of the Egyptian Osiris cult after Jesus pronounces a eulogy.<\/p>\nJubilees, Book of<\/p>\nJubilees is a pseudepigraphal work from the last half of the second century BC<\/span> during the Maccabean period. It is an invaluable source for understanding the environment in the age prior to the launching of the Christian church. Jubilees stands with the Book of Enoch and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs as the most important Hebrew or Aramaic literature of the time. Like these it was translated into Greek and used by the church fathers. Most probably, Jubilees was written in Hebrew since it purported a Mosaic authorship and since its nationalistic Maccabean environment would demand it. Fragments of 10 manuscripts in Hebrew found at Qumran support the thesis that it was originally in that language.<\/p>\nThe work is referred to by later Greek writers following Hebrew sources as “Jubilees” and “the little (lesser) Genesis.” It is also entitled “The Apocalypse of Moses” and the “Testament of Moses.” In revised forms it has been called “The Book of Adam’s Daughters” and “The Life of Adam.”<\/p>\nComplete, fifty-chapter manuscripts exist in six Ethiopian texts of which the texts of the fifth and sixth centuries are best. The Latin text is valuable but partial and only a few fragments of the Greek version remain. The Hebrew fragments found at Qumran are of special importance since they are from the period of original writing. The Bibliotheque Nationale has “Ethiopien 51” and “Ethiopien 160.” The British Museum has Kufale,<\/em> or Liber Jubilaeorum,<\/em> and Enoch<\/em>.<\/em><\/p>\nThe author of Jubilees claims a direct revelational source for the teaching that he espouses. God had spoken to Moses in the Pentateuch in the “lesser law” in this “little book of Genesis.” At Sinai God communicated to Moses by the “Angel of the Presence” saying to the angel, “Write for Moses from the beginning of creation until my sanctuary has been built among them for all eternity” (1:27). This is supplementary to the “first law” (6:22).<\/p>\nFollowing a brief introduction Jubilees follows the text of Genesis and Exodus to 14:31. This midrashic treatment of the Pentateuchal material attempts to show that the patriarchy adhered to the law even prior to Moses. The author’s aim is to strengthen classical Judaism in the face of the serious intrusions of Hellenistic culture among Jewish peoples. In doing this the author does not hesitate in adding and subtracting from Pentateuchal history. The patriarchs are adorned in every way. Anything that showed their weaknesses and sins was removed and legendary content inserted to glorify these fathers. The patriarchs are the fountainheads of culture. Enoch invented writing; Noah, medicine; Abraham, plowing.<\/p>\nAppealing to Leviticus 25:8-12, the work emphasizes the importance of the number seven. History from Adam to Moses is arranged according to cycles of seven. This manner of compartmentalizing history into jubilee periods was revealed to Moses at Sinai and so has divine sanction and in fact is mandated. The philosophy of history that springs from this sees God acting sovereignly and uniquely in Israel in distinction to his relationship with the gentile world. The other nations are ruled by angels but not Israel, which is directly in God’s charge (Jubilees 15:31ff.).<\/p>\nThe polemic that Jubilees mounts against the lunar calendar (6:36-38) and its acceptance of the solar calendar is but another facet of the drive for a deep reform that will cleanse Israel. Israel is to be separated to God in every way with no intermingling in marriage or sitting at the table with Gentiles. There is a surprising stringency demanded in Sabbath keeping (50:1-13). The penalty of death is levied against those who travel, buy or sell, draw water, bear burdens, snare creatures, or have marital relations on the Sabbath. These go far beyond the biblical requirements and belong to that milieu that produced the Qumran community and the Essenes.<\/p>\nThe apocalyptic declaration of the Angel of Presence contains a clear but limited eschatological truth. Jubilees does contain the expectation of an immediate establishment of the messianic age. The entire emphasis, however, is such that ethical and cultural purposes are preeminent.<\/p>\nJudah, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nJudas Iscariot, Gospel of<\/p>\nVery old Gnostic writing probably produced by the Cainite sect. As it is not preserved for us today, we know it only through quotations in the writings of early Christians, especially Irenaeus. Thus, it must have been written before the middle of the second century AD<\/span>. It probably contained a body of secret doctrine purportedly revealed by Judas Iscariot, summarizing the truth of superior and perfect knowledge supposedly revealed to this sect of the Gnostics. The gospel sets forth the “mystery of the betrayal,” explaining how Judas through his treachery made the salvation of all mankind possible. This was accomplished by his forestalling the destruction of the truth proclaimed by Christ or by his thwarting the designs of the evil powers, the Archons, who wished to prevent the crucifixion of Christ because they knew it would destroy their evil power.<\/p>\nLentulus, Epistle of<\/p>\nLentulus, ostensibly a predecessor of Pontius Pilate, is said to have prepared a report to the Roman Senate known as the Letter (or Epistle) of Lentulus. In it he included a detailed description of Jesus: “tall and handsome, his countenance inspiring reverence along with love and fear, his hair dark, shining, curling, parted in the middle, his face with a delicate rudiness. . . .” The authenticity of the letter is extremely doubtful.<\/p>\nLevi, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nLives of Adam and Eve<\/p>\nA general title given to a noncanonical writing extant in Greek and Latin. The book is Jewish in nature, though there is a Christian flavor that causes most scholars to date the original work to the beginning of the Christian era. The content of the book is an expansion on the biblical story of Adam and Eve.<\/p>\nThe Greek version begins with the expulsion from Eden. In a dream, Eve sees the murder of Abel. After Adam had fallen ill Seth and Eve went to obtain oil from the tree of life. Michael the archangel met Seth and told him that Adam would die. Upon his death, he was ultimately taken to the third heaven. Seth witnessed how the angels interred his father and received instructions on how to bury his mother, who died a week after Adam.<\/p>\nThe Latin version gives additional information. After the expulsion from the Garden, Eve asked Adam to kill her but instead of that he suggested they both do an act of penitence. Adam went to stand in the Jordan for 40 days and Eve went to stand in the water of the Euphrates for 37 days. While there, she was again tempted by Satan, who was disguised as an angel of light but was eventually exposed by Adam. Satan now explained the reason for his hostility toward them: when the angels were commanded to worship the Lord, he refused to do obeisance to God and was consequently cast out of heaven.<\/p>\nMatthew, Martyrdom of<\/p>\nLoosely organized tale of Matthew’s martyrdom that borrows heavily from the “Acts of Andrew and Matthias” and assumes that Matthias was in fact Matthew. The document represents the low literary and theological impulse of the later apocryphal texts.<\/p>\nThe story begins when Matthew is commissioned by Jesus to plant a staff in Myrna, the city of man-eaters. Matthew does so, after exorcising the demon Asmodeus from the king’s wife and family. The staff becomes a tree overnight, Matthew preaches to the people, and they “become humanized.” But Asmodeus seeks revenge by directing the king to burn Matthew. The fire consumes golden idols and many soldiers, then turns into a dragon and chases the king, who begs Matthew for help. But Matthew dies.<\/p>\nA somewhat repentant but not yet converted king places the body of Matthew in an iron casket and sinks it secretly in the sea. The next day Matthew appears on the sea in the presence of two shining men and a “beautiful” child. The king is finally converted, baptized, and accepted into the church. Matthew appears to confer on the king his own name and to ordain him a priest and his family, deacons and deaconesses. Then Matthew ascends to heaven with two angels.<\/p>\nMedad, Book of Eldad and<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Eldad and Medad, Book of (above).<\/p>\nMoses, Assumption of<\/p>\nA Jewish legend that Moses was taken bodily into heaven without dying. Probably written between AD<\/span> 7 and 30, it may be a combination of two earlier works, and appears to borrow heavily from the book of Deuteronomy. The work was likely produced to provide a miraculous ending to Moses’ outstanding earthly life, attributing to him an experience similar to Elijah’s. But this Jewish legend is contrary to the OT account of Moses’ death (Dt 32:48-50; 34:5-7).<\/p>\n<h6>The Lost Assumption of Moses<\/h6>\nThree facts indicate that there once was an apocryphal book that contained the legend of the assumption of Moses: (1) early lists of apocryphal works mention a work by this title; (2) several church fathers refer to it; and (3) a few fragments in Greek have survived.<\/p>\nThe following items appeared in the work. God commissioned the archangel Michael to bury Moses’ body. Satan opposed Moses’ burial because he claimed authority over all matter and because Moses was a murderer. Michael countered Satan’s claims and charged him with tempting Eve in Eden. Joshua and Caleb then watched Moses’ assumption occur in a strange way. As they watched, they saw Moses’ dead body buried in the mountain, but they also saw Moses himself in the company of the angels. In effect Moses’ body died, but Moses himself did not.<\/p>\nThough often stated that Jude (v 9) was quoted from the Assumption of Moses, this is impossible to prove, simply because the relevant portions of that work have not survived. The most one can say is that several church fathers, including Clement of Alexandria (d. AD<\/span> 215) and Origen (c. 185–254), suggested that the Assumption of Moses was the source for the account in Jude 1:9. They had both works. We have only Jude, so we cannot check their conclusions. The matter is further complicated because there is another work (see next section) now called the Assumption of Moses. People often suppose that Jude 1:9 is a citation from that book. It is not.<\/p>\n<h6>The Extant Assumption of Moses<\/h6>\nThis work, perhaps written during Jesus’ lifetime, purports to be a description of Moses’ predictions to Joshua of the destiny of the nation of Israel. It is similar to other apocryphal, nonhistorical writings that were written under the names of great Jewish leaders.<\/p>\nIt was discovered quite by chance in 1861, in the Ambrosian Library in Milan, Italy. The manuscript, dated to the fifth century AD<\/span>, is a very poor copy of a Latin translation, perhaps derived from a Greek translation of a Hebrew original. The beginning and the ending are lost. There are numerous spelling mistakes, and there is no space between words. Not surprisingly, scholars have long disputed the reading, interpretation, and translation even of whole verses.<\/p>\nThe opening three lines have not survived, so the original title has been lost. When discovered, the work was assumed to be the long-lost Assumption of Moses, but this identification is now widely doubted. Even though the book is still called by this title, it is far more likely to be either the Testament of Moses (which is also mentioned, along with the Assumption of Moses, in early lists of apocryphal works) or a composite work resulting from the combination of the Testament and the Assumption into one work.<\/p>\nThere is only one reference to Moses’ assumption in the book, and it comes in connection with a mention of his death (10:12). Because the ending of the book is also lost, it is impossible to know the contents of the conclusion or to tell whether this one remaining reference to Moses’ assumption is original or whether it has been added by a scribe by mistake or by an editor combining two different works. It is clear, however, that the author of the surviving section believed that Moses expected to die (1:15; 10:12-14) and that Joshua assumed that he would (11:4-8).<\/p>\nThe work begins midsentence (three lines are missing) and dates Moses’ following speech to 2,500 years after Creation (1:2-5). Expecting to die, Moses summons Joshua, encourages him, and tells him that God created the world for his people (the Israelites), who will repent before the consummation at the end of the days (1:6-18).<\/p>\nThen Moses foretells Israel’s future. The people will inherit the land (Canaan) and be ruled by local magistrates, chiefs (judges?), and kings (2:1-3). The kingdom will divide, and the people will turn to idolatry (2:4-9). A king from the east (Nebuchadnezzar) will take two tribes into captivity for about 77 years, where they will recall Moses’ warnings (3:1-14; cf. Jer 25:11-12; Dt 28:15-68; 30:15-20). Someone (Daniel) will pray for deliverance (cf. Dn 9:4-19), and God will persuade a king (Cyrus) to send the exiles home (4:1-6; cf. Is 45:1-6; Ezr 1:1-4). Some exiles will return to their appointed place (Jerusalem) and rewall it but be unable to offer [proper] sacrifices (4:7-8; contrast Ezr 3:1-7). Others will remain in exile but will increase in population (4:9). This concludes the OT period and begins the intertestamental period (c. 400 to 1 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe widespread apostasy of the Seleucid period (c. 201–267 BC<\/span>) is described, with special reference to priests and judges (4:1-6). The Maccabees, who gained and maintained political independence from Syria (in 164 BC<\/span>) are not mentioned. Instead, the focus is on the kings (the Hasmoneans) who made themselves high priests (6:1). Next will come an insolent king (Herod the Great, 37–4 BC<\/span>), who will rule ruthlessly (6:2-7). Then a powerful king of the West will conquer the people, take some captive, crucify others, and burn part of the temple (6:8-9).<\/p>\nFrom this point on, the author, having reached his own period, had to guess at the future, so the predictions that he put in Moses’ mouth are general or obscure and often unfulfilled. The next rulers (Sadducees?) would be impious, treacherous, gluttons, deceitful, and worried about ritual uncleanness while living in luxury at the expense of the poor (7:1-10). An unprecedented time of wrath would follow, when a great king would persecute the Jews, torturing, imprisoning, and even crucifying them for practicing circumcision (8:1-5). During this persecution, one man, Taxo, a Levite with seven sons, would remain faithful to God and die rather than adopt Greek customs (8:1-7).<\/p>\nThe next section (10:1-10), an apocalyptic poem (ten stanzas, each with three lines), is the only apocalyptic section of the book. The Lord’s kingdom will appear, Satan will be no more, and the chief angel (Michael) will avenge Israel (10:1-2). “The Heavenly One will arise from His royal throne,” and there will be miraculous signs on the earth and in the sky; even the ocean will drain away (10:3-6). The Most High, the Eternal God, will appear and punish the Gentiles, destroying their idols (10:7). But Israel will be happy and exalted, rejoicing at seeing her enemies in Gehenna (hell) and thankfully praising her Creator (10:8-10). With Moses’ mention of his death and some consoling words for Joshua, the composition ends in an incomplete form.<\/p>\nThe book must have been written after Herod died and Varus had subdued a rebellion in Judea (4 BC<\/span>) and before the temple was destroyed (AD<\/span> 70). The book predicts that Herod’s sons will not rule as long as Herod himself did (34 years, 37–4 BC<\/span>). This prediction may be based on the fact that one son, Archelaus, was deposed after a 10-year reign (4 BC<\/span>–AD<\/span> 6). If so, the book was written after AD<\/span> 6. But two other sons (Philip and Antipas) actually ruled longer than their father. For the author not to know this requires that the book must have been written within 34 years of Herod’s death—in other words, before AD<\/span> 30. Therefore, the book was probably written sometime between AD<\/span> 6 and 30. This also means that the book reflects Jewish thinking during Jesus’ lifetime.<\/p>\nThe author was evidently a Palestinian Jew, but it is doubtful whether he was a member of any known major sect of the times. He hates Roman rule (8:1–10:10) without advocating revolt, as the Zealots and their predecessors did. His interest in the temple (2:8-9; 5:3; 6:9; 8:5) is not typical of an Essene. He condemns the Sadducean lifestyle (7:3-10). And his use of apocalyptic writing (10:1-10) is thought to have been unusual for a Pharisee.<\/p>\nNaphtali, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nNicodemus, Gospel of<\/p>\nAlternate title for the apocryphal work Acts of Pilate. See<\/em> Pilate, Acts of (below).<\/p>\nNoah, Book of<\/p>\nAllusion to the writing of Noah is made in the book of Jubilees where it is said “Noah wrote down all things in a book as we instructed him concerning every kind of medicine. Thus the evil spirits were precluded from (hurting) the sons of Noah” (10:13; see also 21:10). The book of Noah borrows heavily from the book of Enoch (see chs 6–11, 54–55, 60, 65–69, 106–110). The other sections relate to the Noachic flood and subjects about which Noah could be presumed to have knowledge. Unfortunately no separate manuscript of the book of Noah is known to be extant.<\/p>\nOdes of Solomon<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Solomon, Psalms of (below).<\/p>\nPatriarchs, Testaments of the Twelve<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nPaul, Acts of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Paul and Thecla, Acts of (below).<\/p>\nPaul, Acts of Andrew and<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Andrew and Paul, Acts of (above).<\/p>\nPaul and Thecla, Acts of<\/p>\nThe Acts of Paul and Thecla is one section of an apocryphal work known as the Acts of Paul. It was apparently written in the latter half of the second century AD<\/span> by a church elder who lived in Asia. According to Tertullian (On Baptism<\/em> 17.19-21), the motive for the writing was “love of Paul,” but the presbyter was removed from office for producing this document. It is not clear whether the reason for his deposition was that he made a false claim to apostolic authorship, or whether it was that the viewpoints expressed in the document were considered heretical.<\/p>\nThe story reads like a folktale. Paul arrives in Iconium after fleeing from Antioch. He is met by Onesiphorus, who welcomes Paul into his home. A group of people gather there to hear Paul’s message. Beside the window of a neighboring house, Thecla is seated. She cannot see Paul, but she listens intently to his message. Her mother, Thecleia, exclaims, “My daughter, like a spider, is bound by his words to the window, seized by a new craving and a terrible passion.” Paul is teaching that in order to “see God,” a person must live a life of abstinence from sexual activity.<\/p>\nThecla is engaged to be married, but she is so impressed with Paul’s teaching that she determines she will break her engagement to Thamyris. Thamyris, in distress, appeals to the governor of the city, who arrests and imprisons Paul. Thecla bribes the jailer with bracelets and a silver mirror and enters Paul’s cell. Again she is transfixed by his teaching. At the trial, Thecla is adamant in her refusal to marry Thamyris. Paul is banned from the city; Thecla is condemned to be burned to death. Miraculously her life is spared, and she is reunited with Paul and travels with him to Antioch.<\/p>\nIn Antioch, Thecla rebuffs the advances of a nobleman, Alexander, and for a second time is condemned to death. But the wild beasts who are to devour her in the public arena instead lick her feet and protect her. When she throws herself into a water cistern to effect her baptism, she is again spared death—a lightning flash kills the fish lurking in the water, and they float lifeless to the surface. Queen Tryphaena, who has befriended Thecla, faints with shock as repeated attempts are made to take Thecla’s life. Seeing this, Alexander finally begs the governor to set Thecla free.<\/p>\nFree once more, Thecla seeks Paul. She disguises herself as a man by putting on male attire. Arriving in Myra, she finds Paul and announces to him that she is returning to Iconium. Paul commands her to “teach the word of God.” After teaching for a while in Iconium, Thecla travels on to Seleucia.<\/p>\nThe remainder of Thecla’s life is not well documented. Some manuscripts record that Thecla, being afraid of the people of Seleucia, withdrew to a mountain and resided in a cave. There she lived an ascetic life, taught certain women who came to her, and carried out a ministry of healing. Later she departed to Rome, seeking Paul. Paul, however, was already dead. When Thecla herself died, at 90 years of age, she was buried not far from the tomb of her beloved master.<\/p>\nAlthough this work is considered apocryphal and is excluded from the NT canon, there are some early writers who held it in high regard. The Acts of Paul, of which this document forms a part, is mentioned by Origen and by Hippolytus with respect. Eusebius was of the opinion that the document was spurious, but he distinguished it from inferior heretical works. There are two instances where details of information have found their way from the Acts of Paul into early manuscripts of canonical books (2 Tm 3:11; 4:19). It is probable that the viewpoints indicated in this document reflected popular religious traditions widely held in the second century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nTertullian, however, argues that the document is quite out of harmony with Paul’s attitudes as expressed in the canonical material. In particular, he objects to the role assumed by a woman in the Acts of Paul and Thecla. Paul, Tertullian says, would never have permitted a woman to teach and to baptize (On Baptism<\/em> 17.21-23). The Acts of Paul and Thecla does differ from the Pauline stance, but not in the way indicated by Tertullian. The document depicts Paul as a proponent of the encratite viewpoint, teaching that celibacy is necessary for salvation. The canonical Paul taught that salvation is attained through faith alone, and that celibacy is a matter of special calling and certainly not the norm for every Christian (1 Cor 7:1-7). The Acts of Paul and Thecla suggests that a woman must assume male attire and must abstain from marriage if she is to exercise a leadership role. The canonical Paul instructed that a woman in a leadership position should dress as a woman (1 Cor 11:4-6), and he affirmed the ministerial function of married women (Rom 16:3). The Acts of Paul and Thecla emulates a woman whose motivating power was personal devotion to the apostle. The canonical writings suggest that Paul strongly discouraged such a show of personal allegiance to himself (1 Cor 1:12-17). Christ alone was to be the motivating influence in Christian service.<\/p>\nThe Acts of Paul and Thecla provides us with a unique description of the physical appearance of Paul: “a man small of stature, with a bald head and crooked legs, in good state of body, with eyebrows meeting and nose somewhat hooked, full of friendliness; for now he appeared like a man, and now he had the face of an angel.” This description is probably not reliable in any historical sense; more likely it pictures a typical Jew of the period. But because there is no other description preserved in early documents, this one has formed the basis for the many portraits of Paul that have come down through the centuries.<\/p>\nPaul, Apocalypse of<\/p>\nThis document, which originated in the late fourth century AD<\/span>, pretends to be a written account of some of the experiences that the apostle Paul had when he was caught up to the third heaven, or paradise, according to 2 Corinthians 12:2-4. The fact that Paul did not describe what he saw or heard during that revelatory vision excited the imagination of some unknown fourth-century Christian. Since the author describes with relish the tortures in hell experienced by a presbyter, bishop, and deacon (chs 34–36) and elsewhere approves of the devotion and piety of monks and nuns (chs 7–9) and of those who are virgins or chaste (ch 22), it is safe to conclude that he was a monk who disapproved of the insincere and hypocritical religiosity of his contemporaries, both laymen and clergy.<\/p>\nThis book, originally written in Greek, survives in relatively complete form in Latin. A partial indication of the great popularity of this piece of religious fiction is the fact that it was translated into Ethiopic, Coptic, and Syriac as well as Latin.<\/p>\nThe book is loosely structured in seven sections. The work begins with a short introductory section that attempts to explain why the book was unknown from the first to the fourth century (chs 1–2): during the consulate of (emperor) Theodosius Augustus the Younger and Cynegius (the document can thus be dated to AD<\/span> 388), a respectable but nameless person received a revelation through an angel. The man happened to be living in Tarsus in a house once occupied by St Paul himself. The angel told the man to break up the foundations and publish whatever he found. After being pummeled by the angel for disobedience, he finally broke the foundations only to discover a marble box that he immediately delivered to the emperor. The emperor opened the box and found the original version of the Apocalypse of Paul (which he copies) and a pair of shoes used by Paul on his missionary journeys. The substance of the mysterious document then follows.<\/p>\nIn chapters 3–6, Paul is said to have received a message from God announcing how all creation is subject to God with the exception of man himself. Chapters 7–10 relate how the guardian angels of each man and woman report every morning and evening to God concerning the deeds of those in their charge. Some are very good, while others are exceedingly wicked. In chapters 11–18, Paul is taken up in the Holy Spirit to the third heaven and asks to see the souls of the righteous and sinners as they leave the world. The angel accompanying Paul shows him a righteous man leaving the world, an ungodly man, and the soul of one who thought himself righteous but in fact was not.<\/p>\nChapters 19–30 describe Paul being lifted up to the third heaven (cf. 2 Cor 12:2-4), where he saw a golden gate flanked by golden pillars upon which were mounted golden tablets containing the names of the righteous. Upon entering paradise he was greeted by Enoch and Elijah and shown things that he could not reveal to others (ch 21; cf. 2 Cor 12:4). From there he was taken to the second heaven and then to the firmament encircled by Ocean (ch 21). There he saw the milk white waters of Lake Acherusia where the city of Christ was located. He was brought to the city in a golden boat while 3,000 angels sang a hymn. At the river of honey he met Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and other prophets (ch 25); at the river of milk he saw the infants slain by Herod (ch 26); at the river of wine he met Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Lot, and Job (ch 27); at the river of oil he met those completely dedicated to God (ch 28). At the center of the city, by a great altar, David sang the hallelujah to God.<\/p>\nPaul’s tour of hell is described in chapters 31–44; it is a place of sorrow and distress in which flows a river boiling with fire. In the river, some of the damned were immersed to the knees, others to the navel or lips, depending on the severity of their sins (ch 31). Chapters 34–36 describe the tortures of a presbyter, bishop, and deacon. Throughout this section the most ghastly tortures imaginable are described in detail with great relish. Finally, in chapter 44, Christ decrees that for Paul’s sake there will be no torture on Sundays henceforth.<\/p>\nPaul’s angelic travel guide then escorts him to paradise (chs 45–51), where the righteous of all ages are anxious to meet him. He meets the Virgin Mary (ch 46), Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as well as the 12 sons of Jacob (ch 47), Moses, who weeps for the unconverted Jews (ch 48), Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, each of whom describes his martyrdom, Lot and Job (ch 49), Noah (ch 50), Elijah, Elisha, Zechariah and his son, John the Baptist, and Adam (ch 51). The document either ended here or, in alternate versions, with Paul’s miraculous trip to the Mt of Olives where he and the other disciples received the divine commission.<\/p>\nThe document is filled with contradictions and inconsistencies and many of the translated versions do not agree with each other in all details. The chief importance of the document is in terms of its glimpses into the thinking of late fourth-century Christianity.<\/p>\nPaul, Passion of<\/p>\nA revised Latin version of the apocryphal Martyrdom of Paul, which was part of a larger body of texts called the Acts of Paul. The original Martyrdom is the story of Paul’s resuscitation of Patroclus, Nero’s cupbearer, who had fallen from a window and died during one of Paul’s sermons. Patroclus confesses his new loyalty to Christ before the stunned Nero, who moves quickly to round up all such “soldiers of the great king (Christ).” Paul is included in the purge. The Passion elaborates on the story to include a passage about Seneca’s admiration for Paul and his writings, portions of which Seneca allegedly read to Nero. Also, Paul on the way to his death borrows a kerchief from Plautilla, promising to return it. When the returning soldiers mock her, she shows them the bloodied kerchief.<\/p>\nPaul, Passion of Peter and<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Peter and Paul, Passion of (below).<\/p>\nPearl, Hymn of the<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Thomas, Acts of (below).<\/p>\nPeter and Paul, Passion of<\/p>\nThis writing comes to us in two forms, both of which are considered to have been written by Marcellus and date from the fifth century. The first form is essentially like the Acts of Peter and Paul. It lays emphasis upon Paul’s journey to Rome. The second gives more attention to the men’s residence in Rome with emphasis upon their stay in the home of a relative of Pontius Pilate. Both emphasize the close relationship between Peter and Paul and their continued and successful opposition to Simon Magus, who claims to be the Christ. Their death sentences are included in the writings but with only a brief account of their martyrdoms.<\/p>\nPeter, Gospel of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Akhmim Fragment (above).<\/p>\nPeter, Preaching of<\/p>\nThis document, which has survived only in fragments, appears to have been written early in the second century AD<\/span> in Egypt. While the title does not explicitly claim Petrine authorship, it was understood by Clement of Alexandria (late second century AD<\/span>) to have been an authentic composition by the apostle Peter (Stromata<\/em> 2.15.68). The majority of the fragments of the Preaching of Peter are preserved in the form of brief quotations in the writings of Clement of Alexandria.<\/p>\nThe fourth-century church historian Eusebius of Caesarea observed that the Preaching of Peter had not been accepted by any ancient authorities (Historia Ecclesiastica<\/em> 3.3.1-4), though he was probably not aware of its acceptance by Clement. Even though only fragments of the document have survived, they are important in that they reveal a transitional stage in the history of early Christian literature. During the first century, Christian literature, including all of the NT, was written for the consumption of other Christians. During the second century, Christian writers began to feel the need to defend their faith against the criticisms of their pagan and Jewish opponents. A new kind of Christian literature, the apology (meaning “defense”), began to appear in the early second century with the writings of the earliest Christian apologists Quadratus and Aristides. The Preaching of Peter represents a transition from the kind of apologetic writing found in the Acts of the Apostles, the sermons that that book contains, and the writings of the early apologists.<\/p>\nSince Clement quotes randomly from the Preaching of Peter, it is not possible to determine the order in which any of the quotations appeared in the original composition. Some of the major emphases of the document will appear from the following summaries of the quotations of Clement. Peter, according to Clement, called the Lord both “Law and Word” in the “Preaching” (Stromata<\/em> 1.29.182; 2.15.68). Mankind must recognize that one<\/em> God created the beginning of all things and has the power to bring all things to an end (Stromata<\/em> 6.5.39-41). The pagans, whom the author of the Preaching of Peter opposed, held that the universe was uncreated and eternal. God, the author contends, is invisible, incomprehensible, needs nothing, is inconceivable, everlasting, imperishable, and uncreated. This God must not be worshiped in the manner of the Greeks, for they have foolishly fashioned images of ordinary materials and worship them as gods. Further, they take animals that should be used for food and sacrifice them to these idols. The worship of the Jews should not be emulated either, for they revere angels, archangels, months, and the moon. If any of the nation of Israel should repent, they will find forgiveness (Stromata<\/em> 6.5.43). In one place the Preaching of Peter narrates how the Lord sent disciples to preach the gospel throughout the world after the resurrection (Stromata<\/em> 6.6.48), though the precise connection between this narrative and the preceding apologetic statements is not clear. It may be that the document began with a special version of the great commission. Elsewhere the document states that the OT prophets speak of Christ, sometimes in parables and enigmas, yet at other times very clearly and directly (Stromata<\/em> 6.15.128). In fact, the major events of the life of Christ, his coming, torture, crucifixion, death, resurrection, and ascension into heaven were predicted in detail by the prophets.<\/p>\nThe importance of the surviving fragments of the Preaching of Peter lies in the way in which they reveal how early second-century Christianity turned from a defensive to an offensive position in its proclamation of the gospel.<\/p>\nPeter, Slavonic Acts of<\/p>\nAn account of the later travels of Peter and his subsequent death in Rome preserved for us only in the Slavonic language. According to this account, a child (Jesus) comes to Peter and bids him to go to Rome. The angel Michael is captain of the ship taking them to Rome. After their arrival in Rome, Peter tells the child to catch some fish, whereupon he catches 12,000 in one hour. Then the child is sold to a Roman noble, Aravistus, for 50 pieces of gold. The child silences his teachers. After a vision of angels, the entire household is baptized. Nero arrests Peter, whereupon the child rebukes him. Many dead are raised, but the child sends them back to their graves to await the resurrection by Michael. Peter is crucified head downward. When the child reveals he is Jesus, the nails fall from Peter’s body, he prays for the forgiveness of his executioners, and then he dies. Such apocryphal versions of the acts of early church leaders are characteristically filled with fanciful acts of the apostles and their contact with the Christ.<\/p>\nPeter’s Letter to Philip<\/p>\nThis letter is part of the Christian Gnostic material discovered in 1947 at Nag Hammadi. It probably dates from the late second or early third century. The letter takes its name from a segment at the beginning of the tractate in which Peter claims to have sent the material to Philip. The letter is written in a dialogue form common in Gnostic literature. The body of the writing consists of a series of questions that are asked by the apostles of the risen Lord and the answers given by him. The questions provide a basis for the exposition of Gnostic philosophy about the structure of the world revealed by the Divine Light. That Light is the Christ, who is the heavenly Redeemer.<\/p>\nPilate, Acts of<\/p>\nThis document is an apocryphal passion gospel that reached its present form by the middle of the fourth century AD<\/span>. The first Christian writer to refer to the Acts of Pilate was Epiphanius, an ecclesiastical heresy hunter, who wrote a lengthy denunciation of various heresies in AD<\/span> 375, in which he definitely mentioned the Acts of Pilate (Heresies<\/em> 50.1). Much earlier, Justin Martyr had referred to Pilate’s report to Tiberius regarding the trial of Jesus (I Apology<\/em> 35; 48), but he does not seem to be referring to the Acts of Pilate. Toward the end of the second century AD<\/span>, a generation after Justin, Tertullian referred to an account sent from Pilate to the emperor Tiberius, yet this cannot be the Acts of Pilate, since Jesus supposedly performed many miracles before the procurator. Although it is not improbable that an earlier version of the Acts of Pilate antedated the fourth century, the present version must be dated to the middle of that century. The original language of the Acts of Pilate was Greek, and translations of it were made into Latin, Coptic, and Armenian. Eusebius, the fourth-century church historian and bishop of Caesarea, condemns what he regarded as a blasphemous account of Pilate, apparently a pagan document calculated to defame Christ (Historia Ecclesiastica,<\/em> 1.9.3; 9.5.1). The Christian Acts of Pilate was probably composed to counter the pagan document.<\/p>\nThe Acts of Pilate is a composite document consisting of two main parts. The first part (chs 1–16) purports to be a translation from Hebrew to Greek of an account written by Nicodemus about the events surrounding the passion of Jesus. The second part (chs 17–27), also called “Christ’s Descent into Hell,” vividly describes Christ’s descent into hades to liberate the righteous dead (an imaginative expansion of 1 Pt 3:19 which was itself transformed in the Apostles’ Creed into the phrase “he descended into hell”). After the 14th century AD<\/span>, the whole composition was commonly designated as the Gospel of Nicodemus because of the prominent place that character played in the document.<\/p>\nIn the prologue to the Acts of Pilate, a Roman soldier named Ananias claims to have found the Acts of Pilate in Hebrew and to have translated it into Greek in the 18th year of the reign of Emperor Flavius Theodosius (AD<\/span> 425). A quotation of the entire document follows: In the 15th year of Tiberius Caesar (AD<\/span> 29), Nicodemus wrote an account of the events that surrounded the passion, death, and resurrection of Jesus. The Jewish high priests accused Jesus of various religious crimes to Pilate and asked that he be tried. Though unwilling, Pilate sent for Jesus anyway, though in a most gracious manner. When Jesus arrived, the Roman standards bowed to him of their own accords (ch 1). In chapter 2 the Jewish charges against Jesus included: (1) that he was born of fornication, (2) that his birth meant the death of the children of Bethlehem, and (3) that Joseph and Mary fled to Egypt because they counted for nothing among the people of Israel. The charge of fornication was immediately refuted by 12 pious Jews who had witnessed the betrothal of Mary and Joseph. An interview between Pilate and Jesus (modeled after Jn 18:33-38) follows in chapter 3. The Jews charge Jesus with blaspheming God, and Pilate reluctantly turns Jesus over to them (ch 4). Nicodemus then stands up in the Jewish council and urges them to let Jesus go, for if he is not of God his movement will fail (cf. Acts 5:38-39), but the Jews oppose him (ch 5). Then three Jews healed by Jesus testify in his behalf (ch 6), followed by Bernice, the woman healed of the issue of blood (ch 7). The crowd proclaims Jesus a prophet (ch 8). When Pilate offers to release a prisoner, the Jews ask for Barabbas, and Pilate then washes his hands of the matter and has Jesus scourged and crucified with the two criminals, Dysmas and Gestas (ch 9). Jesus is mocked by the crowds, while one criminal (Gestas) is rebuked by the other (ch 10). Jesus’ death is accompanied by a darkening of the sun, which the Jews regard as a normal eclipse (ch 11). Joseph of Arimathea is then seized by the Jews and imprisoned; when they come to execute him he has vanished (ch 12). The guards report the appearance of the angel at the tomb, but are bribed by the Jews to keep silence (ch 12). Three Jews then come from Galilee: Phineas, a priest; Adas, a teacher; and Angaeus, a Levite. They report that they have witnessed the great commission and ascension of Jesus on Mt Malich (ch 14). Nicodemus suggests that the surrounding mountains be checked to see if some spirit has not taken Jesus up only to dash him on the rocks; the Jews find nothing except Joseph of Arimathea in his hometown (ch 15). Joseph is summoned to testify before the council and reveals how the risen Jesus had appeared to him when he was imprisoned and set him free (ch 15). The council decides, after hearing other witnesses, that if Jesus is still remembered after 50 years, the stories must be true (ch 16).<\/p>\nThe second document begins with an account of Joseph speaking to the council. Two brothers, he claims, had been raised at the same time as Jesus. The council summons them to give their stories (ch 17). While in hades, the brothers claimed, a great light appeared and Abraham and Isaiah became overjoyed (ch 18). Satan thought that Jesus could be restrained in hades (ch 20); but when the King of Glory arrived, the gates were broken down. Satan was handed over to the angels to be bound (ch 22) and was rebuked by hades for causing the ruin of his kingdom (ch 23). The King of Glory (Christ) then led Adam and the rest of the righteous dead out of hades (ch 24) and to paradise (ch 25), where even the repentant criminal was seen (ch 26). The two brothers claim that they have been sent by the angel Michael to preach the resurrection of Jesus to all mankind.<\/p>\nThe Acts of Pilate is a pastiche (collection) of quotations and allusions from the four canonical Gospels, mingled with imaginative and even fantastic additions. It is basically an apologetic document that attempts to defend the truth of the resurrection of Jesus against the counterclaims of pagan and Jewish adversaries. Unfortunately, it has an anti-Semitic tone that was to characterize Christian dramatizations of the events of Passion Week from the fourth century through the end of the Middle Ages.<\/p>\nPistis Sophia<\/p>\nA fourth-century Coptic manuscript (Codex Askewanus) that represents one of the chief Gnostic works extant today. The work, containing four chapters, derives its name from the heroine, Sophia, though only the first half of the work refers to her. This portion relates how Jesus, during the first 11 years after his resurrection, returned to teach his disciples the highest mystery of all: the Treasury of the Light. Jesus returned to the Mt of Olives where he is caught up through the aeons and on his journey comes to the thirteenth aeon where he finds Sophia. She is in sorrow because she has caught a glimpse of the Treasury of the Light but is deceived by Authades (the self-willed), who flashes a false brightness before her, causing her to fall into the hands of the powers of matter. She maintains her hope and faith, however, and after 12 prayers is delivered from Authades and chaos by Jesus who reinstates her at the lower limit of the thirteenth aeon.<\/p>\nThe work is in dialogue form—with Jesus answering questions asked by his disciples. The theme is thoroughly Gnostic in its view of salvation that comes by a hidden doctrine that brings illumination.<\/p>\nProtevangelium of James<\/p>\nSee<\/em> James, Protevangelium of (above).<\/p>\nPsalms of Solomon<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Solomon, Psalms of (below).<\/p>\nResurrection of Christ by Bartholomew, Book of the<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Bartholomew, Book of the Resurrection of Christ by (above).<\/p>\nReuben, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nSibylline Oracles<\/p>\nA pseudepigraphal writing comprising originally 15 books, 12 of which are extant in late Greek manuscripts. The word sibyl<\/em> is of Greek origin. It claimed to be an oracle of the gods and generally contained a message of a coming catastrophic event. Some Jews adopted and used this mode of writing for propagation purposes.<\/p>\nThe sibyls came from the beginning of the Maccabean period (165 BC<\/span>) and cover a period up to shortly after the destruction of the second temple (AD<\/span> 76). The authors, presumably writing in Alexandria, Egypt, stressed the unity and sovereignty of God. God controlled all events, whereas pagan deities were useless, unable to do anything. “But God is one, most exalted of all, who has made the heaven, the sun, the stars and the moon. . . . He has constituted man as the Divinely appointed ruler of all. You men . . . be ashamed of making gods” (book 2). God controls the history of the nations. The sibyls outline the history of 10 generations from the Assyrian kingdom to the destruction of the second temple and the great earthquake (book 4.47ff.). The third book also contains a section on the devastation and troubles to be experienced before the great judgment. It includes two messianic passages wherein the Messiah introduces an era of peace and prosperity for the faithful: “He will raise up his kingdom for all ages over men. . . . For nothing but peace shall come upon the land of the good” (lines 767, 780). The eternal state is to be reserved for the faithful who will be raised from the dead in a bodily form: “But all who are godly shall live again on earth, when God gives breath and life and grace to them the godly” (book 4.187-190), whereas the ungodly are to be thrown into hell, “And all who have sinned with deeds of impiety a heap of earth shall cover again, and murky Tartarus and the black recesses of hell” (lines 183-186).<\/p>\nThe express purpose of the authors of the sibyls was to demonstrate the reasonableness of the Jewish faith by casting their message in the form of the sibyl, introduced by the Greeks and appreciated by the Romans. In their emphasis on the God of Israel and their opposition to paganism, they nevertheless stand in the stream of the apocalyptic, the unveiling of God’s secrets of past and future. The sibyl as divine oracle was, thus, used as a literary form in order to convey a message to the non-Jewish world.<\/p>\nSilvanus, Teachings of<\/p>\nLiterary work of the Gnostics, attributed to Silvanus, the companion of Peter and Paul. It was discovered at Chenoboskion in Upper Egypt in 1946.<\/p>\nSimeon, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\nSlavonic Acts of Peter<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Peter, Slavonic Acts of (above).<\/p>\nSolomon, Psalms of<\/p>\nThe Psalms of Solomon are a collection of 18 songs attributed to Solomon. They are considered pseudepigrapha. The psalms were probably written by one author, who lived during the middle of the first century BC<\/span> and wrote in Hebrew. The theological perspective of the author is Pharisaic in its views of the law, judgment, and the future of Israel. The Psalms of Solomon are derived from the canonical book of Psalms in their form and phraseology. One of the similarities in the form and phraseology is the emphasis on the antithesis between the righteous and the wicked. The wicked are the Gentiles who defile the holy things of the Lord (2:3) and apostate Jews who have fallen into sin (3:11, 13).<\/p>\nThe character of the sinner is that of the fool, as opposed to the wise man (cf. Wisdom Literature). The fool has no concern for the Lord (4:1); his speech and deeds betray his unrighteousness (4:2ff.). He is known by his lies, judgment of others, false oaths, his immorality, lawlessness, and selfish ambitions at the cost of others (cf. 12). The righteous are the wise, who fear the Lord (4:26). He is not dismayed by bad dreams or perilous times (6:4-5). He is provoked with zeal for the Lord’s righteousness, as he witnesses the desecration of the temple and the law (8:28). The Lord’s love of him is expressed in discipline, and he responds to the Lord’s rebuke with repentance for his sins. The author compares the righteous to the tree of life in Paradise. They are stable and will not be uprooted (14:2ff.). The wicked, on the other hand, will not be remembered in this life, and God will deal righteously with them by casting them into “Sheol and darkness and destruction” (14:6; 15:10).<\/p>\nThe author views God as the King who mightily rules over the nations (2:34ff.) with readiness to judge his enemies and the enemies of the righteous (2:38ff.; 4:9) and to vindicate the righteous (2:39). As the Lord’s care is demonstrated in his sustenance of nature (5:11-12), in his raising up kings, rulers, and nations (5:13), the author assures the reader that his care extends particularly to the poor and those who call upon him (5:2-3, 13). He is the hope of the righteous (8:37).<\/p>\nIn view of the foregoing belief in the righteous kingship of God and in his protection of the righteous, the psalms abound in the conviction that evil will be overcome by God’s intervention on behalf of the righteous. The particular context in which these psalms originated was Pompey’s entrance into Jerusalem and his desecration of the temple (63 BC<\/span>), and it was hoped that at the death of Pompey (48 BC<\/span>, cf. 2:30ff.) the messianic era might be introduced. Therefore, the author reminds God of the covenant made with David (17:5) and asks God’s forgiveness for Israel’s sins in the past. Israel has suffered gentile invasions and control as the result of God’s judgment (17:6). Since Pompey had died, the author prayed for the restoration of the theocracy under a Davidic king—“Behold, O Lord, and raise up unto them their king, the son of David. All the time in the which Thou seest, O God, that he may reign over Israel Thy servant” (17:23). By means of the Davidic Messiah the land will be purged of sinners, godless nations, and the righteous will be sanctified. The messianic rule extends only over the righteous remnant, who when restored to the land, will be divided into the 12 tribes; the Davidic Messiah will rule over the tribes and the other nations “in the wisdom of his righteousness” (17:29-31). The sojourner and the gentile nations will not share in the glory of the kingdom. Rather, their position will be that of servitude.<\/p>\nThe hope of the glorious future of Israel is the apocalyptic element in the psalms. They arose in a historical context, but they anticipate a radically new future. The psalmist pronounced a benediction on all those who would witness God’s judgment on the nations, the restoration of Israel, and the introduction of the messianic kingdom: “Blessed be they that shall be in those days, in that they shall see the good fortune of Israel which God shall bring to pass in the gathering together of the tribes. May the Lord hasten His mercy upon Israel! The Lord Himself is our king for ever and ever” (17:50-51).<\/p>\nSolomon, Testament of<\/p>\nThe Testament of Solomon is a second-century BC<\/span> pseudepigraphal writing. The writing claims that Solomon was the writer of the testament. It is extant in Semitic manuscripts, and in some Greek texts.<\/p>\nThe material is basically Christian with emphasis on the cross and the virgin birth but also contains Jewish material as well. The testament recounts how Solomon, by means of a ring given to him by the archangel Michael, is able to subdue and use the skills of demons to build his temple. After completing the temple, however, Solomon is led into idolatry on account of his lust for a Shunammite girl. His fall was taken by the author of the testament as an occasion to warn the readers of the power and shapes of the demons and the angels having power over them. The work is written in the form of a testament in order to let Solomon reflect (on his deathbed) how he succeeded and failed as a legacy to Israel.<\/p>\nTestaments of the Twelve Patriarchs<\/p>\nPart of the Jewish pseudepigrapha. This particular composition is called a “testament” because it represents the deathbed speeches of each of the sons of Jacob. The testaments start with Reuben’s speech to his sons and ends with Benjamin’s testament to his heirs. Each patriarch is represented as gathering his sons around him and relating the important events of his life. During the speech the patriarch warns against particular vices and attitudes and recommends certain virtues. The advice and warnings of each patriarch often include insight and predictions concerning sin and salvation for his children. The account of the patriarch’s life serves as a guide for the future of his descendants. At the end of the speech, each patriarch dies and is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\nIt would appear that the concept of “testament” finds its orientation in Joshua 23–24, where Joshua summons the elders, heads, judges, and officers of Israel (Jos 23:2; 24:1) and gives them a charge before his death. First Kings 2:1-12 portrays David giving Solomon deathbed advice to walk in God’s ways. The speeches of the patriarchs find further scriptural reference in Genesis chapter 49, where Jacob calls his sons together to hear about their future. At the end of the speech Jacob dies (Gn 49:33).<\/p>\nThe present textual form (Slavonic, Armenian, and Greek versions) probably came about sometime during the second or third century AD<\/span>. However, much of the material would appear to go back to the second or third century BC<\/span>. The general scholarly consensus is that an original text in a Semitic language (either Hebrew or Aramaic) was composed by an author or authors sometime in the third or second century before the common era. At some later period, Christian sections were added to the original text. For examples of the Christian sections see Testament of Simeon 6:7; Testament of Levi 10:2; Testament of Dan 6:9; Testament of Naphtali 4:5; Testament of Asher 7:3-4; Testament of Joseph 19:11; Testament of Benjamin 3:8; 9:2-4. It would appear that the testaments may have been reworked by a Jewish writer(s) and by other Christian writers over the centuries. Thus we have a Jewish document from about the third century before the common era that has undergone both Jewish and Christian redactions over a long period of time. These testaments became quite popular in the tenth century, with special interest being displayed in the prophecies of the patriarchs and their secret knowledge.<\/p>\nThe following is a summary of each of the testaments of the patriarchs. The excerpts are based on R. H. Charles’s Pseudepigrapha,<\/em> pp 282-367.<\/p>\n<h6>Reuben<\/h6>\nThe testament of Reuben is very much influenced by an overwhelming memory of defiling his father’s bed. This refers to Reuben taking his father’s concubine Bilhah while she was in a drunken stupor. Reuben has very strong opinions regarding what he considers to be negative attributes of women, and he warns his sons to be guarded in their relationship with women. His comments on women probably reflect the ill feelings that existed between himself and Jacob in regard to Bilhah. Reuben predicts that in the future his sons would be jealous of the sons of Levi but they would not be able to overthrow them. He admonishes his descendants to have respect and love for one another and to do truth to their neighbors. Reuben is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Simeon<\/h6>\nThe patriarch Simeon is presented as a strong warrior type. Reflecting the biblical account of Joseph being sold into slavery (Gn 37:25-28), Simeon testifies that he wanted to kill Joseph rather than sell him into slavery. As punishment for this attitude, God withered his right hand for seven days. Simeon warns his sons against envy, deceit, and fornication. He predicts that they will attempt to harm the sons of Levi but prophesies that the sons of Levi will remain superior. Simeon looked forward to a blissful era (6:4-7a), when the “Most High” would be blessed. Verse 7b is a Christian interpolation, “Because God has taken a body and eaten with men and saved men.” He admonishes his sons to obey the sons of Levi and Judah, for it would be from them that their salvation would be accomplished. He predicts that a high priest would come from Levi and a king would descend from the lines of Judah. Simeon concludes his testament by predicting that all Gentiles (an interpolation) and Israel would be saved.<\/p>\n<h6>Levi<\/h6>\nLevi’s deathbed testament is in the form of dreams that he relates to his sons. He predicts that from his descendants and those of Judah the Lord would “appear among men” to save every race of men (2:11). The descendants of Levi would be “as the sun to all the seed of Israel” (4:3b) and in one dream it is shown that the blessings of the priesthood would come to his sons (8:2-3). Levi predicts that a king would arise in Judah; this king would establish a new priesthood that ministers to both Jews and Gentiles. The tenth chapter has a Christian interpolation that because of ungodliness and transgression, the sons of Levi would wrong “the Savior of the world, Christ” (10:2) and that for this they would be scattered throughout the world. Chapter 13 has a number of wisdom themes with emphasis on the need to follow and obey the law. Chapter 16 introduces an eschatological prediction that the sons of Levi would go astray for 70 weeks. The following chapter gives a detailed account of the 70 weeks in which there would be a priesthood for each jubilee. The first priesthood would be great, and the priest’s relationship to God would be such that God would be addressed as father. The second priesthood would “be conceived in the sorrow of beloved ones” (17:3), but this priesthood will be glorified by all. The following five priesthoods would be characterized by sorrow, pain, hatred, and darkness. However, a new priesthood would eventually arise and peace will be brought to all the earth (18:4); sin shall come to an end (18:9), for this new priesthood shall have a spirit of understanding and sanctification resting upon him. The testament closes with an admonition to choose either the law of the Lord or the work of Beliar (variant of Belial). The sons pledge themselves to the law, and following Levi’s death they bury him at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Judah<\/h6>\nAt the beginning of the testament by Judah he tells his descendants that he had been promised by his father that he would be king. “And it came to pass, when I became a man, that my father blessed me, saying, You shall be a king, prospering in all things” (1:6). Judah reminisces about his early youth and his ability to conquer wild animals. He obeyed the commandments and did not give in to lust. He predicted that his descendants would fall into wickedness because of the love of money and the enticement of beautiful women (ch 17). In chapter 21 Judah predicts that the Lord would give the kingship to his descendants and the priesthood to the sons of Levi. Chapter 24 includes a Christian messianic redaction. It is predicted that from the star of Jacob one will arise that will be without sin and from it a rod of righteousness will grow to the Gentiles (24:6). The testament concludes with eschatological hope for the future when “they who are poor for the Lord’s sake shall be made rich and they who are put to death for the Lord’s sake shall awake to life” (25:4). Judah dies and is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Issachar<\/h6>\nThe last words of this patriarch are somewhat unique in that Issachar is depicted as being “upright” and without transgression (unlike many of his brothers). He predicts that the priesthood will come from Levi and the kingship will arise from the lineage of Judah. In chapter 6 Issachar predicts that his children will “cleave” after Beliar. If they recognize the mercy of God and follow Issachar’s exemplary life, “every spirit of Beliar will flee from them.” His final request is that he be buried at Hebron with his fathers.<\/p>\n<h6>Zebulun<\/h6>\nThe patriarch Zebulun begins his testament by characterizing himself as a “good gift” to his parents. He, like Issachar, indicates that he is not conscious of sinning “except in thought” (and if he has any iniquity it is only the sin of ignorance). Zebulun claims that he did not support the actions taken against Joseph, and he would have told his father about Joseph’s plight except that the other brothers agreed that if “anyone should declare the secret, he should be slain” (1:6). In 1:7 he declares that if it were not for him the other brothers would have killed Joseph. The brothers were so suspicious of Zebulun that they watched him until Joseph was sold. Verse 5:3 has a familiar theme that is found in the NT and in the rabbis: “Have compassion in your hearts, my children, because even as a man does to his neighbor, even so will the Lord do to him.” Zebulun believes that this lesson is demonstrated in practical terms. The sons of the other brothers were sickened and died on account of the action taken against Joseph (“because they showed no mercy in their hearts,” 5:5). The sons of Zebulun were preserved without sickness. He continues his wisdom teaching (8:3) by declaring that in the degree that a man has compassion upon his neighbor the Lord in the same degree will have mercy on him. Zebulun predicts the division between the northern and southern kingdoms and the eventual conquest of these kingdoms by the Gentiles. However, the people will repent and the Lord will bring them back to “the land” and Jerusalem (9:8). In chapter 10 Zebulun predicts that after his death he will “arise as a ruler in the midst of his sons” (10:2), and he promises reward for those who keep the laws and punishment for the ungodly. Zebulun dies at the end of his testament and is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Dan<\/h6>\nThe patriarch Dan laments his jealousy of Joseph and indicates that he was controlled by the spirit of Beliar. He reveals that he wanted to kill Joseph so that he could have the love of his father. Dan warns against the spirits of lying and anger, and he exhorts his descendants to love truth and long-suffering. He admonishes them to keep the commandments and “love the Lord through all your life and one another with a true heart” (5:3). Dan predicts that his sons will “in the last days” depart from the Lord and thus provoke the anger of the sons of Levi. They also will fight against the sons of Judah. His sons will not win against the sons of Levi and Judah because an angel of the Lord will guide them. Dan is represented as having read in the book of Enoch (a favorite reference for the patriarchs) that Satan and all the spirits of wickedness and pride will cause the sons of Levi, Judah, and Dan to sin. They will be taken into captivity where they will receive the plagues of Egypt and all the evils of the Gentiles. However, when they return to the Lord they will receive mercy and be given peace. The prediction is such that there would be one who would arise from the tribe of Judah and Levi who is called “the salvation of the Lord.” It would appear that the “one arising” would make war against Beliar and execute an “everlasting vengeance” against their enemies (5:10). Dan’s final warning is to beware of Satan and his spirits and to draw near to God and the angel “that intercedes for you” (6:2). The last section admonishes Dan’s sons to pass on to their children all that they have heard so that “the savior of the Gentiles may receive” them. There follows a Christian polemic about the savior being true, long-suffering, meek, and lowly (6:9). When Dan dies, he is buried near Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.<\/p>\n<h6>Naphtali<\/h6>\nNaphtali is said to be 130 years old when he gives his last words. He is depicted as being in good health, but the morning after a feast realizes that he is going to die. Thus he gathers his sons about him. Naphtali has a very strong sense of order that contributes to the makeup and actions of man as well as the universe. He views the “Gentile problem” as their forsaking the Lord and changing their order so that they obeyed the “stocks and stones.” The change of order was the problem at Sodom and it also caused the Flood.<\/p>\nNaphtali reads from the book of Enoch that his sons will depart from the Lord and walk “according to all lawlessness of the Gentiles” (4:1). He predicts that his descendants will be taken captive because of their sins and afterward a “few” will return to the Lord and he will bring them back to their land. After their return to the land, Naphtali predicts that his sons will forget the Lord and “become ungodly” with the result that they will be scattered all over the earth. They will remain in this state until the compassion of the Lord comes and a man working righteousness and mercy comes to them. Naphtali recounts two dreams that he had in his 40th year. In the first dream he saw the sun and moon stand still. Isaac told his grandsons to run and take hold of the sun and moon, each according to his strength. Levi took hold of the sun, and Judah seized the moon. Both of them were lifted up with the sun and moon. There appeared a bull in the dream with two great horns and eagle wings. The other sons attempted to seize this bull but could not. However, Joseph came and took hold of the bull and ascended “up with him on high” (5:7).<\/p>\nThere follows a prediction that the 12 tribes of Israel would be taken into captivity by the Assyrians, Medes, Persians, Chaldeans, and Syrians. The other dream saw a ship sailing on the sea of Jamnia without sailors or pilot. Written on the ship was the inscription “The ship of Jacob” (6:2). Jacob and his sons were on the ship, and when a storm arose Jacob departed from their presence. Eventually the ship breaks up from the pounding of the sea, and while Joseph sails off in a little boat the rest of the brothers are divided among nine planks with Levi and Judah sharing a plank. It would appear that by the prayers of Levi all the brothers eventually land safely on the shore. When Naphtali relates these dreams to his father, Jacob responds that all these things must be fulfilled.<\/p>\nNaphtali admonished his sons to be united to Levi and Judah for through them “shall salvation arise to Israel” (8:2). Also through Levi and Judah the righteous of the Gentiles shall be gathered. Naphtali died and was buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Gad<\/h6>\nThe patriarch Gad is represented as hating Joseph because Joseph had told his father that Gad and some of the other brothers were eating from the best of the flocks while tending them. During his testament Gad confesses his sin of hatred to his sons and warns them against harboring hatred because it only brings anguish: “For as love would quicken even the dead and would call back them that are condemned to die, so hatred would slay the living and those that had sinned venially it would not suffer to live” (4:6).<\/p>\nRepentance is understood to give knowledge to the soul and leads the mind to salvation. Gad encourages his sons to honor the lineage of Levi and Judah, for therein is found the salvation of Israel. He predicts that his sons will walk in all wickedness and corruption and ends on a somewhat pessimistic note by asking to be buried near his fathers. Gad is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Asher<\/h6>\nAsher is very conscious of good and evil spirits and the choice that man has to make between these two possibilities. Asher predicts that his descendants will act ungodly and not give heed to the law of God. Thus they will be delivered into the hands of their enemies and they will be scattered. They will exist in such a state until the “Most High” visits the earth “coming Himself [as man with men eating and drinking] . . . he shall save Israel and all the Gentiles” (7:3-4). This Christian interpolation is followed by a declaration that the Lord will gather them because of his mercy and for the sake of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. When Asher dies, he is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Joseph<\/h6>\nJoseph calls himself the “beloved of Israel,” (1:2) and although he has seen envy and death, he did not go astray. During his testament he tells of his ordeal of being sold into slavery. The verses in chapter one are set in parallelism with the first half of the verse telling the plight of Joseph and the second half exalting the security of the Lord: “I was sold into slavery, and the Lord of all made me free: I was taken into captivity, and his strong hand succoured me. I was beset with hunger and the Lord himself nourished me” (1:5). Joseph details his experiences in Egypt with eight chapters being given to the temptations of the Egyptian woman. However, Joseph resisted her advances and the Lord rewarded him for his convictions. He admonishes his sons to have the fear of the Lord in all their works because whoever does the law of the Lord will be loved by him. This is the key to his success. Joseph encourages his children to do well to anyone who would do evil to them and pray for their enemies. He gives his attitude toward his brothers as an example of such a virtue.<\/p>\nJoseph admonishes his sons to observe the commandments of the Lord and honor Levi and Judah for “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, who saves all the Gentiles and Israel” (19:11) shall arise from them. He predicts the enslavement in Egypt but also the eventual deliverance. He directs his sons to take his bones with them when they leave Egypt, and the testament indicates that Joseph was buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Benjamin<\/h6>\nThe last patriarch gives his testament when he is 125 years old. He encourages his children to love the Lord and keep his commandments. He urges them to follow the goodness of Joseph, for he did not want his brothers’ actions against him to be counted as sin. Benjamin predicts that in Joseph shall the prophecy be fulfilled “concerning the Lamb of God and Savior of the world, and that a blameless one shall be delivered up for lawless men, and a sinless one shall die for ungodly men in the blood of the covenant, for the salvation of the Gentiles and of Israel and shall destroy Beliar and his servants” (3:8). One can immediately see how the Christian interpolation would find easy access for a polemic in this testament. Joseph is depicted as suffering in innocence and without remorse. Likewise the Christian messiah would suffer and die for ungodly men.<\/p>\nBenjamin believes that there are evildoers among his sons; from his reading of the book of Enoch he predicts that they will commit “fornication with the fornication of Sodom” and only a few will survive (9:1). There would appear to be a remnant from each tribe as the 12 tribes and the Gentiles will gather at the last temple. Their salvation will be a result of the “Most High” sending his only “begotten prophet” (9:2), and he will be lifted up upon a tree and the veil of the temple shall be rent and the Spirit of God shall be passed on to the Gentiles. Benjamin admonishes his sons that if they walk in holiness according to the commandments of the Lord, all of Israel will be gathered to the Lord. When Benjamin dies, he is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\nFrom the brief account of each patriarch, it is apparent that the testaments were subject to both Jewish and Christian redaction and go beyond mere interpolation. The text reflects such characteristics as two messiahs, a double love commandment, ethical and theological teachings, as well as universal salvation. However, it is most difficult to place these features within a particular time period or even religion.<\/p>\nThaddeus, Acts of<\/p>\nA sixth-century version and extension of the fifth-century Syriac Doctrina Addaei, or Legend of Abgar. The Legend contains a purported exchange of letters between Abgar, king of Edessa (AD<\/span> 9–46), and Jesus. This exchange results in the sending of Thaddeus, one of Jesus’ apostles, to Edessa. While there, he performs numerous miracles including the healing of Abgar. The Acts has Abgar healed when Ananias, his messenger, returns prior to the arrival of Thaddeus. The Acts focuses on the activity of Thaddeus in establishing the church in Edessa.<\/p>\nThecla, Acts of Paul and<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Paul and Thecla, Acts of (above).<\/p>\nThomas, Acts of<\/p>\nThe Acts of Thomas is one of a cluster of acts of the apostles that have three common characteristics. They narrate the propagation of the gospel around the ancient world, promote the deeds and words of one of the apostles, and inevitably chronicle that apostle’s martyrdom. The oldest of these “acts narratives” are those of Paul, John, Andrew, Peter, and Thomas. Acts of Thomas, like the others, is a blend of Christian piety, the popular Hellenistic romances of the day, and Jewish haggadic-type moralistic teachings.<\/p>\nScholarly study of the Acts of Thomas suggests that it was probably written at the beginning of the third century. It was definitely written in Syriac first and probably by someone with strong tendencies toward the Gnostic heresy. It proved broadly popular among Gnostics, Manichees, and orthodox churches, so much so that it was quickly translated from the original Syriac into Arabic, Armenian, and several Greek translations. From these varied Greek versions, Coptic, Latin, and Ethiopic translations were made. Significant portions of the Coptic version were in turn retranslated back into Arabic, Ethiopic, and Greek, thus creating a most confusing textual tradition. Only one full early Syriac text survives, and it is considered less reliable than some of the extant Greek translations.<\/p>\nIn the critical English edition of the Acts of Thomas, that of A. F. J. Klijn published in 1962, the narrative is divided into the traditional acts (praxeis). There are 13 of these numbered in 170 sequential chapters that include the concluding martyrdom of the apostle. Various liturgical pieces, sermon fragments, and hymns are inserted, including two particularly famous hymns in the early church—that of the “Song of the Bride” in act 1 and that of the “Song of the Pearl” in act 9. The first six acts are not woven together by any particular theme, and they record that Thomas went on board ship to go to India (act 3), which would imply a south Indian ministry. Yet the text speaks of ministry to the north Indian king, Gundaphoro (act 4). However, acts 7 through 13 and the martyrdom are set in the south Indian kingdom of Mazdai and are obviously written by one hand. It is probable that the first six acts represent earlier materials placed into the whole by the writer of the last seven acts and the martyrdom. This document is the first-known mention of the traditions that Thomas ministered in India, was martyred there, and that his bones were returned to Edessa. Acts of Thomas is written, as are all the apocryphal acts of the apostles, on the assumption that the world was divided among the apostles for evangelization and that India fell to Thomas.<\/p>\nThomas is called Judas Thomas throughout these acts after the Syrian style of referring to that apostle. Thomas is spoken of as the twin of Jesus (the Didymus of the NT), as recipient of special divine revelations, and as being Jesus incarnate in the flesh again—in chapters 10, 11, 39, 47, and 48 of the Acts. Many historians think these are clear indications of Gnostic thought. Others think such ideas are expressions of Jesus’ adaptation to human perception and identification with his apostles—features often found in early Christian literature. There seems to be no question but that Gnostic or Manichee tendencies were gradually edited out of Greek and Latin texts by orthodox copyists.<\/p>\nOne quickly gets the feel for this narrative. The Acts of Thomas opens with Judas Thomas’s refusing to go to India. He is then sold as a slave—in parallel to Christ’s coming as a slave to redeem man. So Thomas reaches India as a carpenter (again the parallel with Jesus) and a builder of homes. He plays groomsman in a wedding at which miracles convince the flute player of Thomas’s role as apostle of God; so the king asks Thomas to pray for his daughter. Great stress is placed on purity in Thomas’s teaching, and this usually involves sexual abstinence as well. Finally, many are converted, including the king, and they form an assembly of believers in Sandaruk.<\/p>\nIn the second act the king, Gundophor, gives Thomas a large sum of money to build a palace. After surprising the king by tracing the palace on the ground in winter, Thomas builds him a palace in heaven by giving the money to the poor. The king imprisons and decides to kill Thomas for the supposed deception; but the king’s brother, Gad, dies and goes to heaven where he sees the palace and desires to buy it. Gad is then reunited with his body and tries to buy the palace from Gundophor, whereupon Gundophor learns that he cannot sell it, releases Thomas from prison, and advises Gad to arrange to have his own palace built in heaven. Thomas gives a great doxology (ch 25 of act 2), and the two brothers who have come to believe through all of this want to be baptized.<\/p>\nIn these miracle narratives and teachings, all the books of the NT seem to be echoed, though there are relatively few direct quotations. Favorite miracle passages such as Balaam’s talking donkey and Peter’s release from prison are reexperienced in Thomas’s life with vast embellishment. The talking ass enters a home and casts out a demon at Thomas’s command; Thomas causes great consternation by repeatedly passing in and out of the securely closed prison. Such miracles, sufferings, and conversions make up acts 3 through 13 and continue to the climax of Judas Thomas’s ministry. His martyrdom occurs (ch 168) at the hands of four soldiers with spears who have been ordered by the king of Mazdai to execute Thomas. He thereafter appears to his followers who have Thomas’s bones removed to Edessa. Meantime, the son of the king of Mazdai becomes sick unto death. Desperate, the king goes to Thomas’s tomb, thinking to get a relic to heal his son. Finding the body gone, he uses the very dust upon which Judas Thomas’s body rested, and his son is healed. Thereafter the king becomes a believer and joins the community of believers.<\/p>\nThomas, Gospel of<\/p>\nA noncanonical and heretical gospel of Gnostic origin that probably dates from the second or third century AD<\/span>. It is one of a large number of similar writings that flourished among early religious sects such as the Marcosians (a second-century group that built an elaborate sacramental system around numbers) and the Manicheans (a third-century dualistic heresy based on the primeval conflict between light and darkness). In fact, Cyril of Jerusalem, who died in AD<\/span> 386 says the Gospel of Thomas was written by “one of those wicked disciples of Mani” (the founder of Manichaeism). Along with the Protevangelium of James, it is one of the oldest and most widely known of the more than 50 apocryphal gospels that circulated within the churches during the period of their early growth and expansion.<\/p>\nThis Gospel of Thomas (sometimes referred to as an “infancy gospel”) should not be confused with the Coptic version that was unearthed in 1945 near Nag Hammadi in Upper Egypt. The latter is a collection of 114 “sayings of Jesus,” which shed a great deal of light on the influence of Gnosticism on Egyptian Christianity. They claim to be the “secret words” of Jesus transmitted by “Didymos Judas Thomas.” The Gospel of Thomas, with which this article deals, is composed of a series of childhood miracles of Jesus and is preserved for us in four versions—two in Greek (one quite a bit longer than the other), one in Latin, and one in Syriac.<\/p>\nThe Gospel of Thomas was apparently known as early as Hippolytus (AD<\/span> 155–235), who quotes it as saying, “He who seeks me will find me in children from seven years old; for there will I, who am hidden in the fourteenth aeon, be found.” Hippolytus claimed that it was used by the Naasenes (a Gnostic sect that worshiped the serpent) in support of their doctrine of the nature of the inward man. The quotation above is not found in the extant versions, but this is understandable because there is evidence from the Stichometry of Nicephorus (possibly fourth century) that an earlier version was over twice the length. The Gospel of Thomas was known both to Origen (c. AD<\/span> 185–254) and Eusebius (c. AD<\/span> 260–340). The latter classed it with the heretical writings and said it should be “rejected as altogether absurd and impious” (Historia Ecclesiastica<\/em> 3.25).<\/p>\nThe stories that make up the Gospel of Thomas emphasize the miraculous power and supernatural wisdom of the boy Jesus. Some scholars think they were originally fabricated by orthodox Christians in opposition to the Gnostic heresy that the “supernatural Christ” first came upon Jesus at the time of his baptism. It is much more likely, however, that they owe their origin to people’s curiosity about what the boy Jesus must have been like. Some of the tales may have come from pagan sources.<\/p>\nApart from three or four miracles, which could be classed as beneficial, the supernatural feats said to be performed by the boy Jesus were destructive. For example, when a certain child spoiled some pools made by Jesus, he was cursed by Jesus and totally withered up. Another boy who provoked Jesus by running into him “immediately . . . fell down and died.” A teacher who struck Jesus on the head was straightway cursed and fell to the ground. The French writer Renan referred to the Jesus of the Gospel of Thomas as “a vicious little guttersnipe.”<\/p>\nThroughout the gospel Jesus is presented as infinitely wise. He ridicules his teacher Zacchaeus saying, “You hypocrite, first, if you know it, teach the Alpha, and then we will believe you concerning the Beta.” After Zacchaeus berates himself for being so inferior to the one he intended to take as a disciple, Jesus laughs and announces, “I am come from above that I may curse them.” The text continues, “And no man after that dared to provoke him, lest he should curse him, and he should be maimed.”<\/p>\nOther miracles include making 12 live sparrows out of clay, smiting his accusers with blindness, raising a child from the dead, healing a foot cut in two by an ax, carrying water in a cloth garment, reaping an enormous harvest from one kernal of wheat, stretching a piece of wood to its proper length, and healing his brother James who had been bitten by a viper while gathering fagots (sticks to use as firewood). More miracles may be found in the longer Latin version.<\/p>\nIt comes as no surprise that the orthodox church has always rejected from its canon of sacred scripture the apocryphal Gospel of Thomas. It is, however, quoted in other later gospels of the same sort. For example, the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew from chapter 18 on is based upon the Gospel of Thomas. Along with other apocryphal materials, it has exercised a significant influence on Christian art and literature, especially from the tenth century forward. For example, the account of Jesus making the 12 sparrows from clay shows up in the Koran.<\/p>\nTruth, Gospel of<\/p>\nAround 1945 a group of Egyptian peasant farmers near modern Nag Hammadi inadvertently dug into a grave of the ancient village known as Shenesit-Chenoboskion and unearthed a jar containing 13 books (9 of which were largely complete) and 15 fragments of works. This find was the library of an ancient Gnostic sect and contained all or parts of 51 different Gnostic writings—all but two of which had never come into modern scholars’ hands before. Now called the Nag Hammadi or Chenoboskion texts, these works were the first modern find of original Gnostic literature. All are Coptic translations of earlier Greek originals.<\/p>\nCodex I (titled the Jung Codex because it now is owned by the Jung Institute in Vienna) is unique among the 13 works because it is in Sub-Achimimic Coptic, while the rest of the works are in the more usual Sahidic Coptic. Codex I contains five works, two of which are the enormously controversial Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Truth.<\/p>\nThe Gospel of Truth has no heading but rather draws its title from the incipit (first line of the text); it has no author; it contains no addressee. In fact, it is not a gospel at all, but rather a treatise expressive of Valentinian Gnosticism at its very earliest stage. Because the Gnosticism expressed in the Gospel of Truth is lacking all later-Valentinian mythological development and because it is stated simply and in almost orthodox Christian thought forms, the majority of modern scholars credit it to Valentinus himself, though no final proof of this has been discovered as yet. If Valentinus himself did not write this document, then it had to be someone in the immediate circle of his initial disciples.<\/p>\nValentinus was born in Egypt around AD<\/span> 100 to 110. He received a thorough education at Alexandria, became a Christian, and taught first in Egypt before moving to Rome around AD<\/span> 136, where he stayed until 154 or 155. Tertullian, in his work against heresy, seems to imply that Valentinus was twice expelled from the Roman church; he states that Valentinus was a brilliant and eloquent man who had hopes of becoming a bishop in Rome at one time. Valentinus attracted able followers who later expanded his teachings almost beyond recognition. But when he left Rome sometime after 154 or 155, he had made a final break with orthodoxy and was teaching a form of Gnostic heresy the product of which was the Gospel of Truth, written by himself or someone of his immediate circle. There is a surviving statement that Valentinus taught subsequently in Cyprus, and then he vanishes into the mists of history.<\/p>\nIrenaeus said the Gospel of Truth is no gospel, for it is unlike the four Gospels (Against Heresies<\/em> 3.2.9). Irenaeus was certainly correct, for the work is not a narrative. Nor does the Gospel of Truth contain any story about Jesus, any place name of any type, any date, or any mention of any person other than Jesus, who is only mentioned five times.<\/p>\nMore than 60 times, this brief work uses the notions of knowledge or needing to know. This knowledge is born from within as the soul returns to itself, finding there what Deity deposited in it—or perhaps better, finding there the residue of Deity still entrapped within it. Thus whoever has Gnosis has simply taken what is his and can know where he or she comes from and for where he or she is bound. Christ’s role was to present the “Book of the Living” or the “Living Book.” “Book” is understood, not as the gospel proclamation of the life and teachings of Jesus, but rather as the primordial gospel or truth that existed before creation. It was error and ignorance that rebelled against the Savior and nailed him to the tree. Implied in this, though not explicitly stated, is the Gnostic understanding that it was also divine error and ignorance out of which matter emerged or was created. Salvation for living beings entrapped in this matter comes with return to unalloyed Deity. The path of this return is Gnosis (knowledge). The Pleroma, the fullness of the Deity, went out into the depths of matter in search of the elect among beings by way of Jesus and the cross.<\/p>\nWhile these traits of Gnosticism are clear, this gospel is much closer to orthodoxy than most Gnostic Chenoboskion writings because it mentions only one Son of God, not several emanations; it does not split Jesus into a physical Jesus and a divine Christ; and most strikingly, Sophia, the usual central character in the Gnostic cosmic drama, does not appear at all. It is for these reasons among others that the Gospel of Truth is placed very close to Valentinus’s break with orthodoxy.<\/p>\nThe Gospel of Truth has assumed some degree of importance in NT studies beyond that warranted by its heretical content because it everywhere assumes our full NT canon. By some scholars’ counts, there are no less than 83 places where the Gospel of Truth echoes NT canonical books—in spite of the fact it does not cite a single saying of Jesus directly. Most particularly, it relies heavily on the book of Revelation and the Epistle to the Hebrews.<\/p>\nVirgin, Assumption of the<\/p>\nA widely circulated legend dealing with the death and translation of the Virgin Mary. None of the many versions is earlier than the fourth century. Most go back to Egypt. In the Coptic versions, Jesus himself appears to Mary before the apostles depart on their missionary labors; Jesus announces her coming death and translation. In the other form an angel makes the announcement. Mary requests the presence of all the apostles, who are miraculously brought on the clouds. Mary is transfigured, and many healings result from contact with her dead body. She is transported to heaven by Jesus shortly after her death.<\/p>\nThis legend itself took on a new interest and importance when in 1950 “The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin” was made a part of official Roman Catholic dogma.<\/p>\nVirgin, Life of the<\/p>\nThere are a number of accounts of the early life and existence of the Virgin Mary. Most of them come to us through Coptic texts. They tell of the birth of Mary to Joachim (also called Cleopas) and Anna, who had been taunted by friends for having no children. Mary was born after a vision of a white dove. In some accounts Mary was dedicated to the Lord and then committed to the care of a man, Joseph. While she was in the house weaving on the veil of the temple, angels would come to minister to her. The annunciation by Gabriel is given at great length. The birth of Jesus is described in detail while Joseph is searching for a midwife, Salome. Other accounts go on to describe tender scenes between Mary and the child Jesus. In some of these versions, there is a reckless identification of the Virgin Mary with all of the other Marys of the Gospels.<\/p>\nZebulun, Testament of<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (above).<\/p>","summary_ro":"APOCRYPHA* Books excluded from the canon of Scripture. Preview • Introduction • Apocryphal Gospels • Apocryphal Acts • Apocryphal Epistles • Apocalyptic Apocrypha • Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings Introduction The writings of the Old and New Testaments tended to attract certain additional compositions in the form of books, parts of books, letters, “gospels,” apocalypses, and so on. Most of the authors wrote anonymously, but some presented their writings to the public under the name of ...","summary_en":"APOCRYPHA* Books excluded from the canon of Scripture. Preview • Introduction • Apocryphal Gospels • Apocryphal Acts • Apocryphal Epistles • Apocalyptic Apocrypha • Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings Introduction The writings of the Old and New Testaments tended to attract certain additional compositions in the form of books, parts of books, letters, “gospels,” apocalypses, and so on. Most of the authors wrote anonymously, but some presented their writings to the public under the name of ...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":6461,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Bible* (Old Testament), Chronology","title_en":"of the Bible* (Old Testament), Chronology","content_ro":"<h3>CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (Old Testament)<\/h3>\nBranch of biblical studies that attempts to assign dates and sequences to OT events. Chronology is a science. It deals with evidence, theories, assumptions, and the balance of probabilities. Often it boils down to a matter of choosing among theories that are equally unable to solve all the problems raised by other points of view. OT chronology is an accredited branch of biblical studies primarily because it is essential for understanding the proper historical background of the biblical texts. In general, the chronology of the OT is understood well enough to vindicate the basic accuracy and sequential order of Scripture.<\/p>\nBoth biblical and nonbiblical materials are utilized by students of OT chronology. Biblical data include (1) genealogies showing personal and tribal affiliations among various peoples; (2) specific numbers given by biblical authors to indicate a person’s longevity, a king’s reign, or the duration of a specific event; (3) synchronizing statements that date an event in a specific year of a king’s reign or relate it to a natural phenomenon assumed to be common knowledge at the time of writing (e.g., Am 1:1; Zec 14:5).<\/p>\nFrom the abundance of such chronological passages in the OT, one might conclude that establishment of OT dates and sequences would be a simple procedure. Each of the three kinds of biblical materials, however, exhibits special problems that must be solved first.<\/p>\nNonbiblical materials that shed light on OT chronology are quite numerous, and more are discovered year by year. They include (1) official records of important affairs such as military campaigns from countries like Egypt or Babylonia; (2) official inscriptions that are dedicatory or commemorate a great victory; (3) annals listing major accomplishments of a ruler year by year; (4) ostraca (inscribed pieces of pottery) containing letters, tax transactions and economic records, military dispatches between field leaders and command headquarters, or other information. Ostraca may be dated archaeologically and are often used to supplement the biblical record.<\/p>\nThe chronologist tries to examine the pertinent biblical and nonbiblical information, notes areas of correlation among all the data, and finally establishes a working system into which the most facts can be fitted. New evidence uncovered at any time may necessitate shifts in the present working system. Although the basic structure of biblical chronology seems reasonably firm, many details will no doubt be subject to change as new evidence is discovered.<\/p>\nAs a general rule, the earlier the period, the less certain one can be of one’s dating. In the second millennium BC<\/span>, for example, many dates can be assigned within a range of about 100 years. By the time of David and Solomon (c. 1000 BC<\/span>), the margin of error over which scholars debate is a decade or less. The range narrows as one comes toward the present, so that, with the exception of one or two problem eras, dates accurate to within one or two years are possible by roughly the middle of the ninth century BC<\/span>. Such limitations must be kept in mind in any examination of the major periods of OT history.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Prepatriarchal Period<\/p>\n• From Abraham to Moses<\/p>\n• Conquest and Consolidation<\/p>\n• The Monarchy<\/p>\n• Judah after the Fall of Israel<\/p>\n• Beyond 587 BC<\/span><\/p>\nPrepatriarchal Period<\/p>\n<h5>Biblical Evidence<\/h5>\nIn the first 11 chapters of Genesis are found accounts of the Creation (chs 1–2), the fall (ch 3), Cain and Abel (ch 4), the Flood (chs 6–9), and the Tower of Babel (ch 11). Those events are set within a certain chronological framework.<\/p>\nAccording to Genesis 5, a period of 10 generations elapsed between the Creation and the Flood. Although the individuals listed enjoyed a total life span of a hefty 847 years plus, the total time elapsing between Adam and the Flood was only 1,656 years.<\/p>\nAccording to Genesis 11, another 10 generations elapsed from the time of the Flood until the time of Abraham (at least in the Septuagint, the third-century BC<\/span> Greek translation of the OT; the Hebrew Masoretic text has 9). In that period the average age attained by individuals in the list is 346 years (using a figure of 460 for Arphaxad’s son Cainan, who is included in v 13 of the LXX; cf. Lk 3:36); the total elapsed time from the Flood to Abraham is only 520 years. Taken literally, that would mean that all of Abraham’s ancestors as far back as Noah’s son Shem were still alive at Abraham’s birth, and that a total of only 2,176 years elapsed from the time of Creation to Abraham.<\/p>\n<h5>Interpretation of the Biblical Data<\/h5>\nA literalistic or slavishly mathematical interpretation of the figures, as has appeared in the margin of many kjv<\/span> Bibles, requires a number of assumptions: that no names are omitted from the genealogies, that all the numbers given are consecutive, and especially that numbers used in an ancient biblical source carry the same meaning as that associated with them in the modern Western mind. Each assumption needs serious examination in the light of other established facts.<\/p>\nA cursory reading of other biblical genealogies, for example, reveals that not all the names of a given family were always included. Even Matthew recorded a total of 28 generations (two sets of 14 each) between David and Jesus, and comparison with OT genealogies reveals that Matthew omitted several names. Luke listed a total of 42 generations for the same interval. Omissions are also obvious when one compares the genealogical lists given in 1 Chronicles 1–8 with those recorded earlier in Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Joshua, 1 and 2 Samuel, and 1 and 2 Kings.<\/p>\nFurther, ancient peoples thought of numbers in a schematic or stylized way. Use of numbers among the ancient Near Eastern nations differed sharply from current Western practice. Examples of that practice are known from both biblical and nonbiblical sources. For example, a list of eight Sumerian kings who ruled in the city of Shurruppak before the “great flood” of the Jemdet Nar era (c. 3000 BC<\/span>) assigns each man an average reign of more than 30,000 years. Berossus, a Babylonian priest of Marduk living in the third century BC<\/span>, added two names to the eight found in that earlier list of kings and assigned an average of 43,200 years to each king. Such extraordinarily high numbers provide a perspective for considering the numbers of Genesis.<\/p>\nTherefore, although one can assume that the numbers assigned to the ages of the patriarchs preceding Abraham in Genesis had real meaning for those responsible for their preservation, they should not be employed in a purely literal sense to compute the length of the various generations mentioned in the text. Further, the numbers given in the Septuagint and in the Samaritan Pentateuch, another early version of the Pentateuch, diverge in many details from those of the Hebrew Masoretic Text. That means, among other things, that the Genesis numbers caused problems for even the earliest scholars of Scripture.<\/p>\n<h5>Nonbiblical Evidence<\/h5>\nArchaeology provides no evidence that may be used to date either the Creation or any other account preserved in Genesis 1–11. The Flood is an example that illustrates some of the difficulties. Many claims have been made by persons from a wide variety of backgrounds (scientists, explorers, theologians, and others) to the effect that archaeology has proven the Genesis Flood narrative to be true. Yet no city so far excavated in Palestine and Syria (including some of the oldest towns in the world) shows archaeological evidence of the Flood.<\/p>\nAlthough several cities in Mesopotamia do exhibit evidence of a flood, three factors make it difficult to link that evidence with Genesis 6–9. Each of the flood levels so far discovered dates from a different period. Further, since nearby sites show no evidence of flooding, all of the Mesopotamian flood evidence points to relatively small local floods. Finally, the evidence indicates no great cultural discontinuities of the sort that would result from destruction of an entire population. Thus, it seems that the ancient Mesopotamian floods discovered through archaeological research are of the same kind as the floods that still occur in the Euphrates River valley.<\/p>\nClearly, certain questions one might ask of the Genesis narratives simply cannot be answered. Many who regard the Bible as the Word of God have concluded that the dating of events found in Genesis 1–11 must be less important than the theological truths of salvation, faith, and obedience that these accounts present.<\/p>\n\nFrom Abraham to Moses<\/p>\n<h5>The Patriarchal Age<\/h5>\nThe date of Abraham is still a lively topic among biblical scholars who agree that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were indeed historical persons. Opinions range from an early-date view that estimates that the patriarchal age extended from 2086 to 1871 BC<\/span>, to a late-date view placing Abraham at around 1400 BC<\/span>. Since each position claims to fit the biblical data, a closer look at the two points of view is in order.<\/p>\nMany OT passages seem to support the view that puts Abraham at a comparatively early date. First Kings 6:1 computes 480 years back from the founding of the temple in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign (961 BC<\/span>, according to the early-date view) to the exodus from Egypt, which would then be dated 1441 BC<\/span>. Counting 430 years as the period of the Israelite sojourn in Egypt (see Gn 15:13; Ex 12:40) takes the date back to 1871 BC<\/span>. To that date are added the 215 years demanded by the total of (1) Abraham’s age upon entering Canaan (75 years according to Gn 12:4); (2) 25 additional years before the birth of Isaac (Gn 21:5); (3) 60 more years to the birth of Jacob (Gn 25:26); and (4) the appearance of Jacob before the pharaoh at age 130 (Gn 47:9). Those 215 years added to the previous total give a date of 2086 BC<\/span> for the entrance of Abraham into Canaan and a date of 2161 BC<\/span> for his birth.<\/p>\nSuch a calculation does not use all of the chronological evidence presented in the OT; consequently, the date for Abraham is open to challenge. For example, the 480 years between the exodus and Solomon’s fourth regnal year represent a period of time into which the wilderness wanderings, the career of Joshua and his immediate successors, the period of the judges, Samuel, Saul, and David must all be placed. Although the OT does not specifically say how long were the careers of Joshua, Samuel, or Saul, even a modest reckoning pushes the total years required by all the biblical data together to approximately 600.<\/p>\nIn addition, the length of time to be assigned to the Egyptian sojourn is problematic. The Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint both view the number 430 (in Ex 12:40) as applicable not only to the years in Egypt but to the years of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in Canaan as well. Evidently Paul followed the Septuagint tradition when he dated the giving of the law 430 years later than the time of God’s promise to Abraham (see Gal 3:15-18). That means the Septuagint figure cannot be dismissed lightly.<\/p>\nThe late dating of Abraham (c. 1400 BC<\/span>) is based on two propositions: (1) The picture of patriarchal society portrayed in Genesis most closely parallels that reflected in the cuneiform tablets recovered from Nuzi, a town in northeastern Mesopotamia about 175 miles (282 kilometers) north of Baghdad. (2) Because those tablets must be dated in the 15th and 14th centuries BC<\/span>, the parallel patriarchal age must have fallen within the same general time period.<\/p>\nThose who hold the late-date view are aware that their date for Abraham cannot be equated with the set of numbers on which the early-date view depends. They point to other data, also from the OT. Joseph, who was already a highly placed Egyptian official when Jacob moved to Egypt, lived to be 110 years old (Gn 50:26). Moses was a great-grandson of Levi, Joseph’s older brother. Since Joseph lived to see his own greatgrandchildren born (who would probably be younger than Moses since their great-grandfather was younger than his), the late-date view concludes that Joseph could have been alive when Moses was born. The four-generation genealogy of Moses (Levi-Kohath-Amram-Moses, in Ex 6:16-20; Nm 3:17-19; 26:58-59; 1 Chr 6:1-3) was evidently thought to be complete according to Genesis 15:16, which predicted that Abraham’s descendants would be freed from Egyptian bondage “in the fourth generation.”<\/p>\nHowever, a date of around 1400 BC<\/span> for Abraham cannot be aligned with certain other biblical data, including the long Egyptian sojourn demanded by Genesis 15:13 and Exodus 12:40 and a 40-year (or “one-generation”) wilderness existence. Some normally moderate scholars are forced to reduce the wilderness time to two years in order to maintain their late date for Abraham.<\/p>\nIn short, the late-date theory is consistent with part of the biblical evidence (the genealogies of Moses), but the early-date theory conforms to another part (the actual year figures listed in scattered verses from Genesis and Exodus). The late-date theory holds that the genealogies represent more reliable information in Semitic societies generally, whereas the early-date theory computes years given in the biblical account literally throughout its scheme.<\/p>\nBecause of problems attached to both positions, a large group of scholars take a middle ground in dating the patriarchal age. Archaeologically, they say, Abraham and his life and times fit perfectly within the early second millennium, but imperfectly within any later period. By placing Abraham roughly between 1800 and 1600 BC<\/span>, they provide enough latitude for a merging of all the available evidence, biblical and nonbiblical, into a workable chronological scheme. Archaeology provides four major bits of evidence for an early second-millennium patriarchal era.<\/p>\n1. Though the Nuzi tablets furnish a clear parallel to patriarchal social life, other tablets from other towns and an earlier era reflect many of the same customs common to Nuzi and Genesis. Since the Nuzians were Hurrians who came to northeastern Mesopotamia from elsewhere (perhaps Armenia), their social customs originated no doubt much earlier than the time of their tablets now in our possession. Accordingly, the 15th-century BC<\/span> date of the Nuzi tablets does not preclude an earlier date for Abraham.<\/p>\n<li>2. The names of several of Abraham’s ancestors listed in Genesis 11 can now be identified with towns in the northern area of Mesopotamia around Haran, the city from which Abraham migrated to Canaan (Gn 11:31–12:3). Significantly, Haran flourished in the 19th and 18th centuries BC<\/span>.<\/li>\n<li>3. Shortly after 2000 BC<\/span> Semitic nomads from the desert invaded the civilized communities of the Fertile Crescent. Those invaders, called Amorites in the OT, established themselves in several cities in northern Syria and Mesopotamia. One of the Amorite cities was Babylon, ruled by Hammurabi sometime around the beginning of the 18th century BC<\/span>. Although the King Amraphel of Genesis 14:1 is not linguistically identifiable with the Babylonian king Hammurabi, as earlier scholars believed, the picture of the times following the Amorite invasion still accords well with the Genesis narratives generally.<\/li>\n<li>4. Mari, another Amorite town, is now well known because of more than 20,000 tablets recovered from its royal palace and archives. Geographically, Mari is located in the general area of Haran. Chronologically, the tablets recovered come from the 18th century BC<\/span>. One 18th-century king of Mari, Zimri Lim, carried on extensive correspondence with Hammurabi of Babylon. The tablets from Mari also furnish valuable information about tribal and ethnic groups and their movements in the general region. Of basic importance for dating the Genesis materials are certain documents from Mari that include personal names very similar to Abraham (Abi-ram), Jacob, Laban, and several other West Semitic names.<\/li>\nArchaeological evidence neither proves nor disproves the actual existence of Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob. That is admitted on all sides. What archaeology has done is to provide a framework of probabilities within which the biblical patriarchal narratives appear more and more to be at home.<\/p>\n<h5>Date of the Exodus<\/h5>\nThe problem of dating the patriarchal age is closely related to the problem of assigning a date to the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt. Since the evidence does not permit a precise date for Abraham, a precise date for the entry of Joseph or Jacob into Egypt is likewise unobtainable. Further, the biblical evidence does not yield an exact figure for the length of the Israelite sojourn in Egypt.<\/p>\nFor many years biblical scholars viewed 1 Kings 6:1 as a foundation upon which to build an unshakable date for the exodus. Because Solomon’s fourth year could be unquestionably fixed to within at least a 10-year span (967–958 BC<\/span>), the exodus too could be dated with the same precision simply by adding 480 years. But other biblical data raise serious questions about that simple procedure. When the Bible deals with all the events between the time of the exodus and the founding of Solomon’s temple, that is, from Numbers to 1 Kings 5:18, the precise numbers given total not 480 but closer to 600 years.<\/p>\nBecause the evidence is insufficient to allow a precise date for the exodus, scholarly opinion remains divided between two possibilities. A 15th-century exodus is supported by several pieces of evidence. The chronology in 1 Kings 6:1 appears to be independently corroborated by a passage in Judges 11:26. It claims that Israel had occupied the area around Heshbon for 300 years preceding Jephthah’s own day. If Jephthah is dated at roughly 1100 BC<\/span>, one is obviously led back to an exodus in the middle of the 15th century. Also, three successive generations of pharaohs who ruled in the 16th and 15th centuries produced no male offspring, making it more likely that Moses would have become the foster son of a royal princess during that time; all of the 19th-dynasty kings (1306–1200 BC<\/span>) had legitimate male heirs.<\/p>\nIn addition, a 15th-century date makes possible a connection between the Habiru invasion of Canaan (1400–1350 BC<\/span>)—described in the Amarna letters found at Tell el-Amarna, Egypt—and the invasion of Canaan by the Hebrews described in the OT book of Joshua. Related to that is a reference to “Israel” in the Merneptah Stele, a stone pillar inscribed with the deeds of the Egyptian king, Merneptah, of about 1220 BC<\/span>. It implies that the people referred to, met by Merneptah in the course of a Canaanite military campaign, had been in existence for some time. Finally, an excavator of Jericho, John Garstang, placed the destruction of that city at around 1400 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nOther evidence, however, strongly implies not a 15th- but a 13th-century date for the exodus. Many scholars assign a date between 1290 and 1275 BC<\/span> on the basis of that evidence. First, the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1 discussed above may be interpreted as schematically representing 12 generations, as indicated by 1 Chronicles 6:3-8. Thus if 12 generations averaged 25 years instead of 40 years, the reduction of 480 schematized years to 300 actual years would point to an exodus date of around 1266 BC<\/span>. Second, archaeological evidence exists that dates destruction at the assumed sites of several cities conquered by Joshua (Lachish, Debir, Bethel, and Hazor) to the late 13th century. Third, there is no biblical mention of Egyptian military campaigns (such as Merneptah’s 1220 BC<\/span> incursion); Israelites living in Canaan before the time of the militarily active pharaohs Seti I (1319–1301 BC<\/span>) and Ramses II (1301–1234 BC<\/span>) would certainly have been affected by such activity. Fourth, Exodus 1:11 mentions the city of Rameses, the capital built by Ramses II, according to his own inscriptions. A fifth line of argument comes from archaeological conclusions that Transjordan and the Negev Desert were not occupied by sedentary people between 1900 and 1300 BC<\/span>, whereas the Bible states clearly that the Israelites encountered stiff opposition from groups in that same region. Thus, it is argued, the Israelites must have entered that region after 1300 BC<\/span>. Sixth, connecting the Habiru with the Israelites of the Conquest lacks weight because many texts besides the Amarna tablets attest to the existence of Habiru groups virtually all over the ancient Near East. “Habiru” seems to be a much broader term, possibly meaning “trespasser,” and is probably unrelated etymologically or semantically to “Hebrew.” Seventh, and finally, Garstang’s work at Jericho has now been revised by archaeologist Kathleen Kenyon, who showed that the fallen walls that Garstang had dated about 1400 BC<\/span> in reality were destroyed in 1800 BC<\/span> or earlier.<\/p>\nSo far, it has been impossible to decide with precision between the two centuries proposed for the exodus. The majority opinion among OT scholars generally, including a growing number of moderate or conservative scholars, is in favor of the 13th-century option. On the other hand, many other conservative scholars continue to favor the 15th-century date. Dogmatism is unwarranted since problems remain unresolved with either option.<\/p>\nIn accordance with the majority opinion, however, a date of about 1290 BC<\/span> for the exodus will be used in dealing with subsequent problems.<\/p>\nConquest and Consolidation<\/p>\nThe chronological task for the period of conquest and consolidation is to fit all the events narrated by the OT, chiefly in Joshua and Judges, between the exodus (c. 1290 BC<\/span>) and the times of David (c. 1000 BC<\/span>) and Solomon (d. 930 BC<\/span>). In other words, one must fit roughly 550 years of biblical events between Moses and David into a 290-year span.<\/p>\nAlthough assigning an early date for the exodus (c. 1447 BC<\/span>) would make the task somewhat easier, the mere addition of about 157 years does not by itself solve all the problems. Neither date allows enough time for all the OT events from Joshua to David to take place singly and consecutively. Accordingly, advocates of both dates assume that some of the judges ruled simultaneously rather than consecutively. The difference is one of degree only.<\/p>\nThe book of Joshua furnishes most of the OT evidence regarding the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites. Unfortunately, the book of Joshua has no chronological notes that specify the amount of time elapsing during Joshua’s career. Further, there are no biblical references to major contemporary events in other parts of the ancient world, the dates of which could be used to fix the chronology. Rather, in what is obviously a telescoped account, the book of Joshua records the fall of Jericho and Ai, followed closely by a southern and then a northern campaign. After those victories, covering much of the total territory of Canaan, various parcels of land were distributed to the tribal groups of Israel; the tribes were expected to complete the task of destroying whatever Canaanite inhabitants remained in their particular region. One seeks in vain, however, for any statements indicating how long those events took.<\/p>\nIn the book of Judges a slightly different circumstance prevails. There the OT furnishes a rather complete list of figures to indicate the duration of periods of foreign oppression, judgeships, and ensuing peace. The total number of years described for that period is 410, but that total does not include any time for the many “minor” judges. It seems obvious, therefore, that most if not all of the judges were simply local chieftains whose activity was simultaneous with that of other judges, at least for part of their reign. Unfortunately, the book of Judges provides no cross-reference system to indicate which judges were contemporaries of which others. Perhaps the best one can do is to assume general guidelines for the chronology of that period between Moses and David.<\/p>\nTwo significant facts should be kept in mind. First, archaeological information seems to demand a Conquest date beginning about 1250 BC<\/span> rather than 200 years earlier. Assuming concurrent careers for the judges allows one to compress the literal OT figures into the general scheme demanded by other evidence.<\/p>\nSecond, the ancient scribes evidently related the chronology of the period to a 40-year or generation-based schema, a practice that lasted until the time of the divided kingdom, when a regular dynastic chronology was introduced. In the face of so many careers being assigned exactly 40 years, the fact remains that the literal totals of such numbers cannot be harmonized with either the biblical or the archaeological evidence for the period. Accordingly, most scholars doubt that the number 40 was ever intended to be an exact mathematical calculation. That view permits enough leeway for cautious fitting of biblical and other evidence into a general timetable.<\/p>\nThe Monarchy<\/p>\n<h5>Types of Evidence<\/h5>\nFor the period of the Israelite monarchy, chronological evidence is abundant.<\/p>\nThe OT itself strives to provide all the information necessary for the chronology of the period, including (1) a complete list of all the kings in Israel and in Judah both before and after the division of the kingdom; (2) the age of each king (except Saul) at his accession; (3) synchronisms of the northern kingdom of Israel and the southern kingdom of Judah showing in what year of his contemporary in the other kingdom each king came to the throne; and (4) precise calculations of the length of each king’s reign. In addition some important events are dated by reference to another event; others are coordinated with concurrent events in secular history.<\/p>\nOutside the OT an abundance of material provides evidence for a chronology of the period. By far the most important single source is a collection of Assyrian limmu<\/em> lists. In Assyria a record of each king’s reign was kept on a particular kind of annal. Each year of reign was named after an individual of high rank in the court; the first year was named after the king himself, the second after the next highest-ranking official (though that name appears to have been selected by lot originally), and so on, down until the death of the king. The word limmu<\/em> was used to introduce the name of the official after whom the current year was to be named, hence the designation “limmu<\/em> lists.”<\/p>\nAssyrian limmu<\/em> lists are tied precisely to the solar year, making the documents highly reliable. Further, in addition to many events in Assyrian history, notable natural phenomena were dated on the basis of the limmu<\/em> in which they occurred. For example, a solar eclipse dated by the Assyrian scribes in the limmu<\/em> year of Bur-Sagale has been computed astronomically as June 15, 763 BC<\/span>. Beginning with the year 763, then, and working both backward and forward, a complete list of Assyrian limmu<\/em> officials has been obtained for the period between 891 and 648 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nWith the accuracy of the Assyrian limmu<\/em> lists corroborated by a number of sources, they can be used with confidence in reconstructing the chronology of the corresponding period of biblical history. That is especially true where a biblical writer related an Israelite or a Judahite event to a particular year in the reign of an Assyrian king whose limmu<\/em> list indicates the precise years of his reign.<\/p>\nThere are also records from Chaldean (Babylonian) king lists and from later Greek historians. Ptolemy, in the second century AD<\/span>, for example, gave dates for Babylonian kings from 747 BC<\/span> and continued with dates for Persian, Greek, and Roman rulers down to AD<\/span> 161. Finally, useful information is found in inscriptions from monuments, stelae, and other artifacts from Assyria and elsewhere.<\/p>\n<h5>Monarchical Chronology<\/h5>\nThe limmu<\/em> list of the Assyrian king Shalmaneser III provides a basis for the first comparison of dates among Assyria, Israel, and Judah. In the limmu<\/em> of Daian-Assur, Shalmaneser’s sixth year on the throne, Ahab of Israel was listed as one of the kings who fought against the Assyrians in the battle of Qarqar. Thus the date for that battle may be placed confidently in 853 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nAssyrian records also indicate that Shalmaneser III came into contact with an Israelite king 12 years later, in 841 BC<\/span>. That king was Jehu. Thus two fixed points are available for correlating the biblical information. Following the death of Ahab, which is not dated exactly by reference to the Assyrian records, two of his sons came to power. The first, Ahaziah, reigned two years (1 Kgs 22:51); the second, Joram (also called Jehoram), reigned a total of 12 years (2 Kgs 3:1). Recognizing a nonaccession-year reckoning by the Israelites in that era, the apparent total of 14 years may be reduced to an actual total of 12. Thus it seems evident that Ahab not only fought Shalmaneser III in 853 BC<\/span> but also died in that year. Ahab was then followed by his two sons for a total of 12 years before the accession of Jehu in time to account for his contact with Shalmaneser II in 841 BC<\/span>. Further, because Jehu murdered both the king of Israel (Jehoram) and the king of Judah (Ahaziah) at the same time (2 Kgs 9:24-27), a fixed synchronism is provided between the two kingdoms for the year 841 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe first nine kings of Israel ruled an apparent total of 98 years or an actual total (taking into account Israel’s nonaccession-year policy) of 90 years. Zimri, who ruled only seven days (1 Kgs 16:15-18), counts as one of the nine but does not insert an extra year in either the actual or apparent totals. The accession of Jeroboam I thus occurred in 930 BC<\/span> (adding 90 years to 841 BC<\/span>), and Rehoboam of Judah began to rule in that same year as well. Allowing Solomon the 40-year reign indicated in 1 Kings 11:42 points to the year 970 BC<\/span> for his accession. The death of David would also be pinpointed in that period, although allowance must be made for the possibility of a short co-regency of David and Solomon before David’s death. The reign of Saul then falls approximately in the late 11th century BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nIn Judah the period between the death of Solomon in 930 BC<\/span> and the murder of Ahaziah by Jehu in 841 BC<\/span> was occupied by the kingships of six men whose time on the throne totals 95 biblical years. Computation of that era in Judah is not as simple as for the Israelite kings for several reasons. Problems include a change from accession- to nonaccession-year reckoning sometime around 850 BC<\/span>, at least two co-regencies (Jehoshaphat with Asa and then Jehoram with Jehoshaphat), and the calendar differences between the two kingdoms. It is clear that the 95 apparent years must be reduced, on the basis of the differences in computation and calendar, to 90 actual years in order to bring the Judahite figures into line with the established Assyrian and Israelite synchronisms.<\/p>\nAfter the year 841, the next biblical event to be certified by nonbiblical materials is the fall of Samaria in 722 BC<\/span>. That date is furnished by the annals of Sargon II of Assyria (722–705 BC<\/span>), successor to Shalmaneser V (727–722 BC<\/span>). Although that date comes just 120 years after the fixed point of 841 BC<\/span> in Israelite history, the chronological materials for that period are quite difficult to interpret accurately. In the past, scholars resorted to assumptions of extensive co-regencies, to presumed confusion on the part of certain scribes over methods to be followed in computations, or to other theories in attempting to understand the period. In spite of the many difficulties, however, all the biblical and Assyrian dates for the period of the divided monarchy have been harmonized—with the exception of four figures related to the closing years of the Israelite kingdom, all connected in some way with the problematic reign of Hoshea.<\/p>\nJudah after the Fall of Israel<\/p>\nFollowing the fall of Samaria in 722 BC<\/span>, OT chronology is concerned only with the southern kingdom of Judah until its destruction some 135 years later. Two events in the biblical record important for establishing a chronology for that period are the siege of Jerusalem by Sennacherib of Assyria in the late eighth century and the eventual fall of Jerusalem to the Babylonians in the early sixth century.<\/p>\n<h5>Sennacherib’s Invasion of Judah<\/h5>\nThe Assyrian invasion (704–681 BC<\/span>) is recorded in 2 Kings 18:13-16, where verse 13 dates the event to the 14th year of King Hezekiah. Sennacherib’s own inscriptions include a lengthier version of the affair. From them the date of 701 BC<\/span> is established, placing the accession of Hezekiah in 715 BC<\/span>. That much is simple, but problems still arise. For example, 2 Kings 19:9 reports that Sennacherib was in contact with an Ethiopian king, Tirhakah (c. 690–664 BC<\/span>), during the course of his campaign, which included a siege of Jerusalem. Obviously, contact with a ruler who came to power in 690 BC<\/span> at the earliest could not refer to events in 701 BC<\/span>. It is possible, however, that Sennacherib actually made two invasions of Judah, the first in 701 and the second sometime later. The date of that supposed second invasion is not assured, although 2 Kings 19:35-37 may imply that Sennacherib was murdered only shortly after his withdrawal from Jerusalem. Since Sennacherib was succeeded by his son Esarhaddon in the year 681, the presumed second invasion of Judah would have occurred somewhere in the last half of the same decade.<\/p>\nA number of scholars oppose the assumption of a second invasion of Jerusalem by Sennacherib. They suggest the possibility that Tirhakah, though king only from 690 BC<\/span>, may have led troops against Sennacherib as early as 701, before acceding to the throne. The reference to King Tirhakah in 2 Kings 19:9 would then be understood as use of his eventual title in an effort to identify him to a later generation of readers.<\/p>\nHowever the question of the number of invasions is decided, it is certain that Sennacherib invaded Judah in 701 BC<\/span>, the 14th regnal year of Hezekiah. Such a synchronism establishes Hezekiah’s accession year as 715 BC<\/span>, but that date raises another problem. The fall of Samaria, now established at 722, is dated by 2 Kings 18:10 in the sixth year of Hezekiah’s reign. The most likely solution is that Hezekiah began a co-regency with his father, Ahaz, six years before Samaria fell. The possibility for confusion arises from the fact that one verse (2 Kgs 18:13; repeated in Is 36:1) synchronizes Sennacherib’s 701 BC<\/span> invasion with the 14th year of Hezekiah’s independent reign; another verse (2 Kgs 18:10) correlates the fall of Samaria with the beginning of Hezekiah’s co-regency. Thus from about 728 to 715 BC<\/span> Hezekiah was co-regent with Ahaz. From 715 to 697 he reigned alone. From 696 to 686 his son Manasseh was co-ruler with him.<\/p>\nAccording to the chronological information given by a number of verses in 2 Kings, a total of 128 years and six months elapsed between the time of Hezekiah’s accession in 715 and the capture of King Jehoiachin in 597, a date to be discussed below. Thus another problem is to explain the more than 10-year excess apparently demanded by the biblical totals. The best solution appears to lie in the assumption that Manasseh first came to power in 697 as co-regent with his father, Hezekiah. Manasseh died in 642, following what 2 Kings 21:1 states was a 55-year reign. Hezekiah, who came to the throne in 715, is said to have reigned 29 years (2 Kgs 18:2), which would mean that he was king until 686, roughly 11 years after the time when Manasseh must have come to the throne in order to have completed a 55-year reign by 642.<\/p>\n<h5>Fall of Jerusalem<\/h5>\nContemporary Babylonian records are available to shed valuable light on the last few years of Judah’s existence. For the years 626–623, 618–595, and 556 BC<\/span> the Babylonian Chronicle, a formal record of Babylonian affairs of state, has been recovered. From information contained in that chronicle and other cuneiform documents of the period, three dates in Judah’s history may be fixed firmly. The first is the death of Josiah in 609; the second is the battle of Carchemish in 605; the third is the end of the reign of Jehoiachin, which is dated by the Babylonian Chronicle to the second month of Adar in the ninth year of Nebuchadnezzar, or March 16, 597.<\/p>\nAfter Jehoiachin’s capture, Zedekiah became puppet king of Judah for 11 years (2 Kgs 24:18). On the tenth day of the tenth month during Zedekiah’s ninth regnal year (2 Kgs 25:1), the final siege of Jerusalem was begun by the Babylonian army. That day was January 15, 588. On the ninth day of the fourth month during the 11th regnal year of Zedekiah, after a siege of almost 18 months, the wall of Jerusalem was broken through (2 Kgs 25:3-4). The temple was burned on day seven of the following (fifth) month.<\/p>\nBeyond 586 BC<\/span><\/p>\nFollowing the tragedy of 586 BC<\/span>, several further developments are given chronological notice in the OT. Jeremiah 52:30 records a third deportation of Jews to Babylonia in the 23d year of King Nebuchadnezzar (582 or 581 BC<\/span>). Both 2 Kings 25:27 and Jeremiah 52:31 give evidence of the release of King Jehoiachin from prison; the Babylonian Chronicle dates that event at 27 Adar, or March 21, 561 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nIn 539 BC<\/span> the Babylonians themselves were destined to learn the meaning of defeat. In that year a Persian ruler, Cyrus the Great, launched a successful campaign against Babylon and its king, Nabonidus. Inheriting control over the exiled Jews and many other groups of people conquered earlier by Babylonia, Cyrus moved quickly to initiate a policy of tolerance toward his new subjects. In the first year of his rule Cyrus issued an edict making it possible for Jews to return to their former land (Ezr 1:1). On the first day of the following year, 1 Tishri (Ezr 3:6), an altar was set up in Jerusalem. In Iyyar of the following year (April\/May 536) work was begun on the temple itself (Ezr 3:8).<\/p>\nAfter a period of frustrating work stoppages of varying lengths, the preaching of Haggai and Zechariah spurred on the Jews to complete the temple. Work resumed in 520 (Ezr 4:24; Hg 1:1, 15) and was finally completed on 3 Adar, or March 12, 515 (Ezr 6:15). The final stages of OT chronology pertain to the careers of Ezra and Nehemiah. The traditional view of their era places Ezra in the seventh year of Artaxerxes I (458 BC<\/span>) and Nehemiah in the 20th (445 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> “Date” under each OT book; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Diaspora of the Jews; Exodus, The; Israel, History of; Patriarchs, Period of the; Postexilic Period; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (Old Testament)<\/h3>\nBranch of biblical studies that attempts to assign dates and sequences to OT events. Chronology is a science. It deals with evidence, theories, assumptions, and the balance of probabilities. Often it boils down to a matter of choosing among theories that are equally unable to solve all the problems raised by other points of view. OT chronology is an accredited branch of biblical studies primarily because it is essential for understanding the proper historical background of the biblical texts. In general, the chronology of the OT is understood well enough to vindicate the basic accuracy and sequential order of Scripture.<\/p>\nBoth biblical and nonbiblical materials are utilized by students of OT chronology. Biblical data include (1) genealogies showing personal and tribal affiliations among various peoples; (2) specific numbers given by biblical authors to indicate a person’s longevity, a king’s reign, or the duration of a specific event; (3) synchronizing statements that date an event in a specific year of a king’s reign or relate it to a natural phenomenon assumed to be common knowledge at the time of writing (e.g., Am 1:1; Zec 14:5).<\/p>\nFrom the abundance of such chronological passages in the OT, one might conclude that establishment of OT dates and sequences would be a simple procedure. Each of the three kinds of biblical materials, however, exhibits special problems that must be solved first.<\/p>\nNonbiblical materials that shed light on OT chronology are quite numerous, and more are discovered year by year. They include (1) official records of important affairs such as military campaigns from countries like Egypt or Babylonia; (2) official inscriptions that are dedicatory or commemorate a great victory; (3) annals listing major accomplishments of a ruler year by year; (4) ostraca (inscribed pieces of pottery) containing letters, tax transactions and economic records, military dispatches between field leaders and command headquarters, or other information. Ostraca may be dated archaeologically and are often used to supplement the biblical record.<\/p>\nThe chronologist tries to examine the pertinent biblical and nonbiblical information, notes areas of correlation among all the data, and finally establishes a working system into which the most facts can be fitted. New evidence uncovered at any time may necessitate shifts in the present working system. Although the basic structure of biblical chronology seems reasonably firm, many details will no doubt be subject to change as new evidence is discovered.<\/p>\nAs a general rule, the earlier the period, the less certain one can be of one’s dating. In the second millennium BC<\/span>, for example, many dates can be assigned within a range of about 100 years. By the time of David and Solomon (c. 1000 BC<\/span>), the margin of error over which scholars debate is a decade or less. The range narrows as one comes toward the present, so that, with the exception of one or two problem eras, dates accurate to within one or two years are possible by roughly the middle of the ninth century BC<\/span>. Such limitations must be kept in mind in any examination of the major periods of OT history.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Prepatriarchal Period<\/p>\n• From Abraham to Moses<\/p>\n• Conquest and Consolidation<\/p>\n• The Monarchy<\/p>\n• Judah after the Fall of Israel<\/p>\n• Beyond 587 BC<\/span><\/p>\nPrepatriarchal Period<\/p>\n<h5>Biblical Evidence<\/h5>\nIn the first 11 chapters of Genesis are found accounts of the Creation (chs 1–2), the fall (ch 3), Cain and Abel (ch 4), the Flood (chs 6–9), and the Tower of Babel (ch 11). Those events are set within a certain chronological framework.<\/p>\nAccording to Genesis 5, a period of 10 generations elapsed between the Creation and the Flood. Although the individuals listed enjoyed a total life span of a hefty 847 years plus, the total time elapsing between Adam and the Flood was only 1,656 years.<\/p>\nAccording to Genesis 11, another 10 generations elapsed from the time of the Flood until the time of Abraham (at least in the Septuagint, the third-century BC<\/span> Greek translation of the OT; the Hebrew Masoretic text has 9). In that period the average age attained by individuals in the list is 346 years (using a figure of 460 for Arphaxad’s son Cainan, who is included in v 13 of the LXX; cf. Lk 3:36); the total elapsed time from the Flood to Abraham is only 520 years. Taken literally, that would mean that all of Abraham’s ancestors as far back as Noah’s son Shem were still alive at Abraham’s birth, and that a total of only 2,176 years elapsed from the time of Creation to Abraham.<\/p>\n<h5>Interpretation of the Biblical Data<\/h5>\nA literalistic or slavishly mathematical interpretation of the figures, as has appeared in the margin of many kjv<\/span> Bibles, requires a number of assumptions: that no names are omitted from the genealogies, that all the numbers given are consecutive, and especially that numbers used in an ancient biblical source carry the same meaning as that associated with them in the modern Western mind. Each assumption needs serious examination in the light of other established facts.<\/p>\nA cursory reading of other biblical genealogies, for example, reveals that not all the names of a given family were always included. Even Matthew recorded a total of 28 generations (two sets of 14 each) between David and Jesus, and comparison with OT genealogies reveals that Matthew omitted several names. Luke listed a total of 42 generations for the same interval. Omissions are also obvious when one compares the genealogical lists given in 1 Chronicles 1–8 with those recorded earlier in Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Joshua, 1 and 2 Samuel, and 1 and 2 Kings.<\/p>\nFurther, ancient peoples thought of numbers in a schematic or stylized way. Use of numbers among the ancient Near Eastern nations differed sharply from current Western practice. Examples of that practice are known from both biblical and nonbiblical sources. For example, a list of eight Sumerian kings who ruled in the city of Shurruppak before the “great flood” of the Jemdet Nar era (c. 3000 BC<\/span>) assigns each man an average reign of more than 30,000 years. Berossus, a Babylonian priest of Marduk living in the third century BC<\/span>, added two names to the eight found in that earlier list of kings and assigned an average of 43,200 years to each king. Such extraordinarily high numbers provide a perspective for considering the numbers of Genesis.<\/p>\nTherefore, although one can assume that the numbers assigned to the ages of the patriarchs preceding Abraham in Genesis had real meaning for those responsible for their preservation, they should not be employed in a purely literal sense to compute the length of the various generations mentioned in the text. Further, the numbers given in the Septuagint and in the Samaritan Pentateuch, another early version of the Pentateuch, diverge in many details from those of the Hebrew Masoretic Text. That means, among other things, that the Genesis numbers caused problems for even the earliest scholars of Scripture.<\/p>\n<h5>Nonbiblical Evidence<\/h5>\nArchaeology provides no evidence that may be used to date either the Creation or any other account preserved in Genesis 1–11. The Flood is an example that illustrates some of the difficulties. Many claims have been made by persons from a wide variety of backgrounds (scientists, explorers, theologians, and others) to the effect that archaeology has proven the Genesis Flood narrative to be true. Yet no city so far excavated in Palestine and Syria (including some of the oldest towns in the world) shows archaeological evidence of the Flood.<\/p>\nAlthough several cities in Mesopotamia do exhibit evidence of a flood, three factors make it difficult to link that evidence with Genesis 6–9. Each of the flood levels so far discovered dates from a different period. Further, since nearby sites show no evidence of flooding, all of the Mesopotamian flood evidence points to relatively small local floods. Finally, the evidence indicates no great cultural discontinuities of the sort that would result from destruction of an entire population. Thus, it seems that the ancient Mesopotamian floods discovered through archaeological research are of the same kind as the floods that still occur in the Euphrates River valley.<\/p>\nClearly, certain questions one might ask of the Genesis narratives simply cannot be answered. Many who regard the Bible as the Word of God have concluded that the dating of events found in Genesis 1–11 must be less important than the theological truths of salvation, faith, and obedience that these accounts present.<\/p>\n\nFrom Abraham to Moses<\/p>\n<h5>The Patriarchal Age<\/h5>\nThe date of Abraham is still a lively topic among biblical scholars who agree that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were indeed historical persons. Opinions range from an early-date view that estimates that the patriarchal age extended from 2086 to 1871 BC<\/span>, to a late-date view placing Abraham at around 1400 BC<\/span>. Since each position claims to fit the biblical data, a closer look at the two points of view is in order.<\/p>\nMany OT passages seem to support the view that puts Abraham at a comparatively early date. First Kings 6:1 computes 480 years back from the founding of the temple in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign (961 BC<\/span>, according to the early-date view) to the exodus from Egypt, which would then be dated 1441 BC<\/span>. Counting 430 years as the period of the Israelite sojourn in Egypt (see Gn 15:13; Ex 12:40) takes the date back to 1871 BC<\/span>. To that date are added the 215 years demanded by the total of (1) Abraham’s age upon entering Canaan (75 years according to Gn 12:4); (2) 25 additional years before the birth of Isaac (Gn 21:5); (3) 60 more years to the birth of Jacob (Gn 25:26); and (4) the appearance of Jacob before the pharaoh at age 130 (Gn 47:9). Those 215 years added to the previous total give a date of 2086 BC<\/span> for the entrance of Abraham into Canaan and a date of 2161 BC<\/span> for his birth.<\/p>\nSuch a calculation does not use all of the chronological evidence presented in the OT; consequently, the date for Abraham is open to challenge. For example, the 480 years between the exodus and Solomon’s fourth regnal year represent a period of time into which the wilderness wanderings, the career of Joshua and his immediate successors, the period of the judges, Samuel, Saul, and David must all be placed. Although the OT does not specifically say how long were the careers of Joshua, Samuel, or Saul, even a modest reckoning pushes the total years required by all the biblical data together to approximately 600.<\/p>\nIn addition, the length of time to be assigned to the Egyptian sojourn is problematic. The Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint both view the number 430 (in Ex 12:40) as applicable not only to the years in Egypt but to the years of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in Canaan as well. Evidently Paul followed the Septuagint tradition when he dated the giving of the law 430 years later than the time of God’s promise to Abraham (see Gal 3:15-18). That means the Septuagint figure cannot be dismissed lightly.<\/p>\nThe late dating of Abraham (c. 1400 BC<\/span>) is based on two propositions: (1) The picture of patriarchal society portrayed in Genesis most closely parallels that reflected in the cuneiform tablets recovered from Nuzi, a town in northeastern Mesopotamia about 175 miles (282 kilometers) north of Baghdad. (2) Because those tablets must be dated in the 15th and 14th centuries BC<\/span>, the parallel patriarchal age must have fallen within the same general time period.<\/p>\nThose who hold the late-date view are aware that their date for Abraham cannot be equated with the set of numbers on which the early-date view depends. They point to other data, also from the OT. Joseph, who was already a highly placed Egyptian official when Jacob moved to Egypt, lived to be 110 years old (Gn 50:26). Moses was a great-grandson of Levi, Joseph’s older brother. Since Joseph lived to see his own greatgrandchildren born (who would probably be younger than Moses since their great-grandfather was younger than his), the late-date view concludes that Joseph could have been alive when Moses was born. The four-generation genealogy of Moses (Levi-Kohath-Amram-Moses, in Ex 6:16-20; Nm 3:17-19; 26:58-59; 1 Chr 6:1-3) was evidently thought to be complete according to Genesis 15:16, which predicted that Abraham’s descendants would be freed from Egyptian bondage “in the fourth generation.”<\/p>\nHowever, a date of around 1400 BC<\/span> for Abraham cannot be aligned with certain other biblical data, including the long Egyptian sojourn demanded by Genesis 15:13 and Exodus 12:40 and a 40-year (or “one-generation”) wilderness existence. Some normally moderate scholars are forced to reduce the wilderness time to two years in order to maintain their late date for Abraham.<\/p>\nIn short, the late-date theory is consistent with part of the biblical evidence (the genealogies of Moses), but the early-date theory conforms to another part (the actual year figures listed in scattered verses from Genesis and Exodus). The late-date theory holds that the genealogies represent more reliable information in Semitic societies generally, whereas the early-date theory computes years given in the biblical account literally throughout its scheme.<\/p>\nBecause of problems attached to both positions, a large group of scholars take a middle ground in dating the patriarchal age. Archaeologically, they say, Abraham and his life and times fit perfectly within the early second millennium, but imperfectly within any later period. By placing Abraham roughly between 1800 and 1600 BC<\/span>, they provide enough latitude for a merging of all the available evidence, biblical and nonbiblical, into a workable chronological scheme. Archaeology provides four major bits of evidence for an early second-millennium patriarchal era.<\/p>\n1. Though the Nuzi tablets furnish a clear parallel to patriarchal social life, other tablets from other towns and an earlier era reflect many of the same customs common to Nuzi and Genesis. Since the Nuzians were Hurrians who came to northeastern Mesopotamia from elsewhere (perhaps Armenia), their social customs originated no doubt much earlier than the time of their tablets now in our possession. Accordingly, the 15th-century BC<\/span> date of the Nuzi tablets does not preclude an earlier date for Abraham.<\/p>\n<li>2. The names of several of Abraham’s ancestors listed in Genesis 11 can now be identified with towns in the northern area of Mesopotamia around Haran, the city from which Abraham migrated to Canaan (Gn 11:31–12:3). Significantly, Haran flourished in the 19th and 18th centuries BC<\/span>.<\/li>\n<li>3. Shortly after 2000 BC<\/span> Semitic nomads from the desert invaded the civilized communities of the Fertile Crescent. Those invaders, called Amorites in the OT, established themselves in several cities in northern Syria and Mesopotamia. One of the Amorite cities was Babylon, ruled by Hammurabi sometime around the beginning of the 18th century BC<\/span>. Although the King Amraphel of Genesis 14:1 is not linguistically identifiable with the Babylonian king Hammurabi, as earlier scholars believed, the picture of the times following the Amorite invasion still accords well with the Genesis narratives generally.<\/li>\n<li>4. Mari, another Amorite town, is now well known because of more than 20,000 tablets recovered from its royal palace and archives. Geographically, Mari is located in the general area of Haran. Chronologically, the tablets recovered come from the 18th century BC<\/span>. One 18th-century king of Mari, Zimri Lim, carried on extensive correspondence with Hammurabi of Babylon. The tablets from Mari also furnish valuable information about tribal and ethnic groups and their movements in the general region. Of basic importance for dating the Genesis materials are certain documents from Mari that include personal names very similar to Abraham (Abi-ram), Jacob, Laban, and several other West Semitic names.<\/li>\nArchaeological evidence neither proves nor disproves the actual existence of Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob. That is admitted on all sides. What archaeology has done is to provide a framework of probabilities within which the biblical patriarchal narratives appear more and more to be at home.<\/p>\n<h5>Date of the Exodus<\/h5>\nThe problem of dating the patriarchal age is closely related to the problem of assigning a date to the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt. Since the evidence does not permit a precise date for Abraham, a precise date for the entry of Joseph or Jacob into Egypt is likewise unobtainable. Further, the biblical evidence does not yield an exact figure for the length of the Israelite sojourn in Egypt.<\/p>\nFor many years biblical scholars viewed 1 Kings 6:1 as a foundation upon which to build an unshakable date for the exodus. Because Solomon’s fourth year could be unquestionably fixed to within at least a 10-year span (967–958 BC<\/span>), the exodus too could be dated with the same precision simply by adding 480 years. But other biblical data raise serious questions about that simple procedure. When the Bible deals with all the events between the time of the exodus and the founding of Solomon’s temple, that is, from Numbers to 1 Kings 5:18, the precise numbers given total not 480 but closer to 600 years.<\/p>\nBecause the evidence is insufficient to allow a precise date for the exodus, scholarly opinion remains divided between two possibilities. A 15th-century exodus is supported by several pieces of evidence. The chronology in 1 Kings 6:1 appears to be independently corroborated by a passage in Judges 11:26. It claims that Israel had occupied the area around Heshbon for 300 years preceding Jephthah’s own day. If Jephthah is dated at roughly 1100 BC<\/span>, one is obviously led back to an exodus in the middle of the 15th century. Also, three successive generations of pharaohs who ruled in the 16th and 15th centuries produced no male offspring, making it more likely that Moses would have become the foster son of a royal princess during that time; all of the 19th-dynasty kings (1306–1200 BC<\/span>) had legitimate male heirs.<\/p>\nIn addition, a 15th-century date makes possible a connection between the Habiru invasion of Canaan (1400–1350 BC<\/span>)—described in the Amarna letters found at Tell el-Amarna, Egypt—and the invasion of Canaan by the Hebrews described in the OT book of Joshua. Related to that is a reference to “Israel” in the Merneptah Stele, a stone pillar inscribed with the deeds of the Egyptian king, Merneptah, of about 1220 BC<\/span>. It implies that the people referred to, met by Merneptah in the course of a Canaanite military campaign, had been in existence for some time. Finally, an excavator of Jericho, John Garstang, placed the destruction of that city at around 1400 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nOther evidence, however, strongly implies not a 15th- but a 13th-century date for the exodus. Many scholars assign a date between 1290 and 1275 BC<\/span> on the basis of that evidence. First, the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1 discussed above may be interpreted as schematically representing 12 generations, as indicated by 1 Chronicles 6:3-8. Thus if 12 generations averaged 25 years instead of 40 years, the reduction of 480 schematized years to 300 actual years would point to an exodus date of around 1266 BC<\/span>. Second, archaeological evidence exists that dates destruction at the assumed sites of several cities conquered by Joshua (Lachish, Debir, Bethel, and Hazor) to the late 13th century. Third, there is no biblical mention of Egyptian military campaigns (such as Merneptah’s 1220 BC<\/span> incursion); Israelites living in Canaan before the time of the militarily active pharaohs Seti I (1319–1301 BC<\/span>) and Ramses II (1301–1234 BC<\/span>) would certainly have been affected by such activity. Fourth, Exodus 1:11 mentions the city of Rameses, the capital built by Ramses II, according to his own inscriptions. A fifth line of argument comes from archaeological conclusions that Transjordan and the Negev Desert were not occupied by sedentary people between 1900 and 1300 BC<\/span>, whereas the Bible states clearly that the Israelites encountered stiff opposition from groups in that same region. Thus, it is argued, the Israelites must have entered that region after 1300 BC<\/span>. Sixth, connecting the Habiru with the Israelites of the Conquest lacks weight because many texts besides the Amarna tablets attest to the existence of Habiru groups virtually all over the ancient Near East. “Habiru” seems to be a much broader term, possibly meaning “trespasser,” and is probably unrelated etymologically or semantically to “Hebrew.” Seventh, and finally, Garstang’s work at Jericho has now been revised by archaeologist Kathleen Kenyon, who showed that the fallen walls that Garstang had dated about 1400 BC<\/span> in reality were destroyed in 1800 BC<\/span> or earlier.<\/p>\nSo far, it has been impossible to decide with precision between the two centuries proposed for the exodus. The majority opinion among OT scholars generally, including a growing number of moderate or conservative scholars, is in favor of the 13th-century option. On the other hand, many other conservative scholars continue to favor the 15th-century date. Dogmatism is unwarranted since problems remain unresolved with either option.<\/p>\nIn accordance with the majority opinion, however, a date of about 1290 BC<\/span> for the exodus will be used in dealing with subsequent problems.<\/p>\nConquest and Consolidation<\/p>\nThe chronological task for the period of conquest and consolidation is to fit all the events narrated by the OT, chiefly in Joshua and Judges, between the exodus (c. 1290 BC<\/span>) and the times of David (c. 1000 BC<\/span>) and Solomon (d. 930 BC<\/span>). In other words, one must fit roughly 550 years of biblical events between Moses and David into a 290-year span.<\/p>\nAlthough assigning an early date for the exodus (c. 1447 BC<\/span>) would make the task somewhat easier, the mere addition of about 157 years does not by itself solve all the problems. Neither date allows enough time for all the OT events from Joshua to David to take place singly and consecutively. Accordingly, advocates of both dates assume that some of the judges ruled simultaneously rather than consecutively. The difference is one of degree only.<\/p>\nThe book of Joshua furnishes most of the OT evidence regarding the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites. Unfortunately, the book of Joshua has no chronological notes that specify the amount of time elapsing during Joshua’s career. Further, there are no biblical references to major contemporary events in other parts of the ancient world, the dates of which could be used to fix the chronology. Rather, in what is obviously a telescoped account, the book of Joshua records the fall of Jericho and Ai, followed closely by a southern and then a northern campaign. After those victories, covering much of the total territory of Canaan, various parcels of land were distributed to the tribal groups of Israel; the tribes were expected to complete the task of destroying whatever Canaanite inhabitants remained in their particular region. One seeks in vain, however, for any statements indicating how long those events took.<\/p>\nIn the book of Judges a slightly different circumstance prevails. There the OT furnishes a rather complete list of figures to indicate the duration of periods of foreign oppression, judgeships, and ensuing peace. The total number of years described for that period is 410, but that total does not include any time for the many “minor” judges. It seems obvious, therefore, that most if not all of the judges were simply local chieftains whose activity was simultaneous with that of other judges, at least for part of their reign. Unfortunately, the book of Judges provides no cross-reference system to indicate which judges were contemporaries of which others. Perhaps the best one can do is to assume general guidelines for the chronology of that period between Moses and David.<\/p>\nTwo significant facts should be kept in mind. First, archaeological information seems to demand a Conquest date beginning about 1250 BC<\/span> rather than 200 years earlier. Assuming concurrent careers for the judges allows one to compress the literal OT figures into the general scheme demanded by other evidence.<\/p>\nSecond, the ancient scribes evidently related the chronology of the period to a 40-year or generation-based schema, a practice that lasted until the time of the divided kingdom, when a regular dynastic chronology was introduced. In the face of so many careers being assigned exactly 40 years, the fact remains that the literal totals of such numbers cannot be harmonized with either the biblical or the archaeological evidence for the period. Accordingly, most scholars doubt that the number 40 was ever intended to be an exact mathematical calculation. That view permits enough leeway for cautious fitting of biblical and other evidence into a general timetable.<\/p>\nThe Monarchy<\/p>\n<h5>Types of Evidence<\/h5>\nFor the period of the Israelite monarchy, chronological evidence is abundant.<\/p>\nThe OT itself strives to provide all the information necessary for the chronology of the period, including (1) a complete list of all the kings in Israel and in Judah both before and after the division of the kingdom; (2) the age of each king (except Saul) at his accession; (3) synchronisms of the northern kingdom of Israel and the southern kingdom of Judah showing in what year of his contemporary in the other kingdom each king came to the throne; and (4) precise calculations of the length of each king’s reign. In addition some important events are dated by reference to another event; others are coordinated with concurrent events in secular history.<\/p>\nOutside the OT an abundance of material provides evidence for a chronology of the period. By far the most important single source is a collection of Assyrian limmu<\/em> lists. In Assyria a record of each king’s reign was kept on a particular kind of annal. Each year of reign was named after an individual of high rank in the court; the first year was named after the king himself, the second after the next highest-ranking official (though that name appears to have been selected by lot originally), and so on, down until the death of the king. The word limmu<\/em> was used to introduce the name of the official after whom the current year was to be named, hence the designation “limmu<\/em> lists.”<\/p>\nAssyrian limmu<\/em> lists are tied precisely to the solar year, making the documents highly reliable. Further, in addition to many events in Assyrian history, notable natural phenomena were dated on the basis of the limmu<\/em> in which they occurred. For example, a solar eclipse dated by the Assyrian scribes in the limmu<\/em> year of Bur-Sagale has been computed astronomically as June 15, 763 BC<\/span>. Beginning with the year 763, then, and working both backward and forward, a complete list of Assyrian limmu<\/em> officials has been obtained for the period between 891 and 648 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nWith the accuracy of the Assyrian limmu<\/em> lists corroborated by a number of sources, they can be used with confidence in reconstructing the chronology of the corresponding period of biblical history. That is especially true where a biblical writer related an Israelite or a Judahite event to a particular year in the reign of an Assyrian king whose limmu<\/em> list indicates the precise years of his reign.<\/p>\nThere are also records from Chaldean (Babylonian) king lists and from later Greek historians. Ptolemy, in the second century AD<\/span>, for example, gave dates for Babylonian kings from 747 BC<\/span> and continued with dates for Persian, Greek, and Roman rulers down to AD<\/span> 161. Finally, useful information is found in inscriptions from monuments, stelae, and other artifacts from Assyria and elsewhere.<\/p>\n<h5>Monarchical Chronology<\/h5>\nThe limmu<\/em> list of the Assyrian king Shalmaneser III provides a basis for the first comparison of dates among Assyria, Israel, and Judah. In the limmu<\/em> of Daian-Assur, Shalmaneser’s sixth year on the throne, Ahab of Israel was listed as one of the kings who fought against the Assyrians in the battle of Qarqar. Thus the date for that battle may be placed confidently in 853 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nAssyrian records also indicate that Shalmaneser III came into contact with an Israelite king 12 years later, in 841 BC<\/span>. That king was Jehu. Thus two fixed points are available for correlating the biblical information. Following the death of Ahab, which is not dated exactly by reference to the Assyrian records, two of his sons came to power. The first, Ahaziah, reigned two years (1 Kgs 22:51); the second, Joram (also called Jehoram), reigned a total of 12 years (2 Kgs 3:1). Recognizing a nonaccession-year reckoning by the Israelites in that era, the apparent total of 14 years may be reduced to an actual total of 12. Thus it seems evident that Ahab not only fought Shalmaneser III in 853 BC<\/span> but also died in that year. Ahab was then followed by his two sons for a total of 12 years before the accession of Jehu in time to account for his contact with Shalmaneser II in 841 BC<\/span>. Further, because Jehu murdered both the king of Israel (Jehoram) and the king of Judah (Ahaziah) at the same time (2 Kgs 9:24-27), a fixed synchronism is provided between the two kingdoms for the year 841 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe first nine kings of Israel ruled an apparent total of 98 years or an actual total (taking into account Israel’s nonaccession-year policy) of 90 years. Zimri, who ruled only seven days (1 Kgs 16:15-18), counts as one of the nine but does not insert an extra year in either the actual or apparent totals. The accession of Jeroboam I thus occurred in 930 BC<\/span> (adding 90 years to 841 BC<\/span>), and Rehoboam of Judah began to rule in that same year as well. Allowing Solomon the 40-year reign indicated in 1 Kings 11:42 points to the year 970 BC<\/span> for his accession. The death of David would also be pinpointed in that period, although allowance must be made for the possibility of a short co-regency of David and Solomon before David’s death. The reign of Saul then falls approximately in the late 11th century BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nIn Judah the period between the death of Solomon in 930 BC<\/span> and the murder of Ahaziah by Jehu in 841 BC<\/span> was occupied by the kingships of six men whose time on the throne totals 95 biblical years. Computation of that era in Judah is not as simple as for the Israelite kings for several reasons. Problems include a change from accession- to nonaccession-year reckoning sometime around 850 BC<\/span>, at least two co-regencies (Jehoshaphat with Asa and then Jehoram with Jehoshaphat), and the calendar differences between the two kingdoms. It is clear that the 95 apparent years must be reduced, on the basis of the differences in computation and calendar, to 90 actual years in order to bring the Judahite figures into line with the established Assyrian and Israelite synchronisms.<\/p>\nAfter the year 841, the next biblical event to be certified by nonbiblical materials is the fall of Samaria in 722 BC<\/span>. That date is furnished by the annals of Sargon II of Assyria (722–705 BC<\/span>), successor to Shalmaneser V (727–722 BC<\/span>). Although that date comes just 120 years after the fixed point of 841 BC<\/span> in Israelite history, the chronological materials for that period are quite difficult to interpret accurately. In the past, scholars resorted to assumptions of extensive co-regencies, to presumed confusion on the part of certain scribes over methods to be followed in computations, or to other theories in attempting to understand the period. In spite of the many difficulties, however, all the biblical and Assyrian dates for the period of the divided monarchy have been harmonized—with the exception of four figures related to the closing years of the Israelite kingdom, all connected in some way with the problematic reign of Hoshea.<\/p>\nJudah after the Fall of Israel<\/p>\nFollowing the fall of Samaria in 722 BC<\/span>, OT chronology is concerned only with the southern kingdom of Judah until its destruction some 135 years later. Two events in the biblical record important for establishing a chronology for that period are the siege of Jerusalem by Sennacherib of Assyria in the late eighth century and the eventual fall of Jerusalem to the Babylonians in the early sixth century.<\/p>\n<h5>Sennacherib’s Invasion of Judah<\/h5>\nThe Assyrian invasion (704–681 BC<\/span>) is recorded in 2 Kings 18:13-16, where verse 13 dates the event to the 14th year of King Hezekiah. Sennacherib’s own inscriptions include a lengthier version of the affair. From them the date of 701 BC<\/span> is established, placing the accession of Hezekiah in 715 BC<\/span>. That much is simple, but problems still arise. For example, 2 Kings 19:9 reports that Sennacherib was in contact with an Ethiopian king, Tirhakah (c. 690–664 BC<\/span>), during the course of his campaign, which included a siege of Jerusalem. Obviously, contact with a ruler who came to power in 690 BC<\/span> at the earliest could not refer to events in 701 BC<\/span>. It is possible, however, that Sennacherib actually made two invasions of Judah, the first in 701 and the second sometime later. The date of that supposed second invasion is not assured, although 2 Kings 19:35-37 may imply that Sennacherib was murdered only shortly after his withdrawal from Jerusalem. Since Sennacherib was succeeded by his son Esarhaddon in the year 681, the presumed second invasion of Judah would have occurred somewhere in the last half of the same decade.<\/p>\nA number of scholars oppose the assumption of a second invasion of Jerusalem by Sennacherib. They suggest the possibility that Tirhakah, though king only from 690 BC<\/span>, may have led troops against Sennacherib as early as 701, before acceding to the throne. The reference to King Tirhakah in 2 Kings 19:9 would then be understood as use of his eventual title in an effort to identify him to a later generation of readers.<\/p>\nHowever the question of the number of invasions is decided, it is certain that Sennacherib invaded Judah in 701 BC<\/span>, the 14th regnal year of Hezekiah. Such a synchronism establishes Hezekiah’s accession year as 715 BC<\/span>, but that date raises another problem. The fall of Samaria, now established at 722, is dated by 2 Kings 18:10 in the sixth year of Hezekiah’s reign. The most likely solution is that Hezekiah began a co-regency with his father, Ahaz, six years before Samaria fell. The possibility for confusion arises from the fact that one verse (2 Kgs 18:13; repeated in Is 36:1) synchronizes Sennacherib’s 701 BC<\/span> invasion with the 14th year of Hezekiah’s independent reign; another verse (2 Kgs 18:10) correlates the fall of Samaria with the beginning of Hezekiah’s co-regency. Thus from about 728 to 715 BC<\/span> Hezekiah was co-regent with Ahaz. From 715 to 697 he reigned alone. From 696 to 686 his son Manasseh was co-ruler with him.<\/p>\nAccording to the chronological information given by a number of verses in 2 Kings, a total of 128 years and six months elapsed between the time of Hezekiah’s accession in 715 and the capture of King Jehoiachin in 597, a date to be discussed below. Thus another problem is to explain the more than 10-year excess apparently demanded by the biblical totals. The best solution appears to lie in the assumption that Manasseh first came to power in 697 as co-regent with his father, Hezekiah. Manasseh died in 642, following what 2 Kings 21:1 states was a 55-year reign. Hezekiah, who came to the throne in 715, is said to have reigned 29 years (2 Kgs 18:2), which would mean that he was king until 686, roughly 11 years after the time when Manasseh must have come to the throne in order to have completed a 55-year reign by 642.<\/p>\n<h5>Fall of Jerusalem<\/h5>\nContemporary Babylonian records are available to shed valuable light on the last few years of Judah’s existence. For the years 626–623, 618–595, and 556 BC<\/span> the Babylonian Chronicle, a formal record of Babylonian affairs of state, has been recovered. From information contained in that chronicle and other cuneiform documents of the period, three dates in Judah’s history may be fixed firmly. The first is the death of Josiah in 609; the second is the battle of Carchemish in 605; the third is the end of the reign of Jehoiachin, which is dated by the Babylonian Chronicle to the second month of Adar in the ninth year of Nebuchadnezzar, or March 16, 597.<\/p>\nAfter Jehoiachin’s capture, Zedekiah became puppet king of Judah for 11 years (2 Kgs 24:18). On the tenth day of the tenth month during Zedekiah’s ninth regnal year (2 Kgs 25:1), the final siege of Jerusalem was begun by the Babylonian army. That day was January 15, 588. On the ninth day of the fourth month during the 11th regnal year of Zedekiah, after a siege of almost 18 months, the wall of Jerusalem was broken through (2 Kgs 25:3-4). The temple was burned on day seven of the following (fifth) month.<\/p>\nBeyond 586 BC<\/span><\/p>\nFollowing the tragedy of 586 BC<\/span>, several further developments are given chronological notice in the OT. Jeremiah 52:30 records a third deportation of Jews to Babylonia in the 23d year of King Nebuchadnezzar (582 or 581 BC<\/span>). Both 2 Kings 25:27 and Jeremiah 52:31 give evidence of the release of King Jehoiachin from prison; the Babylonian Chronicle dates that event at 27 Adar, or March 21, 561 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nIn 539 BC<\/span> the Babylonians themselves were destined to learn the meaning of defeat. In that year a Persian ruler, Cyrus the Great, launched a successful campaign against Babylon and its king, Nabonidus. Inheriting control over the exiled Jews and many other groups of people conquered earlier by Babylonia, Cyrus moved quickly to initiate a policy of tolerance toward his new subjects. In the first year of his rule Cyrus issued an edict making it possible for Jews to return to their former land (Ezr 1:1). On the first day of the following year, 1 Tishri (Ezr 3:6), an altar was set up in Jerusalem. In Iyyar of the following year (April\/May 536) work was begun on the temple itself (Ezr 3:8).<\/p>\nAfter a period of frustrating work stoppages of varying lengths, the preaching of Haggai and Zechariah spurred on the Jews to complete the temple. Work resumed in 520 (Ezr 4:24; Hg 1:1, 15) and was finally completed on 3 Adar, or March 12, 515 (Ezr 6:15). The final stages of OT chronology pertain to the careers of Ezra and Nehemiah. The traditional view of their era places Ezra in the seventh year of Artaxerxes I (458 BC<\/span>) and Nehemiah in the 20th (445 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> “Date” under each OT book; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Diaspora of the Jews; Exodus, The; Israel, History of; Patriarchs, Period of the; Postexilic Period; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (Old Testament) Branch of biblical studies that attempts to assign dates and sequences to OT events. Chronology is a science. It deals with evidence, theories, assumptions, and the balance of probabilities. Often it boils down to a matter of choosing among theories that are equally unable to solve all the problems raised by other points of view. OT chronology is an accredited branch of biblical studies primarily because it is essential for understanding the proper his...","summary_en":"CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (Old Testament) Branch of biblical studies that attempts to assign dates and sequences to OT events. Chronology is a science. It deals with evidence, theories, assumptions, and the balance of probabilities. Often it boils down to a matter of choosing among theories that are equally unable to solve all the problems raised by other points of view. OT chronology is an accredited branch of biblical studies primarily because it is essential for understanding the proper his...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":8436,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Cylinder*, Cyrus","title_en":"Cylinder*, Cyrus","content_ro":"<h3>CYRUS CYLINDER*<\/h3>\nBaked clay barrel nine inches (22.9 centimeters) long inscribed in cuneiform, found by archaeologist Hormuzd Rassam during his excavations at Babylon (1879–82). Now in the British Museum, London, the inscription was written by Cyrus the Great (who founded the Persian Empire and ruled it 539–530 BC<\/span>) as an effort to describe and justify his policies. The largely intact text is about 1,000 words in translation and dates from about 536 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nCyrus began his text with an attack on Nabonidus (last ruler of the Neo-Babylonian Empire, father of and co-regent with Belshazzar). He described Nabonidus as a “weakling” who had removed the images of the gods from their temples and had forsaken the proper worship of Marduk, chief of the Babylonian family of gods. To make matters worse, Nabonidus had also required his subjects to labor on a variety of public works projects.<\/p>\nHistorians now believe that Nabonidus had turned from the worship of Marduk to that of Sin, the moon god with great centers of worship at Ur and Haran. Before the fall of Babylon, Nabonidus had tried to transport many of the gods of the Babylonian cities to the capital. Such tampering with the empire’s religion had won Nabonidus the undying hostility of powerful entrenched religious interests and of much of the general populace.<\/p>\nCyrus continued the cylinder inscription with an observation that Marduk had heard the complaints of the gods and sought for a righteous ruler. His search led him to Cyrus, a man of “good deeds” and “upright heart.” The god subjected many lands to Cyrus and ordered him to march against Babylon, “going at his side like a real friend.” The result was that Cyrus took the capital without a fight, and Marduk delivered Nabonidus into Cyrus’s hands. According to Greek sources, Nabonidus’s life was spared. Moreover, the entire populace of Babylonia rejoiced over Cyrus’s kingship, delighted that they had been spared damage and disaster.<\/p>\nNext, Cyrus spoke of his lineage in order to show that he was from an established line of kingship in Anshan, a region east of the head of the Persian Gulf. Moreover, the Babylonian gods Bel and Nebo delighted in him. Perhaps Cyrus felt it necessary to make that statement because he had usurped the throne of the Median Empire (of which Anshan was a part) and had taken the Neo-Babylonian Empire by force.<\/p>\nHaving spoken of his legitimate right to rule, Cyrus described his reception by the populace, his faithfulness in worshiping Marduk his benefactor, and his beneficent treatment of his subjects. His beneficence included strict control over his troops to prevent acts of terror against the newly conquered subjects, maintenance of peace in the cities of Babylonia, abolition of the hated public works detail, and development of public housing projects. Cyrus saw Marduk as pleased with his deeds and bestowing favor on Cyrus, his son Cambyses, and his troops. Moreover, princes from all over the empire came to Babylon to pay homage and bring tribute.<\/p>\nThe next section of the inscription relates to the Jews and to a significant part of biblical history. Cyrus decided to reverse the deportation policy of the Babylonians and of the Assyrians before them. He permitted all the captive peoples who had been uprooted to return to their ancestral homes. He also returned the images of the gods to their former sanctuaries and helped the various groups to rebuild the temples of their gods. Thus it is clear that Ezra’s decree permitting the Jews to return to Palestine (Ezr 1) was not a result of Cyrus’s conversion to faith in the God of Israel, but only part of a larger public policy. Presumably each of the subjected peoples had its own decree of rehabilitation.<\/p>\nIn the last paragraph of his text he asked all the resettled gods to intercede with Bel and Nebo for long life for him and to commend him to Marduk. Cyrus obviously thought that grateful priests and worshipers who were praying for him would be loyal subjects. Thus important sources of disaffection would be removed.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cyrus the Great.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CYRUS CYLINDER*<\/h3>\nBaked clay barrel nine inches (22.9 centimeters) long inscribed in cuneiform, found by archaeologist Hormuzd Rassam during his excavations at Babylon (1879–82). Now in the British Museum, London, the inscription was written by Cyrus the Great (who founded the Persian Empire and ruled it 539–530 BC<\/span>) as an effort to describe and justify his policies. The largely intact text is about 1,000 words in translation and dates from about 536 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nCyrus began his text with an attack on Nabonidus (last ruler of the Neo-Babylonian Empire, father of and co-regent with Belshazzar). He described Nabonidus as a “weakling” who had removed the images of the gods from their temples and had forsaken the proper worship of Marduk, chief of the Babylonian family of gods. To make matters worse, Nabonidus had also required his subjects to labor on a variety of public works projects.<\/p>\nHistorians now believe that Nabonidus had turned from the worship of Marduk to that of Sin, the moon god with great centers of worship at Ur and Haran. Before the fall of Babylon, Nabonidus had tried to transport many of the gods of the Babylonian cities to the capital. Such tampering with the empire’s religion had won Nabonidus the undying hostility of powerful entrenched religious interests and of much of the general populace.<\/p>\nCyrus continued the cylinder inscription with an observation that Marduk had heard the complaints of the gods and sought for a righteous ruler. His search led him to Cyrus, a man of “good deeds” and “upright heart.” The god subjected many lands to Cyrus and ordered him to march against Babylon, “going at his side like a real friend.” The result was that Cyrus took the capital without a fight, and Marduk delivered Nabonidus into Cyrus’s hands. According to Greek sources, Nabonidus’s life was spared. Moreover, the entire populace of Babylonia rejoiced over Cyrus’s kingship, delighted that they had been spared damage and disaster.<\/p>\nNext, Cyrus spoke of his lineage in order to show that he was from an established line of kingship in Anshan, a region east of the head of the Persian Gulf. Moreover, the Babylonian gods Bel and Nebo delighted in him. Perhaps Cyrus felt it necessary to make that statement because he had usurped the throne of the Median Empire (of which Anshan was a part) and had taken the Neo-Babylonian Empire by force.<\/p>\nHaving spoken of his legitimate right to rule, Cyrus described his reception by the populace, his faithfulness in worshiping Marduk his benefactor, and his beneficent treatment of his subjects. His beneficence included strict control over his troops to prevent acts of terror against the newly conquered subjects, maintenance of peace in the cities of Babylonia, abolition of the hated public works detail, and development of public housing projects. Cyrus saw Marduk as pleased with his deeds and bestowing favor on Cyrus, his son Cambyses, and his troops. Moreover, princes from all over the empire came to Babylon to pay homage and bring tribute.<\/p>\nThe next section of the inscription relates to the Jews and to a significant part of biblical history. Cyrus decided to reverse the deportation policy of the Babylonians and of the Assyrians before them. He permitted all the captive peoples who had been uprooted to return to their ancestral homes. He also returned the images of the gods to their former sanctuaries and helped the various groups to rebuild the temples of their gods. Thus it is clear that Ezra’s decree permitting the Jews to return to Palestine (Ezr 1) was not a result of Cyrus’s conversion to faith in the God of Israel, but only part of a larger public policy. Presumably each of the subjected peoples had its own decree of rehabilitation.<\/p>\nIn the last paragraph of his text he asked all the resettled gods to intercede with Bel and Nebo for long life for him and to commend him to Marduk. Cyrus obviously thought that grateful priests and worshipers who were praying for him would be loyal subjects. Thus important sources of disaffection would be removed.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cyrus the Great.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CYRUS CYLINDER* Baked clay barrel nine inches (22.9 centimeters) long inscribed in cuneiform, found by archaeologist Hormuzd Rassam during his excavations at Babylon (1879–82). Now in the British Museum, London, the inscription was written by Cyrus the Great (who founded the Persian Empire and ruled it 539–530 BC) as an effort to describe and justify his policies. The largely intact text is about 1,000 words in translation and dates from about 536 BC. Cyrus began his text with an attack on Na...","summary_en":"CYRUS CYLINDER* Baked clay barrel nine inches (22.9 centimeters) long inscribed in cuneiform, found by archaeologist Hormuzd Rassam during his excavations at Babylon (1879–82). Now in the British Museum, London, the inscription was written by Cyrus the Great (who founded the Persian Empire and ruled it 539–530 BC) as an effort to describe and justify his policies. The largely intact text is about 1,000 words in translation and dates from about 536 BC. Cyrus began his text with an attack on Na...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":8440,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Great*, Cyrus","title_en":"the Great*, Cyrus","content_ro":"<h3>CYRUS THE GREAT*<\/h3>\nPersian king (559–530 BC<\/span>) who founded the Achaemenid dynasty and the Persian Empire. Cyrus (II) was the son of Cambyses I (600–599 BC<\/span>), who ruled the unified territories of Parshumash-anshan and Parsa. Cyrus’s mother was Mandane, daughter of the Median king Astyages (585?–550 BC<\/span>). The ancestor of the dynasty was Achaemenes. Cyrus succeeded his father and established himself in Pasargadae about 559 BC<\/span>. Ambitious and daring, he aligned his kingdom with neighboring peoples and tribes into a solid block of Persian power, then revolted against Astyages of Media. When it became evident that Cyrus would win in the struggle to control Media, the troops of Astyages mutinied and deserted to Cyrus. When Cyrus conquered the Median kingdom, however, he came into conflict with Babylon, since the two kingdoms claimed much of the same territory.<\/p>\nCyrus consolidated his power before fighting with Babylon. First, he conquered Asia Minor. Wealthy King Croesus of Lydia and the Lydians submitted to him. Then he overran the northern mountainous region between the Caspian Sea and the northwest corner of India.<\/p>\nBy 539 BC<\/span>, Cyrus was ready to move against Babylon. The Babylonian governor of Elam defected to Cyrus and joined his army. With a minimum of opposition, the armies of Cyrus entered the Babylonian capital in 539 BC<\/span>. Nabonidus was taken prisoner but was treated with respect and mercy. Sixteen days later Cyrus himself entered the city, to the acclaim of many of its inhabitants.<\/p>\nIsaiah’s prophecy spoke of Cyrus as the Lord’s anointed (Is 45:1). Israel regarded him as called and empowered by their God to free them. Under Cyrus, the Jews were allowed to rebuild Jerusalem and its temple (44:28). Documents preserved in the OT state that in his first year in Babylon, Cyrus issued a decree permitting the reconstruction of the house of God at Jerusalem (2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezr 1:1-3; 6:2-5). He also returned sacred vessels taken from the temple by Nebuchadnezzar. Biblical descriptions of the decree say nothing about rebuilding the city, but that would be in harmony with the king’s policy.<\/p>\nDuring excavations (1879–82) at Babylon, archaeologist Hormuzd Rassam discovered a clay barrel inscription on which Cyrus told of taking the city and of his resulting policies. Isaiah and Chronicles reflect the content of the inscription, which says that captured peoples were allowed to return home and build sanctuaries to their own gods.<\/p>\nNothing is known about the death of Cyrus. Accounts that have been preserved make it clear that he was killed in battle, but the statements are conflicting. Probably the Greek historian Herodotus is right in indicating that Cyrus died in a terrible disaster that destroyed the Persian army fighting the Massagetae. The tomb of Cyrus can still be seen at Pasargadae in Iran.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cyrus Cylinder; Persia, Persians.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CYRUS THE GREAT*<\/h3>\nPersian king (559–530 BC<\/span>) who founded the Achaemenid dynasty and the Persian Empire. Cyrus (II) was the son of Cambyses I (600–599 BC<\/span>), who ruled the unified territories of Parshumash-anshan and Parsa. Cyrus’s mother was Mandane, daughter of the Median king Astyages (585?–550 BC<\/span>). The ancestor of the dynasty was Achaemenes. Cyrus succeeded his father and established himself in Pasargadae about 559 BC<\/span>. Ambitious and daring, he aligned his kingdom with neighboring peoples and tribes into a solid block of Persian power, then revolted against Astyages of Media. When it became evident that Cyrus would win in the struggle to control Media, the troops of Astyages mutinied and deserted to Cyrus. When Cyrus conquered the Median kingdom, however, he came into conflict with Babylon, since the two kingdoms claimed much of the same territory.<\/p>\nCyrus consolidated his power before fighting with Babylon. First, he conquered Asia Minor. Wealthy King Croesus of Lydia and the Lydians submitted to him. Then he overran the northern mountainous region between the Caspian Sea and the northwest corner of India.<\/p>\nBy 539 BC<\/span>, Cyrus was ready to move against Babylon. The Babylonian governor of Elam defected to Cyrus and joined his army. With a minimum of opposition, the armies of Cyrus entered the Babylonian capital in 539 BC<\/span>. Nabonidus was taken prisoner but was treated with respect and mercy. Sixteen days later Cyrus himself entered the city, to the acclaim of many of its inhabitants.<\/p>\nIsaiah’s prophecy spoke of Cyrus as the Lord’s anointed (Is 45:1). Israel regarded him as called and empowered by their God to free them. Under Cyrus, the Jews were allowed to rebuild Jerusalem and its temple (44:28). Documents preserved in the OT state that in his first year in Babylon, Cyrus issued a decree permitting the reconstruction of the house of God at Jerusalem (2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezr 1:1-3; 6:2-5). He also returned sacred vessels taken from the temple by Nebuchadnezzar. Biblical descriptions of the decree say nothing about rebuilding the city, but that would be in harmony with the king’s policy.<\/p>\nDuring excavations (1879–82) at Babylon, archaeologist Hormuzd Rassam discovered a clay barrel inscription on which Cyrus told of taking the city and of his resulting policies. Isaiah and Chronicles reflect the content of the inscription, which says that captured peoples were allowed to return home and build sanctuaries to their own gods.<\/p>\nNothing is known about the death of Cyrus. Accounts that have been preserved make it clear that he was killed in battle, but the statements are conflicting. Probably the Greek historian Herodotus is right in indicating that Cyrus died in a terrible disaster that destroyed the Persian army fighting the Massagetae. The tomb of Cyrus can still be seen at Pasargadae in Iran.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cyrus Cylinder; Persia, Persians.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CYRUS THE GREAT* Persian king (559–530 BC) who founded the Achaemenid dynasty and the Persian Empire. Cyrus (II) was the son of Cambyses I (600–599 BC), who ruled the unified territories of Parshumash-anshan and Parsa. Cyrus’s mother was Mandane, daughter of the Median king Astyages (585?–550 BC). The ancestor of the dynasty was Achaemenes. Cyrus succeeded his father and established himself in Pasargadae about 559 BC. Ambitious and daring, he aligned his kingdom with neighboring peoples and t...","summary_en":"CYRUS THE GREAT* Persian king (559–530 BC) who founded the Achaemenid dynasty and the Persian Empire. Cyrus (II) was the son of Cambyses I (600–599 BC), who ruled the unified territories of Parshumash-anshan and Parsa. Cyrus’s mother was Mandane, daughter of the Median king Astyages (585?–550 BC). The ancestor of the dynasty was Achaemenes. Cyrus succeeded his father and established himself in Pasargadae about 559 BC. Ambitious and daring, he aligned his kingdom with neighboring peoples and t...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":10253,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Elamites Elam (Place)","title_en":"Elamites Elam (Place)","content_ro":"<h3>ELAM (Place), ELAMITES<\/h3>\nOccupying an area roughly the size of Denmark, Elam was located in southwest Asia, east of Babylonia and north of the Persian Gulf, on a plain known to the Iranians since the Middle Ages as Khuzistan. The region today corresponds to southwest Iran. Mountainous areas to the north and east, known as the Anshan range, formed a peripheral part of Elam. The land’s fertility was linked to several waterways, the most significant of which—the Karkheh—forms Elam’s western boundary.<\/p>\nA people with a culture and history spanning more than 2,000 years, the Elamites seem to have lived in constant strife with the Sumerians, Babylonians, Assyrians, and finally the Persians, by whom they were absorbed. As a race, the Elamites were a mixture of dark-skinned aboriginals of questionable origin and Semites who had spilled over into the land from Mesopotamia.<\/p>\nWestern civilization would know virtually nothing of Elam were it not for the biblical witness. Elam is mentioned in conjunction with Shem’s progeny (Gn 10:22), and in the book of Acts it is reported that among the Israelites present in Jerusalem for the Feast of Pentecost were some from the old area of Elam (Acts 2:9). Isaiah prophesied that the Jews carried away in the Babylonian exile would return from such places as Elam (Is 11:11); however, these were most likely Aramaic-speaking Jews who had decided not to return to their homeland following the repatriation edict of Cyrus of Persia (Ezr 1:1-4). The name Kedorlaomer, king of Elam (Gn 14:1), is demonstrably an authentic Elamite name, thereby lending additional support to the accuracy of the historical narrative in Genesis. Daniel’s vision at Shushan in the province of Elam (Dn 8:2) reveals precise knowledge of the geography of the area and its waterways. In such accounts the Bible shows itself to be a valuable adjunct to extrabiblical literature for the history of the ancient Near East.<\/p>\nIn the eighth century BC<\/span>, Isaiah summoned Elam to participate in the shattering of Babylon as an act of the Lord’s judgment (Is 21:2); there is little information, however, about Elam’s role in the overthrow of Babylon in 540 BC<\/span>. Elam, with other rebellious nations, would eventually experience the cup of God’s wrath (Jer 25:15-26). Even its world-renowned archers would prove no match for the Lord of hosts (Is 22:6-12; Jer 49:35; Ez 32:24). Ezekiel’s dirge over Elam dramatically illustrates the horror of a godless grave (Ez 32:24-25). Jeremiah warns the Elamites that they cannot escape the judgment of God, made certain by the presence of his throne among them (Jer 49:38). Yet Elam’s destruction, though politically complete in Persia’s conquest, would not be altogether irremediable (v 39). Though its dislocation would rival those of its contemporaries, Jeremiah spoke of a time when God would extend mercy to descendants of the Elamites. Such an expectance, following the phrase, “in the latter days,” may point to the messianic age. The prophet may well have envisioned that momentous Day of Pentecost, when many from Elam would be among those in Jerusalem upon whom the Spirit of the Lord fell.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ELAM (Place), ELAMITES<\/h3>\nOccupying an area roughly the size of Denmark, Elam was located in southwest Asia, east of Babylonia and north of the Persian Gulf, on a plain known to the Iranians since the Middle Ages as Khuzistan. The region today corresponds to southwest Iran. Mountainous areas to the north and east, known as the Anshan range, formed a peripheral part of Elam. The land’s fertility was linked to several waterways, the most significant of which—the Karkheh—forms Elam’s western boundary.<\/p>\nA people with a culture and history spanning more than 2,000 years, the Elamites seem to have lived in constant strife with the Sumerians, Babylonians, Assyrians, and finally the Persians, by whom they were absorbed. As a race, the Elamites were a mixture of dark-skinned aboriginals of questionable origin and Semites who had spilled over into the land from Mesopotamia.<\/p>\nWestern civilization would know virtually nothing of Elam were it not for the biblical witness. Elam is mentioned in conjunction with Shem’s progeny (Gn 10:22), and in the book of Acts it is reported that among the Israelites present in Jerusalem for the Feast of Pentecost were some from the old area of Elam (Acts 2:9). Isaiah prophesied that the Jews carried away in the Babylonian exile would return from such places as Elam (Is 11:11); however, these were most likely Aramaic-speaking Jews who had decided not to return to their homeland following the repatriation edict of Cyrus of Persia (Ezr 1:1-4). The name Kedorlaomer, king of Elam (Gn 14:1), is demonstrably an authentic Elamite name, thereby lending additional support to the accuracy of the historical narrative in Genesis. Daniel’s vision at Shushan in the province of Elam (Dn 8:2) reveals precise knowledge of the geography of the area and its waterways. In such accounts the Bible shows itself to be a valuable adjunct to extrabiblical literature for the history of the ancient Near East.<\/p>\nIn the eighth century BC<\/span>, Isaiah summoned Elam to participate in the shattering of Babylon as an act of the Lord’s judgment (Is 21:2); there is little information, however, about Elam’s role in the overthrow of Babylon in 540 BC<\/span>. Elam, with other rebellious nations, would eventually experience the cup of God’s wrath (Jer 25:15-26). Even its world-renowned archers would prove no match for the Lord of hosts (Is 22:6-12; Jer 49:35; Ez 32:24). Ezekiel’s dirge over Elam dramatically illustrates the horror of a godless grave (Ez 32:24-25). Jeremiah warns the Elamites that they cannot escape the judgment of God, made certain by the presence of his throne among them (Jer 49:38). Yet Elam’s destruction, though politically complete in Persia’s conquest, would not be altogether irremediable (v 39). Though its dislocation would rival those of its contemporaries, Jeremiah spoke of a time when God would extend mercy to descendants of the Elamites. Such an expectance, following the phrase, “in the latter days,” may point to the messianic age. The prophet may well have envisioned that momentous Day of Pentecost, when many from Elam would be among those in Jerusalem upon whom the Spirit of the Lord fell.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ELAM (Place), ELAMITES Occupying an area roughly the size of Denmark, Elam was located in southwest Asia, east of Babylonia and north of the Persian Gulf, on a plain known to the Iranians since the Middle Ages as Khuzistan. The region today corresponds to southwest Iran. Mountainous areas to the north and east, known as the Anshan range, formed a peripheral part of Elam. The land’s fertility was linked to several waterways, the most significant of which—the Karkheh—forms Elam’s western bounda...","summary_en":"ELAM (Place), ELAMITES Occupying an area roughly the size of Denmark, Elam was located in southwest Asia, east of Babylonia and north of the Persian Gulf, on a plain known to the Iranians since the Middle Ages as Khuzistan. The region today corresponds to southwest Iran. Mountainous areas to the north and east, known as the Anshan range, formed a peripheral part of Elam. The land’s fertility was linked to several waterways, the most significant of which—the Karkheh—forms Elam’s western bounda...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11068,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"First Book of Esdras","title_en":"First Book of Esdras","content_ro":"<h3>ESDRAS, First Book of<\/h3>\nBook that is largely a compilation of material from 2 Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author and Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor and Date<\/p>\nThe author or compiler of 1 Esdras is unknown, and scholars disagree about its origin. Three theories seem to summarize the critical debate. Some think that 1 Esdras might be the original Septuagint (ancient Greek Old Testament) version, and that canonical Ezra and Nehemiah reflect the translation and editing of Theodotion, a second-century AD<\/span> reviser of the Septuagint. Others speculate that 1 Esdras goes back to a now-lost Hebrew text outside the Masoretic Hebrew Text tradition. Most scholars, however, think that 1 Esdras is probably an edited compilation taken from the Septuagint translation of 2 Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah.<\/p>\nEsdras (or Ezra, the spelling most familiar to American Protestants) was a descendant of Aaron’s priestly line and one of those (like Nehemiah and Zerubbabel) who led parties of exiled Jews back to Judea from Babylon. His ministry of leadership, and preservation and promulgation of the law, probably can be dated to the latter part of Persian king Artaxerxes I Longimanus’s reign (465–424 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nIt is certain that 1 Esdras was written before AD<\/span> 90 because first-century Jewish historian Josephus quoted from it. The best date for 1 Esdras is probably around 150–100 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nThere are four books about Ezra and the history of the postexilic restoration of the Jews in Judea. Two of those books, titled Ezra and Nehemiah in Protestant versions of the Bible, are accepted as canonical by Jews, Roman Catholics, and Protestants alike. The other two books, 1 Esdras and 2 Esdras, were not included in the Hebrew canon of the OT by Jews or by Protestants, who followed Hebrew tradition in identifying the books of the OT. The two Esdras books were included in the Latin Vulgate Bible (a translation from the Hebrew by biblical scholar Jerome completed in AD<\/span> 404), and when the Roman Catholic Council of Trent (1545–1663) defined the apocryphal books that would be recognized by Catholics as part of the OT Scriptures, 1 and 2 Esdras were included. In the Vulgate, 1 Esdras is called 3 Esdras; Ezra and Nehemiah there are named 1 Esdras and 2 Esdras, respectively.<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nFirst Esdras is a history of the Jews from the reign of King Josiah in Jerusalem (640–609 BC<\/span>) through the postexilic ministry of Ezra, accentuating the career of Ezra and deletes all mention of Nehemiah. Originally written in idiomatic Greek, 1 Esdras retells the material found in 2 Chronicles 35:1–36:23, Ezra 1:1–10:44 (excluding 4:6 and placing 4:7-24 before 2:1), and Nehemiah 7:73–8:12. Esdras contains two sections of material, one minor (1:23-24) and the other major, not found in the canonical records. The major addition (3:1–4:63) is a story about three youths who are bodyguards or pages of Darius I of Persia (522–486 BC<\/span>). They engage in a contest to determine whether wine, royal power, or women are the strongest. The third youth, Zerubbabel, argues for women but adds “truth” as part of his argument, and thereby wins the verbal contest. For his reward he requests permission to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem, which Darius grants. The story concludes with the preparations for Zerubbabel’s temple-building expedition. Thus, 1 Esdras differs from canonical Ezra and Nehemiah by placing Zerubbabel’s return under Darius I rather than under Cyrus (559–530 BC<\/span>).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ESDRAS, First Book of<\/h3>\nBook that is largely a compilation of material from 2 Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author and Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor and Date<\/p>\nThe author or compiler of 1 Esdras is unknown, and scholars disagree about its origin. Three theories seem to summarize the critical debate. Some think that 1 Esdras might be the original Septuagint (ancient Greek Old Testament) version, and that canonical Ezra and Nehemiah reflect the translation and editing of Theodotion, a second-century AD<\/span> reviser of the Septuagint. Others speculate that 1 Esdras goes back to a now-lost Hebrew text outside the Masoretic Hebrew Text tradition. Most scholars, however, think that 1 Esdras is probably an edited compilation taken from the Septuagint translation of 2 Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah.<\/p>\nEsdras (or Ezra, the spelling most familiar to American Protestants) was a descendant of Aaron’s priestly line and one of those (like Nehemiah and Zerubbabel) who led parties of exiled Jews back to Judea from Babylon. His ministry of leadership, and preservation and promulgation of the law, probably can be dated to the latter part of Persian king Artaxerxes I Longimanus’s reign (465–424 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nIt is certain that 1 Esdras was written before AD<\/span> 90 because first-century Jewish historian Josephus quoted from it. The best date for 1 Esdras is probably around 150–100 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nThere are four books about Ezra and the history of the postexilic restoration of the Jews in Judea. Two of those books, titled Ezra and Nehemiah in Protestant versions of the Bible, are accepted as canonical by Jews, Roman Catholics, and Protestants alike. The other two books, 1 Esdras and 2 Esdras, were not included in the Hebrew canon of the OT by Jews or by Protestants, who followed Hebrew tradition in identifying the books of the OT. The two Esdras books were included in the Latin Vulgate Bible (a translation from the Hebrew by biblical scholar Jerome completed in AD<\/span> 404), and when the Roman Catholic Council of Trent (1545–1663) defined the apocryphal books that would be recognized by Catholics as part of the OT Scriptures, 1 and 2 Esdras were included. In the Vulgate, 1 Esdras is called 3 Esdras; Ezra and Nehemiah there are named 1 Esdras and 2 Esdras, respectively.<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nFirst Esdras is a history of the Jews from the reign of King Josiah in Jerusalem (640–609 BC<\/span>) through the postexilic ministry of Ezra, accentuating the career of Ezra and deletes all mention of Nehemiah. Originally written in idiomatic Greek, 1 Esdras retells the material found in 2 Chronicles 35:1–36:23, Ezra 1:1–10:44 (excluding 4:6 and placing 4:7-24 before 2:1), and Nehemiah 7:73–8:12. Esdras contains two sections of material, one minor (1:23-24) and the other major, not found in the canonical records. The major addition (3:1–4:63) is a story about three youths who are bodyguards or pages of Darius I of Persia (522–486 BC<\/span>). They engage in a contest to determine whether wine, royal power, or women are the strongest. The third youth, Zerubbabel, argues for women but adds “truth” as part of his argument, and thereby wins the verbal contest. For his reward he requests permission to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem, which Darius grants. The story concludes with the preparations for Zerubbabel’s temple-building expedition. Thus, 1 Esdras differs from canonical Ezra and Nehemiah by placing Zerubbabel’s return under Darius I rather than under Cyrus (559–530 BC<\/span>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"ESDRAS, First Book of Book that is largely a compilation of material from 2 Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah. Preview • Author and Date • Background • Content Author and Date The author or compiler of 1 Esdras is unknown, and scholars disagree about its origin. Three theories seem to summarize the critical debate. Some think that 1 Esdras might be the original Septuagint (ancient Greek Old Testament) version, and that canonical Ezra and Nehemiah reflect the translation and editing of Theodotion...","summary_en":"ESDRAS, First Book of Book that is largely a compilation of material from 2 Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah. Preview • Author and Date • Background • Content Author and Date The author or compiler of 1 Esdras is unknown, and scholars disagree about its origin. Three theories seem to summarize the critical debate. Some think that 1 Esdras might be the original Septuagint (ancient Greek Old Testament) version, and that canonical Ezra and Nehemiah reflect the translation and editing of Theodotion...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11750,"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>\nProphetic book of the OT, originating in the time of the Babylonian exile.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date and Background<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nEzekiel 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>\nDate and Background<\/p>\nThe 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 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>\nThough 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 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 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>\nJehoiakim 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>\nAlthough 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 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 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>\nContent<\/p>\nThe prophecy of Ezekiel is easily outlined by subject matter and chronology. The chronology of the period permits a division before and after 586 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>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nEzekiel, 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>\nThe 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 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, 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>\nA 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>\nEzekiel 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 Lord<\/span> says!’ Some of them will listen, but some will ignore you, for they are rebels” (nlt<\/span>; cf. Mt 11:15; 13:43).<\/p>\n<h5>Prophecies of Judgment against Israel (3:22–24:27)<\/h5>\nSymbolism 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>\nEzekiel’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>\nGod 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>\nThe 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 Lord<\/span> went up from the city and stopped above the mountain to the east” (11:23, nlt<\/span>). The people, now without divine protection, were being handed over to the Babylonians (v 9).<\/p>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nEzekiel 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>\nEzekiel 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>\nBoth 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>\nThe 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>\nIn 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>\nChapter 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>\nChapter 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>\nThe 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 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, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nChapters 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, 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, 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>\nChapter 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 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>\nIn 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>\nEzekiel’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>\nThe 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>\nChapters 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>\nThose 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>\nAmmon, 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>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nSix 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>\nEgypt 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 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>\nAfter 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>\nThus 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>\nThe 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>\nChapter 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>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nAs 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\nThere 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 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>\nOther 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>\nSee also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Ezekiel (Person); Prophecy.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EZEKIEL, Book of<\/h3>\nProphetic book of the OT, originating in the time of the Babylonian exile.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date and Background<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nEzekiel 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>\nDate and Background<\/p>\nThe 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 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>\nThough 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 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 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>\nJehoiakim 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>\nAlthough 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 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 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>\nContent<\/p>\nThe prophecy of Ezekiel is easily outlined by subject matter and chronology. The chronology of the period permits a division before and after 586 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>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nEzekiel, 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>\nThe 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 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, 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>\nA 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>\nEzekiel 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 Lord<\/span> says!’ Some of them will listen, but some will ignore you, for they are rebels” (nlt<\/span>; cf. Mt 11:15; 13:43).<\/p>\n<h5>Prophecies of Judgment against Israel (3:22–24:27)<\/h5>\nSymbolism 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>\nEzekiel’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>\nGod 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>\nThe 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 Lord<\/span> went up from the city and stopped above the mountain to the east” (11:23, nlt<\/span>). The people, now without divine protection, were being handed over to the Babylonians (v 9).<\/p>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nEzekiel 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>\nEzekiel 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>\nBoth 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>\nThe 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>\nIn 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>\nChapter 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>\nChapter 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>\nThe 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 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, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nChapters 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, 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, 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>\nChapter 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 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>\nIn 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>\nEzekiel’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>\nThe 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>\nChapters 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>\nThose 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>\nAmmon, 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>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nSix 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>\nEgypt 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 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>\nAfter 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>\nThus 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>\nThe 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>\nChapter 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>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nAs 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\nThere 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 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>\nOther 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>\nSee 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":11788,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Ezra","title_en":"Book of Ezra","content_ro":"<h3>EZRA, Book of<\/h3>\nOne of the historical books of the OT, associated with 2 Chronicles and Nehemiah.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Name<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Sources<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Languages, Texts, and Versions<\/p>\n• Purpose and Content<\/p>\nName<\/p>\nIn the Talmud tractate Baba Bathra<\/em> 15a, the rabbis and scribes regarded Ezra and Nehemiah as one book. Josephus (Apion<\/em> 1.8) also considered the two books to be one when the number of OT books was given as 22. Some church fathers, such as Melito of Sardis and Jerome, thought of them as one book. The Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT) also grouped the two books as one, referring to them as 2 Ezra to distinguish them from an apocryphal book known as 1 Ezra. The Latin Vulgate, however, called Ezra “1 Ezra” and Nehemiah “2 Ezra.”<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nThe Jewish people came under the rule of the Persian Empire when Cyrus conquered Babylon in 539 BC<\/span>. From then until Ezra’s time, the Persian kings were Cyrus (539–530 BC<\/span>), who allowed the Jewish people and other captives to return to their homeland (Ezr 1); Cambyses (529–522 BC<\/span>); Gaumata, a usurper of the throne (522 BC<\/span>); Darius I (521–486 BC<\/span>; Ezr 5:6); Xerxes I (OT Ahasuerus, 486–465 BC<\/span>; Ezr 4:6); and Artaxerxes I (465–424 BC<\/span>; Ezr 4:7-23; 7:1–10:44). Both Ezra’s and Nehemiah’s work fall within the period between Cyrus and Artaxerxes I. Some scholars, however, place Ezra during the reign of Artaxerxes II (404–359 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nSources<\/p>\nBy tradition, the Jewish leader Ezra researched and put together the material that forms his book. Chapters 7–10 are written in the first person singular, and Ezra may have used the autobiographical passages as the core of this book, adding information from other sources. That the book contains portions written in Aramaic has been used as justification for assigning a date later than Ezra’s time. But the Aramaic of Ezra bears a remarkable similarity to fifth-century BC<\/span> Aramaic papyri from the Jewish community at Elephantine in Egypt.<\/p>\nThe book is largely a compilation, using autobiography, official documents, edicts, and other material. The present book of Ezra contains four identifiable strata of source material.<\/p>\n<h5>Memoirs of Ezra<\/h5>\nCertain sections appear in the first person singular (7:27–9:15), located between third-person narratives (7:1-26; 10). The memoirs were probably part of Ezra’s own official reports.<\/p>\n<h5>Aramaic Documents<\/h5>\nAramaic was the diplomatic language of the Persian Empire, and a number of documents appear in the book of Ezra. A letter of complaint was written to Artaxerxes I about the rebuilding of the city walls, for example, and Ezra also included the official reply (Ezr 4:8-23). There is also a letter of Darius I and the king’s reply (5:1–6:18). An official authorization by the Persian court of Artaxerxes permitted Ezra to return, and this included a description of material entrusted into his keeping (7:12-26). Since all of those sections were official correspondence, the record naturally is written in Aramaic.<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrew Lists<\/h5>\nEzra included Hebrew documents listing people’s names for a number of purposes. One such document indicated the Persian government’s permission for Jewish immigrants to return to the land of Israel (Ezr 1:2-4). It was a Jewish version of Cyrus’s general edict expressing concern for all his subjects. The edict in Aramaic is repeated by Ezra in 6:3-5, and that version is probably taken from an original memorandum of a royal decision. Ezra included lists of the immigrants who returned to begin the second commonwealth of Israel (ch 2, repeated in Neh 7). The book also contains a list of immigrants who returned with Ezra by permission of Artaxerxes I (Ezr 8:1-14). Lists of those who had married pagan wives are provided as well (10:18-43).<\/p>\n<h5>Narrative<\/h5>\nThe rest of the book comprises narrative by Ezra himself. For the period of the first return prior to his own time, he probably drew upon existing sources, either oral or documentary. Material in the book that was contemporary with the scribe would be his personal account about his own work.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nTraditionally, the Artaxerxes in Ezra 7:1 has been identified with Artaxerxes I Longimanus. Ezra’s arrival in Jerusalem would thus have been in 458 BC<\/span> (see nlt<\/span> mg for 7:8). Therefore, Ezra’s work at Jerusalem started before that of Nehemiah, who came in 445 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nBut the traditional dates are questioned from a number of sources. One alternative is to place Nehemiah during the reign of Artaxerxes I (464–424 BC<\/span>) and Ezra at a later date, in the reign of Artaxerxes II Mnemon (404–359 BC<\/span>). Such a suggestion creates a difficulty with Nehemiah 8:2, because there Ezra is named as Nehemiah’s contemporary and coworker.<\/p>\nIn addition, the Elephantine papyri (407–400 BC<\/span>) mention the high priest Johanan in Jerusalem, and Sanballat as governor of Samaria. Johanan is considered a grandson of Eliashib, but Nehemiah was a contemporary of Eliashib (Neh 3:1, 20). The biblical material that speaks of Nehemiah going to Jerusalem in the 20th year of Artaxerxes (Neh 2:1, 445 BC<\/span>) and again during the 32nd year (Neh 13:6, 433 BC<\/span>) refers to Eliashib’s contemporary high priesthood with Ezra. The traditional position thus furnishes a reasonable date for the book of Ezra. If the scribe were placed during the reign of Artaxerxes II (c. 397 BC<\/span>), his ministry would be too late for the high priesthood of Johanan.<\/p>\nLanguages, Texts, and Versions<\/p>\nThe primary language of the book of Ezra is Hebrew; the exceptions are 4:7, 6:18, and 7:12-26, which are written in Aramaic. The Hebrew portion appears to resemble the language of Daniel, Haggai, and 2 Chronicles much more than later Hebrew, such as that of Ecclesiasticus. As indicated, the Aramaic portions resemble the Elephantine papyri, dated about 407–400 BC<\/span>. In addition, Persian personal and family names and Persian words and expressions occur in the book, such as Bigvai, Mithredath, and Elam. All of these evidences serve to place the book in about the fifth century BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe Hebrew Masoretic Text of Ezra seems well preserved. The Septuagint version is a bit shorter than the Masoretic Text. Only parts of Ezra 4 and 5 have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\nPurpose and Content<\/p>\nThe book of Ezra is a straightforward account of one of the most important events in Jewish history. From a priestly point of view, it is an account of the restoration of Jewish people to their homeland following the Babylonian dispersion. The record tells of two distinct returns, one under the leadership of Zerubbabel (chs 1–6; 538 BC<\/span>), and 80 years later, the second return led by Ezra (chs 7–10; 458 BC<\/span>). The book emphasizes Ezra’s leadership and the reestablishment of the people on their land, both of which were to have important future consequences.<\/p>\nLittle is known about the political activity of Ezra in the Persian court. He appears to have been a man of considerable influence, however, and could well be described as an official who held a position corresponding to that of “Secretary of State for Jewish Affairs.” To what extent that function applied to the Persian Empire as a whole is uncertain, since Ezra’s recorded activities took place only in the area known to the Persians as the province “Beyond the River,” that is, the territory lying to the west of the Euphrates. The importance of Ezra’s position in the Persian Empire is indicated by the fact that King Artaxerxes gave him full authority to do whatever he thought necessary for the welfare of his people and the empire (7:21-26). Ezra’s genealogy is given in 7:1-5, and he is consistently spoken of as a scribe learned in the Mosaic law. As a descendant of Zadok the priest, he would have the authority to instruct others in the Torah.<\/p>\nChapter 4 speaks of the opposition to rebuilding the temple and the walls. We should recognize that Ezra’s approach in this chapter is topical rather than chronological where, in the middle of describing the earlier opposition to building the temple (5:1-5), he complained that the same kind of opposition was being repeated in his day concerning the attempt to rebuild the city walls and repair the fortifications of Jerusalem (5:7-23). Internal evidence suggests that a long historical interval ensued during the reign of Ahasuerus, or Xerxes, and the early part of Artaxerxes’ regime. During this period, complaints were made to the Persian authorities that the returned Judeans were rebuilding the city wall of Jerusalem, and as a result the work was halted for some time. It readily can be seen that Ezra was dealing with the evil intentions of Judah’s enemies and that the opposition of Rehum and Shimshai did not appear in the 520s (when the temple was being built) because they lived in the 460s, early in the reign of Artaxerxes I.<\/p>\nBut the initial passage is actually a history of opposition to rebuilding the ruined temple. It narrates the frustrations experienced by the Judean community from the time of return to their homeland during Cyrus’s rule (4:1-5) up to the time of King Darius (v 24). The prophet Haggai (520 BC<\/span>) aroused the people with his message and persuaded them to lay the foundations of the new temple.<\/p>\nEzra resumes the theme of the book in chapter 5. He points out the problems, frustrations, and hindrances the Jewish people had with the construction of the temple. It was not until a diligent search had been made in the archives by the Persian authorities that the original edict granting permission to build the temple was found (5:7–6:5).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Ezra (Person) #1; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EZRA, Book of<\/h3>\nOne of the historical books of the OT, associated with 2 Chronicles and Nehemiah.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Name<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Sources<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Languages, Texts, and Versions<\/p>\n• Purpose and Content<\/p>\nName<\/p>\nIn the Talmud tractate Baba Bathra<\/em> 15a, the rabbis and scribes regarded Ezra and Nehemiah as one book. Josephus (Apion<\/em> 1.8) also considered the two books to be one when the number of OT books was given as 22. Some church fathers, such as Melito of Sardis and Jerome, thought of them as one book. The Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT) also grouped the two books as one, referring to them as 2 Ezra to distinguish them from an apocryphal book known as 1 Ezra. The Latin Vulgate, however, called Ezra “1 Ezra” and Nehemiah “2 Ezra.”<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nThe Jewish people came under the rule of the Persian Empire when Cyrus conquered Babylon in 539 BC<\/span>. From then until Ezra’s time, the Persian kings were Cyrus (539–530 BC<\/span>), who allowed the Jewish people and other captives to return to their homeland (Ezr 1); Cambyses (529–522 BC<\/span>); Gaumata, a usurper of the throne (522 BC<\/span>); Darius I (521–486 BC<\/span>; Ezr 5:6); Xerxes I (OT Ahasuerus, 486–465 BC<\/span>; Ezr 4:6); and Artaxerxes I (465–424 BC<\/span>; Ezr 4:7-23; 7:1–10:44). Both Ezra’s and Nehemiah’s work fall within the period between Cyrus and Artaxerxes I. Some scholars, however, place Ezra during the reign of Artaxerxes II (404–359 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nSources<\/p>\nBy tradition, the Jewish leader Ezra researched and put together the material that forms his book. Chapters 7–10 are written in the first person singular, and Ezra may have used the autobiographical passages as the core of this book, adding information from other sources. That the book contains portions written in Aramaic has been used as justification for assigning a date later than Ezra’s time. But the Aramaic of Ezra bears a remarkable similarity to fifth-century BC<\/span> Aramaic papyri from the Jewish community at Elephantine in Egypt.<\/p>\nThe book is largely a compilation, using autobiography, official documents, edicts, and other material. The present book of Ezra contains four identifiable strata of source material.<\/p>\n<h5>Memoirs of Ezra<\/h5>\nCertain sections appear in the first person singular (7:27–9:15), located between third-person narratives (7:1-26; 10). The memoirs were probably part of Ezra’s own official reports.<\/p>\n<h5>Aramaic Documents<\/h5>\nAramaic was the diplomatic language of the Persian Empire, and a number of documents appear in the book of Ezra. A letter of complaint was written to Artaxerxes I about the rebuilding of the city walls, for example, and Ezra also included the official reply (Ezr 4:8-23). There is also a letter of Darius I and the king’s reply (5:1–6:18). An official authorization by the Persian court of Artaxerxes permitted Ezra to return, and this included a description of material entrusted into his keeping (7:12-26). Since all of those sections were official correspondence, the record naturally is written in Aramaic.<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrew Lists<\/h5>\nEzra included Hebrew documents listing people’s names for a number of purposes. One such document indicated the Persian government’s permission for Jewish immigrants to return to the land of Israel (Ezr 1:2-4). It was a Jewish version of Cyrus’s general edict expressing concern for all his subjects. The edict in Aramaic is repeated by Ezra in 6:3-5, and that version is probably taken from an original memorandum of a royal decision. Ezra included lists of the immigrants who returned to begin the second commonwealth of Israel (ch 2, repeated in Neh 7). The book also contains a list of immigrants who returned with Ezra by permission of Artaxerxes I (Ezr 8:1-14). Lists of those who had married pagan wives are provided as well (10:18-43).<\/p>\n<h5>Narrative<\/h5>\nThe rest of the book comprises narrative by Ezra himself. For the period of the first return prior to his own time, he probably drew upon existing sources, either oral or documentary. Material in the book that was contemporary with the scribe would be his personal account about his own work.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nTraditionally, the Artaxerxes in Ezra 7:1 has been identified with Artaxerxes I Longimanus. Ezra’s arrival in Jerusalem would thus have been in 458 BC<\/span> (see nlt<\/span> mg for 7:8). Therefore, Ezra’s work at Jerusalem started before that of Nehemiah, who came in 445 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nBut the traditional dates are questioned from a number of sources. One alternative is to place Nehemiah during the reign of Artaxerxes I (464–424 BC<\/span>) and Ezra at a later date, in the reign of Artaxerxes II Mnemon (404–359 BC<\/span>). Such a suggestion creates a difficulty with Nehemiah 8:2, because there Ezra is named as Nehemiah’s contemporary and coworker.<\/p>\nIn addition, the Elephantine papyri (407–400 BC<\/span>) mention the high priest Johanan in Jerusalem, and Sanballat as governor of Samaria. Johanan is considered a grandson of Eliashib, but Nehemiah was a contemporary of Eliashib (Neh 3:1, 20). The biblical material that speaks of Nehemiah going to Jerusalem in the 20th year of Artaxerxes (Neh 2:1, 445 BC<\/span>) and again during the 32nd year (Neh 13:6, 433 BC<\/span>) refers to Eliashib’s contemporary high priesthood with Ezra. The traditional position thus furnishes a reasonable date for the book of Ezra. If the scribe were placed during the reign of Artaxerxes II (c. 397 BC<\/span>), his ministry would be too late for the high priesthood of Johanan.<\/p>\nLanguages, Texts, and Versions<\/p>\nThe primary language of the book of Ezra is Hebrew; the exceptions are 4:7, 6:18, and 7:12-26, which are written in Aramaic. The Hebrew portion appears to resemble the language of Daniel, Haggai, and 2 Chronicles much more than later Hebrew, such as that of Ecclesiasticus. As indicated, the Aramaic portions resemble the Elephantine papyri, dated about 407–400 BC<\/span>. In addition, Persian personal and family names and Persian words and expressions occur in the book, such as Bigvai, Mithredath, and Elam. All of these evidences serve to place the book in about the fifth century BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe Hebrew Masoretic Text of Ezra seems well preserved. The Septuagint version is a bit shorter than the Masoretic Text. Only parts of Ezra 4 and 5 have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\nPurpose and Content<\/p>\nThe book of Ezra is a straightforward account of one of the most important events in Jewish history. From a priestly point of view, it is an account of the restoration of Jewish people to their homeland following the Babylonian dispersion. The record tells of two distinct returns, one under the leadership of Zerubbabel (chs 1–6; 538 BC<\/span>), and 80 years later, the second return led by Ezra (chs 7–10; 458 BC<\/span>). The book emphasizes Ezra’s leadership and the reestablishment of the people on their land, both of which were to have important future consequences.<\/p>\nLittle is known about the political activity of Ezra in the Persian court. He appears to have been a man of considerable influence, however, and could well be described as an official who held a position corresponding to that of “Secretary of State for Jewish Affairs.” To what extent that function applied to the Persian Empire as a whole is uncertain, since Ezra’s recorded activities took place only in the area known to the Persians as the province “Beyond the River,” that is, the territory lying to the west of the Euphrates. The importance of Ezra’s position in the Persian Empire is indicated by the fact that King Artaxerxes gave him full authority to do whatever he thought necessary for the welfare of his people and the empire (7:21-26). Ezra’s genealogy is given in 7:1-5, and he is consistently spoken of as a scribe learned in the Mosaic law. As a descendant of Zadok the priest, he would have the authority to instruct others in the Torah.<\/p>\nChapter 4 speaks of the opposition to rebuilding the temple and the walls. We should recognize that Ezra’s approach in this chapter is topical rather than chronological where, in the middle of describing the earlier opposition to building the temple (5:1-5), he complained that the same kind of opposition was being repeated in his day concerning the attempt to rebuild the city walls and repair the fortifications of Jerusalem (5:7-23). Internal evidence suggests that a long historical interval ensued during the reign of Ahasuerus, or Xerxes, and the early part of Artaxerxes’ regime. During this period, complaints were made to the Persian authorities that the returned Judeans were rebuilding the city wall of Jerusalem, and as a result the work was halted for some time. It readily can be seen that Ezra was dealing with the evil intentions of Judah’s enemies and that the opposition of Rehum and Shimshai did not appear in the 520s (when the temple was being built) because they lived in the 460s, early in the reign of Artaxerxes I.<\/p>\nBut the initial passage is actually a history of opposition to rebuilding the ruined temple. It narrates the frustrations experienced by the Judean community from the time of return to their homeland during Cyrus’s rule (4:1-5) up to the time of King Darius (v 24). The prophet Haggai (520 BC<\/span>) aroused the people with his message and persuaded them to lay the foundations of the new temple.<\/p>\nEzra resumes the theme of the book in chapter 5. He points out the problems, frustrations, and hindrances the Jewish people had with the construction of the temple. It was not until a diligent search had been made in the archives by the Persian authorities that the original edict granting permission to build the temple was found (5:7–6:5).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Ezra (Person) #1; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EZRA, Book of One of the historical books of the OT, associated with 2 Chronicles and Nehemiah. Preview • Name • Background • Sources • Date • Languages, Texts, and Versions • Purpose and Content Name In the Talmud tractate Baba Bathra 15a, the rabbis and scribes regarded Ezra and Nehemiah as one book. Josephus (Apion 1.8) also considered the two books to be one when the number of OT books was given as 22. Some church fathers, such as Melito of Sardis and Jerome, thought of them as one book. ...","summary_en":"EZRA, Book of One of the historical books of the OT, associated with 2 Chronicles and Nehemiah. Preview • Name • Background • Sources • Date • Languages, Texts, and Versions • Purpose and Content Name In the Talmud tractate Baba Bathra 15a, the rabbis and scribes regarded Ezra and Nehemiah as one book. Josephus (Apion 1.8) also considered the two books to be one when the number of OT books was given as 22. Some church fathers, such as Melito of Sardis and Jerome, thought of them as one book. ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17584,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Inscriptions","title_en":"Inscriptions","content_ro":"<h3>INSCRIPTIONS<\/h3>\nTerm used to refer to writing in the ancient world that was done on a material of a permanent nature, such as stone or clay, rather than on ordinary and impermanent substances, such as papyri or parchment.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Introduction<\/p>\n• Inscriptions on Monuments<\/p>\n• Historical Records<\/p>\n• Official Announcements<\/p>\n• Dedications<\/p>\n• Correspondence<\/p>\n• Mosaic Floor Decorations<\/p>\nIntroduction<\/p>\nThere are occasional references to inscriptions in the Bible; for example, the Ten Commandments were inscribed on stone (Ex 31:18) and given to Moses, and later written by Joshua on stone and set up at Mt Ebal near Shechem (Jos 8:32). In the excavations at Shechem, G. E. Wright found a large stone prepared to receive an inscription that he dated to the time of Joshua on stratigraphic grounds. It may still be seen at the site. A message from the hand of God to the Babylonian king Belshazzar was inscribed on the walls of his palace (Dn 5:5, 24). Paul observed an altar with the inscription “To an unknown god” in the marketplace of Athens (Acts 17:23). The book of Revelation speaks of the names of the 12 tribes of the sons of Israel being inscribed on the gates of the heavenly city (Rv 21:12).<\/p>\nInscriptions in the ancient world can be found in almost any language and from any period of history: Egyptian, Babylonian, Persian, Greek, Latin, Hebrew, Aramaic, Nabatean, Moabite, and so on. It was once popular to argue that Moses could not have written the Pentateuch because writing had not been invented that early. Inscriptions found at the turquoise mines of Serabit el-Khadim dating to the 15th century BC<\/span> have disproven this allegation. In addition, it might be noted that clay tablets found at Ras Shamra by Claude Schaeffer and dated to about 1400 BC<\/span> demonstrate a considerable period of literary activity, as do the tablets at Ebla from approximately 1,000 years earlier.<\/p>\nInscriptions may be found in almost any position or place, but the most common locations are in the floors of synagogues, church buildings, and mosques; the pavements of forums; the walls of public buildings; dedicatory stones and statues; stelae and monumental plaques; tombs and sarcophagi; and Roman milestones. An exhaustive list is impossible, but a few representative samples will illustrate the various kinds of extant inscriptional material.<\/p>\nInscriptions on Monuments<\/p>\nThe Egyptian pharaoh Merneptah commemorated his victory over the Sea Peoples in the 13th century BC<\/span> by inscribing a black granite stele with a record of his victory. It contains the earliest known reference to Israel outside the land of Palestine: “Israel lies desolate.”<\/p>\nThe Israelite king Omri (1 Kgs 16:16-30) is referred to in a text carved in the Moabite language on a stone dating near the end of the reign of the Moabite king Mesha, about 830 BC<\/span>. It was found at Diban (OT Dibon) in 1868 and contains a record of the successful rebellion of the king against Israelite oppression.<\/p>\nAnother monumental inscription was found in Persia carved into the steep slope of Mt Behistun. It is a trilingual (Old Persian, Elamite, Akkadian) record of the exploits of Darius I, providing the key to unlocking the mystery of the cuneiform script in which several of these ancient languages were written.<\/p>\nThe Assyrian king Shalmaneser III left a record of his first six campaigns of conquest inscribed on a monolith found in 1861 at Kurkh on the Tigris. The stone is carved front and back in cuneiform that is written over a bas-relief of the king. This same king left a black stone obelisk, six and a half feet (2 meters) high, depicting his triumphs over several other kings, among whom is Jehu, king of Israel, depicted in the second panel from the top, prostrating himself before the Assyrian monarch. This is the earliest picture available of an Israelite and the only known representation of an Israelite king by a contemporary. The inscription above the picture reads, “The tribute of Jehu, son [descendant] of Omri . . .” It dates to the mid-ninth century BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nHistorical Records<\/p>\nFrequently in the region of Mesopotamia, ancient kings recorded important events or proclamations in stone or clay. A notable example is the clay prism containing the final edition of Sennacherib’s Annals dated to 691 BC<\/span>. It is hexagonal, 15 inches (38.1 centimeters) high and 6 inches (15.2 centimeters) wide, and written on all sides in cuneiform script. The inscription speaks of “Hezekiah the Jew (king of Judah), who did not submit to my yoke. . . . Like a caged bird, I shut him up in Jerusalem, his royal city” (cf. 2 Kgs 18; Is 36–39).<\/p>\nEven though no annals comparable to those produced by the Assyrian kings have survived among the Babylonians, we do have some chronicles written on clay tablets covering the years from 626 BC<\/span> to the fall of Babylon to Cyrus in 539. One of these, the Babylonian Chronicle, provides an exact date of March 16, 597 BC<\/span>, for the fall of Jerusalem to the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar (cf. 2 Kgs 24:10-17).<\/p>\nBabylon itself fell to Cyrus the Mede, king of Persia, in 539. The event is not only referred to in the Bible (Ezr 1:1-3) but is also described on a clay barrel-shaped cylinder nine inches (22.9 centimeters) in length, written in cuneiform script, during the reign of Cyrus. It refers to his policy that allowed captive nations to rebuild their cities and temples. This provides an explanation of his encouragement and financial help to the Jews in returning to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple of Solomon that Nebuchadnezzar had destroyed (Ezr 1:2-4).<\/p>\nEgyptian pharaohs were fond of publishing records of their exploits in hieroglyphic script on the walls of temples and tombs. These were usually incised into the stone and then painted. One of the most interesting is Shishak’s description of his invasion of the land of Israel incised on the southern wall of a court of the temple of Amon at Karnak. The inclusion of Megiddo, as well as other cities in Israel, among the more than 75 cities whose names can still be read adds historical interest to the biblical account of Shishak’s invasion and conquest of Jerusalem and “Judah’s fortified cities” (1 Kgs 14:25-26; 2 Chr 12:2-10). Archaeological finds confirm a destruction and burning of the city at this time.<\/p>\nOfficial Announcements<\/p>\nWhen an ancient monarch or public official wanted to publish an announcement with some degree of permanency, it would be carved in stone or set in mosaic. An inscription on a marble slab dating to the reign of Claudius (AD<\/span> 41–54) was found in 1878, originating in the city of Nazareth. It contains a warning against grave robbing or any other desecration of cemeteries. The penalty for such violation was declared to be death. The inscription may reflect some of the troubles Claudius had in Rome over the person of Christ (Suetonius, Claudius<\/em> 25) which led to the expulsion of Jews from the capital city (Acts 18). At issue must have been the resurrection of Christ as proclaimed in Rome.<\/p>\nAnnouncements were placed even in temples. Josephus referred to a small wall surrounding the Jewish temple in Jerusalem that contained slabs of stone at regular intervals giving warning in Greek and Latin to Gentiles entering the temple (War<\/em> 5.193-34; 6.125-26; Antiquities<\/em> 15.417). Two fragmentary examples have been found. One discovered by Clermont-Ganneau in 1871 reads: “No foreigner is to enter within the balustrade and embankment around the sanctuary. Whoever is caught will have himself to blame for his death which follows.” The Romans allowed the Jews to put anyone to death, even a Roman, who went beyond this barrier (War<\/em> 6.126).<\/p>\nAn important inscription commissioned by the emperor Claudius, was found at the beginning of the 20th century in Delphi, Greece. It was written in Greek and mentions Gallio as proconsul with a date that can be established as AD<\/span> 51–52 for his term of office. This Gallio is the proconsul before whom Paul was brought by the Jews of Corinth (Acts 18:12-17). It is therefore extremely important for establishing the date of Paul’s 18-month stay in Corinth, and an important pivotal date for Pauline chronology in general. The inscription is an imperial announcement to the citizens of Delphi regarding the need for increasing the population of the city with eminent people.<\/p>\nThe name Pontius Pilate has appeared in a Latin inscription carved into a stone found in the Roman theater at Caesarea Maritima on the coast of Israel. It refers to him, in partially mutilated words, as prefect and contains the name Tiberium, which designates a structure built in honor of the emperor Tiberius.<\/p>\nDedications<\/p>\nInscriptions were commonly placed on walls or floors of buildings or attached to some other structure dedicating the completed edifice. An inscription was cut into the wall of a long tunnel built by the Jewish king Hezekiah in Jerusalem when the tunnel was finished (2 Kgs 20:20). It is in Hebrew and is now in the Istanbul museum. One of the oldest inscriptions we have in that language, it describes the construction of the Siloam tunnel.<\/p>\nIn the city of Corinth in Greece there is a dedicatory inscription cut into the pavement of a plaza on the north side of the large theater. The abbreviated Latin inscription reads: Erastus pro aedilitate sua pecunia stravit<\/em> (“Erastus, in return for his aedileship, laid the pavement at his own expense”). The bronze has long since been removed from the letters deeply cut into the gray Acrocorinthian limestone. This is probably the same “Erastus, the city treasurer” mentioned by Paul in Romans 16:23. A similar inscription from the Corinthian agora of Paul’s day reads: “Gnaeus Babbius Philinus, aedile and pontifex, had this monument erected at his own expense, and he approved it in his official capacity as duovir.”<\/p>\nA monumental dedicatory inscription in Greek was found in Jerusalem during excavations in 1913–14, which once stood on the wall of a first-century AD<\/span> synagogue on Mt Ophel. It refers to a Theodotus, the son of a ruler of the synagogue named Vettenos, who built the synagogue. Since the name Vettenos is Roman, it may be that Theodotus was a Jewish slave who had been freed and given the Roman name of his master. If so, this inscription may have hung on the “synagogue of the Freedmen” in Jerusalem (Acts 6:9).<\/p>\nThe British Museum contains a portion of a broken arch that stood over an entrance into the Greek city of Thessalonica from the first century AD<\/span> until 1867, when it was torn down to provide stone for the repair of the vast city wall. The inscription begins: “In the time of the politarchs . . .” This is a rare word referring to Roman officials and is used in the book of Acts (Acts 17:6) in reference to city authorities of Thessalonica. This word is found nowhere else in Greek literature.<\/p>\nCorrespondence<\/p>\nIn the second millennium before Christ, it was common practice to write correspondence on small clay tablets. More than half a million have been found in Mari, Nuzi, Nineveh, Ebla, and elsewhere. Interesting examples of such correspondence may be found in a great number of clay tablets found at Tell el-Amarna in Upper Egypt. They were written in the Babylonian language using the cuneiform script during the time when Akhenaton was captivated with his reformation of Egyptian art and religion at his new capital Tell el-Amarna (Akhetaten), and Palestine and Syria were left to the mercy of marauders called Habiru in the documents. Many of these are written from cities in Canaan under attack and ask for help from the pharaoh, whose vassals they are at this time (late 14th century BC<\/span>). Some think that these Habiru were the ancient Hebrews who invaded the land under the direction of Joshua.<\/p>\nSometimes correspondence was written in ink on broken pieces of ceramic pottery (potsherds) called ostraca. In 1935, 18 of these were found in the excavations at Lachish in southern Israel. They are written in Hebrew and provide examples of the kind of script used by the Judeans in the time of Jeremiah. The language is essentially identical with the Hebrew of the OT. The letters were sent by Hosha’yahu, an officer in charge of a nearby town, to Ya’osh, the military governor of Lachish, during the invasion of Judea by the Babylonians, which ended in the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 586 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nEleven such potsherds were found in Masada, on the western shore of the Dead Sea, in excavations conducted by Yigael Yadin from 1963 to 1965. Masada was destroyed by the Roman army under the command of Flavius Silva in AD<\/span> 73. Nine hundred and sixty men, women, and children committed suicide rather than surrender to the Romans. Ten men were chosen to cut the throats of those who remained. They drew lots for the heartbreaking task, according to Josephus (War<\/em> 7.395), and Professor Yadin thinks the ostraca he found were the ones used in the drawing. One of them contained the name of Ben Yair, who was probably Eleazer ben Yair, the commander of the fortress.<\/p>\nMosaic Floor Decorations<\/p>\nIn the Roman and Byzantine periods it was popular to decorate the floors of basilicas, baths, synagogues, churches, and other public buildings with elaborate tesselation containing inscriptions and artwork. Excavation in 1972 disclosed a building in Caesarea Maritima with mosaic inscriptions in six floors throughout the structure. Two of them are the Greek text of Romans 13:3 set in a circular border. Another is a blessing on the one who enters and exits the room: “May the Lord bless your entry and your exit.” Two of them invoke the aid of Christ for people associated with the function and construction of the building. These were a part of a building that was destroyed in the seventh century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe floors of the synagogues at Tiberias-hamath, Beth Shan, Beth Alpha, Eshtemoa, Susiya, Hamath-gader, En-gedi, and others in Israel have inscriptions in Greek and Aramaic that usually refer to benefactors of the synagogue. A synagogue floor has been found in Naro, Tunisia, which contains a Latin inscription. In the Tiberias synagogue, Hebrew was used only for defining the astrological symbols that appear in the zodiac. Aramaic was used primarily for Halakah (religious rule or law), and Greek was principally used in honoring donors.<\/p>\nOne of the best-known mosaic floor inscriptions in churches was in Madaba, Jordan, where the oldest known map of Israel and Jordan was set into the floor in the sixth century AD<\/span>. The place-names of cities, geographical features, and passages of Scripture are given in Greek. Church floors typically contain dated or undated dedications, blessings, and Scripture quotations that appear in Aramaic, Coptic, Syriac, Latin, and Greek. Symbolism often accompanies the inscriptions, but in AD<\/span> 427 an edict was issued forbidding the use of crosses and other religious symbols on pavements so that they might not be stepped on. It is not clear how widespread this prohibition was.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Archaeology and the Bible; Pottery.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>INSCRIPTIONS<\/h3>\nTerm used to refer to writing in the ancient world that was done on a material of a permanent nature, such as stone or clay, rather than on ordinary and impermanent substances, such as papyri or parchment.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Introduction<\/p>\n• Inscriptions on Monuments<\/p>\n• Historical Records<\/p>\n• Official Announcements<\/p>\n• Dedications<\/p>\n• Correspondence<\/p>\n• Mosaic Floor Decorations<\/p>\nIntroduction<\/p>\nThere are occasional references to inscriptions in the Bible; for example, the Ten Commandments were inscribed on stone (Ex 31:18) and given to Moses, and later written by Joshua on stone and set up at Mt Ebal near Shechem (Jos 8:32). In the excavations at Shechem, G. E. Wright found a large stone prepared to receive an inscription that he dated to the time of Joshua on stratigraphic grounds. It may still be seen at the site. A message from the hand of God to the Babylonian king Belshazzar was inscribed on the walls of his palace (Dn 5:5, 24). Paul observed an altar with the inscription “To an unknown god” in the marketplace of Athens (Acts 17:23). The book of Revelation speaks of the names of the 12 tribes of the sons of Israel being inscribed on the gates of the heavenly city (Rv 21:12).<\/p>\nInscriptions in the ancient world can be found in almost any language and from any period of history: Egyptian, Babylonian, Persian, Greek, Latin, Hebrew, Aramaic, Nabatean, Moabite, and so on. It was once popular to argue that Moses could not have written the Pentateuch because writing had not been invented that early. Inscriptions found at the turquoise mines of Serabit el-Khadim dating to the 15th century BC<\/span> have disproven this allegation. In addition, it might be noted that clay tablets found at Ras Shamra by Claude Schaeffer and dated to about 1400 BC<\/span> demonstrate a considerable period of literary activity, as do the tablets at Ebla from approximately 1,000 years earlier.<\/p>\nInscriptions may be found in almost any position or place, but the most common locations are in the floors of synagogues, church buildings, and mosques; the pavements of forums; the walls of public buildings; dedicatory stones and statues; stelae and monumental plaques; tombs and sarcophagi; and Roman milestones. An exhaustive list is impossible, but a few representative samples will illustrate the various kinds of extant inscriptional material.<\/p>\nInscriptions on Monuments<\/p>\nThe Egyptian pharaoh Merneptah commemorated his victory over the Sea Peoples in the 13th century BC<\/span> by inscribing a black granite stele with a record of his victory. It contains the earliest known reference to Israel outside the land of Palestine: “Israel lies desolate.”<\/p>\nThe Israelite king Omri (1 Kgs 16:16-30) is referred to in a text carved in the Moabite language on a stone dating near the end of the reign of the Moabite king Mesha, about 830 BC<\/span>. It was found at Diban (OT Dibon) in 1868 and contains a record of the successful rebellion of the king against Israelite oppression.<\/p>\nAnother monumental inscription was found in Persia carved into the steep slope of Mt Behistun. It is a trilingual (Old Persian, Elamite, Akkadian) record of the exploits of Darius I, providing the key to unlocking the mystery of the cuneiform script in which several of these ancient languages were written.<\/p>\nThe Assyrian king Shalmaneser III left a record of his first six campaigns of conquest inscribed on a monolith found in 1861 at Kurkh on the Tigris. The stone is carved front and back in cuneiform that is written over a bas-relief of the king. This same king left a black stone obelisk, six and a half feet (2 meters) high, depicting his triumphs over several other kings, among whom is Jehu, king of Israel, depicted in the second panel from the top, prostrating himself before the Assyrian monarch. This is the earliest picture available of an Israelite and the only known representation of an Israelite king by a contemporary. The inscription above the picture reads, “The tribute of Jehu, son [descendant] of Omri . . .” It dates to the mid-ninth century BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nHistorical Records<\/p>\nFrequently in the region of Mesopotamia, ancient kings recorded important events or proclamations in stone or clay. A notable example is the clay prism containing the final edition of Sennacherib’s Annals dated to 691 BC<\/span>. It is hexagonal, 15 inches (38.1 centimeters) high and 6 inches (15.2 centimeters) wide, and written on all sides in cuneiform script. The inscription speaks of “Hezekiah the Jew (king of Judah), who did not submit to my yoke. . . . Like a caged bird, I shut him up in Jerusalem, his royal city” (cf. 2 Kgs 18; Is 36–39).<\/p>\nEven though no annals comparable to those produced by the Assyrian kings have survived among the Babylonians, we do have some chronicles written on clay tablets covering the years from 626 BC<\/span> to the fall of Babylon to Cyrus in 539. One of these, the Babylonian Chronicle, provides an exact date of March 16, 597 BC<\/span>, for the fall of Jerusalem to the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar (cf. 2 Kgs 24:10-17).<\/p>\nBabylon itself fell to Cyrus the Mede, king of Persia, in 539. The event is not only referred to in the Bible (Ezr 1:1-3) but is also described on a clay barrel-shaped cylinder nine inches (22.9 centimeters) in length, written in cuneiform script, during the reign of Cyrus. It refers to his policy that allowed captive nations to rebuild their cities and temples. This provides an explanation of his encouragement and financial help to the Jews in returning to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple of Solomon that Nebuchadnezzar had destroyed (Ezr 1:2-4).<\/p>\nEgyptian pharaohs were fond of publishing records of their exploits in hieroglyphic script on the walls of temples and tombs. These were usually incised into the stone and then painted. One of the most interesting is Shishak’s description of his invasion of the land of Israel incised on the southern wall of a court of the temple of Amon at Karnak. The inclusion of Megiddo, as well as other cities in Israel, among the more than 75 cities whose names can still be read adds historical interest to the biblical account of Shishak’s invasion and conquest of Jerusalem and “Judah’s fortified cities” (1 Kgs 14:25-26; 2 Chr 12:2-10). Archaeological finds confirm a destruction and burning of the city at this time.<\/p>\nOfficial Announcements<\/p>\nWhen an ancient monarch or public official wanted to publish an announcement with some degree of permanency, it would be carved in stone or set in mosaic. An inscription on a marble slab dating to the reign of Claudius (AD<\/span> 41–54) was found in 1878, originating in the city of Nazareth. It contains a warning against grave robbing or any other desecration of cemeteries. The penalty for such violation was declared to be death. The inscription may reflect some of the troubles Claudius had in Rome over the person of Christ (Suetonius, Claudius<\/em> 25) which led to the expulsion of Jews from the capital city (Acts 18). At issue must have been the resurrection of Christ as proclaimed in Rome.<\/p>\nAnnouncements were placed even in temples. Josephus referred to a small wall surrounding the Jewish temple in Jerusalem that contained slabs of stone at regular intervals giving warning in Greek and Latin to Gentiles entering the temple (War<\/em> 5.193-34; 6.125-26; Antiquities<\/em> 15.417). Two fragmentary examples have been found. One discovered by Clermont-Ganneau in 1871 reads: “No foreigner is to enter within the balustrade and embankment around the sanctuary. Whoever is caught will have himself to blame for his death which follows.” The Romans allowed the Jews to put anyone to death, even a Roman, who went beyond this barrier (War<\/em> 6.126).<\/p>\nAn important inscription commissioned by the emperor Claudius, was found at the beginning of the 20th century in Delphi, Greece. It was written in Greek and mentions Gallio as proconsul with a date that can be established as AD<\/span> 51–52 for his term of office. This Gallio is the proconsul before whom Paul was brought by the Jews of Corinth (Acts 18:12-17). It is therefore extremely important for establishing the date of Paul’s 18-month stay in Corinth, and an important pivotal date for Pauline chronology in general. The inscription is an imperial announcement to the citizens of Delphi regarding the need for increasing the population of the city with eminent people.<\/p>\nThe name Pontius Pilate has appeared in a Latin inscription carved into a stone found in the Roman theater at Caesarea Maritima on the coast of Israel. It refers to him, in partially mutilated words, as prefect and contains the name Tiberium, which designates a structure built in honor of the emperor Tiberius.<\/p>\nDedications<\/p>\nInscriptions were commonly placed on walls or floors of buildings or attached to some other structure dedicating the completed edifice. An inscription was cut into the wall of a long tunnel built by the Jewish king Hezekiah in Jerusalem when the tunnel was finished (2 Kgs 20:20). It is in Hebrew and is now in the Istanbul museum. One of the oldest inscriptions we have in that language, it describes the construction of the Siloam tunnel.<\/p>\nIn the city of Corinth in Greece there is a dedicatory inscription cut into the pavement of a plaza on the north side of the large theater. The abbreviated Latin inscription reads: Erastus pro aedilitate sua pecunia stravit<\/em> (“Erastus, in return for his aedileship, laid the pavement at his own expense”). The bronze has long since been removed from the letters deeply cut into the gray Acrocorinthian limestone. This is probably the same “Erastus, the city treasurer” mentioned by Paul in Romans 16:23. A similar inscription from the Corinthian agora of Paul’s day reads: “Gnaeus Babbius Philinus, aedile and pontifex, had this monument erected at his own expense, and he approved it in his official capacity as duovir.”<\/p>\nA monumental dedicatory inscription in Greek was found in Jerusalem during excavations in 1913–14, which once stood on the wall of a first-century AD<\/span> synagogue on Mt Ophel. It refers to a Theodotus, the son of a ruler of the synagogue named Vettenos, who built the synagogue. Since the name Vettenos is Roman, it may be that Theodotus was a Jewish slave who had been freed and given the Roman name of his master. If so, this inscription may have hung on the “synagogue of the Freedmen” in Jerusalem (Acts 6:9).<\/p>\nThe British Museum contains a portion of a broken arch that stood over an entrance into the Greek city of Thessalonica from the first century AD<\/span> until 1867, when it was torn down to provide stone for the repair of the vast city wall. The inscription begins: “In the time of the politarchs . . .” This is a rare word referring to Roman officials and is used in the book of Acts (Acts 17:6) in reference to city authorities of Thessalonica. This word is found nowhere else in Greek literature.<\/p>\nCorrespondence<\/p>\nIn the second millennium before Christ, it was common practice to write correspondence on small clay tablets. More than half a million have been found in Mari, Nuzi, Nineveh, Ebla, and elsewhere. Interesting examples of such correspondence may be found in a great number of clay tablets found at Tell el-Amarna in Upper Egypt. They were written in the Babylonian language using the cuneiform script during the time when Akhenaton was captivated with his reformation of Egyptian art and religion at his new capital Tell el-Amarna (Akhetaten), and Palestine and Syria were left to the mercy of marauders called Habiru in the documents. Many of these are written from cities in Canaan under attack and ask for help from the pharaoh, whose vassals they are at this time (late 14th century BC<\/span>). Some think that these Habiru were the ancient Hebrews who invaded the land under the direction of Joshua.<\/p>\nSometimes correspondence was written in ink on broken pieces of ceramic pottery (potsherds) called ostraca. In 1935, 18 of these were found in the excavations at Lachish in southern Israel. They are written in Hebrew and provide examples of the kind of script used by the Judeans in the time of Jeremiah. The language is essentially identical with the Hebrew of the OT. The letters were sent by Hosha’yahu, an officer in charge of a nearby town, to Ya’osh, the military governor of Lachish, during the invasion of Judea by the Babylonians, which ended in the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 586 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nEleven such potsherds were found in Masada, on the western shore of the Dead Sea, in excavations conducted by Yigael Yadin from 1963 to 1965. Masada was destroyed by the Roman army under the command of Flavius Silva in AD<\/span> 73. Nine hundred and sixty men, women, and children committed suicide rather than surrender to the Romans. Ten men were chosen to cut the throats of those who remained. They drew lots for the heartbreaking task, according to Josephus (War<\/em> 7.395), and Professor Yadin thinks the ostraca he found were the ones used in the drawing. One of them contained the name of Ben Yair, who was probably Eleazer ben Yair, the commander of the fortress.<\/p>\nMosaic Floor Decorations<\/p>\nIn the Roman and Byzantine periods it was popular to decorate the floors of basilicas, baths, synagogues, churches, and other public buildings with elaborate tesselation containing inscriptions and artwork. Excavation in 1972 disclosed a building in Caesarea Maritima with mosaic inscriptions in six floors throughout the structure. Two of them are the Greek text of Romans 13:3 set in a circular border. Another is a blessing on the one who enters and exits the room: “May the Lord bless your entry and your exit.” Two of them invoke the aid of Christ for people associated with the function and construction of the building. These were a part of a building that was destroyed in the seventh century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe floors of the synagogues at Tiberias-hamath, Beth Shan, Beth Alpha, Eshtemoa, Susiya, Hamath-gader, En-gedi, and others in Israel have inscriptions in Greek and Aramaic that usually refer to benefactors of the synagogue. A synagogue floor has been found in Naro, Tunisia, which contains a Latin inscription. In the Tiberias synagogue, Hebrew was used only for defining the astrological symbols that appear in the zodiac. Aramaic was used primarily for Halakah (religious rule or law), and Greek was principally used in honoring donors.<\/p>\nOne of the best-known mosaic floor inscriptions in churches was in Madaba, Jordan, where the oldest known map of Israel and Jordan was set into the floor in the sixth century AD<\/span>. The place-names of cities, geographical features, and passages of Scripture are given in Greek. Church floors typically contain dated or undated dedications, blessings, and Scripture quotations that appear in Aramaic, Coptic, Syriac, Latin, and Greek. Symbolism often accompanies the inscriptions, but in AD<\/span> 427 an edict was issued forbidding the use of crosses and other religious symbols on pavements so that they might not be stepped on. It is not clear how widespread this prohibition was.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Archaeology and the Bible; Pottery.<\/p>","summary_ro":"INSCRIPTIONS Term used to refer to writing in the ancient world that was done on a material of a permanent nature, such as stone or clay, rather than on ordinary and impermanent substances, such as papyri or parchment. Preview • Introduction • Inscriptions on Monuments • Historical Records • Official Announcements • Dedications • Correspondence • Mosaic Floor Decorations Introduction There are occasional references to inscriptions in the Bible; for example, the Ten Commandments were inscribed...","summary_en":"INSCRIPTIONS Term used to refer to writing in the ancient world that was done on a material of a permanent nature, such as stone or clay, rather than on ordinary and impermanent substances, such as papyri or parchment. Preview • Introduction • Inscriptions on Monuments • Historical Records • Official Announcements • Dedications • Correspondence • Mosaic Floor Decorations Introduction There are occasional references to inscriptions in the Bible; for example, the Ten Commandments were inscribed...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":18032,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"History of Israel","title_en":"History of Israel","content_ro":"<h3>ISRAEL, History of<\/h3>\nAn account of God’s sovereign purpose in calling a people out of paganism and establishing them as witnesses for the true faith among the nations, of God’s sovereign power in protecting them from extinction, of his sovereign justice in dealing with their departure from his ways of holiness, of God’s sovereign grace in forgiving their sins and restoring them to fellowship with himself by providing through them a Savior for the entire world.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Patriarchal Age<\/p>\n• Sojourn in Egypt<\/p>\n• The Exodus<\/p>\n• Wilderness Wanderings<\/p>\n• The Conquest<\/p>\n• The Judges<\/p>\n• The United Monarchy<\/p>\n• The Divided Kingdom<\/p>\n• The Restoration<\/p>\n• The Intertestamental Period<\/p>\n• The Roman Period<\/p>\nPatriarchal Age<\/p>\nThe story of Israel begins with Abraham, whom God called first at Ur, and perhaps later at Haran (Acts 7:2-4), to leave Mesopotamia and go into a land to which God would direct the way. In calling Abraham, God made with him a covenant (Gn 12:1-3) that promised him a land, special divine favor (“I will bless those who bless you, and the one who curses you I will curse,” nasb<\/span>), and the privilege of being a channel of blessing to the entire world (“In you all the families of the earth shall be blessed,” nasb<\/span>). In Genesis 12:4-8 God confirmed this unconditional covenant, promising Abraham this new land forever, along with innumerable descendants. Subsequently, in Genesis 15:1-21, God again confirmed the covenant but added the significant prediction that the guarantee of holding Canaan in perpetuity did not mean occupation of the land in every generation. God also spelled out the limits of the Promised Land (from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates, some 500 to 600 miles or 804 to 965 kilometers in extent). A final confirmation of the covenant to Abraham appears in Genesis 17:6-8. It guaranteed the land of Canaan to Abraham’s posterity and added that kings (an anticipation of the Davidic dynasty) would arise in his line. The covenant was confirmed to Abraham’s son Isaac (Gn 26:3-5) and his grandson Jacob (ch 28).<\/p>\nThis period is known as the patriarchal age in Hebrew history. The patriarchs were Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. They were called patriarchs because they were fathers, not only to their immediate families, but also to the extended family of Hebrews, over which they exercised a fatherly control. They served as political, legal, and spiritual heads of their migratory community, looking after their interests and leading them in worship. Periodically they built altars on which they offered sacrifices. That the patriarchal community was very large can be seen from Genesis 14:14, which says that Abraham had 318 armed men in his camp. If one assumes that most of the men were married and had one or more children each, the total extended family may have numbered in excess of 1,000.<\/p>\nAdditional developments in the life of Abraham and Jacob were particularly important for world history. Abraham, frustrated at not having an heir, accepted Sarah’s suggestion to obtain an heir by the slave girl Hagar. (This was also the custom of the land.) The son born was named Ishmael, progenitor of the Arabs. Thus Abraham is revered by Arabs and Muslims as well as by Jews and Christians. He is the father of the Jews through his son Isaac, child of promise. He holds a special place in Christianity as an example of Christ, through whom all Christians obtain their salvation.<\/p>\nJacob, a scheming scoundrel in his earlier years, wound up in exile in northern Mesopotamia for 20 years in the home of his uncle Laban. There he married Leah and Rachel and fathered the sons who became the progenitors of the 12 tribes of Israel. On his return to Palestine he met God along the banks of the Jabbok River (Gn 32), and God changed his name to Israel (“a prince of God,” kjv<\/span> mg).<\/p>\nThe patriarchal period in Canaan lasted for 215 years. One estimate places Abraham’s entry into Canaan at about 2085 BC<\/span>, when he was 75 years of age. Jacob and his sons migrated to Egypt to escape a severe famine in Canaan in about 1870 BC<\/span>. During much of the patriarchal period, Palestine experienced a decline in population and was occupied largely by nomadic or seminomadic tribes. It was relatively easy for the Hebrews to enter such a situation. After 1900 Palestine began to enjoy more settled conditions. Shortly thereafter, the Hebrews made the trek into Egypt.<\/p>\nSojourn in Egypt<\/p>\nIf Jacob and his sons entered Egypt about 1870 BC<\/span>, it was the period of the Middle Kingdom. And by that time other migrants from Asia were coming in increasing numbers. The Hebrews settled in Goshen, in the eastern delta region, under the protecting care of Joseph, who held a position at the Egyptian court roughly equivalent to that of prime minister. As more and more Asiatic Hyksos came into Egypt, they began to take over the country—northern Egypt at least. During this same time the Hebrews became increasingly numerous. Some who hold to a different chronology believe the Hebrews were welcomed into Egypt during the days of Hyksos domination (after 1750 BC<\/span>). At any rate, by about 1580 BC<\/span> native Egyptian princes regained control of the country and expelled many of the Asiatics.<\/p>\nIn process of time there arose a king over Egypt who “knew not Joseph” (Ex 1:8, kjv<\/span>). Very possibly this meant that a native Egyptian dynasty had arisen in Egypt and they were apprehensive over the fact that the growing numbers and wealth of the Hebrews might jeopardize their own supremacy. But Egyptian measures to subjugate the Hebrews and reduce their birthrate had a reverse effect (Ex 1:12). Finally, the Egyptians ordered the killing of all male Hebrew infants at birth. Among those who disobeyed were the parents of Moses, who set him afloat in a waterproof basket made of reeds. Found by a daughter of Pharaoh, he was brought up in the Egyptian court, was given a first-class education, and became a high official of the realm.<\/p>\nAt the age of 40, Moses identified himself with his own people. He killed an Egyptian in defense of a fellow Hebrew, and immediately fled to the land of Midian in the northeastern part of the Sinai Peninsula. He married and lived there for 40 years, becoming thoroughly familiar with the geography and the ways of the wilderness through which he would later lead the Hebrews. The Egyptians continued to oppress the Hebrew people severely until they cried urgently to God for deliverance. In response, God confronted Moses in the famous burning bush experience and called on him to return to Egypt and lead the people back into the land of Canaan (Ex 3–4). He was to have the help of his brother, Aaron.<\/p>\nThe Exodus<\/p>\nUnderstandably the pharaoh of Egypt was reluctant to permit the Hebrews to leave permanently. The value of this great labor force was incalculable. But finally, after suffering a series of ten plagues, lasting perhaps a year, the Egyptians were persuaded to let the Hebrews go (Ex 7–12).<\/p>\nThe plagues had a theological as well as a practical purpose. They discredited the gods of Egypt and exalted the most high God of heaven (Ex 12:12). The plagues clearly discredited specific gods of Egypt (e.g., the Nile was worshiped as Hapi, plague one; the frog, worshiped as Heqt, plague two; the bull, worshiped as Ptah, plague five; the sun, worshiped as Amon-Re\/Aton, plague nine). Taken together, they struck a direct blow at the Egyptian pantheon.<\/p>\nJust before the last plague, which was the night in which the death angel invaded the homes of the Egyptians, the Israelites made the Passover sacrifice according to divine instructions. This involved killing a lamb for each household (unless the household was too small; in that event, households could combine). Anyone who was careless about applying the blood to the doorpost or who rejected this divine provision came under the judgment of God. After the death of the firstborn throughout the land, the Egyptians begged the Hebrews to leave. Their company numbered 600,000 men over 20 years of age, plus women and children, for a total of over 2,500,000. In addition they took their flocks and herds and personal belongings.<\/p>\nThe date they left Egypt is a matter of continuing debate. Traditionally a date of about 1446 BC<\/span> is given for the exodus (cf. 1 Kgs 6:1, which places the exodus 480 years before construction of the temple started in 966 BC<\/span>) and 1406 BC<\/span> for the Conquest under Joshua, and there do not seem to be any compelling arguments for rejecting that position. But a great many scholars prefer 1275 BC<\/span> for a variety of reasons.<\/p>\nThe early date of the exodus would place the later years of the wilderness wanderings and the subsequent conquest of Palestine during the reigns of Amenhotep III and IV (1412–1366), a time when the pharaohs allowed Egyptian control of Palestine to disintegrate. When the Egyptians did reassert their power, about 1300, they restricted their movements largely to the coastal area, and thus did not come in contact with the Hebrews who were living in the hill country of Judea, Samaria, and Galilee.<\/p>\nWilderness Wanderings<\/p>\nThe wilderness wanderings were an important interlude in the history of Israel. During those years, significant and basic institutions came into existence at God’s command. At Sinai, Moses delivered to Israel the law, the pattern of the tabernacle (which later became the model for the temple) and orders for its operation, as well as detailed instructions for the priesthood and sacrificial system of worship.<\/p>\nThe period of the wanderings was truly a remarkable time. The presence of God was evidenced by a pillar of cloud that hovered over the people by day and a pillar of fire by night. God provided food in the form of manna, periodically provided water by miraculous means, and made sure that clothes did not wear out. In spite of all that, the people murmured and complained continually.<\/p>\nAt Sinai, God gave the law (Ex 19:2–24:18), and the people promptly made a commitment to keep it (24:3). Then God gave the pattern for the tabernacle and its furniture (chs 25–27, 30–31, 35–40) and established the priesthood (chs 28–29). While Moses was on the mountain receiving God’s revelation, the people grew restless and clamored for gods they could see. Even Aaron was carried away with the idolatrous wave and supervised the casting of a golden calf and building of an altar before it. The fact that they turned to Egyptian cattle worship so readily indicates that paganism must have made deep inroads among them while in captivity (chs 32–34). Moses’ intercessory response to God’s announcement that he would destroy Israel because of her idolatry led to a divine determination to execute judgment on only the worst offenders (32:9-14).<\/p>\nSubsequently, God revealed the legal and priestly order (Lv 1:1–27:34). Among the divinely appointed institutions described or alluded to in Leviticus are several special days or feasts, including the Sabbath, Passover, Feast of Unleavened Bread, Firstfruits, Pentecost or Feast of Weeks, Feast of Trumpets, Day of Atonement, Feast of Tabernacles, the Year of Sabbath, and the Year of Jubilee.<\/p>\nAfter camping at Sinai for about a year, the Israelites got their orders to go forward (Nm 10:11-12). Miriam (Moses’ sister) and Aaron criticized Moses’ leadership and suffered divine punishment as a consequence (ch 12). When the people arrived at Kadesh-barnea, the gate to southern Palestine, they were frightened by the report of most of the spies who had been reconnoitering in Canaan and decided that they should not advance into Canaan. They called for a new leader to bring them back to Egypt. God declared that the entire generation would wander in the wilderness until the adults had died. Only Joshua and Caleb (the two spies in favor of invading immediately) would enter the Promised Land (14:26-30). Near the end of the period of wandering, Moses also lost the privilege of entering the land by an act of disobedience.<\/p>\nThe Conquest<\/p>\nThe latter part of the book of Numbers describes how Moses led the Israelites to victory over the peoples living east of the Jordan River. Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh requested permission to settle there and reluctantly were allowed to do so on the condition that they would join the rest of the Israelites in conquering Canaan before settling down. Prior to victories in Transjordan, a new census of adult males was taken in order to determine the military capabilities of Israel and to provide a basis for equitable division of the land they were about to enter. The number of males above 20 years of age was 601,730 (Nm 26:51). The book of Deuteronomy consists primarily of a series of speeches delivered by Moses in a covenant renewal ceremony on the plains of Moab just before his death and the appointment of Joshua as leader.<\/p>\nJoshua lost no time in moving forward. Spies sent across the Jordan to Jericho to reconnoiter reported a situation quite different from what the Hebrews had experienced at Kadesh-barnea a generation earlier. Now the people of Canaan were terrified because they had heard of the numerical strength and victories of the Hebrews. Apparently the day after the spies returned, Joshua moved the people to the edge of the Jordan and prepared to cross over. The waters parted for them here as the Red Sea had parted earlier.<\/p>\nThe narrative of conquest that appears in the book of Joshua is not a detailed battle account. It describes a thrust into the middle of Palestine around Jericho and Ai, a southerly drive to defeat the Amorite league, and a northern campaign against Hazor and other towns. The history of Joshua is extremely telescoped, for Joshua’s major military action must have required about six years. Joshua’s friend Caleb was 79 when the Conquest began and 85 after the last great battle with Jabin, king of Hazor (Jos 14:7-10).<\/p>\nWhen the war was over, major strongholds (e.g., Jerusalem) still remained in enemy hands, but the land west of the Jordan was allocated to the nine and a half Hebrew tribes. The task of reducing enemy towns was left to the individual tribes in whose land they were located. The Joshua account was not so much a narrative of Israelite battle prowess as of God’s faithfulness and intervention on behalf of his people. For example, at Jericho they did not attack but merely followed divine orders and watched the defenses collapse; at Gibeon hailstones killed more Amorites than Israelite soldiers did (Jos 10:7-11).<\/p>\nThe Judges<\/p>\nJoshua died some 30 years after he had led the Hebrews into Canaan, and he was followed by a series of divinely appointed leaders who ruled sometimes over the whole of Israel as a loose confederacy and sometimes over one or more tribes. They were judges, civil functionaries, and military leaders all at the same time.<\/p>\nThe book of Judges pictures a series of recurring cycles: apostasy from God, punishment in the form of oppression by neighboring tribes, cries to God for relief, release from bondage under the leadership of a judge, and a period of rest from oppression.<\/p>\nEstablishment of the chronology of the judges is one of the thorniest problems of Scripture. Adding up all years of oppression and rest mentioned in the book gives a total of 410. The book of Acts gives a total of 450 years from the days of Joshua to Samuel (Acts 13:19). The difference in Acts may be accounted for by the addition of 40 years of Eli’s ministry (1 Sm 4:18). Allowing 410 years for the period of the judges, about 30 for the Conquest to the judges, and 40 for the wilderness wanderings, means 480 years from 1050 BC<\/span>, the date for Saul’s kingship, and would give a date of about 1530 for the exodus. This is about 100 years more than even the early date for the exodus. The most probable explanation is that there is some overlap in oppressions and judgeships. For instance, the activities of Jephthah were centered on the eastern frontier, those of Samson in the Philistine plain to the southwest, and those of Deborah and Barak in the north.<\/p>\nThe United Monarchy<\/p>\nBecause of the weakness of Israel resulting from political disunity and the ineptness and corruption of both Eli’s and Samuel’s sons, the people of Israel called for a king to rule over them. This demand was in reality a rejection of the divine plan of theocracy—the rule of God. God granted the Hebrews’ wish but warned them of the disadvantages of monarchy (1 Sm 8:9-21). The concept of kingship was not new to Israel. It had been hinted at in Genesis 49:10 and Numbers 24:17, and Moses had made some very clear statements about it in Deuteronomy 17:14-20.<\/p>\nThe first stage of Hebrew monarchy is commonly called the united monarchy because all Israel was ruled by a single king. This period lasted for 120 years—encompassing the 40-year reigns of Saul (Acts 13:21), David (2 Sm 5:5), and Solomon (1 Kgs 11:42).<\/p>\nThe people asked for a king, and God granted them one, but not one like those of the surrounding nations. The Hebrew king was to be a man who followed God’s dictates in his public and private life, who did not intrude into the affairs of the priesthood, and who did not fall into idolatry, but exerted all his influence to keep the people faithful to God. If he failed in any of these respects, he ran the risk of being deposed by God, of having his line brought to an end, or even of having the people fall into captivity to a foreign power. All this must be kept in mind when evaluating the reigns of Saul, David, Solomon, and the kings of the divided monarchy.<\/p>\nSaul began well. He won a great victory over the Ammonites at Jabesh-gilead and showed considerable wisdom in administrative matters. But after about two years he intruded into the priest’s office to offer sacrifice, bringing the divine prediction that his kingdom would be taken from him (1 Sm 13:8-14). He would go on to enjoy great military victory and ability as a ruler until about the middle of his reign.<\/p>\nAfter Saul’s disobedience to God’s command to totally destroy the Amalekites, the Lord repudiated Saul and instructed Samuel to anoint David privately as future king of Israel. David’s rise to prominence was spurred by his victory over Goliath and the accompanying defeat of the Philistines. Saul later made David commander of the army, and the young man soon earned a reputation greater than that of the king himself. Saul, who had become increasingly mentally disturbed after his relationship with God was broken, began to make attempts on David’s life, and for the last years of Saul’s reign David lived as a fugitive. Meanwhile, the Philistines got completely out of control and finally killed Saul and most of his sons in the great battle of Mt Gilboa, which gave the Philistines control over much of Palestine west of the Jordan (1 Sm 31:1-7).<\/p>\nSoon David became king in Judah with his capital in Hebron. A son of Saul, Ishbosheth, established himself at Mahanaim, east of the Jordan. For seven years the two tiny kingdoms existed side by side (2 Sm 2:2-11). But after the Israelite king and his army commander were assassinated, David became ruler of a united Hebrew kingdom.<\/p>\nNot long after the beginning of his reign (1010–970 BC<\/span>) David completely defeated and subjugated the Philistines. Soon thereafter he captured Jerusalem, making it the capital of the united kingdom. During succeeding years, David built up an empire (2 Sm 8:10; 1 Chr 18–19), conquering Moab, Edom, Damascus, Zobah, and Ammon, so he controlled territory from the Gulf of Aqaba (a branch of the Red Sea) and the Sinai in the south almost to the Euphrates in the north. Moreover, he established good relations, if not an alliance, with Tyre. The establishment of David’s empire was possible because of a power vacuum in the Middle East. The Egyptians, Mycenaeans, Hittites, and Assyrians were either decadent or removed from the stage of history. The Phoenicians, a peaceful commercial people, were also free to expand their trade, and they were happy to sell cedar to David for his palace and the temple.<\/p>\nWithout doubt, David was Israel’s greatest king. Jerusalem came to be known as the city of David. When the king wanted to build the temple as God’s house, God replied that his son should do it instead. But God would in a very real sense build David’s house; he made a covenant with David, promising him that his house (dynasty, kingdom, throne) would be established forever (2 Sm 7). Christ, the infinite One who came from the line of David, alone was capable of fulfilling this divine promise (see Lk 1:31-33; Acts 2:29-36; 13:32-39; 15:14-17).<\/p>\nLike other Oriental monarchs, David fell into the practice of keeping a harem. Scripture names 8 wives and 21 children and refers to other wives and concubines. Such a situation opened the door to family rivalries and questions about succession to the throne. Two sons, Absalom and Adonijah, made a try for the throne, but both efforts were squelched. Solomon, son of David’s favorite wife, Bathsheba, became the next king.<\/p>\nSolomon (970–930 BC<\/span>) was a man of peace and a builder of palaces, cities, fortifications, and the temple. He fortified cities all over his realm and outfitted cities for his chariot corps and cavalry units. With the help of the Phoenicians, he built a seaport and kept a fleet at Ezion-geber, near modern Eilat on the Gulf of Aqaba. He greatly enlarged Jerusalem by enclosing the temple area to the north of David’s city and the southwestern hill now known as Zion. His best-known project was the temple, which took seven years to build. Twice the size of the tabernacle, it was built on the same basic plan; it measured 90 feet (27.4 meters) long and 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide and had magnificent appointments. But he also constructed a palace complex that took 13 years to complete. This included an armory, a throne room, the king’s private residence, and a house for the daughter of pharaoh.<\/p>\nApparently much influenced by the spiritual testimony of David and desiring God’s blessing on his rule, Solomon made a great sacrifice to God at Gibeon near the beginning of his reign. God met him there and offered to grant whatever he might request. Solomon asked for understanding and wisdom to govern God’s people (1 Kgs 3:9). His God-given wisdom is apparent in many administrative decisions and official policies and building plans.<\/p>\nUnfortunately, Solomon did not show such wisdom in maintaining a harem of 700 wives and 300 concubines or in excessive expenditures that left the state in serious financial straits. He even erected places of worship for his foreign wives, thus subsidizing their idolatries and incurring the wrath of God. In fact, foreign wives and their idolatry proved to be his downfall; before Solomon died, God informed him that for this reason he would divide the kingdom at his death and give most of it to someone other than Solomon’s son. But for David’s sake, God would keep Judah and Jerusalem in the hands of the Davidic line (1 Kgs 11:9-13).<\/p>\nThe Divided Kingdom<\/p>\nAfter the death of Solomon, the Near East was destined to become a very different place. Israel was no longer in a power vacuum. The Assyrian Empire rose in Mesopotamia, to be followed by the Neo-Babylonian and the Medo-Persian Empires in turn. Egypt was temporarily powerful in the south, but it would later come under control of Assyria and Medo-Persia. These empires exerted great pressure on Israel and dominated one or both of the two Hebrew kingdoms.<\/p>\n\nWhen Solomon died, his son Rehoboam took the throne and was forced to deal with a rising tide of resentment over the high taxes and economic stagnation of Solomon’s last years. When Rehoboam refused to give relief, all the northern tribes broke away and formed the northern kingdom, Israel, under the leadership of Jeroboam. The southern kingdom, Judah, was left with only the territory of Judah and Benjamin. A total of 20 kings ruled in each of the separate kingdoms. While the north had several dynasties and the reigns of kings were generally short, in the south the dynasty of David continued to rule and the reigns were longer.<\/p>\n<h5>The Northern Kingdom<\/h5>\nThe northern kingdom lasted from the division in 930 BC<\/span> until its conquest by Assyria in 722. Jeroboam, fearing that he would lose the loyalty of the people if they continued to go to Jerusalem to worship, set up a new religion of his own. Instituting calf worship, he built shrines at Dan in the north and Bethel in the south. This idolatry drew the condemnation of God and fulfilled the prediction that Jeroboam’s line would be wiped out. All his successors are said to have followed in his idolatrous steps. Israel found itself at war during much of its history—with Judah, Syria, or Assyria. Jeroboam established his capital first at Shechem and later at Tirzah.<\/p>\nFour other kings of the north require special comment: Omri, Ahab, Jehu, and Jeroboam II. Omri (885–874 BC<\/span>) must have been an impressive ruler. Generations later, Assyrians still spoke of Israel as the land of Omri. After he had established himself on the throne, he located the permanent capital of the kingdom at Samaria and began the palace complex there. Early in his reign he was successful in conquering Moab, and later he reestablished the good relations with Tyre that existed in the days of David and Solomon. Apparently he established a full alliance and cemented it with the marriage of his son Ahab to Jezebel, a princess of Tyre.<\/p>\nAhab (874–853 BC<\/span>) was one of the most significant of Israel’s kings. He and his wife, Jezebel, promoted the vile idolatry of Baal worship with its religious prostitution, arousing the powerful opposition of the prophet Elijah. Ahab was a formidable military man, defeating the Syrians in major campaigns and participating in a coalition that fought the Assyrians to a virtual standstill. He also built extensively at Samaria, Hazor, Megiddo, and other towns, as excavations show.<\/p>\nJehu (841–814 BC<\/span>) was God’s agent for punishing the house of Omri and destroying Baal worship in Israel. He did eradicate Baal worship and liquidated literally scores of relatives and court officials of Ahab. But he was so ruthless that he killed off the people who knew how to run the government; subsequently, it did not work well. Jehu also was forced to become a vassal to Assyria.<\/p>\nJeroboam II ruled during most of the first half of the eighth century (793–753 BC<\/span>) and brought the kingdom to its greatest extent and prosperity. He, with his contemporary Uzziah in the south, ruled most of the land David had once controlled. This was possible because the Assyrians were in a period of decline during most of the first half of the century.<\/p>\nProphets who were active during the history of the northern kingdom include the nonwriting prophets Elijah and Elisha and the writing prophets Jonah, Amos, and Hosea.<\/p>\n<h5>The Southern Kingdom<\/h5>\nThe history of the southern kingdom of Judah was quite different from that of the northern kingdom. The temple was there and so were large numbers of Levites, many of whom came south after the division of the kingdom to protest the idolatry of the north. In addition to this spiritual strength, there was greater political stability and unity, promoted by the fact that only two tribes—Judah and Benjamin—shared power, and all the kings were of the Davidic dynasty. Moreover, eight of the kings were good monarchs. There were also periodic religious revivals. God granted the southern kingdom about 100 more years of existence than the north. But Judah, too, fell into idolatry and went into captivity for her sins.<\/p>\nRehoboam, the first king in the south, is especially remembered because he refused to listen to wise counsel about fiscal matters and perpetrated the division of the kingdom. He is also remembered for his religious policies. After a good beginning, he allowed apostasy to get out of control and brought the judgment of God in the form of an invasion in his fifth year (926 BC<\/span>) by Shishak I of Egypt, resulting in extensive plunder and payment of tribute. Thereafter, he launched an extensive program to fortify the realm. Shishak’s invasion did have the effect of producing a partial and temporary spiritual reform, but the general trend of Rehoboam’s reign was downward.<\/p>\nConditions during the reign of his son, Abijam, were worse, but Asa (910–869 BC<\/span>) initiated a religious reform that was effective for most of his reign. When threatened by the northern kingdom during his latter years, however, Asa turned to Syria for help instead of to God, and he seems to have defied the prophets of God to his dying day.<\/p>\nAsa’s son Jehoshaphat (872–848 BC<\/span>) was apparently influenced by his father’s early religious devotion, and his reign was characterized by faithfulness, winning the favor of God. However, he seems to have made a full alliance with Ahab of Israel, which resulted in the marriage of his son Jehoram to Ahab’s daughter Athaliah. This alliance involved Jehoshaphat in almost ruinous joint ventures with Ahab, and later with two of his sons when they became kings of Israel. It also opened the door for the introduction of Baal worship into Judah when Jehoram came to the throne in the southern kingdom. For his sin Jehoram (853–841 BC<\/span>) suffered internal revolt, invasion, and death from a horrible disease.<\/p>\nAfter his death, his last remaining son, Ahaziah, ruled less than a year, following the wicked ways of his father. When Ahaziah died in battle, the queen mother, Athaliah, decided to seize the throne for herself and to secure her power by killing off all those in line to the throne. But she missed Ahaziah’s infant son Joash, who was kept hidden in the temple for six years.<\/p>\nWhen Joash was seven, Jehoiada the high priest arranged his coronation and also the execution of the murderous and idolatrous Athaliah. During his early years when Joash was influenced by good counsel, he did well. But after the middle of his reign (835–796 BC<\/span>), he began to listen to the princes who wanted to restore idolatry, and conditions deteriorated. Military reversals brought on economic decline and ultimately the king’s assassination.<\/p>\nHis son Amaziah (796–767 BC<\/span>) started well with victory over Edom and faithfulness to God. But he, too, fell into idolatry and was totally defeated by the northern kingdom, being held prisoner there. At that point his son Uzziah took over (c. 792 BC<\/span>) and began a long and generally successful reign. During the several decades that followed, Assyria was in decline, and Uzziah and his contemporary in the north, Jeroboam II, were able to expand Hebrew holdings so that between them they controlled most of the territory Solomon had ruled.<\/p>\nUzziah (792–740 BC<\/span>) was able to restore the power of Judah rather quickly after his father’s defeat by Israel. Then he subjugated the Philistines in the southwest and the Ammonites across the Jordan; he strengthened his hold on the Edomites. All during his reign economic conditions improved. But at the height of his power Uzziah foolishly violated the high priest’s prerogatives and offered sacrifice in the temple. For this he was smitten with leprosy; his son Jotham was co-regent during the years 750–740 BC<\/span>, going on to rule alone for about five more years. Meanwhile, Assyrian power became resurgent.<\/p>\nBy and large, Jotham merely carried on the policies of Uzziah. But the administration of his son Ahaz (735–715 BC<\/span>) was very much affected by the Assyrian threat. Israel and Syria wanted him to join in war against Assyria, but he refused, being pro-Assyrian in sympathy. When Israel and Syria invaded Judah, King Ahaz sent tribute to Assyria and became her vassal in return for protection. This rash course of action was vainly opposed by Isaiah, who was prophet at court (c. 740–700 BC<\/span>). Contemporaneously, the prophet Micah ministered to the common people of Judah. The pro-Assyrian policy of Ahaz was accompanied by a renewed sympathy for idolatry, and this brought the judgment of God in the form of invasion by Edomites and Philistines and trouble with Assyria. In fact, during this period, Assyria had annexed the northern kingdom (722 BC<\/span>) and removed many of her people into captivity.<\/p>\nThe next king of Judah, Hezekiah (715–686 BC<\/span>), was greatly sobered by the fall of Israel because of her sins, and he determined to launch a reform in his realm. He was anti-Assyrian too, but he did not dare to discontinue tribute payments and strike for independence until after Sennacherib came to the throne in Nineveh in 705 BC<\/span>. At first Sennacherib was too preoccupied to attend to Judah, but finally in 701 he invaded. Despite tremendous initial success, he was stopped by a divinely sent plague (Is 36–39). Isaiah stood by the king to reassure and sustain him during this emergency.<\/p>\nHezekiah’s son Manasseh (697–642 BC<\/span>) ruled longer than any other king of Israel or Judah. Unfortunately, he turned his back on his father’s example and caused the people to fall into gross idolatry (2 Kgs 21:9). Carried away captive by the Assyrians late in his reign, he repented of his evil and God restored him to his throne; thereafter, he led some reforms. But the land was too steeped in iniquity to be rescued. His son Amon (642–640 BC<\/span>) reverted to the idolatry he knew in his youth.<\/p>\nThe situation was different with Josiah (640–609 BC<\/span>), however. Throughout his reign he dedicated himself to reform. He sought to root out idolatry and to restore the temple and its worship. In 622 BC<\/span> the Book of the Law was found during repair of the temple, and its demands—which had been forgotten—made a great impression on king and people alike. It is certain that Jeremiah and Zephaniah ministered during Josiah’s reign, as did Nahum and Habakkuk (in all probability).<\/p>\nInternational conditions were now changing rapidly. Assyria was declining, and Nineveh fell to Babylon and the Medes in 612 BC<\/span>. Three years later Pharaoh Neco of Egypt marched north to aid his Assyrian ally. When Josiah tried to stop him, he was killed in battle.<\/p>\nFrom this point everything was downhill for Judah. None of the rest of the kings was devout, and political power and economic health rapidly declined. The people put one of Josiah’s sons, Jehoahaz, on the throne. He lasted three months. Pharaoh Neco replaced him with Jehoiakim (609–598 BC<\/span>), another son of Josiah. In 605 Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon defeated Neco, invaded Judah, and took tribute and hostages from Jehoiakim, including Daniel and his friends (Dn 1:1). Jehoiakim revolted in 600 BC<\/span>, but Nebuchadnezzar did not come to deal with him personally until 597 BC<\/span>. He died before the Babylonians arrived, and his son Jehoiachin came to the throne in 598 BC<\/span> to rule for only three months before the Babylonians carried him away into exile. Ezekiel was among the many captives taken on that occasion.<\/p>\nThe Babylonians then put Zedekiah, youngest son of Josiah, on the throne in 597 BC<\/span>. When he rebelled, Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to Jerusalem and took the city (587 BC<\/span>), destroying it and the temple and carrying off large numbers of people. The judgment of God had finally fallen on the Jews for their idolatrous ways.<\/p>\nThe Restoration<\/p>\nIn judgment God remembered mercy. This is evident in individual lives, when faithful ones like Daniel, Esther, or Nehemiah rose to a position of importance in political life, or as numerous other persons became prosperous in the foreign environment. It is evident on the community level as God moved to protect Hebrew enclaves scattered abroad and to restore an organized society in Palestine.<\/p>\nAmong the exiles, Judaism as a way of life separated from its own political system or cultic center and began to emerge. Jews finally turned their backs on idolatry. And without a temple, priesthood, king, or land, they turned to the divine Scriptures as their rallying point and the foundation of their community. During this period they developed the synagogue as a place for fellowship, prayer, and study.<\/p>\nGod’s restoration of an organized community to Palestine involved particularly the fortunes of his “anointed” Cyrus (Is 44:28; 45:1). Cyrus was a Persian prince who in 559 BC<\/span> revolted against the dominant dynasty controlling the Median Empire. After consolidating his hold on the throne, he proceeded to conquer Asia Minor and the Chaldean or Neo-Babylonian Empire. As a humane man and a wise administrator, he permitted the captive peoples to return to their homes and rebuild their communities. Cyrus’s decree to the Jews appears in Ezra 1 and dates probably to 538 BC<\/span>. A total of almost 50,000 went back to Judah as a result of this edict (Ezr 2:64-65).<\/p>\nUnder the stresses and strains of reestablishment, the people built their houses but got no further than laying the foundation of a new temple. Finally, the prophets Haggai and Zechariah stirred the people to build the house of God (Ezr 5:1). They began in the second year of Darius I, the Great (520 BC<\/span>; Hg 1:1; Zec 1:1), and completed the work in his sixth year (515 BC<\/span>; Ezr 6:15).<\/p>\nDuring the reign of Darius’s son Xerxes (486–465 BC<\/span>), a plot was hatched to exterminate all the Jews in the Persian Empire, which at that time controlled the lands where Jews lived. Fortunately, Xerxes (Ahasuerus in the book of Esther), in his third year (483 BC<\/span>; Est 1:3), went searching for a new queen and chose Esther, who managed to preserve her people.<\/p>\nXerxes’ son Artaxerxes I (465–424 BC<\/span>) also figured significantly in Jewish history. In his seventh year (458 BC<\/span>; Ezr 7:7), under the leadership of Ezra, a second contingent of Jews returned to Jerusalem. And in Artaxerxes’ 20th year (445 BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1), Nehemiah went to Jerusalem to supervise the rebuilding of the walls of the city. Malachi probably wrote his prophecy to the Jews in Jerusalem during the latter part of Artaxerxes’ reign.<\/p>\nAfter the fall of Samaria and the captivity of Judah, the Hebrews remaining in the land intermarried with various pagan groups in the area. Their offspring became the Samaritans, a religious and racial admixture. These people had moved into the vacuum left by the destruction of Judah, and naturally they looked with disfavor on an intrusion of Babylonian Jews into an area they had come to call their own. They did all they could to frustrate the efforts of Nehemiah to rebuild the walls. It took all the courage, tact, energy, and persuasiveness Ezra and Nehemiah could muster to prevent the returning Jews from intermarrying with racially mixed people of the land. Such intermarriage would have meant the ultimate absorption and destruction of the Jewish people.<\/p>\nA Samaritan temple was later built on Mt Gerizim (probably during the fifth century BC<\/span>), and it became the center of the Samaritan worship. The hostility between Samaritans and Jews continued on into the NT period (Jn 4) and exists to the present.<\/p>\nThe Intertestamental Period<\/p>\nAlexander the Great conquered the Persian Empire with lightning speed. When the people of Jerusalem threw open their gates in 332 BC<\/span> and capitulated without a fight, Alexander treated them well. After his death in 323 BC<\/span>, Palestine passed back and forth among his successors until Ptolemy I of Egypt managed to establish control in 301 BC<\/span>. Thereafter the area remained in Egyptian hands until 198 BC<\/span>. The Ptolemies were tolerant and granted the Jews considerable autonomy, allowing them to develop their unique culture undisturbed as long as they paid their taxes and remained submissive. Many Jews settled in Alexandria and gradually forgot their Hebrew in the Hellenistic environment. As a result, a translation of the OT into Greek (the Septuagint) was produced there. While the Ptolemies did not force Hellenism on the Jews of either Alexandria or Palestine, many were influenced by Hellenistic ideas.<\/p>\nWhen Ptolemy V came to the throne as a minor in 203 BC<\/span>, Antiochus III of Syria took advantage of the weakened Egypt and conquered Palestine (198 BC<\/span>). Apparently the Jews hoped to gain something from the change and welcomed the Syrians. But their hope was ill-founded. Antiochus III suffered disastrous defeat at the hands of Rome at Magnesia in 190 BC<\/span>. Syria not only lost much territory but also was forced to pay a huge indemnity. Thereafter, the Jews suffered under great financial burdens, along with other peoples of the empire. The next Syrian king, Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164 BC<\/span>), decided to launch an effort to achieve greater internal strength and unity within the empire by forcing, among other things, a greater acceptance of Greek culture and the cult of the divine ruler. Naturally this idolatrous requirement weighed heavily on the monotheistic Jews and incited revolution.<\/p>\nBut this does not completely explain the Maccabean revolt against Syria. In 168 BC<\/span> armed conflict broke out between Jewish factions in Jerusalem. Antiochus IV chose to interpret this as open rebellion and sent an army against the city. His forces demolished part of the city wall and many houses. After this Antiochus decided to suppress Judaism completely, and he dedicated the temple to Zeus and sacrificed swine on the altar. Circumcision, Sabbath observance, and other religious festivals were no longer permitted, and public worship of heathen gods became compulsory.<\/p>\nSome Jews capitulated to Antiochus’s orders or only resisted passively, but a few decided to resist openly. Chief among them were Mattathias and his five sons. After the early death of Mattathias, his son Judas Maccabeus led his forces to victory over the Syrians, regaining the right to restore Jewish worship. The rededication of the temple on December 25, 164 BC<\/span>, inaugurated the Festival of Hanukkah (1 Macc 4:36-59). Subsequently, Jonathan and Simon (other sons of Mattathias) continued the struggle until independence was gained in 142 BC<\/span>; this was possible in large part because they saw how to take advantage of the increasing weakness of Syrian rulers and the competition for the royal office.<\/p>\nSimon ruled the Jewish state until his assassination in 134 BC<\/span>, when his son John Hyrcanus (134–104 BC<\/span>) took over. John Hyrcanus fought successfully in the east, north, and south, gaining land in Transjordan, capturing Shechem and the Samaritan temple on Mt Gerizim, and subjugating the Idumeans in the south, forcing them to adopt Judaism. His son Aristobulus ruled for only about a year (104–103 BC<\/span>), but he added a portion of Galilee to the kingdom. When he died, his widow married his brother Alexander Janneus (103–76 BC<\/span>). Janneus carried on almost incessant military action during his reign, and by the time of his death had almost recovered the kingdom of Solomon.<\/p>\nWhen Janneus died, Alexandra, widow of two kings, took the throne (76–67 BC<\/span>) and her eldest son, Hyrcanus II, became high priest. Her reign was peaceful and prosperous, but when she died, her sons fell to squabbling. Their appeals to Pompey, who was campaigning in the eastern Mediterranean area, were responsible for Roman interference in the region and conquest of Palestine in 63 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe Roman Period<\/p>\nAfter the Romans took over Palestine, Hyrcanus II was confirmed as high priest and was also appointed as ethnarch or political ruler (63–40 BC<\/span>). But Antipater, father of Herod the Great, was the real power behind the throne, and during many of those years Hyrcanus was virtually unable to function because of the confusion of the Roman civil wars. Antipater was loyal to Rome and saw that Roman policies were carried out; he won Julius Caesar’s favor toward Jews of both Palestine and in the Dispersion.<\/p>\nWith the support of Mark Antony, Herod managed to get himself appointed king of Judea by the Roman senate in 40 BC<\/span>. But a Parthian invasion of Syria and Jewish hatred for the Romans made it possible for Antigonus II, last king of the Maccabean family, to rule for three years (40–37 BC<\/span>). Finally, Herod ascended his throne in 37 and ruled until 4 BC<\/span>. As an allied king, Herod proved to be an excellent ruler from the Roman point of view and earned the title of “Great.” He brought some order to regions east of the Jordan and made possible organization of the Roman province of Arabia. He also furthered the cultural plans of Augustus for development of a Greco-Roman civilization throughout the whole empire.<\/p>\nHerod admired Greek culture and contributed to building projects in Rhodes, Antioch, Damascus, Athens, and elsewhere outside Palestine. Within Palestine he rebuilt Samaria and named it Sebaste in honor of Augustus (Sebastos<\/span> is Greek for “Augustus”) and also constructed the great port of Caesarea. Probably about as large as Manhattan Island, it became the capital of Roman Palestine. Among his many other building projects, remodeling the temple in Jerusalem was the most famous. Begun in 20 BC<\/span>, it was not completed until just a few years before its destruction in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nThe material splendor of Herod’s reign did not win the affection or support of the Jews, however. Nor did he achieve peace and harmony in his family, among whom there were periodic eruptions of treason, unfaithfulness, and murder. He worried about any threat to his rule and cracked down hard to destroy such threats, as is evident from his slaughter of the infants in Bethlehem after the birth of Christ.<\/p>\nUltimately, Herod controlled Idumea, Judea, Samaria, Galilee, Perea, and the area northeast of the Sea of Galilee. By his last will, his son Archelaus was to rule Idumea, Judea, and Samaria; Antipas, Galilee and Perea; and Philip, the region northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Archelaus was deposed in AD<\/span> 6, and his territory became a Roman province (AD<\/span> 6–41) to be ruled by direct appointees of Rome. The best-known of these was Pontius Pilate (AD<\/span> 26–36), who ordered the crucifixion of Jesus. Antipas was more successful and built a new capital at Tiberias, but he ran afoul of the emperor’s good pleasure in AD<\/span> 39 and was deposed. Philip was the most effective of the three and ruled until his death in AD<\/span> 34. Philip’s lands were later given to Herod Agrippa I in AD<\/span> 37; the holdings of Antipas were then added in AD<\/span> 39; and in 41 Agrippa also received Samaria, Judea, and Idumea.<\/p>\nHerod Agrippa I (AD<\/span> 37–44) was the heir of the Maccabees (through his grandmother Mariamne, first wife of Herod the Great), and for this reason had the support of patriotic Jews and of the Pharisees for his observance of divine ordinances. But when he built a new north wall for Jerusalem and dabbled in foreign affairs, he aroused the suspicions of the Romans; when he died in AD<\/span> 44, they turned the kingdom into a Roman province.<\/p>\nAs is clear from the Gospels, several sects had arisen in Palestine by Roman times and were active during the first century. The Zealots opposed Roman rule and advocated armed rebellion. Herodians supported the Herodian family and Roman power. The Pharisees were fanatically devoted to the law and were supernaturalists in theological orientation. They were somewhat content to support Rome if given religious freedom, and they dominated the synagogues of the land. The Sadducees were antisupernaturalists, tended to collaborate with the ruling regime, and were dominant in the temple. Generally speaking, the literature of the intertestamental period and the popular mentality of the time tended to view the Messiah as a political deliverer who would free his people from foreign domination and set up a new independent kingdom.<\/p>\nRoman prefects ruled Palestine from AD<\/span> 44–66. They had a knack for offending the religious scruples of the Jews and alienating them in other ways. With Felix (AD<\/span> 52–60) there began a constant tension between Jews and Romans that led to the first Jewish revolt (AD<\/span> 66–70). While Paul was imprisoned in Caesarea (Acts 23:23–24:27) about AD<\/span> 58–60, riots broke out there between Jews and Gentiles. Festus (AD<\/span> 60–62; Acts 25) was an able administrator, but the situation was almost out of hand. After he died in office, there was virtual anarchy until his successor, Albinus, arrived (AD<\/span> 62–64). Totally incompetent and dishonest, Albinus was recalled in 64 and replaced by Florus (AD<\/span> 64–66). Florus was even worse, resorting to open robbery and bribery until there was no safety or justice in the land. Finally, the Jews could take no more.<\/p>\nThe spark that ignited the fires of rebellion was an anti-Semitic act by the Hellenistic population of Caesarea in AD<\/span> 66. Soon riots spread to numerous cities, and Roman garrisons were massacred in several places. But the Jews were not united, and in Jerusalem armed bands of Jews fought with each other for mastery. Vespasian was chosen to command the Roman army of some 60,000 to deal with the insurrection. He had subjugated most of Palestine by the time he was elevated to the imperial chair in AD<\/span> 69 (after the death of Nero), and he left his son Titus in charge of completing the operations. In August of AD<\/span> 70 the walls of Jerusalem were breached, many of the people butchered, and the city and the temple leveled. Masada held out until AD<\/span> 73. Palestine had been flattened by Roman might. Loss of life and property had been incalculable and indescribable.<\/p>\nOn two more occasions the Jews were destined to fight disastrously against the Romans. Under Trajan’s rule a rebellion of Jews broke out in Cyrenaica in AD<\/span> 115 and spread rapidly to Cyprus, Egypt, Palestine, and Mesopotamia. In the beginning it was an outgrowth of agitation between the Jews and their Hellenistic neighbors, but it developed into a challenge to Roman authority. This was particularly true after the successes of Parthia on Rome’s eastern frontier when there seemed to be some hope of success in throwing off the Roman yoke. Wherever Jews got the upper hand, they perpetrated massacres, and the non-Semitic population retaliated in kind. Trajan ruthlessly suppressed the rebels and restored order everywhere except Egypt; his successor, Hadrian, was left to accomplish that.<\/p>\nBut Hadrian faced a new rebellion of his own, brought on by his law forbidding circumcision (which he considered to be inhumane) and his decision in AD<\/span> 130 to rebuild Jerusalem as Aelia Capitolina and erect a temple to Jupiter on the site of the temple of Yahweh. The latter would not only profane the temple site but also would preclude any rebuilding of the Jewish temple.<\/p>\nLeader of this second Jewish revolt was Simeon, prince of Israel, called Bar-Kochba (“Son of the Star”). Both sides fought with such great ferocity for over three years (AD<\/span> 132–135) that the population of Judea was almost exterminated. Jerusalem was rebuilt as a Roman colony, and Jews were forbidden to enter on pain of death. Even as late as the fourth century they were permitted to enter only once a year, on the anniversary of the destruction of the temple by Nebuchadnezzar. After the Bar-Kochba revolt, Judaism retreated increasingly within the citadel of the written and oral law, thus separating itself from the Gentiles.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Abraham; Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Conquest and Allotment of the Land; David; Diaspora of the Jews; Exodus, The; First Jewish Revolt; Jew; Judaism; Moses; Patriarchs, Period of the; Saul #2; Solomon; Postexilic Period; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ISRAEL, History of<\/h3>\nAn account of God’s sovereign purpose in calling a people out of paganism and establishing them as witnesses for the true faith among the nations, of God’s sovereign power in protecting them from extinction, of his sovereign justice in dealing with their departure from his ways of holiness, of God’s sovereign grace in forgiving their sins and restoring them to fellowship with himself by providing through them a Savior for the entire world.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Patriarchal Age<\/p>\n• Sojourn in Egypt<\/p>\n• The Exodus<\/p>\n• Wilderness Wanderings<\/p>\n• The Conquest<\/p>\n• The Judges<\/p>\n• The United Monarchy<\/p>\n• The Divided Kingdom<\/p>\n• The Restoration<\/p>\n• The Intertestamental Period<\/p>\n• The Roman Period<\/p>\nPatriarchal Age<\/p>\nThe story of Israel begins with Abraham, whom God called first at Ur, and perhaps later at Haran (Acts 7:2-4), to leave Mesopotamia and go into a land to which God would direct the way. In calling Abraham, God made with him a covenant (Gn 12:1-3) that promised him a land, special divine favor (“I will bless those who bless you, and the one who curses you I will curse,” nasb<\/span>), and the privilege of being a channel of blessing to the entire world (“In you all the families of the earth shall be blessed,” nasb<\/span>). In Genesis 12:4-8 God confirmed this unconditional covenant, promising Abraham this new land forever, along with innumerable descendants. Subsequently, in Genesis 15:1-21, God again confirmed the covenant but added the significant prediction that the guarantee of holding Canaan in perpetuity did not mean occupation of the land in every generation. God also spelled out the limits of the Promised Land (from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates, some 500 to 600 miles or 804 to 965 kilometers in extent). A final confirmation of the covenant to Abraham appears in Genesis 17:6-8. It guaranteed the land of Canaan to Abraham’s posterity and added that kings (an anticipation of the Davidic dynasty) would arise in his line. The covenant was confirmed to Abraham’s son Isaac (Gn 26:3-5) and his grandson Jacob (ch 28).<\/p>\nThis period is known as the patriarchal age in Hebrew history. The patriarchs were Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. They were called patriarchs because they were fathers, not only to their immediate families, but also to the extended family of Hebrews, over which they exercised a fatherly control. They served as political, legal, and spiritual heads of their migratory community, looking after their interests and leading them in worship. Periodically they built altars on which they offered sacrifices. That the patriarchal community was very large can be seen from Genesis 14:14, which says that Abraham had 318 armed men in his camp. If one assumes that most of the men were married and had one or more children each, the total extended family may have numbered in excess of 1,000.<\/p>\nAdditional developments in the life of Abraham and Jacob were particularly important for world history. Abraham, frustrated at not having an heir, accepted Sarah’s suggestion to obtain an heir by the slave girl Hagar. (This was also the custom of the land.) The son born was named Ishmael, progenitor of the Arabs. Thus Abraham is revered by Arabs and Muslims as well as by Jews and Christians. He is the father of the Jews through his son Isaac, child of promise. He holds a special place in Christianity as an example of Christ, through whom all Christians obtain their salvation.<\/p>\nJacob, a scheming scoundrel in his earlier years, wound up in exile in northern Mesopotamia for 20 years in the home of his uncle Laban. There he married Leah and Rachel and fathered the sons who became the progenitors of the 12 tribes of Israel. On his return to Palestine he met God along the banks of the Jabbok River (Gn 32), and God changed his name to Israel (“a prince of God,” kjv<\/span> mg).<\/p>\nThe patriarchal period in Canaan lasted for 215 years. One estimate places Abraham’s entry into Canaan at about 2085 BC<\/span>, when he was 75 years of age. Jacob and his sons migrated to Egypt to escape a severe famine in Canaan in about 1870 BC<\/span>. During much of the patriarchal period, Palestine experienced a decline in population and was occupied largely by nomadic or seminomadic tribes. It was relatively easy for the Hebrews to enter such a situation. After 1900 Palestine began to enjoy more settled conditions. Shortly thereafter, the Hebrews made the trek into Egypt.<\/p>\nSojourn in Egypt<\/p>\nIf Jacob and his sons entered Egypt about 1870 BC<\/span>, it was the period of the Middle Kingdom. And by that time other migrants from Asia were coming in increasing numbers. The Hebrews settled in Goshen, in the eastern delta region, under the protecting care of Joseph, who held a position at the Egyptian court roughly equivalent to that of prime minister. As more and more Asiatic Hyksos came into Egypt, they began to take over the country—northern Egypt at least. During this same time the Hebrews became increasingly numerous. Some who hold to a different chronology believe the Hebrews were welcomed into Egypt during the days of Hyksos domination (after 1750 BC<\/span>). At any rate, by about 1580 BC<\/span> native Egyptian princes regained control of the country and expelled many of the Asiatics.<\/p>\nIn process of time there arose a king over Egypt who “knew not Joseph” (Ex 1:8, kjv<\/span>). Very possibly this meant that a native Egyptian dynasty had arisen in Egypt and they were apprehensive over the fact that the growing numbers and wealth of the Hebrews might jeopardize their own supremacy. But Egyptian measures to subjugate the Hebrews and reduce their birthrate had a reverse effect (Ex 1:12). Finally, the Egyptians ordered the killing of all male Hebrew infants at birth. Among those who disobeyed were the parents of Moses, who set him afloat in a waterproof basket made of reeds. Found by a daughter of Pharaoh, he was brought up in the Egyptian court, was given a first-class education, and became a high official of the realm.<\/p>\nAt the age of 40, Moses identified himself with his own people. He killed an Egyptian in defense of a fellow Hebrew, and immediately fled to the land of Midian in the northeastern part of the Sinai Peninsula. He married and lived there for 40 years, becoming thoroughly familiar with the geography and the ways of the wilderness through which he would later lead the Hebrews. The Egyptians continued to oppress the Hebrew people severely until they cried urgently to God for deliverance. In response, God confronted Moses in the famous burning bush experience and called on him to return to Egypt and lead the people back into the land of Canaan (Ex 3–4). He was to have the help of his brother, Aaron.<\/p>\nThe Exodus<\/p>\nUnderstandably the pharaoh of Egypt was reluctant to permit the Hebrews to leave permanently. The value of this great labor force was incalculable. But finally, after suffering a series of ten plagues, lasting perhaps a year, the Egyptians were persuaded to let the Hebrews go (Ex 7–12).<\/p>\nThe plagues had a theological as well as a practical purpose. They discredited the gods of Egypt and exalted the most high God of heaven (Ex 12:12). The plagues clearly discredited specific gods of Egypt (e.g., the Nile was worshiped as Hapi, plague one; the frog, worshiped as Heqt, plague two; the bull, worshiped as Ptah, plague five; the sun, worshiped as Amon-Re\/Aton, plague nine). Taken together, they struck a direct blow at the Egyptian pantheon.<\/p>\nJust before the last plague, which was the night in which the death angel invaded the homes of the Egyptians, the Israelites made the Passover sacrifice according to divine instructions. This involved killing a lamb for each household (unless the household was too small; in that event, households could combine). Anyone who was careless about applying the blood to the doorpost or who rejected this divine provision came under the judgment of God. After the death of the firstborn throughout the land, the Egyptians begged the Hebrews to leave. Their company numbered 600,000 men over 20 years of age, plus women and children, for a total of over 2,500,000. In addition they took their flocks and herds and personal belongings.<\/p>\nThe date they left Egypt is a matter of continuing debate. Traditionally a date of about 1446 BC<\/span> is given for the exodus (cf. 1 Kgs 6:1, which places the exodus 480 years before construction of the temple started in 966 BC<\/span>) and 1406 BC<\/span> for the Conquest under Joshua, and there do not seem to be any compelling arguments for rejecting that position. But a great many scholars prefer 1275 BC<\/span> for a variety of reasons.<\/p>\nThe early date of the exodus would place the later years of the wilderness wanderings and the subsequent conquest of Palestine during the reigns of Amenhotep III and IV (1412–1366), a time when the pharaohs allowed Egyptian control of Palestine to disintegrate. When the Egyptians did reassert their power, about 1300, they restricted their movements largely to the coastal area, and thus did not come in contact with the Hebrews who were living in the hill country of Judea, Samaria, and Galilee.<\/p>\nWilderness Wanderings<\/p>\nThe wilderness wanderings were an important interlude in the history of Israel. During those years, significant and basic institutions came into existence at God’s command. At Sinai, Moses delivered to Israel the law, the pattern of the tabernacle (which later became the model for the temple) and orders for its operation, as well as detailed instructions for the priesthood and sacrificial system of worship.<\/p>\nThe period of the wanderings was truly a remarkable time. The presence of God was evidenced by a pillar of cloud that hovered over the people by day and a pillar of fire by night. God provided food in the form of manna, periodically provided water by miraculous means, and made sure that clothes did not wear out. In spite of all that, the people murmured and complained continually.<\/p>\nAt Sinai, God gave the law (Ex 19:2–24:18), and the people promptly made a commitment to keep it (24:3). Then God gave the pattern for the tabernacle and its furniture (chs 25–27, 30–31, 35–40) and established the priesthood (chs 28–29). While Moses was on the mountain receiving God’s revelation, the people grew restless and clamored for gods they could see. Even Aaron was carried away with the idolatrous wave and supervised the casting of a golden calf and building of an altar before it. The fact that they turned to Egyptian cattle worship so readily indicates that paganism must have made deep inroads among them while in captivity (chs 32–34). Moses’ intercessory response to God’s announcement that he would destroy Israel because of her idolatry led to a divine determination to execute judgment on only the worst offenders (32:9-14).<\/p>\nSubsequently, God revealed the legal and priestly order (Lv 1:1–27:34). Among the divinely appointed institutions described or alluded to in Leviticus are several special days or feasts, including the Sabbath, Passover, Feast of Unleavened Bread, Firstfruits, Pentecost or Feast of Weeks, Feast of Trumpets, Day of Atonement, Feast of Tabernacles, the Year of Sabbath, and the Year of Jubilee.<\/p>\nAfter camping at Sinai for about a year, the Israelites got their orders to go forward (Nm 10:11-12). Miriam (Moses’ sister) and Aaron criticized Moses’ leadership and suffered divine punishment as a consequence (ch 12). When the people arrived at Kadesh-barnea, the gate to southern Palestine, they were frightened by the report of most of the spies who had been reconnoitering in Canaan and decided that they should not advance into Canaan. They called for a new leader to bring them back to Egypt. God declared that the entire generation would wander in the wilderness until the adults had died. Only Joshua and Caleb (the two spies in favor of invading immediately) would enter the Promised Land (14:26-30). Near the end of the period of wandering, Moses also lost the privilege of entering the land by an act of disobedience.<\/p>\nThe Conquest<\/p>\nThe latter part of the book of Numbers describes how Moses led the Israelites to victory over the peoples living east of the Jordan River. Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh requested permission to settle there and reluctantly were allowed to do so on the condition that they would join the rest of the Israelites in conquering Canaan before settling down. Prior to victories in Transjordan, a new census of adult males was taken in order to determine the military capabilities of Israel and to provide a basis for equitable division of the land they were about to enter. The number of males above 20 years of age was 601,730 (Nm 26:51). The book of Deuteronomy consists primarily of a series of speeches delivered by Moses in a covenant renewal ceremony on the plains of Moab just before his death and the appointment of Joshua as leader.<\/p>\nJoshua lost no time in moving forward. Spies sent across the Jordan to Jericho to reconnoiter reported a situation quite different from what the Hebrews had experienced at Kadesh-barnea a generation earlier. Now the people of Canaan were terrified because they had heard of the numerical strength and victories of the Hebrews. Apparently the day after the spies returned, Joshua moved the people to the edge of the Jordan and prepared to cross over. The waters parted for them here as the Red Sea had parted earlier.<\/p>\nThe narrative of conquest that appears in the book of Joshua is not a detailed battle account. It describes a thrust into the middle of Palestine around Jericho and Ai, a southerly drive to defeat the Amorite league, and a northern campaign against Hazor and other towns. The history of Joshua is extremely telescoped, for Joshua’s major military action must have required about six years. Joshua’s friend Caleb was 79 when the Conquest began and 85 after the last great battle with Jabin, king of Hazor (Jos 14:7-10).<\/p>\nWhen the war was over, major strongholds (e.g., Jerusalem) still remained in enemy hands, but the land west of the Jordan was allocated to the nine and a half Hebrew tribes. The task of reducing enemy towns was left to the individual tribes in whose land they were located. The Joshua account was not so much a narrative of Israelite battle prowess as of God’s faithfulness and intervention on behalf of his people. For example, at Jericho they did not attack but merely followed divine orders and watched the defenses collapse; at Gibeon hailstones killed more Amorites than Israelite soldiers did (Jos 10:7-11).<\/p>\nThe Judges<\/p>\nJoshua died some 30 years after he had led the Hebrews into Canaan, and he was followed by a series of divinely appointed leaders who ruled sometimes over the whole of Israel as a loose confederacy and sometimes over one or more tribes. They were judges, civil functionaries, and military leaders all at the same time.<\/p>\nThe book of Judges pictures a series of recurring cycles: apostasy from God, punishment in the form of oppression by neighboring tribes, cries to God for relief, release from bondage under the leadership of a judge, and a period of rest from oppression.<\/p>\nEstablishment of the chronology of the judges is one of the thorniest problems of Scripture. Adding up all years of oppression and rest mentioned in the book gives a total of 410. The book of Acts gives a total of 450 years from the days of Joshua to Samuel (Acts 13:19). The difference in Acts may be accounted for by the addition of 40 years of Eli’s ministry (1 Sm 4:18). Allowing 410 years for the period of the judges, about 30 for the Conquest to the judges, and 40 for the wilderness wanderings, means 480 years from 1050 BC<\/span>, the date for Saul’s kingship, and would give a date of about 1530 for the exodus. This is about 100 years more than even the early date for the exodus. The most probable explanation is that there is some overlap in oppressions and judgeships. For instance, the activities of Jephthah were centered on the eastern frontier, those of Samson in the Philistine plain to the southwest, and those of Deborah and Barak in the north.<\/p>\nThe United Monarchy<\/p>\nBecause of the weakness of Israel resulting from political disunity and the ineptness and corruption of both Eli’s and Samuel’s sons, the people of Israel called for a king to rule over them. This demand was in reality a rejection of the divine plan of theocracy—the rule of God. God granted the Hebrews’ wish but warned them of the disadvantages of monarchy (1 Sm 8:9-21). The concept of kingship was not new to Israel. It had been hinted at in Genesis 49:10 and Numbers 24:17, and Moses had made some very clear statements about it in Deuteronomy 17:14-20.<\/p>\nThe first stage of Hebrew monarchy is commonly called the united monarchy because all Israel was ruled by a single king. This period lasted for 120 years—encompassing the 40-year reigns of Saul (Acts 13:21), David (2 Sm 5:5), and Solomon (1 Kgs 11:42).<\/p>\nThe people asked for a king, and God granted them one, but not one like those of the surrounding nations. The Hebrew king was to be a man who followed God’s dictates in his public and private life, who did not intrude into the affairs of the priesthood, and who did not fall into idolatry, but exerted all his influence to keep the people faithful to God. If he failed in any of these respects, he ran the risk of being deposed by God, of having his line brought to an end, or even of having the people fall into captivity to a foreign power. All this must be kept in mind when evaluating the reigns of Saul, David, Solomon, and the kings of the divided monarchy.<\/p>\nSaul began well. He won a great victory over the Ammonites at Jabesh-gilead and showed considerable wisdom in administrative matters. But after about two years he intruded into the priest’s office to offer sacrifice, bringing the divine prediction that his kingdom would be taken from him (1 Sm 13:8-14). He would go on to enjoy great military victory and ability as a ruler until about the middle of his reign.<\/p>\nAfter Saul’s disobedience to God’s command to totally destroy the Amalekites, the Lord repudiated Saul and instructed Samuel to anoint David privately as future king of Israel. David’s rise to prominence was spurred by his victory over Goliath and the accompanying defeat of the Philistines. Saul later made David commander of the army, and the young man soon earned a reputation greater than that of the king himself. Saul, who had become increasingly mentally disturbed after his relationship with God was broken, began to make attempts on David’s life, and for the last years of Saul’s reign David lived as a fugitive. Meanwhile, the Philistines got completely out of control and finally killed Saul and most of his sons in the great battle of Mt Gilboa, which gave the Philistines control over much of Palestine west of the Jordan (1 Sm 31:1-7).<\/p>\nSoon David became king in Judah with his capital in Hebron. A son of Saul, Ishbosheth, established himself at Mahanaim, east of the Jordan. For seven years the two tiny kingdoms existed side by side (2 Sm 2:2-11). But after the Israelite king and his army commander were assassinated, David became ruler of a united Hebrew kingdom.<\/p>\nNot long after the beginning of his reign (1010–970 BC<\/span>) David completely defeated and subjugated the Philistines. Soon thereafter he captured Jerusalem, making it the capital of the united kingdom. During succeeding years, David built up an empire (2 Sm 8:10; 1 Chr 18–19), conquering Moab, Edom, Damascus, Zobah, and Ammon, so he controlled territory from the Gulf of Aqaba (a branch of the Red Sea) and the Sinai in the south almost to the Euphrates in the north. Moreover, he established good relations, if not an alliance, with Tyre. The establishment of David’s empire was possible because of a power vacuum in the Middle East. The Egyptians, Mycenaeans, Hittites, and Assyrians were either decadent or removed from the stage of history. The Phoenicians, a peaceful commercial people, were also free to expand their trade, and they were happy to sell cedar to David for his palace and the temple.<\/p>\nWithout doubt, David was Israel’s greatest king. Jerusalem came to be known as the city of David. When the king wanted to build the temple as God’s house, God replied that his son should do it instead. But God would in a very real sense build David’s house; he made a covenant with David, promising him that his house (dynasty, kingdom, throne) would be established forever (2 Sm 7). Christ, the infinite One who came from the line of David, alone was capable of fulfilling this divine promise (see Lk 1:31-33; Acts 2:29-36; 13:32-39; 15:14-17).<\/p>\nLike other Oriental monarchs, David fell into the practice of keeping a harem. Scripture names 8 wives and 21 children and refers to other wives and concubines. Such a situation opened the door to family rivalries and questions about succession to the throne. Two sons, Absalom and Adonijah, made a try for the throne, but both efforts were squelched. Solomon, son of David’s favorite wife, Bathsheba, became the next king.<\/p>\nSolomon (970–930 BC<\/span>) was a man of peace and a builder of palaces, cities, fortifications, and the temple. He fortified cities all over his realm and outfitted cities for his chariot corps and cavalry units. With the help of the Phoenicians, he built a seaport and kept a fleet at Ezion-geber, near modern Eilat on the Gulf of Aqaba. He greatly enlarged Jerusalem by enclosing the temple area to the north of David’s city and the southwestern hill now known as Zion. His best-known project was the temple, which took seven years to build. Twice the size of the tabernacle, it was built on the same basic plan; it measured 90 feet (27.4 meters) long and 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide and had magnificent appointments. But he also constructed a palace complex that took 13 years to complete. This included an armory, a throne room, the king’s private residence, and a house for the daughter of pharaoh.<\/p>\nApparently much influenced by the spiritual testimony of David and desiring God’s blessing on his rule, Solomon made a great sacrifice to God at Gibeon near the beginning of his reign. God met him there and offered to grant whatever he might request. Solomon asked for understanding and wisdom to govern God’s people (1 Kgs 3:9). His God-given wisdom is apparent in many administrative decisions and official policies and building plans.<\/p>\nUnfortunately, Solomon did not show such wisdom in maintaining a harem of 700 wives and 300 concubines or in excessive expenditures that left the state in serious financial straits. He even erected places of worship for his foreign wives, thus subsidizing their idolatries and incurring the wrath of God. In fact, foreign wives and their idolatry proved to be his downfall; before Solomon died, God informed him that for this reason he would divide the kingdom at his death and give most of it to someone other than Solomon’s son. But for David’s sake, God would keep Judah and Jerusalem in the hands of the Davidic line (1 Kgs 11:9-13).<\/p>\nThe Divided Kingdom<\/p>\nAfter the death of Solomon, the Near East was destined to become a very different place. Israel was no longer in a power vacuum. The Assyrian Empire rose in Mesopotamia, to be followed by the Neo-Babylonian and the Medo-Persian Empires in turn. Egypt was temporarily powerful in the south, but it would later come under control of Assyria and Medo-Persia. These empires exerted great pressure on Israel and dominated one or both of the two Hebrew kingdoms.<\/p>\n\nWhen Solomon died, his son Rehoboam took the throne and was forced to deal with a rising tide of resentment over the high taxes and economic stagnation of Solomon’s last years. When Rehoboam refused to give relief, all the northern tribes broke away and formed the northern kingdom, Israel, under the leadership of Jeroboam. The southern kingdom, Judah, was left with only the territory of Judah and Benjamin. A total of 20 kings ruled in each of the separate kingdoms. While the north had several dynasties and the reigns of kings were generally short, in the south the dynasty of David continued to rule and the reigns were longer.<\/p>\n<h5>The Northern Kingdom<\/h5>\nThe northern kingdom lasted from the division in 930 BC<\/span> until its conquest by Assyria in 722. Jeroboam, fearing that he would lose the loyalty of the people if they continued to go to Jerusalem to worship, set up a new religion of his own. Instituting calf worship, he built shrines at Dan in the north and Bethel in the south. This idolatry drew the condemnation of God and fulfilled the prediction that Jeroboam’s line would be wiped out. All his successors are said to have followed in his idolatrous steps. Israel found itself at war during much of its history—with Judah, Syria, or Assyria. Jeroboam established his capital first at Shechem and later at Tirzah.<\/p>\nFour other kings of the north require special comment: Omri, Ahab, Jehu, and Jeroboam II. Omri (885–874 BC<\/span>) must have been an impressive ruler. Generations later, Assyrians still spoke of Israel as the land of Omri. After he had established himself on the throne, he located the permanent capital of the kingdom at Samaria and began the palace complex there. Early in his reign he was successful in conquering Moab, and later he reestablished the good relations with Tyre that existed in the days of David and Solomon. Apparently he established a full alliance and cemented it with the marriage of his son Ahab to Jezebel, a princess of Tyre.<\/p>\nAhab (874–853 BC<\/span>) was one of the most significant of Israel’s kings. He and his wife, Jezebel, promoted the vile idolatry of Baal worship with its religious prostitution, arousing the powerful opposition of the prophet Elijah. Ahab was a formidable military man, defeating the Syrians in major campaigns and participating in a coalition that fought the Assyrians to a virtual standstill. He also built extensively at Samaria, Hazor, Megiddo, and other towns, as excavations show.<\/p>\nJehu (841–814 BC<\/span>) was God’s agent for punishing the house of Omri and destroying Baal worship in Israel. He did eradicate Baal worship and liquidated literally scores of relatives and court officials of Ahab. But he was so ruthless that he killed off the people who knew how to run the government; subsequently, it did not work well. Jehu also was forced to become a vassal to Assyria.<\/p>\nJeroboam II ruled during most of the first half of the eighth century (793–753 BC<\/span>) and brought the kingdom to its greatest extent and prosperity. He, with his contemporary Uzziah in the south, ruled most of the land David had once controlled. This was possible because the Assyrians were in a period of decline during most of the first half of the century.<\/p>\nProphets who were active during the history of the northern kingdom include the nonwriting prophets Elijah and Elisha and the writing prophets Jonah, Amos, and Hosea.<\/p>\n<h5>The Southern Kingdom<\/h5>\nThe history of the southern kingdom of Judah was quite different from that of the northern kingdom. The temple was there and so were large numbers of Levites, many of whom came south after the division of the kingdom to protest the idolatry of the north. In addition to this spiritual strength, there was greater political stability and unity, promoted by the fact that only two tribes—Judah and Benjamin—shared power, and all the kings were of the Davidic dynasty. Moreover, eight of the kings were good monarchs. There were also periodic religious revivals. God granted the southern kingdom about 100 more years of existence than the north. But Judah, too, fell into idolatry and went into captivity for her sins.<\/p>\nRehoboam, the first king in the south, is especially remembered because he refused to listen to wise counsel about fiscal matters and perpetrated the division of the kingdom. He is also remembered for his religious policies. After a good beginning, he allowed apostasy to get out of control and brought the judgment of God in the form of an invasion in his fifth year (926 BC<\/span>) by Shishak I of Egypt, resulting in extensive plunder and payment of tribute. Thereafter, he launched an extensive program to fortify the realm. Shishak’s invasion did have the effect of producing a partial and temporary spiritual reform, but the general trend of Rehoboam’s reign was downward.<\/p>\nConditions during the reign of his son, Abijam, were worse, but Asa (910–869 BC<\/span>) initiated a religious reform that was effective for most of his reign. When threatened by the northern kingdom during his latter years, however, Asa turned to Syria for help instead of to God, and he seems to have defied the prophets of God to his dying day.<\/p>\nAsa’s son Jehoshaphat (872–848 BC<\/span>) was apparently influenced by his father’s early religious devotion, and his reign was characterized by faithfulness, winning the favor of God. However, he seems to have made a full alliance with Ahab of Israel, which resulted in the marriage of his son Jehoram to Ahab’s daughter Athaliah. This alliance involved Jehoshaphat in almost ruinous joint ventures with Ahab, and later with two of his sons when they became kings of Israel. It also opened the door for the introduction of Baal worship into Judah when Jehoram came to the throne in the southern kingdom. For his sin Jehoram (853–841 BC<\/span>) suffered internal revolt, invasion, and death from a horrible disease.<\/p>\nAfter his death, his last remaining son, Ahaziah, ruled less than a year, following the wicked ways of his father. When Ahaziah died in battle, the queen mother, Athaliah, decided to seize the throne for herself and to secure her power by killing off all those in line to the throne. But she missed Ahaziah’s infant son Joash, who was kept hidden in the temple for six years.<\/p>\nWhen Joash was seven, Jehoiada the high priest arranged his coronation and also the execution of the murderous and idolatrous Athaliah. During his early years when Joash was influenced by good counsel, he did well. But after the middle of his reign (835–796 BC<\/span>), he began to listen to the princes who wanted to restore idolatry, and conditions deteriorated. Military reversals brought on economic decline and ultimately the king’s assassination.<\/p>\nHis son Amaziah (796–767 BC<\/span>) started well with victory over Edom and faithfulness to God. But he, too, fell into idolatry and was totally defeated by the northern kingdom, being held prisoner there. At that point his son Uzziah took over (c. 792 BC<\/span>) and began a long and generally successful reign. During the several decades that followed, Assyria was in decline, and Uzziah and his contemporary in the north, Jeroboam II, were able to expand Hebrew holdings so that between them they controlled most of the territory Solomon had ruled.<\/p>\nUzziah (792–740 BC<\/span>) was able to restore the power of Judah rather quickly after his father’s defeat by Israel. Then he subjugated the Philistines in the southwest and the Ammonites across the Jordan; he strengthened his hold on the Edomites. All during his reign economic conditions improved. But at the height of his power Uzziah foolishly violated the high priest’s prerogatives and offered sacrifice in the temple. For this he was smitten with leprosy; his son Jotham was co-regent during the years 750–740 BC<\/span>, going on to rule alone for about five more years. Meanwhile, Assyrian power became resurgent.<\/p>\nBy and large, Jotham merely carried on the policies of Uzziah. But the administration of his son Ahaz (735–715 BC<\/span>) was very much affected by the Assyrian threat. Israel and Syria wanted him to join in war against Assyria, but he refused, being pro-Assyrian in sympathy. When Israel and Syria invaded Judah, King Ahaz sent tribute to Assyria and became her vassal in return for protection. This rash course of action was vainly opposed by Isaiah, who was prophet at court (c. 740–700 BC<\/span>). Contemporaneously, the prophet Micah ministered to the common people of Judah. The pro-Assyrian policy of Ahaz was accompanied by a renewed sympathy for idolatry, and this brought the judgment of God in the form of invasion by Edomites and Philistines and trouble with Assyria. In fact, during this period, Assyria had annexed the northern kingdom (722 BC<\/span>) and removed many of her people into captivity.<\/p>\nThe next king of Judah, Hezekiah (715–686 BC<\/span>), was greatly sobered by the fall of Israel because of her sins, and he determined to launch a reform in his realm. He was anti-Assyrian too, but he did not dare to discontinue tribute payments and strike for independence until after Sennacherib came to the throne in Nineveh in 705 BC<\/span>. At first Sennacherib was too preoccupied to attend to Judah, but finally in 701 he invaded. Despite tremendous initial success, he was stopped by a divinely sent plague (Is 36–39). Isaiah stood by the king to reassure and sustain him during this emergency.<\/p>\nHezekiah’s son Manasseh (697–642 BC<\/span>) ruled longer than any other king of Israel or Judah. Unfortunately, he turned his back on his father’s example and caused the people to fall into gross idolatry (2 Kgs 21:9). Carried away captive by the Assyrians late in his reign, he repented of his evil and God restored him to his throne; thereafter, he led some reforms. But the land was too steeped in iniquity to be rescued. His son Amon (642–640 BC<\/span>) reverted to the idolatry he knew in his youth.<\/p>\nThe situation was different with Josiah (640–609 BC<\/span>), however. Throughout his reign he dedicated himself to reform. He sought to root out idolatry and to restore the temple and its worship. In 622 BC<\/span> the Book of the Law was found during repair of the temple, and its demands—which had been forgotten—made a great impression on king and people alike. It is certain that Jeremiah and Zephaniah ministered during Josiah’s reign, as did Nahum and Habakkuk (in all probability).<\/p>\nInternational conditions were now changing rapidly. Assyria was declining, and Nineveh fell to Babylon and the Medes in 612 BC<\/span>. Three years later Pharaoh Neco of Egypt marched north to aid his Assyrian ally. When Josiah tried to stop him, he was killed in battle.<\/p>\nFrom this point everything was downhill for Judah. None of the rest of the kings was devout, and political power and economic health rapidly declined. The people put one of Josiah’s sons, Jehoahaz, on the throne. He lasted three months. Pharaoh Neco replaced him with Jehoiakim (609–598 BC<\/span>), another son of Josiah. In 605 Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon defeated Neco, invaded Judah, and took tribute and hostages from Jehoiakim, including Daniel and his friends (Dn 1:1). Jehoiakim revolted in 600 BC<\/span>, but Nebuchadnezzar did not come to deal with him personally until 597 BC<\/span>. He died before the Babylonians arrived, and his son Jehoiachin came to the throne in 598 BC<\/span> to rule for only three months before the Babylonians carried him away into exile. Ezekiel was among the many captives taken on that occasion.<\/p>\nThe Babylonians then put Zedekiah, youngest son of Josiah, on the throne in 597 BC<\/span>. When he rebelled, Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to Jerusalem and took the city (587 BC<\/span>), destroying it and the temple and carrying off large numbers of people. The judgment of God had finally fallen on the Jews for their idolatrous ways.<\/p>\nThe Restoration<\/p>\nIn judgment God remembered mercy. This is evident in individual lives, when faithful ones like Daniel, Esther, or Nehemiah rose to a position of importance in political life, or as numerous other persons became prosperous in the foreign environment. It is evident on the community level as God moved to protect Hebrew enclaves scattered abroad and to restore an organized society in Palestine.<\/p>\nAmong the exiles, Judaism as a way of life separated from its own political system or cultic center and began to emerge. Jews finally turned their backs on idolatry. And without a temple, priesthood, king, or land, they turned to the divine Scriptures as their rallying point and the foundation of their community. During this period they developed the synagogue as a place for fellowship, prayer, and study.<\/p>\nGod’s restoration of an organized community to Palestine involved particularly the fortunes of his “anointed” Cyrus (Is 44:28; 45:1). Cyrus was a Persian prince who in 559 BC<\/span> revolted against the dominant dynasty controlling the Median Empire. After consolidating his hold on the throne, he proceeded to conquer Asia Minor and the Chaldean or Neo-Babylonian Empire. As a humane man and a wise administrator, he permitted the captive peoples to return to their homes and rebuild their communities. Cyrus’s decree to the Jews appears in Ezra 1 and dates probably to 538 BC<\/span>. A total of almost 50,000 went back to Judah as a result of this edict (Ezr 2:64-65).<\/p>\nUnder the stresses and strains of reestablishment, the people built their houses but got no further than laying the foundation of a new temple. Finally, the prophets Haggai and Zechariah stirred the people to build the house of God (Ezr 5:1). They began in the second year of Darius I, the Great (520 BC<\/span>; Hg 1:1; Zec 1:1), and completed the work in his sixth year (515 BC<\/span>; Ezr 6:15).<\/p>\nDuring the reign of Darius’s son Xerxes (486–465 BC<\/span>), a plot was hatched to exterminate all the Jews in the Persian Empire, which at that time controlled the lands where Jews lived. Fortunately, Xerxes (Ahasuerus in the book of Esther), in his third year (483 BC<\/span>; Est 1:3), went searching for a new queen and chose Esther, who managed to preserve her people.<\/p>\nXerxes’ son Artaxerxes I (465–424 BC<\/span>) also figured significantly in Jewish history. In his seventh year (458 BC<\/span>; Ezr 7:7), under the leadership of Ezra, a second contingent of Jews returned to Jerusalem. And in Artaxerxes’ 20th year (445 BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1), Nehemiah went to Jerusalem to supervise the rebuilding of the walls of the city. Malachi probably wrote his prophecy to the Jews in Jerusalem during the latter part of Artaxerxes’ reign.<\/p>\nAfter the fall of Samaria and the captivity of Judah, the Hebrews remaining in the land intermarried with various pagan groups in the area. Their offspring became the Samaritans, a religious and racial admixture. These people had moved into the vacuum left by the destruction of Judah, and naturally they looked with disfavor on an intrusion of Babylonian Jews into an area they had come to call their own. They did all they could to frustrate the efforts of Nehemiah to rebuild the walls. It took all the courage, tact, energy, and persuasiveness Ezra and Nehemiah could muster to prevent the returning Jews from intermarrying with racially mixed people of the land. Such intermarriage would have meant the ultimate absorption and destruction of the Jewish people.<\/p>\nA Samaritan temple was later built on Mt Gerizim (probably during the fifth century BC<\/span>), and it became the center of the Samaritan worship. The hostility between Samaritans and Jews continued on into the NT period (Jn 4) and exists to the present.<\/p>\nThe Intertestamental Period<\/p>\nAlexander the Great conquered the Persian Empire with lightning speed. When the people of Jerusalem threw open their gates in 332 BC<\/span> and capitulated without a fight, Alexander treated them well. After his death in 323 BC<\/span>, Palestine passed back and forth among his successors until Ptolemy I of Egypt managed to establish control in 301 BC<\/span>. Thereafter the area remained in Egyptian hands until 198 BC<\/span>. The Ptolemies were tolerant and granted the Jews considerable autonomy, allowing them to develop their unique culture undisturbed as long as they paid their taxes and remained submissive. Many Jews settled in Alexandria and gradually forgot their Hebrew in the Hellenistic environment. As a result, a translation of the OT into Greek (the Septuagint) was produced there. While the Ptolemies did not force Hellenism on the Jews of either Alexandria or Palestine, many were influenced by Hellenistic ideas.<\/p>\nWhen Ptolemy V came to the throne as a minor in 203 BC<\/span>, Antiochus III of Syria took advantage of the weakened Egypt and conquered Palestine (198 BC<\/span>). Apparently the Jews hoped to gain something from the change and welcomed the Syrians. But their hope was ill-founded. Antiochus III suffered disastrous defeat at the hands of Rome at Magnesia in 190 BC<\/span>. Syria not only lost much territory but also was forced to pay a huge indemnity. Thereafter, the Jews suffered under great financial burdens, along with other peoples of the empire. The next Syrian king, Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164 BC<\/span>), decided to launch an effort to achieve greater internal strength and unity within the empire by forcing, among other things, a greater acceptance of Greek culture and the cult of the divine ruler. Naturally this idolatrous requirement weighed heavily on the monotheistic Jews and incited revolution.<\/p>\nBut this does not completely explain the Maccabean revolt against Syria. In 168 BC<\/span> armed conflict broke out between Jewish factions in Jerusalem. Antiochus IV chose to interpret this as open rebellion and sent an army against the city. His forces demolished part of the city wall and many houses. After this Antiochus decided to suppress Judaism completely, and he dedicated the temple to Zeus and sacrificed swine on the altar. Circumcision, Sabbath observance, and other religious festivals were no longer permitted, and public worship of heathen gods became compulsory.<\/p>\nSome Jews capitulated to Antiochus’s orders or only resisted passively, but a few decided to resist openly. Chief among them were Mattathias and his five sons. After the early death of Mattathias, his son Judas Maccabeus led his forces to victory over the Syrians, regaining the right to restore Jewish worship. The rededication of the temple on December 25, 164 BC<\/span>, inaugurated the Festival of Hanukkah (1 Macc 4:36-59). Subsequently, Jonathan and Simon (other sons of Mattathias) continued the struggle until independence was gained in 142 BC<\/span>; this was possible in large part because they saw how to take advantage of the increasing weakness of Syrian rulers and the competition for the royal office.<\/p>\nSimon ruled the Jewish state until his assassination in 134 BC<\/span>, when his son John Hyrcanus (134–104 BC<\/span>) took over. John Hyrcanus fought successfully in the east, north, and south, gaining land in Transjordan, capturing Shechem and the Samaritan temple on Mt Gerizim, and subjugating the Idumeans in the south, forcing them to adopt Judaism. His son Aristobulus ruled for only about a year (104–103 BC<\/span>), but he added a portion of Galilee to the kingdom. When he died, his widow married his brother Alexander Janneus (103–76 BC<\/span>). Janneus carried on almost incessant military action during his reign, and by the time of his death had almost recovered the kingdom of Solomon.<\/p>\nWhen Janneus died, Alexandra, widow of two kings, took the throne (76–67 BC<\/span>) and her eldest son, Hyrcanus II, became high priest. Her reign was peaceful and prosperous, but when she died, her sons fell to squabbling. Their appeals to Pompey, who was campaigning in the eastern Mediterranean area, were responsible for Roman interference in the region and conquest of Palestine in 63 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe Roman Period<\/p>\nAfter the Romans took over Palestine, Hyrcanus II was confirmed as high priest and was also appointed as ethnarch or political ruler (63–40 BC<\/span>). But Antipater, father of Herod the Great, was the real power behind the throne, and during many of those years Hyrcanus was virtually unable to function because of the confusion of the Roman civil wars. Antipater was loyal to Rome and saw that Roman policies were carried out; he won Julius Caesar’s favor toward Jews of both Palestine and in the Dispersion.<\/p>\nWith the support of Mark Antony, Herod managed to get himself appointed king of Judea by the Roman senate in 40 BC<\/span>. But a Parthian invasion of Syria and Jewish hatred for the Romans made it possible for Antigonus II, last king of the Maccabean family, to rule for three years (40–37 BC<\/span>). Finally, Herod ascended his throne in 37 and ruled until 4 BC<\/span>. As an allied king, Herod proved to be an excellent ruler from the Roman point of view and earned the title of “Great.” He brought some order to regions east of the Jordan and made possible organization of the Roman province of Arabia. He also furthered the cultural plans of Augustus for development of a Greco-Roman civilization throughout the whole empire.<\/p>\nHerod admired Greek culture and contributed to building projects in Rhodes, Antioch, Damascus, Athens, and elsewhere outside Palestine. Within Palestine he rebuilt Samaria and named it Sebaste in honor of Augustus (Sebastos<\/span> is Greek for “Augustus”) and also constructed the great port of Caesarea. Probably about as large as Manhattan Island, it became the capital of Roman Palestine. Among his many other building projects, remodeling the temple in Jerusalem was the most famous. Begun in 20 BC<\/span>, it was not completed until just a few years before its destruction in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nThe material splendor of Herod’s reign did not win the affection or support of the Jews, however. Nor did he achieve peace and harmony in his family, among whom there were periodic eruptions of treason, unfaithfulness, and murder. He worried about any threat to his rule and cracked down hard to destroy such threats, as is evident from his slaughter of the infants in Bethlehem after the birth of Christ.<\/p>\nUltimately, Herod controlled Idumea, Judea, Samaria, Galilee, Perea, and the area northeast of the Sea of Galilee. By his last will, his son Archelaus was to rule Idumea, Judea, and Samaria; Antipas, Galilee and Perea; and Philip, the region northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Archelaus was deposed in AD<\/span> 6, and his territory became a Roman province (AD<\/span> 6–41) to be ruled by direct appointees of Rome. The best-known of these was Pontius Pilate (AD<\/span> 26–36), who ordered the crucifixion of Jesus. Antipas was more successful and built a new capital at Tiberias, but he ran afoul of the emperor’s good pleasure in AD<\/span> 39 and was deposed. Philip was the most effective of the three and ruled until his death in AD<\/span> 34. Philip’s lands were later given to Herod Agrippa I in AD<\/span> 37; the holdings of Antipas were then added in AD<\/span> 39; and in 41 Agrippa also received Samaria, Judea, and Idumea.<\/p>\nHerod Agrippa I (AD<\/span> 37–44) was the heir of the Maccabees (through his grandmother Mariamne, first wife of Herod the Great), and for this reason had the support of patriotic Jews and of the Pharisees for his observance of divine ordinances. But when he built a new north wall for Jerusalem and dabbled in foreign affairs, he aroused the suspicions of the Romans; when he died in AD<\/span> 44, they turned the kingdom into a Roman province.<\/p>\nAs is clear from the Gospels, several sects had arisen in Palestine by Roman times and were active during the first century. The Zealots opposed Roman rule and advocated armed rebellion. Herodians supported the Herodian family and Roman power. The Pharisees were fanatically devoted to the law and were supernaturalists in theological orientation. They were somewhat content to support Rome if given religious freedom, and they dominated the synagogues of the land. The Sadducees were antisupernaturalists, tended to collaborate with the ruling regime, and were dominant in the temple. Generally speaking, the literature of the intertestamental period and the popular mentality of the time tended to view the Messiah as a political deliverer who would free his people from foreign domination and set up a new independent kingdom.<\/p>\nRoman prefects ruled Palestine from AD<\/span> 44–66. They had a knack for offending the religious scruples of the Jews and alienating them in other ways. With Felix (AD<\/span> 52–60) there began a constant tension between Jews and Romans that led to the first Jewish revolt (AD<\/span> 66–70). While Paul was imprisoned in Caesarea (Acts 23:23–24:27) about AD<\/span> 58–60, riots broke out there between Jews and Gentiles. Festus (AD<\/span> 60–62; Acts 25) was an able administrator, but the situation was almost out of hand. After he died in office, there was virtual anarchy until his successor, Albinus, arrived (AD<\/span> 62–64). Totally incompetent and dishonest, Albinus was recalled in 64 and replaced by Florus (AD<\/span> 64–66). Florus was even worse, resorting to open robbery and bribery until there was no safety or justice in the land. Finally, the Jews could take no more.<\/p>\nThe spark that ignited the fires of rebellion was an anti-Semitic act by the Hellenistic population of Caesarea in AD<\/span> 66. Soon riots spread to numerous cities, and Roman garrisons were massacred in several places. But the Jews were not united, and in Jerusalem armed bands of Jews fought with each other for mastery. Vespasian was chosen to command the Roman army of some 60,000 to deal with the insurrection. He had subjugated most of Palestine by the time he was elevated to the imperial chair in AD<\/span> 69 (after the death of Nero), and he left his son Titus in charge of completing the operations. In August of AD<\/span> 70 the walls of Jerusalem were breached, many of the people butchered, and the city and the temple leveled. Masada held out until AD<\/span> 73. Palestine had been flattened by Roman might. Loss of life and property had been incalculable and indescribable.<\/p>\nOn two more occasions the Jews were destined to fight disastrously against the Romans. Under Trajan’s rule a rebellion of Jews broke out in Cyrenaica in AD<\/span> 115 and spread rapidly to Cyprus, Egypt, Palestine, and Mesopotamia. In the beginning it was an outgrowth of agitation between the Jews and their Hellenistic neighbors, but it developed into a challenge to Roman authority. This was particularly true after the successes of Parthia on Rome’s eastern frontier when there seemed to be some hope of success in throwing off the Roman yoke. Wherever Jews got the upper hand, they perpetrated massacres, and the non-Semitic population retaliated in kind. Trajan ruthlessly suppressed the rebels and restored order everywhere except Egypt; his successor, Hadrian, was left to accomplish that.<\/p>\nBut Hadrian faced a new rebellion of his own, brought on by his law forbidding circumcision (which he considered to be inhumane) and his decision in AD<\/span> 130 to rebuild Jerusalem as Aelia Capitolina and erect a temple to Jupiter on the site of the temple of Yahweh. The latter would not only profane the temple site but also would preclude any rebuilding of the Jewish temple.<\/p>\nLeader of this second Jewish revolt was Simeon, prince of Israel, called Bar-Kochba (“Son of the Star”). Both sides fought with such great ferocity for over three years (AD<\/span> 132–135) that the population of Judea was almost exterminated. Jerusalem was rebuilt as a Roman colony, and Jews were forbidden to enter on pain of death. Even as late as the fourth century they were permitted to enter only once a year, on the anniversary of the destruction of the temple by Nebuchadnezzar. After the Bar-Kochba revolt, Judaism retreated increasingly within the citadel of the written and oral law, thus separating itself from the Gentiles.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Abraham; Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Conquest and Allotment of the Land; David; Diaspora of the Jews; Exodus, The; First Jewish Revolt; Jew; Judaism; Moses; Patriarchs, Period of the; Saul #2; Solomon; Postexilic Period; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ISRAEL, History of An account of God’s sovereign purpose in calling a people out of paganism and establishing them as witnesses for the true faith among the nations, of God’s sovereign power in protecting them from extinction, of his sovereign justice in dealing with their departure from his ways of holiness, of God’s sovereign grace in forgiving their sins and restoring them to fellowship with himself by providing through them a Savior for the entire world. Preview • Patriarchal Age • Sojour...","summary_en":"ISRAEL, History of An account of God’s sovereign purpose in calling a people out of paganism and establishing them as witnesses for the true faith among the nations, of God’s sovereign power in protecting them from extinction, of his sovereign justice in dealing with their departure from his ways of holiness, of God’s sovereign grace in forgiving their sins and restoring them to fellowship with himself by providing through them a Savior for the entire world. Preview • Patriarchal Age • Sojour...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19247,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jerusalem","title_en":"Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>JERUSALEM<\/h3>\nHistoric city sacred to Christians, Jews, and Muslims; the chief city of ancient Palestine and of the modern state of Israel.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Meaning of the Name<\/p>\n• Geographical Situation<\/p>\n• History<\/p>\nMeaning of the Name<\/p>\n<h5>Egyptian Meaning<\/h5>\nThe earliest mention of the name occurs in the Egyptian Execration Texts of the 19th and 18th centuries BC<\/span> in the form probably transliterated Urusalimum.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>Semitic Meaning<\/h5>\nIn the 14th century BC<\/span> the name appears in the Abdi-Hepa correspondence from Tell el-Amarna, written Urusalim.<\/em> Later it is found in the inscription of the Assyrian monarch Sennacherib, written Ursalimmu.<\/em> The two transparently Semitic elements, uru<\/em> (city) and salim<\/em> (a divine name), have produced the hyphenated composite meaning “the city of [the god] Salim.” Hyphenating geographic names to incorporate divine elements was a common practice in the ancient Near Eastern world, and the deity Salim, or Shalem (Akkadian, Shulmanu; cf. Solomon), was a member of the Amorite pantheon (cf. Ez 16:3). Since the oldest textual evidence—Egyptian, West Semitic, and Akkadian—supports only urusalim,<\/em> and since the OT itself attests that Jerusalem was not originally a Hebrew city, it is probable that the Semitic etymological origin of this name produced the meaning “the city of [the god] Salim.”<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrew\/Aramaic Meaning<\/h5>\nIn the Hebrew OT, Jerusalem is written yerushalayim<\/span>,<\/em> and in the Aramaic portions the name is rendered yerushalem.<\/em> Containing the elements yarah<\/span> (“to found,” cf. Jb 38:6) and shalem<\/span> (a divine name), it yields the meaning “the foundation of [the god] Shalem,” the sh<\/em> of the Hebrew\/Aramaic to be taken as the phonemic equivalent of the Akkadian s.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>Greek Meaning<\/h5>\nIn the NT, Jerusalem translates the two Greek words Ierousalem<\/span> and Hierosoluma<\/span>.<\/em> The former is simply the Greek transliteration of the OT Aramaic form; the latter reflects the word hieros<\/span> (holy), representing a Hellenized paronomasia, corresponding neither with the Semitic root of the name nor with the city’s historical reality.<\/p>\n\nGeographical Situation<\/p>\nJerusalem is situated 31º 46’ 45” north latitude and 35º 13’ 25” east longitude. The city rises to just over 2,500 feet (762 meters) above sea level and rests some 14 miles (22.5 kilometers) west of the northern end of the Dead Sea and approximately 33 miles (53 kilometers) east of the Mediterranean coast.<\/p>\nA Mediterranean climate pervades Jerusalem. From October to May, the city experiences its rainy season, with an annual accumulation of about 25 inches (63.5 centimeters). Throughout January and February the rains are often driven by winds, and the mercury drops to near freezing (cf. Ezr 10:9); the coldest weather coincides with the days of heaviest rainfall. Snow falls two years out of three. There is no rain between May and September, and a high percentage of solar radiation produces oppressive heat.<\/p>\nLike Rome, Jerusalem is a city set on hills. A cluster of five hills comprise the denuded quadrilateral landmass roughly one mile (1.6 kilometers) long and one-half mile (.8 kilometer) wide, bordered on all sides, except the north, by deep ravines. Stationed astride the crest of Palestine’s central plateau and located at the crossroad of the watershed route connecting Hebron, Bethlehem, Shechem (Nablus), and points north with the longitudinal route from the Jordan Valley and the several arteries to the Mediterranean, Jerusalem is commercially central to the country. The lateral highway through the Judean mountains and eastward could not pass south of Jerusalem, being blocked by the Dead Sea and its sheer cliffs. Because it lacked significant water supply, the city’s strategic commercial location was probably the deciding criterion for its original occupation.<\/p>\nWater, a lifeline of civilization, has always been in meager supply at Jerusalem. The only natural source of permanent water was the spring at Gihon, today sometimes called the Virgin’s Fountain, located in the Kidron Valley immediately east of the ancient fortress conquered by David. Tunnels were burrowed to provide access to the Gihon when Jerusalem was besieged. Later, the Siloam Tunnel was cut through nearly 1,800 feet (548.6 meters) of limestone, allowing the waters of the Gihon to pass through the hill of Zion to the pool of Siloam.<\/p>\nFarther south, where the Kidron and Hinnom Valleys converge, there was another spring, called En-rogel in the Bible (modern Bir Eyyub). Owing to the lowering of the water table, this source of water ceased to percolate and was subsequently converted into a well.<\/p>\nThese two sources were clearly insufficient to sustain a sizable population, and both were too deep in the Kidron to be employed for irrigation. Hence, a vast network of cisterns, reservoirs, and water conduits for supplemental supply has been devised since ancient times.<\/p>\nHistory<\/p>\n<h5>The Pre-Israelite Period<\/h5>\nPaleolithic and Mesolithic flint implements of an Acheulian type found in the plain of the Rephaim constitute the earliest evidence of the existence of human beings in the area of Jerusalem. Near the beginning of the fourth millennium BC<\/span>, the southeastern hill was first occupied by a sedentary group, a fact evinced from the artifactual remains recovered from three graves and the pottery type discovered on bedrock. By 1800 BC<\/span>, the crest of the southeastern hill was walled in rudimentary form.<\/p>\nFrom the Bible one learns that Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek, king of Salem (Gn 14:17-20). Again (ch 22) the great patriarch visited an area later incorporated into Jerusalem, Mt Moriah, the site where Isaac was nearly sacrificed. Second Chronicles 3:1 identifies Mt Moriah as the temple hill. In the 15th century BC<\/span> or thereabouts the Hurrians (possibly the biblical Horites) penetrated into Palestine. About the same time at Jerusalem, extensive building activities were initiated and improved fortification methods were introduced. Accordingly, most writers attribute these projects at Jerusalem to the Hurrian infiltration.<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest and Settlement Period<\/h5>\nUpon learning of Gibeon’s placation of Joshua’s army (Jos 9), Adoni-zedek, king of Jerusalem, formed a coalition with the kings of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon and attacked Gibeon. In response, Joshua marshaled his forces and defeated the coalition, killing all five monarchs at Makkedah (Jos 10:16-27). It appears that the tribe of Judah temporarily took control of Jerusalem and burned it in the wake of this victory (Jgs 1:8). However, the Jebusites reoccupied the site (Jos 15:63; 1 Chr 11:4-5). Apparently, the Jebusites more or less maintained control of Jerusalem until the time of David.<\/p>\nThe city appears again as a boundary separating the tribal inheritances of Judah and Benjamin, becoming the southern border of the latter’s domain. The identification of the “shoulder of the Jebusite” (rsv<\/span> Jos 15:8; 18:16) with Jerusalem is usually explained as a reference to the southwestern hill, probably held also by the Jebusites at this time.<\/p>\n<h5>David’s Jerusalem<\/h5>\nFollowing the Philistine victory atop Mt Gilboa, where Saul and Jonathan were killed in battle (1 Sm 31), David reigned over the tribe of Judah from Hebron, while a surviving son of Saul, Ishbosheth, ruled over the northern tribes from Mahanaim. During the two-year struggle that ensued, the house of David grew stronger while the forces of Ishbosheth shrunk considerably (2 Sm 3:1). This struggle culminated in the death and decapitation of Ishbosheth and the dispersion of his forces. David became the undisputed monarch of all the tribes of Israel.<\/p>\n\nBut the new monarch recognized that a consolidated national capital acceptable to both the north and the south would have to be created. Jerusalem had remained neutral in the conflict, being the site of a Jebusite enclave. It also represented a location that was militarily desirable, and by being commercially central to the fledgling nation, it was ideally suited.<\/p>\nIn the course of David’s 33-year reign at Jerusalem he made the city into the center of an empire that stretched from Egypt to the Euphrates River. He engaged in considerable building and expansion of the city. He fortified the Canaanite walls and prepared an extension of the city, possibly along the east slope of Zion.<\/p>\nDavid also constructed a royal residence, receiving the technology and many materials from Hiram, king of Tyre (2 Sm 5:11). Nehemiah 12:37 suggests that this palace also may have been near the east side of the southeastern hill. It was from a window of this house that Michal saw David dancing in an undignified manner—according to her perception (2 Sm 6:16-23). From the roof of this palace David gazed upon Bathsheba as she bathed (11:2-5), and from this residence he plotted the murder of her husband, Uriah (vv 14-25).<\/p>\nBy bringing the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sm 6:1-15)—implying that Yahweh would reside there—David displayed his most profound leadership. For in this perceptive act he merged for the first time in Israel’s history its political and religious capitals. Jerusalem took on the unique character of a holy city and<\/em> a royal city. As a result, the city would be known as the “city of David” (5:7) as well as the “city of God” (Ps 46:4). Adult male Jews would make their pilgrimages to Jerusalem to take part in the feasts and offerings. It only remained for David to make this arrangement permanent, to enshrine Yahweh at Jerusalem forever by building him a temple. David aspired to do so (2 Sm 7), but God responded that such an undertaking was to be reserved for a son of the king.<\/p>\n<h5>The First Temple Period<\/h5>\nA growing national realization of the extent and impact of the Davidic empire was employed by Solomon to full advantage. Himself an innovative and dynamic administrator, Solomon turned Jerusalem into a cosmopolitan center. The revenues of caravans from Egypt to Babylonia as well as the Phoenician trade with Elath, the Red Sea, and Ophir passed through his royal capital. Solomon’s own naval fleet traveled as far as Tarshish, most likely located on an island along the western coast of Spain. These expeditions returned every three years with such exotic commodities as apes, peacocks, silver, iron, tin, ivory, and gold. The capital swelled with residents and visitors, and the monarch’s fame became proverbial (1 Kgs 10).<\/p>\nSolomon was the great OT builder of Jerusalem. His most significant building enterprise was undoubtedly the first temple. Erected on the summit of the temple hill, this edifice required seven years to construct, from April\/May 966 (1 Kgs 6:1) to October\/November 959 (v 38). Hiram again provided both the technology and the cedar beams.<\/p>\nOne may find in 1 Kings 10:27 a succinct encapsulation of the economic wealth lavished upon Jerusalem by Solomon: silver became as abundant as stone, and cedar was as common as sycamore. It is estimated that the annual revenues that coursed into Jerusalem were as high as $17 million. Ironically, it was the fiscal factor that became the burden of Solomon’s monarchy. Overextending himself financially, his economic and political programs soon required the levying of heavy taxes (1 Kgs 4:7-19) and the drafting of Israelites into forced labor (1 Kgs 5:13-18; cf. 9:20-23). These were the primary factors that prompted the schism in Israel’s political structure after the death of Solomon and resulted in a divided monarchy by 930 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nWhen the Babylonian army laid final siege to Jerusalem (588 BC<\/span>), capturing it after many months, the city was completely decimated. The temple and Solomon’s palace were destroyed with fire; the city walls were demolished. The temple treasures were completely plundered, and the citizens were deported in large numbers.<\/p>\n<h5>The Second Temple Period<\/h5>\nJerusalem’s doom and 70-year captivity had been spelled out by Jeremiah (Jer 25:11; 29:10; cf. 2 Chr 36:21; Dn 9:2). In 538 BC<\/span>, after the fall of Babylon, Cyrus, king of Persia, issued his famous proclamation (2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezr 1:1-4; cf. Is 44:28; 45:1). Thereupon, a humble group of Jews returned to Jerusalem with Sheshbazzar, a prince of Judah (Ezr 1:8-11) and Zerubbabel (2:2). In 515 BC<\/span>, the doors of the second temple were opened officially, and the Passover feast was again observed from Jerusalem (6:15-18).<\/p>\nEzra came to Jerusalem in the seventh year of Artaxerxes (Ezr 7:7). Assuming this is a reference to Artaxerxes I, the date of Ezra’s return would have been 458 BC<\/span>. Again, it was only a meager remnant who felt the compelling urge to make that difficult journey (cf. Josephus’s Antiquities<\/em> 11.1.3).<\/p>\nMoved by reports of troubled conditions (Neh 1:3-4), Nehemiah, in the 20th year of Artaxerxes (445 BC<\/span>), was able to leave his post as cup-bearer to the king and to go to Jerusalem. If the concern of the earlier returnees focused upon the temple, Nehemiah’s was upon the city walls. His is the most comprehensive description of Jerusalem’s postexilic city walls and topography (Neh 2:11-16). Spurred on by his energetic enthusiasm, the people completed the task of rebuilding the walls in 52 days (6:15).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Roman Period<\/h5>\nIn 40 BC<\/span>, with the aid of the Parthians, Antigonus attacked and seized Jerusalem, forcing Herod to escape by night. He journeyed to Rome, where the Senate appointed him as “king of the Jews” (cf. Mt 2:1). Armed with this new authority, Herod marshaled two Roman legions, and in 37 BC<\/span>, he succeeded in forever expelling the Parthians. So began the long and infamous rule of Herod, who reigned at Jerusalem for 33 years (37–4 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nIt cannot be denied that Jerusalem enjoyed prosperous and peaceful years during his reign. Herod transformed the external aspect of Jerusalem. He transferred the seat of government to the southwestern hill. Here he erected a lavish palace, an arena for athletic contests, a theater, and a vast aqueduct network.<\/p>\nOther building projects concerned the temple hill. Herod transformed the old Maccabean fortress into a much larger structure and named it Antonia, in honor of Mark Antony. In the temple area proper he enlarged the esplanade on both the north and south sides, giving it a rectangular shape. Herod’s reconstruction of the temple was undertaken in 20 BC<\/span>, and it was not completed until around AD<\/span> 64, just six years prior to its destruction by Titus (cf. Jn 2:20).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Israel, History of; Jerusalem, New; Judaism; Zion; Zion, Daughter of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JERUSALEM<\/h3>\nHistoric city sacred to Christians, Jews, and Muslims; the chief city of ancient Palestine and of the modern state of Israel.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Meaning of the Name<\/p>\n• Geographical Situation<\/p>\n• History<\/p>\nMeaning of the Name<\/p>\n<h5>Egyptian Meaning<\/h5>\nThe earliest mention of the name occurs in the Egyptian Execration Texts of the 19th and 18th centuries BC<\/span> in the form probably transliterated Urusalimum.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>Semitic Meaning<\/h5>\nIn the 14th century BC<\/span> the name appears in the Abdi-Hepa correspondence from Tell el-Amarna, written Urusalim.<\/em> Later it is found in the inscription of the Assyrian monarch Sennacherib, written Ursalimmu.<\/em> The two transparently Semitic elements, uru<\/em> (city) and salim<\/em> (a divine name), have produced the hyphenated composite meaning “the city of [the god] Salim.” Hyphenating geographic names to incorporate divine elements was a common practice in the ancient Near Eastern world, and the deity Salim, or Shalem (Akkadian, Shulmanu; cf. Solomon), was a member of the Amorite pantheon (cf. Ez 16:3). Since the oldest textual evidence—Egyptian, West Semitic, and Akkadian—supports only urusalim,<\/em> and since the OT itself attests that Jerusalem was not originally a Hebrew city, it is probable that the Semitic etymological origin of this name produced the meaning “the city of [the god] Salim.”<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrew\/Aramaic Meaning<\/h5>\nIn the Hebrew OT, Jerusalem is written yerushalayim<\/span>,<\/em> and in the Aramaic portions the name is rendered yerushalem.<\/em> Containing the elements yarah<\/span> (“to found,” cf. Jb 38:6) and shalem<\/span> (a divine name), it yields the meaning “the foundation of [the god] Shalem,” the sh<\/em> of the Hebrew\/Aramaic to be taken as the phonemic equivalent of the Akkadian s.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>Greek Meaning<\/h5>\nIn the NT, Jerusalem translates the two Greek words Ierousalem<\/span> and Hierosoluma<\/span>.<\/em> The former is simply the Greek transliteration of the OT Aramaic form; the latter reflects the word hieros<\/span> (holy), representing a Hellenized paronomasia, corresponding neither with the Semitic root of the name nor with the city’s historical reality.<\/p>\n\nGeographical Situation<\/p>\nJerusalem is situated 31º 46’ 45” north latitude and 35º 13’ 25” east longitude. The city rises to just over 2,500 feet (762 meters) above sea level and rests some 14 miles (22.5 kilometers) west of the northern end of the Dead Sea and approximately 33 miles (53 kilometers) east of the Mediterranean coast.<\/p>\nA Mediterranean climate pervades Jerusalem. From October to May, the city experiences its rainy season, with an annual accumulation of about 25 inches (63.5 centimeters). Throughout January and February the rains are often driven by winds, and the mercury drops to near freezing (cf. Ezr 10:9); the coldest weather coincides with the days of heaviest rainfall. Snow falls two years out of three. There is no rain between May and September, and a high percentage of solar radiation produces oppressive heat.<\/p>\nLike Rome, Jerusalem is a city set on hills. A cluster of five hills comprise the denuded quadrilateral landmass roughly one mile (1.6 kilometers) long and one-half mile (.8 kilometer) wide, bordered on all sides, except the north, by deep ravines. Stationed astride the crest of Palestine’s central plateau and located at the crossroad of the watershed route connecting Hebron, Bethlehem, Shechem (Nablus), and points north with the longitudinal route from the Jordan Valley and the several arteries to the Mediterranean, Jerusalem is commercially central to the country. The lateral highway through the Judean mountains and eastward could not pass south of Jerusalem, being blocked by the Dead Sea and its sheer cliffs. Because it lacked significant water supply, the city’s strategic commercial location was probably the deciding criterion for its original occupation.<\/p>\nWater, a lifeline of civilization, has always been in meager supply at Jerusalem. The only natural source of permanent water was the spring at Gihon, today sometimes called the Virgin’s Fountain, located in the Kidron Valley immediately east of the ancient fortress conquered by David. Tunnels were burrowed to provide access to the Gihon when Jerusalem was besieged. Later, the Siloam Tunnel was cut through nearly 1,800 feet (548.6 meters) of limestone, allowing the waters of the Gihon to pass through the hill of Zion to the pool of Siloam.<\/p>\nFarther south, where the Kidron and Hinnom Valleys converge, there was another spring, called En-rogel in the Bible (modern Bir Eyyub). Owing to the lowering of the water table, this source of water ceased to percolate and was subsequently converted into a well.<\/p>\nThese two sources were clearly insufficient to sustain a sizable population, and both were too deep in the Kidron to be employed for irrigation. Hence, a vast network of cisterns, reservoirs, and water conduits for supplemental supply has been devised since ancient times.<\/p>\nHistory<\/p>\n<h5>The Pre-Israelite Period<\/h5>\nPaleolithic and Mesolithic flint implements of an Acheulian type found in the plain of the Rephaim constitute the earliest evidence of the existence of human beings in the area of Jerusalem. Near the beginning of the fourth millennium BC<\/span>, the southeastern hill was first occupied by a sedentary group, a fact evinced from the artifactual remains recovered from three graves and the pottery type discovered on bedrock. By 1800 BC<\/span>, the crest of the southeastern hill was walled in rudimentary form.<\/p>\nFrom the Bible one learns that Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek, king of Salem (Gn 14:17-20). Again (ch 22) the great patriarch visited an area later incorporated into Jerusalem, Mt Moriah, the site where Isaac was nearly sacrificed. Second Chronicles 3:1 identifies Mt Moriah as the temple hill. In the 15th century BC<\/span> or thereabouts the Hurrians (possibly the biblical Horites) penetrated into Palestine. About the same time at Jerusalem, extensive building activities were initiated and improved fortification methods were introduced. Accordingly, most writers attribute these projects at Jerusalem to the Hurrian infiltration.<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest and Settlement Period<\/h5>\nUpon learning of Gibeon’s placation of Joshua’s army (Jos 9), Adoni-zedek, king of Jerusalem, formed a coalition with the kings of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon and attacked Gibeon. In response, Joshua marshaled his forces and defeated the coalition, killing all five monarchs at Makkedah (Jos 10:16-27). It appears that the tribe of Judah temporarily took control of Jerusalem and burned it in the wake of this victory (Jgs 1:8). However, the Jebusites reoccupied the site (Jos 15:63; 1 Chr 11:4-5). Apparently, the Jebusites more or less maintained control of Jerusalem until the time of David.<\/p>\nThe city appears again as a boundary separating the tribal inheritances of Judah and Benjamin, becoming the southern border of the latter’s domain. The identification of the “shoulder of the Jebusite” (rsv<\/span> Jos 15:8; 18:16) with Jerusalem is usually explained as a reference to the southwestern hill, probably held also by the Jebusites at this time.<\/p>\n<h5>David’s Jerusalem<\/h5>\nFollowing the Philistine victory atop Mt Gilboa, where Saul and Jonathan were killed in battle (1 Sm 31), David reigned over the tribe of Judah from Hebron, while a surviving son of Saul, Ishbosheth, ruled over the northern tribes from Mahanaim. During the two-year struggle that ensued, the house of David grew stronger while the forces of Ishbosheth shrunk considerably (2 Sm 3:1). This struggle culminated in the death and decapitation of Ishbosheth and the dispersion of his forces. David became the undisputed monarch of all the tribes of Israel.<\/p>\n\nBut the new monarch recognized that a consolidated national capital acceptable to both the north and the south would have to be created. Jerusalem had remained neutral in the conflict, being the site of a Jebusite enclave. It also represented a location that was militarily desirable, and by being commercially central to the fledgling nation, it was ideally suited.<\/p>\nIn the course of David’s 33-year reign at Jerusalem he made the city into the center of an empire that stretched from Egypt to the Euphrates River. He engaged in considerable building and expansion of the city. He fortified the Canaanite walls and prepared an extension of the city, possibly along the east slope of Zion.<\/p>\nDavid also constructed a royal residence, receiving the technology and many materials from Hiram, king of Tyre (2 Sm 5:11). Nehemiah 12:37 suggests that this palace also may have been near the east side of the southeastern hill. It was from a window of this house that Michal saw David dancing in an undignified manner—according to her perception (2 Sm 6:16-23). From the roof of this palace David gazed upon Bathsheba as she bathed (11:2-5), and from this residence he plotted the murder of her husband, Uriah (vv 14-25).<\/p>\nBy bringing the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sm 6:1-15)—implying that Yahweh would reside there—David displayed his most profound leadership. For in this perceptive act he merged for the first time in Israel’s history its political and religious capitals. Jerusalem took on the unique character of a holy city and<\/em> a royal city. As a result, the city would be known as the “city of David” (5:7) as well as the “city of God” (Ps 46:4). Adult male Jews would make their pilgrimages to Jerusalem to take part in the feasts and offerings. It only remained for David to make this arrangement permanent, to enshrine Yahweh at Jerusalem forever by building him a temple. David aspired to do so (2 Sm 7), but God responded that such an undertaking was to be reserved for a son of the king.<\/p>\n<h5>The First Temple Period<\/h5>\nA growing national realization of the extent and impact of the Davidic empire was employed by Solomon to full advantage. Himself an innovative and dynamic administrator, Solomon turned Jerusalem into a cosmopolitan center. The revenues of caravans from Egypt to Babylonia as well as the Phoenician trade with Elath, the Red Sea, and Ophir passed through his royal capital. Solomon’s own naval fleet traveled as far as Tarshish, most likely located on an island along the western coast of Spain. These expeditions returned every three years with such exotic commodities as apes, peacocks, silver, iron, tin, ivory, and gold. The capital swelled with residents and visitors, and the monarch’s fame became proverbial (1 Kgs 10).<\/p>\nSolomon was the great OT builder of Jerusalem. His most significant building enterprise was undoubtedly the first temple. Erected on the summit of the temple hill, this edifice required seven years to construct, from April\/May 966 (1 Kgs 6:1) to October\/November 959 (v 38). Hiram again provided both the technology and the cedar beams.<\/p>\nOne may find in 1 Kings 10:27 a succinct encapsulation of the economic wealth lavished upon Jerusalem by Solomon: silver became as abundant as stone, and cedar was as common as sycamore. It is estimated that the annual revenues that coursed into Jerusalem were as high as $17 million. Ironically, it was the fiscal factor that became the burden of Solomon’s monarchy. Overextending himself financially, his economic and political programs soon required the levying of heavy taxes (1 Kgs 4:7-19) and the drafting of Israelites into forced labor (1 Kgs 5:13-18; cf. 9:20-23). These were the primary factors that prompted the schism in Israel’s political structure after the death of Solomon and resulted in a divided monarchy by 930 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nWhen the Babylonian army laid final siege to Jerusalem (588 BC<\/span>), capturing it after many months, the city was completely decimated. The temple and Solomon’s palace were destroyed with fire; the city walls were demolished. The temple treasures were completely plundered, and the citizens were deported in large numbers.<\/p>\n<h5>The Second Temple Period<\/h5>\nJerusalem’s doom and 70-year captivity had been spelled out by Jeremiah (Jer 25:11; 29:10; cf. 2 Chr 36:21; Dn 9:2). In 538 BC<\/span>, after the fall of Babylon, Cyrus, king of Persia, issued his famous proclamation (2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezr 1:1-4; cf. Is 44:28; 45:1). Thereupon, a humble group of Jews returned to Jerusalem with Sheshbazzar, a prince of Judah (Ezr 1:8-11) and Zerubbabel (2:2). In 515 BC<\/span>, the doors of the second temple were opened officially, and the Passover feast was again observed from Jerusalem (6:15-18).<\/p>\nEzra came to Jerusalem in the seventh year of Artaxerxes (Ezr 7:7). Assuming this is a reference to Artaxerxes I, the date of Ezra’s return would have been 458 BC<\/span>. Again, it was only a meager remnant who felt the compelling urge to make that difficult journey (cf. Josephus’s Antiquities<\/em> 11.1.3).<\/p>\nMoved by reports of troubled conditions (Neh 1:3-4), Nehemiah, in the 20th year of Artaxerxes (445 BC<\/span>), was able to leave his post as cup-bearer to the king and to go to Jerusalem. If the concern of the earlier returnees focused upon the temple, Nehemiah’s was upon the city walls. His is the most comprehensive description of Jerusalem’s postexilic city walls and topography (Neh 2:11-16). Spurred on by his energetic enthusiasm, the people completed the task of rebuilding the walls in 52 days (6:15).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Roman Period<\/h5>\nIn 40 BC<\/span>, with the aid of the Parthians, Antigonus attacked and seized Jerusalem, forcing Herod to escape by night. He journeyed to Rome, where the Senate appointed him as “king of the Jews” (cf. Mt 2:1). Armed with this new authority, Herod marshaled two Roman legions, and in 37 BC<\/span>, he succeeded in forever expelling the Parthians. So began the long and infamous rule of Herod, who reigned at Jerusalem for 33 years (37–4 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nIt cannot be denied that Jerusalem enjoyed prosperous and peaceful years during his reign. Herod transformed the external aspect of Jerusalem. He transferred the seat of government to the southwestern hill. Here he erected a lavish palace, an arena for athletic contests, a theater, and a vast aqueduct network.<\/p>\nOther building projects concerned the temple hill. Herod transformed the old Maccabean fortress into a much larger structure and named it Antonia, in honor of Mark Antony. In the temple area proper he enlarged the esplanade on both the north and south sides, giving it a rectangular shape. Herod’s reconstruction of the temple was undertaken in 20 BC<\/span>, and it was not completed until around AD<\/span> 64, just six years prior to its destruction by Titus (cf. Jn 2:20).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Israel, History of; Jerusalem, New; Judaism; Zion; Zion, Daughter of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JERUSALEM Historic city sacred to Christians, Jews, and Muslims; the chief city of ancient Palestine and of the modern state of Israel. Preview • Meaning of the Name • Geographical Situation • History Meaning of the Name Egyptian Meaning The earliest mention of the name occurs in the Egyptian Execration Texts of the 19th and 18th centuries BC in the form probably transliterated Urusalimum. Semitic Meaning In the 14th century BC the name appears in the Abdi-Hepa correspondence from Tell el-Ama...","summary_en":"JERUSALEM Historic city sacred to Christians, Jews, and Muslims; the chief city of ancient Palestine and of the modern state of Israel. Preview • Meaning of the Name • Geographical Situation • History Meaning of the Name Egyptian Meaning The earliest mention of the name occurs in the Egyptian Execration Texts of the 19th and 18th centuries BC in the form probably transliterated Urusalimum. Semitic Meaning In the 14th century BC the name appears in the Abdi-Hepa correspondence from Tell el-Ama...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21052,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Judaism","title_en":"Judaism","content_ro":"<h3>JUDAISM<\/h3>\nReligion and culture of the Jewish people from the beginning of the postexilic period (538 BC<\/span>) to modern times. The term “Judaism” is derived from “Judah,” the name of the southern kingdom of ancient Israel, while “Jew” is a shortened form of “Judeans.”<\/p>\nThe Period of the Second Temple (515 BC<\/span>–AD<\/span> 70)<\/p>\n<h5>Historical Survey<\/h5>\nThe united kingdom of Israel under Saul, David, and Solomon came to an end shortly after the death of Solomon. Rehoboam, his son, provoked a revolt about 930 BC<\/span> on the part of the 10 northern tribes by levying unreasonably high taxes (1 Kgs 12). From that time on, the kingdoms of Israel (or Samaria, the northern kingdom) and Judah (the southern kingdom) maintained a separate existence. The northern kingdom fell to the Assyrians in 722 BC<\/span>, and thousands of captives, primarily members of the upper class, were exiled forcibly and taken to Assyria, where they presumably intermarried with the native population and disappeared from history. The kingdom of Judah survived as an independent state until 597 BC<\/span>, when it came under the control of the Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar. The temple was finally destroyed in 586 BC<\/span> and many captives were carried off to Babylonia, beginning a period of exile that was to last two generations. The Babylonians were defeated by Cyrus the Persian in 539 BC<\/span>, and the following year the king issued a decree permitting all captive peoples to return to the lands of their origin (2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezr 1). At least four waves of Jewish expatriates returned from Mesopotamia to Judea during the century following the decree of Cyrus, under such leaders as Sheshbazzar, Zerubbabel, Ezra, and Nehemiah. Many Jews, however, chose to remain in their adopted Mesopotamian homeland. The dedication of the second temple in the spring of 515 BC<\/span> provided a formal end to the exilic period of 70 years (Jer 29:10), and was a direct result of the prophetic exhortations of Haggai and Zechariah.<\/p>\nIn Judea the Jewish people were ruled by governors who held office at the pleasure of the Persian king. One of the earlier governors was Zerubabbel (Hg 1:1; 2:1-2), a descendant of David (1 Chr 3:10-19). In some way he shared rule with the high priest Jeshua ben Jehozadak. Palestine was part of one of the 20 satrapies of the Persian Empire, which lasted from 539 to 331 BC<\/span>, when it fell to the Greeks under Alexander the Great. Little is known about the historical developments in Palestine during most of the Persian period. When Alexander died in 323 BC<\/span>, his empire was divided up among his generals; Egypt and Palestine fell to Ptolemy I. The Ptolemies were benevolent despots who allowed the Jews of Palestine a measure of freedom and autonomy. After the battle of Paneion in 198 BC<\/span>, Palestine came under the rule of the Seleucid Empire, founded by Seleucus I, another of Alexander’s generals.<\/p>\nThe Seleucid Empire embraced a very large area with a diverse population, extending from Asia Minor and Palestine in the west to the borders of India on the east. Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) ascended the Seleucid throne in 175 BC<\/span> and attempted to unify his vast empire by Hellenizing it (i.e., by forcing the adoption of Greek language and culture). Local cultures and religions were forcibly suppressed as a result of this policy, and the Jewish state in Palestine was perhaps the hardest hit of all. In 167 BC<\/span> Antiochus IV dedicated the temple in Jerusalem to Olympian Zeus, sacrificed a sow on the altar, destroyed scrolls containing the Jewish Scriptures, and forbade the rite of circumcision. This repression triggered a revolt led by an aged priest named Mattathias and his sons. The Seleucids were repulsed, and finally in 164 BC<\/span> the temple was retaken by Mattathias’s son Judas the Maccabee (an epithet meaning “the hammer”). This Jewish victory has been commemorated annually by the festival of Hanukkah (“dedication”). Judas and his brothers, called Maccabees or Hasmoneans (Mattathias was of the house of Hasmon), and their descendants ruled Judea from 164 to 63 BC<\/span>, when Palestine fell to the Roman general Pompey. Thereafter, Palestine remained a vassal of Rome.<\/p>\nHyrcanus, a Hasmonean, was high priest after the conquest of Judea by the Romans, though Antipater (an Idumean) was the real power behind Hyrcanus. The sons of Antipater, Phasael and Herod, were governors of Jerusalem and Galilee, respectively. Upon the assassination of Antipater in 43 BC<\/span>, and through his connections in Rome, Herod (later called Herod the Great) was named king of Judea by the Roman senate; he reigned from 37 to 4 BC<\/span>. When he died, Palestine was divided up by the emperor Augustus (27 BC<\/span>–AD<\/span> 14) and placed under the governorship of three of Herod’s sons: Herod Archelaus (ethnarch of Judea, Idumea, and Samaria from 4 BC<\/span> to AD<\/span> 6), Herod Antipas (tetrarch of Galilee and Perea from 4 BC<\/span> to AD<\/span> 39), and Herod Philip (tetrarch of Batanea, Trachonitis, and other small states from 4 BC<\/span> to AD<\/span> 34). These territories were generally placed under Roman procurators after the sons of Herod had died or been deposed. For a brief period (AD<\/span> 41–44), Herod Agrippa I, the grandson of Herod the Great, ruled virtually the same territory as his grandfather. Upon his death (narrated in Acts 12:20-23), his territories were placed under Roman procurators. The greed and ineptitude of these procurators provoked the Jewish populace to rebel. The ill-fated Jewish revolt of AD<\/span> 66–73 resulted in the destruction of the second temple by the tenth Roman legion under Titus in AD<\/span> 70. The revolt was completely quelled in AD<\/span> 73, when more than 900 Jews under siege in the desert fortress of Masada near the Dead Sea committed mass suicide rather than fall into Roman hands. These tragic events ended permanently the temple cult and the priestly system in Judaism.<\/p>\n<h5>Social and Religious Developments<\/h5>\nThe Babylonian conquest of Judea and the destruction of the Solomonic temple in 586 BC<\/span> produced dramatic social and religious changes in Jewish life. The cessation of the temple cult struck a serious blow at the heart of the Israelite religion, since the Jerusalem temple alone was the legitimate and divinely appointed place for discharging much of the ritual requirement of the Mosaic law, chiefly the sacrificial cult. Even the three annual pilgrimage festivals, Succoth (Tabernacles), Pesach (Passover), and Shavuoth (Weeks) could no longer be observed by pious Jews who had remained in Judea after 586 BC<\/span>. When after 538 BC<\/span> many exiles chose to return to Judea, many others elected to remain in their new homeland. For the latter, the temple cult, even when reinstituted in 516 BC<\/span>, could no longer play a significant role in their religious lives.<\/p>\nDuring the exilic and early postexilic period, the peculiar Jewish institution of the synagogue (a Greek word meaning “gathering place”) began to evolve. The synagogue became such a popular and useful institution for Jewish communities outside Palestine that in the centuries after the dedication of the second temple they sprang up throughout Palestine, many in Jerusalem itself. By the end of the second temple period, the synagogue had come to play three important functions in Jewish life: it served as a house of prayer, a house of study, and a place of assembly. First-century AD<\/span> synagogue worship is illustrated in Luke 4:16-30 and Acts 13:13-42. The focus of the service was a reading of a selection from the Torah (Law of Moses), then one from the Haphtorah (Prophets). These readings were followed by a homily based on Scripture. Other elements in first-century AD<\/span> synagogue worship included the recitation of the Shema (“Hear, O Israel”), a combination of biblical passages including Deuteronomy 6:4-9; 11:13-21 and Numbers 15:37-41, and the Shemoneh Esreh (Eighteen Benedictions) called the Amidah (“standing”) because it was recited while standing upright. Jews also wore fringes on their garments in obedience to Numbers 15:38-39 (Mt 23:5), and phylacteries on their foreheads and left arms. Phylacteries are little boxes containing the portions of Scripture recited in Shema; they were used in literal fulfillment of the command in Deuteronomy 6:8. Archaeologists have discovered first-century phylacteries in the ruins of Masada.<\/p>\nOutside of Palestine, Mesopotamia became the second most important center of Judaism. The Babylonian Jewish community was known as the Golah (“captivity”), and its titular head was called the Resh Galuta or Exilarch (both terms mean “leader of the captivity”). By the end of the exilic period, the descendants of the ancient original captives had forgotten Hebrew and had adopted Aramaic, the international language of the ancient Near East and sister language to Hebrew, as their first language. Even in Palestine, Aramaic was the primary language spoken. Thus, when portions of Scripture were read in synagogue services in Hebrew, most of those present were unable to understand what was read. This problem was solved by providing a methurgeman (translator) who would translate orally short sections of Scripture. Eventually these targums (“translations”) were reduced to writing, beginning in the second century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nBy the first century AD<\/span>, it had been estimated that there were from four to seven million Jews in the Greco-Roman world, perhaps three to four times the population of Palestine. Jews in lands outside of Palestine came to be known collectively as the Diaspora (“scattering”). After the Greeks dominated the Mediterranean world through Alexander and his successors, Greek became the common language throughout this region. Just as Mesopotamian Jews spoke Aramaic in place of Hebrew, so Jews in the Greco-Roman world came to speak Greek. By the middle of the third century BC<\/span>, Hellenistic Jews began to translate the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek. This translation, called the Septuagint (a term meaning “seventy,” based on a legend that it was translated simultaneously by seventy Jewish scholars), contained a more extensive canon of Scripture than that recognized by Palestinian Judaism. This reflects the more liberal attitudes of Hellenistic Jews.<\/p>\nDuring the second century BC<\/span>, most of the major sects within Palestinian Judaism came into being. The Hasidim (“pious”) were members of a religious association that aided the Hasmoneans in the revolt against the Seleucids (1 Macc 2:42; 7:13) but later opposed them when they claimed rights to the priesthood. Both the Pharisees and Essenes may have their origin in this religious sect. The Sadducees were perhaps connected with Zadok, a high priest appointed by David. Zadok’s descendants were regarded as the only legitimate priestly line; they were devoted above the Levites in Ezekiel 40–48. The Sadducees were a wealthy, aristocratic class that monopolized the high priesthood. They did not believe in angels, spirits, life after death, or the resurrection (Acts 23:8), nor did they accept the validity of the oral law as developed by the Pharisees. They left no writings and disappeared with the destruction of the temple in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nThe Pharisees (“separated ones”) first appear in our sources toward the end of the second century BC<\/span> and were involved primarily in political affairs. They represented the common people against the tyrannical Hasmonean ruler Alexander Janneus (103–76 BC<\/span>), who had hundreds of Pharisees executed in reprisal. By the first century AD<\/span>, the Pharisees seem wholly concerned with religious matters and were noted for the scrupulous observance of the Mosaic law as traditionally interpreted. On grounds of ritual purity, they separated themselves from other Jews who were not as scrupulous and who might contaminate them. Pharisees went about in groups called Haberim (“associates”) in which they were insulated from those who were lax religiously. In their zeal to remain faithful to the Mosaic law, the Pharisees developed an oral law (later erroneously attributed to Moses) that served as a fence around the Torah. This oral law was an interpretation and expansion of the 613 commands in the Mosaic law; it was finally compiled and reduced to written form as the Mishnah (“teaching”) in the late second century AD<\/span>. Paul (Acts 22:3; 23:6; 26:5; Phil 3:5) and many other early Christians were converts from Pharisaism (Acts 15:5). Pharisaic Judaism survived the destruction of Jerusalem in AD<\/span> 70 to form the rabbinic Judaism that dominated Jewish religious life from the second century AD<\/span> to modern times.<\/p>\nThe Essenes were another religious sect within Judaism that had its origins in the second century BC<\/span>. Like the Pharisees, the Essenes were concerned principally with maintaining ritual purity in obedience to the law of Moses. The Essenes lived and worked in Jewish society; they tried to influence people by the simple, altruistic life they followed. Some Essenes also lived in their own communities, to which they returned each night after work. There were numerous religious factions within Judaism, and one such group, which may only have had vague connections with the Essenes, established a community on the western shore of the Dead Sea. This group regarded itself as the true Israel and in the wilderness prepared for the final visitation of God by keeping themselves pure from all defilement. Many documents written by members of this sect were discovered in caves near the Dead Sea where they had been hidden just before the Romans destroyed the settlement. These documents, the Dead Sea Scrolls, have provided detailed information about this religious sect and its beliefs.<\/p>\nThe Zealots were another Jewish sect, who may be related to the Sicarii (“dagger men”). This group of political activists flourished from AD<\/span> 6 to 66. Regarding God alone as their sovereign, they attempted to overthrow the Romans and those who collaborated with them by violent means, including assassination. They helped to foment the Jewish revolt of AD<\/span> 66–73 and perished with Jerusalem in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nSocial class and status in first-century AD<\/span> Palestine were determined in accordance with the rules of ritual purity. The upper class comprised members of the religious establishment, such as the Sadducees, scribes, Pharisees, and Jerusalem priests. The Sanhedrin was a deliberative body whose membership was drawn from these groups. For all practical purposes there was no middle class. The lower class consisted primarily of the Am Ha Arez (“people of the land”)—Jews who were ignorant of the law through lack of education and who did not scrupulously observe those commandments with which they were familiar. The generally hostile attitude of the Pharisees toward the Am Ha Arez is expressed in John 7:49: “But this crowd, who do not know the law, are accursed” (rsv<\/span>). There was yet another social class in first-century Palestine, which can be designated as “untouchables.” This group was composed of Samaritans, tax collectors, prostitutes, shepherds, lepers, Gentiles, and perhaps worst of all, Jews who became as Gentiles (e.g., the prodigal son of Lk 15:11-32). The rules of ritual purity as generally observed prevented any form of social contact between the upper class and the untouchables, and made contacts with the Am Ha Arez highly undesirable. Against this background, the horror of the Pharisees over Jesus’ association with tax collectors and sinners is throughly understandable (Mk 2:15-17).<\/p>\nA further consequence of this religious criterion for determining social class and status was an uneasy tension between Jerusalem and the rural areas of Palestine, particularly Galilee, during the last two centuries of the second temple period. Those in Jerusalem regarded Galilee as a place where ignorance of the Torah was the rule (Jn 1:46). Jerusalem was primarily a religious center, whose major industry was the temple cult. The total population of Jerusalem in the first century AD<\/span> has been estimated at 25,000 to 40,000. Most of these were either artisans and craftsmen devoted to building and adorning the temple (still incomplete before it was destroyed; see Jn 2:20) or priests and Levites involved in the many ritual activities of the temple. Though Jews were expected to travel to Jerusalem for each of the three annual pilgrimage festivals, this requirement proved difficult for rural Palestinian farmers.<\/p>\nFurther, the tithe demanded by Mosaic command was only on the produce of the land, not upon wages or bartered goods. The rural farmers, therefore, bore the brunt of this taxation and quite naturally resented the privileged position of urban artisans, merchants, and priests who were not obliged to tithe. The temptation not to tithe the produce of the land was very great, and many farmers succumbed to it. Their untithed produce was not kosher, and thus to be avoided by those, like the Pharisees, who were religiously scrupulous. In addition to the first and second tithes demanded of farmers (the second tithe had to be spent in the vicinity of Jerusalem), it has been estimated that Roman tax levies amounted to 10 to 15 percent of an individual’s income. Religious taxes, together with Roman taxes, added up to a crushing tax burden of from 25 to 30 percent. The fact that the Jews finally revolted against their Roman oppressors in AD<\/span> 66 is not difficult to comprehend. Throughout the first century AD<\/span>, in fact, minor revolts in Palestine occurred with predictable frequency. Many of these occurred during the three annual pilgrimage festivals in Jerusalem, when the normal population of 25,000 to 40,000 swelled to 500,000 or more. These festivals provided ideal opportunities for uprisings, and the Romans were particularly alert for such eventualities. Jesus was executed during one such Passover festival because he was suspected of being a political revolutionary (Mk 15:26).<\/p>\nThe second temple period provided the setting for the rise and fall of apocalypticism within Judaism. Apocalypticism (from a Greek word meaning “revelation”) was a kind of eschatology (“account of final events”) that assumed that ideal conditions could not be restored on earth unless God first intervened climactically to destroy evil (particularly foreign oppressors) and vindicate the righteous (Israel). Apocalyptic visionaries composed many documents, called apocalypses, in which they attempted to read the signs of the times and predict the coming of the visitation of God. Since there was a widespread consciousness that the era of prophecy was over, these apocalyptists wrote not under their own names but under the names of ancient Israelite worthies, such as Moses, Abraham, Enoch, and Ezra. Among the more significant expectations of Jewish apocalypticism were (1) the coming of a Messiah; (2) the coming of a great period of tribulation, sometimes called the messianic woes; (3) the resurrection of the just; (4) the judgment of the wicked and the reward of the righteous. Apocalyptic beliefs probably provided the motivation for most—if not all—of the Jewish revolts against the Romans.<\/p>\n\nSome portions of the Hebrew Scriptures were still in the process of composition at the beginning of the second temple period. The last three prophetic books—Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi—were written from the end of the sixth century to the mid fifth century BC<\/span>. Later rabbis expressed the opinion that the Spirit of God had been taken from Israel when these prophets ceased their labors. The Chronicler ends his work by referring to the decree of Cyrus (538 BC<\/span>), and both Ezra-Nehemiah and Esther appear to have been written in the fifth century BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe second temple period witnessed not only the completion of those writings that were later regarded as inspired and authoritative in Judaism but also the full recognition of all 24 sacred books. Prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BC<\/span>, the Mosaic law had not been observed with any consistency (according to 2 Kgs 22 it had been mislaid for an unknown period of time), nor had the classical prophets always received appropriate recognition. But after 586 BC<\/span> the Torah occupied a position of unquestioned sanctity in the lives and thoughts of the Jewish people, replacing in many respects the temple cult even before its final dissolution in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nThe Jewish Scriptures are divided into three sections, designated by Jews with the acrostic “Tanak”: (1) Torah (“Law” or “Revelation”), (2) Nebi’im (“Prophets”), and (3) Kethubim (“Writings”). It is generally claimed that while the Law and Prophets enjoyed canonical status prior to the second century BC<\/span>, the Writings were finally declared canonical at the rabbinic council of Jamnia (c. AD<\/span> 90), though the historicity of this is disputed. The rabbis are thought to have discussed whether certain biblical books should continue to be part of Scripture. In reality, the Jewish canon of Scripture was fully defined from traditional usage by the first century BC<\/span>. The Law consisted of five books: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. The Prophets consisted of two sections, the Former Prophets (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings) and the Latter Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the 12 Minor Prophets). The Writings included Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Lamentations, Ruth, and Daniel. The total number of books in this canon is 24, identical with the Protestant canon of 39 books, since Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, and the 12 are each counted as only one book. The Alexandrian canon of Hellenistic Judaism was more extensive, and the extra books (called Apocrypha by Protestants) are all found in the Roman Catholic OT canon of 46 books.<\/p>\nThe Talmudic Period (AD<\/span> 73–425)<\/p>\n<h5>Historical Survey<\/h5>\nAccording to Jewish legend, when the Romans were about to conquer Jerusalem in the revolt of AD<\/span> 66–73, a prominent Pharisee, Rabbi Johanan ben Zakkai, feigned death and his disciples were permitted to carry him out of the besieged city in a coffin. The more likely scenario is that he received permission from the Romans to move his school from Jerusalem to Jamnia, on the coast of Palestine. The temple cult and the priestly system had disappeared, and rabbinic academies such as that of Rabbi Johanan set themselves to the enormous task of reconstructing Judaism. The older Sanhedrin was reinstituted as the Beth Din (“Court of Law”), and Gamaliel II, a grandson of Hillel, who had presided over the old Sanhedrin, became its leader with the title Nasi (“prince”), or Patriarch. The patriarchate continued until AD<\/span> 425, when Emperor Theodosius II abolished the office upon the death of the last patriarch, Gamaliel VI. In Mesopotamia, Babylonian Judaism experienced a renaissance that lasted until the end of the fifth century AD<\/span>. This period was called the Age of the Gaonim (“excellencies”) after the heads of the two great rabbinic academies at Sura and Pumpeditha. It was there that the great Babylonian Talmud was compiled by the fifth century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nIn AD<\/span> 115 various Jewish communities throughout the eastern Mediterranean, including Egypt, Cyprus, and Cyrene, revolted against the Roman emperor Trajan. Without exception these revolts were all put down by Roman legions. Finally, when the emperor Hadrian was on the brink of founding the new city of Aelia Capitolina on the site of old Jerusalem, the Jews again revolted in AD<\/span> 132, led by a self-proclaimed messiah, Simeon Bar Koziba, who was called Bar-Kochba (“Son of a Star”) by his followers as an allusion to the messianic passage in Numbers 24:17. Bar-Kochba was aided by the famous rabbinic scholar Akiba. This revolt, though initially successful, was put down by the Romans under Julius Severus in 135. Shortly thereafter, Hadrian issued a decree banning all Jews from the new Aelia Capitolina.<\/p>\n<h5>Social and Religious Developments<\/h5>\nDuring this period, the result of generations of rabbinical scholarship bore fruit with the compilation of the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds. The rabbinic sages consciously saw themselves as the heirs of the ancient Israelite prophets, who in turn were the heirs of the Mosaic law. They distinguished consciously between their own legal interpretations of the Mosaic law (which they called Halakah, or “walking,” i.e., a guide for life), and the commands in the Torah itself (called Mitvah, or “commandment”). The oral law, developed through generations of rabbinic discussion, was finally compiled and written down through the efforts of the patriarch Judah ha-Nasi (c. AD<\/span> 135–220) during the last quarter of the second century AD<\/span> and became known as the Mishnah (“teaching”). This is a topical arrangement of rabbinic discussions on such subjects as the Sabbath, firstfruits, sacrifices, and women. The Mishnah became the basis for further rabbinic discussion in both Palestine and Babylonia. The decisions of sages who flourished after the writing of the Mishnah were compiled about AD<\/span> 450 in Palestine and about 500 in Babylonia. This second stage beyond the Mishnah was called the Gemara (meaning either “completion” or “repetition”). The Mishnah and the Babylonian Gemara make up the Babylonian Talmud, while the same Mishnah with the Jerusalem or Palestinian Gemara comprises the Jerusalem Talmud. Yet another type of rabbinic literature is the Midrashim (“interpretations”), which either follow the order of a particular biblical book or consist of homilies on particular biblical texts. The Targums, paraphrastic translations of Scripture into the Aramaic language, finally came to be written down beginning in the late second century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nAfter the destruction of the temple, rabbinic Judaism concentrated on the religious significance of the Torah and elevated scholarship to the central role that it still plays in Judaism. Rabbinic Judaism gradually exerted its influence upon diaspora Judaism under the initial leadership of Rabbi Johanan until a kind of rabbinic orthodoxy emerged during the second century. Christianity was one of the major ideological foes of rabbinic Judaism. In order to purge Jewish Christians from their midst, the rabbis introduced an additional benediction to the eighteen benedictions customarily recited at synagogue services. This 19th benediction was a curse upon the minim<\/em> (Christians and other heretics), which Jewish Christians who attended synagogue services found impossible to recite. The line was firmly drawn between Judaism and Christianity by this device, which was employed late in the first century.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Dead Sea Scrolls; Essenes; Diaspora of the Jews; First Jewish Revolt; Israel, History of; Jew; Judah, Tribe of; Judaism; Pharisees; Philo, Judaeus; Postexilic Period; Sanhedrin; Talmud; Torah; Tradition; Tradition, Oral.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JUDAISM<\/h3>\nReligion and culture of the Jewish people from the beginning of the postexilic period (538 BC<\/span>) to modern times. The term “Judaism” is derived from “Judah,” the name of the southern kingdom of ancient Israel, while “Jew” is a shortened form of “Judeans.”<\/p>\nThe Period of the Second Temple (515 BC<\/span>–AD<\/span> 70)<\/p>\n<h5>Historical Survey<\/h5>\nThe united kingdom of Israel under Saul, David, and Solomon came to an end shortly after the death of Solomon. Rehoboam, his son, provoked a revolt about 930 BC<\/span> on the part of the 10 northern tribes by levying unreasonably high taxes (1 Kgs 12). From that time on, the kingdoms of Israel (or Samaria, the northern kingdom) and Judah (the southern kingdom) maintained a separate existence. The northern kingdom fell to the Assyrians in 722 BC<\/span>, and thousands of captives, primarily members of the upper class, were exiled forcibly and taken to Assyria, where they presumably intermarried with the native population and disappeared from history. The kingdom of Judah survived as an independent state until 597 BC<\/span>, when it came under the control of the Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar. The temple was finally destroyed in 586 BC<\/span> and many captives were carried off to Babylonia, beginning a period of exile that was to last two generations. The Babylonians were defeated by Cyrus the Persian in 539 BC<\/span>, and the following year the king issued a decree permitting all captive peoples to return to the lands of their origin (2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezr 1). At least four waves of Jewish expatriates returned from Mesopotamia to Judea during the century following the decree of Cyrus, under such leaders as Sheshbazzar, Zerubbabel, Ezra, and Nehemiah. Many Jews, however, chose to remain in their adopted Mesopotamian homeland. The dedication of the second temple in the spring of 515 BC<\/span> provided a formal end to the exilic period of 70 years (Jer 29:10), and was a direct result of the prophetic exhortations of Haggai and Zechariah.<\/p>\nIn Judea the Jewish people were ruled by governors who held office at the pleasure of the Persian king. One of the earlier governors was Zerubabbel (Hg 1:1; 2:1-2), a descendant of David (1 Chr 3:10-19). In some way he shared rule with the high priest Jeshua ben Jehozadak. Palestine was part of one of the 20 satrapies of the Persian Empire, which lasted from 539 to 331 BC<\/span>, when it fell to the Greeks under Alexander the Great. Little is known about the historical developments in Palestine during most of the Persian period. When Alexander died in 323 BC<\/span>, his empire was divided up among his generals; Egypt and Palestine fell to Ptolemy I. The Ptolemies were benevolent despots who allowed the Jews of Palestine a measure of freedom and autonomy. After the battle of Paneion in 198 BC<\/span>, Palestine came under the rule of the Seleucid Empire, founded by Seleucus I, another of Alexander’s generals.<\/p>\nThe Seleucid Empire embraced a very large area with a diverse population, extending from Asia Minor and Palestine in the west to the borders of India on the east. Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) ascended the Seleucid throne in 175 BC<\/span> and attempted to unify his vast empire by Hellenizing it (i.e., by forcing the adoption of Greek language and culture). Local cultures and religions were forcibly suppressed as a result of this policy, and the Jewish state in Palestine was perhaps the hardest hit of all. In 167 BC<\/span> Antiochus IV dedicated the temple in Jerusalem to Olympian Zeus, sacrificed a sow on the altar, destroyed scrolls containing the Jewish Scriptures, and forbade the rite of circumcision. This repression triggered a revolt led by an aged priest named Mattathias and his sons. The Seleucids were repulsed, and finally in 164 BC<\/span> the temple was retaken by Mattathias’s son Judas the Maccabee (an epithet meaning “the hammer”). This Jewish victory has been commemorated annually by the festival of Hanukkah (“dedication”). Judas and his brothers, called Maccabees or Hasmoneans (Mattathias was of the house of Hasmon), and their descendants ruled Judea from 164 to 63 BC<\/span>, when Palestine fell to the Roman general Pompey. Thereafter, Palestine remained a vassal of Rome.<\/p>\nHyrcanus, a Hasmonean, was high priest after the conquest of Judea by the Romans, though Antipater (an Idumean) was the real power behind Hyrcanus. The sons of Antipater, Phasael and Herod, were governors of Jerusalem and Galilee, respectively. Upon the assassination of Antipater in 43 BC<\/span>, and through his connections in Rome, Herod (later called Herod the Great) was named king of Judea by the Roman senate; he reigned from 37 to 4 BC<\/span>. When he died, Palestine was divided up by the emperor Augustus (27 BC<\/span>–AD<\/span> 14) and placed under the governorship of three of Herod’s sons: Herod Archelaus (ethnarch of Judea, Idumea, and Samaria from 4 BC<\/span> to AD<\/span> 6), Herod Antipas (tetrarch of Galilee and Perea from 4 BC<\/span> to AD<\/span> 39), and Herod Philip (tetrarch of Batanea, Trachonitis, and other small states from 4 BC<\/span> to AD<\/span> 34). These territories were generally placed under Roman procurators after the sons of Herod had died or been deposed. For a brief period (AD<\/span> 41–44), Herod Agrippa I, the grandson of Herod the Great, ruled virtually the same territory as his grandfather. Upon his death (narrated in Acts 12:20-23), his territories were placed under Roman procurators. The greed and ineptitude of these procurators provoked the Jewish populace to rebel. The ill-fated Jewish revolt of AD<\/span> 66–73 resulted in the destruction of the second temple by the tenth Roman legion under Titus in AD<\/span> 70. The revolt was completely quelled in AD<\/span> 73, when more than 900 Jews under siege in the desert fortress of Masada near the Dead Sea committed mass suicide rather than fall into Roman hands. These tragic events ended permanently the temple cult and the priestly system in Judaism.<\/p>\n<h5>Social and Religious Developments<\/h5>\nThe Babylonian conquest of Judea and the destruction of the Solomonic temple in 586 BC<\/span> produced dramatic social and religious changes in Jewish life. The cessation of the temple cult struck a serious blow at the heart of the Israelite religion, since the Jerusalem temple alone was the legitimate and divinely appointed place for discharging much of the ritual requirement of the Mosaic law, chiefly the sacrificial cult. Even the three annual pilgrimage festivals, Succoth (Tabernacles), Pesach (Passover), and Shavuoth (Weeks) could no longer be observed by pious Jews who had remained in Judea after 586 BC<\/span>. When after 538 BC<\/span> many exiles chose to return to Judea, many others elected to remain in their new homeland. For the latter, the temple cult, even when reinstituted in 516 BC<\/span>, could no longer play a significant role in their religious lives.<\/p>\nDuring the exilic and early postexilic period, the peculiar Jewish institution of the synagogue (a Greek word meaning “gathering place”) began to evolve. The synagogue became such a popular and useful institution for Jewish communities outside Palestine that in the centuries after the dedication of the second temple they sprang up throughout Palestine, many in Jerusalem itself. By the end of the second temple period, the synagogue had come to play three important functions in Jewish life: it served as a house of prayer, a house of study, and a place of assembly. First-century AD<\/span> synagogue worship is illustrated in Luke 4:16-30 and Acts 13:13-42. The focus of the service was a reading of a selection from the Torah (Law of Moses), then one from the Haphtorah (Prophets). These readings were followed by a homily based on Scripture. Other elements in first-century AD<\/span> synagogue worship included the recitation of the Shema (“Hear, O Israel”), a combination of biblical passages including Deuteronomy 6:4-9; 11:13-21 and Numbers 15:37-41, and the Shemoneh Esreh (Eighteen Benedictions) called the Amidah (“standing”) because it was recited while standing upright. Jews also wore fringes on their garments in obedience to Numbers 15:38-39 (Mt 23:5), and phylacteries on their foreheads and left arms. Phylacteries are little boxes containing the portions of Scripture recited in Shema; they were used in literal fulfillment of the command in Deuteronomy 6:8. Archaeologists have discovered first-century phylacteries in the ruins of Masada.<\/p>\nOutside of Palestine, Mesopotamia became the second most important center of Judaism. The Babylonian Jewish community was known as the Golah (“captivity”), and its titular head was called the Resh Galuta or Exilarch (both terms mean “leader of the captivity”). By the end of the exilic period, the descendants of the ancient original captives had forgotten Hebrew and had adopted Aramaic, the international language of the ancient Near East and sister language to Hebrew, as their first language. Even in Palestine, Aramaic was the primary language spoken. Thus, when portions of Scripture were read in synagogue services in Hebrew, most of those present were unable to understand what was read. This problem was solved by providing a methurgeman (translator) who would translate orally short sections of Scripture. Eventually these targums (“translations”) were reduced to writing, beginning in the second century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nBy the first century AD<\/span>, it had been estimated that there were from four to seven million Jews in the Greco-Roman world, perhaps three to four times the population of Palestine. Jews in lands outside of Palestine came to be known collectively as the Diaspora (“scattering”). After the Greeks dominated the Mediterranean world through Alexander and his successors, Greek became the common language throughout this region. Just as Mesopotamian Jews spoke Aramaic in place of Hebrew, so Jews in the Greco-Roman world came to speak Greek. By the middle of the third century BC<\/span>, Hellenistic Jews began to translate the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek. This translation, called the Septuagint (a term meaning “seventy,” based on a legend that it was translated simultaneously by seventy Jewish scholars), contained a more extensive canon of Scripture than that recognized by Palestinian Judaism. This reflects the more liberal attitudes of Hellenistic Jews.<\/p>\nDuring the second century BC<\/span>, most of the major sects within Palestinian Judaism came into being. The Hasidim (“pious”) were members of a religious association that aided the Hasmoneans in the revolt against the Seleucids (1 Macc 2:42; 7:13) but later opposed them when they claimed rights to the priesthood. Both the Pharisees and Essenes may have their origin in this religious sect. The Sadducees were perhaps connected with Zadok, a high priest appointed by David. Zadok’s descendants were regarded as the only legitimate priestly line; they were devoted above the Levites in Ezekiel 40–48. The Sadducees were a wealthy, aristocratic class that monopolized the high priesthood. They did not believe in angels, spirits, life after death, or the resurrection (Acts 23:8), nor did they accept the validity of the oral law as developed by the Pharisees. They left no writings and disappeared with the destruction of the temple in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nThe Pharisees (“separated ones”) first appear in our sources toward the end of the second century BC<\/span> and were involved primarily in political affairs. They represented the common people against the tyrannical Hasmonean ruler Alexander Janneus (103–76 BC<\/span>), who had hundreds of Pharisees executed in reprisal. By the first century AD<\/span>, the Pharisees seem wholly concerned with religious matters and were noted for the scrupulous observance of the Mosaic law as traditionally interpreted. On grounds of ritual purity, they separated themselves from other Jews who were not as scrupulous and who might contaminate them. Pharisees went about in groups called Haberim (“associates”) in which they were insulated from those who were lax religiously. In their zeal to remain faithful to the Mosaic law, the Pharisees developed an oral law (later erroneously attributed to Moses) that served as a fence around the Torah. This oral law was an interpretation and expansion of the 613 commands in the Mosaic law; it was finally compiled and reduced to written form as the Mishnah (“teaching”) in the late second century AD<\/span>. Paul (Acts 22:3; 23:6; 26:5; Phil 3:5) and many other early Christians were converts from Pharisaism (Acts 15:5). Pharisaic Judaism survived the destruction of Jerusalem in AD<\/span> 70 to form the rabbinic Judaism that dominated Jewish religious life from the second century AD<\/span> to modern times.<\/p>\nThe Essenes were another religious sect within Judaism that had its origins in the second century BC<\/span>. Like the Pharisees, the Essenes were concerned principally with maintaining ritual purity in obedience to the law of Moses. The Essenes lived and worked in Jewish society; they tried to influence people by the simple, altruistic life they followed. Some Essenes also lived in their own communities, to which they returned each night after work. There were numerous religious factions within Judaism, and one such group, which may only have had vague connections with the Essenes, established a community on the western shore of the Dead Sea. This group regarded itself as the true Israel and in the wilderness prepared for the final visitation of God by keeping themselves pure from all defilement. Many documents written by members of this sect were discovered in caves near the Dead Sea where they had been hidden just before the Romans destroyed the settlement. These documents, the Dead Sea Scrolls, have provided detailed information about this religious sect and its beliefs.<\/p>\nThe Zealots were another Jewish sect, who may be related to the Sicarii (“dagger men”). This group of political activists flourished from AD<\/span> 6 to 66. Regarding God alone as their sovereign, they attempted to overthrow the Romans and those who collaborated with them by violent means, including assassination. They helped to foment the Jewish revolt of AD<\/span> 66–73 and perished with Jerusalem in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nSocial class and status in first-century AD<\/span> Palestine were determined in accordance with the rules of ritual purity. The upper class comprised members of the religious establishment, such as the Sadducees, scribes, Pharisees, and Jerusalem priests. The Sanhedrin was a deliberative body whose membership was drawn from these groups. For all practical purposes there was no middle class. The lower class consisted primarily of the Am Ha Arez (“people of the land”)—Jews who were ignorant of the law through lack of education and who did not scrupulously observe those commandments with which they were familiar. The generally hostile attitude of the Pharisees toward the Am Ha Arez is expressed in John 7:49: “But this crowd, who do not know the law, are accursed” (rsv<\/span>). There was yet another social class in first-century Palestine, which can be designated as “untouchables.” This group was composed of Samaritans, tax collectors, prostitutes, shepherds, lepers, Gentiles, and perhaps worst of all, Jews who became as Gentiles (e.g., the prodigal son of Lk 15:11-32). The rules of ritual purity as generally observed prevented any form of social contact between the upper class and the untouchables, and made contacts with the Am Ha Arez highly undesirable. Against this background, the horror of the Pharisees over Jesus’ association with tax collectors and sinners is throughly understandable (Mk 2:15-17).<\/p>\nA further consequence of this religious criterion for determining social class and status was an uneasy tension between Jerusalem and the rural areas of Palestine, particularly Galilee, during the last two centuries of the second temple period. Those in Jerusalem regarded Galilee as a place where ignorance of the Torah was the rule (Jn 1:46). Jerusalem was primarily a religious center, whose major industry was the temple cult. The total population of Jerusalem in the first century AD<\/span> has been estimated at 25,000 to 40,000. Most of these were either artisans and craftsmen devoted to building and adorning the temple (still incomplete before it was destroyed; see Jn 2:20) or priests and Levites involved in the many ritual activities of the temple. Though Jews were expected to travel to Jerusalem for each of the three annual pilgrimage festivals, this requirement proved difficult for rural Palestinian farmers.<\/p>\nFurther, the tithe demanded by Mosaic command was only on the produce of the land, not upon wages or bartered goods. The rural farmers, therefore, bore the brunt of this taxation and quite naturally resented the privileged position of urban artisans, merchants, and priests who were not obliged to tithe. The temptation not to tithe the produce of the land was very great, and many farmers succumbed to it. Their untithed produce was not kosher, and thus to be avoided by those, like the Pharisees, who were religiously scrupulous. In addition to the first and second tithes demanded of farmers (the second tithe had to be spent in the vicinity of Jerusalem), it has been estimated that Roman tax levies amounted to 10 to 15 percent of an individual’s income. Religious taxes, together with Roman taxes, added up to a crushing tax burden of from 25 to 30 percent. The fact that the Jews finally revolted against their Roman oppressors in AD<\/span> 66 is not difficult to comprehend. Throughout the first century AD<\/span>, in fact, minor revolts in Palestine occurred with predictable frequency. Many of these occurred during the three annual pilgrimage festivals in Jerusalem, when the normal population of 25,000 to 40,000 swelled to 500,000 or more. These festivals provided ideal opportunities for uprisings, and the Romans were particularly alert for such eventualities. Jesus was executed during one such Passover festival because he was suspected of being a political revolutionary (Mk 15:26).<\/p>\nThe second temple period provided the setting for the rise and fall of apocalypticism within Judaism. Apocalypticism (from a Greek word meaning “revelation”) was a kind of eschatology (“account of final events”) that assumed that ideal conditions could not be restored on earth unless God first intervened climactically to destroy evil (particularly foreign oppressors) and vindicate the righteous (Israel). Apocalyptic visionaries composed many documents, called apocalypses, in which they attempted to read the signs of the times and predict the coming of the visitation of God. Since there was a widespread consciousness that the era of prophecy was over, these apocalyptists wrote not under their own names but under the names of ancient Israelite worthies, such as Moses, Abraham, Enoch, and Ezra. Among the more significant expectations of Jewish apocalypticism were (1) the coming of a Messiah; (2) the coming of a great period of tribulation, sometimes called the messianic woes; (3) the resurrection of the just; (4) the judgment of the wicked and the reward of the righteous. Apocalyptic beliefs probably provided the motivation for most—if not all—of the Jewish revolts against the Romans.<\/p>\n\nSome portions of the Hebrew Scriptures were still in the process of composition at the beginning of the second temple period. The last three prophetic books—Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi—were written from the end of the sixth century to the mid fifth century BC<\/span>. Later rabbis expressed the opinion that the Spirit of God had been taken from Israel when these prophets ceased their labors. The Chronicler ends his work by referring to the decree of Cyrus (538 BC<\/span>), and both Ezra-Nehemiah and Esther appear to have been written in the fifth century BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe second temple period witnessed not only the completion of those writings that were later regarded as inspired and authoritative in Judaism but also the full recognition of all 24 sacred books. Prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BC<\/span>, the Mosaic law had not been observed with any consistency (according to 2 Kgs 22 it had been mislaid for an unknown period of time), nor had the classical prophets always received appropriate recognition. But after 586 BC<\/span> the Torah occupied a position of unquestioned sanctity in the lives and thoughts of the Jewish people, replacing in many respects the temple cult even before its final dissolution in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nThe Jewish Scriptures are divided into three sections, designated by Jews with the acrostic “Tanak”: (1) Torah (“Law” or “Revelation”), (2) Nebi’im (“Prophets”), and (3) Kethubim (“Writings”). It is generally claimed that while the Law and Prophets enjoyed canonical status prior to the second century BC<\/span>, the Writings were finally declared canonical at the rabbinic council of Jamnia (c. AD<\/span> 90), though the historicity of this is disputed. The rabbis are thought to have discussed whether certain biblical books should continue to be part of Scripture. In reality, the Jewish canon of Scripture was fully defined from traditional usage by the first century BC<\/span>. The Law consisted of five books: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. The Prophets consisted of two sections, the Former Prophets (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings) and the Latter Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the 12 Minor Prophets). The Writings included Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Lamentations, Ruth, and Daniel. The total number of books in this canon is 24, identical with the Protestant canon of 39 books, since Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, and the 12 are each counted as only one book. The Alexandrian canon of Hellenistic Judaism was more extensive, and the extra books (called Apocrypha by Protestants) are all found in the Roman Catholic OT canon of 46 books.<\/p>\nThe Talmudic Period (AD<\/span> 73–425)<\/p>\n<h5>Historical Survey<\/h5>\nAccording to Jewish legend, when the Romans were about to conquer Jerusalem in the revolt of AD<\/span> 66–73, a prominent Pharisee, Rabbi Johanan ben Zakkai, feigned death and his disciples were permitted to carry him out of the besieged city in a coffin. The more likely scenario is that he received permission from the Romans to move his school from Jerusalem to Jamnia, on the coast of Palestine. The temple cult and the priestly system had disappeared, and rabbinic academies such as that of Rabbi Johanan set themselves to the enormous task of reconstructing Judaism. The older Sanhedrin was reinstituted as the Beth Din (“Court of Law”), and Gamaliel II, a grandson of Hillel, who had presided over the old Sanhedrin, became its leader with the title Nasi (“prince”), or Patriarch. The patriarchate continued until AD<\/span> 425, when Emperor Theodosius II abolished the office upon the death of the last patriarch, Gamaliel VI. In Mesopotamia, Babylonian Judaism experienced a renaissance that lasted until the end of the fifth century AD<\/span>. This period was called the Age of the Gaonim (“excellencies”) after the heads of the two great rabbinic academies at Sura and Pumpeditha. It was there that the great Babylonian Talmud was compiled by the fifth century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nIn AD<\/span> 115 various Jewish communities throughout the eastern Mediterranean, including Egypt, Cyprus, and Cyrene, revolted against the Roman emperor Trajan. Without exception these revolts were all put down by Roman legions. Finally, when the emperor Hadrian was on the brink of founding the new city of Aelia Capitolina on the site of old Jerusalem, the Jews again revolted in AD<\/span> 132, led by a self-proclaimed messiah, Simeon Bar Koziba, who was called Bar-Kochba (“Son of a Star”) by his followers as an allusion to the messianic passage in Numbers 24:17. Bar-Kochba was aided by the famous rabbinic scholar Akiba. This revolt, though initially successful, was put down by the Romans under Julius Severus in 135. Shortly thereafter, Hadrian issued a decree banning all Jews from the new Aelia Capitolina.<\/p>\n<h5>Social and Religious Developments<\/h5>\nDuring this period, the result of generations of rabbinical scholarship bore fruit with the compilation of the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds. The rabbinic sages consciously saw themselves as the heirs of the ancient Israelite prophets, who in turn were the heirs of the Mosaic law. They distinguished consciously between their own legal interpretations of the Mosaic law (which they called Halakah, or “walking,” i.e., a guide for life), and the commands in the Torah itself (called Mitvah, or “commandment”). The oral law, developed through generations of rabbinic discussion, was finally compiled and written down through the efforts of the patriarch Judah ha-Nasi (c. AD<\/span> 135–220) during the last quarter of the second century AD<\/span> and became known as the Mishnah (“teaching”). This is a topical arrangement of rabbinic discussions on such subjects as the Sabbath, firstfruits, sacrifices, and women. The Mishnah became the basis for further rabbinic discussion in both Palestine and Babylonia. The decisions of sages who flourished after the writing of the Mishnah were compiled about AD<\/span> 450 in Palestine and about 500 in Babylonia. This second stage beyond the Mishnah was called the Gemara (meaning either “completion” or “repetition”). The Mishnah and the Babylonian Gemara make up the Babylonian Talmud, while the same Mishnah with the Jerusalem or Palestinian Gemara comprises the Jerusalem Talmud. Yet another type of rabbinic literature is the Midrashim (“interpretations”), which either follow the order of a particular biblical book or consist of homilies on particular biblical texts. The Targums, paraphrastic translations of Scripture into the Aramaic language, finally came to be written down beginning in the late second century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nAfter the destruction of the temple, rabbinic Judaism concentrated on the religious significance of the Torah and elevated scholarship to the central role that it still plays in Judaism. Rabbinic Judaism gradually exerted its influence upon diaspora Judaism under the initial leadership of Rabbi Johanan until a kind of rabbinic orthodoxy emerged during the second century. Christianity was one of the major ideological foes of rabbinic Judaism. In order to purge Jewish Christians from their midst, the rabbis introduced an additional benediction to the eighteen benedictions customarily recited at synagogue services. This 19th benediction was a curse upon the minim<\/em> (Christians and other heretics), which Jewish Christians who attended synagogue services found impossible to recite. The line was firmly drawn between Judaism and Christianity by this device, which was employed late in the first century.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Dead Sea Scrolls; Essenes; Diaspora of the Jews; First Jewish Revolt; Israel, History of; Jew; Judah, Tribe of; Judaism; Pharisees; Philo, Judaeus; Postexilic Period; Sanhedrin; Talmud; Torah; Tradition; Tradition, Oral.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JUDAISM Religion and culture of the Jewish people from the beginning of the postexilic period (538 BC) to modern times. The term “Judaism” is derived from “Judah,” the name of the southern kingdom of ancient Israel, while “Jew” is a shortened form of “Judeans.” The Period of the Second Temple (515 BC–AD 70) Historical Survey The united kingdom of Israel under Saul, David, and Solomon came to an end shortly after the death of Solomon. Rehoboam, his son, provoked a revolt about 930 BC on the pa...","summary_en":"JUDAISM Religion and culture of the Jewish people from the beginning of the postexilic period (538 BC) to modern times. The term “Judaism” is derived from “Judah,” the name of the southern kingdom of ancient Israel, while “Jew” is a shortened form of “Judeans.” The Period of the Second Temple (515 BC–AD 70) Historical Survey The united kingdom of Israel under Saul, David, and Solomon came to an end shortly after the death of Solomon. Rehoboam, his son, provoked a revolt about 930 BC on the pa...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":29791,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Persians Persia","title_en":"Persians Persia","content_ro":"<h3>PERSIA, PERSIANS<\/h3>\nCountry lying just to the east of Mesopotamia (modern Iraq) and covering virtually the same territory as present-day Iran. It was known in ancient times by various forms of Fars or Pars, which came down to us as Persia. It continued to be known as Persia until 1935, when its name was changed to Iran. The official modern language of the country is Persian, an Indo-European language written in Arabic characters.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Geography and Climate<\/p>\n• History<\/p>\n• Persia and the Bible<\/p>\nGeography and Climate<\/p>\nPersia served as a geographical link between inner Asia and the plateau of Asia Minor. It has been described as a triangle set between two depressions, the Persian Gulf on the south and the Caspian Sea to the north. The sides of the triangle are made up of mountain ranges that enclose an area of desert. On the west the Zagros Mountains run northwest-southeast, with many fertile valleys that are suitable for agriculture. Severe summer heat requires that animals be taken to cooler elevations during that season.<\/p>\nOn the north is the Elburz range, with Mt Demavend reaching a height of more than 19,000 feet (5,791.2 meters). The most heavily populated area of Persia is Azerbaijan, which, because of routes leading from various northern points, was one of the most accessible parts of the country and therefore had to be protected by strong fortifications.<\/p>\nFarther east, the Elburz becomes the mountains of Khorasan, which also afford easy passage into the country. This district, which has been called the “granary of Iran,” has been susceptible to foreign invasion over the centuries. On the south, the third side of the triangle, is another mountain range, the Makran. Within these ranges is a saline depression, the southern part of which has been regarded as more arid than the Gobi Desert.<\/p>\nOne of the important sections of the country was actually an extension of the Mesopotamian plain; this was known in ancient times as Susiana and now is called Khuzistan. Here the capital, Susa, was situated. Adjoining it to the north is a mountain spur that was the location of Luristan, famous for its bronzes. Another plain, near the Caspian Sea, is tropical in climate; because of heavy rainfall, it produces an abundance and variety of food.<\/p>\nLacking a river like the Nile or the Tigris-Euphrates system, and having no regular seasonal rains as in Palestine, the agriculture of Persia is dependent on irrigation. Rainfall varies dramatically from one region to another and the climate differs markedly with the topography.<\/p>\nIn antiquity the lower mountains were heavily forested with many kinds of trees sought for building by the Sumerian kings of Mesopotamia. Alabaster, marble, lapis lazuli, carnelian, and turquoise were used from early times. Iron, copper, tin, and lead were found here. In modern times the oil resources of Iran have been widely exploited.<\/p>\nHistory<\/p>\nThe Medes (a term often used synonymously with Persians, since the two are so closely related) are a people about whom relatively little is known. They were pictured in Assyrian reliefs. It was the Median Cyaxares who teamed up with the Babylonian Nabopolassar to bring about the destruction of Nineveh in 612 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nIn the seventh century BC<\/span>, a small kingdom of Persians was established at Parsumash under Achaemenes, after whom the great Persian dynasty was named. Teispes (675–640 BC<\/span>), the son and successor of Achaemenes, was under the domination of the Medes, who were gathering forces to overthrow Assyria. Trouble for the Medes freed Teispes from their control, and the weakness of Elam enabled him to gain the province of Parsa (modern Fars). The Assyrians under Ashurbanipal destroyed the nation of Elam and came into contact with the Persians under Cyrus I, son of Teispes.<\/p>\nCambyses, son of Cyrus, married the daughter of the Median king Astyages; their son, Cyrus II the Great (559–530 BC<\/span>), built a great palace complex for himself at Pasargadae. The Babylonian king, Nabonidus, allied himself with Cyrus against the Medes. Cyrus fought and defeated his grandfather, Astyages, and made the Median capital, Ecbatana, “place of assembly” (Hamadan), his own capital and set up his archives there (cf. Ezr 6:2).<\/p>\nCyrus, and later Darius, exhibited an attitude of benevolence and generosity toward defeated enemies, a policy that sometimes worked to the disadvantage of the Persians. A capable military leader, Cyrus invaded Asia Minor and defeated Croesus, king of Lydia, and brought the Greek cities of the area into subjection. He then solidified his eastern frontier. In 539 BC<\/span> he captured Babylon with virtually no resistance and decreed that the exiled Jews could return to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple (Ezr 1:1-4).<\/p>\nThe son of Cyrus, Cambyses II (529–522 BC<\/span>), conquered Egypt. Upon his suicide, the empire nearly disintegrated. Cambyses was succeeded by Darius I the Great (521–486 BC<\/span>), the son of Hystaspis, satrap of Parthia. Darius put down the internal revolts and consolidated the empire. For efficient administration of his vast empire, he created 20 provinces or satrapies, each under a satrap or “protector of the kingdom.” Other offices were instituted to check on the activities of the satraps. Darius changed the principal capital from Pasargadae to Persepolis, where his building activities were continued by later Achaemenid kings to make a tremendous palace complex. He was a follower of Zoroaster and a worshiper of Ahura Mazda, as were Xerxes and Artaxerxes.<\/p>\nThe early victory of Darius over the rebels is commemorated on the famous rock of Bisitun (Behistun). This memorial took the form of reliefs and a long cuneiform inscription in three languages: Persian, Elamite, and Akkadian. A copy of these records was made by Henry C. Rawlinson in 1855 at considerable risk, for the monument was difficult to approach, situated some 500 feet (152.4 meters) above the plain. This accomplishment played a large part in the deciphering of languages in the cuneiform script. During the later part of Darius’s reign, he suffered defeat at the hands of the Greeks at Marathon (491 BC<\/span>). Upon his death, Darius was buried in a rock-cut tomb at Naqsh-i-Rustam, a short distance northeast of Persepolis. This was a memorial consisting of reliefs and a trilingual inscription that lauds his person and reign. Later kings were buried in tombs cut in the same cliff.<\/p>\nDarius was succeeded by his son Khshayarsha, better known as Xerxes (485–465 BC<\/span>). An inscription at Persepolis lists the nations subject to him at the time of his accession and confirms his devotion to Ahura Mazda. During his rule, the Persian fleet was defeated at Salamis (480 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nArtaxerxes I Longimanus (Artakhshathra, 464–424 BC<\/span>) was followed by Darius II (423–405), Artaxerxes II Mnemon (404–359), Artaxerxes III Ochus (358–338), Arses (337–336), and finally Darius III (335–331).<\/p>\nThe loss of the empire has been attributed to the cowardice of Darius III, whose armies were defeated by Alexander the Great at Issus in 333 BC<\/span> and ultimately at Gaugamela, near modern Erbil (Arbela) in 331 BC<\/span>. Upon the death of Alexander in 323 BC<\/span>, Persia became the lot of Seleucus, one of his generals. Persian sources say little of the period between Darius III and the beginnings of Sassanian rule in the early third century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n\nPersia and the Bible<\/p>\nThe biblical references to Persia occur in the later period of OT history and in the writings of the prophets who ministered during that time. The earliest mention is the reference to Cyrus in Isaiah 44:28–45:1, a passage that has confounded scholars who have felt that the prophecy could not be so precise. This predictive prophecy was given to Isaiah by God more than 150 years before Cyrus captured Babylon and decreed the return of the captive Jews to Jerusalem.<\/p>\nThe chronological notations in Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, Zechariah, Haggai, and Esther enable us to set chronological markers with some degree of certainty. The first year of Cyrus’s reign over Babylon (Ezr 1:1) may be fixed at 538 BC<\/span>. The rebuilding of the temple met with opposition from enemies of the Jews in the time of Cyrus and Darius (Ezr 4).<\/p>\nIt was at this time that the prophets Haggai and Zechariah encouraged the Jews and urged the completion of the temple. Haggai 1:1 places the message of that prophet on the first day of the sixth month of the second year of Darius I. That translates into August 29, 520 BC<\/span>. Similarly, Zechariah 1:1 is dated to the eighth month of the year, that is, October\/November 520 BC<\/span>. The letter that was sent to Darius concerning the decree for rebuilding the temple (Ezr 5:6-17) brought about a search of the royal archives that Cyrus had set up at Ecbatana (cf. 6:1-2). The finding of the decree of Cyrus enabled the Jews to complete the temple project, which was finished on March 12, 515 BC<\/span> (the third day of the month Adar in the sixth year of Darius, Ezr 6:15).<\/p>\nThe work of Nehemiah occurred in the reign of Artaxerxes I Longimanus. Nehemiah’s request that he be allowed to return to Jerusalem to rebuild the wall was made in the month of Nisan in the 20th year of Artaxerxes (Neh 2:1, April\/May 445 BC<\/span>). This building project also met with strong opposition. The date is generally confirmed by a letter from the 17th year of Darius II (408 BC<\/span>) and found among the Elephantine papyri in Egypt. Two personal names found in Nehemiah also occur in this letter: the sons of Sanballat, Nehemiah’s most virulent enemy (cf. Neh 2:19; 4:1-8), and Johanan the grandson of Eliashib, who was high priest at Jerusalem when Nehemiah arrived there (3:1). Another letter among these papyri grants Persian authority to the Jews at Elephantine to celebrate the Passover according to their custom.<\/p>\nThe book of Esther is set in the time of King Ahasuerus, who is Xerxes, referred to in Ezra 4:6 between Darius and Artaxerxes. The Hebrew Ahasuerus represents Khshayarsha, whom the Greeks called Xerxes. On the other hand, the Septuagint has Artaxerxes, and Josephus names Artaxerxes as the king mentioned in the book of Esther. Esther provides a number of details of the life and customs of Persian royalty.<\/p>\nPersia also figures in the prophecies of Ezekiel, where Persia is named among the armies of Tyre (Ez 27:10). It is also listed as an ally of Gog in the invasion of Israel (38:5). The recorded history in Daniel refers to Persia (Dn 10:1), as do the prophecies of that book (8:20; 11:2).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Postexilic Period; Medes, Media, Median.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PERSIA, PERSIANS<\/h3>\nCountry lying just to the east of Mesopotamia (modern Iraq) and covering virtually the same territory as present-day Iran. It was known in ancient times by various forms of Fars or Pars, which came down to us as Persia. It continued to be known as Persia until 1935, when its name was changed to Iran. The official modern language of the country is Persian, an Indo-European language written in Arabic characters.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Geography and Climate<\/p>\n• History<\/p>\n• Persia and the Bible<\/p>\nGeography and Climate<\/p>\nPersia served as a geographical link between inner Asia and the plateau of Asia Minor. It has been described as a triangle set between two depressions, the Persian Gulf on the south and the Caspian Sea to the north. The sides of the triangle are made up of mountain ranges that enclose an area of desert. On the west the Zagros Mountains run northwest-southeast, with many fertile valleys that are suitable for agriculture. Severe summer heat requires that animals be taken to cooler elevations during that season.<\/p>\nOn the north is the Elburz range, with Mt Demavend reaching a height of more than 19,000 feet (5,791.2 meters). The most heavily populated area of Persia is Azerbaijan, which, because of routes leading from various northern points, was one of the most accessible parts of the country and therefore had to be protected by strong fortifications.<\/p>\nFarther east, the Elburz becomes the mountains of Khorasan, which also afford easy passage into the country. This district, which has been called the “granary of Iran,” has been susceptible to foreign invasion over the centuries. On the south, the third side of the triangle, is another mountain range, the Makran. Within these ranges is a saline depression, the southern part of which has been regarded as more arid than the Gobi Desert.<\/p>\nOne of the important sections of the country was actually an extension of the Mesopotamian plain; this was known in ancient times as Susiana and now is called Khuzistan. Here the capital, Susa, was situated. Adjoining it to the north is a mountain spur that was the location of Luristan, famous for its bronzes. Another plain, near the Caspian Sea, is tropical in climate; because of heavy rainfall, it produces an abundance and variety of food.<\/p>\nLacking a river like the Nile or the Tigris-Euphrates system, and having no regular seasonal rains as in Palestine, the agriculture of Persia is dependent on irrigation. Rainfall varies dramatically from one region to another and the climate differs markedly with the topography.<\/p>\nIn antiquity the lower mountains were heavily forested with many kinds of trees sought for building by the Sumerian kings of Mesopotamia. Alabaster, marble, lapis lazuli, carnelian, and turquoise were used from early times. Iron, copper, tin, and lead were found here. In modern times the oil resources of Iran have been widely exploited.<\/p>\nHistory<\/p>\nThe Medes (a term often used synonymously with Persians, since the two are so closely related) are a people about whom relatively little is known. They were pictured in Assyrian reliefs. It was the Median Cyaxares who teamed up with the Babylonian Nabopolassar to bring about the destruction of Nineveh in 612 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nIn the seventh century BC<\/span>, a small kingdom of Persians was established at Parsumash under Achaemenes, after whom the great Persian dynasty was named. Teispes (675–640 BC<\/span>), the son and successor of Achaemenes, was under the domination of the Medes, who were gathering forces to overthrow Assyria. Trouble for the Medes freed Teispes from their control, and the weakness of Elam enabled him to gain the province of Parsa (modern Fars). The Assyrians under Ashurbanipal destroyed the nation of Elam and came into contact with the Persians under Cyrus I, son of Teispes.<\/p>\nCambyses, son of Cyrus, married the daughter of the Median king Astyages; their son, Cyrus II the Great (559–530 BC<\/span>), built a great palace complex for himself at Pasargadae. The Babylonian king, Nabonidus, allied himself with Cyrus against the Medes. Cyrus fought and defeated his grandfather, Astyages, and made the Median capital, Ecbatana, “place of assembly” (Hamadan), his own capital and set up his archives there (cf. Ezr 6:2).<\/p>\nCyrus, and later Darius, exhibited an attitude of benevolence and generosity toward defeated enemies, a policy that sometimes worked to the disadvantage of the Persians. A capable military leader, Cyrus invaded Asia Minor and defeated Croesus, king of Lydia, and brought the Greek cities of the area into subjection. He then solidified his eastern frontier. In 539 BC<\/span> he captured Babylon with virtually no resistance and decreed that the exiled Jews could return to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple (Ezr 1:1-4).<\/p>\nThe son of Cyrus, Cambyses II (529–522 BC<\/span>), conquered Egypt. Upon his suicide, the empire nearly disintegrated. Cambyses was succeeded by Darius I the Great (521–486 BC<\/span>), the son of Hystaspis, satrap of Parthia. Darius put down the internal revolts and consolidated the empire. For efficient administration of his vast empire, he created 20 provinces or satrapies, each under a satrap or “protector of the kingdom.” Other offices were instituted to check on the activities of the satraps. Darius changed the principal capital from Pasargadae to Persepolis, where his building activities were continued by later Achaemenid kings to make a tremendous palace complex. He was a follower of Zoroaster and a worshiper of Ahura Mazda, as were Xerxes and Artaxerxes.<\/p>\nThe early victory of Darius over the rebels is commemorated on the famous rock of Bisitun (Behistun). This memorial took the form of reliefs and a long cuneiform inscription in three languages: Persian, Elamite, and Akkadian. A copy of these records was made by Henry C. Rawlinson in 1855 at considerable risk, for the monument was difficult to approach, situated some 500 feet (152.4 meters) above the plain. This accomplishment played a large part in the deciphering of languages in the cuneiform script. During the later part of Darius’s reign, he suffered defeat at the hands of the Greeks at Marathon (491 BC<\/span>). Upon his death, Darius was buried in a rock-cut tomb at Naqsh-i-Rustam, a short distance northeast of Persepolis. This was a memorial consisting of reliefs and a trilingual inscription that lauds his person and reign. Later kings were buried in tombs cut in the same cliff.<\/p>\nDarius was succeeded by his son Khshayarsha, better known as Xerxes (485–465 BC<\/span>). An inscription at Persepolis lists the nations subject to him at the time of his accession and confirms his devotion to Ahura Mazda. During his rule, the Persian fleet was defeated at Salamis (480 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nArtaxerxes I Longimanus (Artakhshathra, 464–424 BC<\/span>) was followed by Darius II (423–405), Artaxerxes II Mnemon (404–359), Artaxerxes III Ochus (358–338), Arses (337–336), and finally Darius III (335–331).<\/p>\nThe loss of the empire has been attributed to the cowardice of Darius III, whose armies were defeated by Alexander the Great at Issus in 333 BC<\/span> and ultimately at Gaugamela, near modern Erbil (Arbela) in 331 BC<\/span>. Upon the death of Alexander in 323 BC<\/span>, Persia became the lot of Seleucus, one of his generals. Persian sources say little of the period between Darius III and the beginnings of Sassanian rule in the early third century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n\nPersia and the Bible<\/p>\nThe biblical references to Persia occur in the later period of OT history and in the writings of the prophets who ministered during that time. The earliest mention is the reference to Cyrus in Isaiah 44:28–45:1, a passage that has confounded scholars who have felt that the prophecy could not be so precise. This predictive prophecy was given to Isaiah by God more than 150 years before Cyrus captured Babylon and decreed the return of the captive Jews to Jerusalem.<\/p>\nThe chronological notations in Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, Zechariah, Haggai, and Esther enable us to set chronological markers with some degree of certainty. The first year of Cyrus’s reign over Babylon (Ezr 1:1) may be fixed at 538 BC<\/span>. The rebuilding of the temple met with opposition from enemies of the Jews in the time of Cyrus and Darius (Ezr 4).<\/p>\nIt was at this time that the prophets Haggai and Zechariah encouraged the Jews and urged the completion of the temple. Haggai 1:1 places the message of that prophet on the first day of the sixth month of the second year of Darius I. That translates into August 29, 520 BC<\/span>. Similarly, Zechariah 1:1 is dated to the eighth month of the year, that is, October\/November 520 BC<\/span>. The letter that was sent to Darius concerning the decree for rebuilding the temple (Ezr 5:6-17) brought about a search of the royal archives that Cyrus had set up at Ecbatana (cf. 6:1-2). The finding of the decree of Cyrus enabled the Jews to complete the temple project, which was finished on March 12, 515 BC<\/span> (the third day of the month Adar in the sixth year of Darius, Ezr 6:15).<\/p>\nThe work of Nehemiah occurred in the reign of Artaxerxes I Longimanus. Nehemiah’s request that he be allowed to return to Jerusalem to rebuild the wall was made in the month of Nisan in the 20th year of Artaxerxes (Neh 2:1, April\/May 445 BC<\/span>). This building project also met with strong opposition. The date is generally confirmed by a letter from the 17th year of Darius II (408 BC<\/span>) and found among the Elephantine papyri in Egypt. Two personal names found in Nehemiah also occur in this letter: the sons of Sanballat, Nehemiah’s most virulent enemy (cf. Neh 2:19; 4:1-8), and Johanan the grandson of Eliashib, who was high priest at Jerusalem when Nehemiah arrived there (3:1). Another letter among these papyri grants Persian authority to the Jews at Elephantine to celebrate the Passover according to their custom.<\/p>\nThe book of Esther is set in the time of King Ahasuerus, who is Xerxes, referred to in Ezra 4:6 between Darius and Artaxerxes. The Hebrew Ahasuerus represents Khshayarsha, whom the Greeks called Xerxes. On the other hand, the Septuagint has Artaxerxes, and Josephus names Artaxerxes as the king mentioned in the book of Esther. Esther provides a number of details of the life and customs of Persian royalty.<\/p>\nPersia also figures in the prophecies of Ezekiel, where Persia is named among the armies of Tyre (Ez 27:10). It is also listed as an ally of Gog in the invasion of Israel (38:5). The recorded history in Daniel refers to Persia (Dn 10:1), as do the prophecies of that book (8:20; 11:2).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Postexilic Period; Medes, Media, Median.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PERSIA, PERSIANS Country lying just to the east of Mesopotamia (modern Iraq) and covering virtually the same territory as present-day Iran. It was known in ancient times by various forms of Fars or Pars, which came down to us as Persia. It continued to be known as Persia until 1935, when its name was changed to Iran. The official modern language of the country is Persian, an Indo-European language written in Arabic characters. Preview • Geography and Climate • History • Persia and the Bible G...","summary_en":"PERSIA, PERSIANS Country lying just to the east of Mesopotamia (modern Iraq) and covering virtually the same territory as present-day Iran. It was known in ancient times by various forms of Fars or Pars, which came down to us as Persia. It continued to be known as Persia until 1935, when its name was changed to Iran. The official modern language of the country is Persian, an Indo-European language written in Arabic characters. Preview • Geography and Climate • History • Persia and the Bible G...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30910,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Period*, Postexilic","title_en":"Period*, Postexilic","content_ro":"<h3>POSTEXILIC PERIOD*<\/h3>\nA period in the Jews’ history after their exile to Babylon. This period extends from 539–c. 331 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• The Biblical Perspective<\/p>\n• The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire<\/p>\n• The Policy of Persia<\/p>\n• The Return from Exile<\/p>\n• The Return of Ezra<\/p>\n• Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry<\/p>\n• The Remainder of the Persian Period<\/p>\n• Religious Features of the Postexilic Period<\/p>\nThe Biblical Perspective<\/p>\nThe books that specifically cover the history of the postexilic or Persian period are Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, and Zechariah. These cover a period of over a century, only a portion of which is dealt with in detail, as the following table shows:<\/p>\n\nThe Collapse of the Babylonian Empire<\/p>\nThis occurred with dramatic suddenness, largely because of internal resistance to the policies of the last Babylonian king, Nabonidus (555–539 BC<\/span>). His neglect of the traditional Babylonian deity, Marduk, in favor of the moon god, Sin, was particularly resented. Nabonidus lived in Taima during the last decade of his reign, refusing to enter Babylon, where his son Belshazzar ruled as virtual king, as noted in Daniel 5. Babylon fell to the Persians in October 538 BC<\/span> and the entire empire passed into their control.<\/p>\nThe Policy of Persia<\/p>\nThis is well documented through contemporary inscriptions, notably the record of Cyrus, the first king of the Persian Empire (559–530 BC<\/span>), in the “Cyrus Cylinder.” A new phase in the relationship of conqueror to conquered peoples opened up, which contrasted with the policy of the Assyrian and Babylonian empires of crushing any opposition by massive force. Cyrus and his successors followed a conciliatory line, allowing exiled groups to return home, encouraging local faiths, posing as the champions of the territorial deities, and allowing local autonomy except where Persian interests were affected adversely. The cost of this operation, although considerable, must have been infinitesimal compared with that of keeping rebellious subjects under constant subjection.<\/p>\nThe new enlightened policy is reflected in the decree of Cyrus, dated 538 BC<\/span> (Ezr 1:1) and preserved in two versions. The first (vv 1-4) is clearly the official proclamation, while the second (6:3-5) is a more prosaic memorandum dealing with building specifications, a record of Cyrus’s commitment stored in the official archives (vv 1-2). The critical tendency to question the narrative in Ezra 1, especially on the score of the favorable references to the God of Israel and the vast financial support promised, has been nullified by the archaeological evidence, which shows an identical policy elsewhere. The Cyrus Cylinder, for example, notes, “The gods who live within them [i.e., the cities] I returned to their places. . . . All of their inhabitants I collected and restored to their dwelling places.”<\/p>\nIn Judah itself there is no evidence for any warfare in this period, which suggests that the Persian takeover of the area was nonviolent. Judah was incorporated into the fifth Persian province, which included the entire area west of the Euphrates River (Ezr 7:21). It was no more than a minor subdistrict, governed through Samaria.<\/p>\nThe Return from Exile<\/p>\nThe continuance of a large Jewish community in Babylonia shows that not all the Jews responded to the invitation to return to their homeland, probably because of the prosperity acquired in exile. But 42,360 dedicated Jews (Ezr 2:64) braved the challenge of a four-month 900-mile (1,448-kilometer) journey under Sheshbazzar (1:8), the officially appointed leader, and Zerubbabel his nephew (3:2), who was probably the one to whom the Jews looked as leader. With great enthusiasm the Jews rebuilt the altar of sacrifice and resumed the observance of the traditional feasts (vv 1-6), revealing both a sense of stewardship (2:68-69) and careful attention to the requirements of the Law (3:2-4). Soon after, work on the second temple commenced—the materials and master craftsmen being imported from Tyre and Sidon (Ezr 3:7-9; cf. 1 Kgs 5). When the foundations were laid, the worshipers were doubtless aware that they were fulfilling God’s promise through Jeremiah (Ezr 3:10-11; cf. Jer 33:10-11). But their high hopes were thwarted when there was opposition from neighboring areas (Ezr 4:4-5), selfishness in giving their own accommodations a higher priority than the Lord’s house (Hg 1:2-4, 9), and a series of crop failures that further reduced morale (1:6, 10-11; 2:17).<\/p>\nWork on the temple was not resumed until Haggai and Zechariah appeared in 520 BC<\/span>. They encouraged Zerubbabel and Joshua (Jeshua) the high priest, rebuked the people for their apathy and selfishness, and promised God’s presence and blessing upon the temple project (Hg 1:12–2:9). Zechariah’s preaching went beyond the building of the temple, including the rebuilding of Jerusalem itself (Zec 2:1-5) and its world reputation (2:1-5, 11-12; 8:22). The two leaders were addressed in ways that anticipated the Messiah (Hg 2:21-23; Zec 6:10-14). But the Persian king Darius (521–486 BC<\/span>) was not alarmed when the rebuilding operation was reported to him (Ezr 5:1–6:13) and allowed the work to continue. In February 515 BC<\/span> it was dedicated (6:14-16). The Jewish community again had a focal point for its religion, but the political situation remained difficult, with no real security in a still-shattered city.<\/p>\nThe Return of Ezra<\/p>\nThe traditional date of Ezra’s return is 458 BC<\/span> (preceding that of Nehemiah in 445 BC<\/span>). This is based on the premise that the King Artaxerxes noted in Ezra 7:7 was Artaxerxes I Longimanus (464–424 BC<\/span>) and not Artaxerxes II Mnemon (404–359 BC<\/span>). However, some scholars, allowing that the king was Artaxerxes I, but believing that Nehemiah preceded Ezra, suggest that a tens unit has dropped out of “seventh” in Ezra 7:7, and that the date of Ezra’s return should be the 27th (438 BC<\/span>) or 37th year (428 BC<\/span>) of Artaxerxes I, making Ezra’s return a few years after Nehemiah’s. While this is plausible, there remains strong support for the traditional view. It accords with the order of the two books in the OT and requires no textual emendation. It also accounts for the section in Ezra 4:7-23, where, in the reign of Artaxerxes, an abortive effort was made by a recently returned group to rebuild the wall of Jerusalem. Nehemiah 1:1-4 suggests that this was regarded as important and its abrupt termination, by a decree of the king, caused Nehemiah great distress. The probability is that Ezra, recently returned, realized that little could be done in the way of major religious reformation until Jerusalem was secure, but in attempting to rebuild the wall he exceeded his mandate and was not able to function adequately until Nehemiah arrived, when the new security of Jerusalem allowed the great Law-reading ceremony of Nehemiah 8:1-12 to take place.<\/p>\nEzra’s ministry concerned the teaching of the Law of Moses, the Pentateuch, which had long been extant in its final form by this time. Ezra 7 shows that Artaxerxes was following the traditional Persian policy of encouraging good relationships with his subject peoples. Ezra’s appointment (Ezr 7:12) was to a state office; it has frequently been paraphrased as “Secretary of State for Jewish Religious Affairs.”<\/p>\n\nNehemiah’s Return and Ministry<\/p>\nHanani and others (Neh 1:1-3) informed Nehemiah of the complete failure of a recent attempt to rebuild the wall, probably that recorded in Ezra 4:7-23, and sought his mediation before the very king who had authorized the decree that compelled work on the wall to cease. A friend in high places was vital, and Nehemiah, a trusted and influential member of the court (Neh 1:11), was approached for this delicate and dangerous task. Nehemiah 1:4–2:8 shows how well he prepared for and seized his opportunity. His appointment as the governor of Judah (5:14) involved the removal of this area from the control of the governor of Samaria, which accounts for the unrelenting hostility of Sanballat (2:19; 4:1). The evidence of Nehemiah 3 suggests that the extent of Judah at this time was limited, probably not reaching as far north as Bethel or as far south as Hebron. Nehemiah was faced with opposition that included ridicule (2:19; 4:1-3), armed force (4:8, 11), discouragement (v 10), internal economic problems (5:1-18), intrigue (6:1-2), intimidation, and blackmail (vv 5-14). In spite of these obstacles, the wall was completed in the incredibly brief period of 52 days (v 15).<\/p>\nIn addition to this monumental achievement, Nehemiah completely reorganized the social and economic life of Jerusalem, dealing with alienated mortgages, excessive interest rates (Neh 5:1-13), mixed marriages (10:30; 13:23-30), Sabbath observance (10:31; 13:15-21), and temple supplies (10:32-40; 13:10-13). Almost certainly, it was this political and economic security that allowed Ezra, who probably arrived 13 years earlier, to proceed with his great religious reformation based on the Law. Nehemiah’s book, usually called the “Nehemiah Memoirs,” was probably presented by him in the temple as a “votive offering” (as indicated by the form of 5:19; 13:14, 22, 31).<\/p>\nThe Remainder of the Persian Period<\/p>\nPersian control, which probably centered on Lachish, was traditionally mild, except where her interests were directly threatened. There is no evidence of any major discontent in Judah, which enjoyed a considerable degree of autonomy. The Phoenician revolt of 351 BC<\/span>, which took Artaxerxes III (359–338 BC<\/span>) three years to subdue, was the only serious disturbance in the area. While Artaxerxes deported some Jews to Hyrcania, southeast of the Caspian Sea, that was probably a precautionary measure, and Judah does not appear to have been greatly involved in the revolt. The Jerusalem priests were allowed to mint their own coinage and levy a temple tax. Under the wider influence of the Persian Empire, Hebrew gradually fell out of popular usage as a spoken language, being replaced by Aramaic. As the international stature of Greece increased, so the influence of Hellenism began to be felt, even in Judah.<\/p>\nReligious Features of the Postexilic Period<\/p>\n<h5>The Decline of Prophecy<\/h5>\nThere were three main reasons for this:<\/p>\n1. The prophetic movement as a whole became discredited after Jerusalem fell in 586 BC<\/span>. The large number of popular cult prophets who had foretold a sudden end to the Babylonian oppression (e.g., Jer 28:1-4) were proved decisively wrong. The suspicion that henceforth became attached to prophecy was increased further in the Persian period, when large numbers of itinerant “prophets” of various religions traveled widely. Zechariah 13:2-6 shows the stern measures advocated against such false prophets and fortune-tellers.<\/p>\n<li>2. There was a markedly different historical situation. The chastened remnant that survived had turned away from the blatant apostasy that characterized the preexilic period, so that the prophetic condemnation was not required with the same urgency. The temple and the Law had acquired a new prominence, and postexilic prophecy generally was concerned either with the rebuilding of the temple (e.g., Haggai and Zechariah) or the purification of its cult (e.g., Malachi). Once this goal had been realized, the role of the prophet was diminished. Another historical factor was the relatively large number of priests who returned from captivity, doubtless encouraged by the prospect of serving in the rebuilt temple. The main need at this time was for the priest, who revealed God’s will on the basis of the Law.<\/li>\n<li>3. There was an increasing stress on the transcendence of God, caused partly by an emphasis upon priestly mediation and partly by a fear of God that resulted from the recent judgment. The apocalyptic movement, with its emphasis on angelic intermediaries between humans and a transcendent God, encouraged this tendency. Correspondingly, the prophetic appeal for a personal, moral walk with God weakened.<\/li>\n<h5>The Rise of the Synagogue<\/h5>\nSome type of local worship, independent of the temple and its sacrifices, must have developed in the Captivity, with the Law increasingly occupying a dominant position. Later on, the prophetic books were read and expounded, but the primary stress was always on the Law. This mode of worship later took root in the homeland, and the synagogue gradually developed into the focal point of the community for social relationships, education, and worship. It facilitated the worldwide continuance and expansion of the Jewish faith, independent of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Diaspora of the Jews; Ezra, Book of; Haggai, Book of; Israel, History of; Nehemiah, Book of; Zechariah, Book of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>POSTEXILIC PERIOD*<\/h3>\nA period in the Jews’ history after their exile to Babylon. This period extends from 539–c. 331 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• The Biblical Perspective<\/p>\n• The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire<\/p>\n• The Policy of Persia<\/p>\n• The Return from Exile<\/p>\n• The Return of Ezra<\/p>\n• Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry<\/p>\n• The Remainder of the Persian Period<\/p>\n• Religious Features of the Postexilic Period<\/p>\nThe Biblical Perspective<\/p>\nThe books that specifically cover the history of the postexilic or Persian period are Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, and Zechariah. These cover a period of over a century, only a portion of which is dealt with in detail, as the following table shows:<\/p>\n\nThe Collapse of the Babylonian Empire<\/p>\nThis occurred with dramatic suddenness, largely because of internal resistance to the policies of the last Babylonian king, Nabonidus (555–539 BC<\/span>). His neglect of the traditional Babylonian deity, Marduk, in favor of the moon god, Sin, was particularly resented. Nabonidus lived in Taima during the last decade of his reign, refusing to enter Babylon, where his son Belshazzar ruled as virtual king, as noted in Daniel 5. Babylon fell to the Persians in October 538 BC<\/span> and the entire empire passed into their control.<\/p>\nThe Policy of Persia<\/p>\nThis is well documented through contemporary inscriptions, notably the record of Cyrus, the first king of the Persian Empire (559–530 BC<\/span>), in the “Cyrus Cylinder.” A new phase in the relationship of conqueror to conquered peoples opened up, which contrasted with the policy of the Assyrian and Babylonian empires of crushing any opposition by massive force. Cyrus and his successors followed a conciliatory line, allowing exiled groups to return home, encouraging local faiths, posing as the champions of the territorial deities, and allowing local autonomy except where Persian interests were affected adversely. The cost of this operation, although considerable, must have been infinitesimal compared with that of keeping rebellious subjects under constant subjection.<\/p>\nThe new enlightened policy is reflected in the decree of Cyrus, dated 538 BC<\/span> (Ezr 1:1) and preserved in two versions. The first (vv 1-4) is clearly the official proclamation, while the second (6:3-5) is a more prosaic memorandum dealing with building specifications, a record of Cyrus’s commitment stored in the official archives (vv 1-2). The critical tendency to question the narrative in Ezra 1, especially on the score of the favorable references to the God of Israel and the vast financial support promised, has been nullified by the archaeological evidence, which shows an identical policy elsewhere. The Cyrus Cylinder, for example, notes, “The gods who live within them [i.e., the cities] I returned to their places. . . . All of their inhabitants I collected and restored to their dwelling places.”<\/p>\nIn Judah itself there is no evidence for any warfare in this period, which suggests that the Persian takeover of the area was nonviolent. Judah was incorporated into the fifth Persian province, which included the entire area west of the Euphrates River (Ezr 7:21). It was no more than a minor subdistrict, governed through Samaria.<\/p>\nThe Return from Exile<\/p>\nThe continuance of a large Jewish community in Babylonia shows that not all the Jews responded to the invitation to return to their homeland, probably because of the prosperity acquired in exile. But 42,360 dedicated Jews (Ezr 2:64) braved the challenge of a four-month 900-mile (1,448-kilometer) journey under Sheshbazzar (1:8), the officially appointed leader, and Zerubbabel his nephew (3:2), who was probably the one to whom the Jews looked as leader. With great enthusiasm the Jews rebuilt the altar of sacrifice and resumed the observance of the traditional feasts (vv 1-6), revealing both a sense of stewardship (2:68-69) and careful attention to the requirements of the Law (3:2-4). Soon after, work on the second temple commenced—the materials and master craftsmen being imported from Tyre and Sidon (Ezr 3:7-9; cf. 1 Kgs 5). When the foundations were laid, the worshipers were doubtless aware that they were fulfilling God’s promise through Jeremiah (Ezr 3:10-11; cf. Jer 33:10-11). But their high hopes were thwarted when there was opposition from neighboring areas (Ezr 4:4-5), selfishness in giving their own accommodations a higher priority than the Lord’s house (Hg 1:2-4, 9), and a series of crop failures that further reduced morale (1:6, 10-11; 2:17).<\/p>\nWork on the temple was not resumed until Haggai and Zechariah appeared in 520 BC<\/span>. They encouraged Zerubbabel and Joshua (Jeshua) the high priest, rebuked the people for their apathy and selfishness, and promised God’s presence and blessing upon the temple project (Hg 1:12–2:9). Zechariah’s preaching went beyond the building of the temple, including the rebuilding of Jerusalem itself (Zec 2:1-5) and its world reputation (2:1-5, 11-12; 8:22). The two leaders were addressed in ways that anticipated the Messiah (Hg 2:21-23; Zec 6:10-14). But the Persian king Darius (521–486 BC<\/span>) was not alarmed when the rebuilding operation was reported to him (Ezr 5:1–6:13) and allowed the work to continue. In February 515 BC<\/span> it was dedicated (6:14-16). The Jewish community again had a focal point for its religion, but the political situation remained difficult, with no real security in a still-shattered city.<\/p>\nThe Return of Ezra<\/p>\nThe traditional date of Ezra’s return is 458 BC<\/span> (preceding that of Nehemiah in 445 BC<\/span>). This is based on the premise that the King Artaxerxes noted in Ezra 7:7 was Artaxerxes I Longimanus (464–424 BC<\/span>) and not Artaxerxes II Mnemon (404–359 BC<\/span>). However, some scholars, allowing that the king was Artaxerxes I, but believing that Nehemiah preceded Ezra, suggest that a tens unit has dropped out of “seventh” in Ezra 7:7, and that the date of Ezra’s return should be the 27th (438 BC<\/span>) or 37th year (428 BC<\/span>) of Artaxerxes I, making Ezra’s return a few years after Nehemiah’s. While this is plausible, there remains strong support for the traditional view. It accords with the order of the two books in the OT and requires no textual emendation. It also accounts for the section in Ezra 4:7-23, where, in the reign of Artaxerxes, an abortive effort was made by a recently returned group to rebuild the wall of Jerusalem. Nehemiah 1:1-4 suggests that this was regarded as important and its abrupt termination, by a decree of the king, caused Nehemiah great distress. The probability is that Ezra, recently returned, realized that little could be done in the way of major religious reformation until Jerusalem was secure, but in attempting to rebuild the wall he exceeded his mandate and was not able to function adequately until Nehemiah arrived, when the new security of Jerusalem allowed the great Law-reading ceremony of Nehemiah 8:1-12 to take place.<\/p>\nEzra’s ministry concerned the teaching of the Law of Moses, the Pentateuch, which had long been extant in its final form by this time. Ezra 7 shows that Artaxerxes was following the traditional Persian policy of encouraging good relationships with his subject peoples. Ezra’s appointment (Ezr 7:12) was to a state office; it has frequently been paraphrased as “Secretary of State for Jewish Religious Affairs.”<\/p>\n\nNehemiah’s Return and Ministry<\/p>\nHanani and others (Neh 1:1-3) informed Nehemiah of the complete failure of a recent attempt to rebuild the wall, probably that recorded in Ezra 4:7-23, and sought his mediation before the very king who had authorized the decree that compelled work on the wall to cease. A friend in high places was vital, and Nehemiah, a trusted and influential member of the court (Neh 1:11), was approached for this delicate and dangerous task. Nehemiah 1:4–2:8 shows how well he prepared for and seized his opportunity. His appointment as the governor of Judah (5:14) involved the removal of this area from the control of the governor of Samaria, which accounts for the unrelenting hostility of Sanballat (2:19; 4:1). The evidence of Nehemiah 3 suggests that the extent of Judah at this time was limited, probably not reaching as far north as Bethel or as far south as Hebron. Nehemiah was faced with opposition that included ridicule (2:19; 4:1-3), armed force (4:8, 11), discouragement (v 10), internal economic problems (5:1-18), intrigue (6:1-2), intimidation, and blackmail (vv 5-14). In spite of these obstacles, the wall was completed in the incredibly brief period of 52 days (v 15).<\/p>\nIn addition to this monumental achievement, Nehemiah completely reorganized the social and economic life of Jerusalem, dealing with alienated mortgages, excessive interest rates (Neh 5:1-13), mixed marriages (10:30; 13:23-30), Sabbath observance (10:31; 13:15-21), and temple supplies (10:32-40; 13:10-13). Almost certainly, it was this political and economic security that allowed Ezra, who probably arrived 13 years earlier, to proceed with his great religious reformation based on the Law. Nehemiah’s book, usually called the “Nehemiah Memoirs,” was probably presented by him in the temple as a “votive offering” (as indicated by the form of 5:19; 13:14, 22, 31).<\/p>\nThe Remainder of the Persian Period<\/p>\nPersian control, which probably centered on Lachish, was traditionally mild, except where her interests were directly threatened. There is no evidence of any major discontent in Judah, which enjoyed a considerable degree of autonomy. The Phoenician revolt of 351 BC<\/span>, which took Artaxerxes III (359–338 BC<\/span>) three years to subdue, was the only serious disturbance in the area. While Artaxerxes deported some Jews to Hyrcania, southeast of the Caspian Sea, that was probably a precautionary measure, and Judah does not appear to have been greatly involved in the revolt. The Jerusalem priests were allowed to mint their own coinage and levy a temple tax. Under the wider influence of the Persian Empire, Hebrew gradually fell out of popular usage as a spoken language, being replaced by Aramaic. As the international stature of Greece increased, so the influence of Hellenism began to be felt, even in Judah.<\/p>\nReligious Features of the Postexilic Period<\/p>\n<h5>The Decline of Prophecy<\/h5>\nThere were three main reasons for this:<\/p>\n1. The prophetic movement as a whole became discredited after Jerusalem fell in 586 BC<\/span>. The large number of popular cult prophets who had foretold a sudden end to the Babylonian oppression (e.g., Jer 28:1-4) were proved decisively wrong. The suspicion that henceforth became attached to prophecy was increased further in the Persian period, when large numbers of itinerant “prophets” of various religions traveled widely. Zechariah 13:2-6 shows the stern measures advocated against such false prophets and fortune-tellers.<\/p>\n<li>2. There was a markedly different historical situation. The chastened remnant that survived had turned away from the blatant apostasy that characterized the preexilic period, so that the prophetic condemnation was not required with the same urgency. The temple and the Law had acquired a new prominence, and postexilic prophecy generally was concerned either with the rebuilding of the temple (e.g., Haggai and Zechariah) or the purification of its cult (e.g., Malachi). Once this goal had been realized, the role of the prophet was diminished. Another historical factor was the relatively large number of priests who returned from captivity, doubtless encouraged by the prospect of serving in the rebuilt temple. The main need at this time was for the priest, who revealed God’s will on the basis of the Law.<\/li>\n<li>3. There was an increasing stress on the transcendence of God, caused partly by an emphasis upon priestly mediation and partly by a fear of God that resulted from the recent judgment. The apocalyptic movement, with its emphasis on angelic intermediaries between humans and a transcendent God, encouraged this tendency. Correspondingly, the prophetic appeal for a personal, moral walk with God weakened.<\/li>\n<h5>The Rise of the Synagogue<\/h5>\nSome type of local worship, independent of the temple and its sacrifices, must have developed in the Captivity, with the Law increasingly occupying a dominant position. Later on, the prophetic books were read and expounded, but the primary stress was always on the Law. This mode of worship later took root in the homeland, and the synagogue gradually developed into the focal point of the community for social relationships, education, and worship. It facilitated the worldwide continuance and expansion of the Jewish faith, independent of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Diaspora of the Jews; Ezra, Book of; Haggai, Book of; Israel, History of; Nehemiah, Book of; Zechariah, Book of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"POSTEXILIC PERIOD* A period in the Jews’ history after their exile to Babylon. This period extends from 539–c. 331 BC. Preview • The Biblical Perspective • The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire • The Policy of Persia • The Return from Exile • The Return of Ezra • Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry • The Remainder of the Persian Period • Religious Features of the Postexilic Period The Biblical Perspective The books that specifically cover the history of the postexilic or Persian period are Ezra, N...","summary_en":"POSTEXILIC PERIOD* A period in the Jews’ history after their exile to Babylon. This period extends from 539–c. 331 BC. Preview • The Biblical Perspective • The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire • The Policy of Persia • The Return from Exile • The Return of Ezra • Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry • The Remainder of the Persian Period • Religious Features of the Postexilic Period The Biblical Perspective The books that specifically cover the history of the postexilic or Persian period are Ezra, N...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35026,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sheshbazzar","title_en":"Sheshbazzar","content_ro":"<h3>SHESHBAZZAR<\/h3>\nJewish leader who found favor with Cyrus the Great, king of Persia. In the first year of his reign, Cyrus issued a decree that the temple in Jerusalem should be rebuilt (Ezr 1:1-4; cf. 6:1-5). He appointed Sheshbazzar governor of Judah (Ezr 5:14) and handed over to him the gold and silver vessels that Nebuchadnezzar had carried off when he took Jerusalem (1:7-9). Sheshbazzar fulfilled this commission by taking the vessels to Jerusalem with the returning exiles (v 9) and beginning the restoration of the temple (5:16).<\/p>\nSheshbazzar is mentioned in the Bible only four times, all in the book of Ezra (1:8-9; 5:14-16). For many years it was commonly held that Sheshbazzar was another name for Zerubbabel. Both were of the royal line; Sheshbazzar is called “the prince of Judah,” which may mean that he was heir apparent to the throne. Since his genealogy is not given, he may be represented in that listing by some other name, either Zerubbabel or Shenazzar (1 Chr 3:18-19). In the record of people who returned to Jerusalem, Sheshbazzar’s name does not appear. The name of Zerubbabel is at the head of this list, where one would expect Sheshbazzar’s to be; both were governors of the province of Judah. Zerubbabel is associated with the laying of the foundation of the temple (Ezr 3:8-11), but that work is attributed to Sheshbazzar in 5:16, in accordance with chapter 1. It is evident that the name Sheshbazzar is found only in connection with the Persians, for chapter 1 relates his dealings with Cyrus, and in chapter 5 the two occurrences of his name are in a letter written by the Persian official, Tattenai. One may conclude that the Persians knew him as Sheshbazzar, but the Jews called him Zerubbabel. Both names are Akkadian, so there is no parallel here to the renaming of Jewish captives in Babylon (Dn 1:7).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SHESHBAZZAR<\/h3>\nJewish leader who found favor with Cyrus the Great, king of Persia. In the first year of his reign, Cyrus issued a decree that the temple in Jerusalem should be rebuilt (Ezr 1:1-4; cf. 6:1-5). He appointed Sheshbazzar governor of Judah (Ezr 5:14) and handed over to him the gold and silver vessels that Nebuchadnezzar had carried off when he took Jerusalem (1:7-9). Sheshbazzar fulfilled this commission by taking the vessels to Jerusalem with the returning exiles (v 9) and beginning the restoration of the temple (5:16).<\/p>\nSheshbazzar is mentioned in the Bible only four times, all in the book of Ezra (1:8-9; 5:14-16). For many years it was commonly held that Sheshbazzar was another name for Zerubbabel. Both were of the royal line; Sheshbazzar is called “the prince of Judah,” which may mean that he was heir apparent to the throne. Since his genealogy is not given, he may be represented in that listing by some other name, either Zerubbabel or Shenazzar (1 Chr 3:18-19). In the record of people who returned to Jerusalem, Sheshbazzar’s name does not appear. The name of Zerubbabel is at the head of this list, where one would expect Sheshbazzar’s to be; both were governors of the province of Judah. Zerubbabel is associated with the laying of the foundation of the temple (Ezr 3:8-11), but that work is attributed to Sheshbazzar in 5:16, in accordance with chapter 1. It is evident that the name Sheshbazzar is found only in connection with the Persians, for chapter 1 relates his dealings with Cyrus, and in chapter 5 the two occurrences of his name are in a letter written by the Persian official, Tattenai. One may conclude that the Persians knew him as Sheshbazzar, but the Jews called him Zerubbabel. Both names are Akkadian, so there is no parallel here to the renaming of Jewish captives in Babylon (Dn 1:7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SHESHBAZZAR Jewish leader who found favor with Cyrus the Great, king of Persia. In the first year of his reign, Cyrus issued a decree that the temple in Jerusalem should be rebuilt (Ezr 1:1-4; cf. 6:1-5). He appointed Sheshbazzar governor of Judah (Ezr 5:14) and handed over to him the gold and silver vessels that Nebuchadnezzar had carried off when he took Jerusalem (1:7-9). Sheshbazzar fulfilled this commission by taking the vessels to Jerusalem with the returning exiles (v 9) and beginning ...","summary_en":"SHESHBAZZAR Jewish leader who found favor with Cyrus the Great, king of Persia. In the first year of his reign, Cyrus issued a decree that the temple in Jerusalem should be rebuilt (Ezr 1:1-4; cf. 6:1-5). He appointed Sheshbazzar governor of Judah (Ezr 5:14) and handed over to him the gold and silver vessels that Nebuchadnezzar had carried off when he took Jerusalem (1:7-9). Sheshbazzar fulfilled this commission by taking the vessels to Jerusalem with the returning exiles (v 9) and beginning ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":39084,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Zechariah","title_en":"Book of Zechariah","content_ro":"<h3>ZECHARIAH, Book of<\/h3>\nLongest book of the Minor Prophets and the most difficult to understand. One reason for this difficulty is the numerous visions that call for an interpreter. At times an interpreting angel is present to tell what the vision means (Zec 1:9-10, 19-20; 4:1-6; 5:5-6), but at other times, when an interpretation is really needed, there is no angel to give one. The obscure meaning of many passages has spawned numerous theories concerning the date, authorship, unity, and interpretation of this book. One thing that makes the book of Zechariah significant for the Christian is its use in the NT. The last part of Zechariah (chs 9–11) is the most quoted section of the Prophets in the Gospel Passion narratives, and, other than Ezekiel, Zechariah influenced the book of Revelation more than any other OT book.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Purpose and Message<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nThe name Zechariah probably means “the Lord remembers” or “the Lord is renowned.” Zechariah is a common name in the OT and NT. At least 30 different people in the OT are named Zechariah. There is a problem in identifying the prophet’s father. In Zechariah 1:1 and 1:7, the prophet is called “the son of Berechiah, the son of Iddo,” but in Ezra 5:1 and 6:14 he is called simply “the son of Iddo.” There was another Zechariah in Isaiah’s time whose father was named Jeberechiah (Is 8:2). Another prophet by the name of Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada the priest, lived much earlier during the reign of Joash, king of Judah (835–796 BC<\/span>). This prophet was stoned to death because he proclaimed that the Lord had forsaken his people because of their sins (2 Chr 24:20-22). Jesus seemed to refer to this or a similar unrecorded incident, but he calls the prophet the son of Berechiah, the last of the martyrs among the prophets (Mt 23:35). However, Luke’s account of what Jesus said about Zechariah (Lk 11:51) does not include the words “the son of Berechiah.” Since Jesus was quoting 2 Chronicles, which was the last book in the Hebrew Bible, he was simply indicating the sweep of time from the first murder (Abel) to the last (Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada). There is no evidence that the prophet of the book of Zechariah was martyred; therefore, the best solution to the problem is to consider Berechiah the father, and Iddo the grandfather, of this prophet.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nThe first part of the book of Zechariah (chs 1–8) is easy to date. The first date is in the first verse, “the eighth month of the second year of Darius.” This was Darius, king of Persia (521–486 BC<\/span>). The eighth month of Darius’s second year would be October 520 BC<\/span>. This date seems to be the first time the “word of the Lord” came to Zechariah. The second date in Zechariah is in 1:7: “On the twenty-fourth day of the eleventh month which is the month of Shebat, in the second year of Darius . . .” (rsv<\/span>). This date would be February 15, 519 BC<\/span>. The word of the Lord that came to Zechariah on this date seems to include the account of eight night visions, along with some oracles, from an angel who talked with him. The third date in Zechariah is in 7:1: “In the fourth year of King Darius . . . on the fourth day of the ninth month, which is Chislev . . .” (rsv<\/span>). This date would be the equivalent of December 7, 518 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThere are no dates in Zechariah 9–14. Zechariah’s name is never mentioned, and neither is Darius or any king. A period of relative peace and stability gives place to war. The temple is standing (11:13; 14:20), and evidently Greek soldiers are present (9:13). Any attempt to assign specific dates to Zechariah 9–14 would be speculation.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nThe temple in Jerusalem was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, in 586 BC<\/span>. Nebuchadnezzar made several raids against Jerusalem before and after it fell, taking many captives to Babylon (cf. 2 Kgs 24:1-17; Dn 1:1). On two occasions, Jeremiah had predicted that captivity would last 70 years (Jer 25:11; 29:10; cf. Dn 9:2). In the time of Zechariah, the period of 70 years since the fall of Jerusalem was coming to an end (Zec 1:12; 7:5). It had been 66 years since Jerusalem fell, when the first “word of the Lord” came to Zechariah in the second year of Darius (520 BC<\/span>). The Babylonian Empire had fallen to the Persians in 538 BC<\/span>, and Cyrus the first king of Persia signed a decree permitting all captives to return to their homes (2 Chr 36:23; Ezr 1:1-4). Evidently, the first contingent of Jewish captives returned to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel and Joshua the priest about 536 BC<\/span>. One of the first objectives of the returnees was to rebuild the temple (Ezr 1:3), but internal strife and external opposition from the Samaritans prohibited the immediate rebuilding of the temple. After Darius I became king of Persia in 521 BC<\/span>, a wave of expectation and enthusiasm swept over the Jewish communities in Jerusalem and Babylon. Two prophets, possibly from the Babylonian exiles, Haggai and Zechariah, began preaching so powerfully that work on the second temple began in 520 BC<\/span> and was finished in 516 BC<\/span> (Ezr 5:1, 14-15; Hg 1–2; Zec 1–8).<\/p>\nThe book of Zechariah opens in the second year of Darius (520 BC<\/span>). Some of the captives had been back in Jerusalem for 16 years, but nothing was being done about rebuilding the temple. Zechariah’s first message called for the people to repent and not repeat the mistake of their fathers, whose sins and refusal to repent led to the exile and destruction of the temple (Zec 1:1-6). Then a series of eight night visions follows (1:7–6:8), assuring the people that the temple would be rebuilt by Zerubbabel (1:16; 4:9; 6:15). Two verses in Zechariah speak volumes concerning the hardships and difficulties in Jerusalem before the temple was rebuilt: “This is what the Lord<\/span> Almighty says: Take heart and finish the task! You have heard what the prophets have been saying about building the Temple of the Lord<\/span> Almighty ever since the foundation was laid. Before the work on the Temple began, there were no jobs and no wages for either people or animals. No traveler was safe from the enemy, for there were enemies on all sides. I had turned everyone against each other” (8:9-10, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe first eight chapters of Zechariah are set against the social, political, and religious situations in Jerusalem from 520 to 518 BC<\/span>. But beginning with chapter 9, historical moorings are lost. Chapter 9 opens with an oracle against Syria, including Damascus, Tyre, and Sidon, and against Philistia. Each of these places will be conquered and cleansed and will become like a clan in Judah. There is the promise of a new king coming triumphantly to Jerusalem, yet humbly riding on a donkey. His reign will be peaceful and universal. The next oracle speaks of setting the captives free, but this may not refer to the Babylonian captives, because of a reference to the Greeks. Zechariah 9–12 is almost wholly concerned with the future. Some scholars call this part apocalyptic literature. The nations attack Jerusalem and are defeated (chs 12, 14). The temple is standing (11:13), but it does not seem to have a place of great prominence in the new Jerusalem and in the kingdom of God (14:6-9).<\/p>\nPurpose and Message<\/p>\nThe purpose of the book is to reassure and encourage. The restored Jewish community of 520 BC<\/span> needed the assurance that the temple would be rebuilt, and later groups of God’s people needed to know that ultimately the kingdom of God would come in its fullness. There are three messages in the book of Zechariah: the need for repentance (1:1–5:11); the eight night visions (1:7–6:8) signifying that the temple would be rebuilt and God’s glory would return to Jerusalem; and the coming kingdom of God (chs 9–14).<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nThe book of Zechariah may be divided into two main parts: chapters 1–8 and 9–14. The first part is dated between 520 BC<\/span> and 518 BC<\/span>. It consists of oracles and visions of Zechariah the son of Berechiah. Mainly prose, its primary concern is to assure the restored Jewish community that the temple will be rebuilt. The second part (chs 9–14) is undated. There are no references to Zechariah. The temple is standing, and much of the language is eschatological and apocalyptic. The second part itself has two parts: chapters 9–11 and 12–14. Chapters 9 and 12 begin essentially the same way: “The oracle of the word of the Lord.”<\/p>\nThe first part of Zechariah (chs 1–8) has four main sections: superscription and first oracle (1:1-6); eight night visions and related oracles (1:7–6:8); the symbolic crowning of Joshua (6:9-15); and the question about fasting and morality (7:1–8:23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Superscription (1:1)<\/h5>\nThis section is dated specifically “in the eighth month” of the Babylonian calendar, which was from mid-October to mid-November. The second year of Darius, king of Persia, was 520 BC<\/span>. The date is important in relating the work of Zechariah to that of Haggai (cf. Hg 1:1, 15; 2:1, 10, 18-20) and to the reconstruction of the temple under Zerubbabel. The first oracle concerns the need for repentance. The first message of Zechariah came between Haggai’s second and third message. He, like Haggai, probably attributed the failure of the crops and other hardships to a failure to rebuild the temple (cf. Hg 1:6-11). Zechariah calls for the people to repent so that they can persevere with work on the temple.<\/p>\n<h5>The Eight Night Visions and Related Oracles (1:7–6:8)<\/h5>\nThese visions that Zechariah saw in Jerusalem all seem to have been given on the night of the 24th day of the 11th month (Shebat) in the second year of Darius (mid-January to mid-February 519 BC<\/span>). Seven of the eight visions have essentially the same form. Four of the visions begin with the words “Then I looked up and saw” (1:18; 2:1; 5:1; 6:1). One begins, “In a vision during the night” (1:8). Another begins, “Then the angel who had been talking with me returned and woke me, as though I had been asleep. ‘What do you see now?’ he asked” (4:1-2, nlt<\/span>). Still another (the seventh) vision begins, “Then the angel who was talking with me came forward and said . . .” (5:5). However, the fourth vision is different from the other seven. It begins, “Then he showed me” (3:1, cf. Am 7:1, 4, 7). This message in the third person contains no interpreting angel nor any direct message to Zechariah, as if he were merely an observer. This fourth vision is so different from the other seven that it was not a part of the original series of eight.<\/p>\nAn overall pattern to the eight visions is not evident. Some scholars have seen some significance in the fact that the visions move from the evening or night in the first vision to the sunrise in the last vision. Others have detected some relationships in pairs of visions. The first and last visions involve horses and riders or chariots. The second and third visions involve the restoration of Judah and Jerusalem (1:18-21; 2:1-5). The fourth and fifth deal with the place of the two leaders in the restored community: Joshua will be cleansed and restored as the high priest (3:1-5) and Zerubbabel the governor will complete the temple (4:1-14). The sixth and seventh visions involve the cleansing of the land. A flying scroll enters the house of every thief and false witness and consumes it (5:1-4). Wickedness personified as a woman will be carried in an ephah (basket) to the land of Shinar (vv 5-11). Interspersed in the vision accounts are four oracles (1:14-17; 2:8-13; 3:6-10; 4:8-14). Each of these passages begins with the messenger formula, “Thus says the Lord,” or the expression “Cry out” (1:14, 17). The first oracle assures the people that the temple, the cities, and the choice of Jerusalem will be renewed. The second oracle exhorts any exiles remaining in Babylon to return to Judah and Jerusalem (2:7-12). Zechariah 2:12-13 are interesting. Verse 12 is the only OT reference to Palestine as “the Holy Land,” and verse 13 is similar to the call to worship in Habakkuk 2:20: “Be silent before the Lord<\/span>, all humanity, for he is springing into action from his holy dwelling” (Zec 2:13, nlt<\/span>). The third oracle in the visionary accounts concerns Joshua the high priest as a sign of the coming of God’s servant, the Branch who removes the guilt of the land in a single day (3:6-10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Symbolic Crowning of Joshua (6:9-15)<\/h5>\nZechariah is told to go into the house of Josiah son of Zephaniah, take silver and gold from some returnees from Babylon, make a crown, and put it on the head of Joshua the priest as a symbol of the royal and priestly king, the Branch, the builder of the temple. After the ceremony the crown is to be hung in the temple as a memorial of those who gave the silver and the gold. The last verse (6:15) seems to say that just as gold and silver from exiles was used to symbolize the crowning of the coming king of the kingdom, so exiles, “those who are far off,” will also participate in the completion of the temple. Then Zechariah’s hearers will know God sent him to prophesy. This will all take place when and if they will diligently obey the voice of the Lord.<\/p>\n<h5>The Question about Fasting and Morality (7:1–8:23)<\/h5>\nA delegation from Bethel (10 miles or 16.1 kilometers north of Jerusalem) came to Jerusalem in the fourth year of Darius (518 BC<\/span>). Work on the temple had been going on for two years. The purpose of this visit was to entreat the favor of the Lord (7:2) and to ask the priests and the prophets if they should continue to fast as they had done since the temple was destroyed 70 years earlier (v 3). The Lord told Zechariah to ask why they were fasting—for the Lord or for selfish motives? The answer to the question of fasting seems to be that God desires truth, justice, and covenant-love more than fasting. Zechariah reiterates the message the Lord had already given his people by the former prophets. The last section in the first part of Zechariah is a decalogue of promises (8:1-23). The ten promises begin with the words “Thus says the Lord” or “The word of the Lord came to me.” The last word of God is not judgment but promise, hope, forgiveness, and restoration.<\/p>\n<h5>The Oracles of the Lord (chs 9–12)<\/h5>\nThe last half of the book of Zechariah (chs 9–14) falls into two nearly equal parts: chapters 9–11 (46 verses) and chapters 12–14 (44 verses). Each part begins with the words “An oracle” (9:1; 12:1). Both “oracles” are primarily eschatological. The first part (chs 9–11) is concerned with the restoration of the tribes to Palestine (9:11-17; 10:6-12). In order to accomplish this, the Lord will rid Palestine and Syria of opponents to his rule (9:1-8; 11:1-3), remove the evil shepherds (rulers; 10:2b-5; 11:4-17), and the Prince of Peace will come (9:9-10). The last “oracle” of Zechariah (12:1–14:21) is also eschatological. This time the concern is primarily that of Jerusalem and Judah. Twice Jerusalem is attacked by the nations (12:1-8; 14:1-5). Each time the Lord fights for Jerusalem, Judah, and the house of David. Jerusalem weeps and mourns for an unidentified martyr (12:10-14). The martyr could be called the “good” shepherd who is killed and his sheep scattered (13:7-9). Jesus referred to this passage in connection with his arrest (Mt 26:31; Mk 14:27). A fountain will be opened for the house of David, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem will be cleansed from sin, idolatry, and false prophets (Zec 13:1-6). The new Jerusalem will remain aloft on its site and the land around it will be turned into a plain (14:10-11). There will be no night nor extreme temperatures in the new Jerusalem. Living waters will flow from Jerusalem, and the Lord will become King of all the earth. Those who fight against Jerusalem will be destroyed, but those who survive will worship the Lord year by year by keeping the Feast of Booths.<\/p>\nThe last scene in the book of Zechariah is a picture of the world after Armageddon, a new world cleansed of sin. It will be a time of peace and security. When God comes to reign, everything will become holy. The warhorses will become as holy as the priest’s turban, and the ordinary cooking vessel will be as temple vessels. The Canaanite or trader will be eliminated. There will be no difference between Jew and Gentile, as long as one worships the Lord of Hosts as King.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Israel, History of; Postexilic Period; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess; Zechariah (Person) #20.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ZECHARIAH, Book of<\/h3>\nLongest book of the Minor Prophets and the most difficult to understand. One reason for this difficulty is the numerous visions that call for an interpreter. At times an interpreting angel is present to tell what the vision means (Zec 1:9-10, 19-20; 4:1-6; 5:5-6), but at other times, when an interpretation is really needed, there is no angel to give one. The obscure meaning of many passages has spawned numerous theories concerning the date, authorship, unity, and interpretation of this book. One thing that makes the book of Zechariah significant for the Christian is its use in the NT. The last part of Zechariah (chs 9–11) is the most quoted section of the Prophets in the Gospel Passion narratives, and, other than Ezekiel, Zechariah influenced the book of Revelation more than any other OT book.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Purpose and Message<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nThe name Zechariah probably means “the Lord remembers” or “the Lord is renowned.” Zechariah is a common name in the OT and NT. At least 30 different people in the OT are named Zechariah. There is a problem in identifying the prophet’s father. In Zechariah 1:1 and 1:7, the prophet is called “the son of Berechiah, the son of Iddo,” but in Ezra 5:1 and 6:14 he is called simply “the son of Iddo.” There was another Zechariah in Isaiah’s time whose father was named Jeberechiah (Is 8:2). Another prophet by the name of Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada the priest, lived much earlier during the reign of Joash, king of Judah (835–796 BC<\/span>). This prophet was stoned to death because he proclaimed that the Lord had forsaken his people because of their sins (2 Chr 24:20-22). Jesus seemed to refer to this or a similar unrecorded incident, but he calls the prophet the son of Berechiah, the last of the martyrs among the prophets (Mt 23:35). However, Luke’s account of what Jesus said about Zechariah (Lk 11:51) does not include the words “the son of Berechiah.” Since Jesus was quoting 2 Chronicles, which was the last book in the Hebrew Bible, he was simply indicating the sweep of time from the first murder (Abel) to the last (Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada). There is no evidence that the prophet of the book of Zechariah was martyred; therefore, the best solution to the problem is to consider Berechiah the father, and Iddo the grandfather, of this prophet.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nThe first part of the book of Zechariah (chs 1–8) is easy to date. The first date is in the first verse, “the eighth month of the second year of Darius.” This was Darius, king of Persia (521–486 BC<\/span>). The eighth month of Darius’s second year would be October 520 BC<\/span>. This date seems to be the first time the “word of the Lord” came to Zechariah. The second date in Zechariah is in 1:7: “On the twenty-fourth day of the eleventh month which is the month of Shebat, in the second year of Darius . . .” (rsv<\/span>). This date would be February 15, 519 BC<\/span>. The word of the Lord that came to Zechariah on this date seems to include the account of eight night visions, along with some oracles, from an angel who talked with him. The third date in Zechariah is in 7:1: “In the fourth year of King Darius . . . on the fourth day of the ninth month, which is Chislev . . .” (rsv<\/span>). This date would be the equivalent of December 7, 518 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThere are no dates in Zechariah 9–14. Zechariah’s name is never mentioned, and neither is Darius or any king. A period of relative peace and stability gives place to war. The temple is standing (11:13; 14:20), and evidently Greek soldiers are present (9:13). Any attempt to assign specific dates to Zechariah 9–14 would be speculation.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nThe temple in Jerusalem was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, in 586 BC<\/span>. Nebuchadnezzar made several raids against Jerusalem before and after it fell, taking many captives to Babylon (cf. 2 Kgs 24:1-17; Dn 1:1). On two occasions, Jeremiah had predicted that captivity would last 70 years (Jer 25:11; 29:10; cf. Dn 9:2). In the time of Zechariah, the period of 70 years since the fall of Jerusalem was coming to an end (Zec 1:12; 7:5). It had been 66 years since Jerusalem fell, when the first “word of the Lord” came to Zechariah in the second year of Darius (520 BC<\/span>). The Babylonian Empire had fallen to the Persians in 538 BC<\/span>, and Cyrus the first king of Persia signed a decree permitting all captives to return to their homes (2 Chr 36:23; Ezr 1:1-4). Evidently, the first contingent of Jewish captives returned to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel and Joshua the priest about 536 BC<\/span>. One of the first objectives of the returnees was to rebuild the temple (Ezr 1:3), but internal strife and external opposition from the Samaritans prohibited the immediate rebuilding of the temple. After Darius I became king of Persia in 521 BC<\/span>, a wave of expectation and enthusiasm swept over the Jewish communities in Jerusalem and Babylon. Two prophets, possibly from the Babylonian exiles, Haggai and Zechariah, began preaching so powerfully that work on the second temple began in 520 BC<\/span> and was finished in 516 BC<\/span> (Ezr 5:1, 14-15; Hg 1–2; Zec 1–8).<\/p>\nThe book of Zechariah opens in the second year of Darius (520 BC<\/span>). Some of the captives had been back in Jerusalem for 16 years, but nothing was being done about rebuilding the temple. Zechariah’s first message called for the people to repent and not repeat the mistake of their fathers, whose sins and refusal to repent led to the exile and destruction of the temple (Zec 1:1-6). Then a series of eight night visions follows (1:7–6:8), assuring the people that the temple would be rebuilt by Zerubbabel (1:16; 4:9; 6:15). Two verses in Zechariah speak volumes concerning the hardships and difficulties in Jerusalem before the temple was rebuilt: “This is what the Lord<\/span> Almighty says: Take heart and finish the task! You have heard what the prophets have been saying about building the Temple of the Lord<\/span> Almighty ever since the foundation was laid. Before the work on the Temple began, there were no jobs and no wages for either people or animals. No traveler was safe from the enemy, for there were enemies on all sides. I had turned everyone against each other” (8:9-10, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe first eight chapters of Zechariah are set against the social, political, and religious situations in Jerusalem from 520 to 518 BC<\/span>. But beginning with chapter 9, historical moorings are lost. Chapter 9 opens with an oracle against Syria, including Damascus, Tyre, and Sidon, and against Philistia. Each of these places will be conquered and cleansed and will become like a clan in Judah. There is the promise of a new king coming triumphantly to Jerusalem, yet humbly riding on a donkey. His reign will be peaceful and universal. The next oracle speaks of setting the captives free, but this may not refer to the Babylonian captives, because of a reference to the Greeks. Zechariah 9–12 is almost wholly concerned with the future. Some scholars call this part apocalyptic literature. The nations attack Jerusalem and are defeated (chs 12, 14). The temple is standing (11:13), but it does not seem to have a place of great prominence in the new Jerusalem and in the kingdom of God (14:6-9).<\/p>\nPurpose and Message<\/p>\nThe purpose of the book is to reassure and encourage. The restored Jewish community of 520 BC<\/span> needed the assurance that the temple would be rebuilt, and later groups of God’s people needed to know that ultimately the kingdom of God would come in its fullness. There are three messages in the book of Zechariah: the need for repentance (1:1–5:11); the eight night visions (1:7–6:8) signifying that the temple would be rebuilt and God’s glory would return to Jerusalem; and the coming kingdom of God (chs 9–14).<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nThe book of Zechariah may be divided into two main parts: chapters 1–8 and 9–14. The first part is dated between 520 BC<\/span> and 518 BC<\/span>. It consists of oracles and visions of Zechariah the son of Berechiah. Mainly prose, its primary concern is to assure the restored Jewish community that the temple will be rebuilt. The second part (chs 9–14) is undated. There are no references to Zechariah. The temple is standing, and much of the language is eschatological and apocalyptic. The second part itself has two parts: chapters 9–11 and 12–14. Chapters 9 and 12 begin essentially the same way: “The oracle of the word of the Lord.”<\/p>\nThe first part of Zechariah (chs 1–8) has four main sections: superscription and first oracle (1:1-6); eight night visions and related oracles (1:7–6:8); the symbolic crowning of Joshua (6:9-15); and the question about fasting and morality (7:1–8:23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Superscription (1:1)<\/h5>\nThis section is dated specifically “in the eighth month” of the Babylonian calendar, which was from mid-October to mid-November. The second year of Darius, king of Persia, was 520 BC<\/span>. The date is important in relating the work of Zechariah to that of Haggai (cf. Hg 1:1, 15; 2:1, 10, 18-20) and to the reconstruction of the temple under Zerubbabel. The first oracle concerns the need for repentance. The first message of Zechariah came between Haggai’s second and third message. He, like Haggai, probably attributed the failure of the crops and other hardships to a failure to rebuild the temple (cf. Hg 1:6-11). Zechariah calls for the people to repent so that they can persevere with work on the temple.<\/p>\n<h5>The Eight Night Visions and Related Oracles (1:7–6:8)<\/h5>\nThese visions that Zechariah saw in Jerusalem all seem to have been given on the night of the 24th day of the 11th month (Shebat) in the second year of Darius (mid-January to mid-February 519 BC<\/span>). Seven of the eight visions have essentially the same form. Four of the visions begin with the words “Then I looked up and saw” (1:18; 2:1; 5:1; 6:1). One begins, “In a vision during the night” (1:8). Another begins, “Then the angel who had been talking with me returned and woke me, as though I had been asleep. ‘What do you see now?’ he asked” (4:1-2, nlt<\/span>). Still another (the seventh) vision begins, “Then the angel who was talking with me came forward and said . . .” (5:5). However, the fourth vision is different from the other seven. It begins, “Then he showed me” (3:1, cf. Am 7:1, 4, 7). This message in the third person contains no interpreting angel nor any direct message to Zechariah, as if he were merely an observer. This fourth vision is so different from the other seven that it was not a part of the original series of eight.<\/p>\nAn overall pattern to the eight visions is not evident. Some scholars have seen some significance in the fact that the visions move from the evening or night in the first vision to the sunrise in the last vision. Others have detected some relationships in pairs of visions. The first and last visions involve horses and riders or chariots. The second and third visions involve the restoration of Judah and Jerusalem (1:18-21; 2:1-5). The fourth and fifth deal with the place of the two leaders in the restored community: Joshua will be cleansed and restored as the high priest (3:1-5) and Zerubbabel the governor will complete the temple (4:1-14). The sixth and seventh visions involve the cleansing of the land. A flying scroll enters the house of every thief and false witness and consumes it (5:1-4). Wickedness personified as a woman will be carried in an ephah (basket) to the land of Shinar (vv 5-11). Interspersed in the vision accounts are four oracles (1:14-17; 2:8-13; 3:6-10; 4:8-14). Each of these passages begins with the messenger formula, “Thus says the Lord,” or the expression “Cry out” (1:14, 17). The first oracle assures the people that the temple, the cities, and the choice of Jerusalem will be renewed. The second oracle exhorts any exiles remaining in Babylon to return to Judah and Jerusalem (2:7-12). Zechariah 2:12-13 are interesting. Verse 12 is the only OT reference to Palestine as “the Holy Land,” and verse 13 is similar to the call to worship in Habakkuk 2:20: “Be silent before the Lord<\/span>, all humanity, for he is springing into action from his holy dwelling” (Zec 2:13, nlt<\/span>). The third oracle in the visionary accounts concerns Joshua the high priest as a sign of the coming of God’s servant, the Branch who removes the guilt of the land in a single day (3:6-10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Symbolic Crowning of Joshua (6:9-15)<\/h5>\nZechariah is told to go into the house of Josiah son of Zephaniah, take silver and gold from some returnees from Babylon, make a crown, and put it on the head of Joshua the priest as a symbol of the royal and priestly king, the Branch, the builder of the temple. After the ceremony the crown is to be hung in the temple as a memorial of those who gave the silver and the gold. The last verse (6:15) seems to say that just as gold and silver from exiles was used to symbolize the crowning of the coming king of the kingdom, so exiles, “those who are far off,” will also participate in the completion of the temple. Then Zechariah’s hearers will know God sent him to prophesy. This will all take place when and if they will diligently obey the voice of the Lord.<\/p>\n<h5>The Question about Fasting and Morality (7:1–8:23)<\/h5>\nA delegation from Bethel (10 miles or 16.1 kilometers north of Jerusalem) came to Jerusalem in the fourth year of Darius (518 BC<\/span>). Work on the temple had been going on for two years. The purpose of this visit was to entreat the favor of the Lord (7:2) and to ask the priests and the prophets if they should continue to fast as they had done since the temple was destroyed 70 years earlier (v 3). The Lord told Zechariah to ask why they were fasting—for the Lord or for selfish motives? The answer to the question of fasting seems to be that God desires truth, justice, and covenant-love more than fasting. Zechariah reiterates the message the Lord had already given his people by the former prophets. The last section in the first part of Zechariah is a decalogue of promises (8:1-23). The ten promises begin with the words “Thus says the Lord” or “The word of the Lord came to me.” The last word of God is not judgment but promise, hope, forgiveness, and restoration.<\/p>\n<h5>The Oracles of the Lord (chs 9–12)<\/h5>\nThe last half of the book of Zechariah (chs 9–14) falls into two nearly equal parts: chapters 9–11 (46 verses) and chapters 12–14 (44 verses). Each part begins with the words “An oracle” (9:1; 12:1). Both “oracles” are primarily eschatological. The first part (chs 9–11) is concerned with the restoration of the tribes to Palestine (9:11-17; 10:6-12). In order to accomplish this, the Lord will rid Palestine and Syria of opponents to his rule (9:1-8; 11:1-3), remove the evil shepherds (rulers; 10:2b-5; 11:4-17), and the Prince of Peace will come (9:9-10). The last “oracle” of Zechariah (12:1–14:21) is also eschatological. This time the concern is primarily that of Jerusalem and Judah. Twice Jerusalem is attacked by the nations (12:1-8; 14:1-5). Each time the Lord fights for Jerusalem, Judah, and the house of David. Jerusalem weeps and mourns for an unidentified martyr (12:10-14). The martyr could be called the “good” shepherd who is killed and his sheep scattered (13:7-9). Jesus referred to this passage in connection with his arrest (Mt 26:31; Mk 14:27). A fountain will be opened for the house of David, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem will be cleansed from sin, idolatry, and false prophets (Zec 13:1-6). The new Jerusalem will remain aloft on its site and the land around it will be turned into a plain (14:10-11). There will be no night nor extreme temperatures in the new Jerusalem. Living waters will flow from Jerusalem, and the Lord will become King of all the earth. Those who fight against Jerusalem will be destroyed, but those who survive will worship the Lord year by year by keeping the Feast of Booths.<\/p>\nThe last scene in the book of Zechariah is a picture of the world after Armageddon, a new world cleansed of sin. It will be a time of peace and security. When God comes to reign, everything will become holy. The warhorses will become as holy as the priest’s turban, and the ordinary cooking vessel will be as temple vessels. The Canaanite or trader will be eliminated. There will be no difference between Jew and Gentile, as long as one worships the Lord of Hosts as King.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Israel, History of; Postexilic Period; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess; Zechariah (Person) #20.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ZECHARIAH, Book of Longest book of the Minor Prophets and the most difficult to understand. One reason for this difficulty is the numerous visions that call for an interpreter. At times an interpreting angel is present to tell what the vision means (Zec 1:9-10, 19-20; 4:1-6; 5:5-6), but at other times, when an interpretation is really needed, there is no angel to give one. The obscure meaning of many passages has spawned numerous theories concerning the date, authorship, unity, and interpreta...","summary_en":"ZECHARIAH, Book of Longest book of the Minor Prophets and the most difficult to understand. One reason for this difficulty is the numerous visions that call for an interpreter. At times an interpreting angel is present to tell what the vision means (Zec 1:9-10, 19-20; 4:1-6; 5:5-6), but at other times, when an interpretation is really needed, there is no angel to give one. The obscure meaning of many passages has spawned numerous theories concerning the date, authorship, unity, and interpreta...","source":"Articles\/Z.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":39613,"type":"chart","type_label":"Diagramă","type_icon":"📊","type_color":"#3b82f6","title_ro":"Books of Postexilic Times","title_en":"Books of Postexilic Times","content_ro":"<h3>Books of Postexilic Times<\/h3>\n<table>\n <tr>\n <td>Reference<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Dates<\/strong><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Ezr 1:1–4:6, 24<\/p><\/td>\n <td>538–536 BC<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Ezr 5:1–6:22; Hg; Zec<\/p><\/td>\n <td>520–515 BC<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Ezr 7–10<\/p><\/td>\n <td>458 BC<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Ezr 4:7-23<\/p><\/td>\n <td>c. 447 BC<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Neh 1:1–13:3<\/p><\/td>\n <td>445–433 BC<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Neh 13:4-31<\/p><\/td>\n <td>c. 431 BC<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr><\/table>","content_en":"<h3>Books of Postexilic Times<\/h3>\n<table>\n <tr>\n <td>Reference<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Dates<\/strong><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Ezr 1:1–4:6, 24<\/p><\/td>\n <td>538–536 BC<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Ezr 5:1–6:22; Hg; Zec<\/p><\/td>\n <td>520–515 BC<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Ezr 7–10<\/p><\/td>\n <td>458 BC<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Ezr 4:7-23<\/p><\/td>\n <td>c. 447 BC<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Neh 1:1–13:3<\/p><\/td>\n <td>445–433 BC<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Neh 13:4-31<\/p><\/td>\n <td>c. 431 BC<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr><\/table>","summary_ro":"Books of Postexilic Times Reference Dates Ezr 1:1–4:6, 24 538–536 BC Ezr 5:1–6:22; Hg; Zec 520–515 BC Ezr 7–10 458 BC Ezr 4:7-23 c. 447 BC Neh 1:1–13:3 445–433 BC Neh 13:4-31 c. 431 BC","summary_en":"Books of Postexilic Times Reference Dates Ezr 1:1–4:6, 24 538–536 BC Ezr 5:1–6:22; Hg; Zec 520–515 BC Ezr 7–10 458 BC Ezr 4:7-23 c. 447 BC Neh 1:1–13:3 445–433 BC Neh 13:4-31 c. 431 BC","source":"Charts\/Charts.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":39744,"type":"chart","type_label":"Diagramă","type_icon":"📊","type_color":"#3b82f6","title_ro":"Significant Old Testament Events and Dates","title_en":"Old Testament Events and Dates, Significant","content_ro":"<h3>Significant Old Testament Events and Dates<\/h3>\n<table>\n <tr>\n <td>Event<\/em><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Reference Point<\/em><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Biblical Basis<\/em><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Date<\/em><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Nehemiah’s wall<\/p><\/td>\n <td>20th yr. of Artaxerses I of Persia<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Neh 2:1<\/p><\/td>\n <td>444 BC<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Return decreed<\/p><\/td>\n <td>1st yr. of Cyrus II of Persia over Babylon<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Ezr 1:1<\/p><\/td>\n <td>538<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Fall of Jerusalem<\/p><\/td>\n <td>19th yr. of Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon<\/p><\/td>\n <td>2 Kgs 25:8<\/p><\/td>\n <td>586<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Fall of Samaria<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Last yr. of Shalmaneser V of Assyria<\/p><\/td>\n <td>2 Kgs 17:3<\/p><\/td>\n <td>722<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Division of Kingdom<\/p><\/td>\n <td>77 yrs. before 6th yr. of Shalmaneser III<\/p><\/td>\n <td>1 Kgs 11:29-43<\/p><\/td>\n <td>930<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Temple founded<\/p><\/td>\n <td>4th yr. of Solomon<\/p><\/td>\n <td>1 Kgs 6:1<\/p><\/td>\n <td>966<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Exodus from Egypt<\/p><\/td>\n <td>480 yrs. before temple’s founding<\/p><\/td>\n <td>1 Kgs 6:1<\/p><\/td>\n <td>1446<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Descent into Egypt<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Inaugurating a 430 yr. sojourn there (but 397 there, plus 33 in Canaan, for “the sons of Israel,” according to Greek).<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Ex 12:40<\/p><\/td>\n <td>1876<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><\/td>\n <td><\/td>\n <td><\/td>\n <td>Gk\/Heb Text<\/em><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Jacob born<\/p><\/td>\n <td>130 yrs. before<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Gn 47:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td>1973 (2006)<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Isaac born<\/p><\/td>\n <td>60 yrs. before<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Gn 25:26<\/p><\/td>\n <td>2033 (2066)<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Abraham born<\/p><\/td>\n <td>100 yrs. before<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Gn 26:5<\/p><\/td>\n <td>2133 (2166)<\/p><\/td><\/tr><\/table>","content_en":"<h3>Significant Old Testament Events and Dates<\/h3>\n<table>\n <tr>\n <td>Event<\/em><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Reference Point<\/em><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Biblical Basis<\/em><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Date<\/em><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Nehemiah’s wall<\/p><\/td>\n <td>20th yr. of Artaxerses I of Persia<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Neh 2:1<\/p><\/td>\n <td>444 BC<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Return decreed<\/p><\/td>\n <td>1st yr. of Cyrus II of Persia over Babylon<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Ezr 1:1<\/p><\/td>\n <td>538<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Fall of Jerusalem<\/p><\/td>\n <td>19th yr. of Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon<\/p><\/td>\n <td>2 Kgs 25:8<\/p><\/td>\n <td>586<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Fall of Samaria<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Last yr. of Shalmaneser V of Assyria<\/p><\/td>\n <td>2 Kgs 17:3<\/p><\/td>\n <td>722<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Division of Kingdom<\/p><\/td>\n <td>77 yrs. before 6th yr. of Shalmaneser III<\/p><\/td>\n <td>1 Kgs 11:29-43<\/p><\/td>\n <td>930<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Temple founded<\/p><\/td>\n <td>4th yr. of Solomon<\/p><\/td>\n <td>1 Kgs 6:1<\/p><\/td>\n <td>966<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Exodus from Egypt<\/p><\/td>\n <td>480 yrs. before temple’s founding<\/p><\/td>\n <td>1 Kgs 6:1<\/p><\/td>\n <td>1446<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Descent into Egypt<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Inaugurating a 430 yr. sojourn there (but 397 there, plus 33 in Canaan, for “the sons of Israel,” according to Greek).<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Ex 12:40<\/p><\/td>\n <td>1876<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><\/td>\n <td><\/td>\n <td><\/td>\n <td>Gk\/Heb Text<\/em><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Jacob born<\/p><\/td>\n <td>130 yrs. before<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Gn 47:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td>1973 (2006)<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Isaac born<\/p><\/td>\n <td>60 yrs. before<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Gn 25:26<\/p><\/td>\n <td>2033 (2066)<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Abraham born<\/p><\/td>\n <td>100 yrs. before<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Gn 26:5<\/p><\/td>\n <td>2133 (2166)<\/p><\/td><\/tr><\/table>","summary_ro":"Significant Old Testament Events and Dates Event Reference Point Biblical Basis Date Nehemiah’s wall 20th yr. of Artaxerses I of Persia Neh 2:1 444 BC Return decreed 1st yr. of Cyrus II of Persia over Babylon Ezr 1:1 538 Fall of Jerusalem 19th yr. of Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon 2 Kgs 25:8 586 Fall of Samaria Last yr. of Shalmaneser V of Assyria 2 Kgs 17:3 722 Division of Kingdom 77 yrs. before 6th yr. of Shalmaneser III 1 Kgs 11:29-43 930 Temple founded 4th yr. of Solomon 1 Kgs 6:1 966 Exodu...","summary_en":"Significant Old Testament Events and Dates Event Reference Point Biblical Basis Date Nehemiah’s wall 20th yr. of Artaxerses I of Persia Neh 2:1 444 BC Return decreed 1st yr. of Cyrus II of Persia over Babylon Ezr 1:1 538 Fall of Jerusalem 19th yr. of Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon 2 Kgs 25:8 586 Fall of Samaria Last yr. of Shalmaneser V of Assyria 2 Kgs 17:3 722 Division of Kingdom 77 yrs. before 6th yr. of Shalmaneser III 1 Kgs 11:29-43 930 Temple founded 4th yr. of Solomon 1 Kgs 6:1 966 Exodu...","source":"Charts\/Charts.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":39824,"type":"chart","type_label":"Diagramă","type_icon":"📊","type_color":"#3b82f6","title_ro":"The Three Returns from Exile","title_en":"The Three Returns from Exile","content_ro":"<h3>The Three Returns from Exile<\/h3>\n<table>\n <tr>\n <td><\/td>\n <td>First Return<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Second Return<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Third Return<\/strong><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Scripture<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Ezra 1–6<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Ezra 7–10<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Nehemiah 1–2<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Date<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>538 BC<\/span><\/p><\/td>\n <td>458 BC<\/span><\/p><\/td>\n <td>445 BC<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>King of Persia<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Cyrus<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Artaxerxes<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Artaxerxes<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Leader of Return<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Zerubbabel<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Ezra<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Nehemiah<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Leader’s Tribe and Ancestry<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Judah (through David and Jehoiakin)<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Levi (through Aaron, Phinehas, Zadok)<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Leader’s Role<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>governor<\/p><\/td>\n <td>priest<\/p><\/td>\n <td>governor<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Number<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>49,897<\/p><\/td>\n <td>1,774<\/p><\/td>\n <td>armed escort<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Other Leaders at the Time<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Jeshua the priest, Haggai, Zechariah<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Nehemiah, Malachi<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Ezra, Malachi<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Result<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Temple built<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Law taught; people separated<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Jerusalem’s walls rebuilt<\/p><\/td><\/tr><\/table>","content_en":"<h3>The Three Returns from Exile<\/h3>\n<table>\n <tr>\n <td><\/td>\n <td>First Return<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Second Return<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Third Return<\/strong><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Scripture<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Ezra 1–6<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Ezra 7–10<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Nehemiah 1–2<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Date<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>538 BC<\/span><\/p><\/td>\n <td>458 BC<\/span><\/p><\/td>\n <td>445 BC<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>King of Persia<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Cyrus<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Artaxerxes<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Artaxerxes<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Leader of Return<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Zerubbabel<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Ezra<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Nehemiah<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Leader’s Tribe and Ancestry<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Judah (through David and Jehoiakin)<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Levi (through Aaron, Phinehas, Zadok)<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Leader’s Role<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>governor<\/p><\/td>\n <td>priest<\/p><\/td>\n <td>governor<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Number<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>49,897<\/p><\/td>\n <td>1,774<\/p><\/td>\n <td>armed escort<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Other Leaders at the Time<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Jeshua the priest, Haggai, Zechariah<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Nehemiah, Malachi<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Ezra, Malachi<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td>Result<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td>Temple built<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Law taught; people separated<\/p><\/td>\n <td>Jerusalem’s walls rebuilt<\/p><\/td><\/tr><\/table>","summary_ro":"The Three Returns from Exile First Return Second Return Third Return Scripture Ezra 1–6 Ezra 7–10 Nehemiah 1–2 Date 538 BC 458 BC 445 BC King of Persia Cyrus Artaxerxes Artaxerxes Leader of Return Zerubbabel Ezra Nehemiah Leader’s Tribe and Ancestry Judah (through David and Jehoiakin) Levi (through Aaron, Phinehas, Zadok) Leader’s Role governor priest governor Number 49,897 1,774 armed escort Other Leaders at the Time Jeshua the priest, Haggai, Zechariah Nehemiah, Malachi Ezra, Malachi Result...","summary_en":"The Three Returns from Exile First Return Second Return Third Return Scripture Ezra 1–6 Ezra 7–10 Nehemiah 1–2 Date 538 BC 458 BC 445 BC King of Persia Cyrus Artaxerxes Artaxerxes Leader of Return Zerubbabel Ezra Nehemiah Leader’s Tribe and Ancestry Judah (through David and Jehoiakin) Levi (through Aaron, Phinehas, Zadok) Leader’s Role governor priest governor Number 49,897 1,774 armed escort Other Leaders at the Time Jeshua the priest, Haggai, Zechariah Nehemiah, Malachi Ezra, Malachi Result...","source":"Charts\/Charts.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":47982,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:1","content_ro":"1:1-3<\/strong> The first three verses of Ezra appear almost verbatim in 2 Chr 36:22-23, suggesting continuity between the books.<\/p>","content_en":"1:1-3<\/strong> The first three verses of Ezra appear almost verbatim in 2 Chr 36:22-23, suggesting continuity between the books.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:1-3 The first three verses of Ezra appear almost verbatim in 2 Chr 36:22-23, suggesting continuity between the books.","summary_en":"1:1-3 The first three verses of Ezra appear almost verbatim in 2 Chr 36:22-23, suggesting continuity between the books.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":47983,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:1","content_ro":"1:1<\/strong> King Cyrus<\/em> II reigned over Persia<\/em> from 559 to 530 BC<\/span>. Cyrus and his Persian forces defeated the city of Babylon in October, 539 BC<\/span>, just as Daniel had predicted (Dan 5). • the prophecy . . . through Jeremiah:<\/em> God had promised to return his people after seventy years in exile (Jer 25:11-12; 29:10). • God’s power over the heart<\/em> and mind of this pagan king moved him to enact the decree that follows (see also Isa 13:17; 41:2, 25; Jer 50:9). God is sovereign, even when rulers and nations do not recognize his authority (Isa 10:5, 12-14).<\/p>","content_en":"1:1<\/strong> King Cyrus<\/em> II reigned over Persia<\/em> from 559 to 530 BC<\/span>. Cyrus and his Persian forces defeated the city of Babylon in October, 539 BC<\/span>, just as Daniel had predicted (Dan 5). • the prophecy . . . through Jeremiah:<\/em> God had promised to return his people after seventy years in exile (Jer 25:11-12; 29:10). • God’s power over the heart<\/em> and mind of this pagan king moved him to enact the decree that follows (see also Isa 13:17; 41:2, 25; Jer 50:9). God is sovereign, even when rulers and nations do not recognize his authority (Isa 10:5, 12-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:1 King Cyrus II reigned over Persia from 559 to 530 BC. Cyrus and his Persian forces defeated the city of Babylon in October, 539 BC, just as Daniel had predicted (Dan 5). • the prophecy . . . through Jeremiah: God had promised to return his people after seventy years in exile (Jer 25:11-12; 29:10). • God’s power over the heart and mind of this pagan king moved him to enact the decree that follows (see also Isa 13:17; 41:2, 25; Jer 50:9). God is sovereign, even when rulers and nations do no...","summary_en":"1:1 King Cyrus II reigned over Persia from 559 to 530 BC. Cyrus and his Persian forces defeated the city of Babylon in October, 539 BC, just as Daniel had predicted (Dan 5). • the prophecy . . . through Jeremiah: God had promised to return his people after seventy years in exile (Jer 25:11-12; 29:10). • God’s power over the heart and mind of this pagan king moved him to enact the decree that follows (see also Isa 13:17; 41:2, 25; Jer 50:9). God is sovereign, even when rulers and nations do no...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75608,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:1","content_ro":"1:1-3<\/strong> The first three verses of Ezra appear almost verbatim in 2 Chr 36:22-23, suggesting continuity between the books.<\/p>","content_en":"1:1-3<\/strong> The first three verses of Ezra appear almost verbatim in 2 Chr 36:22-23, suggesting continuity between the books.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:1-3 The first three verses of Ezra appear almost verbatim in 2 Chr 36:22-23, suggesting continuity between the books.","summary_en":"1:1-3 The first three verses of Ezra appear almost verbatim in 2 Chr 36:22-23, suggesting continuity between the books.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75609,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:1","content_ro":"1:1<\/strong> King Cyrus<\/em> II reigned over Persia<\/em> from 559 to 530 BC<\/span>. Cyrus and his Persian forces defeated the city of Babylon in October, 539 BC<\/span>, just as Daniel had predicted (Dan 5). • the prophecy . . . through Jeremiah:<\/em> God had promised to return his people after seventy years in exile (Jer 25:11-12; 29:10). • God’s power over the heart<\/em> and mind of this pagan king moved him to enact the decree that follows (see also Isa 13:17; 41:2, 25; Jer 50:9). God is sovereign, even when rulers and nations do not recognize his authority (Isa 10:5, 12-14).<\/p>","content_en":"1:1<\/strong> King Cyrus<\/em> II reigned over Persia<\/em> from 559 to 530 BC<\/span>. Cyrus and his Persian forces defeated the city of Babylon in October, 539 BC<\/span>, just as Daniel had predicted (Dan 5). • the prophecy . . . through Jeremiah:<\/em> God had promised to return his people after seventy years in exile (Jer 25:11-12; 29:10). • God’s power over the heart<\/em> and mind of this pagan king moved him to enact the decree that follows (see also Isa 13:17; 41:2, 25; Jer 50:9). God is sovereign, even when rulers and nations do not recognize his authority (Isa 10:5, 12-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:1 King Cyrus II reigned over Persia from 559 to 530 BC. Cyrus and his Persian forces defeated the city of Babylon in October, 539 BC, just as Daniel had predicted (Dan 5). • the prophecy . . . through Jeremiah: God had promised to return his people after seventy years in exile (Jer 25:11-12; 29:10). • God’s power over the heart and mind of this pagan king moved him to enact the decree that follows (see also Isa 13:17; 41:2, 25; Jer 50:9). God is sovereign, even when rulers and nations do no...","summary_en":"1:1 King Cyrus II reigned over Persia from 559 to 530 BC. Cyrus and his Persian forces defeated the city of Babylon in October, 539 BC, just as Daniel had predicted (Dan 5). • the prophecy . . . through Jeremiah: God had promised to return his people after seventy years in exile (Jer 25:11-12; 29:10). • God’s power over the heart and mind of this pagan king moved him to enact the decree that follows (see also Isa 13:17; 41:2, 25; Jer 50:9). God is sovereign, even when rulers and nations do no...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103234,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:1","content_ro":"1:1-3<\/strong> The first three verses of Ezra appear almost verbatim in 2 Chr 36:22-23, suggesting continuity between the books.<\/p>","content_en":"1:1-3<\/strong> The first three verses of Ezra appear almost verbatim in 2 Chr 36:22-23, suggesting continuity between the books.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:1-3 The first three verses of Ezra appear almost verbatim in 2 Chr 36:22-23, suggesting continuity between the books.","summary_en":"1:1-3 The first three verses of Ezra appear almost verbatim in 2 Chr 36:22-23, suggesting continuity between the books.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103235,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:1","content_ro":"1:1<\/strong> King Cyrus<\/em> II reigned over Persia<\/em> from 559 to 530 BC<\/span>. Cyrus and his Persian forces defeated the city of Babylon in October, 539 BC<\/span>, just as Daniel had predicted (Dan 5). • the prophecy . . . through Jeremiah:<\/em> God had promised to return his people after seventy years in exile (Jer 25:11-12; 29:10). • God’s power over the heart<\/em> and mind of this pagan king moved him to enact the decree that follows (see also Isa 13:17; 41:2, 25; Jer 50:9). God is sovereign, even when rulers and nations do not recognize his authority (Isa 10:5, 12-14).<\/p>","content_en":"1:1<\/strong> King Cyrus<\/em> II reigned over Persia<\/em> from 559 to 530 BC<\/span>. Cyrus and his Persian forces defeated the city of Babylon in October, 539 BC<\/span>, just as Daniel had predicted (Dan 5). • the prophecy . . . through Jeremiah:<\/em> God had promised to return his people after seventy years in exile (Jer 25:11-12; 29:10). • God’s power over the heart<\/em> and mind of this pagan king moved him to enact the decree that follows (see also Isa 13:17; 41:2, 25; Jer 50:9). God is sovereign, even when rulers and nations do not recognize his authority (Isa 10:5, 12-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:1 King Cyrus II reigned over Persia from 559 to 530 BC. Cyrus and his Persian forces defeated the city of Babylon in October, 539 BC, just as Daniel had predicted (Dan 5). • the prophecy . . . through Jeremiah: God had promised to return his people after seventy years in exile (Jer 25:11-12; 29:10). • God’s power over the heart and mind of this pagan king moved him to enact the decree that follows (see also Isa 13:17; 41:2, 25; Jer 50:9). God is sovereign, even when rulers and nations do no...","summary_en":"1:1 King Cyrus II reigned over Persia from 559 to 530 BC. Cyrus and his Persian forces defeated the city of Babylon in October, 539 BC, just as Daniel had predicted (Dan 5). • the prophecy . . . through Jeremiah: God had promised to return his people after seventy years in exile (Jer 25:11-12; 29:10). • God’s power over the heart and mind of this pagan king moved him to enact the decree that follows (see also Isa 13:17; 41:2, 25; Jer 50:9). God is sovereign, even when rulers and nations do no...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":130860,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:1","content_ro":"1:1-3<\/strong> The first three verses of Ezra appear almost verbatim in 2 Chr 36:22-23, suggesting continuity between the books.<\/p>","content_en":"1:1-3<\/strong> The first three verses of Ezra appear almost verbatim in 2 Chr 36:22-23, suggesting continuity between the books.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:1-3 The first three verses of Ezra appear almost verbatim in 2 Chr 36:22-23, suggesting continuity between the books.","summary_en":"1:1-3 The first three verses of Ezra appear almost verbatim in 2 Chr 36:22-23, suggesting continuity between the books.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":130861,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:1","content_ro":"1:1<\/strong> King Cyrus<\/em> II reigned over Persia<\/em> from 559 to 530 BC<\/span>. Cyrus and his Persian forces defeated the city of Babylon in October, 539 BC<\/span>, just as Daniel had predicted (Dan 5). • the prophecy . . . through Jeremiah:<\/em> God had promised to return his people after seventy years in exile (Jer 25:11-12; 29:10). • God’s power over the heart<\/em> and mind of this pagan king moved him to enact the decree that follows (see also Isa 13:17; 41:2, 25; Jer 50:9). God is sovereign, even when rulers and nations do not recognize his authority (Isa 10:5, 12-14).<\/p>","content_en":"1:1<\/strong> King Cyrus<\/em> II reigned over Persia<\/em> from 559 to 530 BC<\/span>. Cyrus and his Persian forces defeated the city of Babylon in October, 539 BC<\/span>, just as Daniel had predicted (Dan 5). • the prophecy . . . through Jeremiah:<\/em> God had promised to return his people after seventy years in exile (Jer 25:11-12; 29:10). • God’s power over the heart<\/em> and mind of this pagan king moved him to enact the decree that follows (see also Isa 13:17; 41:2, 25; Jer 50:9). God is sovereign, even when rulers and nations do not recognize his authority (Isa 10:5, 12-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:1 King Cyrus II reigned over Persia from 559 to 530 BC. Cyrus and his Persian forces defeated the city of Babylon in October, 539 BC, just as Daniel had predicted (Dan 5). • the prophecy . . . through Jeremiah: God had promised to return his people after seventy years in exile (Jer 25:11-12; 29:10). • God’s power over the heart and mind of this pagan king moved him to enact the decree that follows (see also Isa 13:17; 41:2, 25; Jer 50:9). God is sovereign, even when rulers and nations do no...","summary_en":"1:1 King Cyrus II reigned over Persia from 559 to 530 BC. Cyrus and his Persian forces defeated the city of Babylon in October, 539 BC, just as Daniel had predicted (Dan 5). • the prophecy . . . through Jeremiah: God had promised to return his people after seventy years in exile (Jer 25:11-12; 29:10). • God’s power over the heart and mind of this pagan king moved him to enact the decree that follows (see also Isa 13:17; 41:2, 25; Jer 50:9). God is sovereign, even when rulers and nations do no...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60253,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Ancient Law Codes","title_en":"Ancient Law Codes","content_ro":"<h3>Ancient Law Codes<\/h3>\nUntil the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC<\/span>, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken from Hammurabi, subsequent discoveries produced law codes preceding Hammurabi’s by at least 500 years, and several laws are common to all of them, so Hammurabi also did not originate them.<\/p>\nWhat does this mean for the Bible? First, it is not surprising that we find similar laws from cultures neighboring Israel; similar societies require similar codes of conduct in order to ensure justice. Second, the biblical laws are unique in that they are incorporated in a covenant with God. Elsewhere in the ancient Near East, religious laws (about sacrifice, prayers, offerings, etc.) and civil laws (covering theft, lying, sexual conduct, murder, etc.) were completely unrelated because ethics and religion were considered separate domains. Religion was a matter of prayer, devotion, offerings, and ritual behavior—the territory of priests. Ethics concerned social and civil behavior—the business of the king. The biblical view of things is different: God is sovereign over both religion and society. So a person who is in a relationship with the true God must not only participate in proper worship (religion) but also treat other people rightly (ethics).<\/p>\nIsrael’s covenant with God made use of existing forms but invested them with new meaning. For example, the basic layout of Israel’s Tabernacle (Exod 26–27) and Temple (see 1 Kgs 6:1–7:51) were the same as elsewhere in the ancient world, and the basic forms of the Hebrew sacrifices (see Lev 1–7) were largely identical to the forms of pagan sacrifices. But the meaning and purpose of the Temple and the sacrifices were significantly different from the meaning and purpose of such things in paganism (see study notes on Exod 20:3-17; 25:1–40:38; Lev 1:1–7:38).<\/p>\nWhile many of the laws of Moses were not new to the world at that time, the idea that the behavior they called for is written into the very fabric of the universe by its Creator was radically new.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 20:1–23:33; 34:1–35:3; Lev 1:1–27:34; Deut 4:1–33:29; Ezra 1:1-4; Esth 1:13-19; 8:9-14; Dan 6:6-9; Luke 2:1-3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Ancient Law Codes<\/h3>\nUntil the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC<\/span>, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken from Hammurabi, subsequent discoveries produced law codes preceding Hammurabi’s by at least 500 years, and several laws are common to all of them, so Hammurabi also did not originate them.<\/p>\nWhat does this mean for the Bible? First, it is not surprising that we find similar laws from cultures neighboring Israel; similar societies require similar codes of conduct in order to ensure justice. Second, the biblical laws are unique in that they are incorporated in a covenant with God. Elsewhere in the ancient Near East, religious laws (about sacrifice, prayers, offerings, etc.) and civil laws (covering theft, lying, sexual conduct, murder, etc.) were completely unrelated because ethics and religion were considered separate domains. Religion was a matter of prayer, devotion, offerings, and ritual behavior—the territory of priests. Ethics concerned social and civil behavior—the business of the king. The biblical view of things is different: God is sovereign over both religion and society. So a person who is in a relationship with the true God must not only participate in proper worship (religion) but also treat other people rightly (ethics).<\/p>\nIsrael’s covenant with God made use of existing forms but invested them with new meaning. For example, the basic layout of Israel’s Tabernacle (Exod 26–27) and Temple (see 1 Kgs 6:1–7:51) were the same as elsewhere in the ancient world, and the basic forms of the Hebrew sacrifices (see Lev 1–7) were largely identical to the forms of pagan sacrifices. But the meaning and purpose of the Temple and the sacrifices were significantly different from the meaning and purpose of such things in paganism (see study notes on Exod 20:3-17; 25:1–40:38; Lev 1:1–7:38).<\/p>\nWhile many of the laws of Moses were not new to the world at that time, the idea that the behavior they called for is written into the very fabric of the universe by its Creator was radically new.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 20:1–23:33; 34:1–35:3; Lev 1:1–27:34; Deut 4:1–33:29; Ezra 1:1-4; Esth 1:13-19; 8:9-14; Dan 6:6-9; Luke 2:1-3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Ancient Law Codes Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken ...","summary_en":"Ancient Law Codes Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61446,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jerusalem","title_en":"Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>Jerusalem<\/h3>\nJerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (2 Kgs 25:1-10).<\/p>\nWhatever David’s method of capturing Jerusalem (his use of a water tunnel is debatable—see study note on 5:8), he secured Jerusalem as the political, and eventually spiritual, capital of Israel. Psalm 48 speaks beautifully and powerfully of Jerusalem as a fortress. Its towers, bulwarks, and easily defensible citadels with their rugged terrain could produce a false sense of security, if not idolatry. Psalm 48:1-3 reminds the reader that God’s living presence, not the topography of the city, made Jerusalem safe.<\/p>\nBoth the Old Testament and the New Testament call Jerusalem a “holy city” (see Neh 11:1, 18; Isa 52:1; Dan 9:24; Matt 4:5; 27:53; Rev 21:2). It is the only city so described in the Bible. Wherein lies this city’s holiness? It cannot be a reflection of the holiness of its occupants. In fact, so unholy was the populace that the city was decimated by the Babylonians in 586 BC<\/span>. Nor was it a holy city because it was Israel’s capital for several centuries. Jerusalem was a holy city, first of all, because God chose it (1 Kgs 8:44, 48; 11:13, 32, 36; 2 Chr 6:5, 34). And because he chose it, he put his glory and his name there (see 1 Kgs 14:21; 2 Chr 12:13; Ezek 8–10; 43:1-27).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels and Acts, Jerusalem was still a city of great importance. Herod the Great (37–4 BC<\/span>) had expanded the city and conducted extensive building projects—including the Temple. It remained the center of Israel’s spiritual life (see e.g., Acts 2:46; 3:1-26; 5:12), and many events in the lives of Jesus and his followers occurred in Jerusalem. Jesus had some harsh words for Jerusalem (see Matt 23:37-39)—especially its leadership—and he was eventually put to death there. Jesus warned of impending judgment on the city (see Mark 13:1-2; Luke 21:20-24), and his words were actualized in the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nBut the New Testament also introduces the new Jerusalem, the heavenly city comprised of God’s holy people (Heb 11:10; Rev 3:12; 21:2). As the earthly Jerusalem was the sphere in which the glorious presence and reign of God was partially actualized through King David and his successors, the new Jerusalem represents the government of Jesus Christ, the son of David, and his everlasting presence with his people (cp. John 1:14; Rev 21:3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJosh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21; 2 Sam 5:6-9; 1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 18:13-17; 25:1-10; 2 Chr 3:1; 12:1-12; 26:9, 15; 32:1-5, 27-30; Ezra 1:1-6; Neh 1:1–6:19; Ps 48:1-3; 125:2; Isa 14:32; 52:1-3; Gal 4:25-26; Heb 12:22-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jerusalem<\/h3>\nJerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (2 Kgs 25:1-10).<\/p>\nWhatever David’s method of capturing Jerusalem (his use of a water tunnel is debatable—see study note on 5:8), he secured Jerusalem as the political, and eventually spiritual, capital of Israel. Psalm 48 speaks beautifully and powerfully of Jerusalem as a fortress. Its towers, bulwarks, and easily defensible citadels with their rugged terrain could produce a false sense of security, if not idolatry. Psalm 48:1-3 reminds the reader that God’s living presence, not the topography of the city, made Jerusalem safe.<\/p>\nBoth the Old Testament and the New Testament call Jerusalem a “holy city” (see Neh 11:1, 18; Isa 52:1; Dan 9:24; Matt 4:5; 27:53; Rev 21:2). It is the only city so described in the Bible. Wherein lies this city’s holiness? It cannot be a reflection of the holiness of its occupants. In fact, so unholy was the populace that the city was decimated by the Babylonians in 586 BC<\/span>. Nor was it a holy city because it was Israel’s capital for several centuries. Jerusalem was a holy city, first of all, because God chose it (1 Kgs 8:44, 48; 11:13, 32, 36; 2 Chr 6:5, 34). And because he chose it, he put his glory and his name there (see 1 Kgs 14:21; 2 Chr 12:13; Ezek 8–10; 43:1-27).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels and Acts, Jerusalem was still a city of great importance. Herod the Great (37–4 BC<\/span>) had expanded the city and conducted extensive building projects—including the Temple. It remained the center of Israel’s spiritual life (see e.g., Acts 2:46; 3:1-26; 5:12), and many events in the lives of Jesus and his followers occurred in Jerusalem. Jesus had some harsh words for Jerusalem (see Matt 23:37-39)—especially its leadership—and he was eventually put to death there. Jesus warned of impending judgment on the city (see Mark 13:1-2; Luke 21:20-24), and his words were actualized in the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nBut the New Testament also introduces the new Jerusalem, the heavenly city comprised of God’s holy people (Heb 11:10; Rev 3:12; 21:2). As the earthly Jerusalem was the sphere in which the glorious presence and reign of God was partially actualized through King David and his successors, the new Jerusalem represents the government of Jesus Christ, the son of David, and his everlasting presence with his people (cp. John 1:14; Rev 21:3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJosh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21; 2 Sam 5:6-9; 1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 18:13-17; 25:1-10; 2 Chr 3:1; 12:1-12; 26:9, 15; 32:1-5, 27-30; Ezra 1:1-6; Neh 1:1–6:19; Ps 48:1-3; 125:2; Isa 14:32; 52:1-3; Gal 4:25-26; Heb 12:22-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jerusalem Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon...","summary_en":"Jerusalem Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64561,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Seventy Sets of Seven","title_en":"The Seventy Sets of Seven","content_ro":"<h3>The Seventy Sets of Seven<\/h3>\nThe seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them. The two main interpretations of the seventy sets of seven are presented here.<\/p>\nSCENARIO A: THE REIGN OF ANTIOCHUS IV (175–163 BC<\/span>).) The seventy sets of seven refer to history from Cyrus II of Persia (539 BC<\/span>; see 9:25; Ezra 1:2-4) to Antiochus IV (175–163 BC<\/span>; see Dan 8:23-25; 11:21-39). In this scenario, the “Anointed One” was the high priest Onias III, and the “ruler” (9:26-27) was Antiochus IV, whose treaty with the people of Judea in 174 BC<\/span> was supposed to allow them to practice their faith peacefully. In 170 BC<\/span>, Antiochus attacked Jerusalem, killed many, and looted the Temple. Then in 167 BC<\/span> he put an end to the sacrifices and offerings, forced the Jews to stop practicing their faith on pain of death, and desecrated the Temple with a “sacrilegious object”: He placed a statue of Zeus on the altar of burnt offering, where he sacrificed pigs and other unclean animals (cp. 11:21-35). Antiochus was struck with a painful disease, and he died in 163 BC<\/span>—“The fate decreed for this defiler” was “finally poured out on him” (9:27; see also 8:25; 1 Maccabees<\/em> 1:10-24; 6:7-16; 2 Maccabees<\/em> 9:1-29). In Scenario A, when Jesus spoke of the “sacrilegious object that causes desecration,” he was referring to the Jews’ experience in the time of Antiochus as a paradigm of the things that would happen in the future (see Matt 24:15; cp. Luke 21:20; 2 Thes 2:3-4).<\/p>\nSCENARIO B: THE DEATH OF CHRIST (AD<\/span> 30 or 33). The seventy weeks are a prophecy concerning Jesus Christ, the anointed Messiah. In this scenario, the “seventy sets of seven” began either with the decree of Cyrus (538 BC<\/span>; Ezra 1:1-4) or with one of the decrees of Artaxerxes (458 or 445 BC<\/span>; Ezra 7:8-26; Neh 2:1-10). The death of Christ then occurred either at the end of sixty-nine sets of seven (seven plus sixty-two, Dan 9:25-26) or at the midpoint of the seventieth (9:27). These two options have implications for how the seventy sets of seven are brought to completion. In the first option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as a future time not yet fulfilled. In the second option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as having been completed when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in AD<\/span> 70. If the decree of Cyrus is seen as the starting point, the 490 years are symbolic. However, if the decree given to Nehemiah to rebuild the city (445 BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1) is taken as the starting point (Dan 9:25), then there were very nearly 483 years (69 x 7 years) between that date and the death of Christ in AD<\/span> 30 or 33.<\/p>\nOption 1: The Seventieth Set of Seven Remains to Be Fulfilled in the Future.<\/em> Many interpreters have argued that Christ’s death occurred at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, and the seventieth set of seven is yet to be fulfilled. In that case, there is now a long gap from the sixty-ninth set of seven to the seventieth. The seventieth still lies in the future and corresponds to the reign of the Antichrist during the tribulation at the end of history (see 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10).<\/p>\nOption 2: The Seventieth Set of Seven Was Completed When Rome Destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple.<\/em> Other interpreters have held that the seventy weeks were fulfilled with the coming of Christ, his death and resurrection, and the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. In this case, Christ began his ministry at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, around AD<\/span> 28. He ministered for approximately three and a half years, then was killed in the middle of the seventieth seven. The remaining half-seven ended when the “ruler”—one or more of the Roman rulers—destroyed Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. The war and its miseries now continue between God’s people and the kingdom of this world to the very end, when Christ will return, judge the wicked, and establish his Kingdom.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDan 7:8, 11, 20-21, 24-27; 8:9-14; 9:24-27; 11:29-31, 40-45; 12:7, 11; 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Seventy Sets of Seven<\/h3>\nThe seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them. The two main interpretations of the seventy sets of seven are presented here.<\/p>\nSCENARIO A: THE REIGN OF ANTIOCHUS IV (175–163 BC<\/span>).) The seventy sets of seven refer to history from Cyrus II of Persia (539 BC<\/span>; see 9:25; Ezra 1:2-4) to Antiochus IV (175–163 BC<\/span>; see Dan 8:23-25; 11:21-39). In this scenario, the “Anointed One” was the high priest Onias III, and the “ruler” (9:26-27) was Antiochus IV, whose treaty with the people of Judea in 174 BC<\/span> was supposed to allow them to practice their faith peacefully. In 170 BC<\/span>, Antiochus attacked Jerusalem, killed many, and looted the Temple. Then in 167 BC<\/span> he put an end to the sacrifices and offerings, forced the Jews to stop practicing their faith on pain of death, and desecrated the Temple with a “sacrilegious object”: He placed a statue of Zeus on the altar of burnt offering, where he sacrificed pigs and other unclean animals (cp. 11:21-35). Antiochus was struck with a painful disease, and he died in 163 BC<\/span>—“The fate decreed for this defiler” was “finally poured out on him” (9:27; see also 8:25; 1 Maccabees<\/em> 1:10-24; 6:7-16; 2 Maccabees<\/em> 9:1-29). In Scenario A, when Jesus spoke of the “sacrilegious object that causes desecration,” he was referring to the Jews’ experience in the time of Antiochus as a paradigm of the things that would happen in the future (see Matt 24:15; cp. Luke 21:20; 2 Thes 2:3-4).<\/p>\nSCENARIO B: THE DEATH OF CHRIST (AD<\/span> 30 or 33). The seventy weeks are a prophecy concerning Jesus Christ, the anointed Messiah. In this scenario, the “seventy sets of seven” began either with the decree of Cyrus (538 BC<\/span>; Ezra 1:1-4) or with one of the decrees of Artaxerxes (458 or 445 BC<\/span>; Ezra 7:8-26; Neh 2:1-10). The death of Christ then occurred either at the end of sixty-nine sets of seven (seven plus sixty-two, Dan 9:25-26) or at the midpoint of the seventieth (9:27). These two options have implications for how the seventy sets of seven are brought to completion. In the first option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as a future time not yet fulfilled. In the second option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as having been completed when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in AD<\/span> 70. If the decree of Cyrus is seen as the starting point, the 490 years are symbolic. However, if the decree given to Nehemiah to rebuild the city (445 BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1) is taken as the starting point (Dan 9:25), then there were very nearly 483 years (69 x 7 years) between that date and the death of Christ in AD<\/span> 30 or 33.<\/p>\nOption 1: The Seventieth Set of Seven Remains to Be Fulfilled in the Future.<\/em> Many interpreters have argued that Christ’s death occurred at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, and the seventieth set of seven is yet to be fulfilled. In that case, there is now a long gap from the sixty-ninth set of seven to the seventieth. The seventieth still lies in the future and corresponds to the reign of the Antichrist during the tribulation at the end of history (see 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10).<\/p>\nOption 2: The Seventieth Set of Seven Was Completed When Rome Destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple.<\/em> Other interpreters have held that the seventy weeks were fulfilled with the coming of Christ, his death and resurrection, and the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. In this case, Christ began his ministry at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, around AD<\/span> 28. He ministered for approximately three and a half years, then was killed in the middle of the seventieth seven. The remaining half-seven ended when the “ruler”—one or more of the Roman rulers—destroyed Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. The war and its miseries now continue between God’s people and the kingdom of this world to the very end, when Christ will return, judge the wicked, and establish his Kingdom.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDan 7:8, 11, 20-21, 24-27; 8:9-14; 9:24-27; 11:29-31, 40-45; 12:7, 11; 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Seventy Sets of Seven The seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them...","summary_en":"The Seventy Sets of Seven The seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87879,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Ancient Law Codes","title_en":"Ancient Law Codes","content_ro":"<h3>Ancient Law Codes<\/h3>\nUntil the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC<\/span>, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken from Hammurabi, subsequent discoveries produced law codes preceding Hammurabi’s by at least 500 years, and several laws are common to all of them, so Hammurabi also did not originate them.<\/p>\nWhat does this mean for the Bible? First, it is not surprising that we find similar laws from cultures neighboring Israel; similar societies require similar codes of conduct in order to ensure justice. Second, the biblical laws are unique in that they are incorporated in a covenant with God. Elsewhere in the ancient Near East, religious laws (about sacrifice, prayers, offerings, etc.) and civil laws (covering theft, lying, sexual conduct, murder, etc.) were completely unrelated because ethics and religion were considered separate domains. Religion was a matter of prayer, devotion, offerings, and ritual behavior—the territory of priests. Ethics concerned social and civil behavior—the business of the king. The biblical view of things is different: God is sovereign over both religion and society. So a person who is in a relationship with the true God must not only participate in proper worship (religion) but also treat other people rightly (ethics).<\/p>\nIsrael’s covenant with God made use of existing forms but invested them with new meaning. For example, the basic layout of Israel’s Tabernacle (Exod 26–27) and Temple (see 1 Kgs 6:1–7:51) were the same as elsewhere in the ancient world, and the basic forms of the Hebrew sacrifices (see Lev 1–7) were largely identical to the forms of pagan sacrifices. But the meaning and purpose of the Temple and the sacrifices were significantly different from the meaning and purpose of such things in paganism (see study notes on Exod 20:3-17; 25:1–40:38; Lev 1:1–7:38).<\/p>\nWhile many of the laws of Moses were not new to the world at that time, the idea that the behavior they called for is written into the very fabric of the universe by its Creator was radically new.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 20:1–23:33; 34:1–35:3; Lev 1:1–27:34; Deut 4:1–33:29; Ezra 1:1-4; Esth 1:13-19; 8:9-14; Dan 6:6-9; Luke 2:1-3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Ancient Law Codes<\/h3>\nUntil the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC<\/span>, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken from Hammurabi, subsequent discoveries produced law codes preceding Hammurabi’s by at least 500 years, and several laws are common to all of them, so Hammurabi also did not originate them.<\/p>\nWhat does this mean for the Bible? First, it is not surprising that we find similar laws from cultures neighboring Israel; similar societies require similar codes of conduct in order to ensure justice. Second, the biblical laws are unique in that they are incorporated in a covenant with God. Elsewhere in the ancient Near East, religious laws (about sacrifice, prayers, offerings, etc.) and civil laws (covering theft, lying, sexual conduct, murder, etc.) were completely unrelated because ethics and religion were considered separate domains. Religion was a matter of prayer, devotion, offerings, and ritual behavior—the territory of priests. Ethics concerned social and civil behavior—the business of the king. The biblical view of things is different: God is sovereign over both religion and society. So a person who is in a relationship with the true God must not only participate in proper worship (religion) but also treat other people rightly (ethics).<\/p>\nIsrael’s covenant with God made use of existing forms but invested them with new meaning. For example, the basic layout of Israel’s Tabernacle (Exod 26–27) and Temple (see 1 Kgs 6:1–7:51) were the same as elsewhere in the ancient world, and the basic forms of the Hebrew sacrifices (see Lev 1–7) were largely identical to the forms of pagan sacrifices. But the meaning and purpose of the Temple and the sacrifices were significantly different from the meaning and purpose of such things in paganism (see study notes on Exod 20:3-17; 25:1–40:38; Lev 1:1–7:38).<\/p>\nWhile many of the laws of Moses were not new to the world at that time, the idea that the behavior they called for is written into the very fabric of the universe by its Creator was radically new.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 20:1–23:33; 34:1–35:3; Lev 1:1–27:34; Deut 4:1–33:29; Ezra 1:1-4; Esth 1:13-19; 8:9-14; Dan 6:6-9; Luke 2:1-3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Ancient Law Codes Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken ...","summary_en":"Ancient Law Codes Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89072,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jerusalem","title_en":"Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>Jerusalem<\/h3>\nJerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (2 Kgs 25:1-10).<\/p>\nWhatever David’s method of capturing Jerusalem (his use of a water tunnel is debatable—see study note on 5:8), he secured Jerusalem as the political, and eventually spiritual, capital of Israel. Psalm 48 speaks beautifully and powerfully of Jerusalem as a fortress. Its towers, bulwarks, and easily defensible citadels with their rugged terrain could produce a false sense of security, if not idolatry. Psalm 48:1-3 reminds the reader that God’s living presence, not the topography of the city, made Jerusalem safe.<\/p>\nBoth the Old Testament and the New Testament call Jerusalem a “holy city” (see Neh 11:1, 18; Isa 52:1; Dan 9:24; Matt 4:5; 27:53; Rev 21:2). It is the only city so described in the Bible. Wherein lies this city’s holiness? It cannot be a reflection of the holiness of its occupants. In fact, so unholy was the populace that the city was decimated by the Babylonians in 586 BC<\/span>. Nor was it a holy city because it was Israel’s capital for several centuries. Jerusalem was a holy city, first of all, because God chose it (1 Kgs 8:44, 48; 11:13, 32, 36; 2 Chr 6:5, 34). And because he chose it, he put his glory and his name there (see 1 Kgs 14:21; 2 Chr 12:13; Ezek 8–10; 43:1-27).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels and Acts, Jerusalem was still a city of great importance. Herod the Great (37–4 BC<\/span>) had expanded the city and conducted extensive building projects—including the Temple. It remained the center of Israel’s spiritual life (see e.g., Acts 2:46; 3:1-26; 5:12), and many events in the lives of Jesus and his followers occurred in Jerusalem. Jesus had some harsh words for Jerusalem (see Matt 23:37-39)—especially its leadership—and he was eventually put to death there. Jesus warned of impending judgment on the city (see Mark 13:1-2; Luke 21:20-24), and his words were actualized in the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nBut the New Testament also introduces the new Jerusalem, the heavenly city comprised of God’s holy people (Heb 11:10; Rev 3:12; 21:2). As the earthly Jerusalem was the sphere in which the glorious presence and reign of God was partially actualized through King David and his successors, the new Jerusalem represents the government of Jesus Christ, the son of David, and his everlasting presence with his people (cp. John 1:14; Rev 21:3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJosh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21; 2 Sam 5:6-9; 1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 18:13-17; 25:1-10; 2 Chr 3:1; 12:1-12; 26:9, 15; 32:1-5, 27-30; Ezra 1:1-6; Neh 1:1–6:19; Ps 48:1-3; 125:2; Isa 14:32; 52:1-3; Gal 4:25-26; Heb 12:22-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jerusalem<\/h3>\nJerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (2 Kgs 25:1-10).<\/p>\nWhatever David’s method of capturing Jerusalem (his use of a water tunnel is debatable—see study note on 5:8), he secured Jerusalem as the political, and eventually spiritual, capital of Israel. Psalm 48 speaks beautifully and powerfully of Jerusalem as a fortress. Its towers, bulwarks, and easily defensible citadels with their rugged terrain could produce a false sense of security, if not idolatry. Psalm 48:1-3 reminds the reader that God’s living presence, not the topography of the city, made Jerusalem safe.<\/p>\nBoth the Old Testament and the New Testament call Jerusalem a “holy city” (see Neh 11:1, 18; Isa 52:1; Dan 9:24; Matt 4:5; 27:53; Rev 21:2). It is the only city so described in the Bible. Wherein lies this city’s holiness? It cannot be a reflection of the holiness of its occupants. In fact, so unholy was the populace that the city was decimated by the Babylonians in 586 BC<\/span>. Nor was it a holy city because it was Israel’s capital for several centuries. Jerusalem was a holy city, first of all, because God chose it (1 Kgs 8:44, 48; 11:13, 32, 36; 2 Chr 6:5, 34). And because he chose it, he put his glory and his name there (see 1 Kgs 14:21; 2 Chr 12:13; Ezek 8–10; 43:1-27).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels and Acts, Jerusalem was still a city of great importance. Herod the Great (37–4 BC<\/span>) had expanded the city and conducted extensive building projects—including the Temple. It remained the center of Israel’s spiritual life (see e.g., Acts 2:46; 3:1-26; 5:12), and many events in the lives of Jesus and his followers occurred in Jerusalem. Jesus had some harsh words for Jerusalem (see Matt 23:37-39)—especially its leadership—and he was eventually put to death there. Jesus warned of impending judgment on the city (see Mark 13:1-2; Luke 21:20-24), and his words were actualized in the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nBut the New Testament also introduces the new Jerusalem, the heavenly city comprised of God’s holy people (Heb 11:10; Rev 3:12; 21:2). As the earthly Jerusalem was the sphere in which the glorious presence and reign of God was partially actualized through King David and his successors, the new Jerusalem represents the government of Jesus Christ, the son of David, and his everlasting presence with his people (cp. John 1:14; Rev 21:3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJosh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21; 2 Sam 5:6-9; 1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 18:13-17; 25:1-10; 2 Chr 3:1; 12:1-12; 26:9, 15; 32:1-5, 27-30; Ezra 1:1-6; Neh 1:1–6:19; Ps 48:1-3; 125:2; Isa 14:32; 52:1-3; Gal 4:25-26; Heb 12:22-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jerusalem Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon...","summary_en":"Jerusalem Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92187,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Seventy Sets of Seven","title_en":"The Seventy Sets of Seven","content_ro":"<h3>The Seventy Sets of Seven<\/h3>\nThe seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them. The two main interpretations of the seventy sets of seven are presented here.<\/p>\nSCENARIO A: THE REIGN OF ANTIOCHUS IV (175–163 BC<\/span>).) The seventy sets of seven refer to history from Cyrus II of Persia (539 BC<\/span>; see 9:25; Ezra 1:2-4) to Antiochus IV (175–163 BC<\/span>; see Dan 8:23-25; 11:21-39). In this scenario, the “Anointed One” was the high priest Onias III, and the “ruler” (9:26-27) was Antiochus IV, whose treaty with the people of Judea in 174 BC<\/span> was supposed to allow them to practice their faith peacefully. In 170 BC<\/span>, Antiochus attacked Jerusalem, killed many, and looted the Temple. Then in 167 BC<\/span> he put an end to the sacrifices and offerings, forced the Jews to stop practicing their faith on pain of death, and desecrated the Temple with a “sacrilegious object”: He placed a statue of Zeus on the altar of burnt offering, where he sacrificed pigs and other unclean animals (cp. 11:21-35). Antiochus was struck with a painful disease, and he died in 163 BC<\/span>—“The fate decreed for this defiler” was “finally poured out on him” (9:27; see also 8:25; 1 Maccabees<\/em> 1:10-24; 6:7-16; 2 Maccabees<\/em> 9:1-29). In Scenario A, when Jesus spoke of the “sacrilegious object that causes desecration,” he was referring to the Jews’ experience in the time of Antiochus as a paradigm of the things that would happen in the future (see Matt 24:15; cp. Luke 21:20; 2 Thes 2:3-4).<\/p>\nSCENARIO B: THE DEATH OF CHRIST (AD<\/span> 30 or 33). The seventy weeks are a prophecy concerning Jesus Christ, the anointed Messiah. In this scenario, the “seventy sets of seven” began either with the decree of Cyrus (538 BC<\/span>; Ezra 1:1-4) or with one of the decrees of Artaxerxes (458 or 445 BC<\/span>; Ezra 7:8-26; Neh 2:1-10). The death of Christ then occurred either at the end of sixty-nine sets of seven (seven plus sixty-two, Dan 9:25-26) or at the midpoint of the seventieth (9:27). These two options have implications for how the seventy sets of seven are brought to completion. In the first option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as a future time not yet fulfilled. In the second option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as having been completed when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in AD<\/span> 70. If the decree of Cyrus is seen as the starting point, the 490 years are symbolic. However, if the decree given to Nehemiah to rebuild the city (445 BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1) is taken as the starting point (Dan 9:25), then there were very nearly 483 years (69 x 7 years) between that date and the death of Christ in AD<\/span> 30 or 33.<\/p>\nOption 1: The Seventieth Set of Seven Remains to Be Fulfilled in the Future.<\/em> Many interpreters have argued that Christ’s death occurred at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, and the seventieth set of seven is yet to be fulfilled. In that case, there is now a long gap from the sixty-ninth set of seven to the seventieth. The seventieth still lies in the future and corresponds to the reign of the Antichrist during the tribulation at the end of history (see 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10).<\/p>\nOption 2: The Seventieth Set of Seven Was Completed When Rome Destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple.<\/em> Other interpreters have held that the seventy weeks were fulfilled with the coming of Christ, his death and resurrection, and the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. In this case, Christ began his ministry at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, around AD<\/span> 28. He ministered for approximately three and a half years, then was killed in the middle of the seventieth seven. The remaining half-seven ended when the “ruler”—one or more of the Roman rulers—destroyed Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. The war and its miseries now continue between God’s people and the kingdom of this world to the very end, when Christ will return, judge the wicked, and establish his Kingdom.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDan 7:8, 11, 20-21, 24-27; 8:9-14; 9:24-27; 11:29-31, 40-45; 12:7, 11; 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Seventy Sets of Seven<\/h3>\nThe seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them. The two main interpretations of the seventy sets of seven are presented here.<\/p>\nSCENARIO A: THE REIGN OF ANTIOCHUS IV (175–163 BC<\/span>).) The seventy sets of seven refer to history from Cyrus II of Persia (539 BC<\/span>; see 9:25; Ezra 1:2-4) to Antiochus IV (175–163 BC<\/span>; see Dan 8:23-25; 11:21-39). In this scenario, the “Anointed One” was the high priest Onias III, and the “ruler” (9:26-27) was Antiochus IV, whose treaty with the people of Judea in 174 BC<\/span> was supposed to allow them to practice their faith peacefully. In 170 BC<\/span>, Antiochus attacked Jerusalem, killed many, and looted the Temple. Then in 167 BC<\/span> he put an end to the sacrifices and offerings, forced the Jews to stop practicing their faith on pain of death, and desecrated the Temple with a “sacrilegious object”: He placed a statue of Zeus on the altar of burnt offering, where he sacrificed pigs and other unclean animals (cp. 11:21-35). Antiochus was struck with a painful disease, and he died in 163 BC<\/span>—“The fate decreed for this defiler” was “finally poured out on him” (9:27; see also 8:25; 1 Maccabees<\/em> 1:10-24; 6:7-16; 2 Maccabees<\/em> 9:1-29). In Scenario A, when Jesus spoke of the “sacrilegious object that causes desecration,” he was referring to the Jews’ experience in the time of Antiochus as a paradigm of the things that would happen in the future (see Matt 24:15; cp. Luke 21:20; 2 Thes 2:3-4).<\/p>\nSCENARIO B: THE DEATH OF CHRIST (AD<\/span> 30 or 33). The seventy weeks are a prophecy concerning Jesus Christ, the anointed Messiah. In this scenario, the “seventy sets of seven” began either with the decree of Cyrus (538 BC<\/span>; Ezra 1:1-4) or with one of the decrees of Artaxerxes (458 or 445 BC<\/span>; Ezra 7:8-26; Neh 2:1-10). The death of Christ then occurred either at the end of sixty-nine sets of seven (seven plus sixty-two, Dan 9:25-26) or at the midpoint of the seventieth (9:27). These two options have implications for how the seventy sets of seven are brought to completion. In the first option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as a future time not yet fulfilled. In the second option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as having been completed when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in AD<\/span> 70. If the decree of Cyrus is seen as the starting point, the 490 years are symbolic. However, if the decree given to Nehemiah to rebuild the city (445 BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1) is taken as the starting point (Dan 9:25), then there were very nearly 483 years (69 x 7 years) between that date and the death of Christ in AD<\/span> 30 or 33.<\/p>\nOption 1: The Seventieth Set of Seven Remains to Be Fulfilled in the Future.<\/em> Many interpreters have argued that Christ’s death occurred at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, and the seventieth set of seven is yet to be fulfilled. In that case, there is now a long gap from the sixty-ninth set of seven to the seventieth. The seventieth still lies in the future and corresponds to the reign of the Antichrist during the tribulation at the end of history (see 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10).<\/p>\nOption 2: The Seventieth Set of Seven Was Completed When Rome Destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple.<\/em> Other interpreters have held that the seventy weeks were fulfilled with the coming of Christ, his death and resurrection, and the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. In this case, Christ began his ministry at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, around AD<\/span> 28. He ministered for approximately three and a half years, then was killed in the middle of the seventieth seven. The remaining half-seven ended when the “ruler”—one or more of the Roman rulers—destroyed Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. The war and its miseries now continue between God’s people and the kingdom of this world to the very end, when Christ will return, judge the wicked, and establish his Kingdom.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDan 7:8, 11, 20-21, 24-27; 8:9-14; 9:24-27; 11:29-31, 40-45; 12:7, 11; 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Seventy Sets of Seven The seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them...","summary_en":"The Seventy Sets of Seven The seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115505,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Ancient Law Codes","title_en":"Ancient Law Codes","content_ro":"<h3>Ancient Law Codes<\/h3>\nUntil the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC<\/span>, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken from Hammurabi, subsequent discoveries produced law codes preceding Hammurabi’s by at least 500 years, and several laws are common to all of them, so Hammurabi also did not originate them.<\/p>\nWhat does this mean for the Bible? First, it is not surprising that we find similar laws from cultures neighboring Israel; similar societies require similar codes of conduct in order to ensure justice. Second, the biblical laws are unique in that they are incorporated in a covenant with God. Elsewhere in the ancient Near East, religious laws (about sacrifice, prayers, offerings, etc.) and civil laws (covering theft, lying, sexual conduct, murder, etc.) were completely unrelated because ethics and religion were considered separate domains. Religion was a matter of prayer, devotion, offerings, and ritual behavior—the territory of priests. Ethics concerned social and civil behavior—the business of the king. The biblical view of things is different: God is sovereign over both religion and society. So a person who is in a relationship with the true God must not only participate in proper worship (religion) but also treat other people rightly (ethics).<\/p>\nIsrael’s covenant with God made use of existing forms but invested them with new meaning. For example, the basic layout of Israel’s Tabernacle (Exod 26–27) and Temple (see 1 Kgs 6:1–7:51) were the same as elsewhere in the ancient world, and the basic forms of the Hebrew sacrifices (see Lev 1–7) were largely identical to the forms of pagan sacrifices. But the meaning and purpose of the Temple and the sacrifices were significantly different from the meaning and purpose of such things in paganism (see study notes on Exod 20:3-17; 25:1–40:38; Lev 1:1–7:38).<\/p>\nWhile many of the laws of Moses were not new to the world at that time, the idea that the behavior they called for is written into the very fabric of the universe by its Creator was radically new.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 20:1–23:33; 34:1–35:3; Lev 1:1–27:34; Deut 4:1–33:29; Ezra 1:1-4; Esth 1:13-19; 8:9-14; Dan 6:6-9; Luke 2:1-3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Ancient Law Codes<\/h3>\nUntil the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC<\/span>, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken from Hammurabi, subsequent discoveries produced law codes preceding Hammurabi’s by at least 500 years, and several laws are common to all of them, so Hammurabi also did not originate them.<\/p>\nWhat does this mean for the Bible? First, it is not surprising that we find similar laws from cultures neighboring Israel; similar societies require similar codes of conduct in order to ensure justice. Second, the biblical laws are unique in that they are incorporated in a covenant with God. Elsewhere in the ancient Near East, religious laws (about sacrifice, prayers, offerings, etc.) and civil laws (covering theft, lying, sexual conduct, murder, etc.) were completely unrelated because ethics and religion were considered separate domains. Religion was a matter of prayer, devotion, offerings, and ritual behavior—the territory of priests. Ethics concerned social and civil behavior—the business of the king. The biblical view of things is different: God is sovereign over both religion and society. So a person who is in a relationship with the true God must not only participate in proper worship (religion) but also treat other people rightly (ethics).<\/p>\nIsrael’s covenant with God made use of existing forms but invested them with new meaning. For example, the basic layout of Israel’s Tabernacle (Exod 26–27) and Temple (see 1 Kgs 6:1–7:51) were the same as elsewhere in the ancient world, and the basic forms of the Hebrew sacrifices (see Lev 1–7) were largely identical to the forms of pagan sacrifices. But the meaning and purpose of the Temple and the sacrifices were significantly different from the meaning and purpose of such things in paganism (see study notes on Exod 20:3-17; 25:1–40:38; Lev 1:1–7:38).<\/p>\nWhile many of the laws of Moses were not new to the world at that time, the idea that the behavior they called for is written into the very fabric of the universe by its Creator was radically new.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 20:1–23:33; 34:1–35:3; Lev 1:1–27:34; Deut 4:1–33:29; Ezra 1:1-4; Esth 1:13-19; 8:9-14; Dan 6:6-9; Luke 2:1-3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Ancient Law Codes Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken ...","summary_en":"Ancient Law Codes Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116698,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jerusalem","title_en":"Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>Jerusalem<\/h3>\nJerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (2 Kgs 25:1-10).<\/p>\nWhatever David’s method of capturing Jerusalem (his use of a water tunnel is debatable—see study note on 5:8), he secured Jerusalem as the political, and eventually spiritual, capital of Israel. Psalm 48 speaks beautifully and powerfully of Jerusalem as a fortress. Its towers, bulwarks, and easily defensible citadels with their rugged terrain could produce a false sense of security, if not idolatry. Psalm 48:1-3 reminds the reader that God’s living presence, not the topography of the city, made Jerusalem safe.<\/p>\nBoth the Old Testament and the New Testament call Jerusalem a “holy city” (see Neh 11:1, 18; Isa 52:1; Dan 9:24; Matt 4:5; 27:53; Rev 21:2). It is the only city so described in the Bible. Wherein lies this city’s holiness? It cannot be a reflection of the holiness of its occupants. In fact, so unholy was the populace that the city was decimated by the Babylonians in 586 BC<\/span>. Nor was it a holy city because it was Israel’s capital for several centuries. Jerusalem was a holy city, first of all, because God chose it (1 Kgs 8:44, 48; 11:13, 32, 36; 2 Chr 6:5, 34). And because he chose it, he put his glory and his name there (see 1 Kgs 14:21; 2 Chr 12:13; Ezek 8–10; 43:1-27).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels and Acts, Jerusalem was still a city of great importance. Herod the Great (37–4 BC<\/span>) had expanded the city and conducted extensive building projects—including the Temple. It remained the center of Israel’s spiritual life (see e.g., Acts 2:46; 3:1-26; 5:12), and many events in the lives of Jesus and his followers occurred in Jerusalem. Jesus had some harsh words for Jerusalem (see Matt 23:37-39)—especially its leadership—and he was eventually put to death there. Jesus warned of impending judgment on the city (see Mark 13:1-2; Luke 21:20-24), and his words were actualized in the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nBut the New Testament also introduces the new Jerusalem, the heavenly city comprised of God’s holy people (Heb 11:10; Rev 3:12; 21:2). As the earthly Jerusalem was the sphere in which the glorious presence and reign of God was partially actualized through King David and his successors, the new Jerusalem represents the government of Jesus Christ, the son of David, and his everlasting presence with his people (cp. John 1:14; Rev 21:3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJosh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21; 2 Sam 5:6-9; 1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 18:13-17; 25:1-10; 2 Chr 3:1; 12:1-12; 26:9, 15; 32:1-5, 27-30; Ezra 1:1-6; Neh 1:1–6:19; Ps 48:1-3; 125:2; Isa 14:32; 52:1-3; Gal 4:25-26; Heb 12:22-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jerusalem<\/h3>\nJerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (2 Kgs 25:1-10).<\/p>\nWhatever David’s method of capturing Jerusalem (his use of a water tunnel is debatable—see study note on 5:8), he secured Jerusalem as the political, and eventually spiritual, capital of Israel. Psalm 48 speaks beautifully and powerfully of Jerusalem as a fortress. Its towers, bulwarks, and easily defensible citadels with their rugged terrain could produce a false sense of security, if not idolatry. Psalm 48:1-3 reminds the reader that God’s living presence, not the topography of the city, made Jerusalem safe.<\/p>\nBoth the Old Testament and the New Testament call Jerusalem a “holy city” (see Neh 11:1, 18; Isa 52:1; Dan 9:24; Matt 4:5; 27:53; Rev 21:2). It is the only city so described in the Bible. Wherein lies this city’s holiness? It cannot be a reflection of the holiness of its occupants. In fact, so unholy was the populace that the city was decimated by the Babylonians in 586 BC<\/span>. Nor was it a holy city because it was Israel’s capital for several centuries. Jerusalem was a holy city, first of all, because God chose it (1 Kgs 8:44, 48; 11:13, 32, 36; 2 Chr 6:5, 34). And because he chose it, he put his glory and his name there (see 1 Kgs 14:21; 2 Chr 12:13; Ezek 8–10; 43:1-27).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels and Acts, Jerusalem was still a city of great importance. Herod the Great (37–4 BC<\/span>) had expanded the city and conducted extensive building projects—including the Temple. It remained the center of Israel’s spiritual life (see e.g., Acts 2:46; 3:1-26; 5:12), and many events in the lives of Jesus and his followers occurred in Jerusalem. Jesus had some harsh words for Jerusalem (see Matt 23:37-39)—especially its leadership—and he was eventually put to death there. Jesus warned of impending judgment on the city (see Mark 13:1-2; Luke 21:20-24), and his words were actualized in the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nBut the New Testament also introduces the new Jerusalem, the heavenly city comprised of God’s holy people (Heb 11:10; Rev 3:12; 21:2). As the earthly Jerusalem was the sphere in which the glorious presence and reign of God was partially actualized through King David and his successors, the new Jerusalem represents the government of Jesus Christ, the son of David, and his everlasting presence with his people (cp. John 1:14; Rev 21:3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJosh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21; 2 Sam 5:6-9; 1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 18:13-17; 25:1-10; 2 Chr 3:1; 12:1-12; 26:9, 15; 32:1-5, 27-30; Ezra 1:1-6; Neh 1:1–6:19; Ps 48:1-3; 125:2; Isa 14:32; 52:1-3; Gal 4:25-26; Heb 12:22-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jerusalem Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon...","summary_en":"Jerusalem Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119813,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Seventy Sets of Seven","title_en":"The Seventy Sets of Seven","content_ro":"<h3>The Seventy Sets of Seven<\/h3>\nThe seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them. The two main interpretations of the seventy sets of seven are presented here.<\/p>\nSCENARIO A: THE REIGN OF ANTIOCHUS IV (175–163 BC<\/span>).) The seventy sets of seven refer to history from Cyrus II of Persia (539 BC<\/span>; see 9:25; Ezra 1:2-4) to Antiochus IV (175–163 BC<\/span>; see Dan 8:23-25; 11:21-39). In this scenario, the “Anointed One” was the high priest Onias III, and the “ruler” (9:26-27) was Antiochus IV, whose treaty with the people of Judea in 174 BC<\/span> was supposed to allow them to practice their faith peacefully. In 170 BC<\/span>, Antiochus attacked Jerusalem, killed many, and looted the Temple. Then in 167 BC<\/span> he put an end to the sacrifices and offerings, forced the Jews to stop practicing their faith on pain of death, and desecrated the Temple with a “sacrilegious object”: He placed a statue of Zeus on the altar of burnt offering, where he sacrificed pigs and other unclean animals (cp. 11:21-35). Antiochus was struck with a painful disease, and he died in 163 BC<\/span>—“The fate decreed for this defiler” was “finally poured out on him” (9:27; see also 8:25; 1 Maccabees<\/em> 1:10-24; 6:7-16; 2 Maccabees<\/em> 9:1-29). In Scenario A, when Jesus spoke of the “sacrilegious object that causes desecration,” he was referring to the Jews’ experience in the time of Antiochus as a paradigm of the things that would happen in the future (see Matt 24:15; cp. Luke 21:20; 2 Thes 2:3-4).<\/p>\nSCENARIO B: THE DEATH OF CHRIST (AD<\/span> 30 or 33). The seventy weeks are a prophecy concerning Jesus Christ, the anointed Messiah. In this scenario, the “seventy sets of seven” began either with the decree of Cyrus (538 BC<\/span>; Ezra 1:1-4) or with one of the decrees of Artaxerxes (458 or 445 BC<\/span>; Ezra 7:8-26; Neh 2:1-10). The death of Christ then occurred either at the end of sixty-nine sets of seven (seven plus sixty-two, Dan 9:25-26) or at the midpoint of the seventieth (9:27). These two options have implications for how the seventy sets of seven are brought to completion. In the first option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as a future time not yet fulfilled. In the second option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as having been completed when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in AD<\/span> 70. If the decree of Cyrus is seen as the starting point, the 490 years are symbolic. However, if the decree given to Nehemiah to rebuild the city (445 BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1) is taken as the starting point (Dan 9:25), then there were very nearly 483 years (69 x 7 years) between that date and the death of Christ in AD<\/span> 30 or 33.<\/p>\nOption 1: The Seventieth Set of Seven Remains to Be Fulfilled in the Future.<\/em> Many interpreters have argued that Christ’s death occurred at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, and the seventieth set of seven is yet to be fulfilled. In that case, there is now a long gap from the sixty-ninth set of seven to the seventieth. The seventieth still lies in the future and corresponds to the reign of the Antichrist during the tribulation at the end of history (see 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10).<\/p>\nOption 2: The Seventieth Set of Seven Was Completed When Rome Destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple.<\/em> Other interpreters have held that the seventy weeks were fulfilled with the coming of Christ, his death and resurrection, and the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. In this case, Christ began his ministry at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, around AD<\/span> 28. He ministered for approximately three and a half years, then was killed in the middle of the seventieth seven. The remaining half-seven ended when the “ruler”—one or more of the Roman rulers—destroyed Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. The war and its miseries now continue between God’s people and the kingdom of this world to the very end, when Christ will return, judge the wicked, and establish his Kingdom.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDan 7:8, 11, 20-21, 24-27; 8:9-14; 9:24-27; 11:29-31, 40-45; 12:7, 11; 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Seventy Sets of Seven<\/h3>\nThe seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them. The two main interpretations of the seventy sets of seven are presented here.<\/p>\nSCENARIO A: THE REIGN OF ANTIOCHUS IV (175–163 BC<\/span>).) The seventy sets of seven refer to history from Cyrus II of Persia (539 BC<\/span>; see 9:25; Ezra 1:2-4) to Antiochus IV (175–163 BC<\/span>; see Dan 8:23-25; 11:21-39). In this scenario, the “Anointed One” was the high priest Onias III, and the “ruler” (9:26-27) was Antiochus IV, whose treaty with the people of Judea in 174 BC<\/span> was supposed to allow them to practice their faith peacefully. In 170 BC<\/span>, Antiochus attacked Jerusalem, killed many, and looted the Temple. Then in 167 BC<\/span> he put an end to the sacrifices and offerings, forced the Jews to stop practicing their faith on pain of death, and desecrated the Temple with a “sacrilegious object”: He placed a statue of Zeus on the altar of burnt offering, where he sacrificed pigs and other unclean animals (cp. 11:21-35). Antiochus was struck with a painful disease, and he died in 163 BC<\/span>—“The fate decreed for this defiler” was “finally poured out on him” (9:27; see also 8:25; 1 Maccabees<\/em> 1:10-24; 6:7-16; 2 Maccabees<\/em> 9:1-29). In Scenario A, when Jesus spoke of the “sacrilegious object that causes desecration,” he was referring to the Jews’ experience in the time of Antiochus as a paradigm of the things that would happen in the future (see Matt 24:15; cp. Luke 21:20; 2 Thes 2:3-4).<\/p>\nSCENARIO B: THE DEATH OF CHRIST (AD<\/span> 30 or 33). The seventy weeks are a prophecy concerning Jesus Christ, the anointed Messiah. In this scenario, the “seventy sets of seven” began either with the decree of Cyrus (538 BC<\/span>; Ezra 1:1-4) or with one of the decrees of Artaxerxes (458 or 445 BC<\/span>; Ezra 7:8-26; Neh 2:1-10). The death of Christ then occurred either at the end of sixty-nine sets of seven (seven plus sixty-two, Dan 9:25-26) or at the midpoint of the seventieth (9:27). These two options have implications for how the seventy sets of seven are brought to completion. In the first option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as a future time not yet fulfilled. In the second option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as having been completed when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in AD<\/span> 70. If the decree of Cyrus is seen as the starting point, the 490 years are symbolic. However, if the decree given to Nehemiah to rebuild the city (445 BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1) is taken as the starting point (Dan 9:25), then there were very nearly 483 years (69 x 7 years) between that date and the death of Christ in AD<\/span> 30 or 33.<\/p>\nOption 1: The Seventieth Set of Seven Remains to Be Fulfilled in the Future.<\/em> Many interpreters have argued that Christ’s death occurred at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, and the seventieth set of seven is yet to be fulfilled. In that case, there is now a long gap from the sixty-ninth set of seven to the seventieth. The seventieth still lies in the future and corresponds to the reign of the Antichrist during the tribulation at the end of history (see 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10).<\/p>\nOption 2: The Seventieth Set of Seven Was Completed When Rome Destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple.<\/em> Other interpreters have held that the seventy weeks were fulfilled with the coming of Christ, his death and resurrection, and the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. In this case, Christ began his ministry at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, around AD<\/span> 28. He ministered for approximately three and a half years, then was killed in the middle of the seventieth seven. The remaining half-seven ended when the “ruler”—one or more of the Roman rulers—destroyed Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. The war and its miseries now continue between God’s people and the kingdom of this world to the very end, when Christ will return, judge the wicked, and establish his Kingdom.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDan 7:8, 11, 20-21, 24-27; 8:9-14; 9:24-27; 11:29-31, 40-45; 12:7, 11; 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Seventy Sets of Seven The seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them...","summary_en":"The Seventy Sets of Seven The seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143131,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Ancient Law Codes","title_en":"Ancient Law Codes","content_ro":"<h3>Ancient Law Codes<\/h3>\nUntil the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC<\/span>, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken from Hammurabi, subsequent discoveries produced law codes preceding Hammurabi’s by at least 500 years, and several laws are common to all of them, so Hammurabi also did not originate them.<\/p>\nWhat does this mean for the Bible? First, it is not surprising that we find similar laws from cultures neighboring Israel; similar societies require similar codes of conduct in order to ensure justice. Second, the biblical laws are unique in that they are incorporated in a covenant with God. Elsewhere in the ancient Near East, religious laws (about sacrifice, prayers, offerings, etc.) and civil laws (covering theft, lying, sexual conduct, murder, etc.) were completely unrelated because ethics and religion were considered separate domains. Religion was a matter of prayer, devotion, offerings, and ritual behavior—the territory of priests. Ethics concerned social and civil behavior—the business of the king. The biblical view of things is different: God is sovereign over both religion and society. So a person who is in a relationship with the true God must not only participate in proper worship (religion) but also treat other people rightly (ethics).<\/p>\nIsrael’s covenant with God made use of existing forms but invested them with new meaning. For example, the basic layout of Israel’s Tabernacle (Exod 26–27) and Temple (see 1 Kgs 6:1–7:51) were the same as elsewhere in the ancient world, and the basic forms of the Hebrew sacrifices (see Lev 1–7) were largely identical to the forms of pagan sacrifices. But the meaning and purpose of the Temple and the sacrifices were significantly different from the meaning and purpose of such things in paganism (see study notes on Exod 20:3-17; 25:1–40:38; Lev 1:1–7:38).<\/p>\nWhile many of the laws of Moses were not new to the world at that time, the idea that the behavior they called for is written into the very fabric of the universe by its Creator was radically new.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 20:1–23:33; 34:1–35:3; Lev 1:1–27:34; Deut 4:1–33:29; Ezra 1:1-4; Esth 1:13-19; 8:9-14; Dan 6:6-9; Luke 2:1-3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Ancient Law Codes<\/h3>\nUntil the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC<\/span>, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken from Hammurabi, subsequent discoveries produced law codes preceding Hammurabi’s by at least 500 years, and several laws are common to all of them, so Hammurabi also did not originate them.<\/p>\nWhat does this mean for the Bible? First, it is not surprising that we find similar laws from cultures neighboring Israel; similar societies require similar codes of conduct in order to ensure justice. Second, the biblical laws are unique in that they are incorporated in a covenant with God. Elsewhere in the ancient Near East, religious laws (about sacrifice, prayers, offerings, etc.) and civil laws (covering theft, lying, sexual conduct, murder, etc.) were completely unrelated because ethics and religion were considered separate domains. Religion was a matter of prayer, devotion, offerings, and ritual behavior—the territory of priests. Ethics concerned social and civil behavior—the business of the king. The biblical view of things is different: God is sovereign over both religion and society. So a person who is in a relationship with the true God must not only participate in proper worship (religion) but also treat other people rightly (ethics).<\/p>\nIsrael’s covenant with God made use of existing forms but invested them with new meaning. For example, the basic layout of Israel’s Tabernacle (Exod 26–27) and Temple (see 1 Kgs 6:1–7:51) were the same as elsewhere in the ancient world, and the basic forms of the Hebrew sacrifices (see Lev 1–7) were largely identical to the forms of pagan sacrifices. But the meaning and purpose of the Temple and the sacrifices were significantly different from the meaning and purpose of such things in paganism (see study notes on Exod 20:3-17; 25:1–40:38; Lev 1:1–7:38).<\/p>\nWhile many of the laws of Moses were not new to the world at that time, the idea that the behavior they called for is written into the very fabric of the universe by its Creator was radically new.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 20:1–23:33; 34:1–35:3; Lev 1:1–27:34; Deut 4:1–33:29; Ezra 1:1-4; Esth 1:13-19; 8:9-14; Dan 6:6-9; Luke 2:1-3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Ancient Law Codes Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken ...","summary_en":"Ancient Law Codes Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144324,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jerusalem","title_en":"Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>Jerusalem<\/h3>\nJerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (2 Kgs 25:1-10).<\/p>\nWhatever David’s method of capturing Jerusalem (his use of a water tunnel is debatable—see study note on 5:8), he secured Jerusalem as the political, and eventually spiritual, capital of Israel. Psalm 48 speaks beautifully and powerfully of Jerusalem as a fortress. Its towers, bulwarks, and easily defensible citadels with their rugged terrain could produce a false sense of security, if not idolatry. Psalm 48:1-3 reminds the reader that God’s living presence, not the topography of the city, made Jerusalem safe.<\/p>\nBoth the Old Testament and the New Testament call Jerusalem a “holy city” (see Neh 11:1, 18; Isa 52:1; Dan 9:24; Matt 4:5; 27:53; Rev 21:2). It is the only city so described in the Bible. Wherein lies this city’s holiness? It cannot be a reflection of the holiness of its occupants. In fact, so unholy was the populace that the city was decimated by the Babylonians in 586 BC<\/span>. Nor was it a holy city because it was Israel’s capital for several centuries. Jerusalem was a holy city, first of all, because God chose it (1 Kgs 8:44, 48; 11:13, 32, 36; 2 Chr 6:5, 34). And because he chose it, he put his glory and his name there (see 1 Kgs 14:21; 2 Chr 12:13; Ezek 8–10; 43:1-27).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels and Acts, Jerusalem was still a city of great importance. Herod the Great (37–4 BC<\/span>) had expanded the city and conducted extensive building projects—including the Temple. It remained the center of Israel’s spiritual life (see e.g., Acts 2:46; 3:1-26; 5:12), and many events in the lives of Jesus and his followers occurred in Jerusalem. Jesus had some harsh words for Jerusalem (see Matt 23:37-39)—especially its leadership—and he was eventually put to death there. Jesus warned of impending judgment on the city (see Mark 13:1-2; Luke 21:20-24), and his words were actualized in the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nBut the New Testament also introduces the new Jerusalem, the heavenly city comprised of God’s holy people (Heb 11:10; Rev 3:12; 21:2). As the earthly Jerusalem was the sphere in which the glorious presence and reign of God was partially actualized through King David and his successors, the new Jerusalem represents the government of Jesus Christ, the son of David, and his everlasting presence with his people (cp. John 1:14; Rev 21:3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJosh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21; 2 Sam 5:6-9; 1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 18:13-17; 25:1-10; 2 Chr 3:1; 12:1-12; 26:9, 15; 32:1-5, 27-30; Ezra 1:1-6; Neh 1:1–6:19; Ps 48:1-3; 125:2; Isa 14:32; 52:1-3; Gal 4:25-26; Heb 12:22-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jerusalem<\/h3>\nJerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (2 Kgs 25:1-10).<\/p>\nWhatever David’s method of capturing Jerusalem (his use of a water tunnel is debatable—see study note on 5:8), he secured Jerusalem as the political, and eventually spiritual, capital of Israel. Psalm 48 speaks beautifully and powerfully of Jerusalem as a fortress. Its towers, bulwarks, and easily defensible citadels with their rugged terrain could produce a false sense of security, if not idolatry. Psalm 48:1-3 reminds the reader that God’s living presence, not the topography of the city, made Jerusalem safe.<\/p>\nBoth the Old Testament and the New Testament call Jerusalem a “holy city” (see Neh 11:1, 18; Isa 52:1; Dan 9:24; Matt 4:5; 27:53; Rev 21:2). It is the only city so described in the Bible. Wherein lies this city’s holiness? It cannot be a reflection of the holiness of its occupants. In fact, so unholy was the populace that the city was decimated by the Babylonians in 586 BC<\/span>. Nor was it a holy city because it was Israel’s capital for several centuries. Jerusalem was a holy city, first of all, because God chose it (1 Kgs 8:44, 48; 11:13, 32, 36; 2 Chr 6:5, 34). And because he chose it, he put his glory and his name there (see 1 Kgs 14:21; 2 Chr 12:13; Ezek 8–10; 43:1-27).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels and Acts, Jerusalem was still a city of great importance. Herod the Great (37–4 BC<\/span>) had expanded the city and conducted extensive building projects—including the Temple. It remained the center of Israel’s spiritual life (see e.g., Acts 2:46; 3:1-26; 5:12), and many events in the lives of Jesus and his followers occurred in Jerusalem. Jesus had some harsh words for Jerusalem (see Matt 23:37-39)—especially its leadership—and he was eventually put to death there. Jesus warned of impending judgment on the city (see Mark 13:1-2; Luke 21:20-24), and his words were actualized in the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nBut the New Testament also introduces the new Jerusalem, the heavenly city comprised of God’s holy people (Heb 11:10; Rev 3:12; 21:2). As the earthly Jerusalem was the sphere in which the glorious presence and reign of God was partially actualized through King David and his successors, the new Jerusalem represents the government of Jesus Christ, the son of David, and his everlasting presence with his people (cp. John 1:14; Rev 21:3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJosh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21; 2 Sam 5:6-9; 1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 18:13-17; 25:1-10; 2 Chr 3:1; 12:1-12; 26:9, 15; 32:1-5, 27-30; Ezra 1:1-6; Neh 1:1–6:19; Ps 48:1-3; 125:2; Isa 14:32; 52:1-3; Gal 4:25-26; Heb 12:22-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jerusalem Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon...","summary_en":"Jerusalem Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147439,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Seventy Sets of Seven","title_en":"The Seventy Sets of Seven","content_ro":"<h3>The Seventy Sets of Seven<\/h3>\nThe seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them. The two main interpretations of the seventy sets of seven are presented here.<\/p>\nSCENARIO A: THE REIGN OF ANTIOCHUS IV (175–163 BC<\/span>).) The seventy sets of seven refer to history from Cyrus II of Persia (539 BC<\/span>; see 9:25; Ezra 1:2-4) to Antiochus IV (175–163 BC<\/span>; see Dan 8:23-25; 11:21-39). In this scenario, the “Anointed One” was the high priest Onias III, and the “ruler” (9:26-27) was Antiochus IV, whose treaty with the people of Judea in 174 BC<\/span> was supposed to allow them to practice their faith peacefully. In 170 BC<\/span>, Antiochus attacked Jerusalem, killed many, and looted the Temple. Then in 167 BC<\/span> he put an end to the sacrifices and offerings, forced the Jews to stop practicing their faith on pain of death, and desecrated the Temple with a “sacrilegious object”: He placed a statue of Zeus on the altar of burnt offering, where he sacrificed pigs and other unclean animals (cp. 11:21-35). Antiochus was struck with a painful disease, and he died in 163 BC<\/span>—“The fate decreed for this defiler” was “finally poured out on him” (9:27; see also 8:25; 1 Maccabees<\/em> 1:10-24; 6:7-16; 2 Maccabees<\/em> 9:1-29). In Scenario A, when Jesus spoke of the “sacrilegious object that causes desecration,” he was referring to the Jews’ experience in the time of Antiochus as a paradigm of the things that would happen in the future (see Matt 24:15; cp. Luke 21:20; 2 Thes 2:3-4).<\/p>\nSCENARIO B: THE DEATH OF CHRIST (AD<\/span> 30 or 33). The seventy weeks are a prophecy concerning Jesus Christ, the anointed Messiah. In this scenario, the “seventy sets of seven” began either with the decree of Cyrus (538 BC<\/span>; Ezra 1:1-4) or with one of the decrees of Artaxerxes (458 or 445 BC<\/span>; Ezra 7:8-26; Neh 2:1-10). The death of Christ then occurred either at the end of sixty-nine sets of seven (seven plus sixty-two, Dan 9:25-26) or at the midpoint of the seventieth (9:27). These two options have implications for how the seventy sets of seven are brought to completion. In the first option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as a future time not yet fulfilled. In the second option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as having been completed when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in AD<\/span> 70. If the decree of Cyrus is seen as the starting point, the 490 years are symbolic. However, if the decree given to Nehemiah to rebuild the city (445 BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1) is taken as the starting point (Dan 9:25), then there were very nearly 483 years (69 x 7 years) between that date and the death of Christ in AD<\/span> 30 or 33.<\/p>\nOption 1: The Seventieth Set of Seven Remains to Be Fulfilled in the Future.<\/em> Many interpreters have argued that Christ’s death occurred at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, and the seventieth set of seven is yet to be fulfilled. In that case, there is now a long gap from the sixty-ninth set of seven to the seventieth. The seventieth still lies in the future and corresponds to the reign of the Antichrist during the tribulation at the end of history (see 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10).<\/p>\nOption 2: The Seventieth Set of Seven Was Completed When Rome Destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple.<\/em> Other interpreters have held that the seventy weeks were fulfilled with the coming of Christ, his death and resurrection, and the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. In this case, Christ began his ministry at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, around AD<\/span> 28. He ministered for approximately three and a half years, then was killed in the middle of the seventieth seven. The remaining half-seven ended when the “ruler”—one or more of the Roman rulers—destroyed Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. The war and its miseries now continue between God’s people and the kingdom of this world to the very end, when Christ will return, judge the wicked, and establish his Kingdom.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDan 7:8, 11, 20-21, 24-27; 8:9-14; 9:24-27; 11:29-31, 40-45; 12:7, 11; 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Seventy Sets of Seven<\/h3>\nThe seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them. The two main interpretations of the seventy sets of seven are presented here.<\/p>\nSCENARIO A: THE REIGN OF ANTIOCHUS IV (175–163 BC<\/span>).) The seventy sets of seven refer to history from Cyrus II of Persia (539 BC<\/span>; see 9:25; Ezra 1:2-4) to Antiochus IV (175–163 BC<\/span>; see Dan 8:23-25; 11:21-39). In this scenario, the “Anointed One” was the high priest Onias III, and the “ruler” (9:26-27) was Antiochus IV, whose treaty with the people of Judea in 174 BC<\/span> was supposed to allow them to practice their faith peacefully. In 170 BC<\/span>, Antiochus attacked Jerusalem, killed many, and looted the Temple. Then in 167 BC<\/span> he put an end to the sacrifices and offerings, forced the Jews to stop practicing their faith on pain of death, and desecrated the Temple with a “sacrilegious object”: He placed a statue of Zeus on the altar of burnt offering, where he sacrificed pigs and other unclean animals (cp. 11:21-35). Antiochus was struck with a painful disease, and he died in 163 BC<\/span>—“The fate decreed for this defiler” was “finally poured out on him” (9:27; see also 8:25; 1 Maccabees<\/em> 1:10-24; 6:7-16; 2 Maccabees<\/em> 9:1-29). In Scenario A, when Jesus spoke of the “sacrilegious object that causes desecration,” he was referring to the Jews’ experience in the time of Antiochus as a paradigm of the things that would happen in the future (see Matt 24:15; cp. Luke 21:20; 2 Thes 2:3-4).<\/p>\nSCENARIO B: THE DEATH OF CHRIST (AD<\/span> 30 or 33). The seventy weeks are a prophecy concerning Jesus Christ, the anointed Messiah. In this scenario, the “seventy sets of seven” began either with the decree of Cyrus (538 BC<\/span>; Ezra 1:1-4) or with one of the decrees of Artaxerxes (458 or 445 BC<\/span>; Ezra 7:8-26; Neh 2:1-10). The death of Christ then occurred either at the end of sixty-nine sets of seven (seven plus sixty-two, Dan 9:25-26) or at the midpoint of the seventieth (9:27). These two options have implications for how the seventy sets of seven are brought to completion. In the first option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as a future time not yet fulfilled. In the second option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as having been completed when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in AD<\/span> 70. If the decree of Cyrus is seen as the starting point, the 490 years are symbolic. However, if the decree given to Nehemiah to rebuild the city (445 BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1) is taken as the starting point (Dan 9:25), then there were very nearly 483 years (69 x 7 years) between that date and the death of Christ in AD<\/span> 30 or 33.<\/p>\nOption 1: The Seventieth Set of Seven Remains to Be Fulfilled in the Future.<\/em> Many interpreters have argued that Christ’s death occurred at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, and the seventieth set of seven is yet to be fulfilled. In that case, there is now a long gap from the sixty-ninth set of seven to the seventieth. The seventieth still lies in the future and corresponds to the reign of the Antichrist during the tribulation at the end of history (see 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10).<\/p>\nOption 2: The Seventieth Set of Seven Was Completed When Rome Destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple.<\/em> Other interpreters have held that the seventy weeks were fulfilled with the coming of Christ, his death and resurrection, and the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. In this case, Christ began his ministry at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, around AD<\/span> 28. He ministered for approximately three and a half years, then was killed in the middle of the seventieth seven. The remaining half-seven ended when the “ruler”—one or more of the Roman rulers—destroyed Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. The war and its miseries now continue between God’s people and the kingdom of this world to the very end, when Christ will return, judge the wicked, and establish his Kingdom.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDan 7:8, 11, 20-21, 24-27; 8:9-14; 9:24-27; 11:29-31, 40-45; 12:7, 11; 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Seventy Sets of Seven The seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them...","summary_en":"The Seventy Sets of Seven The seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":10016,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ecbatana","title_en":"Ecbatana","content_ro":"<h3>ECBATANA<\/h3>\nGreek name for the capital of the ancient Median Empire, later one of the capital cities of the Persian and Parthian empires. It is often spelled Achmetha (Ezr 6:2, kjv<\/span>), approximating its Aramaic name. The Old Persian name, Hangmatana, may have meant “place of assembly.” Modern Hamadan covers most of the ruins of the ancient city.<\/p>\nThe city is at 6,300 feet (1,920.1 meters) on the eastern slopes of Mt Oronte (Alvand), a granite peak reaching to a height of 12,000 feet (3,657.4 meters) above sea level, part of an impassable range broken only by the pass leading to Ecbatana. Major trade routes converged on this pass and gave Ecbatana its strategic importance.<\/p>\nThe altitude of the city also accounted for its popularity as the summer residence of Persian and Parthian kings. In the winter, blizzards pile snow several feet deep and temperatures plummet below zero, but the summer climate is cool and comfortable; mountains shade the afternoon sun, while melting snows bring ample water. Greek general Xenophon reported that the Persian king Cyrus annually spent three months of spring in Susa, seven months of winter in Babylon, “and in the height of summer two months in Ecbatana.”<\/p>\nThe Greek historian Herodotus recorded that the city was established by Deioces, founder of the Median dynasty, early in the seventh century BC<\/span>. In 550 BC<\/span> Cyrus captured the city from a Median king, Astyages. It was from Ecbatana that Cyrus issued his 538 BC<\/span> decree that all Jews throughout his kingdom might return to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple of the Lord (Ezr 1:2-4). Later, an Aramaic memorandum regarding this decree was found in the records of Ecbatana after a fruitless search of the archives in Babylon (6:1-12). After Darius I (521–486 BC<\/span>) quelled a revolt in securing the throne, he had the famous Behistun inscription carved in the side of Mt Orontes high above the city. The city was taken and pillaged by Alexander the Great in 330 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nAlthough Ezra 6:2 is the only explicit biblical reference to the city, Ecbatana could have been one of the Median cities receiving exiles from the northern kingdom (722 BC<\/span>), if the city were in existence before fortification by Deioces (2 Kgs 17:6). The book of Tobit places Jewish exiles in Ecbatana in the seventh century (3:7; 7:1; 14:14), though that is of questionable historical worth. The book of Judith records a battle between a Median king, Arphaxad, and an Assyrian king, Nebuchadnezzar, in which the Assyrians capture Ecbatana (1:1-2, 14), but the account is dubious because the identity of those kings is unknown. Antiochus Epiphanes may have died there in 164 BC<\/span> (2 Macc 9:1-3, 19-28).<\/p>\nEcbatana is the only one of the three Persian capitals that has yet to be completely excavated, since it lies partly within the modern city of Hamadan, Iran. Ancient Greek authors gave elaborate descriptions of the city and its wealth. Polybius, for example, reported that it “greatly exceeded all the other cities in wealth and the magnificence of its buildings.” Incidental archaeological discoveries of two foundation inscriptions in silver and gold from the time of Darius I and column bases from Artaxerxes II suggest the great promise of excavations there. Excavations have been forestalled, however, because extensive demolition of modern Hamadan would be necessary for access to much of the ancient city below.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Persia, Persians.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ECBATANA<\/h3>\nGreek name for the capital of the ancient Median Empire, later one of the capital cities of the Persian and Parthian empires. It is often spelled Achmetha (Ezr 6:2, kjv<\/span>), approximating its Aramaic name. The Old Persian name, Hangmatana, may have meant “place of assembly.” Modern Hamadan covers most of the ruins of the ancient city.<\/p>\nThe city is at 6,300 feet (1,920.1 meters) on the eastern slopes of Mt Oronte (Alvand), a granite peak reaching to a height of 12,000 feet (3,657.4 meters) above sea level, part of an impassable range broken only by the pass leading to Ecbatana. Major trade routes converged on this pass and gave Ecbatana its strategic importance.<\/p>\nThe altitude of the city also accounted for its popularity as the summer residence of Persian and Parthian kings. In the winter, blizzards pile snow several feet deep and temperatures plummet below zero, but the summer climate is cool and comfortable; mountains shade the afternoon sun, while melting snows bring ample water. Greek general Xenophon reported that the Persian king Cyrus annually spent three months of spring in Susa, seven months of winter in Babylon, “and in the height of summer two months in Ecbatana.”<\/p>\nThe Greek historian Herodotus recorded that the city was established by Deioces, founder of the Median dynasty, early in the seventh century BC<\/span>. In 550 BC<\/span> Cyrus captured the city from a Median king, Astyages. It was from Ecbatana that Cyrus issued his 538 BC<\/span> decree that all Jews throughout his kingdom might return to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple of the Lord (Ezr 1:2-4). Later, an Aramaic memorandum regarding this decree was found in the records of Ecbatana after a fruitless search of the archives in Babylon (6:1-12). After Darius I (521–486 BC<\/span>) quelled a revolt in securing the throne, he had the famous Behistun inscription carved in the side of Mt Orontes high above the city. The city was taken and pillaged by Alexander the Great in 330 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nAlthough Ezra 6:2 is the only explicit biblical reference to the city, Ecbatana could have been one of the Median cities receiving exiles from the northern kingdom (722 BC<\/span>), if the city were in existence before fortification by Deioces (2 Kgs 17:6). The book of Tobit places Jewish exiles in Ecbatana in the seventh century (3:7; 7:1; 14:14), though that is of questionable historical worth. The book of Judith records a battle between a Median king, Arphaxad, and an Assyrian king, Nebuchadnezzar, in which the Assyrians capture Ecbatana (1:1-2, 14), but the account is dubious because the identity of those kings is unknown. Antiochus Epiphanes may have died there in 164 BC<\/span> (2 Macc 9:1-3, 19-28).<\/p>\nEcbatana is the only one of the three Persian capitals that has yet to be completely excavated, since it lies partly within the modern city of Hamadan, Iran. Ancient Greek authors gave elaborate descriptions of the city and its wealth. Polybius, for example, reported that it “greatly exceeded all the other cities in wealth and the magnificence of its buildings.” Incidental archaeological discoveries of two foundation inscriptions in silver and gold from the time of Darius I and column bases from Artaxerxes II suggest the great promise of excavations there. Excavations have been forestalled, however, because extensive demolition of modern Hamadan would be necessary for access to much of the ancient city below.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Persia, Persians.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ECBATANA Greek name for the capital of the ancient Median Empire, later one of the capital cities of the Persian and Parthian empires. It is often spelled Achmetha (Ezr 6:2, kjv), approximating its Aramaic name. The Old Persian name, Hangmatana, may have meant “place of assembly.” Modern Hamadan covers most of the ruins of the ancient city. The city is at 6,300 feet (1,920.1 meters) on the eastern slopes of Mt Oronte (Alvand), a granite peak reaching to a height of 12,000 feet (3,657.4 meters...","summary_en":"ECBATANA Greek name for the capital of the ancient Median Empire, later one of the capital cities of the Persian and Parthian empires. It is often spelled Achmetha (Ezr 6:2, kjv), approximating its Aramaic name. The Old Persian name, Hangmatana, may have meant “place of assembly.” Modern Hamadan covers most of the ruins of the ancient city. The city is at 6,300 feet (1,920.1 meters) on the eastern slopes of Mt Oronte (Alvand), a granite peak reaching to a height of 12,000 feet (3,657.4 meters...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11798,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Ezra","title_en":"Book of Ezra","content_ro":"<h3>EZRA, Book of<\/h3>\nOne of the historical books of the OT, associated with 2 Chronicles and Nehemiah.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Name<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Sources<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Languages, Texts, and Versions<\/p>\n• Purpose and Content<\/p>\nName<\/p>\nIn the Talmud tractate Baba Bathra<\/em> 15a, the rabbis and scribes regarded Ezra and Nehemiah as one book. Josephus (Apion<\/em> 1.8) also considered the two books to be one when the number of OT books was given as 22. Some church fathers, such as Melito of Sardis and Jerome, thought of them as one book. The Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT) also grouped the two books as one, referring to them as 2 Ezra to distinguish them from an apocryphal book known as 1 Ezra. The Latin Vulgate, however, called Ezra “1 Ezra” and Nehemiah “2 Ezra.”<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nThe Jewish people came under the rule of the Persian Empire when Cyrus conquered Babylon in 539 BC<\/span>. From then until Ezra’s time, the Persian kings were Cyrus (539–530 BC<\/span>), who allowed the Jewish people and other captives to return to their homeland (Ezr 1); Cambyses (529–522 BC<\/span>); Gaumata, a usurper of the throne (522 BC<\/span>); Darius I (521–486 BC<\/span>; Ezr 5:6); Xerxes I (OT Ahasuerus, 486–465 BC<\/span>; Ezr 4:6); and Artaxerxes I (465–424 BC<\/span>; Ezr 4:7-23; 7:1–10:44). Both Ezra’s and Nehemiah’s work fall within the period between Cyrus and Artaxerxes I. Some scholars, however, place Ezra during the reign of Artaxerxes II (404–359 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nSources<\/p>\nBy tradition, the Jewish leader Ezra researched and put together the material that forms his book. Chapters 7–10 are written in the first person singular, and Ezra may have used the autobiographical passages as the core of this book, adding information from other sources. That the book contains portions written in Aramaic has been used as justification for assigning a date later than Ezra’s time. But the Aramaic of Ezra bears a remarkable similarity to fifth-century BC<\/span> Aramaic papyri from the Jewish community at Elephantine in Egypt.<\/p>\nThe book is largely a compilation, using autobiography, official documents, edicts, and other material. The present book of Ezra contains four identifiable strata of source material.<\/p>\n<h5>Memoirs of Ezra<\/h5>\nCertain sections appear in the first person singular (7:27–9:15), located between third-person narratives (7:1-26; 10). The memoirs were probably part of Ezra’s own official reports.<\/p>\n<h5>Aramaic Documents<\/h5>\nAramaic was the diplomatic language of the Persian Empire, and a number of documents appear in the book of Ezra. A letter of complaint was written to Artaxerxes I about the rebuilding of the city walls, for example, and Ezra also included the official reply (Ezr 4:8-23). There is also a letter of Darius I and the king’s reply (5:1–6:18). An official authorization by the Persian court of Artaxerxes permitted Ezra to return, and this included a description of material entrusted into his keeping (7:12-26). Since all of those sections were official correspondence, the record naturally is written in Aramaic.<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrew Lists<\/h5>\nEzra included Hebrew documents listing people’s names for a number of purposes. One such document indicated the Persian government’s permission for Jewish immigrants to return to the land of Israel (Ezr 1:2-4). It was a Jewish version of Cyrus’s general edict expressing concern for all his subjects. The edict in Aramaic is repeated by Ezra in 6:3-5, and that version is probably taken from an original memorandum of a royal decision. Ezra included lists of the immigrants who returned to begin the second commonwealth of Israel (ch 2, repeated in Neh 7). The book also contains a list of immigrants who returned with Ezra by permission of Artaxerxes I (Ezr 8:1-14). Lists of those who had married pagan wives are provided as well (10:18-43).<\/p>\n<h5>Narrative<\/h5>\nThe rest of the book comprises narrative by Ezra himself. For the period of the first return prior to his own time, he probably drew upon existing sources, either oral or documentary. Material in the book that was contemporary with the scribe would be his personal account about his own work.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nTraditionally, the Artaxerxes in Ezra 7:1 has been identified with Artaxerxes I Longimanus. Ezra’s arrival in Jerusalem would thus have been in 458 BC<\/span> (see nlt<\/span> mg for 7:8). Therefore, Ezra’s work at Jerusalem started before that of Nehemiah, who came in 445 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nBut the traditional dates are questioned from a number of sources. One alternative is to place Nehemiah during the reign of Artaxerxes I (464–424 BC<\/span>) and Ezra at a later date, in the reign of Artaxerxes II Mnemon (404–359 BC<\/span>). Such a suggestion creates a difficulty with Nehemiah 8:2, because there Ezra is named as Nehemiah’s contemporary and coworker.<\/p>\nIn addition, the Elephantine papyri (407–400 BC<\/span>) mention the high priest Johanan in Jerusalem, and Sanballat as governor of Samaria. Johanan is considered a grandson of Eliashib, but Nehemiah was a contemporary of Eliashib (Neh 3:1, 20). The biblical material that speaks of Nehemiah going to Jerusalem in the 20th year of Artaxerxes (Neh 2:1, 445 BC<\/span>) and again during the 32nd year (Neh 13:6, 433 BC<\/span>) refers to Eliashib’s contemporary high priesthood with Ezra. The traditional position thus furnishes a reasonable date for the book of Ezra. If the scribe were placed during the reign of Artaxerxes II (c. 397 BC<\/span>), his ministry would be too late for the high priesthood of Johanan.<\/p>\nLanguages, Texts, and Versions<\/p>\nThe primary language of the book of Ezra is Hebrew; the exceptions are 4:7, 6:18, and 7:12-26, which are written in Aramaic. The Hebrew portion appears to resemble the language of Daniel, Haggai, and 2 Chronicles much more than later Hebrew, such as that of Ecclesiasticus. As indicated, the Aramaic portions resemble the Elephantine papyri, dated about 407–400 BC<\/span>. In addition, Persian personal and family names and Persian words and expressions occur in the book, such as Bigvai, Mithredath, and Elam. All of these evidences serve to place the book in about the fifth century BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe Hebrew Masoretic Text of Ezra seems well preserved. The Septuagint version is a bit shorter than the Masoretic Text. Only parts of Ezra 4 and 5 have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\nPurpose and Content<\/p>\nThe book of Ezra is a straightforward account of one of the most important events in Jewish history. From a priestly point of view, it is an account of the restoration of Jewish people to their homeland following the Babylonian dispersion. The record tells of two distinct returns, one under the leadership of Zerubbabel (chs 1–6; 538 BC<\/span>), and 80 years later, the second return led by Ezra (chs 7–10; 458 BC<\/span>). The book emphasizes Ezra’s leadership and the reestablishment of the people on their land, both of which were to have important future consequences.<\/p>\nLittle is known about the political activity of Ezra in the Persian court. He appears to have been a man of considerable influence, however, and could well be described as an official who held a position corresponding to that of “Secretary of State for Jewish Affairs.” To what extent that function applied to the Persian Empire as a whole is uncertain, since Ezra’s recorded activities took place only in the area known to the Persians as the province “Beyond the River,” that is, the territory lying to the west of the Euphrates. The importance of Ezra’s position in the Persian Empire is indicated by the fact that King Artaxerxes gave him full authority to do whatever he thought necessary for the welfare of his people and the empire (7:21-26). Ezra’s genealogy is given in 7:1-5, and he is consistently spoken of as a scribe learned in the Mosaic law. As a descendant of Zadok the priest, he would have the authority to instruct others in the Torah.<\/p>\nChapter 4 speaks of the opposition to rebuilding the temple and the walls. We should recognize that Ezra’s approach in this chapter is topical rather than chronological where, in the middle of describing the earlier opposition to building the temple (5:1-5), he complained that the same kind of opposition was being repeated in his day concerning the attempt to rebuild the city walls and repair the fortifications of Jerusalem (5:7-23). Internal evidence suggests that a long historical interval ensued during the reign of Ahasuerus, or Xerxes, and the early part of Artaxerxes’ regime. During this period, complaints were made to the Persian authorities that the returned Judeans were rebuilding the city wall of Jerusalem, and as a result the work was halted for some time. It readily can be seen that Ezra was dealing with the evil intentions of Judah’s enemies and that the opposition of Rehum and Shimshai did not appear in the 520s (when the temple was being built) because they lived in the 460s, early in the reign of Artaxerxes I.<\/p>\nBut the initial passage is actually a history of opposition to rebuilding the ruined temple. It narrates the frustrations experienced by the Judean community from the time of return to their homeland during Cyrus’s rule (4:1-5) up to the time of King Darius (v 24). The prophet Haggai (520 BC<\/span>) aroused the people with his message and persuaded them to lay the foundations of the new temple.<\/p>\nEzra resumes the theme of the book in chapter 5. He points out the problems, frustrations, and hindrances the Jewish people had with the construction of the temple. It was not until a diligent search had been made in the archives by the Persian authorities that the original edict granting permission to build the temple was found (5:7–6:5).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Ezra (Person) #1; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EZRA, Book of<\/h3>\nOne of the historical books of the OT, associated with 2 Chronicles and Nehemiah.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Name<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Sources<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Languages, Texts, and Versions<\/p>\n• Purpose and Content<\/p>\nName<\/p>\nIn the Talmud tractate Baba Bathra<\/em> 15a, the rabbis and scribes regarded Ezra and Nehemiah as one book. Josephus (Apion<\/em> 1.8) also considered the two books to be one when the number of OT books was given as 22. Some church fathers, such as Melito of Sardis and Jerome, thought of them as one book. The Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT) also grouped the two books as one, referring to them as 2 Ezra to distinguish them from an apocryphal book known as 1 Ezra. The Latin Vulgate, however, called Ezra “1 Ezra” and Nehemiah “2 Ezra.”<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nThe Jewish people came under the rule of the Persian Empire when Cyrus conquered Babylon in 539 BC<\/span>. From then until Ezra’s time, the Persian kings were Cyrus (539–530 BC<\/span>), who allowed the Jewish people and other captives to return to their homeland (Ezr 1); Cambyses (529–522 BC<\/span>); Gaumata, a usurper of the throne (522 BC<\/span>); Darius I (521–486 BC<\/span>; Ezr 5:6); Xerxes I (OT Ahasuerus, 486–465 BC<\/span>; Ezr 4:6); and Artaxerxes I (465–424 BC<\/span>; Ezr 4:7-23; 7:1–10:44). Both Ezra’s and Nehemiah’s work fall within the period between Cyrus and Artaxerxes I. Some scholars, however, place Ezra during the reign of Artaxerxes II (404–359 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nSources<\/p>\nBy tradition, the Jewish leader Ezra researched and put together the material that forms his book. Chapters 7–10 are written in the first person singular, and Ezra may have used the autobiographical passages as the core of this book, adding information from other sources. That the book contains portions written in Aramaic has been used as justification for assigning a date later than Ezra’s time. But the Aramaic of Ezra bears a remarkable similarity to fifth-century BC<\/span> Aramaic papyri from the Jewish community at Elephantine in Egypt.<\/p>\nThe book is largely a compilation, using autobiography, official documents, edicts, and other material. The present book of Ezra contains four identifiable strata of source material.<\/p>\n<h5>Memoirs of Ezra<\/h5>\nCertain sections appear in the first person singular (7:27–9:15), located between third-person narratives (7:1-26; 10). The memoirs were probably part of Ezra’s own official reports.<\/p>\n<h5>Aramaic Documents<\/h5>\nAramaic was the diplomatic language of the Persian Empire, and a number of documents appear in the book of Ezra. A letter of complaint was written to Artaxerxes I about the rebuilding of the city walls, for example, and Ezra also included the official reply (Ezr 4:8-23). There is also a letter of Darius I and the king’s reply (5:1–6:18). An official authorization by the Persian court of Artaxerxes permitted Ezra to return, and this included a description of material entrusted into his keeping (7:12-26). Since all of those sections were official correspondence, the record naturally is written in Aramaic.<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrew Lists<\/h5>\nEzra included Hebrew documents listing people’s names for a number of purposes. One such document indicated the Persian government’s permission for Jewish immigrants to return to the land of Israel (Ezr 1:2-4). It was a Jewish version of Cyrus’s general edict expressing concern for all his subjects. The edict in Aramaic is repeated by Ezra in 6:3-5, and that version is probably taken from an original memorandum of a royal decision. Ezra included lists of the immigrants who returned to begin the second commonwealth of Israel (ch 2, repeated in Neh 7). The book also contains a list of immigrants who returned with Ezra by permission of Artaxerxes I (Ezr 8:1-14). Lists of those who had married pagan wives are provided as well (10:18-43).<\/p>\n<h5>Narrative<\/h5>\nThe rest of the book comprises narrative by Ezra himself. For the period of the first return prior to his own time, he probably drew upon existing sources, either oral or documentary. Material in the book that was contemporary with the scribe would be his personal account about his own work.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nTraditionally, the Artaxerxes in Ezra 7:1 has been identified with Artaxerxes I Longimanus. Ezra’s arrival in Jerusalem would thus have been in 458 BC<\/span> (see nlt<\/span> mg for 7:8). Therefore, Ezra’s work at Jerusalem started before that of Nehemiah, who came in 445 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nBut the traditional dates are questioned from a number of sources. One alternative is to place Nehemiah during the reign of Artaxerxes I (464–424 BC<\/span>) and Ezra at a later date, in the reign of Artaxerxes II Mnemon (404–359 BC<\/span>). Such a suggestion creates a difficulty with Nehemiah 8:2, because there Ezra is named as Nehemiah’s contemporary and coworker.<\/p>\nIn addition, the Elephantine papyri (407–400 BC<\/span>) mention the high priest Johanan in Jerusalem, and Sanballat as governor of Samaria. Johanan is considered a grandson of Eliashib, but Nehemiah was a contemporary of Eliashib (Neh 3:1, 20). The biblical material that speaks of Nehemiah going to Jerusalem in the 20th year of Artaxerxes (Neh 2:1, 445 BC<\/span>) and again during the 32nd year (Neh 13:6, 433 BC<\/span>) refers to Eliashib’s contemporary high priesthood with Ezra. The traditional position thus furnishes a reasonable date for the book of Ezra. If the scribe were placed during the reign of Artaxerxes II (c. 397 BC<\/span>), his ministry would be too late for the high priesthood of Johanan.<\/p>\nLanguages, Texts, and Versions<\/p>\nThe primary language of the book of Ezra is Hebrew; the exceptions are 4:7, 6:18, and 7:12-26, which are written in Aramaic. The Hebrew portion appears to resemble the language of Daniel, Haggai, and 2 Chronicles much more than later Hebrew, such as that of Ecclesiasticus. As indicated, the Aramaic portions resemble the Elephantine papyri, dated about 407–400 BC<\/span>. In addition, Persian personal and family names and Persian words and expressions occur in the book, such as Bigvai, Mithredath, and Elam. All of these evidences serve to place the book in about the fifth century BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe Hebrew Masoretic Text of Ezra seems well preserved. The Septuagint version is a bit shorter than the Masoretic Text. Only parts of Ezra 4 and 5 have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\nPurpose and Content<\/p>\nThe book of Ezra is a straightforward account of one of the most important events in Jewish history. From a priestly point of view, it is an account of the restoration of Jewish people to their homeland following the Babylonian dispersion. The record tells of two distinct returns, one under the leadership of Zerubbabel (chs 1–6; 538 BC<\/span>), and 80 years later, the second return led by Ezra (chs 7–10; 458 BC<\/span>). The book emphasizes Ezra’s leadership and the reestablishment of the people on their land, both of which were to have important future consequences.<\/p>\nLittle is known about the political activity of Ezra in the Persian court. He appears to have been a man of considerable influence, however, and could well be described as an official who held a position corresponding to that of “Secretary of State for Jewish Affairs.” To what extent that function applied to the Persian Empire as a whole is uncertain, since Ezra’s recorded activities took place only in the area known to the Persians as the province “Beyond the River,” that is, the territory lying to the west of the Euphrates. The importance of Ezra’s position in the Persian Empire is indicated by the fact that King Artaxerxes gave him full authority to do whatever he thought necessary for the welfare of his people and the empire (7:21-26). Ezra’s genealogy is given in 7:1-5, and he is consistently spoken of as a scribe learned in the Mosaic law. As a descendant of Zadok the priest, he would have the authority to instruct others in the Torah.<\/p>\nChapter 4 speaks of the opposition to rebuilding the temple and the walls. We should recognize that Ezra’s approach in this chapter is topical rather than chronological where, in the middle of describing the earlier opposition to building the temple (5:1-5), he complained that the same kind of opposition was being repeated in his day concerning the attempt to rebuild the city walls and repair the fortifications of Jerusalem (5:7-23). Internal evidence suggests that a long historical interval ensued during the reign of Ahasuerus, or Xerxes, and the early part of Artaxerxes’ regime. During this period, complaints were made to the Persian authorities that the returned Judeans were rebuilding the city wall of Jerusalem, and as a result the work was halted for some time. It readily can be seen that Ezra was dealing with the evil intentions of Judah’s enemies and that the opposition of Rehum and Shimshai did not appear in the 520s (when the temple was being built) because they lived in the 460s, early in the reign of Artaxerxes I.<\/p>\nBut the initial passage is actually a history of opposition to rebuilding the ruined temple. It narrates the frustrations experienced by the Judean community from the time of return to their homeland during Cyrus’s rule (4:1-5) up to the time of King Darius (v 24). The prophet Haggai (520 BC<\/span>) aroused the people with his message and persuaded them to lay the foundations of the new temple.<\/p>\nEzra resumes the theme of the book in chapter 5. He points out the problems, frustrations, and hindrances the Jewish people had with the construction of the temple. It was not until a diligent search had been made in the archives by the Persian authorities that the original edict granting permission to build the temple was found (5:7–6:5).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Ezra (Person) #1; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EZRA, Book of One of the historical books of the OT, associated with 2 Chronicles and Nehemiah. Preview • Name • Background • Sources • Date • Languages, Texts, and Versions • Purpose and Content Name In the Talmud tractate Baba Bathra 15a, the rabbis and scribes regarded Ezra and Nehemiah as one book. Josephus (Apion 1.8) also considered the two books to be one when the number of OT books was given as 22. Some church fathers, such as Melito of Sardis and Jerome, thought of them as one book. ...","summary_en":"EZRA, Book of One of the historical books of the OT, associated with 2 Chronicles and Nehemiah. Preview • Name • Background • Sources • Date • Languages, Texts, and Versions • Purpose and Content Name In the Talmud tractate Baba Bathra 15a, the rabbis and scribes regarded Ezra and Nehemiah as one book. Josephus (Apion 1.8) also considered the two books to be one when the number of OT books was given as 22. Some church fathers, such as Melito of Sardis and Jerome, thought of them as one book. ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17585,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Inscriptions","title_en":"Inscriptions","content_ro":"<h3>INSCRIPTIONS<\/h3>\nTerm used to refer to writing in the ancient world that was done on a material of a permanent nature, such as stone or clay, rather than on ordinary and impermanent substances, such as papyri or parchment.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Introduction<\/p>\n• Inscriptions on Monuments<\/p>\n• Historical Records<\/p>\n• Official Announcements<\/p>\n• Dedications<\/p>\n• Correspondence<\/p>\n• Mosaic Floor Decorations<\/p>\nIntroduction<\/p>\nThere are occasional references to inscriptions in the Bible; for example, the Ten Commandments were inscribed on stone (Ex 31:18) and given to Moses, and later written by Joshua on stone and set up at Mt Ebal near Shechem (Jos 8:32). In the excavations at Shechem, G. E. Wright found a large stone prepared to receive an inscription that he dated to the time of Joshua on stratigraphic grounds. It may still be seen at the site. A message from the hand of God to the Babylonian king Belshazzar was inscribed on the walls of his palace (Dn 5:5, 24). Paul observed an altar with the inscription “To an unknown god” in the marketplace of Athens (Acts 17:23). The book of Revelation speaks of the names of the 12 tribes of the sons of Israel being inscribed on the gates of the heavenly city (Rv 21:12).<\/p>\nInscriptions in the ancient world can be found in almost any language and from any period of history: Egyptian, Babylonian, Persian, Greek, Latin, Hebrew, Aramaic, Nabatean, Moabite, and so on. It was once popular to argue that Moses could not have written the Pentateuch because writing had not been invented that early. Inscriptions found at the turquoise mines of Serabit el-Khadim dating to the 15th century BC<\/span> have disproven this allegation. In addition, it might be noted that clay tablets found at Ras Shamra by Claude Schaeffer and dated to about 1400 BC<\/span> demonstrate a considerable period of literary activity, as do the tablets at Ebla from approximately 1,000 years earlier.<\/p>\nInscriptions may be found in almost any position or place, but the most common locations are in the floors of synagogues, church buildings, and mosques; the pavements of forums; the walls of public buildings; dedicatory stones and statues; stelae and monumental plaques; tombs and sarcophagi; and Roman milestones. An exhaustive list is impossible, but a few representative samples will illustrate the various kinds of extant inscriptional material.<\/p>\nInscriptions on Monuments<\/p>\nThe Egyptian pharaoh Merneptah commemorated his victory over the Sea Peoples in the 13th century BC<\/span> by inscribing a black granite stele with a record of his victory. It contains the earliest known reference to Israel outside the land of Palestine: “Israel lies desolate.”<\/p>\nThe Israelite king Omri (1 Kgs 16:16-30) is referred to in a text carved in the Moabite language on a stone dating near the end of the reign of the Moabite king Mesha, about 830 BC<\/span>. It was found at Diban (OT Dibon) in 1868 and contains a record of the successful rebellion of the king against Israelite oppression.<\/p>\nAnother monumental inscription was found in Persia carved into the steep slope of Mt Behistun. It is a trilingual (Old Persian, Elamite, Akkadian) record of the exploits of Darius I, providing the key to unlocking the mystery of the cuneiform script in which several of these ancient languages were written.<\/p>\nThe Assyrian king Shalmaneser III left a record of his first six campaigns of conquest inscribed on a monolith found in 1861 at Kurkh on the Tigris. The stone is carved front and back in cuneiform that is written over a bas-relief of the king. This same king left a black stone obelisk, six and a half feet (2 meters) high, depicting his triumphs over several other kings, among whom is Jehu, king of Israel, depicted in the second panel from the top, prostrating himself before the Assyrian monarch. This is the earliest picture available of an Israelite and the only known representation of an Israelite king by a contemporary. The inscription above the picture reads, “The tribute of Jehu, son [descendant] of Omri . . .” It dates to the mid-ninth century BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nHistorical Records<\/p>\nFrequently in the region of Mesopotamia, ancient kings recorded important events or proclamations in stone or clay. A notable example is the clay prism containing the final edition of Sennacherib’s Annals dated to 691 BC<\/span>. It is hexagonal, 15 inches (38.1 centimeters) high and 6 inches (15.2 centimeters) wide, and written on all sides in cuneiform script. The inscription speaks of “Hezekiah the Jew (king of Judah), who did not submit to my yoke. . . . Like a caged bird, I shut him up in Jerusalem, his royal city” (cf. 2 Kgs 18; Is 36–39).<\/p>\nEven though no annals comparable to those produced by the Assyrian kings have survived among the Babylonians, we do have some chronicles written on clay tablets covering the years from 626 BC<\/span> to the fall of Babylon to Cyrus in 539. One of these, the Babylonian Chronicle, provides an exact date of March 16, 597 BC<\/span>, for the fall of Jerusalem to the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar (cf. 2 Kgs 24:10-17).<\/p>\nBabylon itself fell to Cyrus the Mede, king of Persia, in 539. The event is not only referred to in the Bible (Ezr 1:1-3) but is also described on a clay barrel-shaped cylinder nine inches (22.9 centimeters) in length, written in cuneiform script, during the reign of Cyrus. It refers to his policy that allowed captive nations to rebuild their cities and temples. This provides an explanation of his encouragement and financial help to the Jews in returning to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple of Solomon that Nebuchadnezzar had destroyed (Ezr 1:2-4).<\/p>\nEgyptian pharaohs were fond of publishing records of their exploits in hieroglyphic script on the walls of temples and tombs. These were usually incised into the stone and then painted. One of the most interesting is Shishak’s description of his invasion of the land of Israel incised on the southern wall of a court of the temple of Amon at Karnak. The inclusion of Megiddo, as well as other cities in Israel, among the more than 75 cities whose names can still be read adds historical interest to the biblical account of Shishak’s invasion and conquest of Jerusalem and “Judah’s fortified cities” (1 Kgs 14:25-26; 2 Chr 12:2-10). Archaeological finds confirm a destruction and burning of the city at this time.<\/p>\nOfficial Announcements<\/p>\nWhen an ancient monarch or public official wanted to publish an announcement with some degree of permanency, it would be carved in stone or set in mosaic. An inscription on a marble slab dating to the reign of Claudius (AD<\/span> 41–54) was found in 1878, originating in the city of Nazareth. It contains a warning against grave robbing or any other desecration of cemeteries. The penalty for such violation was declared to be death. The inscription may reflect some of the troubles Claudius had in Rome over the person of Christ (Suetonius, Claudius<\/em> 25) which led to the expulsion of Jews from the capital city (Acts 18). At issue must have been the resurrection of Christ as proclaimed in Rome.<\/p>\nAnnouncements were placed even in temples. Josephus referred to a small wall surrounding the Jewish temple in Jerusalem that contained slabs of stone at regular intervals giving warning in Greek and Latin to Gentiles entering the temple (War<\/em> 5.193-34; 6.125-26; Antiquities<\/em> 15.417). Two fragmentary examples have been found. One discovered by Clermont-Ganneau in 1871 reads: “No foreigner is to enter within the balustrade and embankment around the sanctuary. Whoever is caught will have himself to blame for his death which follows.” The Romans allowed the Jews to put anyone to death, even a Roman, who went beyond this barrier (War<\/em> 6.126).<\/p>\nAn important inscription commissioned by the emperor Claudius, was found at the beginning of the 20th century in Delphi, Greece. It was written in Greek and mentions Gallio as proconsul with a date that can be established as AD<\/span> 51–52 for his term of office. This Gallio is the proconsul before whom Paul was brought by the Jews of Corinth (Acts 18:12-17). It is therefore extremely important for establishing the date of Paul’s 18-month stay in Corinth, and an important pivotal date for Pauline chronology in general. The inscription is an imperial announcement to the citizens of Delphi regarding the need for increasing the population of the city with eminent people.<\/p>\nThe name Pontius Pilate has appeared in a Latin inscription carved into a stone found in the Roman theater at Caesarea Maritima on the coast of Israel. It refers to him, in partially mutilated words, as prefect and contains the name Tiberium, which designates a structure built in honor of the emperor Tiberius.<\/p>\nDedications<\/p>\nInscriptions were commonly placed on walls or floors of buildings or attached to some other structure dedicating the completed edifice. An inscription was cut into the wall of a long tunnel built by the Jewish king Hezekiah in Jerusalem when the tunnel was finished (2 Kgs 20:20). It is in Hebrew and is now in the Istanbul museum. One of the oldest inscriptions we have in that language, it describes the construction of the Siloam tunnel.<\/p>\nIn the city of Corinth in Greece there is a dedicatory inscription cut into the pavement of a plaza on the north side of the large theater. The abbreviated Latin inscription reads: Erastus pro aedilitate sua pecunia stravit<\/em> (“Erastus, in return for his aedileship, laid the pavement at his own expense”). The bronze has long since been removed from the letters deeply cut into the gray Acrocorinthian limestone. This is probably the same “Erastus, the city treasurer” mentioned by Paul in Romans 16:23. A similar inscription from the Corinthian agora of Paul’s day reads: “Gnaeus Babbius Philinus, aedile and pontifex, had this monument erected at his own expense, and he approved it in his official capacity as duovir.”<\/p>\nA monumental dedicatory inscription in Greek was found in Jerusalem during excavations in 1913–14, which once stood on the wall of a first-century AD<\/span> synagogue on Mt Ophel. It refers to a Theodotus, the son of a ruler of the synagogue named Vettenos, who built the synagogue. Since the name Vettenos is Roman, it may be that Theodotus was a Jewish slave who had been freed and given the Roman name of his master. If so, this inscription may have hung on the “synagogue of the Freedmen” in Jerusalem (Acts 6:9).<\/p>\nThe British Museum contains a portion of a broken arch that stood over an entrance into the Greek city of Thessalonica from the first century AD<\/span> until 1867, when it was torn down to provide stone for the repair of the vast city wall. The inscription begins: “In the time of the politarchs . . .” This is a rare word referring to Roman officials and is used in the book of Acts (Acts 17:6) in reference to city authorities of Thessalonica. This word is found nowhere else in Greek literature.<\/p>\nCorrespondence<\/p>\nIn the second millennium before Christ, it was common practice to write correspondence on small clay tablets. More than half a million have been found in Mari, Nuzi, Nineveh, Ebla, and elsewhere. Interesting examples of such correspondence may be found in a great number of clay tablets found at Tell el-Amarna in Upper Egypt. They were written in the Babylonian language using the cuneiform script during the time when Akhenaton was captivated with his reformation of Egyptian art and religion at his new capital Tell el-Amarna (Akhetaten), and Palestine and Syria were left to the mercy of marauders called Habiru in the documents. Many of these are written from cities in Canaan under attack and ask for help from the pharaoh, whose vassals they are at this time (late 14th century BC<\/span>). Some think that these Habiru were the ancient Hebrews who invaded the land under the direction of Joshua.<\/p>\nSometimes correspondence was written in ink on broken pieces of ceramic pottery (potsherds) called ostraca. In 1935, 18 of these were found in the excavations at Lachish in southern Israel. They are written in Hebrew and provide examples of the kind of script used by the Judeans in the time of Jeremiah. The language is essentially identical with the Hebrew of the OT. The letters were sent by Hosha’yahu, an officer in charge of a nearby town, to Ya’osh, the military governor of Lachish, during the invasion of Judea by the Babylonians, which ended in the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 586 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nEleven such potsherds were found in Masada, on the western shore of the Dead Sea, in excavations conducted by Yigael Yadin from 1963 to 1965. Masada was destroyed by the Roman army under the command of Flavius Silva in AD<\/span> 73. Nine hundred and sixty men, women, and children committed suicide rather than surrender to the Romans. Ten men were chosen to cut the throats of those who remained. They drew lots for the heartbreaking task, according to Josephus (War<\/em> 7.395), and Professor Yadin thinks the ostraca he found were the ones used in the drawing. One of them contained the name of Ben Yair, who was probably Eleazer ben Yair, the commander of the fortress.<\/p>\nMosaic Floor Decorations<\/p>\nIn the Roman and Byzantine periods it was popular to decorate the floors of basilicas, baths, synagogues, churches, and other public buildings with elaborate tesselation containing inscriptions and artwork. Excavation in 1972 disclosed a building in Caesarea Maritima with mosaic inscriptions in six floors throughout the structure. Two of them are the Greek text of Romans 13:3 set in a circular border. Another is a blessing on the one who enters and exits the room: “May the Lord bless your entry and your exit.” Two of them invoke the aid of Christ for people associated with the function and construction of the building. These were a part of a building that was destroyed in the seventh century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe floors of the synagogues at Tiberias-hamath, Beth Shan, Beth Alpha, Eshtemoa, Susiya, Hamath-gader, En-gedi, and others in Israel have inscriptions in Greek and Aramaic that usually refer to benefactors of the synagogue. A synagogue floor has been found in Naro, Tunisia, which contains a Latin inscription. In the Tiberias synagogue, Hebrew was used only for defining the astrological symbols that appear in the zodiac. Aramaic was used primarily for Halakah (religious rule or law), and Greek was principally used in honoring donors.<\/p>\nOne of the best-known mosaic floor inscriptions in churches was in Madaba, Jordan, where the oldest known map of Israel and Jordan was set into the floor in the sixth century AD<\/span>. The place-names of cities, geographical features, and passages of Scripture are given in Greek. Church floors typically contain dated or undated dedications, blessings, and Scripture quotations that appear in Aramaic, Coptic, Syriac, Latin, and Greek. Symbolism often accompanies the inscriptions, but in AD<\/span> 427 an edict was issued forbidding the use of crosses and other religious symbols on pavements so that they might not be stepped on. It is not clear how widespread this prohibition was.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Archaeology and the Bible; Pottery.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>INSCRIPTIONS<\/h3>\nTerm used to refer to writing in the ancient world that was done on a material of a permanent nature, such as stone or clay, rather than on ordinary and impermanent substances, such as papyri or parchment.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Introduction<\/p>\n• Inscriptions on Monuments<\/p>\n• Historical Records<\/p>\n• Official Announcements<\/p>\n• Dedications<\/p>\n• Correspondence<\/p>\n• Mosaic Floor Decorations<\/p>\nIntroduction<\/p>\nThere are occasional references to inscriptions in the Bible; for example, the Ten Commandments were inscribed on stone (Ex 31:18) and given to Moses, and later written by Joshua on stone and set up at Mt Ebal near Shechem (Jos 8:32). In the excavations at Shechem, G. E. Wright found a large stone prepared to receive an inscription that he dated to the time of Joshua on stratigraphic grounds. It may still be seen at the site. A message from the hand of God to the Babylonian king Belshazzar was inscribed on the walls of his palace (Dn 5:5, 24). Paul observed an altar with the inscription “To an unknown god” in the marketplace of Athens (Acts 17:23). The book of Revelation speaks of the names of the 12 tribes of the sons of Israel being inscribed on the gates of the heavenly city (Rv 21:12).<\/p>\nInscriptions in the ancient world can be found in almost any language and from any period of history: Egyptian, Babylonian, Persian, Greek, Latin, Hebrew, Aramaic, Nabatean, Moabite, and so on. It was once popular to argue that Moses could not have written the Pentateuch because writing had not been invented that early. Inscriptions found at the turquoise mines of Serabit el-Khadim dating to the 15th century BC<\/span> have disproven this allegation. In addition, it might be noted that clay tablets found at Ras Shamra by Claude Schaeffer and dated to about 1400 BC<\/span> demonstrate a considerable period of literary activity, as do the tablets at Ebla from approximately 1,000 years earlier.<\/p>\nInscriptions may be found in almost any position or place, but the most common locations are in the floors of synagogues, church buildings, and mosques; the pavements of forums; the walls of public buildings; dedicatory stones and statues; stelae and monumental plaques; tombs and sarcophagi; and Roman milestones. An exhaustive list is impossible, but a few representative samples will illustrate the various kinds of extant inscriptional material.<\/p>\nInscriptions on Monuments<\/p>\nThe Egyptian pharaoh Merneptah commemorated his victory over the Sea Peoples in the 13th century BC<\/span> by inscribing a black granite stele with a record of his victory. It contains the earliest known reference to Israel outside the land of Palestine: “Israel lies desolate.”<\/p>\nThe Israelite king Omri (1 Kgs 16:16-30) is referred to in a text carved in the Moabite language on a stone dating near the end of the reign of the Moabite king Mesha, about 830 BC<\/span>. It was found at Diban (OT Dibon) in 1868 and contains a record of the successful rebellion of the king against Israelite oppression.<\/p>\nAnother monumental inscription was found in Persia carved into the steep slope of Mt Behistun. It is a trilingual (Old Persian, Elamite, Akkadian) record of the exploits of Darius I, providing the key to unlocking the mystery of the cuneiform script in which several of these ancient languages were written.<\/p>\nThe Assyrian king Shalmaneser III left a record of his first six campaigns of conquest inscribed on a monolith found in 1861 at Kurkh on the Tigris. The stone is carved front and back in cuneiform that is written over a bas-relief of the king. This same king left a black stone obelisk, six and a half feet (2 meters) high, depicting his triumphs over several other kings, among whom is Jehu, king of Israel, depicted in the second panel from the top, prostrating himself before the Assyrian monarch. This is the earliest picture available of an Israelite and the only known representation of an Israelite king by a contemporary. The inscription above the picture reads, “The tribute of Jehu, son [descendant] of Omri . . .” It dates to the mid-ninth century BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nHistorical Records<\/p>\nFrequently in the region of Mesopotamia, ancient kings recorded important events or proclamations in stone or clay. A notable example is the clay prism containing the final edition of Sennacherib’s Annals dated to 691 BC<\/span>. It is hexagonal, 15 inches (38.1 centimeters) high and 6 inches (15.2 centimeters) wide, and written on all sides in cuneiform script. The inscription speaks of “Hezekiah the Jew (king of Judah), who did not submit to my yoke. . . . Like a caged bird, I shut him up in Jerusalem, his royal city” (cf. 2 Kgs 18; Is 36–39).<\/p>\nEven though no annals comparable to those produced by the Assyrian kings have survived among the Babylonians, we do have some chronicles written on clay tablets covering the years from 626 BC<\/span> to the fall of Babylon to Cyrus in 539. One of these, the Babylonian Chronicle, provides an exact date of March 16, 597 BC<\/span>, for the fall of Jerusalem to the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar (cf. 2 Kgs 24:10-17).<\/p>\nBabylon itself fell to Cyrus the Mede, king of Persia, in 539. The event is not only referred to in the Bible (Ezr 1:1-3) but is also described on a clay barrel-shaped cylinder nine inches (22.9 centimeters) in length, written in cuneiform script, during the reign of Cyrus. It refers to his policy that allowed captive nations to rebuild their cities and temples. This provides an explanation of his encouragement and financial help to the Jews in returning to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple of Solomon that Nebuchadnezzar had destroyed (Ezr 1:2-4).<\/p>\nEgyptian pharaohs were fond of publishing records of their exploits in hieroglyphic script on the walls of temples and tombs. These were usually incised into the stone and then painted. One of the most interesting is Shishak’s description of his invasion of the land of Israel incised on the southern wall of a court of the temple of Amon at Karnak. The inclusion of Megiddo, as well as other cities in Israel, among the more than 75 cities whose names can still be read adds historical interest to the biblical account of Shishak’s invasion and conquest of Jerusalem and “Judah’s fortified cities” (1 Kgs 14:25-26; 2 Chr 12:2-10). Archaeological finds confirm a destruction and burning of the city at this time.<\/p>\nOfficial Announcements<\/p>\nWhen an ancient monarch or public official wanted to publish an announcement with some degree of permanency, it would be carved in stone or set in mosaic. An inscription on a marble slab dating to the reign of Claudius (AD<\/span> 41–54) was found in 1878, originating in the city of Nazareth. It contains a warning against grave robbing or any other desecration of cemeteries. The penalty for such violation was declared to be death. The inscription may reflect some of the troubles Claudius had in Rome over the person of Christ (Suetonius, Claudius<\/em> 25) which led to the expulsion of Jews from the capital city (Acts 18). At issue must have been the resurrection of Christ as proclaimed in Rome.<\/p>\nAnnouncements were placed even in temples. Josephus referred to a small wall surrounding the Jewish temple in Jerusalem that contained slabs of stone at regular intervals giving warning in Greek and Latin to Gentiles entering the temple (War<\/em> 5.193-34; 6.125-26; Antiquities<\/em> 15.417). Two fragmentary examples have been found. One discovered by Clermont-Ganneau in 1871 reads: “No foreigner is to enter within the balustrade and embankment around the sanctuary. Whoever is caught will have himself to blame for his death which follows.” The Romans allowed the Jews to put anyone to death, even a Roman, who went beyond this barrier (War<\/em> 6.126).<\/p>\nAn important inscription commissioned by the emperor Claudius, was found at the beginning of the 20th century in Delphi, Greece. It was written in Greek and mentions Gallio as proconsul with a date that can be established as AD<\/span> 51–52 for his term of office. This Gallio is the proconsul before whom Paul was brought by the Jews of Corinth (Acts 18:12-17). It is therefore extremely important for establishing the date of Paul’s 18-month stay in Corinth, and an important pivotal date for Pauline chronology in general. The inscription is an imperial announcement to the citizens of Delphi regarding the need for increasing the population of the city with eminent people.<\/p>\nThe name Pontius Pilate has appeared in a Latin inscription carved into a stone found in the Roman theater at Caesarea Maritima on the coast of Israel. It refers to him, in partially mutilated words, as prefect and contains the name Tiberium, which designates a structure built in honor of the emperor Tiberius.<\/p>\nDedications<\/p>\nInscriptions were commonly placed on walls or floors of buildings or attached to some other structure dedicating the completed edifice. An inscription was cut into the wall of a long tunnel built by the Jewish king Hezekiah in Jerusalem when the tunnel was finished (2 Kgs 20:20). It is in Hebrew and is now in the Istanbul museum. One of the oldest inscriptions we have in that language, it describes the construction of the Siloam tunnel.<\/p>\nIn the city of Corinth in Greece there is a dedicatory inscription cut into the pavement of a plaza on the north side of the large theater. The abbreviated Latin inscription reads: Erastus pro aedilitate sua pecunia stravit<\/em> (“Erastus, in return for his aedileship, laid the pavement at his own expense”). The bronze has long since been removed from the letters deeply cut into the gray Acrocorinthian limestone. This is probably the same “Erastus, the city treasurer” mentioned by Paul in Romans 16:23. A similar inscription from the Corinthian agora of Paul’s day reads: “Gnaeus Babbius Philinus, aedile and pontifex, had this monument erected at his own expense, and he approved it in his official capacity as duovir.”<\/p>\nA monumental dedicatory inscription in Greek was found in Jerusalem during excavations in 1913–14, which once stood on the wall of a first-century AD<\/span> synagogue on Mt Ophel. It refers to a Theodotus, the son of a ruler of the synagogue named Vettenos, who built the synagogue. Since the name Vettenos is Roman, it may be that Theodotus was a Jewish slave who had been freed and given the Roman name of his master. If so, this inscription may have hung on the “synagogue of the Freedmen” in Jerusalem (Acts 6:9).<\/p>\nThe British Museum contains a portion of a broken arch that stood over an entrance into the Greek city of Thessalonica from the first century AD<\/span> until 1867, when it was torn down to provide stone for the repair of the vast city wall. The inscription begins: “In the time of the politarchs . . .” This is a rare word referring to Roman officials and is used in the book of Acts (Acts 17:6) in reference to city authorities of Thessalonica. This word is found nowhere else in Greek literature.<\/p>\nCorrespondence<\/p>\nIn the second millennium before Christ, it was common practice to write correspondence on small clay tablets. More than half a million have been found in Mari, Nuzi, Nineveh, Ebla, and elsewhere. Interesting examples of such correspondence may be found in a great number of clay tablets found at Tell el-Amarna in Upper Egypt. They were written in the Babylonian language using the cuneiform script during the time when Akhenaton was captivated with his reformation of Egyptian art and religion at his new capital Tell el-Amarna (Akhetaten), and Palestine and Syria were left to the mercy of marauders called Habiru in the documents. Many of these are written from cities in Canaan under attack and ask for help from the pharaoh, whose vassals they are at this time (late 14th century BC<\/span>). Some think that these Habiru were the ancient Hebrews who invaded the land under the direction of Joshua.<\/p>\nSometimes correspondence was written in ink on broken pieces of ceramic pottery (potsherds) called ostraca. In 1935, 18 of these were found in the excavations at Lachish in southern Israel. They are written in Hebrew and provide examples of the kind of script used by the Judeans in the time of Jeremiah. The language is essentially identical with the Hebrew of the OT. The letters were sent by Hosha’yahu, an officer in charge of a nearby town, to Ya’osh, the military governor of Lachish, during the invasion of Judea by the Babylonians, which ended in the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 586 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nEleven such potsherds were found in Masada, on the western shore of the Dead Sea, in excavations conducted by Yigael Yadin from 1963 to 1965. Masada was destroyed by the Roman army under the command of Flavius Silva in AD<\/span> 73. Nine hundred and sixty men, women, and children committed suicide rather than surrender to the Romans. Ten men were chosen to cut the throats of those who remained. They drew lots for the heartbreaking task, according to Josephus (War<\/em> 7.395), and Professor Yadin thinks the ostraca he found were the ones used in the drawing. One of them contained the name of Ben Yair, who was probably Eleazer ben Yair, the commander of the fortress.<\/p>\nMosaic Floor Decorations<\/p>\nIn the Roman and Byzantine periods it was popular to decorate the floors of basilicas, baths, synagogues, churches, and other public buildings with elaborate tesselation containing inscriptions and artwork. Excavation in 1972 disclosed a building in Caesarea Maritima with mosaic inscriptions in six floors throughout the structure. Two of them are the Greek text of Romans 13:3 set in a circular border. Another is a blessing on the one who enters and exits the room: “May the Lord bless your entry and your exit.” Two of them invoke the aid of Christ for people associated with the function and construction of the building. These were a part of a building that was destroyed in the seventh century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe floors of the synagogues at Tiberias-hamath, Beth Shan, Beth Alpha, Eshtemoa, Susiya, Hamath-gader, En-gedi, and others in Israel have inscriptions in Greek and Aramaic that usually refer to benefactors of the synagogue. A synagogue floor has been found in Naro, Tunisia, which contains a Latin inscription. In the Tiberias synagogue, Hebrew was used only for defining the astrological symbols that appear in the zodiac. Aramaic was used primarily for Halakah (religious rule or law), and Greek was principally used in honoring donors.<\/p>\nOne of the best-known mosaic floor inscriptions in churches was in Madaba, Jordan, where the oldest known map of Israel and Jordan was set into the floor in the sixth century AD<\/span>. The place-names of cities, geographical features, and passages of Scripture are given in Greek. Church floors typically contain dated or undated dedications, blessings, and Scripture quotations that appear in Aramaic, Coptic, Syriac, Latin, and Greek. Symbolism often accompanies the inscriptions, but in AD<\/span> 427 an edict was issued forbidding the use of crosses and other religious symbols on pavements so that they might not be stepped on. It is not clear how widespread this prohibition was.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Archaeology and the Bible; Pottery.<\/p>","summary_ro":"INSCRIPTIONS Term used to refer to writing in the ancient world that was done on a material of a permanent nature, such as stone or clay, rather than on ordinary and impermanent substances, such as papyri or parchment. Preview • Introduction • Inscriptions on Monuments • Historical Records • Official Announcements • Dedications • Correspondence • Mosaic Floor Decorations Introduction There are occasional references to inscriptions in the Bible; for example, the Ten Commandments were inscribed...","summary_en":"INSCRIPTIONS Term used to refer to writing in the ancient world that was done on a material of a permanent nature, such as stone or clay, rather than on ordinary and impermanent substances, such as papyri or parchment. Preview • Introduction • Inscriptions on Monuments • Historical Records • Official Announcements • Dedications • Correspondence • Mosaic Floor Decorations Introduction There are occasional references to inscriptions in the Bible; for example, the Ten Commandments were inscribed...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27216,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Nehemiah","title_en":"Book of Nehemiah","content_ro":"<h3>NEHEMIAH, Book of<\/h3>\nOne of the last of the Jewish historical books.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Historical Authenticity<\/p>\n• Chronology<\/p>\n• Significance<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nIn 597 BC<\/span> Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon took away the first exiles from Jerusalem. In 586 BC<\/span> the Babylonians returned, pillaged and burned the city and its temple, and took an estimated 60,000 to 80,000 Judeans into exile. The expatriates settled in various districts where they enjoyed a measure of freedom. They engaged in agriculture and commerce and in some instances acquired considerable wealth. The elders continued to function, prophets like Ezekiel ministered among the exiles, and resistance to religious apostasy was kept alive in the popular mind.<\/p>\nWith the appearance of the Persian king Cyrus the Great (559–530 BC<\/span>), the Jewish exiles’ prospects altered dramatically. Cyrus was a civilized and enlightened statesman, and within a short time after his conquest of Babylon, he issued an edict (Ezr 1:2-4) that granted the expatriates permission to return to their homeland. Two separate groups of exiles returned to Judah and built a new sanctuary in Jerusalem on the site of Solomon’s temple in 516 BC<\/span>. Then, under King Artaxerxes I (464–424 BC<\/span>), two separate groups returned from Babylon under Ezra (458 BC<\/span>) and Nehemiah (445 BC<\/span>), respectively. From this seedbed there sprang the theocratic people of Judah, the Jews, dedicated to the law of God, isolated from foreign influence, and centered in Jerusalem.<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nNehemiah’s personal memoirs form a considerable portion of the book that bears his name. These memoirs reveal a man of nobility and piety, who was compassionate, prudent, and patriotic. He was a man of generosity and fidelity, political acumen, and religious zeal, of total dedication to God, outstanding organizational ability, and dynamic leadership. At the same time Nehemiah possessed a capacity for ruthlessness when confronting the sin and waywardness of his compatriots (Neh 5:1-13) and the intrigues of powerful non-Jewish enemies (13:8, 28). Not surprisingly, then, a dispirited and dejected people awoke from their lethargic and apathetic state and responded to Nehemiah’s stringent approach to their situation (2:4; 13:14, 22, 31).<\/p>\nHistorical Authenticity<\/p>\nAccording to Josephus and other early writers, the books of Ezra and Nehemiah formed one book in the early Hebrew Bible entitled the book of Ezra. The earliest Hebrew manuscript in which the two books are divided is dated 1448, and modern Hebrew Bibles refer to them as the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. In manuscripts of the Greek OT (LXX) they also formed one book. Origen, in the beginning of the third century, is the first to attest to a division. There is general acknowledgment of the genuineness of the personal memoirs of Nehemiah, which constitute a major part of the book.<\/p>\nThe historical framework of the book is confirmed by papyri that were discovered between 1898 and 1908 in Elephantine, an island in the upper Nile. Here Psammetichus II (593–588 BC<\/span>) established a Jewish colony. The Elephantine papyri are well preserved, written in Aramaic, and are the fifth-century BC<\/span> literary remains of this Jewish colony of the Persian period.<\/p>\nThe most important item among the papyri is a copy of a letter sent to the Persian governor of Judah in 407 BC<\/span>. Three years earlier the Jewish temple in Elephantine had been destroyed. This disaster was the occasion of a letter to Jehohanan, the high priest in Jerusalem (see Neh 12:12-13). Now, in their letter to the governor in Judah, they asked permission to rebuild their temple and said that they had sent a similar request to Delaiah and Shelamiah, the sons of Sanballat (Nehemiah’s enemy, 2:10, 19; 4:1). The Elephantine papyri reveal that Sanballat was governor of the province of Samaria and that Tobiah was governor of the province of Ammon in Transjordan (2:10, 19). Here, then, is evidence that there was in Judah a twofold authority, civil and religious, and that the high priest of 408–407 BC<\/span> was Jehohanan (12:13).<\/p>\nChronology<\/p>\nThe question about whether Ezra or Nehemiah came to Jerusalem first has been hotly debated. There is no doubt that Nehemiah arrived in the city in 445 BC<\/span>. The objections to the view that Ezra came to Jerusalem 13 years earlier, in 458 BC<\/span>, raise questions concerning historical and textual data that are of such complexity as to preclude discussion of them here. However, achieving an understanding of the spiritual values of the book does not depend on a correct interpretation of the details of chronology. Arguments against the traditional chronology are neither altogether decisive, nor do they dispel the inherent complexities.<\/p>\nSignificance<\/p>\nWhen the exiles returned to Jerusalem, Judah had neither nationhood nor political status. Only one thing remained to them: their religion. They were the “remnant” of Yahweh’s chosen people, from whom would rise the new and glorious Israel. It was this vision that explains Nehemiah’s insistence that the Jewish people maintain the purity and exclusiveness of their religious faith and practice in order to rejuvenate their national life and rebuild the city walls (6:15), because this symbolized the racial and the religious purity of the people. He also insisted on separation from paganism, prohibition of marriage with non-Jews (13:23-28), and careful observance of the laws of the Sabbath (vv 15-22).<\/p>\nIt is, therefore, difficult to exaggerate the significance of the book of Nehemiah. Along with the book of Ezra, it furnishes the only consecutive Hebrew account of that period in Jewish history when the foundations of Judaism—with its inflexible segregation of the Jews and its passionate veneration of the Mosaic law—were laid. Of course, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi also contribute to knowledge of the period, but Nehemiah (with Ezra) provides a progressive narrative of this epoch. The return of the expatriates from Babylon to Jerusalem constitutes a resumption of the saving purposes of God for his ancient people, leading to the advent of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\nThe account of the return from Babylon under Nehemiah emphasizes the religious aspect of the community of repatriates in Jerusalem. But other, secondary factors should be noted: Nehemiah’s preoccupation with Judah’s political security and constitutional status to ensure its independence of Samaria; the rebuilding of the city walls; Nehemiah’s resettlements of population (7:4; 11:1-2); and his appointment to the governorship of the new province. However, there is no reference in the book of Nehemiah (or for that matter in Ezra) to a restoration to nationhood under a scion of the house of David—no mention of a Messiah, no allusion to the universal kingdom of God. Nehemiah manifests absolute loyalty to the Persian overlord who, while showing remarkable openness to Nehemiah’s request (2:4-9), still continues to levy taxes (5:4, 15).<\/p>\nThe repatriates retreated behind their city’s new walls and congregated around the second temple, completed in 516 BC<\/span>. “The book of the law of Moses” (8:1), recognized by the Persian overlord as the law of the land of Judah, became central to Jewish devotion and worship. Judaism was the product of the restoration, which became both a protective barrier against, and a wall of separation from, the Gentiles. Religious institutions initiated during the Babylonian exile and transplanted to Jerusalem took deep and firm root: the synagogue where the Law and the Prophets were read and the prayers were offered; the scribes who worked with single-minded devotion; and the Sanhedrin that continued to serve the new theocracy.<\/p>\nThe Jewish remnant of the fifth century BC<\/span> parallels the modern Christian church in that both share the challenge of spiritual reconstruction and renewal essential to God’s purposes.<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nIn the winter of 445 BC<\/span>, the Persian court was in Susa, the ancient capital of Elam (1:1). There Nehemiah occupied a position of honor and influence (2:1). From Jerusalem, a company of Judeans arrived, among them Nehemiah’s brother, whose description of conditions in Jerusalem horrified and grieved Nehemiah (1:2-4). Four months later, and after much prayer, he reached Jerusalem with an armed escort (1:5–2:11). After a three-day inspection of the situation, Nehemiah realized that rebuilding the walls would be his primary task (2:12–3:32).<\/p>\nAn outburst of new national spirit caused latent opposition to surface. Sanballat, Tobiah, and Geshem were powerful, resourceful, astute antagonists. Through ridicule and rumors, they insinuated that work on the walls was a form of rebellion against the king (2:19; 4:1-3, 7-14; 6:1-9). But Nehemiah countered every subterfuge and stratagem with prayer and with an adamant refusal to deviate from his goal. There was also hostility from traitors within the camp (6:10-19). Despite all opposition, Jerusalem’s walls were reconstructed (v 15) and rededicated amid enthusiastic celebration (12:27-43).<\/p>\nThe community’s response to the reading by Ezra, priest and scribe, of the law of Moses and to its interpretation by the Levites (8:1-8), was a complex response of sorrow for sin and rejoicing in God (vv 9-18); of fasting and prayer (9:1-37); of renewing the covenant (9:38–10:29); and of self-commitment to obey God’s commandments, ordinances, and statutes (10:30-39). Chapters 11 and 12 refer to various offices and duties, civil and religious, and the names of the people appointed to them. Then follows the decision to exclude all people of foreign descent from Judaism (13:1-3).<\/p>\nAt this juncture Nehemiah traveled to Susa to give an account of his stewardship; a further leave of absence being granted, he returned to Jerusalem to find that serious irregularities were again present. His enemy Tobiah and the priest Eliashib were embroiled (13:4-9); the people failed to provide the Levites with adequate maintenance (vv 10-14); the laws of the Sabbath were being violated (vv 15-22); and Jews were marrying non-Jews (vv 23-32). Due to the increase of intermarriage with foreigners, the offspring could not speak Hebrew (vv 23-25). The danger of assimilation was halted by enforcing a policy of exclusivism.<\/p>\nThe book of Nehemiah ends rather abruptly with a description of his vigorous and ruthless handling of these deviations from the newly established principles and precepts of Judaism.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Ezra, Book of; Ezra (Person) #1; Israel, History of; Judaism; Nehemiah (Person) #3; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NEHEMIAH, Book of<\/h3>\nOne of the last of the Jewish historical books.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Historical Authenticity<\/p>\n• Chronology<\/p>\n• Significance<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nIn 597 BC<\/span> Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon took away the first exiles from Jerusalem. In 586 BC<\/span> the Babylonians returned, pillaged and burned the city and its temple, and took an estimated 60,000 to 80,000 Judeans into exile. The expatriates settled in various districts where they enjoyed a measure of freedom. They engaged in agriculture and commerce and in some instances acquired considerable wealth. The elders continued to function, prophets like Ezekiel ministered among the exiles, and resistance to religious apostasy was kept alive in the popular mind.<\/p>\nWith the appearance of the Persian king Cyrus the Great (559–530 BC<\/span>), the Jewish exiles’ prospects altered dramatically. Cyrus was a civilized and enlightened statesman, and within a short time after his conquest of Babylon, he issued an edict (Ezr 1:2-4) that granted the expatriates permission to return to their homeland. Two separate groups of exiles returned to Judah and built a new sanctuary in Jerusalem on the site of Solomon’s temple in 516 BC<\/span>. Then, under King Artaxerxes I (464–424 BC<\/span>), two separate groups returned from Babylon under Ezra (458 BC<\/span>) and Nehemiah (445 BC<\/span>), respectively. From this seedbed there sprang the theocratic people of Judah, the Jews, dedicated to the law of God, isolated from foreign influence, and centered in Jerusalem.<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nNehemiah’s personal memoirs form a considerable portion of the book that bears his name. These memoirs reveal a man of nobility and piety, who was compassionate, prudent, and patriotic. He was a man of generosity and fidelity, political acumen, and religious zeal, of total dedication to God, outstanding organizational ability, and dynamic leadership. At the same time Nehemiah possessed a capacity for ruthlessness when confronting the sin and waywardness of his compatriots (Neh 5:1-13) and the intrigues of powerful non-Jewish enemies (13:8, 28). Not surprisingly, then, a dispirited and dejected people awoke from their lethargic and apathetic state and responded to Nehemiah’s stringent approach to their situation (2:4; 13:14, 22, 31).<\/p>\nHistorical Authenticity<\/p>\nAccording to Josephus and other early writers, the books of Ezra and Nehemiah formed one book in the early Hebrew Bible entitled the book of Ezra. The earliest Hebrew manuscript in which the two books are divided is dated 1448, and modern Hebrew Bibles refer to them as the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. In manuscripts of the Greek OT (LXX) they also formed one book. Origen, in the beginning of the third century, is the first to attest to a division. There is general acknowledgment of the genuineness of the personal memoirs of Nehemiah, which constitute a major part of the book.<\/p>\nThe historical framework of the book is confirmed by papyri that were discovered between 1898 and 1908 in Elephantine, an island in the upper Nile. Here Psammetichus II (593–588 BC<\/span>) established a Jewish colony. The Elephantine papyri are well preserved, written in Aramaic, and are the fifth-century BC<\/span> literary remains of this Jewish colony of the Persian period.<\/p>\nThe most important item among the papyri is a copy of a letter sent to the Persian governor of Judah in 407 BC<\/span>. Three years earlier the Jewish temple in Elephantine had been destroyed. This disaster was the occasion of a letter to Jehohanan, the high priest in Jerusalem (see Neh 12:12-13). Now, in their letter to the governor in Judah, they asked permission to rebuild their temple and said that they had sent a similar request to Delaiah and Shelamiah, the sons of Sanballat (Nehemiah’s enemy, 2:10, 19; 4:1). The Elephantine papyri reveal that Sanballat was governor of the province of Samaria and that Tobiah was governor of the province of Ammon in Transjordan (2:10, 19). Here, then, is evidence that there was in Judah a twofold authority, civil and religious, and that the high priest of 408–407 BC<\/span> was Jehohanan (12:13).<\/p>\nChronology<\/p>\nThe question about whether Ezra or Nehemiah came to Jerusalem first has been hotly debated. There is no doubt that Nehemiah arrived in the city in 445 BC<\/span>. The objections to the view that Ezra came to Jerusalem 13 years earlier, in 458 BC<\/span>, raise questions concerning historical and textual data that are of such complexity as to preclude discussion of them here. However, achieving an understanding of the spiritual values of the book does not depend on a correct interpretation of the details of chronology. Arguments against the traditional chronology are neither altogether decisive, nor do they dispel the inherent complexities.<\/p>\nSignificance<\/p>\nWhen the exiles returned to Jerusalem, Judah had neither nationhood nor political status. Only one thing remained to them: their religion. They were the “remnant” of Yahweh’s chosen people, from whom would rise the new and glorious Israel. It was this vision that explains Nehemiah’s insistence that the Jewish people maintain the purity and exclusiveness of their religious faith and practice in order to rejuvenate their national life and rebuild the city walls (6:15), because this symbolized the racial and the religious purity of the people. He also insisted on separation from paganism, prohibition of marriage with non-Jews (13:23-28), and careful observance of the laws of the Sabbath (vv 15-22).<\/p>\nIt is, therefore, difficult to exaggerate the significance of the book of Nehemiah. Along with the book of Ezra, it furnishes the only consecutive Hebrew account of that period in Jewish history when the foundations of Judaism—with its inflexible segregation of the Jews and its passionate veneration of the Mosaic law—were laid. Of course, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi also contribute to knowledge of the period, but Nehemiah (with Ezra) provides a progressive narrative of this epoch. The return of the expatriates from Babylon to Jerusalem constitutes a resumption of the saving purposes of God for his ancient people, leading to the advent of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\nThe account of the return from Babylon under Nehemiah emphasizes the religious aspect of the community of repatriates in Jerusalem. But other, secondary factors should be noted: Nehemiah’s preoccupation with Judah’s political security and constitutional status to ensure its independence of Samaria; the rebuilding of the city walls; Nehemiah’s resettlements of population (7:4; 11:1-2); and his appointment to the governorship of the new province. However, there is no reference in the book of Nehemiah (or for that matter in Ezra) to a restoration to nationhood under a scion of the house of David—no mention of a Messiah, no allusion to the universal kingdom of God. Nehemiah manifests absolute loyalty to the Persian overlord who, while showing remarkable openness to Nehemiah’s request (2:4-9), still continues to levy taxes (5:4, 15).<\/p>\nThe repatriates retreated behind their city’s new walls and congregated around the second temple, completed in 516 BC<\/span>. “The book of the law of Moses” (8:1), recognized by the Persian overlord as the law of the land of Judah, became central to Jewish devotion and worship. Judaism was the product of the restoration, which became both a protective barrier against, and a wall of separation from, the Gentiles. Religious institutions initiated during the Babylonian exile and transplanted to Jerusalem took deep and firm root: the synagogue where the Law and the Prophets were read and the prayers were offered; the scribes who worked with single-minded devotion; and the Sanhedrin that continued to serve the new theocracy.<\/p>\nThe Jewish remnant of the fifth century BC<\/span> parallels the modern Christian church in that both share the challenge of spiritual reconstruction and renewal essential to God’s purposes.<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nIn the winter of 445 BC<\/span>, the Persian court was in Susa, the ancient capital of Elam (1:1). There Nehemiah occupied a position of honor and influence (2:1). From Jerusalem, a company of Judeans arrived, among them Nehemiah’s brother, whose description of conditions in Jerusalem horrified and grieved Nehemiah (1:2-4). Four months later, and after much prayer, he reached Jerusalem with an armed escort (1:5–2:11). After a three-day inspection of the situation, Nehemiah realized that rebuilding the walls would be his primary task (2:12–3:32).<\/p>\nAn outburst of new national spirit caused latent opposition to surface. Sanballat, Tobiah, and Geshem were powerful, resourceful, astute antagonists. Through ridicule and rumors, they insinuated that work on the walls was a form of rebellion against the king (2:19; 4:1-3, 7-14; 6:1-9). But Nehemiah countered every subterfuge and stratagem with prayer and with an adamant refusal to deviate from his goal. There was also hostility from traitors within the camp (6:10-19). Despite all opposition, Jerusalem’s walls were reconstructed (v 15) and rededicated amid enthusiastic celebration (12:27-43).<\/p>\nThe community’s response to the reading by Ezra, priest and scribe, of the law of Moses and to its interpretation by the Levites (8:1-8), was a complex response of sorrow for sin and rejoicing in God (vv 9-18); of fasting and prayer (9:1-37); of renewing the covenant (9:38–10:29); and of self-commitment to obey God’s commandments, ordinances, and statutes (10:30-39). Chapters 11 and 12 refer to various offices and duties, civil and religious, and the names of the people appointed to them. Then follows the decision to exclude all people of foreign descent from Judaism (13:1-3).<\/p>\nAt this juncture Nehemiah traveled to Susa to give an account of his stewardship; a further leave of absence being granted, he returned to Jerusalem to find that serious irregularities were again present. His enemy Tobiah and the priest Eliashib were embroiled (13:4-9); the people failed to provide the Levites with adequate maintenance (vv 10-14); the laws of the Sabbath were being violated (vv 15-22); and Jews were marrying non-Jews (vv 23-32). Due to the increase of intermarriage with foreigners, the offspring could not speak Hebrew (vv 23-25). The danger of assimilation was halted by enforcing a policy of exclusivism.<\/p>\nThe book of Nehemiah ends rather abruptly with a description of his vigorous and ruthless handling of these deviations from the newly established principles and precepts of Judaism.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Ezra, Book of; Ezra (Person) #1; Israel, History of; Judaism; Nehemiah (Person) #3; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NEHEMIAH, Book of One of the last of the Jewish historical books. Preview • Background • Author • Historical Authenticity • Chronology • Significance • Content Background In 597 BC Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon took away the first exiles from Jerusalem. In 586 BC the Babylonians returned, pillaged and burned the city and its temple, and took an estimated 60,000 to 80,000 Judeans into exile. The expatriates settled in various districts where they enjoyed a measure of freedom. They engaged in agric...","summary_en":"NEHEMIAH, Book of One of the last of the Jewish historical books. Preview • Background • Author • Historical Authenticity • Chronology • Significance • Content Background In 597 BC Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon took away the first exiles from Jerusalem. In 586 BC the Babylonians returned, pillaged and burned the city and its temple, and took an estimated 60,000 to 80,000 Judeans into exile. The expatriates settled in various districts where they enjoyed a measure of freedom. They engaged in agric...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37013,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Temple","title_en":"Temple","content_ro":"<h3>TEMPLE<\/h3>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Solomon’s Temple<\/p>\n• Zerubbabel’s Temple<\/p>\n• Herod’s Temple<\/p>\n• Significance of the Temple in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Significance of the Temple in the New Testament<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nDavid’s capture of Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:6-9) and his designation of it as the nation’s capital is one of the great masterstrokes of history. Occupied by the Jebusites, it was a pocket of neutral territory between the northern and southern sections of David’s united kingdom and was politically acceptable to both. Jerusalem was then established as the national religious center by the return of the ark, which had been largely neglected since its capture by the Philistines (2 Sm 6:1-17). Henceforth, God’s choices of both David and Jerusalem (“Mount Zion”) were indissolubly linked (Ps 78:67-72).<\/p>\nDavid’s great impulse was to build an adequate dwelling place for Israel’s God. The idea was initially approved by Nathan the prophet (2 Sm 7:1-3), but God revealed otherwise to him, and he conveyed the divine purpose to David (vv 4-17). In a significant wordplay, David was informed that, while he was not to build a house (temple) for God, God would build a house (dynasty) for him. David was not the one to build a temple because of the numerous wars during his reign; the temple would instead be built by his son (1 Kgs 5:3; 1 Chr 22:7-8; 28:3). Nevertheless, David enthusiastically amassed most of the necessary finances and materials and drew up the blueprints for the temple (1 Chr 22:3-5, 14; 28:2, 11-19). He also purchased the temple site (21:25).<\/p>\nSolomon’s Temple<\/p>\n\n<h5>Date<\/h5>\nConstruction commenced in Solomon’s fourth year, about 966 BC<\/span>, and took seven years to complete (1 Kgs 6:1, 38). Everything necessary for the temple, including the workers, had been prepared by David (1 Chr 28:21). The temple evidently had first priority among Solomon’s building schemes, as he built his own palace later (1 Kgs 7:1).<\/p>\n<h5>Superintendents and Workforce<\/h5>\nThe principal architect for the bronze furnishings was Huram (Hebrew “Hiram”), whose father was a metal craftsman from Tyre and whose mother was an Israelite (1 Kgs 7:13-14). Cedar for the temple came from Lebanon and was felled and transported by the skilled woodsmen of another Hiram—the king of Tyre, Solomon’s ally (5:5-9). Thirty thousand Israelites, divided into three groups, were drafted to assist at Lebanon. Each group was on duty for one month in three. For the stonework, Solomon conscripted 153,600 foreigners resident in Israel to provide a self-contained group of carriers, stone cutters, and supervisors (vv 15-17; 2 Chr 2:17-18). Possibly the “men of Gebal,” with their specialized skills, formed yet another group (1 Kgs 5:18). Building the temple was obviously a national project of immense size and effort. In order to preserve the sanctity of the site and to eliminate noise, the masonry and carpentry were not done at the temple site (6:7).<\/p>\n<h5>Description<\/h5>\nThe details given in the Bible are sufficiently clear for us to make a reasonably accurate description of the temple. The accounts in Kings and Chronicles are supplemented by Ezekiel’s depiction of the temple (see below), which was broadly based on his knowledge of the Jerusalem temple (Ez 40–48).<\/p>\nThe side rooms probably rested on a foundation or platform that was separate from the temple itself (1 Kgs 6:5, 10; cf. Ez 41:8-9) and were arranged in three stories, each seven and a half feet (2.3 meters) high, extending around the whole building except for the porch side. Each successive story was one and a half feet (.5 meter) wider than the one below, these dimensions coinciding with the thickness of the side wall of the Holy Place. The ground floor rooms were seven and a half feet (2.3 meters) wide; the first story was nine feet (2.7 meters), and the second was ten and a half feet (3.2 meters). Access to the upper stories was possibly by winding staircases (1 Kgs 6:8). There is some uncertainty concerning the location of the entrances; there may have been one on either side, but only one is mentioned (v 8). As in Ezekiel’s temple (Ez 40:17, 28), there were two adjacent courts, an inner and an outer (1 Kgs 6:36; 7:12), but no dimensions are given for these. The inner court, or “court of the priests,” being next to the temple itself, was also called “the upper court” (2 Chr 4:9; Jer 36:10). The wall of the inner court was made of three layers of hewn stone held together by a layer of cedar beams (1 Kgs 6:36), and the doors of both courts were sheathed in bronze (2 Chr 4:9). The palace buildings were within the outer court area, probably with a private passageway between the palace and the temple that was later closed during the reign of Ahaz (2 Chr 4:9, 12; 2 Kgs 16:18).<\/p>\nThe temple itself was 90 feet (27.4 meters) long, 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide, and 45 feet (13.7 meters) high (1 Kgs 6:2), with a porch or vestibule 15 feet (4.6 meters) deep stretching across the width. Probably the vestibule was on the east end of the temple, thus corresponding with the orientation of Ezekiel’s temple (Ez 43:1; 44:1). The larger part of the main sanctuary, next to the porch, formed the Holy Place, which was 60 feet (18.3 meters) long (1 Kgs 6:17). Beyond this was the innermost sanctuary, the Holy of Holies (or the “Most Holy Place“), which was a perfect cube of 30 feet (9.1 meters). All the interior walls were paneled with cedar decorated with flower patterns, cherubim, and palm trees, so that no masonry was visible. The walls of both inner and outer sanctuaries were “overlaid” (v 22) with pure gold. Actually the gold decoration may have been inlaid, on the basis that a solid sheath of gold would spoil the natural beauty of the wood carving. The floor was made of cypress planks (v 15). Narrow windows set high in the walls above the level of the three-storied outer chambers provided light in the Holy Place (v 4). The ceiling was paneled with beams and planks of cedar. No detail is given about the exterior roofing, but probably the contemporary technique was employed, using a wooden, latticelike framework into which a waterproof, limestone plaster was packed and rolled.<\/p>\nThe outer porch was apparently an open space, since no doors are mentioned. Access into the Holy Place was by double doors, both hinged to fold back on themselves, made of cypress and decorated in exactly the same way as the interior walls (vv 34-35). The doorposts were made of olive wood. Within the Holy Place was the altar of incense made of cedar overlaid with gold; it was placed centrally before the Holy of Holies. Also in the Holy Place were a table for the bread of the Presence of God, ten lampstands arranged in two groups of five on either side, and various utensils required for maintaining the priestly duties (1 Kgs 7:48-50). All these were made or overlaid with gold. The ten tables, arranged five on each side, were presumably for the utensils and accessories (2 Chr 4:8).<\/p>\nBetween the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies was a double door made of olive wood, carved with cherubim, palm trees, and flower patterns and overlaid with gold. Inside these doors, veiling still further the Holy of Holies, was a blue, purple, and crimson curtain, made of the finest fabrics and ornamented with cherubim (2 Chr 3:14).<\/p>\nIn the Holy of Holies were two cherubim, each 15 feet (4.6 meters) high and made of olive wood covered with gold (1 Kgs 6:23-28). Each wing measured seven and a half feet (2.3 meters). A wing of each touched the side walls; the other wings met at the center of the room. The divine throne had been considerably less impressive in the tabernacle, where a wing of each cherubim fused into the mercy seat above the ark (Ex 25:17-22). In Solomon’s temple, the ark of the covenant was placed below the forward-facing cherubim, the symbolic protectors. The ark, the only major item surviving from the Mosaic tabernacle, still contained the tablets of the law, but the pot of manna and Aaron’s rod were missing (1 Kgs 8:9).<\/p>\nImmediately outside the temple and on either side of the vestibule were two hollow bronze pillars (1 Kgs 7:15-20; 2 Chr 3:15-17). According to the book of Kings, these pillars were 27 feet (8.2 meters) high, with a circumference of 18 feet (5.5 meters). The metal itself was about four inches (10.2 centimeters) thick. The pillars were surmounted by bronze, lily-shaped capitals seven and a half feet (2.3 meters) high and six feet (1.8 meters) wide, intricately adorned with a chain latticework that supported two rows of pomegranates. The total weight must have been enormous, and their size is attested to by Jeremiah, who notes that the Babylonians had to break them in pieces before transporting them to Babylon (Jer 52:17, 21-23).<\/p>\nThe bronze altar of sacrifice in front of the vestibule is not listed in the specifications of 1 Kings 7. However, it is mentioned in the temple dedication and subsequently (1 Kgs 8:22, 54, 64; 9:25) and clearly stood in the inner court. Its dimensions were 30 feet (9.1 meters) square and 15 feet (4.6 meters) high (2 Chr 4:1). In view of its weight, it was probably cast in sections at Solomon’s foundry in the Jordan Rift valley (vv 17-18) and then transported to the temple site for assembly.<\/p>\nProbably the most striking article in the inner court was the “molten (bronze) sea,” a huge, round tank made of bronze 3 inches (8 centimeters) thick, 7½ feet (2.3 meters) high, and 15 feet (4.6 meters) in diameter (1 Kgs 7:23-26). Its rim flared out like a lily (2 Chr 4:2-5). The tank was supported on 12 bronze oxen, four on each side, and had two rows of decoration, possibly gourds or pomegranates, under the brim. Its capacity was between 10,000 and 12,000 gallons (37,850–45,420 liters). The bronze sea was used for priestly ablutions (v 6). Presumably this involved a platform of sorts, for the brim of this vast basin would have been about 15 feet (4.6 meters) above ground level.<\/p>\nHiram also constructed ten large lavers, mounted on moveable stands and placed in two groups of five, on the north and south sides of the inner court (1 Kgs 7:27-39). Basically the stands were bronze boxes, six feet (1.8 meters) square and four and a half feet (1.4 meters) high with a nine-inch (22.9-centimeter) rim around the top edge. Each corner was attached to braced posts to which the axles were fixed. The four-spoked wheels were 27 inches (68.6 centimeters) high. Into each stand there fitted a laver containing approximately 220 gallons (832.7 liters) of water, used for washing sacrificial animals (2 Chr 4:6). Probably each was adjacent to one of the ten tables that would be used to flay and otherwise prepare the sacrifices (v 8). Supplementary items, such as pots, shovels, and basins, all made of bronze, were also manufactured (1 Kgs 7:40, 45).<\/p>\n<h5>The Dedication<\/h5>\nEleven months elapsed between the completion of the temple and its dedication (1 Kgs 6:38; 8:2), during which time the major items of furniture were set in place. The dedication itself took place in the seventh month, presumably in connection with the Feast of Tabernacles and the Day of Atonement (Lv 23:23-36). The ark of the covenant was brought into its final resting place (1 Kgs 8:3-4), but the inner court proved inadequate for the vast numbers of beasts sacrificed (1 Kgs 8:62-64; 2 Chr 7:7).<\/p>\nThe temple employed the most sophisticated building techniques of the age, and no expense had been spared in construction, ornamentation, or equipment. Yet Solomon readily confessed its utter inadequacy to house the eternal God (1 Kgs 8:27). His prayer also underlined Israel’s propensity to forsake the Lord, contrasting the nation with God, who, though a just judge, was also merciful and faithful. The climax of the proceedings came when fire from heaven consumed the sacrifices and the shekinah glory filled the temple (2 Chr 7:1-3).<\/p>\n<h5>Later History<\/h5>\nLike most ancient shrines, the temple became a treasury for national wealth and as such was often the target for attack. Shishak of Egypt plundered it within five years of Solomon’s death (1 Kgs 14:25-38). Shortly afterward, King Asa (910–869 BC<\/span>) depleted its gold and silver treasures to buy Syrian help against his oppressor, Baasha (908–886 BC<\/span>), king of Israel (15:16-19). Joash, the king of Judah (835–796 BC<\/span>) who was concealed in the temple from the vicious Athaliah during his youth (2 Kgs 11), made provision for its repair after protesting the priests’ embezzlement of gifts (12:4-16). But after the death of Jehoiada, the high priest, Joash himself was adversely influenced by his nobles (2 Chr 24:15-19). As punishment for his apostasy, the Lord allowed the Syrians to attack, and Joash used the temple treasures to buy them off (2 Kgs 12:17-18). Hardly had provision for replacements been made, when Jehoash of Israel (798–782 BC<\/span>), having shattered the arrogant pride of Amaziah of Judah (796–767 BC<\/span>), again stripped the temple (14:8-14). Later, King Ahaz (735-715 BC<\/span>) used the remaining resources of the temple to enlist support from the Assyrians (16:7-9), though he eventually became completely subservient to them.<\/p>\n Then Hezekiah (715–686 BC<\/span>), one of the great reforming kings, thoroughly renovated the temple and restored worship after it had fallen into disuse during theclosing years of Ahaz (2 Chr 29:1-19; 31:9-21). Manasseh (696–642 BC<\/span>), however, completely reversed his father’s policy, bringing the practices of Canaanite and Mesopotamian worship into the temple (2 Kgs 21:3-7). His conversion experience, which probably occurred late in his reign and resulted in certain reform measures in the temple (2 Chr 33:12-19), was not far-reaching enough to escape the final judgment that his reign was the dark spot of Judah’s history (2 Kgs 21:10-16).<\/p>\nManasseh’s grandson Josiah (640–609 BC<\/span>), was the second great reforming king. He organized the repair of the temple in 622 BC<\/span>, during which the lost Book of the Law (almost certainly the book of Deuteronomy) was discovered (2 Kgs 22:3-13). As a result, Josiah’s reformation gained a new dimension and sense of urgency (22:14–23:3). The reformation included a thorough purge of all idolatrous elements from the temple (23:4-12) and the restoration of the traditional festivals. Sadly, however, Josiah’s reformation died with him, and Judah’s downward slide continued under the apostate Jehoiakim (609–598 BC<\/span>). It was probably during this time that Jeremiah preached his famous temple sermon foretelling its destruction (Jer 7:1–8:3; 26:1-19), which alienated him from the religious leaders. In Nebuchadnezzar’s reprisal raid following Jehoiakim’s rebellion in 601 BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 24:1-4), Jerusalem was captured (596 BC<\/span>) and many of the temple treasures were transported to Babylon (2 Chr 36:7). The temple itself appears to have escaped damage, but when Judah again rebelled under Zedekiah (597–586 BC<\/span>), the temple was demolished (2 Kgs 25:8-10). The remaining temple treasures were taken away.<\/p>\nZerubbabel’s Temple<\/p>\n<h5>Construction<\/h5>\nAlthough the temple was devastated, the site still remained as a place of pilgrimage during the exile (Jer 41:4-5). In 538 BC<\/span> the Persian king, Cyrus, in pursuance of a liberal policy diametrically opposed to that of the earlier empires, permitted the Jews to return from exile. And he authorized the rebuilding of the temple, financing it from the Persian treasury.<\/p>\nIn the book of Ezra, the decree of authorization has been preserved in two forms: the general proclamation (Ezr 1:2-4) and a more prosaic memorandum in the national archives indicating the main temple specifications and the amount of promised Persian help (6:1-5). Probably only a minority of the Jews opted to leave the relative comforts of Mesopotamia for the dangers of a long journey to their desolated homeland. According to the book of Ezra, 42,360 dedicated individuals and their servants (2:64-65) responded under the leadership of Sheshbazzar (1:8-11; 5:14-16) and Zerubbabel (2:2; 3:2, 8; 4:2). With great enthusiasm, the altar was rebuilt on the temple site and the traditional pattern of worship reestablished (3:1-6). Utilizing the grant from Persia as well as their own freewill gifts (2:68-69; 3:7), the Jews began to plan the second temple and lay its foundations (3:7-13). The initial impetus quickly died as a result of local opposition (4:1-4, 24), selfish preoccupation, and crop failures (Hg 1:2-11). In 520 BC<\/span> (Ezr 4:24; Hg 1:1; Zec 1:1), inspired by the prophets Haggai and Zechariah, the Jews under Zerubbabel and Joshua the high priest commenced rebuilding. Work continued in spite of official suspicion, if not direct opposition, and the temple was completed and dedicated in 515 BC<\/span> (Ezr 5:1–6:22).<\/p>\nLittle is known of the physical features of Zerubbabel’s temple. The inference that it was vastly inferior to Solomon’s temple (Hg 2:3) probably relates to an early stage in the building operation. In fact, the second temple stood for over 500 years. The dimensions noted in Ezra 6:3 are incomplete; the new temple was no doubt about the same size as its predecessor and was probably built on the same foundation. The construction technique appears to have followed the method of the original, with layers of timber providing a framework for sections of masonry (v 4). Clearly, there was auxiliary accommodation, probably like the side rooms of Solomon’s temple (Ezr 8:29; Neh 12:44; 13:4-5). If Persian aid was forthcoming as promised (Ezr 6:8-12), the second temple was a more splendid, substantial structure than is generally supposed.<\/p>\n<h5>Later History<\/h5>\nSeveral references in the Apocrypha, pseudepigrapha, rabbinic writings, and the historian Josephus help to illumine the history of the temple and give more detail on its structure and furnishings. Josephus, quoting from Hecateus of Abdera (fourth century BC<\/span>), states that the temple was a large building in an enclosure about 500 feet by 150 feet (152.4 meters by 45.7 meters), surrounded by a stone wall, with an altar of unhewn stones the same size as Solomon’s bronze altar (cf. 2 Chr 4:1). Within the sanctuary was a golden altar of incense and a lampstand, the flame of which burned continually. Josephus also notes that Antiochus III (223–187 BC<\/span>) financially supported the temple when the Seleucids displaced the Ptolemies as masters of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nBen Sirach, early in the second century BC<\/span>, commended Simon, the son of Onias the high priest, for his work in fortifying and repairing the temple area. First Maccabees provides valuable evidence of the fate of the temple during the oppression under Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164 BC<\/span>). The books of the Maccabees recount the defilement of the altar of burnt offering (1 Macc 1:54) and the plundering of the golden lampstand, altar of incense, table of offering, veil, and other treasures (2 Macc 5:15-16; 6:2-4). When the temple was recaptured and restored, the victorious Maccabees replaced the items taken by the Seleucids, except for the altar of sacrifice, which was considered so polluted that it was dismantled and replaced by a new one constructed of unhewn stone (1 Macc 4:36-61; 2 Macc 10:1-9). Clearly the temple area was used as a fortress, both in opposition to the Seleucid garrison that was maintained in Jerusalem in the Maccabean period and in the conflicts of the later Hasmonean period. When Pompey captured Jerusalem about 63 BC<\/span>, he entered the temple to assert his authority but took no plunder, thus showing respect for it.<\/p>\nThe history of Zerubbabel’s temple closed when Herod, having carefully preserved it from any major damage when he gained control of Jerusalem with Roman aid in 37 BC<\/span>, began to dismantle it about 21 BC<\/span> in preparation for the construction of his own grand temple.<\/p>\nHerod’s Temple<\/p>\nApart from over 100 references in the NT, our main sources of information about Herod’s temple come from the Jewish historian Josephus and from the Middoth (a section of the Jewish rabbinic writings). There are considerable differences in detail between the two, which rules out any dogmatic interpretation in attempted reconstructions. Since Josephus was contemporary with the temple (he was born about AD<\/span> 37 and died early in the second century), he is probably more reliable than the Middoth, which, dating from about AD<\/span> 150, appears to exaggerate occasionally. Archaeological research has been helpful in determining the positions of the outer walls and gates.<\/p>\nHerod’s motive in building his temple was political rather than religious. As an Idumean, he wished to placate his Jewish subjects by constructing a sanctuary as magnificent as Solomon’s. Possible fears that the site might be profaned, or that the existing temple might be demolished and never rebuilt, were allayed by the training of 1,000 priests as masons and the amassing of materials before the work commenced. Herod’s temple followed the tripartite plan of its predecessors, although its porch was much larger. It was built in the contemporary Greco-Roman architectural style and must therefore be regarded as distinct from Zerubbabel’s temple. Work began in 20 BC<\/span>, and while the main sanctuary was quickly erected (it was in full operation within ten years), the total project was not completed until AD<\/span> 64, only six years before it was destroyed by the Romans.<\/p>\nHerod first prepared the site by clearing and leveling an area approximately 500 yards (457.2 meters) from north to south and about 325 yards (297.2 meters) from east to west. This involved cutting away sections of rock in some areas and building up with rubble in others. Considerable sections of the enclosing wall, constructed on stone blocks averaging about 15 feet (4.6 meters) long by 4 feet (1.2 meters) high, still survive. Some of the stones in the corners of the south wall weigh up to 70 tons (63.5 metric tons).<\/p>\nThe sanctuary itself seems to have been based on the same dimensions as Solomon’s temple. It was divided into the Holy Place, which was 60 feet (18.3 meters) long, 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide, and 60 feet high, and the Holy of Holies, which was 30 feet square. There was no furniture within the Holy of Holies, which was separated by a veil from the Holy Place. The Holy Place contained the seven-branch lampstand, the table for the bread of the Presence, and the incense altar. The main divergence from Solomon’s temple was the imposing porch, 150 feet (45.7 meters) in width and height. Outside was a doorway approximately 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide by 40 feet (12.2 meters) high, with an inner doorway about half that size leading into the sanctuary. By allowing empty rooms over the Holy of Holies and the Holy Place, there was a uniform roof height of 150 feet (45.7 meters). Golden spikes on the roof discouraged birds from alighting and defiling the structure. Like its predecessors, the temple was oriented toward the east and was surrounded on the other sides by three stories of rooms rising to a height of 60 feet (18.3 meters). The stone used was the local white stone, cut in huge blocks and highly polished.<\/p>\nAccess to the porch was by a flight of 12 steps from the Court of the Priests. Centrally placed before the porch and 33 feet (10.1 meters) away was the altar of sacrifice. Made of unhewn stone, it was a multilevel construction 15 feet (4.6 meters) high and about 48 feet (14.6 meters) square at its base. Male Israelites were allowed into this area once a year, during the Feast of the Tabernacles, to walk around the altar of sacrifice. Otherwise, they were restricted to the Court of Israel. To the east of the Court of Israel, and separated from it by a flight of 15 steps and by the ornate Great Gate, made of Corinthian bronze, was the Court of the Women. Here the offertory chests for temple expenses were located (Mk 12:41-44). The next court was the large, lower, outer Court of the Gentiles, which surrounded the inner courts and was separated from them by a balustrade and a series of warning notices. Two of these have been excavated, written in Latin and Greek and forbidding trespass by Gentiles into the inner areas, on pain of death. This outer court was widely used. Immediately inside its walls was a portico, supported by four rows of columns almost 40 feet (12.2 meters) high on the south side (the Royal Porch), and two rows on the other sides, the eastern portico known as “Solomon’s Porch” or “Solomon’s Colonnade.” Here is the area where the stalls of the money changers and merchants were set up, where the Sanhedrin met, and where Christ and the scribes taught and debated (Mk 11:27; Lk 2:46; 19:47; Jn 10:23). Here, too, the infant church met before it was rejected by a hostile Judaism (Acts 3:11; 5:12). Just to the northwest of the temple enclosure was the Fortress of Antonia, where the Roman governor resided while in Jerusalem, and where a Roman garrison was on hand to deal with disturbances (Acts 21:31-40). Overlooking the temple area, it was separated from it by a wide moat. The high priest’s vestments were stored in the fortress as a symbol of Roman authority. Access to the Court of the Gentiles was by four gates in the west wall; two in the south wall, where the ground fell away steeply into the valley, a site often identified as the pinnacle of the temple (Mt 4:5; Lk 4:9); and one gate in each of the east and north walls.<\/p>\nSignificance of the Temple in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe temple in Jerusalem functioned as the focal point of the tribal confederation. In spite of the attempt of Jeroboam I, the first king of the northern kingdom, to divert attention from Jerusalem by establishing shrines at Bethel and Dan (1 Kgs 12:26-30), Jerusalem never lost its preeminence. Naturally, both Hezekiah and Josiah sought to extend their reformation into the area of the northern tribes (2 Chr 30:1-12; 34:6-7), and Jerusalem was a pilgrimage center for those areas even after its destruction (Jer 41:5). The prophets foretold its destiny as the focal point of universal worship (Is 2:1-4).<\/p>\nThe temple was God’s dwelling place among his people. God’s presence, symbolized in the shekinah glory and the pillar of cloud, was associated with the tent of meeting (Ex 33:9-11), with the tabernacle (40:34-38), and finally with the temple (1 Kgs 8:10-11). The paradox is that while God is completely unrestricted, the temple was considered a place for God to live forever (vv 13, 27). God had chosen Zion, as he had chosen David (Pss 68:15-18; 76:2; 78:67-72), so the temple was regarded as God’s house (27:4; 42:4; 84:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>Ezekiel’s Temple<\/h5>\nEzekiel’s detailed description of the ideal temple (Ez 40–48) was not used as the blueprint for Zerubbabel’s temple. In fact, since Ezekiel must have been familiar with Solomon’s temple before his deportation in 597 BC<\/span>, his description is of greater help in determining uncertain details of the first temple. Ezekiel’s concern was to show the nature of pure worship, safeguarded from all contamination. This worship would allow the glory of God, which had departed from corrupted Solomon’s temple (9:3; 10:4, 18-19: 11:22-23), to return so that Jerusalem could again be named “the Lord is there” (43:1-5; 48:35). This thought, linked with Ezekiel’s vital concept of God’s Spirit indwelling his faithful worshipers (36:24-28), anticipated the NT teaching of the believers becoming God’s temple.<\/p>\nSignificance of the Temple in the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>Christ and the Temple<\/h5>\nChrist showed considerable respect for the temple. When he was 12 years old, he entered into the rabbinic discussions in its porticoes and described it as his Father’s house (Lk 2:41-50). To him “the house of God” was indwelt by God (Mt 12:4; 23:21). Although he twice cleansed it in righteous anger (Mt 21:12-13; Jn 2:13-16), he wept over the impending destruction of the city and temple (Lk 19:41-44). He often taught there, but he was “greater than the temple” (Mt 12:6). When his presentation to Jerusalem as the predicted Messiah was rejected, in spite of attendant miracles, he foretold its inevitable destruction (Mt 21:9-15; 24:1-2). For a brief period after Pentecost, the early church used the temple as its meeting place, until mounting opposition drove believers from Jerusalem (Acts 5:12, 21, 42; 8:1).<\/p>\n<h5>The Church as the Temple<\/h5>\nThe NT writers used two different Greek words to describe the temple: naos<\/span> and hieron<\/span>.<\/em> Naos<\/span> refers to the actual sanctuary of the temple, the place of God’s dwelling. Hieron<\/span> refers to the temple precincts as well as to the sanctuary. Generally speaking, naos<\/span> was used to designate the inner section of the temple known as the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies, whereas hieron<\/span> included the outer court and the temple proper.<\/p>\nIn Paul’s epistles the word naos<\/span> appears six times (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 2 Thes 2:4) and hieron<\/span> once (1 Cor 9:13). In these verses Paul maintains the distinction of definition noted above. When speaking of the actual physical temple, he used the word hieron<\/span> to indicate the place where the priests offered up animal sacrifices on the altar (1 Cor 9:13), which was situated in the outer court (see Ex 27–29, 40). And when Paul referred to the abominable act of the lawless one in usurping God’s place in the temple, he used the word naos<\/span>—the word that designates the place of deity’s presence (2 Thes 2:4).<\/p>\nIn all the other Pauline passages, naos<\/span> is used metaphorically—to depict a human habitation for the divine Spirit. In one instance the sanctuary image is used to describe the individual believer’s body (1 Cor 6:19); in every other instance the sanctuary depicts Christ’s body, the church (1 Cor 3:16-17; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21). Mistakenly, many readers think 1 Corinthians 3:16-17 speaks of the individual, but according to the Greek text, it is unquestionably clear that Paul was speaking about the collective church (specifically, the church in Corinth).<\/p>\nWhen Paul told the church in Corinth that it was God’s sanctuary, they would have understood the image from their knowledge of pagan temples. But Paul probably had in mind the one temple in Jerusalem. The Gentiles had many gods with many temples in one city; the Jews had one God with only one temple in all of Israel. This helped to preserve unity among the Israelites. The Corinthians needed spiritual unity; they were fragmented due to their individual preferences (see 1 Cor 1:10-13).<\/p>\nIn Ephesians, Paul’s masterpiece on the church, he speaks of the local churches as living, organic entities that are all (compositely speaking) growing into a holy sanctuary in the Lord (Eph 2:21). Paul pictured each local church as providing God with a spiritual habitation in that locality (v 22) and as growing together with all the other churches into one holy, universal sanctuary for the Lord’s indwelling.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temple in John’s Revelation<\/h5>\nIn John’s revelation there is no material temple, even though he continues to use the imagery of Jerusalem and Mt Zion (Rv 3:12; 14:1; 21:2, 10, 22). Three interrelated ideas dominate. First is the concept of the church made up of martyrs, whose faithful members are God’s temple (3:12; 14:1). This temple grows gradually as the number of martyrs increases (6:11). Another aspect is the temple as the place of judgment (11:19; 14:15; 15:5–16:1). Finally, any temple in the new age is unnecessary, “for its temple is the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb” (21:22). The ultimate state will be God’s dwelling with his people—the eternal, spritual temple.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Altar; Ark of the Covenant; Bread of the Presence; David; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; First Jewish Revolt; Judaism; Mercy Seat; Offerings and Sacrifices; Priests and Levites; Sanctuary; Singers in the Temple; Solomon (Person).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TEMPLE<\/h3>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Solomon’s Temple<\/p>\n• Zerubbabel’s Temple<\/p>\n• Herod’s Temple<\/p>\n• Significance of the Temple in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Significance of the Temple in the New Testament<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nDavid’s capture of Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:6-9) and his designation of it as the nation’s capital is one of the great masterstrokes of history. Occupied by the Jebusites, it was a pocket of neutral territory between the northern and southern sections of David’s united kingdom and was politically acceptable to both. Jerusalem was then established as the national religious center by the return of the ark, which had been largely neglected since its capture by the Philistines (2 Sm 6:1-17). Henceforth, God’s choices of both David and Jerusalem (“Mount Zion”) were indissolubly linked (Ps 78:67-72).<\/p>\nDavid’s great impulse was to build an adequate dwelling place for Israel’s God. The idea was initially approved by Nathan the prophet (2 Sm 7:1-3), but God revealed otherwise to him, and he conveyed the divine purpose to David (vv 4-17). In a significant wordplay, David was informed that, while he was not to build a house (temple) for God, God would build a house (dynasty) for him. David was not the one to build a temple because of the numerous wars during his reign; the temple would instead be built by his son (1 Kgs 5:3; 1 Chr 22:7-8; 28:3). Nevertheless, David enthusiastically amassed most of the necessary finances and materials and drew up the blueprints for the temple (1 Chr 22:3-5, 14; 28:2, 11-19). He also purchased the temple site (21:25).<\/p>\nSolomon’s Temple<\/p>\n\n<h5>Date<\/h5>\nConstruction commenced in Solomon’s fourth year, about 966 BC<\/span>, and took seven years to complete (1 Kgs 6:1, 38). Everything necessary for the temple, including the workers, had been prepared by David (1 Chr 28:21). The temple evidently had first priority among Solomon’s building schemes, as he built his own palace later (1 Kgs 7:1).<\/p>\n<h5>Superintendents and Workforce<\/h5>\nThe principal architect for the bronze furnishings was Huram (Hebrew “Hiram”), whose father was a metal craftsman from Tyre and whose mother was an Israelite (1 Kgs 7:13-14). Cedar for the temple came from Lebanon and was felled and transported by the skilled woodsmen of another Hiram—the king of Tyre, Solomon’s ally (5:5-9). Thirty thousand Israelites, divided into three groups, were drafted to assist at Lebanon. Each group was on duty for one month in three. For the stonework, Solomon conscripted 153,600 foreigners resident in Israel to provide a self-contained group of carriers, stone cutters, and supervisors (vv 15-17; 2 Chr 2:17-18). Possibly the “men of Gebal,” with their specialized skills, formed yet another group (1 Kgs 5:18). Building the temple was obviously a national project of immense size and effort. In order to preserve the sanctity of the site and to eliminate noise, the masonry and carpentry were not done at the temple site (6:7).<\/p>\n<h5>Description<\/h5>\nThe details given in the Bible are sufficiently clear for us to make a reasonably accurate description of the temple. The accounts in Kings and Chronicles are supplemented by Ezekiel’s depiction of the temple (see below), which was broadly based on his knowledge of the Jerusalem temple (Ez 40–48).<\/p>\nThe side rooms probably rested on a foundation or platform that was separate from the temple itself (1 Kgs 6:5, 10; cf. Ez 41:8-9) and were arranged in three stories, each seven and a half feet (2.3 meters) high, extending around the whole building except for the porch side. Each successive story was one and a half feet (.5 meter) wider than the one below, these dimensions coinciding with the thickness of the side wall of the Holy Place. The ground floor rooms were seven and a half feet (2.3 meters) wide; the first story was nine feet (2.7 meters), and the second was ten and a half feet (3.2 meters). Access to the upper stories was possibly by winding staircases (1 Kgs 6:8). There is some uncertainty concerning the location of the entrances; there may have been one on either side, but only one is mentioned (v 8). As in Ezekiel’s temple (Ez 40:17, 28), there were two adjacent courts, an inner and an outer (1 Kgs 6:36; 7:12), but no dimensions are given for these. The inner court, or “court of the priests,” being next to the temple itself, was also called “the upper court” (2 Chr 4:9; Jer 36:10). The wall of the inner court was made of three layers of hewn stone held together by a layer of cedar beams (1 Kgs 6:36), and the doors of both courts were sheathed in bronze (2 Chr 4:9). The palace buildings were within the outer court area, probably with a private passageway between the palace and the temple that was later closed during the reign of Ahaz (2 Chr 4:9, 12; 2 Kgs 16:18).<\/p>\nThe temple itself was 90 feet (27.4 meters) long, 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide, and 45 feet (13.7 meters) high (1 Kgs 6:2), with a porch or vestibule 15 feet (4.6 meters) deep stretching across the width. Probably the vestibule was on the east end of the temple, thus corresponding with the orientation of Ezekiel’s temple (Ez 43:1; 44:1). The larger part of the main sanctuary, next to the porch, formed the Holy Place, which was 60 feet (18.3 meters) long (1 Kgs 6:17). Beyond this was the innermost sanctuary, the Holy of Holies (or the “Most Holy Place“), which was a perfect cube of 30 feet (9.1 meters). All the interior walls were paneled with cedar decorated with flower patterns, cherubim, and palm trees, so that no masonry was visible. The walls of both inner and outer sanctuaries were “overlaid” (v 22) with pure gold. Actually the gold decoration may have been inlaid, on the basis that a solid sheath of gold would spoil the natural beauty of the wood carving. The floor was made of cypress planks (v 15). Narrow windows set high in the walls above the level of the three-storied outer chambers provided light in the Holy Place (v 4). The ceiling was paneled with beams and planks of cedar. No detail is given about the exterior roofing, but probably the contemporary technique was employed, using a wooden, latticelike framework into which a waterproof, limestone plaster was packed and rolled.<\/p>\nThe outer porch was apparently an open space, since no doors are mentioned. Access into the Holy Place was by double doors, both hinged to fold back on themselves, made of cypress and decorated in exactly the same way as the interior walls (vv 34-35). The doorposts were made of olive wood. Within the Holy Place was the altar of incense made of cedar overlaid with gold; it was placed centrally before the Holy of Holies. Also in the Holy Place were a table for the bread of the Presence of God, ten lampstands arranged in two groups of five on either side, and various utensils required for maintaining the priestly duties (1 Kgs 7:48-50). All these were made or overlaid with gold. The ten tables, arranged five on each side, were presumably for the utensils and accessories (2 Chr 4:8).<\/p>\nBetween the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies was a double door made of olive wood, carved with cherubim, palm trees, and flower patterns and overlaid with gold. Inside these doors, veiling still further the Holy of Holies, was a blue, purple, and crimson curtain, made of the finest fabrics and ornamented with cherubim (2 Chr 3:14).<\/p>\nIn the Holy of Holies were two cherubim, each 15 feet (4.6 meters) high and made of olive wood covered with gold (1 Kgs 6:23-28). Each wing measured seven and a half feet (2.3 meters). A wing of each touched the side walls; the other wings met at the center of the room. The divine throne had been considerably less impressive in the tabernacle, where a wing of each cherubim fused into the mercy seat above the ark (Ex 25:17-22). In Solomon’s temple, the ark of the covenant was placed below the forward-facing cherubim, the symbolic protectors. The ark, the only major item surviving from the Mosaic tabernacle, still contained the tablets of the law, but the pot of manna and Aaron’s rod were missing (1 Kgs 8:9).<\/p>\nImmediately outside the temple and on either side of the vestibule were two hollow bronze pillars (1 Kgs 7:15-20; 2 Chr 3:15-17). According to the book of Kings, these pillars were 27 feet (8.2 meters) high, with a circumference of 18 feet (5.5 meters). The metal itself was about four inches (10.2 centimeters) thick. The pillars were surmounted by bronze, lily-shaped capitals seven and a half feet (2.3 meters) high and six feet (1.8 meters) wide, intricately adorned with a chain latticework that supported two rows of pomegranates. The total weight must have been enormous, and their size is attested to by Jeremiah, who notes that the Babylonians had to break them in pieces before transporting them to Babylon (Jer 52:17, 21-23).<\/p>\nThe bronze altar of sacrifice in front of the vestibule is not listed in the specifications of 1 Kings 7. However, it is mentioned in the temple dedication and subsequently (1 Kgs 8:22, 54, 64; 9:25) and clearly stood in the inner court. Its dimensions were 30 feet (9.1 meters) square and 15 feet (4.6 meters) high (2 Chr 4:1). In view of its weight, it was probably cast in sections at Solomon’s foundry in the Jordan Rift valley (vv 17-18) and then transported to the temple site for assembly.<\/p>\nProbably the most striking article in the inner court was the “molten (bronze) sea,” a huge, round tank made of bronze 3 inches (8 centimeters) thick, 7½ feet (2.3 meters) high, and 15 feet (4.6 meters) in diameter (1 Kgs 7:23-26). Its rim flared out like a lily (2 Chr 4:2-5). The tank was supported on 12 bronze oxen, four on each side, and had two rows of decoration, possibly gourds or pomegranates, under the brim. Its capacity was between 10,000 and 12,000 gallons (37,850–45,420 liters). The bronze sea was used for priestly ablutions (v 6). Presumably this involved a platform of sorts, for the brim of this vast basin would have been about 15 feet (4.6 meters) above ground level.<\/p>\nHiram also constructed ten large lavers, mounted on moveable stands and placed in two groups of five, on the north and south sides of the inner court (1 Kgs 7:27-39). Basically the stands were bronze boxes, six feet (1.8 meters) square and four and a half feet (1.4 meters) high with a nine-inch (22.9-centimeter) rim around the top edge. Each corner was attached to braced posts to which the axles were fixed. The four-spoked wheels were 27 inches (68.6 centimeters) high. Into each stand there fitted a laver containing approximately 220 gallons (832.7 liters) of water, used for washing sacrificial animals (2 Chr 4:6). Probably each was adjacent to one of the ten tables that would be used to flay and otherwise prepare the sacrifices (v 8). Supplementary items, such as pots, shovels, and basins, all made of bronze, were also manufactured (1 Kgs 7:40, 45).<\/p>\n<h5>The Dedication<\/h5>\nEleven months elapsed between the completion of the temple and its dedication (1 Kgs 6:38; 8:2), during which time the major items of furniture were set in place. The dedication itself took place in the seventh month, presumably in connection with the Feast of Tabernacles and the Day of Atonement (Lv 23:23-36). The ark of the covenant was brought into its final resting place (1 Kgs 8:3-4), but the inner court proved inadequate for the vast numbers of beasts sacrificed (1 Kgs 8:62-64; 2 Chr 7:7).<\/p>\nThe temple employed the most sophisticated building techniques of the age, and no expense had been spared in construction, ornamentation, or equipment. Yet Solomon readily confessed its utter inadequacy to house the eternal God (1 Kgs 8:27). His prayer also underlined Israel’s propensity to forsake the Lord, contrasting the nation with God, who, though a just judge, was also merciful and faithful. The climax of the proceedings came when fire from heaven consumed the sacrifices and the shekinah glory filled the temple (2 Chr 7:1-3).<\/p>\n<h5>Later History<\/h5>\nLike most ancient shrines, the temple became a treasury for national wealth and as such was often the target for attack. Shishak of Egypt plundered it within five years of Solomon’s death (1 Kgs 14:25-38). Shortly afterward, King Asa (910–869 BC<\/span>) depleted its gold and silver treasures to buy Syrian help against his oppressor, Baasha (908–886 BC<\/span>), king of Israel (15:16-19). Joash, the king of Judah (835–796 BC<\/span>) who was concealed in the temple from the vicious Athaliah during his youth (2 Kgs 11), made provision for its repair after protesting the priests’ embezzlement of gifts (12:4-16). But after the death of Jehoiada, the high priest, Joash himself was adversely influenced by his nobles (2 Chr 24:15-19). As punishment for his apostasy, the Lord allowed the Syrians to attack, and Joash used the temple treasures to buy them off (2 Kgs 12:17-18). Hardly had provision for replacements been made, when Jehoash of Israel (798–782 BC<\/span>), having shattered the arrogant pride of Amaziah of Judah (796–767 BC<\/span>), again stripped the temple (14:8-14). Later, King Ahaz (735-715 BC<\/span>) used the remaining resources of the temple to enlist support from the Assyrians (16:7-9), though he eventually became completely subservient to them.<\/p>\n Then Hezekiah (715–686 BC<\/span>), one of the great reforming kings, thoroughly renovated the temple and restored worship after it had fallen into disuse during theclosing years of Ahaz (2 Chr 29:1-19; 31:9-21). Manasseh (696–642 BC<\/span>), however, completely reversed his father’s policy, bringing the practices of Canaanite and Mesopotamian worship into the temple (2 Kgs 21:3-7). His conversion experience, which probably occurred late in his reign and resulted in certain reform measures in the temple (2 Chr 33:12-19), was not far-reaching enough to escape the final judgment that his reign was the dark spot of Judah’s history (2 Kgs 21:10-16).<\/p>\nManasseh’s grandson Josiah (640–609 BC<\/span>), was the second great reforming king. He organized the repair of the temple in 622 BC<\/span>, during which the lost Book of the Law (almost certainly the book of Deuteronomy) was discovered (2 Kgs 22:3-13). As a result, Josiah’s reformation gained a new dimension and sense of urgency (22:14–23:3). The reformation included a thorough purge of all idolatrous elements from the temple (23:4-12) and the restoration of the traditional festivals. Sadly, however, Josiah’s reformation died with him, and Judah’s downward slide continued under the apostate Jehoiakim (609–598 BC<\/span>). It was probably during this time that Jeremiah preached his famous temple sermon foretelling its destruction (Jer 7:1–8:3; 26:1-19), which alienated him from the religious leaders. In Nebuchadnezzar’s reprisal raid following Jehoiakim’s rebellion in 601 BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 24:1-4), Jerusalem was captured (596 BC<\/span>) and many of the temple treasures were transported to Babylon (2 Chr 36:7). The temple itself appears to have escaped damage, but when Judah again rebelled under Zedekiah (597–586 BC<\/span>), the temple was demolished (2 Kgs 25:8-10). The remaining temple treasures were taken away.<\/p>\nZerubbabel’s Temple<\/p>\n<h5>Construction<\/h5>\nAlthough the temple was devastated, the site still remained as a place of pilgrimage during the exile (Jer 41:4-5). In 538 BC<\/span> the Persian king, Cyrus, in pursuance of a liberal policy diametrically opposed to that of the earlier empires, permitted the Jews to return from exile. And he authorized the rebuilding of the temple, financing it from the Persian treasury.<\/p>\nIn the book of Ezra, the decree of authorization has been preserved in two forms: the general proclamation (Ezr 1:2-4) and a more prosaic memorandum in the national archives indicating the main temple specifications and the amount of promised Persian help (6:1-5). Probably only a minority of the Jews opted to leave the relative comforts of Mesopotamia for the dangers of a long journey to their desolated homeland. According to the book of Ezra, 42,360 dedicated individuals and their servants (2:64-65) responded under the leadership of Sheshbazzar (1:8-11; 5:14-16) and Zerubbabel (2:2; 3:2, 8; 4:2). With great enthusiasm, the altar was rebuilt on the temple site and the traditional pattern of worship reestablished (3:1-6). Utilizing the grant from Persia as well as their own freewill gifts (2:68-69; 3:7), the Jews began to plan the second temple and lay its foundations (3:7-13). The initial impetus quickly died as a result of local opposition (4:1-4, 24), selfish preoccupation, and crop failures (Hg 1:2-11). In 520 BC<\/span> (Ezr 4:24; Hg 1:1; Zec 1:1), inspired by the prophets Haggai and Zechariah, the Jews under Zerubbabel and Joshua the high priest commenced rebuilding. Work continued in spite of official suspicion, if not direct opposition, and the temple was completed and dedicated in 515 BC<\/span> (Ezr 5:1–6:22).<\/p>\nLittle is known of the physical features of Zerubbabel’s temple. The inference that it was vastly inferior to Solomon’s temple (Hg 2:3) probably relates to an early stage in the building operation. In fact, the second temple stood for over 500 years. The dimensions noted in Ezra 6:3 are incomplete; the new temple was no doubt about the same size as its predecessor and was probably built on the same foundation. The construction technique appears to have followed the method of the original, with layers of timber providing a framework for sections of masonry (v 4). Clearly, there was auxiliary accommodation, probably like the side rooms of Solomon’s temple (Ezr 8:29; Neh 12:44; 13:4-5). If Persian aid was forthcoming as promised (Ezr 6:8-12), the second temple was a more splendid, substantial structure than is generally supposed.<\/p>\n<h5>Later History<\/h5>\nSeveral references in the Apocrypha, pseudepigrapha, rabbinic writings, and the historian Josephus help to illumine the history of the temple and give more detail on its structure and furnishings. Josephus, quoting from Hecateus of Abdera (fourth century BC<\/span>), states that the temple was a large building in an enclosure about 500 feet by 150 feet (152.4 meters by 45.7 meters), surrounded by a stone wall, with an altar of unhewn stones the same size as Solomon’s bronze altar (cf. 2 Chr 4:1). Within the sanctuary was a golden altar of incense and a lampstand, the flame of which burned continually. Josephus also notes that Antiochus III (223–187 BC<\/span>) financially supported the temple when the Seleucids displaced the Ptolemies as masters of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nBen Sirach, early in the second century BC<\/span>, commended Simon, the son of Onias the high priest, for his work in fortifying and repairing the temple area. First Maccabees provides valuable evidence of the fate of the temple during the oppression under Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164 BC<\/span>). The books of the Maccabees recount the defilement of the altar of burnt offering (1 Macc 1:54) and the plundering of the golden lampstand, altar of incense, table of offering, veil, and other treasures (2 Macc 5:15-16; 6:2-4). When the temple was recaptured and restored, the victorious Maccabees replaced the items taken by the Seleucids, except for the altar of sacrifice, which was considered so polluted that it was dismantled and replaced by a new one constructed of unhewn stone (1 Macc 4:36-61; 2 Macc 10:1-9). Clearly the temple area was used as a fortress, both in opposition to the Seleucid garrison that was maintained in Jerusalem in the Maccabean period and in the conflicts of the later Hasmonean period. When Pompey captured Jerusalem about 63 BC<\/span>, he entered the temple to assert his authority but took no plunder, thus showing respect for it.<\/p>\nThe history of Zerubbabel’s temple closed when Herod, having carefully preserved it from any major damage when he gained control of Jerusalem with Roman aid in 37 BC<\/span>, began to dismantle it about 21 BC<\/span> in preparation for the construction of his own grand temple.<\/p>\nHerod’s Temple<\/p>\nApart from over 100 references in the NT, our main sources of information about Herod’s temple come from the Jewish historian Josephus and from the Middoth (a section of the Jewish rabbinic writings). There are considerable differences in detail between the two, which rules out any dogmatic interpretation in attempted reconstructions. Since Josephus was contemporary with the temple (he was born about AD<\/span> 37 and died early in the second century), he is probably more reliable than the Middoth, which, dating from about AD<\/span> 150, appears to exaggerate occasionally. Archaeological research has been helpful in determining the positions of the outer walls and gates.<\/p>\nHerod’s motive in building his temple was political rather than religious. As an Idumean, he wished to placate his Jewish subjects by constructing a sanctuary as magnificent as Solomon’s. Possible fears that the site might be profaned, or that the existing temple might be demolished and never rebuilt, were allayed by the training of 1,000 priests as masons and the amassing of materials before the work commenced. Herod’s temple followed the tripartite plan of its predecessors, although its porch was much larger. It was built in the contemporary Greco-Roman architectural style and must therefore be regarded as distinct from Zerubbabel’s temple. Work began in 20 BC<\/span>, and while the main sanctuary was quickly erected (it was in full operation within ten years), the total project was not completed until AD<\/span> 64, only six years before it was destroyed by the Romans.<\/p>\nHerod first prepared the site by clearing and leveling an area approximately 500 yards (457.2 meters) from north to south and about 325 yards (297.2 meters) from east to west. This involved cutting away sections of rock in some areas and building up with rubble in others. Considerable sections of the enclosing wall, constructed on stone blocks averaging about 15 feet (4.6 meters) long by 4 feet (1.2 meters) high, still survive. Some of the stones in the corners of the south wall weigh up to 70 tons (63.5 metric tons).<\/p>\nThe sanctuary itself seems to have been based on the same dimensions as Solomon’s temple. It was divided into the Holy Place, which was 60 feet (18.3 meters) long, 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide, and 60 feet high, and the Holy of Holies, which was 30 feet square. There was no furniture within the Holy of Holies, which was separated by a veil from the Holy Place. The Holy Place contained the seven-branch lampstand, the table for the bread of the Presence, and the incense altar. The main divergence from Solomon’s temple was the imposing porch, 150 feet (45.7 meters) in width and height. Outside was a doorway approximately 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide by 40 feet (12.2 meters) high, with an inner doorway about half that size leading into the sanctuary. By allowing empty rooms over the Holy of Holies and the Holy Place, there was a uniform roof height of 150 feet (45.7 meters). Golden spikes on the roof discouraged birds from alighting and defiling the structure. Like its predecessors, the temple was oriented toward the east and was surrounded on the other sides by three stories of rooms rising to a height of 60 feet (18.3 meters). The stone used was the local white stone, cut in huge blocks and highly polished.<\/p>\nAccess to the porch was by a flight of 12 steps from the Court of the Priests. Centrally placed before the porch and 33 feet (10.1 meters) away was the altar of sacrifice. Made of unhewn stone, it was a multilevel construction 15 feet (4.6 meters) high and about 48 feet (14.6 meters) square at its base. Male Israelites were allowed into this area once a year, during the Feast of the Tabernacles, to walk around the altar of sacrifice. Otherwise, they were restricted to the Court of Israel. To the east of the Court of Israel, and separated from it by a flight of 15 steps and by the ornate Great Gate, made of Corinthian bronze, was the Court of the Women. Here the offertory chests for temple expenses were located (Mk 12:41-44). The next court was the large, lower, outer Court of the Gentiles, which surrounded the inner courts and was separated from them by a balustrade and a series of warning notices. Two of these have been excavated, written in Latin and Greek and forbidding trespass by Gentiles into the inner areas, on pain of death. This outer court was widely used. Immediately inside its walls was a portico, supported by four rows of columns almost 40 feet (12.2 meters) high on the south side (the Royal Porch), and two rows on the other sides, the eastern portico known as “Solomon’s Porch” or “Solomon’s Colonnade.” Here is the area where the stalls of the money changers and merchants were set up, where the Sanhedrin met, and where Christ and the scribes taught and debated (Mk 11:27; Lk 2:46; 19:47; Jn 10:23). Here, too, the infant church met before it was rejected by a hostile Judaism (Acts 3:11; 5:12). Just to the northwest of the temple enclosure was the Fortress of Antonia, where the Roman governor resided while in Jerusalem, and where a Roman garrison was on hand to deal with disturbances (Acts 21:31-40). Overlooking the temple area, it was separated from it by a wide moat. The high priest’s vestments were stored in the fortress as a symbol of Roman authority. Access to the Court of the Gentiles was by four gates in the west wall; two in the south wall, where the ground fell away steeply into the valley, a site often identified as the pinnacle of the temple (Mt 4:5; Lk 4:9); and one gate in each of the east and north walls.<\/p>\nSignificance of the Temple in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe temple in Jerusalem functioned as the focal point of the tribal confederation. In spite of the attempt of Jeroboam I, the first king of the northern kingdom, to divert attention from Jerusalem by establishing shrines at Bethel and Dan (1 Kgs 12:26-30), Jerusalem never lost its preeminence. Naturally, both Hezekiah and Josiah sought to extend their reformation into the area of the northern tribes (2 Chr 30:1-12; 34:6-7), and Jerusalem was a pilgrimage center for those areas even after its destruction (Jer 41:5). The prophets foretold its destiny as the focal point of universal worship (Is 2:1-4).<\/p>\nThe temple was God’s dwelling place among his people. God’s presence, symbolized in the shekinah glory and the pillar of cloud, was associated with the tent of meeting (Ex 33:9-11), with the tabernacle (40:34-38), and finally with the temple (1 Kgs 8:10-11). The paradox is that while God is completely unrestricted, the temple was considered a place for God to live forever (vv 13, 27). God had chosen Zion, as he had chosen David (Pss 68:15-18; 76:2; 78:67-72), so the temple was regarded as God’s house (27:4; 42:4; 84:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>Ezekiel’s Temple<\/h5>\nEzekiel’s detailed description of the ideal temple (Ez 40–48) was not used as the blueprint for Zerubbabel’s temple. In fact, since Ezekiel must have been familiar with Solomon’s temple before his deportation in 597 BC<\/span>, his description is of greater help in determining uncertain details of the first temple. Ezekiel’s concern was to show the nature of pure worship, safeguarded from all contamination. This worship would allow the glory of God, which had departed from corrupted Solomon’s temple (9:3; 10:4, 18-19: 11:22-23), to return so that Jerusalem could again be named “the Lord is there” (43:1-5; 48:35). This thought, linked with Ezekiel’s vital concept of God’s Spirit indwelling his faithful worshipers (36:24-28), anticipated the NT teaching of the believers becoming God’s temple.<\/p>\nSignificance of the Temple in the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>Christ and the Temple<\/h5>\nChrist showed considerable respect for the temple. When he was 12 years old, he entered into the rabbinic discussions in its porticoes and described it as his Father’s house (Lk 2:41-50). To him “the house of God” was indwelt by God (Mt 12:4; 23:21). Although he twice cleansed it in righteous anger (Mt 21:12-13; Jn 2:13-16), he wept over the impending destruction of the city and temple (Lk 19:41-44). He often taught there, but he was “greater than the temple” (Mt 12:6). When his presentation to Jerusalem as the predicted Messiah was rejected, in spite of attendant miracles, he foretold its inevitable destruction (Mt 21:9-15; 24:1-2). For a brief period after Pentecost, the early church used the temple as its meeting place, until mounting opposition drove believers from Jerusalem (Acts 5:12, 21, 42; 8:1).<\/p>\n<h5>The Church as the Temple<\/h5>\nThe NT writers used two different Greek words to describe the temple: naos<\/span> and hieron<\/span>.<\/em> Naos<\/span> refers to the actual sanctuary of the temple, the place of God’s dwelling. Hieron<\/span> refers to the temple precincts as well as to the sanctuary. Generally speaking, naos<\/span> was used to designate the inner section of the temple known as the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies, whereas hieron<\/span> included the outer court and the temple proper.<\/p>\nIn Paul’s epistles the word naos<\/span> appears six times (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 2 Thes 2:4) and hieron<\/span> once (1 Cor 9:13). In these verses Paul maintains the distinction of definition noted above. When speaking of the actual physical temple, he used the word hieron<\/span> to indicate the place where the priests offered up animal sacrifices on the altar (1 Cor 9:13), which was situated in the outer court (see Ex 27–29, 40). And when Paul referred to the abominable act of the lawless one in usurping God’s place in the temple, he used the word naos<\/span>—the word that designates the place of deity’s presence (2 Thes 2:4).<\/p>\nIn all the other Pauline passages, naos<\/span> is used metaphorically—to depict a human habitation for the divine Spirit. In one instance the sanctuary image is used to describe the individual believer’s body (1 Cor 6:19); in every other instance the sanctuary depicts Christ’s body, the church (1 Cor 3:16-17; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21). Mistakenly, many readers think 1 Corinthians 3:16-17 speaks of the individual, but according to the Greek text, it is unquestionably clear that Paul was speaking about the collective church (specifically, the church in Corinth).<\/p>\nWhen Paul told the church in Corinth that it was God’s sanctuary, they would have understood the image from their knowledge of pagan temples. But Paul probably had in mind the one temple in Jerusalem. The Gentiles had many gods with many temples in one city; the Jews had one God with only one temple in all of Israel. This helped to preserve unity among the Israelites. The Corinthians needed spiritual unity; they were fragmented due to their individual preferences (see 1 Cor 1:10-13).<\/p>\nIn Ephesians, Paul’s masterpiece on the church, he speaks of the local churches as living, organic entities that are all (compositely speaking) growing into a holy sanctuary in the Lord (Eph 2:21). Paul pictured each local church as providing God with a spiritual habitation in that locality (v 22) and as growing together with all the other churches into one holy, universal sanctuary for the Lord’s indwelling.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temple in John’s Revelation<\/h5>\nIn John’s revelation there is no material temple, even though he continues to use the imagery of Jerusalem and Mt Zion (Rv 3:12; 14:1; 21:2, 10, 22). Three interrelated ideas dominate. First is the concept of the church made up of martyrs, whose faithful members are God’s temple (3:12; 14:1). This temple grows gradually as the number of martyrs increases (6:11). Another aspect is the temple as the place of judgment (11:19; 14:15; 15:5–16:1). Finally, any temple in the new age is unnecessary, “for its temple is the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb” (21:22). The ultimate state will be God’s dwelling with his people—the eternal, spritual temple.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Altar; Ark of the Covenant; Bread of the Presence; David; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; First Jewish Revolt; Judaism; Mercy Seat; Offerings and Sacrifices; Priests and Levites; Sanctuary; Singers in the Temple; Solomon (Person).<\/p>","summary_ro":"TEMPLE Preview • Background • Solomon’s Temple • Zerubbabel’s Temple • Herod’s Temple • Significance of the Temple in the Old Testament • Significance of the Temple in the New Testament Background David’s capture of Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:6-9) and his designation of it as the nation’s capital is one of the great masterstrokes of history. Occupied by the Jebusites, it was a pocket of neutral territory between the northern and southern sections of David’s united kingdom and was politically acceptabl...","summary_en":"TEMPLE Preview • Background • Solomon’s Temple • Zerubbabel’s Temple • Herod’s Temple • Significance of the Temple in the Old Testament • Significance of the Temple in the New Testament Background David’s capture of Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:6-9) and his designation of it as the nation’s capital is one of the great masterstrokes of history. Occupied by the Jebusites, it was a pocket of neutral territory between the northern and southern sections of David’s united kingdom and was politically acceptabl...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":47984,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:2","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:2","content_ro":"1:2<\/strong> Though Cyrus speaks of the<\/em> Lord<\/span>, the God of heaven,<\/em> Cyrus actually was a Zoroastrian. His proclamation, written in Hebrew, was probably political propaganda to gain Jewish support for his rule. In a similar statement to the Babylonians, Cyrus claimed to worship their chief god, Marduk. However, his words here do reflect that God had appointed<\/em> him to build him a Temple at Jerusalem<\/em> (see Isa 44:28; 45:1, 13). He might have learned of such prophecies from Daniel, who served in his court as a high government official (Cyrus is apparently referred to by his Median name, Darius, in Dan 6:1-28; 9:1). God had long planned to raise up Cyrus and give him a vision to restore worship at Jerusalem (Isa 44:28; 45:13; 48:14-15).<\/p>","content_en":"1:2<\/strong> Though Cyrus speaks of the<\/em> Lord<\/span>, the God of heaven,<\/em> Cyrus actually was a Zoroastrian. His proclamation, written in Hebrew, was probably political propaganda to gain Jewish support for his rule. In a similar statement to the Babylonians, Cyrus claimed to worship their chief god, Marduk. However, his words here do reflect that God had appointed<\/em> him to build him a Temple at Jerusalem<\/em> (see Isa 44:28; 45:1, 13). He might have learned of such prophecies from Daniel, who served in his court as a high government official (Cyrus is apparently referred to by his Median name, Darius, in Dan 6:1-28; 9:1). God had long planned to raise up Cyrus and give him a vision to restore worship at Jerusalem (Isa 44:28; 45:13; 48:14-15).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:2 Though Cyrus speaks of the Lord, the God of heaven, Cyrus actually was a Zoroastrian. His proclamation, written in Hebrew, was probably political propaganda to gain Jewish support for his rule. In a similar statement to the Babylonians, Cyrus claimed to worship their chief god, Marduk. However, his words here do reflect that God had appointed him to build him a Temple at Jerusalem (see Isa 44:28; 45:1, 13). He might have learned of such prophecies from Daniel, who served in his court as a...","summary_en":"1:2 Though Cyrus speaks of the Lord, the God of heaven, Cyrus actually was a Zoroastrian. His proclamation, written in Hebrew, was probably political propaganda to gain Jewish support for his rule. In a similar statement to the Babylonians, Cyrus claimed to worship their chief god, Marduk. However, his words here do reflect that God had appointed him to build him a Temple at Jerusalem (see Isa 44:28; 45:1, 13). He might have learned of such prophecies from Daniel, who served in his court as a...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75610,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:2","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:2","content_ro":"1:2<\/strong> Though Cyrus speaks of the<\/em> Lord<\/span>, the God of heaven,<\/em> Cyrus actually was a Zoroastrian. His proclamation, written in Hebrew, was probably political propaganda to gain Jewish support for his rule. In a similar statement to the Babylonians, Cyrus claimed to worship their chief god, Marduk. However, his words here do reflect that God had appointed<\/em> him to build him a Temple at Jerusalem<\/em> (see Isa 44:28; 45:1, 13). He might have learned of such prophecies from Daniel, who served in his court as a high government official (Cyrus is apparently referred to by his Median name, Darius, in Dan 6:1-28; 9:1). God had long planned to raise up Cyrus and give him a vision to restore worship at Jerusalem (Isa 44:28; 45:13; 48:14-15).<\/p>","content_en":"1:2<\/strong> Though Cyrus speaks of the<\/em> Lord<\/span>, the God of heaven,<\/em> Cyrus actually was a Zoroastrian. His proclamation, written in Hebrew, was probably political propaganda to gain Jewish support for his rule. In a similar statement to the Babylonians, Cyrus claimed to worship their chief god, Marduk. However, his words here do reflect that God had appointed<\/em> him to build him a Temple at Jerusalem<\/em> (see Isa 44:28; 45:1, 13). He might have learned of such prophecies from Daniel, who served in his court as a high government official (Cyrus is apparently referred to by his Median name, Darius, in Dan 6:1-28; 9:1). God had long planned to raise up Cyrus and give him a vision to restore worship at Jerusalem (Isa 44:28; 45:13; 48:14-15).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:2 Though Cyrus speaks of the Lord, the God of heaven, Cyrus actually was a Zoroastrian. His proclamation, written in Hebrew, was probably political propaganda to gain Jewish support for his rule. In a similar statement to the Babylonians, Cyrus claimed to worship their chief god, Marduk. However, his words here do reflect that God had appointed him to build him a Temple at Jerusalem (see Isa 44:28; 45:1, 13). He might have learned of such prophecies from Daniel, who served in his court as a...","summary_en":"1:2 Though Cyrus speaks of the Lord, the God of heaven, Cyrus actually was a Zoroastrian. His proclamation, written in Hebrew, was probably political propaganda to gain Jewish support for his rule. In a similar statement to the Babylonians, Cyrus claimed to worship their chief god, Marduk. However, his words here do reflect that God had appointed him to build him a Temple at Jerusalem (see Isa 44:28; 45:1, 13). He might have learned of such prophecies from Daniel, who served in his court as a...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103236,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:2","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:2","content_ro":"1:2<\/strong> Though Cyrus speaks of the<\/em> Lord<\/span>, the God of heaven,<\/em> Cyrus actually was a Zoroastrian. His proclamation, written in Hebrew, was probably political propaganda to gain Jewish support for his rule. In a similar statement to the Babylonians, Cyrus claimed to worship their chief god, Marduk. However, his words here do reflect that God had appointed<\/em> him to build him a Temple at Jerusalem<\/em> (see Isa 44:28; 45:1, 13). He might have learned of such prophecies from Daniel, who served in his court as a high government official (Cyrus is apparently referred to by his Median name, Darius, in Dan 6:1-28; 9:1). God had long planned to raise up Cyrus and give him a vision to restore worship at Jerusalem (Isa 44:28; 45:13; 48:14-15).<\/p>","content_en":"1:2<\/strong> Though Cyrus speaks of the<\/em> Lord<\/span>, the God of heaven,<\/em> Cyrus actually was a Zoroastrian. His proclamation, written in Hebrew, was probably political propaganda to gain Jewish support for his rule. In a similar statement to the Babylonians, Cyrus claimed to worship their chief god, Marduk. However, his words here do reflect that God had appointed<\/em> him to build him a Temple at Jerusalem<\/em> (see Isa 44:28; 45:1, 13). He might have learned of such prophecies from Daniel, who served in his court as a high government official (Cyrus is apparently referred to by his Median name, Darius, in Dan 6:1-28; 9:1). God had long planned to raise up Cyrus and give him a vision to restore worship at Jerusalem (Isa 44:28; 45:13; 48:14-15).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:2 Though Cyrus speaks of the Lord, the God of heaven, Cyrus actually was a Zoroastrian. His proclamation, written in Hebrew, was probably political propaganda to gain Jewish support for his rule. In a similar statement to the Babylonians, Cyrus claimed to worship their chief god, Marduk. However, his words here do reflect that God had appointed him to build him a Temple at Jerusalem (see Isa 44:28; 45:1, 13). He might have learned of such prophecies from Daniel, who served in his court as a...","summary_en":"1:2 Though Cyrus speaks of the Lord, the God of heaven, Cyrus actually was a Zoroastrian. His proclamation, written in Hebrew, was probably political propaganda to gain Jewish support for his rule. In a similar statement to the Babylonians, Cyrus claimed to worship their chief god, Marduk. However, his words here do reflect that God had appointed him to build him a Temple at Jerusalem (see Isa 44:28; 45:1, 13). He might have learned of such prophecies from Daniel, who served in his court as a...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":130862,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:2","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:2","content_ro":"1:2<\/strong> Though Cyrus speaks of the<\/em> Lord<\/span>, the God of heaven,<\/em> Cyrus actually was a Zoroastrian. His proclamation, written in Hebrew, was probably political propaganda to gain Jewish support for his rule. In a similar statement to the Babylonians, Cyrus claimed to worship their chief god, Marduk. However, his words here do reflect that God had appointed<\/em> him to build him a Temple at Jerusalem<\/em> (see Isa 44:28; 45:1, 13). He might have learned of such prophecies from Daniel, who served in his court as a high government official (Cyrus is apparently referred to by his Median name, Darius, in Dan 6:1-28; 9:1). God had long planned to raise up Cyrus and give him a vision to restore worship at Jerusalem (Isa 44:28; 45:13; 48:14-15).<\/p>","content_en":"1:2<\/strong> Though Cyrus speaks of the<\/em> Lord<\/span>, the God of heaven,<\/em> Cyrus actually was a Zoroastrian. His proclamation, written in Hebrew, was probably political propaganda to gain Jewish support for his rule. In a similar statement to the Babylonians, Cyrus claimed to worship their chief god, Marduk. However, his words here do reflect that God had appointed<\/em> him to build him a Temple at Jerusalem<\/em> (see Isa 44:28; 45:1, 13). He might have learned of such prophecies from Daniel, who served in his court as a high government official (Cyrus is apparently referred to by his Median name, Darius, in Dan 6:1-28; 9:1). God had long planned to raise up Cyrus and give him a vision to restore worship at Jerusalem (Isa 44:28; 45:13; 48:14-15).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:2 Though Cyrus speaks of the Lord, the God of heaven, Cyrus actually was a Zoroastrian. His proclamation, written in Hebrew, was probably political propaganda to gain Jewish support for his rule. In a similar statement to the Babylonians, Cyrus claimed to worship their chief god, Marduk. However, his words here do reflect that God had appointed him to build him a Temple at Jerusalem (see Isa 44:28; 45:1, 13). He might have learned of such prophecies from Daniel, who served in his court as a...","summary_en":"1:2 Though Cyrus speaks of the Lord, the God of heaven, Cyrus actually was a Zoroastrian. His proclamation, written in Hebrew, was probably political propaganda to gain Jewish support for his rule. In a similar statement to the Babylonians, Cyrus claimed to worship their chief god, Marduk. However, his words here do reflect that God had appointed him to build him a Temple at Jerusalem (see Isa 44:28; 45:1, 13). He might have learned of such prophecies from Daniel, who served in his court as a...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":63823,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Remnant","title_en":"The Remnant","content_ro":"<h3>The Remnant<\/h3>\nIn the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness.<\/p>\nThe theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub, which means “a remnant will return” (Isa 7:3; see 10:21). Isaiah prophesied that when the Lord judged his people with destruction (which occurred at the hands of the Babylonians in 605–586 BC<\/span>), he would save a small community—the remnant—to be the core of a new beginning. Because the population of Judah would be decimated (as the northern kingdom of Israel had been already), this remnant would be a very small beginning. It is depicted as a “branch” (4:2), a “stump” (6:13), a community of the “poor” and “needy” (25:4), and “handpicked grain” (27:12-13). This remnant was to put their trust in the Lord while waiting for him to establish his rule and come to reward them (see 3:10; 40:10). The Lord promised that this small community would swell into a huge multitude that would come out of both Israel and the Gentile nations (27:6; 60:3).<\/p>\nIn fulfillment of prophecy, a remnant of God’s people were allowed to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple during the reign of King Cyrus of Persia (Ezra 1:2-4). Ezra the priest recognized this preservation of a remnant as purely an act of God’s grace, an act that could be jeopardized if the people followed their ancestors in disobedience (Ezra 9:5-15).<\/p>\nThe notion of the remnant serves as an encouragement to remain faithful to God in the midst of the unfaithfulness of others. In the case of the people of Israel and Judah, such faithfulness would lead to the restoration of their land and to the blessings God had promised his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 19:31; 2 Chr 36:20; Ezra 9:14; Isa 1:8-9; 4:1-3; 6:13; 10:19-22; 11:10-16; 27:12-13; 28:5; 37:31-32; 46:3-4; Jer 6:9; 23:3-4; 31:7-8; Amos 5:15; Mic 2:12; 4:6-7; 5:7-8; 7:18; Zeph 3:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Remnant<\/h3>\nIn the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness.<\/p>\nThe theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub, which means “a remnant will return” (Isa 7:3; see 10:21). Isaiah prophesied that when the Lord judged his people with destruction (which occurred at the hands of the Babylonians in 605–586 BC<\/span>), he would save a small community—the remnant—to be the core of a new beginning. Because the population of Judah would be decimated (as the northern kingdom of Israel had been already), this remnant would be a very small beginning. It is depicted as a “branch” (4:2), a “stump” (6:13), a community of the “poor” and “needy” (25:4), and “handpicked grain” (27:12-13). This remnant was to put their trust in the Lord while waiting for him to establish his rule and come to reward them (see 3:10; 40:10). The Lord promised that this small community would swell into a huge multitude that would come out of both Israel and the Gentile nations (27:6; 60:3).<\/p>\nIn fulfillment of prophecy, a remnant of God’s people were allowed to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple during the reign of King Cyrus of Persia (Ezra 1:2-4). Ezra the priest recognized this preservation of a remnant as purely an act of God’s grace, an act that could be jeopardized if the people followed their ancestors in disobedience (Ezra 9:5-15).<\/p>\nThe notion of the remnant serves as an encouragement to remain faithful to God in the midst of the unfaithfulness of others. In the case of the people of Israel and Judah, such faithfulness would lead to the restoration of their land and to the blessings God had promised his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 19:31; 2 Chr 36:20; Ezra 9:14; Isa 1:8-9; 4:1-3; 6:13; 10:19-22; 11:10-16; 27:12-13; 28:5; 37:31-32; 46:3-4; Jer 6:9; 23:3-4; 31:7-8; Amos 5:15; Mic 2:12; 4:6-7; 5:7-8; 7:18; Zeph 3:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Remnant In the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness. The theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub,...","summary_en":"The Remnant In the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness. The theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub,...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64552,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Seventy Sets of Seven","title_en":"The Seventy Sets of Seven","content_ro":"<h3>The Seventy Sets of Seven<\/h3>\nThe seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them. The two main interpretations of the seventy sets of seven are presented here.<\/p>\nSCENARIO A: THE REIGN OF ANTIOCHUS IV (175–163 BC<\/span>).) The seventy sets of seven refer to history from Cyrus II of Persia (539 BC<\/span>; see 9:25; Ezra 1:2-4) to Antiochus IV (175–163 BC<\/span>; see Dan 8:23-25; 11:21-39). In this scenario, the “Anointed One” was the high priest Onias III, and the “ruler” (9:26-27) was Antiochus IV, whose treaty with the people of Judea in 174 BC<\/span> was supposed to allow them to practice their faith peacefully. In 170 BC<\/span>, Antiochus attacked Jerusalem, killed many, and looted the Temple. Then in 167 BC<\/span> he put an end to the sacrifices and offerings, forced the Jews to stop practicing their faith on pain of death, and desecrated the Temple with a “sacrilegious object”: He placed a statue of Zeus on the altar of burnt offering, where he sacrificed pigs and other unclean animals (cp. 11:21-35). Antiochus was struck with a painful disease, and he died in 163 BC<\/span>—“The fate decreed for this defiler” was “finally poured out on him” (9:27; see also 8:25; 1 Maccabees<\/em> 1:10-24; 6:7-16; 2 Maccabees<\/em> 9:1-29). In Scenario A, when Jesus spoke of the “sacrilegious object that causes desecration,” he was referring to the Jews’ experience in the time of Antiochus as a paradigm of the things that would happen in the future (see Matt 24:15; cp. Luke 21:20; 2 Thes 2:3-4).<\/p>\nSCENARIO B: THE DEATH OF CHRIST (AD<\/span> 30 or 33). The seventy weeks are a prophecy concerning Jesus Christ, the anointed Messiah. In this scenario, the “seventy sets of seven” began either with the decree of Cyrus (538 BC<\/span>; Ezra 1:1-4) or with one of the decrees of Artaxerxes (458 or 445 BC<\/span>; Ezra 7:8-26; Neh 2:1-10). The death of Christ then occurred either at the end of sixty-nine sets of seven (seven plus sixty-two, Dan 9:25-26) or at the midpoint of the seventieth (9:27). These two options have implications for how the seventy sets of seven are brought to completion. In the first option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as a future time not yet fulfilled. In the second option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as having been completed when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in AD<\/span> 70. If the decree of Cyrus is seen as the starting point, the 490 years are symbolic. However, if the decree given to Nehemiah to rebuild the city (445 BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1) is taken as the starting point (Dan 9:25), then there were very nearly 483 years (69 x 7 years) between that date and the death of Christ in AD<\/span> 30 or 33.<\/p>\nOption 1: The Seventieth Set of Seven Remains to Be Fulfilled in the Future.<\/em> Many interpreters have argued that Christ’s death occurred at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, and the seventieth set of seven is yet to be fulfilled. In that case, there is now a long gap from the sixty-ninth set of seven to the seventieth. The seventieth still lies in the future and corresponds to the reign of the Antichrist during the tribulation at the end of history (see 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10).<\/p>\nOption 2: The Seventieth Set of Seven Was Completed When Rome Destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple.<\/em> Other interpreters have held that the seventy weeks were fulfilled with the coming of Christ, his death and resurrection, and the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. In this case, Christ began his ministry at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, around AD<\/span> 28. He ministered for approximately three and a half years, then was killed in the middle of the seventieth seven. The remaining half-seven ended when the “ruler”—one or more of the Roman rulers—destroyed Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. The war and its miseries now continue between God’s people and the kingdom of this world to the very end, when Christ will return, judge the wicked, and establish his Kingdom.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDan 7:8, 11, 20-21, 24-27; 8:9-14; 9:24-27; 11:29-31, 40-45; 12:7, 11; 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Seventy Sets of Seven<\/h3>\nThe seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them. The two main interpretations of the seventy sets of seven are presented here.<\/p>\nSCENARIO A: THE REIGN OF ANTIOCHUS IV (175–163 BC<\/span>).) The seventy sets of seven refer to history from Cyrus II of Persia (539 BC<\/span>; see 9:25; Ezra 1:2-4) to Antiochus IV (175–163 BC<\/span>; see Dan 8:23-25; 11:21-39). In this scenario, the “Anointed One” was the high priest Onias III, and the “ruler” (9:26-27) was Antiochus IV, whose treaty with the people of Judea in 174 BC<\/span> was supposed to allow them to practice their faith peacefully. In 170 BC<\/span>, Antiochus attacked Jerusalem, killed many, and looted the Temple. Then in 167 BC<\/span> he put an end to the sacrifices and offerings, forced the Jews to stop practicing their faith on pain of death, and desecrated the Temple with a “sacrilegious object”: He placed a statue of Zeus on the altar of burnt offering, where he sacrificed pigs and other unclean animals (cp. 11:21-35). Antiochus was struck with a painful disease, and he died in 163 BC<\/span>—“The fate decreed for this defiler” was “finally poured out on him” (9:27; see also 8:25; 1 Maccabees<\/em> 1:10-24; 6:7-16; 2 Maccabees<\/em> 9:1-29). In Scenario A, when Jesus spoke of the “sacrilegious object that causes desecration,” he was referring to the Jews’ experience in the time of Antiochus as a paradigm of the things that would happen in the future (see Matt 24:15; cp. Luke 21:20; 2 Thes 2:3-4).<\/p>\nSCENARIO B: THE DEATH OF CHRIST (AD<\/span> 30 or 33). The seventy weeks are a prophecy concerning Jesus Christ, the anointed Messiah. In this scenario, the “seventy sets of seven” began either with the decree of Cyrus (538 BC<\/span>; Ezra 1:1-4) or with one of the decrees of Artaxerxes (458 or 445 BC<\/span>; Ezra 7:8-26; Neh 2:1-10). The death of Christ then occurred either at the end of sixty-nine sets of seven (seven plus sixty-two, Dan 9:25-26) or at the midpoint of the seventieth (9:27). These two options have implications for how the seventy sets of seven are brought to completion. In the first option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as a future time not yet fulfilled. In the second option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as having been completed when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in AD<\/span> 70. If the decree of Cyrus is seen as the starting point, the 490 years are symbolic. However, if the decree given to Nehemiah to rebuild the city (445 BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1) is taken as the starting point (Dan 9:25), then there were very nearly 483 years (69 x 7 years) between that date and the death of Christ in AD<\/span> 30 or 33.<\/p>\nOption 1: The Seventieth Set of Seven Remains to Be Fulfilled in the Future.<\/em> Many interpreters have argued that Christ’s death occurred at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, and the seventieth set of seven is yet to be fulfilled. In that case, there is now a long gap from the sixty-ninth set of seven to the seventieth. The seventieth still lies in the future and corresponds to the reign of the Antichrist during the tribulation at the end of history (see 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10).<\/p>\nOption 2: The Seventieth Set of Seven Was Completed When Rome Destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple.<\/em> Other interpreters have held that the seventy weeks were fulfilled with the coming of Christ, his death and resurrection, and the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. In this case, Christ began his ministry at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, around AD<\/span> 28. He ministered for approximately three and a half years, then was killed in the middle of the seventieth seven. The remaining half-seven ended when the “ruler”—one or more of the Roman rulers—destroyed Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. The war and its miseries now continue between God’s people and the kingdom of this world to the very end, when Christ will return, judge the wicked, and establish his Kingdom.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDan 7:8, 11, 20-21, 24-27; 8:9-14; 9:24-27; 11:29-31, 40-45; 12:7, 11; 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Seventy Sets of Seven The seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them...","summary_en":"The Seventy Sets of Seven The seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91449,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Remnant","title_en":"The Remnant","content_ro":"<h3>The Remnant<\/h3>\nIn the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness.<\/p>\nThe theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub, which means “a remnant will return” (Isa 7:3; see 10:21). Isaiah prophesied that when the Lord judged his people with destruction (which occurred at the hands of the Babylonians in 605–586 BC<\/span>), he would save a small community—the remnant—to be the core of a new beginning. Because the population of Judah would be decimated (as the northern kingdom of Israel had been already), this remnant would be a very small beginning. It is depicted as a “branch” (4:2), a “stump” (6:13), a community of the “poor” and “needy” (25:4), and “handpicked grain” (27:12-13). This remnant was to put their trust in the Lord while waiting for him to establish his rule and come to reward them (see 3:10; 40:10). The Lord promised that this small community would swell into a huge multitude that would come out of both Israel and the Gentile nations (27:6; 60:3).<\/p>\nIn fulfillment of prophecy, a remnant of God’s people were allowed to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple during the reign of King Cyrus of Persia (Ezra 1:2-4). Ezra the priest recognized this preservation of a remnant as purely an act of God’s grace, an act that could be jeopardized if the people followed their ancestors in disobedience (Ezra 9:5-15).<\/p>\nThe notion of the remnant serves as an encouragement to remain faithful to God in the midst of the unfaithfulness of others. In the case of the people of Israel and Judah, such faithfulness would lead to the restoration of their land and to the blessings God had promised his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 19:31; 2 Chr 36:20; Ezra 9:14; Isa 1:8-9; 4:1-3; 6:13; 10:19-22; 11:10-16; 27:12-13; 28:5; 37:31-32; 46:3-4; Jer 6:9; 23:3-4; 31:7-8; Amos 5:15; Mic 2:12; 4:6-7; 5:7-8; 7:18; Zeph 3:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Remnant<\/h3>\nIn the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness.<\/p>\nThe theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub, which means “a remnant will return” (Isa 7:3; see 10:21). Isaiah prophesied that when the Lord judged his people with destruction (which occurred at the hands of the Babylonians in 605–586 BC<\/span>), he would save a small community—the remnant—to be the core of a new beginning. Because the population of Judah would be decimated (as the northern kingdom of Israel had been already), this remnant would be a very small beginning. It is depicted as a “branch” (4:2), a “stump” (6:13), a community of the “poor” and “needy” (25:4), and “handpicked grain” (27:12-13). This remnant was to put their trust in the Lord while waiting for him to establish his rule and come to reward them (see 3:10; 40:10). The Lord promised that this small community would swell into a huge multitude that would come out of both Israel and the Gentile nations (27:6; 60:3).<\/p>\nIn fulfillment of prophecy, a remnant of God’s people were allowed to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple during the reign of King Cyrus of Persia (Ezra 1:2-4). Ezra the priest recognized this preservation of a remnant as purely an act of God’s grace, an act that could be jeopardized if the people followed their ancestors in disobedience (Ezra 9:5-15).<\/p>\nThe notion of the remnant serves as an encouragement to remain faithful to God in the midst of the unfaithfulness of others. In the case of the people of Israel and Judah, such faithfulness would lead to the restoration of their land and to the blessings God had promised his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 19:31; 2 Chr 36:20; Ezra 9:14; Isa 1:8-9; 4:1-3; 6:13; 10:19-22; 11:10-16; 27:12-13; 28:5; 37:31-32; 46:3-4; Jer 6:9; 23:3-4; 31:7-8; Amos 5:15; Mic 2:12; 4:6-7; 5:7-8; 7:18; Zeph 3:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Remnant In the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness. The theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub,...","summary_en":"The Remnant In the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness. The theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub,...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92178,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Seventy Sets of Seven","title_en":"The Seventy Sets of Seven","content_ro":"<h3>The Seventy Sets of Seven<\/h3>\nThe seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them. The two main interpretations of the seventy sets of seven are presented here.<\/p>\nSCENARIO A: THE REIGN OF ANTIOCHUS IV (175–163 BC<\/span>).) The seventy sets of seven refer to history from Cyrus II of Persia (539 BC<\/span>; see 9:25; Ezra 1:2-4) to Antiochus IV (175–163 BC<\/span>; see Dan 8:23-25; 11:21-39). In this scenario, the “Anointed One” was the high priest Onias III, and the “ruler” (9:26-27) was Antiochus IV, whose treaty with the people of Judea in 174 BC<\/span> was supposed to allow them to practice their faith peacefully. In 170 BC<\/span>, Antiochus attacked Jerusalem, killed many, and looted the Temple. Then in 167 BC<\/span> he put an end to the sacrifices and offerings, forced the Jews to stop practicing their faith on pain of death, and desecrated the Temple with a “sacrilegious object”: He placed a statue of Zeus on the altar of burnt offering, where he sacrificed pigs and other unclean animals (cp. 11:21-35). Antiochus was struck with a painful disease, and he died in 163 BC<\/span>—“The fate decreed for this defiler” was “finally poured out on him” (9:27; see also 8:25; 1 Maccabees<\/em> 1:10-24; 6:7-16; 2 Maccabees<\/em> 9:1-29). In Scenario A, when Jesus spoke of the “sacrilegious object that causes desecration,” he was referring to the Jews’ experience in the time of Antiochus as a paradigm of the things that would happen in the future (see Matt 24:15; cp. Luke 21:20; 2 Thes 2:3-4).<\/p>\nSCENARIO B: THE DEATH OF CHRIST (AD<\/span> 30 or 33). The seventy weeks are a prophecy concerning Jesus Christ, the anointed Messiah. In this scenario, the “seventy sets of seven” began either with the decree of Cyrus (538 BC<\/span>; Ezra 1:1-4) or with one of the decrees of Artaxerxes (458 or 445 BC<\/span>; Ezra 7:8-26; Neh 2:1-10). The death of Christ then occurred either at the end of sixty-nine sets of seven (seven plus sixty-two, Dan 9:25-26) or at the midpoint of the seventieth (9:27). These two options have implications for how the seventy sets of seven are brought to completion. In the first option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as a future time not yet fulfilled. In the second option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as having been completed when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in AD<\/span> 70. If the decree of Cyrus is seen as the starting point, the 490 years are symbolic. However, if the decree given to Nehemiah to rebuild the city (445 BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1) is taken as the starting point (Dan 9:25), then there were very nearly 483 years (69 x 7 years) between that date and the death of Christ in AD<\/span> 30 or 33.<\/p>\nOption 1: The Seventieth Set of Seven Remains to Be Fulfilled in the Future.<\/em> Many interpreters have argued that Christ’s death occurred at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, and the seventieth set of seven is yet to be fulfilled. In that case, there is now a long gap from the sixty-ninth set of seven to the seventieth. The seventieth still lies in the future and corresponds to the reign of the Antichrist during the tribulation at the end of history (see 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10).<\/p>\nOption 2: The Seventieth Set of Seven Was Completed When Rome Destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple.<\/em> Other interpreters have held that the seventy weeks were fulfilled with the coming of Christ, his death and resurrection, and the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. In this case, Christ began his ministry at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, around AD<\/span> 28. He ministered for approximately three and a half years, then was killed in the middle of the seventieth seven. The remaining half-seven ended when the “ruler”—one or more of the Roman rulers—destroyed Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. The war and its miseries now continue between God’s people and the kingdom of this world to the very end, when Christ will return, judge the wicked, and establish his Kingdom.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDan 7:8, 11, 20-21, 24-27; 8:9-14; 9:24-27; 11:29-31, 40-45; 12:7, 11; 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Seventy Sets of Seven<\/h3>\nThe seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them. The two main interpretations of the seventy sets of seven are presented here.<\/p>\nSCENARIO A: THE REIGN OF ANTIOCHUS IV (175–163 BC<\/span>).) The seventy sets of seven refer to history from Cyrus II of Persia (539 BC<\/span>; see 9:25; Ezra 1:2-4) to Antiochus IV (175–163 BC<\/span>; see Dan 8:23-25; 11:21-39). In this scenario, the “Anointed One” was the high priest Onias III, and the “ruler” (9:26-27) was Antiochus IV, whose treaty with the people of Judea in 174 BC<\/span> was supposed to allow them to practice their faith peacefully. In 170 BC<\/span>, Antiochus attacked Jerusalem, killed many, and looted the Temple. Then in 167 BC<\/span> he put an end to the sacrifices and offerings, forced the Jews to stop practicing their faith on pain of death, and desecrated the Temple with a “sacrilegious object”: He placed a statue of Zeus on the altar of burnt offering, where he sacrificed pigs and other unclean animals (cp. 11:21-35). Antiochus was struck with a painful disease, and he died in 163 BC<\/span>—“The fate decreed for this defiler” was “finally poured out on him” (9:27; see also 8:25; 1 Maccabees<\/em> 1:10-24; 6:7-16; 2 Maccabees<\/em> 9:1-29). In Scenario A, when Jesus spoke of the “sacrilegious object that causes desecration,” he was referring to the Jews’ experience in the time of Antiochus as a paradigm of the things that would happen in the future (see Matt 24:15; cp. Luke 21:20; 2 Thes 2:3-4).<\/p>\nSCENARIO B: THE DEATH OF CHRIST (AD<\/span> 30 or 33). The seventy weeks are a prophecy concerning Jesus Christ, the anointed Messiah. In this scenario, the “seventy sets of seven” began either with the decree of Cyrus (538 BC<\/span>; Ezra 1:1-4) or with one of the decrees of Artaxerxes (458 or 445 BC<\/span>; Ezra 7:8-26; Neh 2:1-10). The death of Christ then occurred either at the end of sixty-nine sets of seven (seven plus sixty-two, Dan 9:25-26) or at the midpoint of the seventieth (9:27). These two options have implications for how the seventy sets of seven are brought to completion. In the first option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as a future time not yet fulfilled. In the second option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as having been completed when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in AD<\/span> 70. If the decree of Cyrus is seen as the starting point, the 490 years are symbolic. However, if the decree given to Nehemiah to rebuild the city (445 BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1) is taken as the starting point (Dan 9:25), then there were very nearly 483 years (69 x 7 years) between that date and the death of Christ in AD<\/span> 30 or 33.<\/p>\nOption 1: The Seventieth Set of Seven Remains to Be Fulfilled in the Future.<\/em> Many interpreters have argued that Christ’s death occurred at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, and the seventieth set of seven is yet to be fulfilled. In that case, there is now a long gap from the sixty-ninth set of seven to the seventieth. The seventieth still lies in the future and corresponds to the reign of the Antichrist during the tribulation at the end of history (see 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10).<\/p>\nOption 2: The Seventieth Set of Seven Was Completed When Rome Destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple.<\/em> Other interpreters have held that the seventy weeks were fulfilled with the coming of Christ, his death and resurrection, and the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. In this case, Christ began his ministry at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, around AD<\/span> 28. He ministered for approximately three and a half years, then was killed in the middle of the seventieth seven. The remaining half-seven ended when the “ruler”—one or more of the Roman rulers—destroyed Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. The war and its miseries now continue between God’s people and the kingdom of this world to the very end, when Christ will return, judge the wicked, and establish his Kingdom.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDan 7:8, 11, 20-21, 24-27; 8:9-14; 9:24-27; 11:29-31, 40-45; 12:7, 11; 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Seventy Sets of Seven The seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them...","summary_en":"The Seventy Sets of Seven The seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119075,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Remnant","title_en":"The Remnant","content_ro":"<h3>The Remnant<\/h3>\nIn the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness.<\/p>\nThe theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub, which means “a remnant will return” (Isa 7:3; see 10:21). Isaiah prophesied that when the Lord judged his people with destruction (which occurred at the hands of the Babylonians in 605–586 BC<\/span>), he would save a small community—the remnant—to be the core of a new beginning. Because the population of Judah would be decimated (as the northern kingdom of Israel had been already), this remnant would be a very small beginning. It is depicted as a “branch” (4:2), a “stump” (6:13), a community of the “poor” and “needy” (25:4), and “handpicked grain” (27:12-13). This remnant was to put their trust in the Lord while waiting for him to establish his rule and come to reward them (see 3:10; 40:10). The Lord promised that this small community would swell into a huge multitude that would come out of both Israel and the Gentile nations (27:6; 60:3).<\/p>\nIn fulfillment of prophecy, a remnant of God’s people were allowed to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple during the reign of King Cyrus of Persia (Ezra 1:2-4). Ezra the priest recognized this preservation of a remnant as purely an act of God’s grace, an act that could be jeopardized if the people followed their ancestors in disobedience (Ezra 9:5-15).<\/p>\nThe notion of the remnant serves as an encouragement to remain faithful to God in the midst of the unfaithfulness of others. In the case of the people of Israel and Judah, such faithfulness would lead to the restoration of their land and to the blessings God had promised his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 19:31; 2 Chr 36:20; Ezra 9:14; Isa 1:8-9; 4:1-3; 6:13; 10:19-22; 11:10-16; 27:12-13; 28:5; 37:31-32; 46:3-4; Jer 6:9; 23:3-4; 31:7-8; Amos 5:15; Mic 2:12; 4:6-7; 5:7-8; 7:18; Zeph 3:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Remnant<\/h3>\nIn the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness.<\/p>\nThe theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub, which means “a remnant will return” (Isa 7:3; see 10:21). Isaiah prophesied that when the Lord judged his people with destruction (which occurred at the hands of the Babylonians in 605–586 BC<\/span>), he would save a small community—the remnant—to be the core of a new beginning. Because the population of Judah would be decimated (as the northern kingdom of Israel had been already), this remnant would be a very small beginning. It is depicted as a “branch” (4:2), a “stump” (6:13), a community of the “poor” and “needy” (25:4), and “handpicked grain” (27:12-13). This remnant was to put their trust in the Lord while waiting for him to establish his rule and come to reward them (see 3:10; 40:10). The Lord promised that this small community would swell into a huge multitude that would come out of both Israel and the Gentile nations (27:6; 60:3).<\/p>\nIn fulfillment of prophecy, a remnant of God’s people were allowed to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple during the reign of King Cyrus of Persia (Ezra 1:2-4). Ezra the priest recognized this preservation of a remnant as purely an act of God’s grace, an act that could be jeopardized if the people followed their ancestors in disobedience (Ezra 9:5-15).<\/p>\nThe notion of the remnant serves as an encouragement to remain faithful to God in the midst of the unfaithfulness of others. In the case of the people of Israel and Judah, such faithfulness would lead to the restoration of their land and to the blessings God had promised his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 19:31; 2 Chr 36:20; Ezra 9:14; Isa 1:8-9; 4:1-3; 6:13; 10:19-22; 11:10-16; 27:12-13; 28:5; 37:31-32; 46:3-4; Jer 6:9; 23:3-4; 31:7-8; Amos 5:15; Mic 2:12; 4:6-7; 5:7-8; 7:18; Zeph 3:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Remnant In the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness. The theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub,...","summary_en":"The Remnant In the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness. The theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub,...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119804,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Seventy Sets of Seven","title_en":"The Seventy Sets of Seven","content_ro":"<h3>The Seventy Sets of Seven<\/h3>\nThe seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them. The two main interpretations of the seventy sets of seven are presented here.<\/p>\nSCENARIO A: THE REIGN OF ANTIOCHUS IV (175–163 BC<\/span>).) The seventy sets of seven refer to history from Cyrus II of Persia (539 BC<\/span>; see 9:25; Ezra 1:2-4) to Antiochus IV (175–163 BC<\/span>; see Dan 8:23-25; 11:21-39). In this scenario, the “Anointed One” was the high priest Onias III, and the “ruler” (9:26-27) was Antiochus IV, whose treaty with the people of Judea in 174 BC<\/span> was supposed to allow them to practice their faith peacefully. In 170 BC<\/span>, Antiochus attacked Jerusalem, killed many, and looted the Temple. Then in 167 BC<\/span> he put an end to the sacrifices and offerings, forced the Jews to stop practicing their faith on pain of death, and desecrated the Temple with a “sacrilegious object”: He placed a statue of Zeus on the altar of burnt offering, where he sacrificed pigs and other unclean animals (cp. 11:21-35). Antiochus was struck with a painful disease, and he died in 163 BC<\/span>—“The fate decreed for this defiler” was “finally poured out on him” (9:27; see also 8:25; 1 Maccabees<\/em> 1:10-24; 6:7-16; 2 Maccabees<\/em> 9:1-29). In Scenario A, when Jesus spoke of the “sacrilegious object that causes desecration,” he was referring to the Jews’ experience in the time of Antiochus as a paradigm of the things that would happen in the future (see Matt 24:15; cp. Luke 21:20; 2 Thes 2:3-4).<\/p>\nSCENARIO B: THE DEATH OF CHRIST (AD<\/span> 30 or 33). The seventy weeks are a prophecy concerning Jesus Christ, the anointed Messiah. In this scenario, the “seventy sets of seven” began either with the decree of Cyrus (538 BC<\/span>; Ezra 1:1-4) or with one of the decrees of Artaxerxes (458 or 445 BC<\/span>; Ezra 7:8-26; Neh 2:1-10). The death of Christ then occurred either at the end of sixty-nine sets of seven (seven plus sixty-two, Dan 9:25-26) or at the midpoint of the seventieth (9:27). These two options have implications for how the seventy sets of seven are brought to completion. In the first option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as a future time not yet fulfilled. In the second option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as having been completed when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in AD<\/span> 70. If the decree of Cyrus is seen as the starting point, the 490 years are symbolic. However, if the decree given to Nehemiah to rebuild the city (445 BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1) is taken as the starting point (Dan 9:25), then there were very nearly 483 years (69 x 7 years) between that date and the death of Christ in AD<\/span> 30 or 33.<\/p>\nOption 1: The Seventieth Set of Seven Remains to Be Fulfilled in the Future.<\/em> Many interpreters have argued that Christ’s death occurred at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, and the seventieth set of seven is yet to be fulfilled. In that case, there is now a long gap from the sixty-ninth set of seven to the seventieth. The seventieth still lies in the future and corresponds to the reign of the Antichrist during the tribulation at the end of history (see 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10).<\/p>\nOption 2: The Seventieth Set of Seven Was Completed When Rome Destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple.<\/em> Other interpreters have held that the seventy weeks were fulfilled with the coming of Christ, his death and resurrection, and the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. In this case, Christ began his ministry at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, around AD<\/span> 28. He ministered for approximately three and a half years, then was killed in the middle of the seventieth seven. The remaining half-seven ended when the “ruler”—one or more of the Roman rulers—destroyed Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. The war and its miseries now continue between God’s people and the kingdom of this world to the very end, when Christ will return, judge the wicked, and establish his Kingdom.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDan 7:8, 11, 20-21, 24-27; 8:9-14; 9:24-27; 11:29-31, 40-45; 12:7, 11; 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Seventy Sets of Seven<\/h3>\nThe seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them. The two main interpretations of the seventy sets of seven are presented here.<\/p>\nSCENARIO A: THE REIGN OF ANTIOCHUS IV (175–163 BC<\/span>).) The seventy sets of seven refer to history from Cyrus II of Persia (539 BC<\/span>; see 9:25; Ezra 1:2-4) to Antiochus IV (175–163 BC<\/span>; see Dan 8:23-25; 11:21-39). In this scenario, the “Anointed One” was the high priest Onias III, and the “ruler” (9:26-27) was Antiochus IV, whose treaty with the people of Judea in 174 BC<\/span> was supposed to allow them to practice their faith peacefully. In 170 BC<\/span>, Antiochus attacked Jerusalem, killed many, and looted the Temple. Then in 167 BC<\/span> he put an end to the sacrifices and offerings, forced the Jews to stop practicing their faith on pain of death, and desecrated the Temple with a “sacrilegious object”: He placed a statue of Zeus on the altar of burnt offering, where he sacrificed pigs and other unclean animals (cp. 11:21-35). Antiochus was struck with a painful disease, and he died in 163 BC<\/span>—“The fate decreed for this defiler” was “finally poured out on him” (9:27; see also 8:25; 1 Maccabees<\/em> 1:10-24; 6:7-16; 2 Maccabees<\/em> 9:1-29). In Scenario A, when Jesus spoke of the “sacrilegious object that causes desecration,” he was referring to the Jews’ experience in the time of Antiochus as a paradigm of the things that would happen in the future (see Matt 24:15; cp. Luke 21:20; 2 Thes 2:3-4).<\/p>\nSCENARIO B: THE DEATH OF CHRIST (AD<\/span> 30 or 33). The seventy weeks are a prophecy concerning Jesus Christ, the anointed Messiah. In this scenario, the “seventy sets of seven” began either with the decree of Cyrus (538 BC<\/span>; Ezra 1:1-4) or with one of the decrees of Artaxerxes (458 or 445 BC<\/span>; Ezra 7:8-26; Neh 2:1-10). The death of Christ then occurred either at the end of sixty-nine sets of seven (seven plus sixty-two, Dan 9:25-26) or at the midpoint of the seventieth (9:27). These two options have implications for how the seventy sets of seven are brought to completion. In the first option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as a future time not yet fulfilled. In the second option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as having been completed when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in AD<\/span> 70. If the decree of Cyrus is seen as the starting point, the 490 years are symbolic. However, if the decree given to Nehemiah to rebuild the city (445 BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1) is taken as the starting point (Dan 9:25), then there were very nearly 483 years (69 x 7 years) between that date and the death of Christ in AD<\/span> 30 or 33.<\/p>\nOption 1: The Seventieth Set of Seven Remains to Be Fulfilled in the Future.<\/em> Many interpreters have argued that Christ’s death occurred at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, and the seventieth set of seven is yet to be fulfilled. In that case, there is now a long gap from the sixty-ninth set of seven to the seventieth. The seventieth still lies in the future and corresponds to the reign of the Antichrist during the tribulation at the end of history (see 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10).<\/p>\nOption 2: The Seventieth Set of Seven Was Completed When Rome Destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple.<\/em> Other interpreters have held that the seventy weeks were fulfilled with the coming of Christ, his death and resurrection, and the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. In this case, Christ began his ministry at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, around AD<\/span> 28. He ministered for approximately three and a half years, then was killed in the middle of the seventieth seven. The remaining half-seven ended when the “ruler”—one or more of the Roman rulers—destroyed Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. The war and its miseries now continue between God’s people and the kingdom of this world to the very end, when Christ will return, judge the wicked, and establish his Kingdom.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDan 7:8, 11, 20-21, 24-27; 8:9-14; 9:24-27; 11:29-31, 40-45; 12:7, 11; 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Seventy Sets of Seven The seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them...","summary_en":"The Seventy Sets of Seven The seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146701,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Remnant","title_en":"The Remnant","content_ro":"<h3>The Remnant<\/h3>\nIn the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness.<\/p>\nThe theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub, which means “a remnant will return” (Isa 7:3; see 10:21). Isaiah prophesied that when the Lord judged his people with destruction (which occurred at the hands of the Babylonians in 605–586 BC<\/span>), he would save a small community—the remnant—to be the core of a new beginning. Because the population of Judah would be decimated (as the northern kingdom of Israel had been already), this remnant would be a very small beginning. It is depicted as a “branch” (4:2), a “stump” (6:13), a community of the “poor” and “needy” (25:4), and “handpicked grain” (27:12-13). This remnant was to put their trust in the Lord while waiting for him to establish his rule and come to reward them (see 3:10; 40:10). The Lord promised that this small community would swell into a huge multitude that would come out of both Israel and the Gentile nations (27:6; 60:3).<\/p>\nIn fulfillment of prophecy, a remnant of God’s people were allowed to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple during the reign of King Cyrus of Persia (Ezra 1:2-4). Ezra the priest recognized this preservation of a remnant as purely an act of God’s grace, an act that could be jeopardized if the people followed their ancestors in disobedience (Ezra 9:5-15).<\/p>\nThe notion of the remnant serves as an encouragement to remain faithful to God in the midst of the unfaithfulness of others. In the case of the people of Israel and Judah, such faithfulness would lead to the restoration of their land and to the blessings God had promised his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 19:31; 2 Chr 36:20; Ezra 9:14; Isa 1:8-9; 4:1-3; 6:13; 10:19-22; 11:10-16; 27:12-13; 28:5; 37:31-32; 46:3-4; Jer 6:9; 23:3-4; 31:7-8; Amos 5:15; Mic 2:12; 4:6-7; 5:7-8; 7:18; Zeph 3:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Remnant<\/h3>\nIn the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness.<\/p>\nThe theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub, which means “a remnant will return” (Isa 7:3; see 10:21). Isaiah prophesied that when the Lord judged his people with destruction (which occurred at the hands of the Babylonians in 605–586 BC<\/span>), he would save a small community—the remnant—to be the core of a new beginning. Because the population of Judah would be decimated (as the northern kingdom of Israel had been already), this remnant would be a very small beginning. It is depicted as a “branch” (4:2), a “stump” (6:13), a community of the “poor” and “needy” (25:4), and “handpicked grain” (27:12-13). This remnant was to put their trust in the Lord while waiting for him to establish his rule and come to reward them (see 3:10; 40:10). The Lord promised that this small community would swell into a huge multitude that would come out of both Israel and the Gentile nations (27:6; 60:3).<\/p>\nIn fulfillment of prophecy, a remnant of God’s people were allowed to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple during the reign of King Cyrus of Persia (Ezra 1:2-4). Ezra the priest recognized this preservation of a remnant as purely an act of God’s grace, an act that could be jeopardized if the people followed their ancestors in disobedience (Ezra 9:5-15).<\/p>\nThe notion of the remnant serves as an encouragement to remain faithful to God in the midst of the unfaithfulness of others. In the case of the people of Israel and Judah, such faithfulness would lead to the restoration of their land and to the blessings God had promised his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 19:31; 2 Chr 36:20; Ezra 9:14; Isa 1:8-9; 4:1-3; 6:13; 10:19-22; 11:10-16; 27:12-13; 28:5; 37:31-32; 46:3-4; Jer 6:9; 23:3-4; 31:7-8; Amos 5:15; Mic 2:12; 4:6-7; 5:7-8; 7:18; Zeph 3:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Remnant In the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness. The theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub,...","summary_en":"The Remnant In the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness. The theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub,...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147430,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Seventy Sets of Seven","title_en":"The Seventy Sets of Seven","content_ro":"<h3>The Seventy Sets of Seven<\/h3>\nThe seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them. The two main interpretations of the seventy sets of seven are presented here.<\/p>\nSCENARIO A: THE REIGN OF ANTIOCHUS IV (175–163 BC<\/span>).) The seventy sets of seven refer to history from Cyrus II of Persia (539 BC<\/span>; see 9:25; Ezra 1:2-4) to Antiochus IV (175–163 BC<\/span>; see Dan 8:23-25; 11:21-39). In this scenario, the “Anointed One” was the high priest Onias III, and the “ruler” (9:26-27) was Antiochus IV, whose treaty with the people of Judea in 174 BC<\/span> was supposed to allow them to practice their faith peacefully. In 170 BC<\/span>, Antiochus attacked Jerusalem, killed many, and looted the Temple. Then in 167 BC<\/span> he put an end to the sacrifices and offerings, forced the Jews to stop practicing their faith on pain of death, and desecrated the Temple with a “sacrilegious object”: He placed a statue of Zeus on the altar of burnt offering, where he sacrificed pigs and other unclean animals (cp. 11:21-35). Antiochus was struck with a painful disease, and he died in 163 BC<\/span>—“The fate decreed for this defiler” was “finally poured out on him” (9:27; see also 8:25; 1 Maccabees<\/em> 1:10-24; 6:7-16; 2 Maccabees<\/em> 9:1-29). In Scenario A, when Jesus spoke of the “sacrilegious object that causes desecration,” he was referring to the Jews’ experience in the time of Antiochus as a paradigm of the things that would happen in the future (see Matt 24:15; cp. Luke 21:20; 2 Thes 2:3-4).<\/p>\nSCENARIO B: THE DEATH OF CHRIST (AD<\/span> 30 or 33). The seventy weeks are a prophecy concerning Jesus Christ, the anointed Messiah. In this scenario, the “seventy sets of seven” began either with the decree of Cyrus (538 BC<\/span>; Ezra 1:1-4) or with one of the decrees of Artaxerxes (458 or 445 BC<\/span>; Ezra 7:8-26; Neh 2:1-10). The death of Christ then occurred either at the end of sixty-nine sets of seven (seven plus sixty-two, Dan 9:25-26) or at the midpoint of the seventieth (9:27). These two options have implications for how the seventy sets of seven are brought to completion. In the first option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as a future time not yet fulfilled. In the second option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as having been completed when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in AD<\/span> 70. If the decree of Cyrus is seen as the starting point, the 490 years are symbolic. However, if the decree given to Nehemiah to rebuild the city (445 BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1) is taken as the starting point (Dan 9:25), then there were very nearly 483 years (69 x 7 years) between that date and the death of Christ in AD<\/span> 30 or 33.<\/p>\nOption 1: The Seventieth Set of Seven Remains to Be Fulfilled in the Future.<\/em> Many interpreters have argued that Christ’s death occurred at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, and the seventieth set of seven is yet to be fulfilled. In that case, there is now a long gap from the sixty-ninth set of seven to the seventieth. The seventieth still lies in the future and corresponds to the reign of the Antichrist during the tribulation at the end of history (see 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10).<\/p>\nOption 2: The Seventieth Set of Seven Was Completed When Rome Destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple.<\/em> Other interpreters have held that the seventy weeks were fulfilled with the coming of Christ, his death and resurrection, and the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. In this case, Christ began his ministry at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, around AD<\/span> 28. He ministered for approximately three and a half years, then was killed in the middle of the seventieth seven. The remaining half-seven ended when the “ruler”—one or more of the Roman rulers—destroyed Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. The war and its miseries now continue between God’s people and the kingdom of this world to the very end, when Christ will return, judge the wicked, and establish his Kingdom.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDan 7:8, 11, 20-21, 24-27; 8:9-14; 9:24-27; 11:29-31, 40-45; 12:7, 11; 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Seventy Sets of Seven<\/h3>\nThe seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them. The two main interpretations of the seventy sets of seven are presented here.<\/p>\nSCENARIO A: THE REIGN OF ANTIOCHUS IV (175–163 BC<\/span>).) The seventy sets of seven refer to history from Cyrus II of Persia (539 BC<\/span>; see 9:25; Ezra 1:2-4) to Antiochus IV (175–163 BC<\/span>; see Dan 8:23-25; 11:21-39). In this scenario, the “Anointed One” was the high priest Onias III, and the “ruler” (9:26-27) was Antiochus IV, whose treaty with the people of Judea in 174 BC<\/span> was supposed to allow them to practice their faith peacefully. In 170 BC<\/span>, Antiochus attacked Jerusalem, killed many, and looted the Temple. Then in 167 BC<\/span> he put an end to the sacrifices and offerings, forced the Jews to stop practicing their faith on pain of death, and desecrated the Temple with a “sacrilegious object”: He placed a statue of Zeus on the altar of burnt offering, where he sacrificed pigs and other unclean animals (cp. 11:21-35). Antiochus was struck with a painful disease, and he died in 163 BC<\/span>—“The fate decreed for this defiler” was “finally poured out on him” (9:27; see also 8:25; 1 Maccabees<\/em> 1:10-24; 6:7-16; 2 Maccabees<\/em> 9:1-29). In Scenario A, when Jesus spoke of the “sacrilegious object that causes desecration,” he was referring to the Jews’ experience in the time of Antiochus as a paradigm of the things that would happen in the future (see Matt 24:15; cp. Luke 21:20; 2 Thes 2:3-4).<\/p>\nSCENARIO B: THE DEATH OF CHRIST (AD<\/span> 30 or 33). The seventy weeks are a prophecy concerning Jesus Christ, the anointed Messiah. In this scenario, the “seventy sets of seven” began either with the decree of Cyrus (538 BC<\/span>; Ezra 1:1-4) or with one of the decrees of Artaxerxes (458 or 445 BC<\/span>; Ezra 7:8-26; Neh 2:1-10). The death of Christ then occurred either at the end of sixty-nine sets of seven (seven plus sixty-two, Dan 9:25-26) or at the midpoint of the seventieth (9:27). These two options have implications for how the seventy sets of seven are brought to completion. In the first option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as a future time not yet fulfilled. In the second option, the seventieth set of seven is seen as having been completed when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in AD<\/span> 70. If the decree of Cyrus is seen as the starting point, the 490 years are symbolic. However, if the decree given to Nehemiah to rebuild the city (445 BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1) is taken as the starting point (Dan 9:25), then there were very nearly 483 years (69 x 7 years) between that date and the death of Christ in AD<\/span> 30 or 33.<\/p>\nOption 1: The Seventieth Set of Seven Remains to Be Fulfilled in the Future.<\/em> Many interpreters have argued that Christ’s death occurred at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, and the seventieth set of seven is yet to be fulfilled. In that case, there is now a long gap from the sixty-ninth set of seven to the seventieth. The seventieth still lies in the future and corresponds to the reign of the Antichrist during the tribulation at the end of history (see 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10).<\/p>\nOption 2: The Seventieth Set of Seven Was Completed When Rome Destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple.<\/em> Other interpreters have held that the seventy weeks were fulfilled with the coming of Christ, his death and resurrection, and the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. In this case, Christ began his ministry at the end of the sixty-ninth set of seven, around AD<\/span> 28. He ministered for approximately three and a half years, then was killed in the middle of the seventieth seven. The remaining half-seven ended when the “ruler”—one or more of the Roman rulers—destroyed Jerusalem and its Temple in AD<\/span> 70. The war and its miseries now continue between God’s people and the kingdom of this world to the very end, when Christ will return, judge the wicked, and establish his Kingdom.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDan 7:8, 11, 20-21, 24-27; 8:9-14; 9:24-27; 11:29-31, 40-45; 12:7, 11; 2 Thes 2:3-12; 1 Jn 2:18-22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Rev 13:1, 5; 16:13-14; 17:11; 19:20-21; 20:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Seventy Sets of Seven The seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them...","summary_en":"The Seventy Sets of Seven The seventy sevens (or weeks) of Daniel 9:24-27 have always puzzled students of the Bible. Although difficult to assign to a precise period of history, the seventy sets of seven are significant: They demonstrate God’s sovereignty over history and emphasize his ability to bring his plans for his people to completion. The number seventy (seven times ten) represents completeness. For example, the seventy years of exile for God’s people (9:2) were enough to chastise them...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":39085,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Zechariah","title_en":"Book of Zechariah","content_ro":"<h3>ZECHARIAH, Book of<\/h3>\nLongest book of the Minor Prophets and the most difficult to understand. One reason for this difficulty is the numerous visions that call for an interpreter. At times an interpreting angel is present to tell what the vision means (Zec 1:9-10, 19-20; 4:1-6; 5:5-6), but at other times, when an interpretation is really needed, there is no angel to give one. The obscure meaning of many passages has spawned numerous theories concerning the date, authorship, unity, and interpretation of this book. One thing that makes the book of Zechariah significant for the Christian is its use in the NT. The last part of Zechariah (chs 9–11) is the most quoted section of the Prophets in the Gospel Passion narratives, and, other than Ezekiel, Zechariah influenced the book of Revelation more than any other OT book.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Purpose and Message<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nThe name Zechariah probably means “the Lord remembers” or “the Lord is renowned.” Zechariah is a common name in the OT and NT. At least 30 different people in the OT are named Zechariah. There is a problem in identifying the prophet’s father. In Zechariah 1:1 and 1:7, the prophet is called “the son of Berechiah, the son of Iddo,” but in Ezra 5:1 and 6:14 he is called simply “the son of Iddo.” There was another Zechariah in Isaiah’s time whose father was named Jeberechiah (Is 8:2). Another prophet by the name of Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada the priest, lived much earlier during the reign of Joash, king of Judah (835–796 BC<\/span>). This prophet was stoned to death because he proclaimed that the Lord had forsaken his people because of their sins (2 Chr 24:20-22). Jesus seemed to refer to this or a similar unrecorded incident, but he calls the prophet the son of Berechiah, the last of the martyrs among the prophets (Mt 23:35). However, Luke’s account of what Jesus said about Zechariah (Lk 11:51) does not include the words “the son of Berechiah.” Since Jesus was quoting 2 Chronicles, which was the last book in the Hebrew Bible, he was simply indicating the sweep of time from the first murder (Abel) to the last (Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada). There is no evidence that the prophet of the book of Zechariah was martyred; therefore, the best solution to the problem is to consider Berechiah the father, and Iddo the grandfather, of this prophet.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nThe first part of the book of Zechariah (chs 1–8) is easy to date. The first date is in the first verse, “the eighth month of the second year of Darius.” This was Darius, king of Persia (521–486 BC<\/span>). The eighth month of Darius’s second year would be October 520 BC<\/span>. This date seems to be the first time the “word of the Lord” came to Zechariah. The second date in Zechariah is in 1:7: “On the twenty-fourth day of the eleventh month which is the month of Shebat, in the second year of Darius . . .” (rsv<\/span>). This date would be February 15, 519 BC<\/span>. The word of the Lord that came to Zechariah on this date seems to include the account of eight night visions, along with some oracles, from an angel who talked with him. The third date in Zechariah is in 7:1: “In the fourth year of King Darius . . . on the fourth day of the ninth month, which is Chislev . . .” (rsv<\/span>). This date would be the equivalent of December 7, 518 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThere are no dates in Zechariah 9–14. Zechariah’s name is never mentioned, and neither is Darius or any king. A period of relative peace and stability gives place to war. The temple is standing (11:13; 14:20), and evidently Greek soldiers are present (9:13). Any attempt to assign specific dates to Zechariah 9–14 would be speculation.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nThe temple in Jerusalem was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, in 586 BC<\/span>. Nebuchadnezzar made several raids against Jerusalem before and after it fell, taking many captives to Babylon (cf. 2 Kgs 24:1-17; Dn 1:1). On two occasions, Jeremiah had predicted that captivity would last 70 years (Jer 25:11; 29:10; cf. Dn 9:2). In the time of Zechariah, the period of 70 years since the fall of Jerusalem was coming to an end (Zec 1:12; 7:5). It had been 66 years since Jerusalem fell, when the first “word of the Lord” came to Zechariah in the second year of Darius (520 BC<\/span>). The Babylonian Empire had fallen to the Persians in 538 BC<\/span>, and Cyrus the first king of Persia signed a decree permitting all captives to return to their homes (2 Chr 36:23; Ezr 1:1-4). Evidently, the first contingent of Jewish captives returned to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel and Joshua the priest about 536 BC<\/span>. One of the first objectives of the returnees was to rebuild the temple (Ezr 1:3), but internal strife and external opposition from the Samaritans prohibited the immediate rebuilding of the temple. After Darius I became king of Persia in 521 BC<\/span>, a wave of expectation and enthusiasm swept over the Jewish communities in Jerusalem and Babylon. Two prophets, possibly from the Babylonian exiles, Haggai and Zechariah, began preaching so powerfully that work on the second temple began in 520 BC<\/span> and was finished in 516 BC<\/span> (Ezr 5:1, 14-15; Hg 1–2; Zec 1–8).<\/p>\nThe book of Zechariah opens in the second year of Darius (520 BC<\/span>). Some of the captives had been back in Jerusalem for 16 years, but nothing was being done about rebuilding the temple. Zechariah’s first message called for the people to repent and not repeat the mistake of their fathers, whose sins and refusal to repent led to the exile and destruction of the temple (Zec 1:1-6). Then a series of eight night visions follows (1:7–6:8), assuring the people that the temple would be rebuilt by Zerubbabel (1:16; 4:9; 6:15). Two verses in Zechariah speak volumes concerning the hardships and difficulties in Jerusalem before the temple was rebuilt: “This is what the Lord<\/span> Almighty says: Take heart and finish the task! You have heard what the prophets have been saying about building the Temple of the Lord<\/span> Almighty ever since the foundation was laid. Before the work on the Temple began, there were no jobs and no wages for either people or animals. No traveler was safe from the enemy, for there were enemies on all sides. I had turned everyone against each other” (8:9-10, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe first eight chapters of Zechariah are set against the social, political, and religious situations in Jerusalem from 520 to 518 BC<\/span>. But beginning with chapter 9, historical moorings are lost. Chapter 9 opens with an oracle against Syria, including Damascus, Tyre, and Sidon, and against Philistia. Each of these places will be conquered and cleansed and will become like a clan in Judah. There is the promise of a new king coming triumphantly to Jerusalem, yet humbly riding on a donkey. His reign will be peaceful and universal. The next oracle speaks of setting the captives free, but this may not refer to the Babylonian captives, because of a reference to the Greeks. Zechariah 9–12 is almost wholly concerned with the future. Some scholars call this part apocalyptic literature. The nations attack Jerusalem and are defeated (chs 12, 14). The temple is standing (11:13), but it does not seem to have a place of great prominence in the new Jerusalem and in the kingdom of God (14:6-9).<\/p>\nPurpose and Message<\/p>\nThe purpose of the book is to reassure and encourage. The restored Jewish community of 520 BC<\/span> needed the assurance that the temple would be rebuilt, and later groups of God’s people needed to know that ultimately the kingdom of God would come in its fullness. There are three messages in the book of Zechariah: the need for repentance (1:1–5:11); the eight night visions (1:7–6:8) signifying that the temple would be rebuilt and God’s glory would return to Jerusalem; and the coming kingdom of God (chs 9–14).<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nThe book of Zechariah may be divided into two main parts: chapters 1–8 and 9–14. The first part is dated between 520 BC<\/span> and 518 BC<\/span>. It consists of oracles and visions of Zechariah the son of Berechiah. Mainly prose, its primary concern is to assure the restored Jewish community that the temple will be rebuilt. The second part (chs 9–14) is undated. There are no references to Zechariah. The temple is standing, and much of the language is eschatological and apocalyptic. The second part itself has two parts: chapters 9–11 and 12–14. Chapters 9 and 12 begin essentially the same way: “The oracle of the word of the Lord.”<\/p>\nThe first part of Zechariah (chs 1–8) has four main sections: superscription and first oracle (1:1-6); eight night visions and related oracles (1:7–6:8); the symbolic crowning of Joshua (6:9-15); and the question about fasting and morality (7:1–8:23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Superscription (1:1)<\/h5>\nThis section is dated specifically “in the eighth month” of the Babylonian calendar, which was from mid-October to mid-November. The second year of Darius, king of Persia, was 520 BC<\/span>. The date is important in relating the work of Zechariah to that of Haggai (cf. Hg 1:1, 15; 2:1, 10, 18-20) and to the reconstruction of the temple under Zerubbabel. The first oracle concerns the need for repentance. The first message of Zechariah came between Haggai’s second and third message. He, like Haggai, probably attributed the failure of the crops and other hardships to a failure to rebuild the temple (cf. Hg 1:6-11). Zechariah calls for the people to repent so that they can persevere with work on the temple.<\/p>\n<h5>The Eight Night Visions and Related Oracles (1:7–6:8)<\/h5>\nThese visions that Zechariah saw in Jerusalem all seem to have been given on the night of the 24th day of the 11th month (Shebat) in the second year of Darius (mid-January to mid-February 519 BC<\/span>). Seven of the eight visions have essentially the same form. Four of the visions begin with the words “Then I looked up and saw” (1:18; 2:1; 5:1; 6:1). One begins, “In a vision during the night” (1:8). Another begins, “Then the angel who had been talking with me returned and woke me, as though I had been asleep. ‘What do you see now?’ he asked” (4:1-2, nlt<\/span>). Still another (the seventh) vision begins, “Then the angel who was talking with me came forward and said . . .” (5:5). However, the fourth vision is different from the other seven. It begins, “Then he showed me” (3:1, cf. Am 7:1, 4, 7). This message in the third person contains no interpreting angel nor any direct message to Zechariah, as if he were merely an observer. This fourth vision is so different from the other seven that it was not a part of the original series of eight.<\/p>\nAn overall pattern to the eight visions is not evident. Some scholars have seen some significance in the fact that the visions move from the evening or night in the first vision to the sunrise in the last vision. Others have detected some relationships in pairs of visions. The first and last visions involve horses and riders or chariots. The second and third visions involve the restoration of Judah and Jerusalem (1:18-21; 2:1-5). The fourth and fifth deal with the place of the two leaders in the restored community: Joshua will be cleansed and restored as the high priest (3:1-5) and Zerubbabel the governor will complete the temple (4:1-14). The sixth and seventh visions involve the cleansing of the land. A flying scroll enters the house of every thief and false witness and consumes it (5:1-4). Wickedness personified as a woman will be carried in an ephah (basket) to the land of Shinar (vv 5-11). Interspersed in the vision accounts are four oracles (1:14-17; 2:8-13; 3:6-10; 4:8-14). Each of these passages begins with the messenger formula, “Thus says the Lord,” or the expression “Cry out” (1:14, 17). The first oracle assures the people that the temple, the cities, and the choice of Jerusalem will be renewed. The second oracle exhorts any exiles remaining in Babylon to return to Judah and Jerusalem (2:7-12). Zechariah 2:12-13 are interesting. Verse 12 is the only OT reference to Palestine as “the Holy Land,” and verse 13 is similar to the call to worship in Habakkuk 2:20: “Be silent before the Lord<\/span>, all humanity, for he is springing into action from his holy dwelling” (Zec 2:13, nlt<\/span>). The third oracle in the visionary accounts concerns Joshua the high priest as a sign of the coming of God’s servant, the Branch who removes the guilt of the land in a single day (3:6-10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Symbolic Crowning of Joshua (6:9-15)<\/h5>\nZechariah is told to go into the house of Josiah son of Zephaniah, take silver and gold from some returnees from Babylon, make a crown, and put it on the head of Joshua the priest as a symbol of the royal and priestly king, the Branch, the builder of the temple. After the ceremony the crown is to be hung in the temple as a memorial of those who gave the silver and the gold. The last verse (6:15) seems to say that just as gold and silver from exiles was used to symbolize the crowning of the coming king of the kingdom, so exiles, “those who are far off,” will also participate in the completion of the temple. Then Zechariah’s hearers will know God sent him to prophesy. This will all take place when and if they will diligently obey the voice of the Lord.<\/p>\n<h5>The Question about Fasting and Morality (7:1–8:23)<\/h5>\nA delegation from Bethel (10 miles or 16.1 kilometers north of Jerusalem) came to Jerusalem in the fourth year of Darius (518 BC<\/span>). Work on the temple had been going on for two years. The purpose of this visit was to entreat the favor of the Lord (7:2) and to ask the priests and the prophets if they should continue to fast as they had done since the temple was destroyed 70 years earlier (v 3). The Lord told Zechariah to ask why they were fasting—for the Lord or for selfish motives? The answer to the question of fasting seems to be that God desires truth, justice, and covenant-love more than fasting. Zechariah reiterates the message the Lord had already given his people by the former prophets. The last section in the first part of Zechariah is a decalogue of promises (8:1-23). The ten promises begin with the words “Thus says the Lord” or “The word of the Lord came to me.” The last word of God is not judgment but promise, hope, forgiveness, and restoration.<\/p>\n<h5>The Oracles of the Lord (chs 9–12)<\/h5>\nThe last half of the book of Zechariah (chs 9–14) falls into two nearly equal parts: chapters 9–11 (46 verses) and chapters 12–14 (44 verses). Each part begins with the words “An oracle” (9:1; 12:1). Both “oracles” are primarily eschatological. The first part (chs 9–11) is concerned with the restoration of the tribes to Palestine (9:11-17; 10:6-12). In order to accomplish this, the Lord will rid Palestine and Syria of opponents to his rule (9:1-8; 11:1-3), remove the evil shepherds (rulers; 10:2b-5; 11:4-17), and the Prince of Peace will come (9:9-10). The last “oracle” of Zechariah (12:1–14:21) is also eschatological. This time the concern is primarily that of Jerusalem and Judah. Twice Jerusalem is attacked by the nations (12:1-8; 14:1-5). Each time the Lord fights for Jerusalem, Judah, and the house of David. Jerusalem weeps and mourns for an unidentified martyr (12:10-14). The martyr could be called the “good” shepherd who is killed and his sheep scattered (13:7-9). Jesus referred to this passage in connection with his arrest (Mt 26:31; Mk 14:27). A fountain will be opened for the house of David, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem will be cleansed from sin, idolatry, and false prophets (Zec 13:1-6). The new Jerusalem will remain aloft on its site and the land around it will be turned into a plain (14:10-11). There will be no night nor extreme temperatures in the new Jerusalem. Living waters will flow from Jerusalem, and the Lord will become King of all the earth. Those who fight against Jerusalem will be destroyed, but those who survive will worship the Lord year by year by keeping the Feast of Booths.<\/p>\nThe last scene in the book of Zechariah is a picture of the world after Armageddon, a new world cleansed of sin. It will be a time of peace and security. When God comes to reign, everything will become holy. The warhorses will become as holy as the priest’s turban, and the ordinary cooking vessel will be as temple vessels. The Canaanite or trader will be eliminated. There will be no difference between Jew and Gentile, as long as one worships the Lord of Hosts as King.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Israel, History of; Postexilic Period; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess; Zechariah (Person) #20.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ZECHARIAH, Book of<\/h3>\nLongest book of the Minor Prophets and the most difficult to understand. One reason for this difficulty is the numerous visions that call for an interpreter. At times an interpreting angel is present to tell what the vision means (Zec 1:9-10, 19-20; 4:1-6; 5:5-6), but at other times, when an interpretation is really needed, there is no angel to give one. The obscure meaning of many passages has spawned numerous theories concerning the date, authorship, unity, and interpretation of this book. One thing that makes the book of Zechariah significant for the Christian is its use in the NT. The last part of Zechariah (chs 9–11) is the most quoted section of the Prophets in the Gospel Passion narratives, and, other than Ezekiel, Zechariah influenced the book of Revelation more than any other OT book.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Purpose and Message<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nThe name Zechariah probably means “the Lord remembers” or “the Lord is renowned.” Zechariah is a common name in the OT and NT. At least 30 different people in the OT are named Zechariah. There is a problem in identifying the prophet’s father. In Zechariah 1:1 and 1:7, the prophet is called “the son of Berechiah, the son of Iddo,” but in Ezra 5:1 and 6:14 he is called simply “the son of Iddo.” There was another Zechariah in Isaiah’s time whose father was named Jeberechiah (Is 8:2). Another prophet by the name of Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada the priest, lived much earlier during the reign of Joash, king of Judah (835–796 BC<\/span>). This prophet was stoned to death because he proclaimed that the Lord had forsaken his people because of their sins (2 Chr 24:20-22). Jesus seemed to refer to this or a similar unrecorded incident, but he calls the prophet the son of Berechiah, the last of the martyrs among the prophets (Mt 23:35). However, Luke’s account of what Jesus said about Zechariah (Lk 11:51) does not include the words “the son of Berechiah.” Since Jesus was quoting 2 Chronicles, which was the last book in the Hebrew Bible, he was simply indicating the sweep of time from the first murder (Abel) to the last (Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada). There is no evidence that the prophet of the book of Zechariah was martyred; therefore, the best solution to the problem is to consider Berechiah the father, and Iddo the grandfather, of this prophet.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nThe first part of the book of Zechariah (chs 1–8) is easy to date. The first date is in the first verse, “the eighth month of the second year of Darius.” This was Darius, king of Persia (521–486 BC<\/span>). The eighth month of Darius’s second year would be October 520 BC<\/span>. This date seems to be the first time the “word of the Lord” came to Zechariah. The second date in Zechariah is in 1:7: “On the twenty-fourth day of the eleventh month which is the month of Shebat, in the second year of Darius . . .” (rsv<\/span>). This date would be February 15, 519 BC<\/span>. The word of the Lord that came to Zechariah on this date seems to include the account of eight night visions, along with some oracles, from an angel who talked with him. The third date in Zechariah is in 7:1: “In the fourth year of King Darius . . . on the fourth day of the ninth month, which is Chislev . . .” (rsv<\/span>). This date would be the equivalent of December 7, 518 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThere are no dates in Zechariah 9–14. Zechariah’s name is never mentioned, and neither is Darius or any king. A period of relative peace and stability gives place to war. The temple is standing (11:13; 14:20), and evidently Greek soldiers are present (9:13). Any attempt to assign specific dates to Zechariah 9–14 would be speculation.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nThe temple in Jerusalem was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, in 586 BC<\/span>. Nebuchadnezzar made several raids against Jerusalem before and after it fell, taking many captives to Babylon (cf. 2 Kgs 24:1-17; Dn 1:1). On two occasions, Jeremiah had predicted that captivity would last 70 years (Jer 25:11; 29:10; cf. Dn 9:2). In the time of Zechariah, the period of 70 years since the fall of Jerusalem was coming to an end (Zec 1:12; 7:5). It had been 66 years since Jerusalem fell, when the first “word of the Lord” came to Zechariah in the second year of Darius (520 BC<\/span>). The Babylonian Empire had fallen to the Persians in 538 BC<\/span>, and Cyrus the first king of Persia signed a decree permitting all captives to return to their homes (2 Chr 36:23; Ezr 1:1-4). Evidently, the first contingent of Jewish captives returned to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel and Joshua the priest about 536 BC<\/span>. One of the first objectives of the returnees was to rebuild the temple (Ezr 1:3), but internal strife and external opposition from the Samaritans prohibited the immediate rebuilding of the temple. After Darius I became king of Persia in 521 BC<\/span>, a wave of expectation and enthusiasm swept over the Jewish communities in Jerusalem and Babylon. Two prophets, possibly from the Babylonian exiles, Haggai and Zechariah, began preaching so powerfully that work on the second temple began in 520 BC<\/span> and was finished in 516 BC<\/span> (Ezr 5:1, 14-15; Hg 1–2; Zec 1–8).<\/p>\nThe book of Zechariah opens in the second year of Darius (520 BC<\/span>). Some of the captives had been back in Jerusalem for 16 years, but nothing was being done about rebuilding the temple. Zechariah’s first message called for the people to repent and not repeat the mistake of their fathers, whose sins and refusal to repent led to the exile and destruction of the temple (Zec 1:1-6). Then a series of eight night visions follows (1:7–6:8), assuring the people that the temple would be rebuilt by Zerubbabel (1:16; 4:9; 6:15). Two verses in Zechariah speak volumes concerning the hardships and difficulties in Jerusalem before the temple was rebuilt: “This is what the Lord<\/span> Almighty says: Take heart and finish the task! You have heard what the prophets have been saying about building the Temple of the Lord<\/span> Almighty ever since the foundation was laid. Before the work on the Temple began, there were no jobs and no wages for either people or animals. No traveler was safe from the enemy, for there were enemies on all sides. I had turned everyone against each other” (8:9-10, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe first eight chapters of Zechariah are set against the social, political, and religious situations in Jerusalem from 520 to 518 BC<\/span>. But beginning with chapter 9, historical moorings are lost. Chapter 9 opens with an oracle against Syria, including Damascus, Tyre, and Sidon, and against Philistia. Each of these places will be conquered and cleansed and will become like a clan in Judah. There is the promise of a new king coming triumphantly to Jerusalem, yet humbly riding on a donkey. His reign will be peaceful and universal. The next oracle speaks of setting the captives free, but this may not refer to the Babylonian captives, because of a reference to the Greeks. Zechariah 9–12 is almost wholly concerned with the future. Some scholars call this part apocalyptic literature. The nations attack Jerusalem and are defeated (chs 12, 14). The temple is standing (11:13), but it does not seem to have a place of great prominence in the new Jerusalem and in the kingdom of God (14:6-9).<\/p>\nPurpose and Message<\/p>\nThe purpose of the book is to reassure and encourage. The restored Jewish community of 520 BC<\/span> needed the assurance that the temple would be rebuilt, and later groups of God’s people needed to know that ultimately the kingdom of God would come in its fullness. There are three messages in the book of Zechariah: the need for repentance (1:1–5:11); the eight night visions (1:7–6:8) signifying that the temple would be rebuilt and God’s glory would return to Jerusalem; and the coming kingdom of God (chs 9–14).<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nThe book of Zechariah may be divided into two main parts: chapters 1–8 and 9–14. The first part is dated between 520 BC<\/span> and 518 BC<\/span>. It consists of oracles and visions of Zechariah the son of Berechiah. Mainly prose, its primary concern is to assure the restored Jewish community that the temple will be rebuilt. The second part (chs 9–14) is undated. There are no references to Zechariah. The temple is standing, and much of the language is eschatological and apocalyptic. The second part itself has two parts: chapters 9–11 and 12–14. Chapters 9 and 12 begin essentially the same way: “The oracle of the word of the Lord.”<\/p>\nThe first part of Zechariah (chs 1–8) has four main sections: superscription and first oracle (1:1-6); eight night visions and related oracles (1:7–6:8); the symbolic crowning of Joshua (6:9-15); and the question about fasting and morality (7:1–8:23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Superscription (1:1)<\/h5>\nThis section is dated specifically “in the eighth month” of the Babylonian calendar, which was from mid-October to mid-November. The second year of Darius, king of Persia, was 520 BC<\/span>. The date is important in relating the work of Zechariah to that of Haggai (cf. Hg 1:1, 15; 2:1, 10, 18-20) and to the reconstruction of the temple under Zerubbabel. The first oracle concerns the need for repentance. The first message of Zechariah came between Haggai’s second and third message. He, like Haggai, probably attributed the failure of the crops and other hardships to a failure to rebuild the temple (cf. Hg 1:6-11). Zechariah calls for the people to repent so that they can persevere with work on the temple.<\/p>\n<h5>The Eight Night Visions and Related Oracles (1:7–6:8)<\/h5>\nThese visions that Zechariah saw in Jerusalem all seem to have been given on the night of the 24th day of the 11th month (Shebat) in the second year of Darius (mid-January to mid-February 519 BC<\/span>). Seven of the eight visions have essentially the same form. Four of the visions begin with the words “Then I looked up and saw” (1:18; 2:1; 5:1; 6:1). One begins, “In a vision during the night” (1:8). Another begins, “Then the angel who had been talking with me returned and woke me, as though I had been asleep. ‘What do you see now?’ he asked” (4:1-2, nlt<\/span>). Still another (the seventh) vision begins, “Then the angel who was talking with me came forward and said . . .” (5:5). However, the fourth vision is different from the other seven. It begins, “Then he showed me” (3:1, cf. Am 7:1, 4, 7). This message in the third person contains no interpreting angel nor any direct message to Zechariah, as if he were merely an observer. This fourth vision is so different from the other seven that it was not a part of the original series of eight.<\/p>\nAn overall pattern to the eight visions is not evident. Some scholars have seen some significance in the fact that the visions move from the evening or night in the first vision to the sunrise in the last vision. Others have detected some relationships in pairs of visions. The first and last visions involve horses and riders or chariots. The second and third visions involve the restoration of Judah and Jerusalem (1:18-21; 2:1-5). The fourth and fifth deal with the place of the two leaders in the restored community: Joshua will be cleansed and restored as the high priest (3:1-5) and Zerubbabel the governor will complete the temple (4:1-14). The sixth and seventh visions involve the cleansing of the land. A flying scroll enters the house of every thief and false witness and consumes it (5:1-4). Wickedness personified as a woman will be carried in an ephah (basket) to the land of Shinar (vv 5-11). Interspersed in the vision accounts are four oracles (1:14-17; 2:8-13; 3:6-10; 4:8-14). Each of these passages begins with the messenger formula, “Thus says the Lord,” or the expression “Cry out” (1:14, 17). The first oracle assures the people that the temple, the cities, and the choice of Jerusalem will be renewed. The second oracle exhorts any exiles remaining in Babylon to return to Judah and Jerusalem (2:7-12). Zechariah 2:12-13 are interesting. Verse 12 is the only OT reference to Palestine as “the Holy Land,” and verse 13 is similar to the call to worship in Habakkuk 2:20: “Be silent before the Lord<\/span>, all humanity, for he is springing into action from his holy dwelling” (Zec 2:13, nlt<\/span>). The third oracle in the visionary accounts concerns Joshua the high priest as a sign of the coming of God’s servant, the Branch who removes the guilt of the land in a single day (3:6-10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Symbolic Crowning of Joshua (6:9-15)<\/h5>\nZechariah is told to go into the house of Josiah son of Zephaniah, take silver and gold from some returnees from Babylon, make a crown, and put it on the head of Joshua the priest as a symbol of the royal and priestly king, the Branch, the builder of the temple. After the ceremony the crown is to be hung in the temple as a memorial of those who gave the silver and the gold. The last verse (6:15) seems to say that just as gold and silver from exiles was used to symbolize the crowning of the coming king of the kingdom, so exiles, “those who are far off,” will also participate in the completion of the temple. Then Zechariah’s hearers will know God sent him to prophesy. This will all take place when and if they will diligently obey the voice of the Lord.<\/p>\n<h5>The Question about Fasting and Morality (7:1–8:23)<\/h5>\nA delegation from Bethel (10 miles or 16.1 kilometers north of Jerusalem) came to Jerusalem in the fourth year of Darius (518 BC<\/span>). Work on the temple had been going on for two years. The purpose of this visit was to entreat the favor of the Lord (7:2) and to ask the priests and the prophets if they should continue to fast as they had done since the temple was destroyed 70 years earlier (v 3). The Lord told Zechariah to ask why they were fasting—for the Lord or for selfish motives? The answer to the question of fasting seems to be that God desires truth, justice, and covenant-love more than fasting. Zechariah reiterates the message the Lord had already given his people by the former prophets. The last section in the first part of Zechariah is a decalogue of promises (8:1-23). The ten promises begin with the words “Thus says the Lord” or “The word of the Lord came to me.” The last word of God is not judgment but promise, hope, forgiveness, and restoration.<\/p>\n<h5>The Oracles of the Lord (chs 9–12)<\/h5>\nThe last half of the book of Zechariah (chs 9–14) falls into two nearly equal parts: chapters 9–11 (46 verses) and chapters 12–14 (44 verses). Each part begins with the words “An oracle” (9:1; 12:1). Both “oracles” are primarily eschatological. The first part (chs 9–11) is concerned with the restoration of the tribes to Palestine (9:11-17; 10:6-12). In order to accomplish this, the Lord will rid Palestine and Syria of opponents to his rule (9:1-8; 11:1-3), remove the evil shepherds (rulers; 10:2b-5; 11:4-17), and the Prince of Peace will come (9:9-10). The last “oracle” of Zechariah (12:1–14:21) is also eschatological. This time the concern is primarily that of Jerusalem and Judah. Twice Jerusalem is attacked by the nations (12:1-8; 14:1-5). Each time the Lord fights for Jerusalem, Judah, and the house of David. Jerusalem weeps and mourns for an unidentified martyr (12:10-14). The martyr could be called the “good” shepherd who is killed and his sheep scattered (13:7-9). Jesus referred to this passage in connection with his arrest (Mt 26:31; Mk 14:27). A fountain will be opened for the house of David, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem will be cleansed from sin, idolatry, and false prophets (Zec 13:1-6). The new Jerusalem will remain aloft on its site and the land around it will be turned into a plain (14:10-11). There will be no night nor extreme temperatures in the new Jerusalem. Living waters will flow from Jerusalem, and the Lord will become King of all the earth. Those who fight against Jerusalem will be destroyed, but those who survive will worship the Lord year by year by keeping the Feast of Booths.<\/p>\nThe last scene in the book of Zechariah is a picture of the world after Armageddon, a new world cleansed of sin. It will be a time of peace and security. When God comes to reign, everything will become holy. The warhorses will become as holy as the priest’s turban, and the ordinary cooking vessel will be as temple vessels. The Canaanite or trader will be eliminated. There will be no difference between Jew and Gentile, as long as one worships the Lord of Hosts as King.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Israel, History of; Postexilic Period; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess; Zechariah (Person) #20.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ZECHARIAH, Book of Longest book of the Minor Prophets and the most difficult to understand. One reason for this difficulty is the numerous visions that call for an interpreter. At times an interpreting angel is present to tell what the vision means (Zec 1:9-10, 19-20; 4:1-6; 5:5-6), but at other times, when an interpretation is really needed, there is no angel to give one. The obscure meaning of many passages has spawned numerous theories concerning the date, authorship, unity, and interpreta...","summary_en":"ZECHARIAH, Book of Longest book of the Minor Prophets and the most difficult to understand. One reason for this difficulty is the numerous visions that call for an interpreter. At times an interpreting angel is present to tell what the vision means (Zec 1:9-10, 19-20; 4:1-6; 5:5-6), but at other times, when an interpretation is really needed, there is no angel to give one. The obscure meaning of many passages has spawned numerous theories concerning the date, authorship, unity, and interpreta...","source":"Articles\/Z.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":47985,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:3","content_ro":"1:3<\/strong> Any of you who are his people may go:<\/em> The Assyrians and Babylonians had ruled their empires by deporting people and spreading them out in cities throughout their empires. The Persians, by contrast, returned exiled people to their homelands, expecting the returned people to be thankful, obey the Persians, and pay their taxes.<\/p>","content_en":"1:3<\/strong> Any of you who are his people may go:<\/em> The Assyrians and Babylonians had ruled their empires by deporting people and spreading them out in cities throughout their empires. The Persians, by contrast, returned exiled people to their homelands, expecting the returned people to be thankful, obey the Persians, and pay their taxes.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:3 Any of you who are his people may go: The Assyrians and Babylonians had ruled their empires by deporting people and spreading them out in cities throughout their empires. The Persians, by contrast, returned exiled people to their homelands, expecting the returned people to be thankful, obey the Persians, and pay their taxes.","summary_en":"1:3 Any of you who are his people may go: The Assyrians and Babylonians had ruled their empires by deporting people and spreading them out in cities throughout their empires. The Persians, by contrast, returned exiled people to their homelands, expecting the returned people to be thankful, obey the Persians, and pay their taxes.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75611,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:3","content_ro":"1:3<\/strong> Any of you who are his people may go:<\/em> The Assyrians and Babylonians had ruled their empires by deporting people and spreading them out in cities throughout their empires. The Persians, by contrast, returned exiled people to their homelands, expecting the returned people to be thankful, obey the Persians, and pay their taxes.<\/p>","content_en":"1:3<\/strong> Any of you who are his people may go:<\/em> The Assyrians and Babylonians had ruled their empires by deporting people and spreading them out in cities throughout their empires. The Persians, by contrast, returned exiled people to their homelands, expecting the returned people to be thankful, obey the Persians, and pay their taxes.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:3 Any of you who are his people may go: The Assyrians and Babylonians had ruled their empires by deporting people and spreading them out in cities throughout their empires. The Persians, by contrast, returned exiled people to their homelands, expecting the returned people to be thankful, obey the Persians, and pay their taxes.","summary_en":"1:3 Any of you who are his people may go: The Assyrians and Babylonians had ruled their empires by deporting people and spreading them out in cities throughout their empires. The Persians, by contrast, returned exiled people to their homelands, expecting the returned people to be thankful, obey the Persians, and pay their taxes.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103237,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:3","content_ro":"1:3<\/strong> Any of you who are his people may go:<\/em> The Assyrians and Babylonians had ruled their empires by deporting people and spreading them out in cities throughout their empires. The Persians, by contrast, returned exiled people to their homelands, expecting the returned people to be thankful, obey the Persians, and pay their taxes.<\/p>","content_en":"1:3<\/strong> Any of you who are his people may go:<\/em> The Assyrians and Babylonians had ruled their empires by deporting people and spreading them out in cities throughout their empires. The Persians, by contrast, returned exiled people to their homelands, expecting the returned people to be thankful, obey the Persians, and pay their taxes.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:3 Any of you who are his people may go: The Assyrians and Babylonians had ruled their empires by deporting people and spreading them out in cities throughout their empires. The Persians, by contrast, returned exiled people to their homelands, expecting the returned people to be thankful, obey the Persians, and pay their taxes.","summary_en":"1:3 Any of you who are his people may go: The Assyrians and Babylonians had ruled their empires by deporting people and spreading them out in cities throughout their empires. The Persians, by contrast, returned exiled people to their homelands, expecting the returned people to be thankful, obey the Persians, and pay their taxes.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":130863,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:3","content_ro":"1:3<\/strong> Any of you who are his people may go:<\/em> The Assyrians and Babylonians had ruled their empires by deporting people and spreading them out in cities throughout their empires. The Persians, by contrast, returned exiled people to their homelands, expecting the returned people to be thankful, obey the Persians, and pay their taxes.<\/p>","content_en":"1:3<\/strong> Any of you who are his people may go:<\/em> The Assyrians and Babylonians had ruled their empires by deporting people and spreading them out in cities throughout their empires. The Persians, by contrast, returned exiled people to their homelands, expecting the returned people to be thankful, obey the Persians, and pay their taxes.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:3 Any of you who are his people may go: The Assyrians and Babylonians had ruled their empires by deporting people and spreading them out in cities throughout their empires. The Persians, by contrast, returned exiled people to their homelands, expecting the returned people to be thankful, obey the Persians, and pay their taxes.","summary_en":"1:3 Any of you who are his people may go: The Assyrians and Babylonians had ruled their empires by deporting people and spreading them out in cities throughout their empires. The Persians, by contrast, returned exiled people to their homelands, expecting the returned people to be thankful, obey the Persians, and pay their taxes.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":47986,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:4","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:4","content_ro":"1:4<\/strong> Cyrus was probably not urging Babylonian neighbors<\/em> of the Jewish remnant<\/em> to help the Hebrews. Rather, he was encouraging Jews who had decided to stay in Babylon to help their countrymen who were returning to Jerusalem.<\/p>","content_en":"1:4<\/strong> Cyrus was probably not urging Babylonian neighbors<\/em> of the Jewish remnant<\/em> to help the Hebrews. Rather, he was encouraging Jews who had decided to stay in Babylon to help their countrymen who were returning to Jerusalem.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:4 Cyrus was probably not urging Babylonian neighbors of the Jewish remnant to help the Hebrews. Rather, he was encouraging Jews who had decided to stay in Babylon to help their countrymen who were returning to Jerusalem.","summary_en":"1:4 Cyrus was probably not urging Babylonian neighbors of the Jewish remnant to help the Hebrews. Rather, he was encouraging Jews who had decided to stay in Babylon to help their countrymen who were returning to Jerusalem.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75612,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:4","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:4","content_ro":"1:4<\/strong> Cyrus was probably not urging Babylonian neighbors<\/em> of the Jewish remnant<\/em> to help the Hebrews. Rather, he was encouraging Jews who had decided to stay in Babylon to help their countrymen who were returning to Jerusalem.<\/p>","content_en":"1:4<\/strong> Cyrus was probably not urging Babylonian neighbors<\/em> of the Jewish remnant<\/em> to help the Hebrews. Rather, he was encouraging Jews who had decided to stay in Babylon to help their countrymen who were returning to Jerusalem.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:4 Cyrus was probably not urging Babylonian neighbors of the Jewish remnant to help the Hebrews. Rather, he was encouraging Jews who had decided to stay in Babylon to help their countrymen who were returning to Jerusalem.","summary_en":"1:4 Cyrus was probably not urging Babylonian neighbors of the Jewish remnant to help the Hebrews. Rather, he was encouraging Jews who had decided to stay in Babylon to help their countrymen who were returning to Jerusalem.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103238,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:4","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:4","content_ro":"1:4<\/strong> Cyrus was probably not urging Babylonian neighbors<\/em> of the Jewish remnant<\/em> to help the Hebrews. Rather, he was encouraging Jews who had decided to stay in Babylon to help their countrymen who were returning to Jerusalem.<\/p>","content_en":"1:4<\/strong> Cyrus was probably not urging Babylonian neighbors<\/em> of the Jewish remnant<\/em> to help the Hebrews. Rather, he was encouraging Jews who had decided to stay in Babylon to help their countrymen who were returning to Jerusalem.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:4 Cyrus was probably not urging Babylonian neighbors of the Jewish remnant to help the Hebrews. Rather, he was encouraging Jews who had decided to stay in Babylon to help their countrymen who were returning to Jerusalem.","summary_en":"1:4 Cyrus was probably not urging Babylonian neighbors of the Jewish remnant to help the Hebrews. Rather, he was encouraging Jews who had decided to stay in Babylon to help their countrymen who were returning to Jerusalem.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":130864,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:4","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:4","content_ro":"1:4<\/strong> Cyrus was probably not urging Babylonian neighbors<\/em> of the Jewish remnant<\/em> to help the Hebrews. Rather, he was encouraging Jews who had decided to stay in Babylon to help their countrymen who were returning to Jerusalem.<\/p>","content_en":"1:4<\/strong> Cyrus was probably not urging Babylonian neighbors<\/em> of the Jewish remnant<\/em> to help the Hebrews. Rather, he was encouraging Jews who had decided to stay in Babylon to help their countrymen who were returning to Jerusalem.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:4 Cyrus was probably not urging Babylonian neighbors of the Jewish remnant to help the Hebrews. Rather, he was encouraging Jews who had decided to stay in Babylon to help their countrymen who were returning to Jerusalem.","summary_en":"1:4 Cyrus was probably not urging Babylonian neighbors of the Jewish remnant to help the Hebrews. Rather, he was encouraging Jews who had decided to stay in Babylon to help their countrymen who were returning to Jerusalem.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":47987,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:5","content_ro":"1:5-6<\/strong> As he had done with the heart of Cyrus (1:1), God stirred the hearts<\/em> of Israel’s leaders. • Very few priests<\/em> and Levites<\/em> actually responded (see 2:36-42). Most of the people who did respond were from two tribes, Judah<\/em> and Benjamin<\/em>. Persian documents show that many Jews stayed in Babylon, where they had homes, businesses, and relatives. A dangerous four-month trip back to the desolate city of Jerusalem, now inhabited by foreigners, was not an inviting choice compared to their comfortable life in Babylon. It was much easier to give many valuable gifts<\/em> and voluntary offerings<\/em> to those who did return.<\/p>","content_en":"1:5-6<\/strong> As he had done with the heart of Cyrus (1:1), God stirred the hearts<\/em> of Israel’s leaders. • Very few priests<\/em> and Levites<\/em> actually responded (see 2:36-42). Most of the people who did respond were from two tribes, Judah<\/em> and Benjamin<\/em>. Persian documents show that many Jews stayed in Babylon, where they had homes, businesses, and relatives. A dangerous four-month trip back to the desolate city of Jerusalem, now inhabited by foreigners, was not an inviting choice compared to their comfortable life in Babylon. It was much easier to give many valuable gifts<\/em> and voluntary offerings<\/em> to those who did return.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:5-6 As he had done with the heart of Cyrus (1:1), God stirred the hearts of Israel’s leaders. • Very few priests and Levites actually responded (see 2:36-42). Most of the people who did respond were from two tribes, Judah and Benjamin. Persian documents show that many Jews stayed in Babylon, where they had homes, businesses, and relatives. A dangerous four-month trip back to the desolate city of Jerusalem, now inhabited by foreigners, was not an inviting choice compared to their comfortable...","summary_en":"1:5-6 As he had done with the heart of Cyrus (1:1), God stirred the hearts of Israel’s leaders. • Very few priests and Levites actually responded (see 2:36-42). Most of the people who did respond were from two tribes, Judah and Benjamin. Persian documents show that many Jews stayed in Babylon, where they had homes, businesses, and relatives. A dangerous four-month trip back to the desolate city of Jerusalem, now inhabited by foreigners, was not an inviting choice compared to their comfortable...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75613,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:5","content_ro":"1:5-6<\/strong> As he had done with the heart of Cyrus (1:1), God stirred the hearts<\/em> of Israel’s leaders. • Very few priests<\/em> and Levites<\/em> actually responded (see 2:36-42). Most of the people who did respond were from two tribes, Judah<\/em> and Benjamin<\/em>. Persian documents show that many Jews stayed in Babylon, where they had homes, businesses, and relatives. A dangerous four-month trip back to the desolate city of Jerusalem, now inhabited by foreigners, was not an inviting choice compared to their comfortable life in Babylon. It was much easier to give many valuable gifts<\/em> and voluntary offerings<\/em> to those who did return.<\/p>","content_en":"1:5-6<\/strong> As he had done with the heart of Cyrus (1:1), God stirred the hearts<\/em> of Israel’s leaders. • Very few priests<\/em> and Levites<\/em> actually responded (see 2:36-42). Most of the people who did respond were from two tribes, Judah<\/em> and Benjamin<\/em>. Persian documents show that many Jews stayed in Babylon, where they had homes, businesses, and relatives. A dangerous four-month trip back to the desolate city of Jerusalem, now inhabited by foreigners, was not an inviting choice compared to their comfortable life in Babylon. It was much easier to give many valuable gifts<\/em> and voluntary offerings<\/em> to those who did return.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:5-6 As he had done with the heart of Cyrus (1:1), God stirred the hearts of Israel’s leaders. • Very few priests and Levites actually responded (see 2:36-42). Most of the people who did respond were from two tribes, Judah and Benjamin. Persian documents show that many Jews stayed in Babylon, where they had homes, businesses, and relatives. A dangerous four-month trip back to the desolate city of Jerusalem, now inhabited by foreigners, was not an inviting choice compared to their comfortable...","summary_en":"1:5-6 As he had done with the heart of Cyrus (1:1), God stirred the hearts of Israel’s leaders. • Very few priests and Levites actually responded (see 2:36-42). Most of the people who did respond were from two tribes, Judah and Benjamin. Persian documents show that many Jews stayed in Babylon, where they had homes, businesses, and relatives. A dangerous four-month trip back to the desolate city of Jerusalem, now inhabited by foreigners, was not an inviting choice compared to their comfortable...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103239,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:5","content_ro":"1:5-6<\/strong> As he had done with the heart of Cyrus (1:1), God stirred the hearts<\/em> of Israel’s leaders. • Very few priests<\/em> and Levites<\/em> actually responded (see 2:36-42). Most of the people who did respond were from two tribes, Judah<\/em> and Benjamin<\/em>. Persian documents show that many Jews stayed in Babylon, where they had homes, businesses, and relatives. A dangerous four-month trip back to the desolate city of Jerusalem, now inhabited by foreigners, was not an inviting choice compared to their comfortable life in Babylon. It was much easier to give many valuable gifts<\/em> and voluntary offerings<\/em> to those who did return.<\/p>","content_en":"1:5-6<\/strong> As he had done with the heart of Cyrus (1:1), God stirred the hearts<\/em> of Israel’s leaders. • Very few priests<\/em> and Levites<\/em> actually responded (see 2:36-42). Most of the people who did respond were from two tribes, Judah<\/em> and Benjamin<\/em>. Persian documents show that many Jews stayed in Babylon, where they had homes, businesses, and relatives. A dangerous four-month trip back to the desolate city of Jerusalem, now inhabited by foreigners, was not an inviting choice compared to their comfortable life in Babylon. It was much easier to give many valuable gifts<\/em> and voluntary offerings<\/em> to those who did return.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:5-6 As he had done with the heart of Cyrus (1:1), God stirred the hearts of Israel’s leaders. • Very few priests and Levites actually responded (see 2:36-42). Most of the people who did respond were from two tribes, Judah and Benjamin. Persian documents show that many Jews stayed in Babylon, where they had homes, businesses, and relatives. A dangerous four-month trip back to the desolate city of Jerusalem, now inhabited by foreigners, was not an inviting choice compared to their comfortable...","summary_en":"1:5-6 As he had done with the heart of Cyrus (1:1), God stirred the hearts of Israel’s leaders. • Very few priests and Levites actually responded (see 2:36-42). Most of the people who did respond were from two tribes, Judah and Benjamin. Persian documents show that many Jews stayed in Babylon, where they had homes, businesses, and relatives. A dangerous four-month trip back to the desolate city of Jerusalem, now inhabited by foreigners, was not an inviting choice compared to their comfortable...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":130865,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:5","content_ro":"1:5-6<\/strong> As he had done with the heart of Cyrus (1:1), God stirred the hearts<\/em> of Israel’s leaders. • Very few priests<\/em> and Levites<\/em> actually responded (see 2:36-42). Most of the people who did respond were from two tribes, Judah<\/em> and Benjamin<\/em>. Persian documents show that many Jews stayed in Babylon, where they had homes, businesses, and relatives. A dangerous four-month trip back to the desolate city of Jerusalem, now inhabited by foreigners, was not an inviting choice compared to their comfortable life in Babylon. It was much easier to give many valuable gifts<\/em> and voluntary offerings<\/em> to those who did return.<\/p>","content_en":"1:5-6<\/strong> As he had done with the heart of Cyrus (1:1), God stirred the hearts<\/em> of Israel’s leaders. • Very few priests<\/em> and Levites<\/em> actually responded (see 2:36-42). Most of the people who did respond were from two tribes, Judah<\/em> and Benjamin<\/em>. Persian documents show that many Jews stayed in Babylon, where they had homes, businesses, and relatives. A dangerous four-month trip back to the desolate city of Jerusalem, now inhabited by foreigners, was not an inviting choice compared to their comfortable life in Babylon. It was much easier to give many valuable gifts<\/em> and voluntary offerings<\/em> to those who did return.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:5-6 As he had done with the heart of Cyrus (1:1), God stirred the hearts of Israel’s leaders. • Very few priests and Levites actually responded (see 2:36-42). Most of the people who did respond were from two tribes, Judah and Benjamin. Persian documents show that many Jews stayed in Babylon, where they had homes, businesses, and relatives. A dangerous four-month trip back to the desolate city of Jerusalem, now inhabited by foreigners, was not an inviting choice compared to their comfortable...","summary_en":"1:5-6 As he had done with the heart of Cyrus (1:1), God stirred the hearts of Israel’s leaders. • Very few priests and Levites actually responded (see 2:36-42). Most of the people who did respond were from two tribes, Judah and Benjamin. Persian documents show that many Jews stayed in Babylon, where they had homes, businesses, and relatives. A dangerous four-month trip back to the desolate city of Jerusalem, now inhabited by foreigners, was not an inviting choice compared to their comfortable...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":35029,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sheshbazzar","title_en":"Sheshbazzar","content_ro":"<h3>SHESHBAZZAR<\/h3>\nJewish leader who found favor with Cyrus the Great, king of Persia. In the first year of his reign, Cyrus issued a decree that the temple in Jerusalem should be rebuilt (Ezr 1:1-4; cf. 6:1-5). He appointed Sheshbazzar governor of Judah (Ezr 5:14) and handed over to him the gold and silver vessels that Nebuchadnezzar had carried off when he took Jerusalem (1:7-9). Sheshbazzar fulfilled this commission by taking the vessels to Jerusalem with the returning exiles (v 9) and beginning the restoration of the temple (5:16).<\/p>\nSheshbazzar is mentioned in the Bible only four times, all in the book of Ezra (1:8-9; 5:14-16). For many years it was commonly held that Sheshbazzar was another name for Zerubbabel. Both were of the royal line; Sheshbazzar is called “the prince of Judah,” which may mean that he was heir apparent to the throne. Since his genealogy is not given, he may be represented in that listing by some other name, either Zerubbabel or Shenazzar (1 Chr 3:18-19). In the record of people who returned to Jerusalem, Sheshbazzar’s name does not appear. The name of Zerubbabel is at the head of this list, where one would expect Sheshbazzar’s to be; both were governors of the province of Judah. Zerubbabel is associated with the laying of the foundation of the temple (Ezr 3:8-11), but that work is attributed to Sheshbazzar in 5:16, in accordance with chapter 1. It is evident that the name Sheshbazzar is found only in connection with the Persians, for chapter 1 relates his dealings with Cyrus, and in chapter 5 the two occurrences of his name are in a letter written by the Persian official, Tattenai. One may conclude that the Persians knew him as Sheshbazzar, but the Jews called him Zerubbabel. Both names are Akkadian, so there is no parallel here to the renaming of Jewish captives in Babylon (Dn 1:7).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SHESHBAZZAR<\/h3>\nJewish leader who found favor with Cyrus the Great, king of Persia. In the first year of his reign, Cyrus issued a decree that the temple in Jerusalem should be rebuilt (Ezr 1:1-4; cf. 6:1-5). He appointed Sheshbazzar governor of Judah (Ezr 5:14) and handed over to him the gold and silver vessels that Nebuchadnezzar had carried off when he took Jerusalem (1:7-9). Sheshbazzar fulfilled this commission by taking the vessels to Jerusalem with the returning exiles (v 9) and beginning the restoration of the temple (5:16).<\/p>\nSheshbazzar is mentioned in the Bible only four times, all in the book of Ezra (1:8-9; 5:14-16). For many years it was commonly held that Sheshbazzar was another name for Zerubbabel. Both were of the royal line; Sheshbazzar is called “the prince of Judah,” which may mean that he was heir apparent to the throne. Since his genealogy is not given, he may be represented in that listing by some other name, either Zerubbabel or Shenazzar (1 Chr 3:18-19). In the record of people who returned to Jerusalem, Sheshbazzar’s name does not appear. The name of Zerubbabel is at the head of this list, where one would expect Sheshbazzar’s to be; both were governors of the province of Judah. Zerubbabel is associated with the laying of the foundation of the temple (Ezr 3:8-11), but that work is attributed to Sheshbazzar in 5:16, in accordance with chapter 1. It is evident that the name Sheshbazzar is found only in connection with the Persians, for chapter 1 relates his dealings with Cyrus, and in chapter 5 the two occurrences of his name are in a letter written by the Persian official, Tattenai. One may conclude that the Persians knew him as Sheshbazzar, but the Jews called him Zerubbabel. Both names are Akkadian, so there is no parallel here to the renaming of Jewish captives in Babylon (Dn 1:7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SHESHBAZZAR Jewish leader who found favor with Cyrus the Great, king of Persia. In the first year of his reign, Cyrus issued a decree that the temple in Jerusalem should be rebuilt (Ezr 1:1-4; cf. 6:1-5). He appointed Sheshbazzar governor of Judah (Ezr 5:14) and handed over to him the gold and silver vessels that Nebuchadnezzar had carried off when he took Jerusalem (1:7-9). Sheshbazzar fulfilled this commission by taking the vessels to Jerusalem with the returning exiles (v 9) and beginning ...","summary_en":"SHESHBAZZAR Jewish leader who found favor with Cyrus the Great, king of Persia. In the first year of his reign, Cyrus issued a decree that the temple in Jerusalem should be rebuilt (Ezr 1:1-4; cf. 6:1-5). He appointed Sheshbazzar governor of Judah (Ezr 5:14) and handed over to him the gold and silver vessels that Nebuchadnezzar had carried off when he took Jerusalem (1:7-9). Sheshbazzar fulfilled this commission by taking the vessels to Jerusalem with the returning exiles (v 9) and beginning ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":47988,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:7","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:7","content_ro":"1:7<\/strong> Many articles . . . from the<\/em> Lord<\/span>’s Temple<\/em> had been taken to Babylon (see 2 Chr 36:7; Dan 1:2). By putting these items in his pagan temple, Nebuchadnezzar<\/em> had attempted to show his god’s power over the Hebrew God. However, God had promised the return of all the stolen items (see Jer 27:16-22). The items from the Temple were holy utensils, acceptable to God for worship and very valuable to the returning worshipers.<\/p>","content_en":"1:7<\/strong> Many articles . . . from the<\/em> Lord<\/span>’s Temple<\/em> had been taken to Babylon (see 2 Chr 36:7; Dan 1:2). By putting these items in his pagan temple, Nebuchadnezzar<\/em> had attempted to show his god’s power over the Hebrew God. However, God had promised the return of all the stolen items (see Jer 27:16-22). The items from the Temple were holy utensils, acceptable to God for worship and very valuable to the returning worshipers.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:7 Many articles . . . from the Lord’s Temple had been taken to Babylon (see 2 Chr 36:7; Dan 1:2). By putting these items in his pagan temple, Nebuchadnezzar had attempted to show his god’s power over the Hebrew God. However, God had promised the return of all the stolen items (see Jer 27:16-22). The items from the Temple were holy utensils, acceptable to God for worship and very valuable to the returning worshipers.","summary_en":"1:7 Many articles . . . from the Lord’s Temple had been taken to Babylon (see 2 Chr 36:7; Dan 1:2). By putting these items in his pagan temple, Nebuchadnezzar had attempted to show his god’s power over the Hebrew God. However, God had promised the return of all the stolen items (see Jer 27:16-22). The items from the Temple were holy utensils, acceptable to God for worship and very valuable to the returning worshipers.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75614,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:7","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:7","content_ro":"1:7<\/strong> Many articles . . . from the<\/em> Lord<\/span>’s Temple<\/em> had been taken to Babylon (see 2 Chr 36:7; Dan 1:2). By putting these items in his pagan temple, Nebuchadnezzar<\/em> had attempted to show his god’s power over the Hebrew God. However, God had promised the return of all the stolen items (see Jer 27:16-22). The items from the Temple were holy utensils, acceptable to God for worship and very valuable to the returning worshipers.<\/p>","content_en":"1:7<\/strong> Many articles . . . from the<\/em> Lord<\/span>’s Temple<\/em> had been taken to Babylon (see 2 Chr 36:7; Dan 1:2). By putting these items in his pagan temple, Nebuchadnezzar<\/em> had attempted to show his god’s power over the Hebrew God. However, God had promised the return of all the stolen items (see Jer 27:16-22). The items from the Temple were holy utensils, acceptable to God for worship and very valuable to the returning worshipers.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:7 Many articles . . . from the Lord’s Temple had been taken to Babylon (see 2 Chr 36:7; Dan 1:2). By putting these items in his pagan temple, Nebuchadnezzar had attempted to show his god’s power over the Hebrew God. However, God had promised the return of all the stolen items (see Jer 27:16-22). The items from the Temple were holy utensils, acceptable to God for worship and very valuable to the returning worshipers.","summary_en":"1:7 Many articles . . . from the Lord’s Temple had been taken to Babylon (see 2 Chr 36:7; Dan 1:2). By putting these items in his pagan temple, Nebuchadnezzar had attempted to show his god’s power over the Hebrew God. However, God had promised the return of all the stolen items (see Jer 27:16-22). The items from the Temple were holy utensils, acceptable to God for worship and very valuable to the returning worshipers.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103240,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:7","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:7","content_ro":"1:7<\/strong> Many articles . . . from the<\/em> Lord<\/span>’s Temple<\/em> had been taken to Babylon (see 2 Chr 36:7; Dan 1:2). By putting these items in his pagan temple, Nebuchadnezzar<\/em> had attempted to show his god’s power over the Hebrew God. However, God had promised the return of all the stolen items (see Jer 27:16-22). The items from the Temple were holy utensils, acceptable to God for worship and very valuable to the returning worshipers.<\/p>","content_en":"1:7<\/strong> Many articles . . . from the<\/em> Lord<\/span>’s Temple<\/em> had been taken to Babylon (see 2 Chr 36:7; Dan 1:2). By putting these items in his pagan temple, Nebuchadnezzar<\/em> had attempted to show his god’s power over the Hebrew God. However, God had promised the return of all the stolen items (see Jer 27:16-22). The items from the Temple were holy utensils, acceptable to God for worship and very valuable to the returning worshipers.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:7 Many articles . . . from the Lord’s Temple had been taken to Babylon (see 2 Chr 36:7; Dan 1:2). By putting these items in his pagan temple, Nebuchadnezzar had attempted to show his god’s power over the Hebrew God. However, God had promised the return of all the stolen items (see Jer 27:16-22). The items from the Temple were holy utensils, acceptable to God for worship and very valuable to the returning worshipers.","summary_en":"1:7 Many articles . . . from the Lord’s Temple had been taken to Babylon (see 2 Chr 36:7; Dan 1:2). By putting these items in his pagan temple, Nebuchadnezzar had attempted to show his god’s power over the Hebrew God. However, God had promised the return of all the stolen items (see Jer 27:16-22). The items from the Temple were holy utensils, acceptable to God for worship and very valuable to the returning worshipers.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":130866,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:7","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:7","content_ro":"1:7<\/strong> Many articles . . . from the<\/em> Lord<\/span>’s Temple<\/em> had been taken to Babylon (see 2 Chr 36:7; Dan 1:2). By putting these items in his pagan temple, Nebuchadnezzar<\/em> had attempted to show his god’s power over the Hebrew God. However, God had promised the return of all the stolen items (see Jer 27:16-22). The items from the Temple were holy utensils, acceptable to God for worship and very valuable to the returning worshipers.<\/p>","content_en":"1:7<\/strong> Many articles . . . from the<\/em> Lord<\/span>’s Temple<\/em> had been taken to Babylon (see 2 Chr 36:7; Dan 1:2). By putting these items in his pagan temple, Nebuchadnezzar<\/em> had attempted to show his god’s power over the Hebrew God. However, God had promised the return of all the stolen items (see Jer 27:16-22). The items from the Temple were holy utensils, acceptable to God for worship and very valuable to the returning worshipers.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:7 Many articles . . . from the Lord’s Temple had been taken to Babylon (see 2 Chr 36:7; Dan 1:2). By putting these items in his pagan temple, Nebuchadnezzar had attempted to show his god’s power over the Hebrew God. However, God had promised the return of all the stolen items (see Jer 27:16-22). The items from the Temple were holy utensils, acceptable to God for worship and very valuable to the returning worshipers.","summary_en":"1:7 Many articles . . . from the Lord’s Temple had been taken to Babylon (see 2 Chr 36:7; Dan 1:2). By putting these items in his pagan temple, Nebuchadnezzar had attempted to show his god’s power over the Hebrew God. However, God had promised the return of all the stolen items (see Jer 27:16-22). The items from the Temple were holy utensils, acceptable to God for worship and very valuable to the returning worshipers.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":19250,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jerusalem","title_en":"Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>JERUSALEM<\/h3>\nHistoric city sacred to Christians, Jews, and Muslims; the chief city of ancient Palestine and of the modern state of Israel.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Meaning of the Name<\/p>\n• Geographical Situation<\/p>\n• History<\/p>\nMeaning of the Name<\/p>\n<h5>Egyptian Meaning<\/h5>\nThe earliest mention of the name occurs in the Egyptian Execration Texts of the 19th and 18th centuries BC<\/span> in the form probably transliterated Urusalimum.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>Semitic Meaning<\/h5>\nIn the 14th century BC<\/span> the name appears in the Abdi-Hepa correspondence from Tell el-Amarna, written Urusalim.<\/em> Later it is found in the inscription of the Assyrian monarch Sennacherib, written Ursalimmu.<\/em> The two transparently Semitic elements, uru<\/em> (city) and salim<\/em> (a divine name), have produced the hyphenated composite meaning “the city of [the god] Salim.” Hyphenating geographic names to incorporate divine elements was a common practice in the ancient Near Eastern world, and the deity Salim, or Shalem (Akkadian, Shulmanu; cf. Solomon), was a member of the Amorite pantheon (cf. Ez 16:3). Since the oldest textual evidence—Egyptian, West Semitic, and Akkadian—supports only urusalim,<\/em> and since the OT itself attests that Jerusalem was not originally a Hebrew city, it is probable that the Semitic etymological origin of this name produced the meaning “the city of [the god] Salim.”<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrew\/Aramaic Meaning<\/h5>\nIn the Hebrew OT, Jerusalem is written yerushalayim<\/span>,<\/em> and in the Aramaic portions the name is rendered yerushalem.<\/em> Containing the elements yarah<\/span> (“to found,” cf. Jb 38:6) and shalem<\/span> (a divine name), it yields the meaning “the foundation of [the god] Shalem,” the sh<\/em> of the Hebrew\/Aramaic to be taken as the phonemic equivalent of the Akkadian s.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>Greek Meaning<\/h5>\nIn the NT, Jerusalem translates the two Greek words Ierousalem<\/span> and Hierosoluma<\/span>.<\/em> The former is simply the Greek transliteration of the OT Aramaic form; the latter reflects the word hieros<\/span> (holy), representing a Hellenized paronomasia, corresponding neither with the Semitic root of the name nor with the city’s historical reality.<\/p>\n\nGeographical Situation<\/p>\nJerusalem is situated 31º 46’ 45” north latitude and 35º 13’ 25” east longitude. The city rises to just over 2,500 feet (762 meters) above sea level and rests some 14 miles (22.5 kilometers) west of the northern end of the Dead Sea and approximately 33 miles (53 kilometers) east of the Mediterranean coast.<\/p>\nA Mediterranean climate pervades Jerusalem. From October to May, the city experiences its rainy season, with an annual accumulation of about 25 inches (63.5 centimeters). Throughout January and February the rains are often driven by winds, and the mercury drops to near freezing (cf. Ezr 10:9); the coldest weather coincides with the days of heaviest rainfall. Snow falls two years out of three. There is no rain between May and September, and a high percentage of solar radiation produces oppressive heat.<\/p>\nLike Rome, Jerusalem is a city set on hills. A cluster of five hills comprise the denuded quadrilateral landmass roughly one mile (1.6 kilometers) long and one-half mile (.8 kilometer) wide, bordered on all sides, except the north, by deep ravines. Stationed astride the crest of Palestine’s central plateau and located at the crossroad of the watershed route connecting Hebron, Bethlehem, Shechem (Nablus), and points north with the longitudinal route from the Jordan Valley and the several arteries to the Mediterranean, Jerusalem is commercially central to the country. The lateral highway through the Judean mountains and eastward could not pass south of Jerusalem, being blocked by the Dead Sea and its sheer cliffs. Because it lacked significant water supply, the city’s strategic commercial location was probably the deciding criterion for its original occupation.<\/p>\nWater, a lifeline of civilization, has always been in meager supply at Jerusalem. The only natural source of permanent water was the spring at Gihon, today sometimes called the Virgin’s Fountain, located in the Kidron Valley immediately east of the ancient fortress conquered by David. Tunnels were burrowed to provide access to the Gihon when Jerusalem was besieged. Later, the Siloam Tunnel was cut through nearly 1,800 feet (548.6 meters) of limestone, allowing the waters of the Gihon to pass through the hill of Zion to the pool of Siloam.<\/p>\nFarther south, where the Kidron and Hinnom Valleys converge, there was another spring, called En-rogel in the Bible (modern Bir Eyyub). Owing to the lowering of the water table, this source of water ceased to percolate and was subsequently converted into a well.<\/p>\nThese two sources were clearly insufficient to sustain a sizable population, and both were too deep in the Kidron to be employed for irrigation. Hence, a vast network of cisterns, reservoirs, and water conduits for supplemental supply has been devised since ancient times.<\/p>\nHistory<\/p>\n<h5>The Pre-Israelite Period<\/h5>\nPaleolithic and Mesolithic flint implements of an Acheulian type found in the plain of the Rephaim constitute the earliest evidence of the existence of human beings in the area of Jerusalem. Near the beginning of the fourth millennium BC<\/span>, the southeastern hill was first occupied by a sedentary group, a fact evinced from the artifactual remains recovered from three graves and the pottery type discovered on bedrock. By 1800 BC<\/span>, the crest of the southeastern hill was walled in rudimentary form.<\/p>\nFrom the Bible one learns that Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek, king of Salem (Gn 14:17-20). Again (ch 22) the great patriarch visited an area later incorporated into Jerusalem, Mt Moriah, the site where Isaac was nearly sacrificed. Second Chronicles 3:1 identifies Mt Moriah as the temple hill. In the 15th century BC<\/span> or thereabouts the Hurrians (possibly the biblical Horites) penetrated into Palestine. About the same time at Jerusalem, extensive building activities were initiated and improved fortification methods were introduced. Accordingly, most writers attribute these projects at Jerusalem to the Hurrian infiltration.<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest and Settlement Period<\/h5>\nUpon learning of Gibeon’s placation of Joshua’s army (Jos 9), Adoni-zedek, king of Jerusalem, formed a coalition with the kings of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon and attacked Gibeon. In response, Joshua marshaled his forces and defeated the coalition, killing all five monarchs at Makkedah (Jos 10:16-27). It appears that the tribe of Judah temporarily took control of Jerusalem and burned it in the wake of this victory (Jgs 1:8). However, the Jebusites reoccupied the site (Jos 15:63; 1 Chr 11:4-5). Apparently, the Jebusites more or less maintained control of Jerusalem until the time of David.<\/p>\nThe city appears again as a boundary separating the tribal inheritances of Judah and Benjamin, becoming the southern border of the latter’s domain. The identification of the “shoulder of the Jebusite” (rsv<\/span> Jos 15:8; 18:16) with Jerusalem is usually explained as a reference to the southwestern hill, probably held also by the Jebusites at this time.<\/p>\n<h5>David’s Jerusalem<\/h5>\nFollowing the Philistine victory atop Mt Gilboa, where Saul and Jonathan were killed in battle (1 Sm 31), David reigned over the tribe of Judah from Hebron, while a surviving son of Saul, Ishbosheth, ruled over the northern tribes from Mahanaim. During the two-year struggle that ensued, the house of David grew stronger while the forces of Ishbosheth shrunk considerably (2 Sm 3:1). This struggle culminated in the death and decapitation of Ishbosheth and the dispersion of his forces. David became the undisputed monarch of all the tribes of Israel.<\/p>\n\nBut the new monarch recognized that a consolidated national capital acceptable to both the north and the south would have to be created. Jerusalem had remained neutral in the conflict, being the site of a Jebusite enclave. It also represented a location that was militarily desirable, and by being commercially central to the fledgling nation, it was ideally suited.<\/p>\nIn the course of David’s 33-year reign at Jerusalem he made the city into the center of an empire that stretched from Egypt to the Euphrates River. He engaged in considerable building and expansion of the city. He fortified the Canaanite walls and prepared an extension of the city, possibly along the east slope of Zion.<\/p>\nDavid also constructed a royal residence, receiving the technology and many materials from Hiram, king of Tyre (2 Sm 5:11). Nehemiah 12:37 suggests that this palace also may have been near the east side of the southeastern hill. It was from a window of this house that Michal saw David dancing in an undignified manner—according to her perception (2 Sm 6:16-23). From the roof of this palace David gazed upon Bathsheba as she bathed (11:2-5), and from this residence he plotted the murder of her husband, Uriah (vv 14-25).<\/p>\nBy bringing the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sm 6:1-15)—implying that Yahweh would reside there—David displayed his most profound leadership. For in this perceptive act he merged for the first time in Israel’s history its political and religious capitals. Jerusalem took on the unique character of a holy city and<\/em> a royal city. As a result, the city would be known as the “city of David” (5:7) as well as the “city of God” (Ps 46:4). Adult male Jews would make their pilgrimages to Jerusalem to take part in the feasts and offerings. It only remained for David to make this arrangement permanent, to enshrine Yahweh at Jerusalem forever by building him a temple. David aspired to do so (2 Sm 7), but God responded that such an undertaking was to be reserved for a son of the king.<\/p>\n<h5>The First Temple Period<\/h5>\nA growing national realization of the extent and impact of the Davidic empire was employed by Solomon to full advantage. Himself an innovative and dynamic administrator, Solomon turned Jerusalem into a cosmopolitan center. The revenues of caravans from Egypt to Babylonia as well as the Phoenician trade with Elath, the Red Sea, and Ophir passed through his royal capital. Solomon’s own naval fleet traveled as far as Tarshish, most likely located on an island along the western coast of Spain. These expeditions returned every three years with such exotic commodities as apes, peacocks, silver, iron, tin, ivory, and gold. The capital swelled with residents and visitors, and the monarch’s fame became proverbial (1 Kgs 10).<\/p>\nSolomon was the great OT builder of Jerusalem. His most significant building enterprise was undoubtedly the first temple. Erected on the summit of the temple hill, this edifice required seven years to construct, from April\/May 966 (1 Kgs 6:1) to October\/November 959 (v 38). Hiram again provided both the technology and the cedar beams.<\/p>\nOne may find in 1 Kings 10:27 a succinct encapsulation of the economic wealth lavished upon Jerusalem by Solomon: silver became as abundant as stone, and cedar was as common as sycamore. It is estimated that the annual revenues that coursed into Jerusalem were as high as $17 million. Ironically, it was the fiscal factor that became the burden of Solomon’s monarchy. Overextending himself financially, his economic and political programs soon required the levying of heavy taxes (1 Kgs 4:7-19) and the drafting of Israelites into forced labor (1 Kgs 5:13-18; cf. 9:20-23). These were the primary factors that prompted the schism in Israel’s political structure after the death of Solomon and resulted in a divided monarchy by 930 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nWhen the Babylonian army laid final siege to Jerusalem (588 BC<\/span>), capturing it after many months, the city was completely decimated. The temple and Solomon’s palace were destroyed with fire; the city walls were demolished. The temple treasures were completely plundered, and the citizens were deported in large numbers.<\/p>\n<h5>The Second Temple Period<\/h5>\nJerusalem’s doom and 70-year captivity had been spelled out by Jeremiah (Jer 25:11; 29:10; cf. 2 Chr 36:21; Dn 9:2). In 538 BC<\/span>, after the fall of Babylon, Cyrus, king of Persia, issued his famous proclamation (2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezr 1:1-4; cf. Is 44:28; 45:1). Thereupon, a humble group of Jews returned to Jerusalem with Sheshbazzar, a prince of Judah (Ezr 1:8-11) and Zerubbabel (2:2). In 515 BC<\/span>, the doors of the second temple were opened officially, and the Passover feast was again observed from Jerusalem (6:15-18).<\/p>\nEzra came to Jerusalem in the seventh year of Artaxerxes (Ezr 7:7). Assuming this is a reference to Artaxerxes I, the date of Ezra’s return would have been 458 BC<\/span>. Again, it was only a meager remnant who felt the compelling urge to make that difficult journey (cf. Josephus’s Antiquities<\/em> 11.1.3).<\/p>\nMoved by reports of troubled conditions (Neh 1:3-4), Nehemiah, in the 20th year of Artaxerxes (445 BC<\/span>), was able to leave his post as cup-bearer to the king and to go to Jerusalem. If the concern of the earlier returnees focused upon the temple, Nehemiah’s was upon the city walls. His is the most comprehensive description of Jerusalem’s postexilic city walls and topography (Neh 2:11-16). Spurred on by his energetic enthusiasm, the people completed the task of rebuilding the walls in 52 days (6:15).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Roman Period<\/h5>\nIn 40 BC<\/span>, with the aid of the Parthians, Antigonus attacked and seized Jerusalem, forcing Herod to escape by night. He journeyed to Rome, where the Senate appointed him as “king of the Jews” (cf. Mt 2:1). Armed with this new authority, Herod marshaled two Roman legions, and in 37 BC<\/span>, he succeeded in forever expelling the Parthians. So began the long and infamous rule of Herod, who reigned at Jerusalem for 33 years (37–4 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nIt cannot be denied that Jerusalem enjoyed prosperous and peaceful years during his reign. Herod transformed the external aspect of Jerusalem. He transferred the seat of government to the southwestern hill. Here he erected a lavish palace, an arena for athletic contests, a theater, and a vast aqueduct network.<\/p>\nOther building projects concerned the temple hill. Herod transformed the old Maccabean fortress into a much larger structure and named it Antonia, in honor of Mark Antony. In the temple area proper he enlarged the esplanade on both the north and south sides, giving it a rectangular shape. Herod’s reconstruction of the temple was undertaken in 20 BC<\/span>, and it was not completed until around AD<\/span> 64, just six years prior to its destruction by Titus (cf. Jn 2:20).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Israel, History of; Jerusalem, New; Judaism; Zion; Zion, Daughter of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JERUSALEM<\/h3>\nHistoric city sacred to Christians, Jews, and Muslims; the chief city of ancient Palestine and of the modern state of Israel.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Meaning of the Name<\/p>\n• Geographical Situation<\/p>\n• History<\/p>\nMeaning of the Name<\/p>\n<h5>Egyptian Meaning<\/h5>\nThe earliest mention of the name occurs in the Egyptian Execration Texts of the 19th and 18th centuries BC<\/span> in the form probably transliterated Urusalimum.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>Semitic Meaning<\/h5>\nIn the 14th century BC<\/span> the name appears in the Abdi-Hepa correspondence from Tell el-Amarna, written Urusalim.<\/em> Later it is found in the inscription of the Assyrian monarch Sennacherib, written Ursalimmu.<\/em> The two transparently Semitic elements, uru<\/em> (city) and salim<\/em> (a divine name), have produced the hyphenated composite meaning “the city of [the god] Salim.” Hyphenating geographic names to incorporate divine elements was a common practice in the ancient Near Eastern world, and the deity Salim, or Shalem (Akkadian, Shulmanu; cf. Solomon), was a member of the Amorite pantheon (cf. Ez 16:3). Since the oldest textual evidence—Egyptian, West Semitic, and Akkadian—supports only urusalim,<\/em> and since the OT itself attests that Jerusalem was not originally a Hebrew city, it is probable that the Semitic etymological origin of this name produced the meaning “the city of [the god] Salim.”<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrew\/Aramaic Meaning<\/h5>\nIn the Hebrew OT, Jerusalem is written yerushalayim<\/span>,<\/em> and in the Aramaic portions the name is rendered yerushalem.<\/em> Containing the elements yarah<\/span> (“to found,” cf. Jb 38:6) and shalem<\/span> (a divine name), it yields the meaning “the foundation of [the god] Shalem,” the sh<\/em> of the Hebrew\/Aramaic to be taken as the phonemic equivalent of the Akkadian s.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>Greek Meaning<\/h5>\nIn the NT, Jerusalem translates the two Greek words Ierousalem<\/span> and Hierosoluma<\/span>.<\/em> The former is simply the Greek transliteration of the OT Aramaic form; the latter reflects the word hieros<\/span> (holy), representing a Hellenized paronomasia, corresponding neither with the Semitic root of the name nor with the city’s historical reality.<\/p>\n\nGeographical Situation<\/p>\nJerusalem is situated 31º 46’ 45” north latitude and 35º 13’ 25” east longitude. The city rises to just over 2,500 feet (762 meters) above sea level and rests some 14 miles (22.5 kilometers) west of the northern end of the Dead Sea and approximately 33 miles (53 kilometers) east of the Mediterranean coast.<\/p>\nA Mediterranean climate pervades Jerusalem. From October to May, the city experiences its rainy season, with an annual accumulation of about 25 inches (63.5 centimeters). Throughout January and February the rains are often driven by winds, and the mercury drops to near freezing (cf. Ezr 10:9); the coldest weather coincides with the days of heaviest rainfall. Snow falls two years out of three. There is no rain between May and September, and a high percentage of solar radiation produces oppressive heat.<\/p>\nLike Rome, Jerusalem is a city set on hills. A cluster of five hills comprise the denuded quadrilateral landmass roughly one mile (1.6 kilometers) long and one-half mile (.8 kilometer) wide, bordered on all sides, except the north, by deep ravines. Stationed astride the crest of Palestine’s central plateau and located at the crossroad of the watershed route connecting Hebron, Bethlehem, Shechem (Nablus), and points north with the longitudinal route from the Jordan Valley and the several arteries to the Mediterranean, Jerusalem is commercially central to the country. The lateral highway through the Judean mountains and eastward could not pass south of Jerusalem, being blocked by the Dead Sea and its sheer cliffs. Because it lacked significant water supply, the city’s strategic commercial location was probably the deciding criterion for its original occupation.<\/p>\nWater, a lifeline of civilization, has always been in meager supply at Jerusalem. The only natural source of permanent water was the spring at Gihon, today sometimes called the Virgin’s Fountain, located in the Kidron Valley immediately east of the ancient fortress conquered by David. Tunnels were burrowed to provide access to the Gihon when Jerusalem was besieged. Later, the Siloam Tunnel was cut through nearly 1,800 feet (548.6 meters) of limestone, allowing the waters of the Gihon to pass through the hill of Zion to the pool of Siloam.<\/p>\nFarther south, where the Kidron and Hinnom Valleys converge, there was another spring, called En-rogel in the Bible (modern Bir Eyyub). Owing to the lowering of the water table, this source of water ceased to percolate and was subsequently converted into a well.<\/p>\nThese two sources were clearly insufficient to sustain a sizable population, and both were too deep in the Kidron to be employed for irrigation. Hence, a vast network of cisterns, reservoirs, and water conduits for supplemental supply has been devised since ancient times.<\/p>\nHistory<\/p>\n<h5>The Pre-Israelite Period<\/h5>\nPaleolithic and Mesolithic flint implements of an Acheulian type found in the plain of the Rephaim constitute the earliest evidence of the existence of human beings in the area of Jerusalem. Near the beginning of the fourth millennium BC<\/span>, the southeastern hill was first occupied by a sedentary group, a fact evinced from the artifactual remains recovered from three graves and the pottery type discovered on bedrock. By 1800 BC<\/span>, the crest of the southeastern hill was walled in rudimentary form.<\/p>\nFrom the Bible one learns that Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek, king of Salem (Gn 14:17-20). Again (ch 22) the great patriarch visited an area later incorporated into Jerusalem, Mt Moriah, the site where Isaac was nearly sacrificed. Second Chronicles 3:1 identifies Mt Moriah as the temple hill. In the 15th century BC<\/span> or thereabouts the Hurrians (possibly the biblical Horites) penetrated into Palestine. About the same time at Jerusalem, extensive building activities were initiated and improved fortification methods were introduced. Accordingly, most writers attribute these projects at Jerusalem to the Hurrian infiltration.<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest and Settlement Period<\/h5>\nUpon learning of Gibeon’s placation of Joshua’s army (Jos 9), Adoni-zedek, king of Jerusalem, formed a coalition with the kings of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon and attacked Gibeon. In response, Joshua marshaled his forces and defeated the coalition, killing all five monarchs at Makkedah (Jos 10:16-27). It appears that the tribe of Judah temporarily took control of Jerusalem and burned it in the wake of this victory (Jgs 1:8). However, the Jebusites reoccupied the site (Jos 15:63; 1 Chr 11:4-5). Apparently, the Jebusites more or less maintained control of Jerusalem until the time of David.<\/p>\nThe city appears again as a boundary separating the tribal inheritances of Judah and Benjamin, becoming the southern border of the latter’s domain. The identification of the “shoulder of the Jebusite” (rsv<\/span> Jos 15:8; 18:16) with Jerusalem is usually explained as a reference to the southwestern hill, probably held also by the Jebusites at this time.<\/p>\n<h5>David’s Jerusalem<\/h5>\nFollowing the Philistine victory atop Mt Gilboa, where Saul and Jonathan were killed in battle (1 Sm 31), David reigned over the tribe of Judah from Hebron, while a surviving son of Saul, Ishbosheth, ruled over the northern tribes from Mahanaim. During the two-year struggle that ensued, the house of David grew stronger while the forces of Ishbosheth shrunk considerably (2 Sm 3:1). This struggle culminated in the death and decapitation of Ishbosheth and the dispersion of his forces. David became the undisputed monarch of all the tribes of Israel.<\/p>\n\nBut the new monarch recognized that a consolidated national capital acceptable to both the north and the south would have to be created. Jerusalem had remained neutral in the conflict, being the site of a Jebusite enclave. It also represented a location that was militarily desirable, and by being commercially central to the fledgling nation, it was ideally suited.<\/p>\nIn the course of David’s 33-year reign at Jerusalem he made the city into the center of an empire that stretched from Egypt to the Euphrates River. He engaged in considerable building and expansion of the city. He fortified the Canaanite walls and prepared an extension of the city, possibly along the east slope of Zion.<\/p>\nDavid also constructed a royal residence, receiving the technology and many materials from Hiram, king of Tyre (2 Sm 5:11). Nehemiah 12:37 suggests that this palace also may have been near the east side of the southeastern hill. It was from a window of this house that Michal saw David dancing in an undignified manner—according to her perception (2 Sm 6:16-23). From the roof of this palace David gazed upon Bathsheba as she bathed (11:2-5), and from this residence he plotted the murder of her husband, Uriah (vv 14-25).<\/p>\nBy bringing the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sm 6:1-15)—implying that Yahweh would reside there—David displayed his most profound leadership. For in this perceptive act he merged for the first time in Israel’s history its political and religious capitals. Jerusalem took on the unique character of a holy city and<\/em> a royal city. As a result, the city would be known as the “city of David” (5:7) as well as the “city of God” (Ps 46:4). Adult male Jews would make their pilgrimages to Jerusalem to take part in the feasts and offerings. It only remained for David to make this arrangement permanent, to enshrine Yahweh at Jerusalem forever by building him a temple. David aspired to do so (2 Sm 7), but God responded that such an undertaking was to be reserved for a son of the king.<\/p>\n<h5>The First Temple Period<\/h5>\nA growing national realization of the extent and impact of the Davidic empire was employed by Solomon to full advantage. Himself an innovative and dynamic administrator, Solomon turned Jerusalem into a cosmopolitan center. The revenues of caravans from Egypt to Babylonia as well as the Phoenician trade with Elath, the Red Sea, and Ophir passed through his royal capital. Solomon’s own naval fleet traveled as far as Tarshish, most likely located on an island along the western coast of Spain. These expeditions returned every three years with such exotic commodities as apes, peacocks, silver, iron, tin, ivory, and gold. The capital swelled with residents and visitors, and the monarch’s fame became proverbial (1 Kgs 10).<\/p>\nSolomon was the great OT builder of Jerusalem. His most significant building enterprise was undoubtedly the first temple. Erected on the summit of the temple hill, this edifice required seven years to construct, from April\/May 966 (1 Kgs 6:1) to October\/November 959 (v 38). Hiram again provided both the technology and the cedar beams.<\/p>\nOne may find in 1 Kings 10:27 a succinct encapsulation of the economic wealth lavished upon Jerusalem by Solomon: silver became as abundant as stone, and cedar was as common as sycamore. It is estimated that the annual revenues that coursed into Jerusalem were as high as $17 million. Ironically, it was the fiscal factor that became the burden of Solomon’s monarchy. Overextending himself financially, his economic and political programs soon required the levying of heavy taxes (1 Kgs 4:7-19) and the drafting of Israelites into forced labor (1 Kgs 5:13-18; cf. 9:20-23). These were the primary factors that prompted the schism in Israel’s political structure after the death of Solomon and resulted in a divided monarchy by 930 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nWhen the Babylonian army laid final siege to Jerusalem (588 BC<\/span>), capturing it after many months, the city was completely decimated. The temple and Solomon’s palace were destroyed with fire; the city walls were demolished. The temple treasures were completely plundered, and the citizens were deported in large numbers.<\/p>\n<h5>The Second Temple Period<\/h5>\nJerusalem’s doom and 70-year captivity had been spelled out by Jeremiah (Jer 25:11; 29:10; cf. 2 Chr 36:21; Dn 9:2). In 538 BC<\/span>, after the fall of Babylon, Cyrus, king of Persia, issued his famous proclamation (2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezr 1:1-4; cf. Is 44:28; 45:1). Thereupon, a humble group of Jews returned to Jerusalem with Sheshbazzar, a prince of Judah (Ezr 1:8-11) and Zerubbabel (2:2). In 515 BC<\/span>, the doors of the second temple were opened officially, and the Passover feast was again observed from Jerusalem (6:15-18).<\/p>\nEzra came to Jerusalem in the seventh year of Artaxerxes (Ezr 7:7). Assuming this is a reference to Artaxerxes I, the date of Ezra’s return would have been 458 BC<\/span>. Again, it was only a meager remnant who felt the compelling urge to make that difficult journey (cf. Josephus’s Antiquities<\/em> 11.1.3).<\/p>\nMoved by reports of troubled conditions (Neh 1:3-4), Nehemiah, in the 20th year of Artaxerxes (445 BC<\/span>), was able to leave his post as cup-bearer to the king and to go to Jerusalem. If the concern of the earlier returnees focused upon the temple, Nehemiah’s was upon the city walls. His is the most comprehensive description of Jerusalem’s postexilic city walls and topography (Neh 2:11-16). Spurred on by his energetic enthusiasm, the people completed the task of rebuilding the walls in 52 days (6:15).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Roman Period<\/h5>\nIn 40 BC<\/span>, with the aid of the Parthians, Antigonus attacked and seized Jerusalem, forcing Herod to escape by night. He journeyed to Rome, where the Senate appointed him as “king of the Jews” (cf. Mt 2:1). Armed with this new authority, Herod marshaled two Roman legions, and in 37 BC<\/span>, he succeeded in forever expelling the Parthians. So began the long and infamous rule of Herod, who reigned at Jerusalem for 33 years (37–4 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nIt cannot be denied that Jerusalem enjoyed prosperous and peaceful years during his reign. Herod transformed the external aspect of Jerusalem. He transferred the seat of government to the southwestern hill. Here he erected a lavish palace, an arena for athletic contests, a theater, and a vast aqueduct network.<\/p>\nOther building projects concerned the temple hill. Herod transformed the old Maccabean fortress into a much larger structure and named it Antonia, in honor of Mark Antony. In the temple area proper he enlarged the esplanade on both the north and south sides, giving it a rectangular shape. Herod’s reconstruction of the temple was undertaken in 20 BC<\/span>, and it was not completed until around AD<\/span> 64, just six years prior to its destruction by Titus (cf. Jn 2:20).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Israel, History of; Jerusalem, New; Judaism; Zion; Zion, Daughter of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JERUSALEM Historic city sacred to Christians, Jews, and Muslims; the chief city of ancient Palestine and of the modern state of Israel. Preview • Meaning of the Name • Geographical Situation • History Meaning of the Name Egyptian Meaning The earliest mention of the name occurs in the Egyptian Execration Texts of the 19th and 18th centuries BC in the form probably transliterated Urusalimum. Semitic Meaning In the 14th century BC the name appears in the Abdi-Hepa correspondence from Tell el-Ama...","summary_en":"JERUSALEM Historic city sacred to Christians, Jews, and Muslims; the chief city of ancient Palestine and of the modern state of Israel. Preview • Meaning of the Name • Geographical Situation • History Meaning of the Name Egyptian Meaning The earliest mention of the name occurs in the Egyptian Execration Texts of the 19th and 18th centuries BC in the form probably transliterated Urusalimum. Semitic Meaning In the 14th century BC the name appears in the Abdi-Hepa correspondence from Tell el-Ama...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":26094,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Mithredath","title_en":"Mithredath","content_ro":"<h3>MITHREDATH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Name of the treasurer of King Cyrus of Persia, who was given charge of the sacred vessels to give to the Judean prince Sheshbazzar as the exiles prepared to return to Jerusalem (Ezr 1:8).<\/li>\n<li>2. Persian officer stationed in Samaria who, along with others, wrote a letter to King Artaxerxes of Persia, protesting the restoration of the city and walls of Jerusalem (Ezr 4:7).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>MITHREDATH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Name of the treasurer of King Cyrus of Persia, who was given charge of the sacred vessels to give to the Judean prince Sheshbazzar as the exiles prepared to return to Jerusalem (Ezr 1:8).<\/li>\n<li>2. Persian officer stationed in Samaria who, along with others, wrote a letter to King Artaxerxes of Persia, protesting the restoration of the city and walls of Jerusalem (Ezr 4:7).<\/li>","summary_ro":"MITHREDATH 1. Name of the treasurer of King Cyrus of Persia, who was given charge of the sacred vessels to give to the Judean prince Sheshbazzar as the exiles prepared to return to Jerusalem (Ezr 1:8). 2. Persian officer stationed in Samaria who, along with others, wrote a letter to King Artaxerxes of Persia, protesting the restoration of the city and walls of Jerusalem (Ezr 4:7).","summary_en":"MITHREDATH 1. Name of the treasurer of King Cyrus of Persia, who was given charge of the sacred vessels to give to the Judean prince Sheshbazzar as the exiles prepared to return to Jerusalem (Ezr 1:8). 2. Persian officer stationed in Samaria who, along with others, wrote a letter to King Artaxerxes of Persia, protesting the restoration of the city and walls of Jerusalem (Ezr 4:7).","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30915,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Period*, Postexilic","title_en":"Period*, Postexilic","content_ro":"<h3>POSTEXILIC PERIOD*<\/h3>\nA period in the Jews’ history after their exile to Babylon. This period extends from 539–c. 331 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• The Biblical Perspective<\/p>\n• The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire<\/p>\n• The Policy of Persia<\/p>\n• The Return from Exile<\/p>\n• The Return of Ezra<\/p>\n• Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry<\/p>\n• The Remainder of the Persian Period<\/p>\n• Religious Features of the Postexilic Period<\/p>\nThe Biblical Perspective<\/p>\nThe books that specifically cover the history of the postexilic or Persian period are Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, and Zechariah. These cover a period of over a century, only a portion of which is dealt with in detail, as the following table shows:<\/p>\n\nThe Collapse of the Babylonian Empire<\/p>\nThis occurred with dramatic suddenness, largely because of internal resistance to the policies of the last Babylonian king, Nabonidus (555–539 BC<\/span>). His neglect of the traditional Babylonian deity, Marduk, in favor of the moon god, Sin, was particularly resented. Nabonidus lived in Taima during the last decade of his reign, refusing to enter Babylon, where his son Belshazzar ruled as virtual king, as noted in Daniel 5. Babylon fell to the Persians in October 538 BC<\/span> and the entire empire passed into their control.<\/p>\nThe Policy of Persia<\/p>\nThis is well documented through contemporary inscriptions, notably the record of Cyrus, the first king of the Persian Empire (559–530 BC<\/span>), in the “Cyrus Cylinder.” A new phase in the relationship of conqueror to conquered peoples opened up, which contrasted with the policy of the Assyrian and Babylonian empires of crushing any opposition by massive force. Cyrus and his successors followed a conciliatory line, allowing exiled groups to return home, encouraging local faiths, posing as the champions of the territorial deities, and allowing local autonomy except where Persian interests were affected adversely. The cost of this operation, although considerable, must have been infinitesimal compared with that of keeping rebellious subjects under constant subjection.<\/p>\nThe new enlightened policy is reflected in the decree of Cyrus, dated 538 BC<\/span> (Ezr 1:1) and preserved in two versions. The first (vv 1-4) is clearly the official proclamation, while the second (6:3-5) is a more prosaic memorandum dealing with building specifications, a record of Cyrus’s commitment stored in the official archives (vv 1-2). The critical tendency to question the narrative in Ezra 1, especially on the score of the favorable references to the God of Israel and the vast financial support promised, has been nullified by the archaeological evidence, which shows an identical policy elsewhere. The Cyrus Cylinder, for example, notes, “The gods who live within them [i.e., the cities] I returned to their places. . . . All of their inhabitants I collected and restored to their dwelling places.”<\/p>\nIn Judah itself there is no evidence for any warfare in this period, which suggests that the Persian takeover of the area was nonviolent. Judah was incorporated into the fifth Persian province, which included the entire area west of the Euphrates River (Ezr 7:21). It was no more than a minor subdistrict, governed through Samaria.<\/p>\nThe Return from Exile<\/p>\nThe continuance of a large Jewish community in Babylonia shows that not all the Jews responded to the invitation to return to their homeland, probably because of the prosperity acquired in exile. But 42,360 dedicated Jews (Ezr 2:64) braved the challenge of a four-month 900-mile (1,448-kilometer) journey under Sheshbazzar (1:8), the officially appointed leader, and Zerubbabel his nephew (3:2), who was probably the one to whom the Jews looked as leader. With great enthusiasm the Jews rebuilt the altar of sacrifice and resumed the observance of the traditional feasts (vv 1-6), revealing both a sense of stewardship (2:68-69) and careful attention to the requirements of the Law (3:2-4). Soon after, work on the second temple commenced—the materials and master craftsmen being imported from Tyre and Sidon (Ezr 3:7-9; cf. 1 Kgs 5). When the foundations were laid, the worshipers were doubtless aware that they were fulfilling God’s promise through Jeremiah (Ezr 3:10-11; cf. Jer 33:10-11). But their high hopes were thwarted when there was opposition from neighboring areas (Ezr 4:4-5), selfishness in giving their own accommodations a higher priority than the Lord’s house (Hg 1:2-4, 9), and a series of crop failures that further reduced morale (1:6, 10-11; 2:17).<\/p>\nWork on the temple was not resumed until Haggai and Zechariah appeared in 520 BC<\/span>. They encouraged Zerubbabel and Joshua (Jeshua) the high priest, rebuked the people for their apathy and selfishness, and promised God’s presence and blessing upon the temple project (Hg 1:12–2:9). Zechariah’s preaching went beyond the building of the temple, including the rebuilding of Jerusalem itself (Zec 2:1-5) and its world reputation (2:1-5, 11-12; 8:22). The two leaders were addressed in ways that anticipated the Messiah (Hg 2:21-23; Zec 6:10-14). But the Persian king Darius (521–486 BC<\/span>) was not alarmed when the rebuilding operation was reported to him (Ezr 5:1–6:13) and allowed the work to continue. In February 515 BC<\/span> it was dedicated (6:14-16). The Jewish community again had a focal point for its religion, but the political situation remained difficult, with no real security in a still-shattered city.<\/p>\nThe Return of Ezra<\/p>\nThe traditional date of Ezra’s return is 458 BC<\/span> (preceding that of Nehemiah in 445 BC<\/span>). This is based on the premise that the King Artaxerxes noted in Ezra 7:7 was Artaxerxes I Longimanus (464–424 BC<\/span>) and not Artaxerxes II Mnemon (404–359 BC<\/span>). However, some scholars, allowing that the king was Artaxerxes I, but believing that Nehemiah preceded Ezra, suggest that a tens unit has dropped out of “seventh” in Ezra 7:7, and that the date of Ezra’s return should be the 27th (438 BC<\/span>) or 37th year (428 BC<\/span>) of Artaxerxes I, making Ezra’s return a few years after Nehemiah’s. While this is plausible, there remains strong support for the traditional view. It accords with the order of the two books in the OT and requires no textual emendation. It also accounts for the section in Ezra 4:7-23, where, in the reign of Artaxerxes, an abortive effort was made by a recently returned group to rebuild the wall of Jerusalem. Nehemiah 1:1-4 suggests that this was regarded as important and its abrupt termination, by a decree of the king, caused Nehemiah great distress. The probability is that Ezra, recently returned, realized that little could be done in the way of major religious reformation until Jerusalem was secure, but in attempting to rebuild the wall he exceeded his mandate and was not able to function adequately until Nehemiah arrived, when the new security of Jerusalem allowed the great Law-reading ceremony of Nehemiah 8:1-12 to take place.<\/p>\nEzra’s ministry concerned the teaching of the Law of Moses, the Pentateuch, which had long been extant in its final form by this time. Ezra 7 shows that Artaxerxes was following the traditional Persian policy of encouraging good relationships with his subject peoples. Ezra’s appointment (Ezr 7:12) was to a state office; it has frequently been paraphrased as “Secretary of State for Jewish Religious Affairs.”<\/p>\n\nNehemiah’s Return and Ministry<\/p>\nHanani and others (Neh 1:1-3) informed Nehemiah of the complete failure of a recent attempt to rebuild the wall, probably that recorded in Ezra 4:7-23, and sought his mediation before the very king who had authorized the decree that compelled work on the wall to cease. A friend in high places was vital, and Nehemiah, a trusted and influential member of the court (Neh 1:11), was approached for this delicate and dangerous task. Nehemiah 1:4–2:8 shows how well he prepared for and seized his opportunity. His appointment as the governor of Judah (5:14) involved the removal of this area from the control of the governor of Samaria, which accounts for the unrelenting hostility of Sanballat (2:19; 4:1). The evidence of Nehemiah 3 suggests that the extent of Judah at this time was limited, probably not reaching as far north as Bethel or as far south as Hebron. Nehemiah was faced with opposition that included ridicule (2:19; 4:1-3), armed force (4:8, 11), discouragement (v 10), internal economic problems (5:1-18), intrigue (6:1-2), intimidation, and blackmail (vv 5-14). In spite of these obstacles, the wall was completed in the incredibly brief period of 52 days (v 15).<\/p>\nIn addition to this monumental achievement, Nehemiah completely reorganized the social and economic life of Jerusalem, dealing with alienated mortgages, excessive interest rates (Neh 5:1-13), mixed marriages (10:30; 13:23-30), Sabbath observance (10:31; 13:15-21), and temple supplies (10:32-40; 13:10-13). Almost certainly, it was this political and economic security that allowed Ezra, who probably arrived 13 years earlier, to proceed with his great religious reformation based on the Law. Nehemiah’s book, usually called the “Nehemiah Memoirs,” was probably presented by him in the temple as a “votive offering” (as indicated by the form of 5:19; 13:14, 22, 31).<\/p>\nThe Remainder of the Persian Period<\/p>\nPersian control, which probably centered on Lachish, was traditionally mild, except where her interests were directly threatened. There is no evidence of any major discontent in Judah, which enjoyed a considerable degree of autonomy. The Phoenician revolt of 351 BC<\/span>, which took Artaxerxes III (359–338 BC<\/span>) three years to subdue, was the only serious disturbance in the area. While Artaxerxes deported some Jews to Hyrcania, southeast of the Caspian Sea, that was probably a precautionary measure, and Judah does not appear to have been greatly involved in the revolt. The Jerusalem priests were allowed to mint their own coinage and levy a temple tax. Under the wider influence of the Persian Empire, Hebrew gradually fell out of popular usage as a spoken language, being replaced by Aramaic. As the international stature of Greece increased, so the influence of Hellenism began to be felt, even in Judah.<\/p>\nReligious Features of the Postexilic Period<\/p>\n<h5>The Decline of Prophecy<\/h5>\nThere were three main reasons for this:<\/p>\n1. The prophetic movement as a whole became discredited after Jerusalem fell in 586 BC<\/span>. The large number of popular cult prophets who had foretold a sudden end to the Babylonian oppression (e.g., Jer 28:1-4) were proved decisively wrong. The suspicion that henceforth became attached to prophecy was increased further in the Persian period, when large numbers of itinerant “prophets” of various religions traveled widely. Zechariah 13:2-6 shows the stern measures advocated against such false prophets and fortune-tellers.<\/p>\n<li>2. There was a markedly different historical situation. The chastened remnant that survived had turned away from the blatant apostasy that characterized the preexilic period, so that the prophetic condemnation was not required with the same urgency. The temple and the Law had acquired a new prominence, and postexilic prophecy generally was concerned either with the rebuilding of the temple (e.g., Haggai and Zechariah) or the purification of its cult (e.g., Malachi). Once this goal had been realized, the role of the prophet was diminished. Another historical factor was the relatively large number of priests who returned from captivity, doubtless encouraged by the prospect of serving in the rebuilt temple. The main need at this time was for the priest, who revealed God’s will on the basis of the Law.<\/li>\n<li>3. There was an increasing stress on the transcendence of God, caused partly by an emphasis upon priestly mediation and partly by a fear of God that resulted from the recent judgment. The apocalyptic movement, with its emphasis on angelic intermediaries between humans and a transcendent God, encouraged this tendency. Correspondingly, the prophetic appeal for a personal, moral walk with God weakened.<\/li>\n<h5>The Rise of the Synagogue<\/h5>\nSome type of local worship, independent of the temple and its sacrifices, must have developed in the Captivity, with the Law increasingly occupying a dominant position. Later on, the prophetic books were read and expounded, but the primary stress was always on the Law. This mode of worship later took root in the homeland, and the synagogue gradually developed into the focal point of the community for social relationships, education, and worship. It facilitated the worldwide continuance and expansion of the Jewish faith, independent of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Diaspora of the Jews; Ezra, Book of; Haggai, Book of; Israel, History of; Nehemiah, Book of; Zechariah, Book of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>POSTEXILIC PERIOD*<\/h3>\nA period in the Jews’ history after their exile to Babylon. This period extends from 539–c. 331 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• The Biblical Perspective<\/p>\n• The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire<\/p>\n• The Policy of Persia<\/p>\n• The Return from Exile<\/p>\n• The Return of Ezra<\/p>\n• Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry<\/p>\n• The Remainder of the Persian Period<\/p>\n• Religious Features of the Postexilic Period<\/p>\nThe Biblical Perspective<\/p>\nThe books that specifically cover the history of the postexilic or Persian period are Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, and Zechariah. These cover a period of over a century, only a portion of which is dealt with in detail, as the following table shows:<\/p>\n\nThe Collapse of the Babylonian Empire<\/p>\nThis occurred with dramatic suddenness, largely because of internal resistance to the policies of the last Babylonian king, Nabonidus (555–539 BC<\/span>). His neglect of the traditional Babylonian deity, Marduk, in favor of the moon god, Sin, was particularly resented. Nabonidus lived in Taima during the last decade of his reign, refusing to enter Babylon, where his son Belshazzar ruled as virtual king, as noted in Daniel 5. Babylon fell to the Persians in October 538 BC<\/span> and the entire empire passed into their control.<\/p>\nThe Policy of Persia<\/p>\nThis is well documented through contemporary inscriptions, notably the record of Cyrus, the first king of the Persian Empire (559–530 BC<\/span>), in the “Cyrus Cylinder.” A new phase in the relationship of conqueror to conquered peoples opened up, which contrasted with the policy of the Assyrian and Babylonian empires of crushing any opposition by massive force. Cyrus and his successors followed a conciliatory line, allowing exiled groups to return home, encouraging local faiths, posing as the champions of the territorial deities, and allowing local autonomy except where Persian interests were affected adversely. The cost of this operation, although considerable, must have been infinitesimal compared with that of keeping rebellious subjects under constant subjection.<\/p>\nThe new enlightened policy is reflected in the decree of Cyrus, dated 538 BC<\/span> (Ezr 1:1) and preserved in two versions. The first (vv 1-4) is clearly the official proclamation, while the second (6:3-5) is a more prosaic memorandum dealing with building specifications, a record of Cyrus’s commitment stored in the official archives (vv 1-2). The critical tendency to question the narrative in Ezra 1, especially on the score of the favorable references to the God of Israel and the vast financial support promised, has been nullified by the archaeological evidence, which shows an identical policy elsewhere. The Cyrus Cylinder, for example, notes, “The gods who live within them [i.e., the cities] I returned to their places. . . . All of their inhabitants I collected and restored to their dwelling places.”<\/p>\nIn Judah itself there is no evidence for any warfare in this period, which suggests that the Persian takeover of the area was nonviolent. Judah was incorporated into the fifth Persian province, which included the entire area west of the Euphrates River (Ezr 7:21). It was no more than a minor subdistrict, governed through Samaria.<\/p>\nThe Return from Exile<\/p>\nThe continuance of a large Jewish community in Babylonia shows that not all the Jews responded to the invitation to return to their homeland, probably because of the prosperity acquired in exile. But 42,360 dedicated Jews (Ezr 2:64) braved the challenge of a four-month 900-mile (1,448-kilometer) journey under Sheshbazzar (1:8), the officially appointed leader, and Zerubbabel his nephew (3:2), who was probably the one to whom the Jews looked as leader. With great enthusiasm the Jews rebuilt the altar of sacrifice and resumed the observance of the traditional feasts (vv 1-6), revealing both a sense of stewardship (2:68-69) and careful attention to the requirements of the Law (3:2-4). Soon after, work on the second temple commenced—the materials and master craftsmen being imported from Tyre and Sidon (Ezr 3:7-9; cf. 1 Kgs 5). When the foundations were laid, the worshipers were doubtless aware that they were fulfilling God’s promise through Jeremiah (Ezr 3:10-11; cf. Jer 33:10-11). But their high hopes were thwarted when there was opposition from neighboring areas (Ezr 4:4-5), selfishness in giving their own accommodations a higher priority than the Lord’s house (Hg 1:2-4, 9), and a series of crop failures that further reduced morale (1:6, 10-11; 2:17).<\/p>\nWork on the temple was not resumed until Haggai and Zechariah appeared in 520 BC<\/span>. They encouraged Zerubbabel and Joshua (Jeshua) the high priest, rebuked the people for their apathy and selfishness, and promised God’s presence and blessing upon the temple project (Hg 1:12–2:9). Zechariah’s preaching went beyond the building of the temple, including the rebuilding of Jerusalem itself (Zec 2:1-5) and its world reputation (2:1-5, 11-12; 8:22). The two leaders were addressed in ways that anticipated the Messiah (Hg 2:21-23; Zec 6:10-14). But the Persian king Darius (521–486 BC<\/span>) was not alarmed when the rebuilding operation was reported to him (Ezr 5:1–6:13) and allowed the work to continue. In February 515 BC<\/span> it was dedicated (6:14-16). The Jewish community again had a focal point for its religion, but the political situation remained difficult, with no real security in a still-shattered city.<\/p>\nThe Return of Ezra<\/p>\nThe traditional date of Ezra’s return is 458 BC<\/span> (preceding that of Nehemiah in 445 BC<\/span>). This is based on the premise that the King Artaxerxes noted in Ezra 7:7 was Artaxerxes I Longimanus (464–424 BC<\/span>) and not Artaxerxes II Mnemon (404–359 BC<\/span>). However, some scholars, allowing that the king was Artaxerxes I, but believing that Nehemiah preceded Ezra, suggest that a tens unit has dropped out of “seventh” in Ezra 7:7, and that the date of Ezra’s return should be the 27th (438 BC<\/span>) or 37th year (428 BC<\/span>) of Artaxerxes I, making Ezra’s return a few years after Nehemiah’s. While this is plausible, there remains strong support for the traditional view. It accords with the order of the two books in the OT and requires no textual emendation. It also accounts for the section in Ezra 4:7-23, where, in the reign of Artaxerxes, an abortive effort was made by a recently returned group to rebuild the wall of Jerusalem. Nehemiah 1:1-4 suggests that this was regarded as important and its abrupt termination, by a decree of the king, caused Nehemiah great distress. The probability is that Ezra, recently returned, realized that little could be done in the way of major religious reformation until Jerusalem was secure, but in attempting to rebuild the wall he exceeded his mandate and was not able to function adequately until Nehemiah arrived, when the new security of Jerusalem allowed the great Law-reading ceremony of Nehemiah 8:1-12 to take place.<\/p>\nEzra’s ministry concerned the teaching of the Law of Moses, the Pentateuch, which had long been extant in its final form by this time. Ezra 7 shows that Artaxerxes was following the traditional Persian policy of encouraging good relationships with his subject peoples. Ezra’s appointment (Ezr 7:12) was to a state office; it has frequently been paraphrased as “Secretary of State for Jewish Religious Affairs.”<\/p>\n\nNehemiah’s Return and Ministry<\/p>\nHanani and others (Neh 1:1-3) informed Nehemiah of the complete failure of a recent attempt to rebuild the wall, probably that recorded in Ezra 4:7-23, and sought his mediation before the very king who had authorized the decree that compelled work on the wall to cease. A friend in high places was vital, and Nehemiah, a trusted and influential member of the court (Neh 1:11), was approached for this delicate and dangerous task. Nehemiah 1:4–2:8 shows how well he prepared for and seized his opportunity. His appointment as the governor of Judah (5:14) involved the removal of this area from the control of the governor of Samaria, which accounts for the unrelenting hostility of Sanballat (2:19; 4:1). The evidence of Nehemiah 3 suggests that the extent of Judah at this time was limited, probably not reaching as far north as Bethel or as far south as Hebron. Nehemiah was faced with opposition that included ridicule (2:19; 4:1-3), armed force (4:8, 11), discouragement (v 10), internal economic problems (5:1-18), intrigue (6:1-2), intimidation, and blackmail (vv 5-14). In spite of these obstacles, the wall was completed in the incredibly brief period of 52 days (v 15).<\/p>\nIn addition to this monumental achievement, Nehemiah completely reorganized the social and economic life of Jerusalem, dealing with alienated mortgages, excessive interest rates (Neh 5:1-13), mixed marriages (10:30; 13:23-30), Sabbath observance (10:31; 13:15-21), and temple supplies (10:32-40; 13:10-13). Almost certainly, it was this political and economic security that allowed Ezra, who probably arrived 13 years earlier, to proceed with his great religious reformation based on the Law. Nehemiah’s book, usually called the “Nehemiah Memoirs,” was probably presented by him in the temple as a “votive offering” (as indicated by the form of 5:19; 13:14, 22, 31).<\/p>\nThe Remainder of the Persian Period<\/p>\nPersian control, which probably centered on Lachish, was traditionally mild, except where her interests were directly threatened. There is no evidence of any major discontent in Judah, which enjoyed a considerable degree of autonomy. The Phoenician revolt of 351 BC<\/span>, which took Artaxerxes III (359–338 BC<\/span>) three years to subdue, was the only serious disturbance in the area. While Artaxerxes deported some Jews to Hyrcania, southeast of the Caspian Sea, that was probably a precautionary measure, and Judah does not appear to have been greatly involved in the revolt. The Jerusalem priests were allowed to mint their own coinage and levy a temple tax. Under the wider influence of the Persian Empire, Hebrew gradually fell out of popular usage as a spoken language, being replaced by Aramaic. As the international stature of Greece increased, so the influence of Hellenism began to be felt, even in Judah.<\/p>\nReligious Features of the Postexilic Period<\/p>\n<h5>The Decline of Prophecy<\/h5>\nThere were three main reasons for this:<\/p>\n1. The prophetic movement as a whole became discredited after Jerusalem fell in 586 BC<\/span>. The large number of popular cult prophets who had foretold a sudden end to the Babylonian oppression (e.g., Jer 28:1-4) were proved decisively wrong. The suspicion that henceforth became attached to prophecy was increased further in the Persian period, when large numbers of itinerant “prophets” of various religions traveled widely. Zechariah 13:2-6 shows the stern measures advocated against such false prophets and fortune-tellers.<\/p>\n<li>2. There was a markedly different historical situation. The chastened remnant that survived had turned away from the blatant apostasy that characterized the preexilic period, so that the prophetic condemnation was not required with the same urgency. The temple and the Law had acquired a new prominence, and postexilic prophecy generally was concerned either with the rebuilding of the temple (e.g., Haggai and Zechariah) or the purification of its cult (e.g., Malachi). Once this goal had been realized, the role of the prophet was diminished. Another historical factor was the relatively large number of priests who returned from captivity, doubtless encouraged by the prospect of serving in the rebuilt temple. The main need at this time was for the priest, who revealed God’s will on the basis of the Law.<\/li>\n<li>3. There was an increasing stress on the transcendence of God, caused partly by an emphasis upon priestly mediation and partly by a fear of God that resulted from the recent judgment. The apocalyptic movement, with its emphasis on angelic intermediaries between humans and a transcendent God, encouraged this tendency. Correspondingly, the prophetic appeal for a personal, moral walk with God weakened.<\/li>\n<h5>The Rise of the Synagogue<\/h5>\nSome type of local worship, independent of the temple and its sacrifices, must have developed in the Captivity, with the Law increasingly occupying a dominant position. Later on, the prophetic books were read and expounded, but the primary stress was always on the Law. This mode of worship later took root in the homeland, and the synagogue gradually developed into the focal point of the community for social relationships, education, and worship. It facilitated the worldwide continuance and expansion of the Jewish faith, independent of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Diaspora of the Jews; Ezra, Book of; Haggai, Book of; Israel, History of; Nehemiah, Book of; Zechariah, Book of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"POSTEXILIC PERIOD* A period in the Jews’ history after their exile to Babylon. This period extends from 539–c. 331 BC. Preview • The Biblical Perspective • The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire • The Policy of Persia • The Return from Exile • The Return of Ezra • Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry • The Remainder of the Persian Period • Religious Features of the Postexilic Period The Biblical Perspective The books that specifically cover the history of the postexilic or Persian period are Ezra, N...","summary_en":"POSTEXILIC PERIOD* A period in the Jews’ history after their exile to Babylon. This period extends from 539–c. 331 BC. Preview • The Biblical Perspective • The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire • The Policy of Persia • The Return from Exile • The Return of Ezra • Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry • The Remainder of the Persian Period • Religious Features of the Postexilic Period The Biblical Perspective The books that specifically cover the history of the postexilic or Persian period are Ezra, N...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35032,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sheshbazzar","title_en":"Sheshbazzar","content_ro":"<h3>SHESHBAZZAR<\/h3>\nJewish leader who found favor with Cyrus the Great, king of Persia. In the first year of his reign, Cyrus issued a decree that the temple in Jerusalem should be rebuilt (Ezr 1:1-4; cf. 6:1-5). He appointed Sheshbazzar governor of Judah (Ezr 5:14) and handed over to him the gold and silver vessels that Nebuchadnezzar had carried off when he took Jerusalem (1:7-9). Sheshbazzar fulfilled this commission by taking the vessels to Jerusalem with the returning exiles (v 9) and beginning the restoration of the temple (5:16).<\/p>\nSheshbazzar is mentioned in the Bible only four times, all in the book of Ezra (1:8-9; 5:14-16). For many years it was commonly held that Sheshbazzar was another name for Zerubbabel. Both were of the royal line; Sheshbazzar is called “the prince of Judah,” which may mean that he was heir apparent to the throne. Since his genealogy is not given, he may be represented in that listing by some other name, either Zerubbabel or Shenazzar (1 Chr 3:18-19). In the record of people who returned to Jerusalem, Sheshbazzar’s name does not appear. The name of Zerubbabel is at the head of this list, where one would expect Sheshbazzar’s to be; both were governors of the province of Judah. Zerubbabel is associated with the laying of the foundation of the temple (Ezr 3:8-11), but that work is attributed to Sheshbazzar in 5:16, in accordance with chapter 1. It is evident that the name Sheshbazzar is found only in connection with the Persians, for chapter 1 relates his dealings with Cyrus, and in chapter 5 the two occurrences of his name are in a letter written by the Persian official, Tattenai. One may conclude that the Persians knew him as Sheshbazzar, but the Jews called him Zerubbabel. Both names are Akkadian, so there is no parallel here to the renaming of Jewish captives in Babylon (Dn 1:7).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SHESHBAZZAR<\/h3>\nJewish leader who found favor with Cyrus the Great, king of Persia. In the first year of his reign, Cyrus issued a decree that the temple in Jerusalem should be rebuilt (Ezr 1:1-4; cf. 6:1-5). He appointed Sheshbazzar governor of Judah (Ezr 5:14) and handed over to him the gold and silver vessels that Nebuchadnezzar had carried off when he took Jerusalem (1:7-9). Sheshbazzar fulfilled this commission by taking the vessels to Jerusalem with the returning exiles (v 9) and beginning the restoration of the temple (5:16).<\/p>\nSheshbazzar is mentioned in the Bible only four times, all in the book of Ezra (1:8-9; 5:14-16). For many years it was commonly held that Sheshbazzar was another name for Zerubbabel. Both were of the royal line; Sheshbazzar is called “the prince of Judah,” which may mean that he was heir apparent to the throne. Since his genealogy is not given, he may be represented in that listing by some other name, either Zerubbabel or Shenazzar (1 Chr 3:18-19). In the record of people who returned to Jerusalem, Sheshbazzar’s name does not appear. The name of Zerubbabel is at the head of this list, where one would expect Sheshbazzar’s to be; both were governors of the province of Judah. Zerubbabel is associated with the laying of the foundation of the temple (Ezr 3:8-11), but that work is attributed to Sheshbazzar in 5:16, in accordance with chapter 1. It is evident that the name Sheshbazzar is found only in connection with the Persians, for chapter 1 relates his dealings with Cyrus, and in chapter 5 the two occurrences of his name are in a letter written by the Persian official, Tattenai. One may conclude that the Persians knew him as Sheshbazzar, but the Jews called him Zerubbabel. Both names are Akkadian, so there is no parallel here to the renaming of Jewish captives in Babylon (Dn 1:7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SHESHBAZZAR Jewish leader who found favor with Cyrus the Great, king of Persia. In the first year of his reign, Cyrus issued a decree that the temple in Jerusalem should be rebuilt (Ezr 1:1-4; cf. 6:1-5). He appointed Sheshbazzar governor of Judah (Ezr 5:14) and handed over to him the gold and silver vessels that Nebuchadnezzar had carried off when he took Jerusalem (1:7-9). Sheshbazzar fulfilled this commission by taking the vessels to Jerusalem with the returning exiles (v 9) and beginning ...","summary_en":"SHESHBAZZAR Jewish leader who found favor with Cyrus the Great, king of Persia. In the first year of his reign, Cyrus issued a decree that the temple in Jerusalem should be rebuilt (Ezr 1:1-4; cf. 6:1-5). He appointed Sheshbazzar governor of Judah (Ezr 5:14) and handed over to him the gold and silver vessels that Nebuchadnezzar had carried off when he took Jerusalem (1:7-9). Sheshbazzar fulfilled this commission by taking the vessels to Jerusalem with the returning exiles (v 9) and beginning ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37016,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Temple","title_en":"Temple","content_ro":"<h3>TEMPLE<\/h3>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Solomon’s Temple<\/p>\n• Zerubbabel’s Temple<\/p>\n• Herod’s Temple<\/p>\n• Significance of the Temple in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Significance of the Temple in the New Testament<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nDavid’s capture of Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:6-9) and his designation of it as the nation’s capital is one of the great masterstrokes of history. Occupied by the Jebusites, it was a pocket of neutral territory between the northern and southern sections of David’s united kingdom and was politically acceptable to both. Jerusalem was then established as the national religious center by the return of the ark, which had been largely neglected since its capture by the Philistines (2 Sm 6:1-17). Henceforth, God’s choices of both David and Jerusalem (“Mount Zion”) were indissolubly linked (Ps 78:67-72).<\/p>\nDavid’s great impulse was to build an adequate dwelling place for Israel’s God. The idea was initially approved by Nathan the prophet (2 Sm 7:1-3), but God revealed otherwise to him, and he conveyed the divine purpose to David (vv 4-17). In a significant wordplay, David was informed that, while he was not to build a house (temple) for God, God would build a house (dynasty) for him. David was not the one to build a temple because of the numerous wars during his reign; the temple would instead be built by his son (1 Kgs 5:3; 1 Chr 22:7-8; 28:3). Nevertheless, David enthusiastically amassed most of the necessary finances and materials and drew up the blueprints for the temple (1 Chr 22:3-5, 14; 28:2, 11-19). He also purchased the temple site (21:25).<\/p>\nSolomon’s Temple<\/p>\n\n<h5>Date<\/h5>\nConstruction commenced in Solomon’s fourth year, about 966 BC<\/span>, and took seven years to complete (1 Kgs 6:1, 38). Everything necessary for the temple, including the workers, had been prepared by David (1 Chr 28:21). The temple evidently had first priority among Solomon’s building schemes, as he built his own palace later (1 Kgs 7:1).<\/p>\n<h5>Superintendents and Workforce<\/h5>\nThe principal architect for the bronze furnishings was Huram (Hebrew “Hiram”), whose father was a metal craftsman from Tyre and whose mother was an Israelite (1 Kgs 7:13-14). Cedar for the temple came from Lebanon and was felled and transported by the skilled woodsmen of another Hiram—the king of Tyre, Solomon’s ally (5:5-9). Thirty thousand Israelites, divided into three groups, were drafted to assist at Lebanon. Each group was on duty for one month in three. For the stonework, Solomon conscripted 153,600 foreigners resident in Israel to provide a self-contained group of carriers, stone cutters, and supervisors (vv 15-17; 2 Chr 2:17-18). Possibly the “men of Gebal,” with their specialized skills, formed yet another group (1 Kgs 5:18). Building the temple was obviously a national project of immense size and effort. In order to preserve the sanctity of the site and to eliminate noise, the masonry and carpentry were not done at the temple site (6:7).<\/p>\n<h5>Description<\/h5>\nThe details given in the Bible are sufficiently clear for us to make a reasonably accurate description of the temple. The accounts in Kings and Chronicles are supplemented by Ezekiel’s depiction of the temple (see below), which was broadly based on his knowledge of the Jerusalem temple (Ez 40–48).<\/p>\nThe side rooms probably rested on a foundation or platform that was separate from the temple itself (1 Kgs 6:5, 10; cf. Ez 41:8-9) and were arranged in three stories, each seven and a half feet (2.3 meters) high, extending around the whole building except for the porch side. Each successive story was one and a half feet (.5 meter) wider than the one below, these dimensions coinciding with the thickness of the side wall of the Holy Place. The ground floor rooms were seven and a half feet (2.3 meters) wide; the first story was nine feet (2.7 meters), and the second was ten and a half feet (3.2 meters). Access to the upper stories was possibly by winding staircases (1 Kgs 6:8). There is some uncertainty concerning the location of the entrances; there may have been one on either side, but only one is mentioned (v 8). As in Ezekiel’s temple (Ez 40:17, 28), there were two adjacent courts, an inner and an outer (1 Kgs 6:36; 7:12), but no dimensions are given for these. The inner court, or “court of the priests,” being next to the temple itself, was also called “the upper court” (2 Chr 4:9; Jer 36:10). The wall of the inner court was made of three layers of hewn stone held together by a layer of cedar beams (1 Kgs 6:36), and the doors of both courts were sheathed in bronze (2 Chr 4:9). The palace buildings were within the outer court area, probably with a private passageway between the palace and the temple that was later closed during the reign of Ahaz (2 Chr 4:9, 12; 2 Kgs 16:18).<\/p>\nThe temple itself was 90 feet (27.4 meters) long, 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide, and 45 feet (13.7 meters) high (1 Kgs 6:2), with a porch or vestibule 15 feet (4.6 meters) deep stretching across the width. Probably the vestibule was on the east end of the temple, thus corresponding with the orientation of Ezekiel’s temple (Ez 43:1; 44:1). The larger part of the main sanctuary, next to the porch, formed the Holy Place, which was 60 feet (18.3 meters) long (1 Kgs 6:17). Beyond this was the innermost sanctuary, the Holy of Holies (or the “Most Holy Place“), which was a perfect cube of 30 feet (9.1 meters). All the interior walls were paneled with cedar decorated with flower patterns, cherubim, and palm trees, so that no masonry was visible. The walls of both inner and outer sanctuaries were “overlaid” (v 22) with pure gold. Actually the gold decoration may have been inlaid, on the basis that a solid sheath of gold would spoil the natural beauty of the wood carving. The floor was made of cypress planks (v 15). Narrow windows set high in the walls above the level of the three-storied outer chambers provided light in the Holy Place (v 4). The ceiling was paneled with beams and planks of cedar. No detail is given about the exterior roofing, but probably the contemporary technique was employed, using a wooden, latticelike framework into which a waterproof, limestone plaster was packed and rolled.<\/p>\nThe outer porch was apparently an open space, since no doors are mentioned. Access into the Holy Place was by double doors, both hinged to fold back on themselves, made of cypress and decorated in exactly the same way as the interior walls (vv 34-35). The doorposts were made of olive wood. Within the Holy Place was the altar of incense made of cedar overlaid with gold; it was placed centrally before the Holy of Holies. Also in the Holy Place were a table for the bread of the Presence of God, ten lampstands arranged in two groups of five on either side, and various utensils required for maintaining the priestly duties (1 Kgs 7:48-50). All these were made or overlaid with gold. The ten tables, arranged five on each side, were presumably for the utensils and accessories (2 Chr 4:8).<\/p>\nBetween the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies was a double door made of olive wood, carved with cherubim, palm trees, and flower patterns and overlaid with gold. Inside these doors, veiling still further the Holy of Holies, was a blue, purple, and crimson curtain, made of the finest fabrics and ornamented with cherubim (2 Chr 3:14).<\/p>\nIn the Holy of Holies were two cherubim, each 15 feet (4.6 meters) high and made of olive wood covered with gold (1 Kgs 6:23-28). Each wing measured seven and a half feet (2.3 meters). A wing of each touched the side walls; the other wings met at the center of the room. The divine throne had been considerably less impressive in the tabernacle, where a wing of each cherubim fused into the mercy seat above the ark (Ex 25:17-22). In Solomon’s temple, the ark of the covenant was placed below the forward-facing cherubim, the symbolic protectors. The ark, the only major item surviving from the Mosaic tabernacle, still contained the tablets of the law, but the pot of manna and Aaron’s rod were missing (1 Kgs 8:9).<\/p>\nImmediately outside the temple and on either side of the vestibule were two hollow bronze pillars (1 Kgs 7:15-20; 2 Chr 3:15-17). According to the book of Kings, these pillars were 27 feet (8.2 meters) high, with a circumference of 18 feet (5.5 meters). The metal itself was about four inches (10.2 centimeters) thick. The pillars were surmounted by bronze, lily-shaped capitals seven and a half feet (2.3 meters) high and six feet (1.8 meters) wide, intricately adorned with a chain latticework that supported two rows of pomegranates. The total weight must have been enormous, and their size is attested to by Jeremiah, who notes that the Babylonians had to break them in pieces before transporting them to Babylon (Jer 52:17, 21-23).<\/p>\nThe bronze altar of sacrifice in front of the vestibule is not listed in the specifications of 1 Kings 7. However, it is mentioned in the temple dedication and subsequently (1 Kgs 8:22, 54, 64; 9:25) and clearly stood in the inner court. Its dimensions were 30 feet (9.1 meters) square and 15 feet (4.6 meters) high (2 Chr 4:1). In view of its weight, it was probably cast in sections at Solomon’s foundry in the Jordan Rift valley (vv 17-18) and then transported to the temple site for assembly.<\/p>\nProbably the most striking article in the inner court was the “molten (bronze) sea,” a huge, round tank made of bronze 3 inches (8 centimeters) thick, 7½ feet (2.3 meters) high, and 15 feet (4.6 meters) in diameter (1 Kgs 7:23-26). Its rim flared out like a lily (2 Chr 4:2-5). The tank was supported on 12 bronze oxen, four on each side, and had two rows of decoration, possibly gourds or pomegranates, under the brim. Its capacity was between 10,000 and 12,000 gallons (37,850–45,420 liters). The bronze sea was used for priestly ablutions (v 6). Presumably this involved a platform of sorts, for the brim of this vast basin would have been about 15 feet (4.6 meters) above ground level.<\/p>\nHiram also constructed ten large lavers, mounted on moveable stands and placed in two groups of five, on the north and south sides of the inner court (1 Kgs 7:27-39). Basically the stands were bronze boxes, six feet (1.8 meters) square and four and a half feet (1.4 meters) high with a nine-inch (22.9-centimeter) rim around the top edge. Each corner was attached to braced posts to which the axles were fixed. The four-spoked wheels were 27 inches (68.6 centimeters) high. Into each stand there fitted a laver containing approximately 220 gallons (832.7 liters) of water, used for washing sacrificial animals (2 Chr 4:6). Probably each was adjacent to one of the ten tables that would be used to flay and otherwise prepare the sacrifices (v 8). Supplementary items, such as pots, shovels, and basins, all made of bronze, were also manufactured (1 Kgs 7:40, 45).<\/p>\n<h5>The Dedication<\/h5>\nEleven months elapsed between the completion of the temple and its dedication (1 Kgs 6:38; 8:2), during which time the major items of furniture were set in place. The dedication itself took place in the seventh month, presumably in connection with the Feast of Tabernacles and the Day of Atonement (Lv 23:23-36). The ark of the covenant was brought into its final resting place (1 Kgs 8:3-4), but the inner court proved inadequate for the vast numbers of beasts sacrificed (1 Kgs 8:62-64; 2 Chr 7:7).<\/p>\nThe temple employed the most sophisticated building techniques of the age, and no expense had been spared in construction, ornamentation, or equipment. Yet Solomon readily confessed its utter inadequacy to house the eternal God (1 Kgs 8:27). His prayer also underlined Israel’s propensity to forsake the Lord, contrasting the nation with God, who, though a just judge, was also merciful and faithful. The climax of the proceedings came when fire from heaven consumed the sacrifices and the shekinah glory filled the temple (2 Chr 7:1-3).<\/p>\n<h5>Later History<\/h5>\nLike most ancient shrines, the temple became a treasury for national wealth and as such was often the target for attack. Shishak of Egypt plundered it within five years of Solomon’s death (1 Kgs 14:25-38). Shortly afterward, King Asa (910–869 BC<\/span>) depleted its gold and silver treasures to buy Syrian help against his oppressor, Baasha (908–886 BC<\/span>), king of Israel (15:16-19). Joash, the king of Judah (835–796 BC<\/span>) who was concealed in the temple from the vicious Athaliah during his youth (2 Kgs 11), made provision for its repair after protesting the priests’ embezzlement of gifts (12:4-16). But after the death of Jehoiada, the high priest, Joash himself was adversely influenced by his nobles (2 Chr 24:15-19). As punishment for his apostasy, the Lord allowed the Syrians to attack, and Joash used the temple treasures to buy them off (2 Kgs 12:17-18). Hardly had provision for replacements been made, when Jehoash of Israel (798–782 BC<\/span>), having shattered the arrogant pride of Amaziah of Judah (796–767 BC<\/span>), again stripped the temple (14:8-14). Later, King Ahaz (735-715 BC<\/span>) used the remaining resources of the temple to enlist support from the Assyrians (16:7-9), though he eventually became completely subservient to them.<\/p>\n Then Hezekiah (715–686 BC<\/span>), one of the great reforming kings, thoroughly renovated the temple and restored worship after it had fallen into disuse during theclosing years of Ahaz (2 Chr 29:1-19; 31:9-21). Manasseh (696–642 BC<\/span>), however, completely reversed his father’s policy, bringing the practices of Canaanite and Mesopotamian worship into the temple (2 Kgs 21:3-7). His conversion experience, which probably occurred late in his reign and resulted in certain reform measures in the temple (2 Chr 33:12-19), was not far-reaching enough to escape the final judgment that his reign was the dark spot of Judah’s history (2 Kgs 21:10-16).<\/p>\nManasseh’s grandson Josiah (640–609 BC<\/span>), was the second great reforming king. He organized the repair of the temple in 622 BC<\/span>, during which the lost Book of the Law (almost certainly the book of Deuteronomy) was discovered (2 Kgs 22:3-13). As a result, Josiah’s reformation gained a new dimension and sense of urgency (22:14–23:3). The reformation included a thorough purge of all idolatrous elements from the temple (23:4-12) and the restoration of the traditional festivals. Sadly, however, Josiah’s reformation died with him, and Judah’s downward slide continued under the apostate Jehoiakim (609–598 BC<\/span>). It was probably during this time that Jeremiah preached his famous temple sermon foretelling its destruction (Jer 7:1–8:3; 26:1-19), which alienated him from the religious leaders. In Nebuchadnezzar’s reprisal raid following Jehoiakim’s rebellion in 601 BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 24:1-4), Jerusalem was captured (596 BC<\/span>) and many of the temple treasures were transported to Babylon (2 Chr 36:7). The temple itself appears to have escaped damage, but when Judah again rebelled under Zedekiah (597–586 BC<\/span>), the temple was demolished (2 Kgs 25:8-10). The remaining temple treasures were taken away.<\/p>\nZerubbabel’s Temple<\/p>\n<h5>Construction<\/h5>\nAlthough the temple was devastated, the site still remained as a place of pilgrimage during the exile (Jer 41:4-5). In 538 BC<\/span> the Persian king, Cyrus, in pursuance of a liberal policy diametrically opposed to that of the earlier empires, permitted the Jews to return from exile. And he authorized the rebuilding of the temple, financing it from the Persian treasury.<\/p>\nIn the book of Ezra, the decree of authorization has been preserved in two forms: the general proclamation (Ezr 1:2-4) and a more prosaic memorandum in the national archives indicating the main temple specifications and the amount of promised Persian help (6:1-5). Probably only a minority of the Jews opted to leave the relative comforts of Mesopotamia for the dangers of a long journey to their desolated homeland. According to the book of Ezra, 42,360 dedicated individuals and their servants (2:64-65) responded under the leadership of Sheshbazzar (1:8-11; 5:14-16) and Zerubbabel (2:2; 3:2, 8; 4:2). With great enthusiasm, the altar was rebuilt on the temple site and the traditional pattern of worship reestablished (3:1-6). Utilizing the grant from Persia as well as their own freewill gifts (2:68-69; 3:7), the Jews began to plan the second temple and lay its foundations (3:7-13). The initial impetus quickly died as a result of local opposition (4:1-4, 24), selfish preoccupation, and crop failures (Hg 1:2-11). In 520 BC<\/span> (Ezr 4:24; Hg 1:1; Zec 1:1), inspired by the prophets Haggai and Zechariah, the Jews under Zerubbabel and Joshua the high priest commenced rebuilding. Work continued in spite of official suspicion, if not direct opposition, and the temple was completed and dedicated in 515 BC<\/span> (Ezr 5:1–6:22).<\/p>\nLittle is known of the physical features of Zerubbabel’s temple. The inference that it was vastly inferior to Solomon’s temple (Hg 2:3) probably relates to an early stage in the building operation. In fact, the second temple stood for over 500 years. The dimensions noted in Ezra 6:3 are incomplete; the new temple was no doubt about the same size as its predecessor and was probably built on the same foundation. The construction technique appears to have followed the method of the original, with layers of timber providing a framework for sections of masonry (v 4). Clearly, there was auxiliary accommodation, probably like the side rooms of Solomon’s temple (Ezr 8:29; Neh 12:44; 13:4-5). If Persian aid was forthcoming as promised (Ezr 6:8-12), the second temple was a more splendid, substantial structure than is generally supposed.<\/p>\n<h5>Later History<\/h5>\nSeveral references in the Apocrypha, pseudepigrapha, rabbinic writings, and the historian Josephus help to illumine the history of the temple and give more detail on its structure and furnishings. Josephus, quoting from Hecateus of Abdera (fourth century BC<\/span>), states that the temple was a large building in an enclosure about 500 feet by 150 feet (152.4 meters by 45.7 meters), surrounded by a stone wall, with an altar of unhewn stones the same size as Solomon’s bronze altar (cf. 2 Chr 4:1). Within the sanctuary was a golden altar of incense and a lampstand, the flame of which burned continually. Josephus also notes that Antiochus III (223–187 BC<\/span>) financially supported the temple when the Seleucids displaced the Ptolemies as masters of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nBen Sirach, early in the second century BC<\/span>, commended Simon, the son of Onias the high priest, for his work in fortifying and repairing the temple area. First Maccabees provides valuable evidence of the fate of the temple during the oppression under Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164 BC<\/span>). The books of the Maccabees recount the defilement of the altar of burnt offering (1 Macc 1:54) and the plundering of the golden lampstand, altar of incense, table of offering, veil, and other treasures (2 Macc 5:15-16; 6:2-4). When the temple was recaptured and restored, the victorious Maccabees replaced the items taken by the Seleucids, except for the altar of sacrifice, which was considered so polluted that it was dismantled and replaced by a new one constructed of unhewn stone (1 Macc 4:36-61; 2 Macc 10:1-9). Clearly the temple area was used as a fortress, both in opposition to the Seleucid garrison that was maintained in Jerusalem in the Maccabean period and in the conflicts of the later Hasmonean period. When Pompey captured Jerusalem about 63 BC<\/span>, he entered the temple to assert his authority but took no plunder, thus showing respect for it.<\/p>\nThe history of Zerubbabel’s temple closed when Herod, having carefully preserved it from any major damage when he gained control of Jerusalem with Roman aid in 37 BC<\/span>, began to dismantle it about 21 BC<\/span> in preparation for the construction of his own grand temple.<\/p>\nHerod’s Temple<\/p>\nApart from over 100 references in the NT, our main sources of information about Herod’s temple come from the Jewish historian Josephus and from the Middoth (a section of the Jewish rabbinic writings). There are considerable differences in detail between the two, which rules out any dogmatic interpretation in attempted reconstructions. Since Josephus was contemporary with the temple (he was born about AD<\/span> 37 and died early in the second century), he is probably more reliable than the Middoth, which, dating from about AD<\/span> 150, appears to exaggerate occasionally. Archaeological research has been helpful in determining the positions of the outer walls and gates.<\/p>\nHerod’s motive in building his temple was political rather than religious. As an Idumean, he wished to placate his Jewish subjects by constructing a sanctuary as magnificent as Solomon’s. Possible fears that the site might be profaned, or that the existing temple might be demolished and never rebuilt, were allayed by the training of 1,000 priests as masons and the amassing of materials before the work commenced. Herod’s temple followed the tripartite plan of its predecessors, although its porch was much larger. It was built in the contemporary Greco-Roman architectural style and must therefore be regarded as distinct from Zerubbabel’s temple. Work began in 20 BC<\/span>, and while the main sanctuary was quickly erected (it was in full operation within ten years), the total project was not completed until AD<\/span> 64, only six years before it was destroyed by the Romans.<\/p>\nHerod first prepared the site by clearing and leveling an area approximately 500 yards (457.2 meters) from north to south and about 325 yards (297.2 meters) from east to west. This involved cutting away sections of rock in some areas and building up with rubble in others. Considerable sections of the enclosing wall, constructed on stone blocks averaging about 15 feet (4.6 meters) long by 4 feet (1.2 meters) high, still survive. Some of the stones in the corners of the south wall weigh up to 70 tons (63.5 metric tons).<\/p>\nThe sanctuary itself seems to have been based on the same dimensions as Solomon’s temple. It was divided into the Holy Place, which was 60 feet (18.3 meters) long, 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide, and 60 feet high, and the Holy of Holies, which was 30 feet square. There was no furniture within the Holy of Holies, which was separated by a veil from the Holy Place. The Holy Place contained the seven-branch lampstand, the table for the bread of the Presence, and the incense altar. The main divergence from Solomon’s temple was the imposing porch, 150 feet (45.7 meters) in width and height. Outside was a doorway approximately 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide by 40 feet (12.2 meters) high, with an inner doorway about half that size leading into the sanctuary. By allowing empty rooms over the Holy of Holies and the Holy Place, there was a uniform roof height of 150 feet (45.7 meters). Golden spikes on the roof discouraged birds from alighting and defiling the structure. Like its predecessors, the temple was oriented toward the east and was surrounded on the other sides by three stories of rooms rising to a height of 60 feet (18.3 meters). The stone used was the local white stone, cut in huge blocks and highly polished.<\/p>\nAccess to the porch was by a flight of 12 steps from the Court of the Priests. Centrally placed before the porch and 33 feet (10.1 meters) away was the altar of sacrifice. Made of unhewn stone, it was a multilevel construction 15 feet (4.6 meters) high and about 48 feet (14.6 meters) square at its base. Male Israelites were allowed into this area once a year, during the Feast of the Tabernacles, to walk around the altar of sacrifice. Otherwise, they were restricted to the Court of Israel. To the east of the Court of Israel, and separated from it by a flight of 15 steps and by the ornate Great Gate, made of Corinthian bronze, was the Court of the Women. Here the offertory chests for temple expenses were located (Mk 12:41-44). The next court was the large, lower, outer Court of the Gentiles, which surrounded the inner courts and was separated from them by a balustrade and a series of warning notices. Two of these have been excavated, written in Latin and Greek and forbidding trespass by Gentiles into the inner areas, on pain of death. This outer court was widely used. Immediately inside its walls was a portico, supported by four rows of columns almost 40 feet (12.2 meters) high on the south side (the Royal Porch), and two rows on the other sides, the eastern portico known as “Solomon’s Porch” or “Solomon’s Colonnade.” Here is the area where the stalls of the money changers and merchants were set up, where the Sanhedrin met, and where Christ and the scribes taught and debated (Mk 11:27; Lk 2:46; 19:47; Jn 10:23). Here, too, the infant church met before it was rejected by a hostile Judaism (Acts 3:11; 5:12). Just to the northwest of the temple enclosure was the Fortress of Antonia, where the Roman governor resided while in Jerusalem, and where a Roman garrison was on hand to deal with disturbances (Acts 21:31-40). Overlooking the temple area, it was separated from it by a wide moat. The high priest’s vestments were stored in the fortress as a symbol of Roman authority. Access to the Court of the Gentiles was by four gates in the west wall; two in the south wall, where the ground fell away steeply into the valley, a site often identified as the pinnacle of the temple (Mt 4:5; Lk 4:9); and one gate in each of the east and north walls.<\/p>\nSignificance of the Temple in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe temple in Jerusalem functioned as the focal point of the tribal confederation. In spite of the attempt of Jeroboam I, the first king of the northern kingdom, to divert attention from Jerusalem by establishing shrines at Bethel and Dan (1 Kgs 12:26-30), Jerusalem never lost its preeminence. Naturally, both Hezekiah and Josiah sought to extend their reformation into the area of the northern tribes (2 Chr 30:1-12; 34:6-7), and Jerusalem was a pilgrimage center for those areas even after its destruction (Jer 41:5). The prophets foretold its destiny as the focal point of universal worship (Is 2:1-4).<\/p>\nThe temple was God’s dwelling place among his people. God’s presence, symbolized in the shekinah glory and the pillar of cloud, was associated with the tent of meeting (Ex 33:9-11), with the tabernacle (40:34-38), and finally with the temple (1 Kgs 8:10-11). The paradox is that while God is completely unrestricted, the temple was considered a place for God to live forever (vv 13, 27). God had chosen Zion, as he had chosen David (Pss 68:15-18; 76:2; 78:67-72), so the temple was regarded as God’s house (27:4; 42:4; 84:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>Ezekiel’s Temple<\/h5>\nEzekiel’s detailed description of the ideal temple (Ez 40–48) was not used as the blueprint for Zerubbabel’s temple. In fact, since Ezekiel must have been familiar with Solomon’s temple before his deportation in 597 BC<\/span>, his description is of greater help in determining uncertain details of the first temple. Ezekiel’s concern was to show the nature of pure worship, safeguarded from all contamination. This worship would allow the glory of God, which had departed from corrupted Solomon’s temple (9:3; 10:4, 18-19: 11:22-23), to return so that Jerusalem could again be named “the Lord is there” (43:1-5; 48:35). This thought, linked with Ezekiel’s vital concept of God’s Spirit indwelling his faithful worshipers (36:24-28), anticipated the NT teaching of the believers becoming God’s temple.<\/p>\nSignificance of the Temple in the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>Christ and the Temple<\/h5>\nChrist showed considerable respect for the temple. When he was 12 years old, he entered into the rabbinic discussions in its porticoes and described it as his Father’s house (Lk 2:41-50). To him “the house of God” was indwelt by God (Mt 12:4; 23:21). Although he twice cleansed it in righteous anger (Mt 21:12-13; Jn 2:13-16), he wept over the impending destruction of the city and temple (Lk 19:41-44). He often taught there, but he was “greater than the temple” (Mt 12:6). When his presentation to Jerusalem as the predicted Messiah was rejected, in spite of attendant miracles, he foretold its inevitable destruction (Mt 21:9-15; 24:1-2). For a brief period after Pentecost, the early church used the temple as its meeting place, until mounting opposition drove believers from Jerusalem (Acts 5:12, 21, 42; 8:1).<\/p>\n<h5>The Church as the Temple<\/h5>\nThe NT writers used two different Greek words to describe the temple: naos<\/span> and hieron<\/span>.<\/em> Naos<\/span> refers to the actual sanctuary of the temple, the place of God’s dwelling. Hieron<\/span> refers to the temple precincts as well as to the sanctuary. Generally speaking, naos<\/span> was used to designate the inner section of the temple known as the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies, whereas hieron<\/span> included the outer court and the temple proper.<\/p>\nIn Paul’s epistles the word naos<\/span> appears six times (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 2 Thes 2:4) and hieron<\/span> once (1 Cor 9:13). In these verses Paul maintains the distinction of definition noted above. When speaking of the actual physical temple, he used the word hieron<\/span> to indicate the place where the priests offered up animal sacrifices on the altar (1 Cor 9:13), which was situated in the outer court (see Ex 27–29, 40). And when Paul referred to the abominable act of the lawless one in usurping God’s place in the temple, he used the word naos<\/span>—the word that designates the place of deity’s presence (2 Thes 2:4).<\/p>\nIn all the other Pauline passages, naos<\/span> is used metaphorically—to depict a human habitation for the divine Spirit. In one instance the sanctuary image is used to describe the individual believer’s body (1 Cor 6:19); in every other instance the sanctuary depicts Christ’s body, the church (1 Cor 3:16-17; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21). Mistakenly, many readers think 1 Corinthians 3:16-17 speaks of the individual, but according to the Greek text, it is unquestionably clear that Paul was speaking about the collective church (specifically, the church in Corinth).<\/p>\nWhen Paul told the church in Corinth that it was God’s sanctuary, they would have understood the image from their knowledge of pagan temples. But Paul probably had in mind the one temple in Jerusalem. The Gentiles had many gods with many temples in one city; the Jews had one God with only one temple in all of Israel. This helped to preserve unity among the Israelites. The Corinthians needed spiritual unity; they were fragmented due to their individual preferences (see 1 Cor 1:10-13).<\/p>\nIn Ephesians, Paul’s masterpiece on the church, he speaks of the local churches as living, organic entities that are all (compositely speaking) growing into a holy sanctuary in the Lord (Eph 2:21). Paul pictured each local church as providing God with a spiritual habitation in that locality (v 22) and as growing together with all the other churches into one holy, universal sanctuary for the Lord’s indwelling.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temple in John’s Revelation<\/h5>\nIn John’s revelation there is no material temple, even though he continues to use the imagery of Jerusalem and Mt Zion (Rv 3:12; 14:1; 21:2, 10, 22). Three interrelated ideas dominate. First is the concept of the church made up of martyrs, whose faithful members are God’s temple (3:12; 14:1). This temple grows gradually as the number of martyrs increases (6:11). Another aspect is the temple as the place of judgment (11:19; 14:15; 15:5–16:1). Finally, any temple in the new age is unnecessary, “for its temple is the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb” (21:22). The ultimate state will be God’s dwelling with his people—the eternal, spritual temple.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Altar; Ark of the Covenant; Bread of the Presence; David; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; First Jewish Revolt; Judaism; Mercy Seat; Offerings and Sacrifices; Priests and Levites; Sanctuary; Singers in the Temple; Solomon (Person).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TEMPLE<\/h3>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Solomon’s Temple<\/p>\n• Zerubbabel’s Temple<\/p>\n• Herod’s Temple<\/p>\n• Significance of the Temple in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Significance of the Temple in the New Testament<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nDavid’s capture of Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:6-9) and his designation of it as the nation’s capital is one of the great masterstrokes of history. Occupied by the Jebusites, it was a pocket of neutral territory between the northern and southern sections of David’s united kingdom and was politically acceptable to both. Jerusalem was then established as the national religious center by the return of the ark, which had been largely neglected since its capture by the Philistines (2 Sm 6:1-17). Henceforth, God’s choices of both David and Jerusalem (“Mount Zion”) were indissolubly linked (Ps 78:67-72).<\/p>\nDavid’s great impulse was to build an adequate dwelling place for Israel’s God. The idea was initially approved by Nathan the prophet (2 Sm 7:1-3), but God revealed otherwise to him, and he conveyed the divine purpose to David (vv 4-17). In a significant wordplay, David was informed that, while he was not to build a house (temple) for God, God would build a house (dynasty) for him. David was not the one to build a temple because of the numerous wars during his reign; the temple would instead be built by his son (1 Kgs 5:3; 1 Chr 22:7-8; 28:3). Nevertheless, David enthusiastically amassed most of the necessary finances and materials and drew up the blueprints for the temple (1 Chr 22:3-5, 14; 28:2, 11-19). He also purchased the temple site (21:25).<\/p>\nSolomon’s Temple<\/p>\n\n<h5>Date<\/h5>\nConstruction commenced in Solomon’s fourth year, about 966 BC<\/span>, and took seven years to complete (1 Kgs 6:1, 38). Everything necessary for the temple, including the workers, had been prepared by David (1 Chr 28:21). The temple evidently had first priority among Solomon’s building schemes, as he built his own palace later (1 Kgs 7:1).<\/p>\n<h5>Superintendents and Workforce<\/h5>\nThe principal architect for the bronze furnishings was Huram (Hebrew “Hiram”), whose father was a metal craftsman from Tyre and whose mother was an Israelite (1 Kgs 7:13-14). Cedar for the temple came from Lebanon and was felled and transported by the skilled woodsmen of another Hiram—the king of Tyre, Solomon’s ally (5:5-9). Thirty thousand Israelites, divided into three groups, were drafted to assist at Lebanon. Each group was on duty for one month in three. For the stonework, Solomon conscripted 153,600 foreigners resident in Israel to provide a self-contained group of carriers, stone cutters, and supervisors (vv 15-17; 2 Chr 2:17-18). Possibly the “men of Gebal,” with their specialized skills, formed yet another group (1 Kgs 5:18). Building the temple was obviously a national project of immense size and effort. In order to preserve the sanctity of the site and to eliminate noise, the masonry and carpentry were not done at the temple site (6:7).<\/p>\n<h5>Description<\/h5>\nThe details given in the Bible are sufficiently clear for us to make a reasonably accurate description of the temple. The accounts in Kings and Chronicles are supplemented by Ezekiel’s depiction of the temple (see below), which was broadly based on his knowledge of the Jerusalem temple (Ez 40–48).<\/p>\nThe side rooms probably rested on a foundation or platform that was separate from the temple itself (1 Kgs 6:5, 10; cf. Ez 41:8-9) and were arranged in three stories, each seven and a half feet (2.3 meters) high, extending around the whole building except for the porch side. Each successive story was one and a half feet (.5 meter) wider than the one below, these dimensions coinciding with the thickness of the side wall of the Holy Place. The ground floor rooms were seven and a half feet (2.3 meters) wide; the first story was nine feet (2.7 meters), and the second was ten and a half feet (3.2 meters). Access to the upper stories was possibly by winding staircases (1 Kgs 6:8). There is some uncertainty concerning the location of the entrances; there may have been one on either side, but only one is mentioned (v 8). As in Ezekiel’s temple (Ez 40:17, 28), there were two adjacent courts, an inner and an outer (1 Kgs 6:36; 7:12), but no dimensions are given for these. The inner court, or “court of the priests,” being next to the temple itself, was also called “the upper court” (2 Chr 4:9; Jer 36:10). The wall of the inner court was made of three layers of hewn stone held together by a layer of cedar beams (1 Kgs 6:36), and the doors of both courts were sheathed in bronze (2 Chr 4:9). The palace buildings were within the outer court area, probably with a private passageway between the palace and the temple that was later closed during the reign of Ahaz (2 Chr 4:9, 12; 2 Kgs 16:18).<\/p>\nThe temple itself was 90 feet (27.4 meters) long, 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide, and 45 feet (13.7 meters) high (1 Kgs 6:2), with a porch or vestibule 15 feet (4.6 meters) deep stretching across the width. Probably the vestibule was on the east end of the temple, thus corresponding with the orientation of Ezekiel’s temple (Ez 43:1; 44:1). The larger part of the main sanctuary, next to the porch, formed the Holy Place, which was 60 feet (18.3 meters) long (1 Kgs 6:17). Beyond this was the innermost sanctuary, the Holy of Holies (or the “Most Holy Place“), which was a perfect cube of 30 feet (9.1 meters). All the interior walls were paneled with cedar decorated with flower patterns, cherubim, and palm trees, so that no masonry was visible. The walls of both inner and outer sanctuaries were “overlaid” (v 22) with pure gold. Actually the gold decoration may have been inlaid, on the basis that a solid sheath of gold would spoil the natural beauty of the wood carving. The floor was made of cypress planks (v 15). Narrow windows set high in the walls above the level of the three-storied outer chambers provided light in the Holy Place (v 4). The ceiling was paneled with beams and planks of cedar. No detail is given about the exterior roofing, but probably the contemporary technique was employed, using a wooden, latticelike framework into which a waterproof, limestone plaster was packed and rolled.<\/p>\nThe outer porch was apparently an open space, since no doors are mentioned. Access into the Holy Place was by double doors, both hinged to fold back on themselves, made of cypress and decorated in exactly the same way as the interior walls (vv 34-35). The doorposts were made of olive wood. Within the Holy Place was the altar of incense made of cedar overlaid with gold; it was placed centrally before the Holy of Holies. Also in the Holy Place were a table for the bread of the Presence of God, ten lampstands arranged in two groups of five on either side, and various utensils required for maintaining the priestly duties (1 Kgs 7:48-50). All these were made or overlaid with gold. The ten tables, arranged five on each side, were presumably for the utensils and accessories (2 Chr 4:8).<\/p>\nBetween the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies was a double door made of olive wood, carved with cherubim, palm trees, and flower patterns and overlaid with gold. Inside these doors, veiling still further the Holy of Holies, was a blue, purple, and crimson curtain, made of the finest fabrics and ornamented with cherubim (2 Chr 3:14).<\/p>\nIn the Holy of Holies were two cherubim, each 15 feet (4.6 meters) high and made of olive wood covered with gold (1 Kgs 6:23-28). Each wing measured seven and a half feet (2.3 meters). A wing of each touched the side walls; the other wings met at the center of the room. The divine throne had been considerably less impressive in the tabernacle, where a wing of each cherubim fused into the mercy seat above the ark (Ex 25:17-22). In Solomon’s temple, the ark of the covenant was placed below the forward-facing cherubim, the symbolic protectors. The ark, the only major item surviving from the Mosaic tabernacle, still contained the tablets of the law, but the pot of manna and Aaron’s rod were missing (1 Kgs 8:9).<\/p>\nImmediately outside the temple and on either side of the vestibule were two hollow bronze pillars (1 Kgs 7:15-20; 2 Chr 3:15-17). According to the book of Kings, these pillars were 27 feet (8.2 meters) high, with a circumference of 18 feet (5.5 meters). The metal itself was about four inches (10.2 centimeters) thick. The pillars were surmounted by bronze, lily-shaped capitals seven and a half feet (2.3 meters) high and six feet (1.8 meters) wide, intricately adorned with a chain latticework that supported two rows of pomegranates. The total weight must have been enormous, and their size is attested to by Jeremiah, who notes that the Babylonians had to break them in pieces before transporting them to Babylon (Jer 52:17, 21-23).<\/p>\nThe bronze altar of sacrifice in front of the vestibule is not listed in the specifications of 1 Kings 7. However, it is mentioned in the temple dedication and subsequently (1 Kgs 8:22, 54, 64; 9:25) and clearly stood in the inner court. Its dimensions were 30 feet (9.1 meters) square and 15 feet (4.6 meters) high (2 Chr 4:1). In view of its weight, it was probably cast in sections at Solomon’s foundry in the Jordan Rift valley (vv 17-18) and then transported to the temple site for assembly.<\/p>\nProbably the most striking article in the inner court was the “molten (bronze) sea,” a huge, round tank made of bronze 3 inches (8 centimeters) thick, 7½ feet (2.3 meters) high, and 15 feet (4.6 meters) in diameter (1 Kgs 7:23-26). Its rim flared out like a lily (2 Chr 4:2-5). The tank was supported on 12 bronze oxen, four on each side, and had two rows of decoration, possibly gourds or pomegranates, under the brim. Its capacity was between 10,000 and 12,000 gallons (37,850–45,420 liters). The bronze sea was used for priestly ablutions (v 6). Presumably this involved a platform of sorts, for the brim of this vast basin would have been about 15 feet (4.6 meters) above ground level.<\/p>\nHiram also constructed ten large lavers, mounted on moveable stands and placed in two groups of five, on the north and south sides of the inner court (1 Kgs 7:27-39). Basically the stands were bronze boxes, six feet (1.8 meters) square and four and a half feet (1.4 meters) high with a nine-inch (22.9-centimeter) rim around the top edge. Each corner was attached to braced posts to which the axles were fixed. The four-spoked wheels were 27 inches (68.6 centimeters) high. Into each stand there fitted a laver containing approximately 220 gallons (832.7 liters) of water, used for washing sacrificial animals (2 Chr 4:6). Probably each was adjacent to one of the ten tables that would be used to flay and otherwise prepare the sacrifices (v 8). Supplementary items, such as pots, shovels, and basins, all made of bronze, were also manufactured (1 Kgs 7:40, 45).<\/p>\n<h5>The Dedication<\/h5>\nEleven months elapsed between the completion of the temple and its dedication (1 Kgs 6:38; 8:2), during which time the major items of furniture were set in place. The dedication itself took place in the seventh month, presumably in connection with the Feast of Tabernacles and the Day of Atonement (Lv 23:23-36). The ark of the covenant was brought into its final resting place (1 Kgs 8:3-4), but the inner court proved inadequate for the vast numbers of beasts sacrificed (1 Kgs 8:62-64; 2 Chr 7:7).<\/p>\nThe temple employed the most sophisticated building techniques of the age, and no expense had been spared in construction, ornamentation, or equipment. Yet Solomon readily confessed its utter inadequacy to house the eternal God (1 Kgs 8:27). His prayer also underlined Israel’s propensity to forsake the Lord, contrasting the nation with God, who, though a just judge, was also merciful and faithful. The climax of the proceedings came when fire from heaven consumed the sacrifices and the shekinah glory filled the temple (2 Chr 7:1-3).<\/p>\n<h5>Later History<\/h5>\nLike most ancient shrines, the temple became a treasury for national wealth and as such was often the target for attack. Shishak of Egypt plundered it within five years of Solomon’s death (1 Kgs 14:25-38). Shortly afterward, King Asa (910–869 BC<\/span>) depleted its gold and silver treasures to buy Syrian help against his oppressor, Baasha (908–886 BC<\/span>), king of Israel (15:16-19). Joash, the king of Judah (835–796 BC<\/span>) who was concealed in the temple from the vicious Athaliah during his youth (2 Kgs 11), made provision for its repair after protesting the priests’ embezzlement of gifts (12:4-16). But after the death of Jehoiada, the high priest, Joash himself was adversely influenced by his nobles (2 Chr 24:15-19). As punishment for his apostasy, the Lord allowed the Syrians to attack, and Joash used the temple treasures to buy them off (2 Kgs 12:17-18). Hardly had provision for replacements been made, when Jehoash of Israel (798–782 BC<\/span>), having shattered the arrogant pride of Amaziah of Judah (796–767 BC<\/span>), again stripped the temple (14:8-14). Later, King Ahaz (735-715 BC<\/span>) used the remaining resources of the temple to enlist support from the Assyrians (16:7-9), though he eventually became completely subservient to them.<\/p>\n Then Hezekiah (715–686 BC<\/span>), one of the great reforming kings, thoroughly renovated the temple and restored worship after it had fallen into disuse during theclosing years of Ahaz (2 Chr 29:1-19; 31:9-21). Manasseh (696–642 BC<\/span>), however, completely reversed his father’s policy, bringing the practices of Canaanite and Mesopotamian worship into the temple (2 Kgs 21:3-7). His conversion experience, which probably occurred late in his reign and resulted in certain reform measures in the temple (2 Chr 33:12-19), was not far-reaching enough to escape the final judgment that his reign was the dark spot of Judah’s history (2 Kgs 21:10-16).<\/p>\nManasseh’s grandson Josiah (640–609 BC<\/span>), was the second great reforming king. He organized the repair of the temple in 622 BC<\/span>, during which the lost Book of the Law (almost certainly the book of Deuteronomy) was discovered (2 Kgs 22:3-13). As a result, Josiah’s reformation gained a new dimension and sense of urgency (22:14–23:3). The reformation included a thorough purge of all idolatrous elements from the temple (23:4-12) and the restoration of the traditional festivals. Sadly, however, Josiah’s reformation died with him, and Judah’s downward slide continued under the apostate Jehoiakim (609–598 BC<\/span>). It was probably during this time that Jeremiah preached his famous temple sermon foretelling its destruction (Jer 7:1–8:3; 26:1-19), which alienated him from the religious leaders. In Nebuchadnezzar’s reprisal raid following Jehoiakim’s rebellion in 601 BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 24:1-4), Jerusalem was captured (596 BC<\/span>) and many of the temple treasures were transported to Babylon (2 Chr 36:7). The temple itself appears to have escaped damage, but when Judah again rebelled under Zedekiah (597–586 BC<\/span>), the temple was demolished (2 Kgs 25:8-10). The remaining temple treasures were taken away.<\/p>\nZerubbabel’s Temple<\/p>\n<h5>Construction<\/h5>\nAlthough the temple was devastated, the site still remained as a place of pilgrimage during the exile (Jer 41:4-5). In 538 BC<\/span> the Persian king, Cyrus, in pursuance of a liberal policy diametrically opposed to that of the earlier empires, permitted the Jews to return from exile. And he authorized the rebuilding of the temple, financing it from the Persian treasury.<\/p>\nIn the book of Ezra, the decree of authorization has been preserved in two forms: the general proclamation (Ezr 1:2-4) and a more prosaic memorandum in the national archives indicating the main temple specifications and the amount of promised Persian help (6:1-5). Probably only a minority of the Jews opted to leave the relative comforts of Mesopotamia for the dangers of a long journey to their desolated homeland. According to the book of Ezra, 42,360 dedicated individuals and their servants (2:64-65) responded under the leadership of Sheshbazzar (1:8-11; 5:14-16) and Zerubbabel (2:2; 3:2, 8; 4:2). With great enthusiasm, the altar was rebuilt on the temple site and the traditional pattern of worship reestablished (3:1-6). Utilizing the grant from Persia as well as their own freewill gifts (2:68-69; 3:7), the Jews began to plan the second temple and lay its foundations (3:7-13). The initial impetus quickly died as a result of local opposition (4:1-4, 24), selfish preoccupation, and crop failures (Hg 1:2-11). In 520 BC<\/span> (Ezr 4:24; Hg 1:1; Zec 1:1), inspired by the prophets Haggai and Zechariah, the Jews under Zerubbabel and Joshua the high priest commenced rebuilding. Work continued in spite of official suspicion, if not direct opposition, and the temple was completed and dedicated in 515 BC<\/span> (Ezr 5:1–6:22).<\/p>\nLittle is known of the physical features of Zerubbabel’s temple. The inference that it was vastly inferior to Solomon’s temple (Hg 2:3) probably relates to an early stage in the building operation. In fact, the second temple stood for over 500 years. The dimensions noted in Ezra 6:3 are incomplete; the new temple was no doubt about the same size as its predecessor and was probably built on the same foundation. The construction technique appears to have followed the method of the original, with layers of timber providing a framework for sections of masonry (v 4). Clearly, there was auxiliary accommodation, probably like the side rooms of Solomon’s temple (Ezr 8:29; Neh 12:44; 13:4-5). If Persian aid was forthcoming as promised (Ezr 6:8-12), the second temple was a more splendid, substantial structure than is generally supposed.<\/p>\n<h5>Later History<\/h5>\nSeveral references in the Apocrypha, pseudepigrapha, rabbinic writings, and the historian Josephus help to illumine the history of the temple and give more detail on its structure and furnishings. Josephus, quoting from Hecateus of Abdera (fourth century BC<\/span>), states that the temple was a large building in an enclosure about 500 feet by 150 feet (152.4 meters by 45.7 meters), surrounded by a stone wall, with an altar of unhewn stones the same size as Solomon’s bronze altar (cf. 2 Chr 4:1). Within the sanctuary was a golden altar of incense and a lampstand, the flame of which burned continually. Josephus also notes that Antiochus III (223–187 BC<\/span>) financially supported the temple when the Seleucids displaced the Ptolemies as masters of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nBen Sirach, early in the second century BC<\/span>, commended Simon, the son of Onias the high priest, for his work in fortifying and repairing the temple area. First Maccabees provides valuable evidence of the fate of the temple during the oppression under Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164 BC<\/span>). The books of the Maccabees recount the defilement of the altar of burnt offering (1 Macc 1:54) and the plundering of the golden lampstand, altar of incense, table of offering, veil, and other treasures (2 Macc 5:15-16; 6:2-4). When the temple was recaptured and restored, the victorious Maccabees replaced the items taken by the Seleucids, except for the altar of sacrifice, which was considered so polluted that it was dismantled and replaced by a new one constructed of unhewn stone (1 Macc 4:36-61; 2 Macc 10:1-9). Clearly the temple area was used as a fortress, both in opposition to the Seleucid garrison that was maintained in Jerusalem in the Maccabean period and in the conflicts of the later Hasmonean period. When Pompey captured Jerusalem about 63 BC<\/span>, he entered the temple to assert his authority but took no plunder, thus showing respect for it.<\/p>\nThe history of Zerubbabel’s temple closed when Herod, having carefully preserved it from any major damage when he gained control of Jerusalem with Roman aid in 37 BC<\/span>, began to dismantle it about 21 BC<\/span> in preparation for the construction of his own grand temple.<\/p>\nHerod’s Temple<\/p>\nApart from over 100 references in the NT, our main sources of information about Herod’s temple come from the Jewish historian Josephus and from the Middoth (a section of the Jewish rabbinic writings). There are considerable differences in detail between the two, which rules out any dogmatic interpretation in attempted reconstructions. Since Josephus was contemporary with the temple (he was born about AD<\/span> 37 and died early in the second century), he is probably more reliable than the Middoth, which, dating from about AD<\/span> 150, appears to exaggerate occasionally. Archaeological research has been helpful in determining the positions of the outer walls and gates.<\/p>\nHerod’s motive in building his temple was political rather than religious. As an Idumean, he wished to placate his Jewish subjects by constructing a sanctuary as magnificent as Solomon’s. Possible fears that the site might be profaned, or that the existing temple might be demolished and never rebuilt, were allayed by the training of 1,000 priests as masons and the amassing of materials before the work commenced. Herod’s temple followed the tripartite plan of its predecessors, although its porch was much larger. It was built in the contemporary Greco-Roman architectural style and must therefore be regarded as distinct from Zerubbabel’s temple. Work began in 20 BC<\/span>, and while the main sanctuary was quickly erected (it was in full operation within ten years), the total project was not completed until AD<\/span> 64, only six years before it was destroyed by the Romans.<\/p>\nHerod first prepared the site by clearing and leveling an area approximately 500 yards (457.2 meters) from north to south and about 325 yards (297.2 meters) from east to west. This involved cutting away sections of rock in some areas and building up with rubble in others. Considerable sections of the enclosing wall, constructed on stone blocks averaging about 15 feet (4.6 meters) long by 4 feet (1.2 meters) high, still survive. Some of the stones in the corners of the south wall weigh up to 70 tons (63.5 metric tons).<\/p>\nThe sanctuary itself seems to have been based on the same dimensions as Solomon’s temple. It was divided into the Holy Place, which was 60 feet (18.3 meters) long, 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide, and 60 feet high, and the Holy of Holies, which was 30 feet square. There was no furniture within the Holy of Holies, which was separated by a veil from the Holy Place. The Holy Place contained the seven-branch lampstand, the table for the bread of the Presence, and the incense altar. The main divergence from Solomon’s temple was the imposing porch, 150 feet (45.7 meters) in width and height. Outside was a doorway approximately 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide by 40 feet (12.2 meters) high, with an inner doorway about half that size leading into the sanctuary. By allowing empty rooms over the Holy of Holies and the Holy Place, there was a uniform roof height of 150 feet (45.7 meters). Golden spikes on the roof discouraged birds from alighting and defiling the structure. Like its predecessors, the temple was oriented toward the east and was surrounded on the other sides by three stories of rooms rising to a height of 60 feet (18.3 meters). The stone used was the local white stone, cut in huge blocks and highly polished.<\/p>\nAccess to the porch was by a flight of 12 steps from the Court of the Priests. Centrally placed before the porch and 33 feet (10.1 meters) away was the altar of sacrifice. Made of unhewn stone, it was a multilevel construction 15 feet (4.6 meters) high and about 48 feet (14.6 meters) square at its base. Male Israelites were allowed into this area once a year, during the Feast of the Tabernacles, to walk around the altar of sacrifice. Otherwise, they were restricted to the Court of Israel. To the east of the Court of Israel, and separated from it by a flight of 15 steps and by the ornate Great Gate, made of Corinthian bronze, was the Court of the Women. Here the offertory chests for temple expenses were located (Mk 12:41-44). The next court was the large, lower, outer Court of the Gentiles, which surrounded the inner courts and was separated from them by a balustrade and a series of warning notices. Two of these have been excavated, written in Latin and Greek and forbidding trespass by Gentiles into the inner areas, on pain of death. This outer court was widely used. Immediately inside its walls was a portico, supported by four rows of columns almost 40 feet (12.2 meters) high on the south side (the Royal Porch), and two rows on the other sides, the eastern portico known as “Solomon’s Porch” or “Solomon’s Colonnade.” Here is the area where the stalls of the money changers and merchants were set up, where the Sanhedrin met, and where Christ and the scribes taught and debated (Mk 11:27; Lk 2:46; 19:47; Jn 10:23). Here, too, the infant church met before it was rejected by a hostile Judaism (Acts 3:11; 5:12). Just to the northwest of the temple enclosure was the Fortress of Antonia, where the Roman governor resided while in Jerusalem, and where a Roman garrison was on hand to deal with disturbances (Acts 21:31-40). Overlooking the temple area, it was separated from it by a wide moat. The high priest’s vestments were stored in the fortress as a symbol of Roman authority. Access to the Court of the Gentiles was by four gates in the west wall; two in the south wall, where the ground fell away steeply into the valley, a site often identified as the pinnacle of the temple (Mt 4:5; Lk 4:9); and one gate in each of the east and north walls.<\/p>\nSignificance of the Temple in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe temple in Jerusalem functioned as the focal point of the tribal confederation. In spite of the attempt of Jeroboam I, the first king of the northern kingdom, to divert attention from Jerusalem by establishing shrines at Bethel and Dan (1 Kgs 12:26-30), Jerusalem never lost its preeminence. Naturally, both Hezekiah and Josiah sought to extend their reformation into the area of the northern tribes (2 Chr 30:1-12; 34:6-7), and Jerusalem was a pilgrimage center for those areas even after its destruction (Jer 41:5). The prophets foretold its destiny as the focal point of universal worship (Is 2:1-4).<\/p>\nThe temple was God’s dwelling place among his people. God’s presence, symbolized in the shekinah glory and the pillar of cloud, was associated with the tent of meeting (Ex 33:9-11), with the tabernacle (40:34-38), and finally with the temple (1 Kgs 8:10-11). The paradox is that while God is completely unrestricted, the temple was considered a place for God to live forever (vv 13, 27). God had chosen Zion, as he had chosen David (Pss 68:15-18; 76:2; 78:67-72), so the temple was regarded as God’s house (27:4; 42:4; 84:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>Ezekiel’s Temple<\/h5>\nEzekiel’s detailed description of the ideal temple (Ez 40–48) was not used as the blueprint for Zerubbabel’s temple. In fact, since Ezekiel must have been familiar with Solomon’s temple before his deportation in 597 BC<\/span>, his description is of greater help in determining uncertain details of the first temple. Ezekiel’s concern was to show the nature of pure worship, safeguarded from all contamination. This worship would allow the glory of God, which had departed from corrupted Solomon’s temple (9:3; 10:4, 18-19: 11:22-23), to return so that Jerusalem could again be named “the Lord is there” (43:1-5; 48:35). This thought, linked with Ezekiel’s vital concept of God’s Spirit indwelling his faithful worshipers (36:24-28), anticipated the NT teaching of the believers becoming God’s temple.<\/p>\nSignificance of the Temple in the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>Christ and the Temple<\/h5>\nChrist showed considerable respect for the temple. When he was 12 years old, he entered into the rabbinic discussions in its porticoes and described it as his Father’s house (Lk 2:41-50). To him “the house of God” was indwelt by God (Mt 12:4; 23:21). Although he twice cleansed it in righteous anger (Mt 21:12-13; Jn 2:13-16), he wept over the impending destruction of the city and temple (Lk 19:41-44). He often taught there, but he was “greater than the temple” (Mt 12:6). When his presentation to Jerusalem as the predicted Messiah was rejected, in spite of attendant miracles, he foretold its inevitable destruction (Mt 21:9-15; 24:1-2). For a brief period after Pentecost, the early church used the temple as its meeting place, until mounting opposition drove believers from Jerusalem (Acts 5:12, 21, 42; 8:1).<\/p>\n<h5>The Church as the Temple<\/h5>\nThe NT writers used two different Greek words to describe the temple: naos<\/span> and hieron<\/span>.<\/em> Naos<\/span> refers to the actual sanctuary of the temple, the place of God’s dwelling. Hieron<\/span> refers to the temple precincts as well as to the sanctuary. Generally speaking, naos<\/span> was used to designate the inner section of the temple known as the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies, whereas hieron<\/span> included the outer court and the temple proper.<\/p>\nIn Paul’s epistles the word naos<\/span> appears six times (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 2 Thes 2:4) and hieron<\/span> once (1 Cor 9:13). In these verses Paul maintains the distinction of definition noted above. When speaking of the actual physical temple, he used the word hieron<\/span> to indicate the place where the priests offered up animal sacrifices on the altar (1 Cor 9:13), which was situated in the outer court (see Ex 27–29, 40). And when Paul referred to the abominable act of the lawless one in usurping God’s place in the temple, he used the word naos<\/span>—the word that designates the place of deity’s presence (2 Thes 2:4).<\/p>\nIn all the other Pauline passages, naos<\/span> is used metaphorically—to depict a human habitation for the divine Spirit. In one instance the sanctuary image is used to describe the individual believer’s body (1 Cor 6:19); in every other instance the sanctuary depicts Christ’s body, the church (1 Cor 3:16-17; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21). Mistakenly, many readers think 1 Corinthians 3:16-17 speaks of the individual, but according to the Greek text, it is unquestionably clear that Paul was speaking about the collective church (specifically, the church in Corinth).<\/p>\nWhen Paul told the church in Corinth that it was God’s sanctuary, they would have understood the image from their knowledge of pagan temples. But Paul probably had in mind the one temple in Jerusalem. The Gentiles had many gods with many temples in one city; the Jews had one God with only one temple in all of Israel. This helped to preserve unity among the Israelites. The Corinthians needed spiritual unity; they were fragmented due to their individual preferences (see 1 Cor 1:10-13).<\/p>\nIn Ephesians, Paul’s masterpiece on the church, he speaks of the local churches as living, organic entities that are all (compositely speaking) growing into a holy sanctuary in the Lord (Eph 2:21). Paul pictured each local church as providing God with a spiritual habitation in that locality (v 22) and as growing together with all the other churches into one holy, universal sanctuary for the Lord’s indwelling.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temple in John’s Revelation<\/h5>\nIn John’s revelation there is no material temple, even though he continues to use the imagery of Jerusalem and Mt Zion (Rv 3:12; 14:1; 21:2, 10, 22). Three interrelated ideas dominate. First is the concept of the church made up of martyrs, whose faithful members are God’s temple (3:12; 14:1). This temple grows gradually as the number of martyrs increases (6:11). Another aspect is the temple as the place of judgment (11:19; 14:15; 15:5–16:1). Finally, any temple in the new age is unnecessary, “for its temple is the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb” (21:22). The ultimate state will be God’s dwelling with his people—the eternal, spritual temple.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Altar; Ark of the Covenant; Bread of the Presence; David; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; First Jewish Revolt; Judaism; Mercy Seat; Offerings and Sacrifices; Priests and Levites; Sanctuary; Singers in the Temple; Solomon (Person).<\/p>","summary_ro":"TEMPLE Preview • Background • Solomon’s Temple • Zerubbabel’s Temple • Herod’s Temple • Significance of the Temple in the Old Testament • Significance of the Temple in the New Testament Background David’s capture of Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:6-9) and his designation of it as the nation’s capital is one of the great masterstrokes of history. Occupied by the Jebusites, it was a pocket of neutral territory between the northern and southern sections of David’s united kingdom and was politically acceptabl...","summary_en":"TEMPLE Preview • Background • Solomon’s Temple • Zerubbabel’s Temple • Herod’s Temple • Significance of the Temple in the Old Testament • Significance of the Temple in the New Testament Background David’s capture of Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:6-9) and his designation of it as the nation’s capital is one of the great masterstrokes of history. Occupied by the Jebusites, it was a pocket of neutral territory between the northern and southern sections of David’s united kingdom and was politically acceptabl...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37658,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Treasurer","title_en":"Treasurer","content_ro":"<h3>TREASURER<\/h3>\nAn officer in charge of financial matters. In OT times he had charge of the royal or sacred treasures, which consisted of goods, documents, money, and jewels. He was steward of the king’s possessions and overseer of the treasury. David appointed Azmaveth over the king’s treasuries, Jonathan over the treasuries in cities and villages (1 Chr 27:25), and Ahijah over the temple treasuries (26:20). Solomon’s temple treasury was in the care of Jehiel (29:7-8). In Isaiah’s day there was a treasurer for the household named Shebna (Is 22:15). An inscription found near Jerusalem may record his name.<\/p>\nTreasurers held positions in other lands too. King Cyrus of Persia entrusted his temple treasures to Mithredath (Ezr 1:8). Artaxerxes ordered the treasurers of the province “beyond the river” to supply funds to Ezra the priest (7:21-22). Nehemiah appointed treasurers over storehouses to distribute goods (Neh 12:44; 13:13).<\/p>\nIn the NT, two treasurers are known. The Ethiopian eunuch was in charge of the treasury of Candace, queen of Ethiopia (Acts 8:27), and Erastus was the city treasurer of Corinth (Rom 16:23). An inscription left at Corinth by Erastus, a Roman treasurer, may be his.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Money; Banker, Banking.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TREASURER<\/h3>\nAn officer in charge of financial matters. In OT times he had charge of the royal or sacred treasures, which consisted of goods, documents, money, and jewels. He was steward of the king’s possessions and overseer of the treasury. David appointed Azmaveth over the king’s treasuries, Jonathan over the treasuries in cities and villages (1 Chr 27:25), and Ahijah over the temple treasuries (26:20). Solomon’s temple treasury was in the care of Jehiel (29:7-8). In Isaiah’s day there was a treasurer for the household named Shebna (Is 22:15). An inscription found near Jerusalem may record his name.<\/p>\nTreasurers held positions in other lands too. King Cyrus of Persia entrusted his temple treasures to Mithredath (Ezr 1:8). Artaxerxes ordered the treasurers of the province “beyond the river” to supply funds to Ezra the priest (7:21-22). Nehemiah appointed treasurers over storehouses to distribute goods (Neh 12:44; 13:13).<\/p>\nIn the NT, two treasurers are known. The Ethiopian eunuch was in charge of the treasury of Candace, queen of Ethiopia (Acts 8:27), and Erastus was the city treasurer of Corinth (Rom 16:23). An inscription left at Corinth by Erastus, a Roman treasurer, may be his.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Money; Banker, Banking.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TREASURER An officer in charge of financial matters. In OT times he had charge of the royal or sacred treasures, which consisted of goods, documents, money, and jewels. He was steward of the king’s possessions and overseer of the treasury. David appointed Azmaveth over the king’s treasuries, Jonathan over the treasuries in cities and villages (1 Chr 27:25), and Ahijah over the temple treasuries (26:20). Solomon’s temple treasury was in the care of Jehiel (29:7-8). In Isaiah’s day there was a ...","summary_en":"TREASURER An officer in charge of financial matters. In OT times he had charge of the royal or sacred treasures, which consisted of goods, documents, money, and jewels. He was steward of the king’s possessions and overseer of the treasury. David appointed Azmaveth over the king’s treasuries, Jonathan over the treasuries in cities and villages (1 Chr 27:25), and Ahijah over the temple treasuries (26:20). Solomon’s temple treasury was in the care of Jehiel (29:7-8). In Isaiah’s day there was a ...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":47989,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:8","content_ro":"1:8<\/strong> Sheshbazzar<\/em> was the Persian-appointed governor of Judah who laid the foundation of the Temple (5:14-16). Some believe that Zerubbabel (3:2, 8) was the same person with a new name (cp. Dan 1:7). However, both names are Babylonian, so it is more likely that these two leaders worked together on the Temple foundation and that Zerubbabel later took over as governor when Sheshbazzar died.<\/p>","content_en":"1:8<\/strong> Sheshbazzar<\/em> was the Persian-appointed governor of Judah who laid the foundation of the Temple (5:14-16). Some believe that Zerubbabel (3:2, 8) was the same person with a new name (cp. Dan 1:7). However, both names are Babylonian, so it is more likely that these two leaders worked together on the Temple foundation and that Zerubbabel later took over as governor when Sheshbazzar died.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:8 Sheshbazzar was the Persian-appointed governor of Judah who laid the foundation of the Temple (5:14-16). Some believe that Zerubbabel (3:2, 8) was the same person with a new name (cp. Dan 1:7). However, both names are Babylonian, so it is more likely that these two leaders worked together on the Temple foundation and that Zerubbabel later took over as governor when Sheshbazzar died.","summary_en":"1:8 Sheshbazzar was the Persian-appointed governor of Judah who laid the foundation of the Temple (5:14-16). Some believe that Zerubbabel (3:2, 8) was the same person with a new name (cp. Dan 1:7). However, both names are Babylonian, so it is more likely that these two leaders worked together on the Temple foundation and that Zerubbabel later took over as governor when Sheshbazzar died.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75615,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:8","content_ro":"1:8<\/strong> Sheshbazzar<\/em> was the Persian-appointed governor of Judah who laid the foundation of the Temple (5:14-16). Some believe that Zerubbabel (3:2, 8) was the same person with a new name (cp. Dan 1:7). However, both names are Babylonian, so it is more likely that these two leaders worked together on the Temple foundation and that Zerubbabel later took over as governor when Sheshbazzar died.<\/p>","content_en":"1:8<\/strong> Sheshbazzar<\/em> was the Persian-appointed governor of Judah who laid the foundation of the Temple (5:14-16). Some believe that Zerubbabel (3:2, 8) was the same person with a new name (cp. Dan 1:7). However, both names are Babylonian, so it is more likely that these two leaders worked together on the Temple foundation and that Zerubbabel later took over as governor when Sheshbazzar died.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:8 Sheshbazzar was the Persian-appointed governor of Judah who laid the foundation of the Temple (5:14-16). Some believe that Zerubbabel (3:2, 8) was the same person with a new name (cp. Dan 1:7). However, both names are Babylonian, so it is more likely that these two leaders worked together on the Temple foundation and that Zerubbabel later took over as governor when Sheshbazzar died.","summary_en":"1:8 Sheshbazzar was the Persian-appointed governor of Judah who laid the foundation of the Temple (5:14-16). Some believe that Zerubbabel (3:2, 8) was the same person with a new name (cp. Dan 1:7). However, both names are Babylonian, so it is more likely that these two leaders worked together on the Temple foundation and that Zerubbabel later took over as governor when Sheshbazzar died.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103241,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:8","content_ro":"1:8<\/strong> Sheshbazzar<\/em> was the Persian-appointed governor of Judah who laid the foundation of the Temple (5:14-16). Some believe that Zerubbabel (3:2, 8) was the same person with a new name (cp. Dan 1:7). However, both names are Babylonian, so it is more likely that these two leaders worked together on the Temple foundation and that Zerubbabel later took over as governor when Sheshbazzar died.<\/p>","content_en":"1:8<\/strong> Sheshbazzar<\/em> was the Persian-appointed governor of Judah who laid the foundation of the Temple (5:14-16). Some believe that Zerubbabel (3:2, 8) was the same person with a new name (cp. Dan 1:7). However, both names are Babylonian, so it is more likely that these two leaders worked together on the Temple foundation and that Zerubbabel later took over as governor when Sheshbazzar died.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:8 Sheshbazzar was the Persian-appointed governor of Judah who laid the foundation of the Temple (5:14-16). Some believe that Zerubbabel (3:2, 8) was the same person with a new name (cp. Dan 1:7). However, both names are Babylonian, so it is more likely that these two leaders worked together on the Temple foundation and that Zerubbabel later took over as governor when Sheshbazzar died.","summary_en":"1:8 Sheshbazzar was the Persian-appointed governor of Judah who laid the foundation of the Temple (5:14-16). Some believe that Zerubbabel (3:2, 8) was the same person with a new name (cp. Dan 1:7). However, both names are Babylonian, so it is more likely that these two leaders worked together on the Temple foundation and that Zerubbabel later took over as governor when Sheshbazzar died.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":130867,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:8","content_ro":"1:8<\/strong> Sheshbazzar<\/em> was the Persian-appointed governor of Judah who laid the foundation of the Temple (5:14-16). Some believe that Zerubbabel (3:2, 8) was the same person with a new name (cp. Dan 1:7). However, both names are Babylonian, so it is more likely that these two leaders worked together on the Temple foundation and that Zerubbabel later took over as governor when Sheshbazzar died.<\/p>","content_en":"1:8<\/strong> Sheshbazzar<\/em> was the Persian-appointed governor of Judah who laid the foundation of the Temple (5:14-16). Some believe that Zerubbabel (3:2, 8) was the same person with a new name (cp. Dan 1:7). However, both names are Babylonian, so it is more likely that these two leaders worked together on the Temple foundation and that Zerubbabel later took over as governor when Sheshbazzar died.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:8 Sheshbazzar was the Persian-appointed governor of Judah who laid the foundation of the Temple (5:14-16). Some believe that Zerubbabel (3:2, 8) was the same person with a new name (cp. Dan 1:7). However, both names are Babylonian, so it is more likely that these two leaders worked together on the Temple foundation and that Zerubbabel later took over as governor when Sheshbazzar died.","summary_en":"1:8 Sheshbazzar was the Persian-appointed governor of Judah who laid the foundation of the Temple (5:14-16). Some believe that Zerubbabel (3:2, 8) was the same person with a new name (cp. Dan 1:7). However, both names are Babylonian, so it is more likely that these two leaders worked together on the Temple foundation and that Zerubbabel later took over as governor when Sheshbazzar died.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"9":[{"id":35030,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sheshbazzar","title_en":"Sheshbazzar","content_ro":"<h3>SHESHBAZZAR<\/h3>\nJewish leader who found favor with Cyrus the Great, king of Persia. In the first year of his reign, Cyrus issued a decree that the temple in Jerusalem should be rebuilt (Ezr 1:1-4; cf. 6:1-5). He appointed Sheshbazzar governor of Judah (Ezr 5:14) and handed over to him the gold and silver vessels that Nebuchadnezzar had carried off when he took Jerusalem (1:7-9). Sheshbazzar fulfilled this commission by taking the vessels to Jerusalem with the returning exiles (v 9) and beginning the restoration of the temple (5:16).<\/p>\nSheshbazzar is mentioned in the Bible only four times, all in the book of Ezra (1:8-9; 5:14-16). For many years it was commonly held that Sheshbazzar was another name for Zerubbabel. Both were of the royal line; Sheshbazzar is called “the prince of Judah,” which may mean that he was heir apparent to the throne. Since his genealogy is not given, he may be represented in that listing by some other name, either Zerubbabel or Shenazzar (1 Chr 3:18-19). In the record of people who returned to Jerusalem, Sheshbazzar’s name does not appear. The name of Zerubbabel is at the head of this list, where one would expect Sheshbazzar’s to be; both were governors of the province of Judah. Zerubbabel is associated with the laying of the foundation of the temple (Ezr 3:8-11), but that work is attributed to Sheshbazzar in 5:16, in accordance with chapter 1. It is evident that the name Sheshbazzar is found only in connection with the Persians, for chapter 1 relates his dealings with Cyrus, and in chapter 5 the two occurrences of his name are in a letter written by the Persian official, Tattenai. One may conclude that the Persians knew him as Sheshbazzar, but the Jews called him Zerubbabel. Both names are Akkadian, so there is no parallel here to the renaming of Jewish captives in Babylon (Dn 1:7).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SHESHBAZZAR<\/h3>\nJewish leader who found favor with Cyrus the Great, king of Persia. In the first year of his reign, Cyrus issued a decree that the temple in Jerusalem should be rebuilt (Ezr 1:1-4; cf. 6:1-5). He appointed Sheshbazzar governor of Judah (Ezr 5:14) and handed over to him the gold and silver vessels that Nebuchadnezzar had carried off when he took Jerusalem (1:7-9). Sheshbazzar fulfilled this commission by taking the vessels to Jerusalem with the returning exiles (v 9) and beginning the restoration of the temple (5:16).<\/p>\nSheshbazzar is mentioned in the Bible only four times, all in the book of Ezra (1:8-9; 5:14-16). For many years it was commonly held that Sheshbazzar was another name for Zerubbabel. Both were of the royal line; Sheshbazzar is called “the prince of Judah,” which may mean that he was heir apparent to the throne. Since his genealogy is not given, he may be represented in that listing by some other name, either Zerubbabel or Shenazzar (1 Chr 3:18-19). In the record of people who returned to Jerusalem, Sheshbazzar’s name does not appear. The name of Zerubbabel is at the head of this list, where one would expect Sheshbazzar’s to be; both were governors of the province of Judah. Zerubbabel is associated with the laying of the foundation of the temple (Ezr 3:8-11), but that work is attributed to Sheshbazzar in 5:16, in accordance with chapter 1. It is evident that the name Sheshbazzar is found only in connection with the Persians, for chapter 1 relates his dealings with Cyrus, and in chapter 5 the two occurrences of his name are in a letter written by the Persian official, Tattenai. One may conclude that the Persians knew him as Sheshbazzar, but the Jews called him Zerubbabel. Both names are Akkadian, so there is no parallel here to the renaming of Jewish captives in Babylon (Dn 1:7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SHESHBAZZAR Jewish leader who found favor with Cyrus the Great, king of Persia. In the first year of his reign, Cyrus issued a decree that the temple in Jerusalem should be rebuilt (Ezr 1:1-4; cf. 6:1-5). He appointed Sheshbazzar governor of Judah (Ezr 5:14) and handed over to him the gold and silver vessels that Nebuchadnezzar had carried off when he took Jerusalem (1:7-9). Sheshbazzar fulfilled this commission by taking the vessels to Jerusalem with the returning exiles (v 9) and beginning ...","summary_en":"SHESHBAZZAR Jewish leader who found favor with Cyrus the Great, king of Persia. In the first year of his reign, Cyrus issued a decree that the temple in Jerusalem should be rebuilt (Ezr 1:1-4; cf. 6:1-5). He appointed Sheshbazzar governor of Judah (Ezr 5:14) and handed over to him the gold and silver vessels that Nebuchadnezzar had carried off when he took Jerusalem (1:7-9). Sheshbazzar fulfilled this commission by taking the vessels to Jerusalem with the returning exiles (v 9) and beginning ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":47990,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:9","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:9","content_ro":"1:9-11<\/strong> 5,400 articles of gold and silver:<\/em> The numbers listed total only 2,499 items. A parallel account, in the apocryphal book 1 Esdras<\/em> 2:13-15, lists 5,469 items, while a list in the Jewish historian Josephus’s Antiquities<\/em> 11.15 lists 5,220 objects. Ezra’s shortened list illustrates the kind of items included but does not include every item. Keeping track of consecrated utensils reduced the possibility of confusing these sacred items with the pagan utensils used in the worship of other gods.<\/p>","content_en":"1:9-11<\/strong> 5,400 articles of gold and silver:<\/em> The numbers listed total only 2,499 items. A parallel account, in the apocryphal book 1 Esdras<\/em> 2:13-15, lists 5,469 items, while a list in the Jewish historian Josephus’s Antiquities<\/em> 11.15 lists 5,220 objects. Ezra’s shortened list illustrates the kind of items included but does not include every item. Keeping track of consecrated utensils reduced the possibility of confusing these sacred items with the pagan utensils used in the worship of other gods.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:9-11 5,400 articles of gold and silver: The numbers listed total only 2,499 items. A parallel account, in the apocryphal book 1 Esdras 2:13-15, lists 5,469 items, while a list in the Jewish historian Josephus’s Antiquities 11.15 lists 5,220 objects. Ezra’s shortened list illustrates the kind of items included but does not include every item. Keeping track of consecrated utensils reduced the possibility of confusing these sacred items with the pagan utensils used in the worship of other gods.","summary_en":"1:9-11 5,400 articles of gold and silver: The numbers listed total only 2,499 items. A parallel account, in the apocryphal book 1 Esdras 2:13-15, lists 5,469 items, while a list in the Jewish historian Josephus’s Antiquities 11.15 lists 5,220 objects. Ezra’s shortened list illustrates the kind of items included but does not include every item. Keeping track of consecrated utensils reduced the possibility of confusing these sacred items with the pagan utensils used in the worship of other gods.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75616,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:9","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:9","content_ro":"1:9-11<\/strong> 5,400 articles of gold and silver:<\/em> The numbers listed total only 2,499 items. A parallel account, in the apocryphal book 1 Esdras<\/em> 2:13-15, lists 5,469 items, while a list in the Jewish historian Josephus’s Antiquities<\/em> 11.15 lists 5,220 objects. Ezra’s shortened list illustrates the kind of items included but does not include every item. Keeping track of consecrated utensils reduced the possibility of confusing these sacred items with the pagan utensils used in the worship of other gods.<\/p>","content_en":"1:9-11<\/strong> 5,400 articles of gold and silver:<\/em> The numbers listed total only 2,499 items. A parallel account, in the apocryphal book 1 Esdras<\/em> 2:13-15, lists 5,469 items, while a list in the Jewish historian Josephus’s Antiquities<\/em> 11.15 lists 5,220 objects. Ezra’s shortened list illustrates the kind of items included but does not include every item. Keeping track of consecrated utensils reduced the possibility of confusing these sacred items with the pagan utensils used in the worship of other gods.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:9-11 5,400 articles of gold and silver: The numbers listed total only 2,499 items. A parallel account, in the apocryphal book 1 Esdras 2:13-15, lists 5,469 items, while a list in the Jewish historian Josephus’s Antiquities 11.15 lists 5,220 objects. Ezra’s shortened list illustrates the kind of items included but does not include every item. Keeping track of consecrated utensils reduced the possibility of confusing these sacred items with the pagan utensils used in the worship of other gods.","summary_en":"1:9-11 5,400 articles of gold and silver: The numbers listed total only 2,499 items. A parallel account, in the apocryphal book 1 Esdras 2:13-15, lists 5,469 items, while a list in the Jewish historian Josephus’s Antiquities 11.15 lists 5,220 objects. Ezra’s shortened list illustrates the kind of items included but does not include every item. Keeping track of consecrated utensils reduced the possibility of confusing these sacred items with the pagan utensils used in the worship of other gods.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103242,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:9","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:9","content_ro":"1:9-11<\/strong> 5,400 articles of gold and silver:<\/em> The numbers listed total only 2,499 items. A parallel account, in the apocryphal book 1 Esdras<\/em> 2:13-15, lists 5,469 items, while a list in the Jewish historian Josephus’s Antiquities<\/em> 11.15 lists 5,220 objects. Ezra’s shortened list illustrates the kind of items included but does not include every item. Keeping track of consecrated utensils reduced the possibility of confusing these sacred items with the pagan utensils used in the worship of other gods.<\/p>","content_en":"1:9-11<\/strong> 5,400 articles of gold and silver:<\/em> The numbers listed total only 2,499 items. A parallel account, in the apocryphal book 1 Esdras<\/em> 2:13-15, lists 5,469 items, while a list in the Jewish historian Josephus’s Antiquities<\/em> 11.15 lists 5,220 objects. Ezra’s shortened list illustrates the kind of items included but does not include every item. Keeping track of consecrated utensils reduced the possibility of confusing these sacred items with the pagan utensils used in the worship of other gods.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:9-11 5,400 articles of gold and silver: The numbers listed total only 2,499 items. A parallel account, in the apocryphal book 1 Esdras 2:13-15, lists 5,469 items, while a list in the Jewish historian Josephus’s Antiquities 11.15 lists 5,220 objects. Ezra’s shortened list illustrates the kind of items included but does not include every item. Keeping track of consecrated utensils reduced the possibility of confusing these sacred items with the pagan utensils used in the worship of other gods.","summary_en":"1:9-11 5,400 articles of gold and silver: The numbers listed total only 2,499 items. A parallel account, in the apocryphal book 1 Esdras 2:13-15, lists 5,469 items, while a list in the Jewish historian Josephus’s Antiquities 11.15 lists 5,220 objects. Ezra’s shortened list illustrates the kind of items included but does not include every item. Keeping track of consecrated utensils reduced the possibility of confusing these sacred items with the pagan utensils used in the worship of other gods.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":130868,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezra 1:9","title_en":"Study Note: Ezra 1:9","content_ro":"1:9-11<\/strong> 5,400 articles of gold and silver:<\/em> The numbers listed total only 2,499 items. A parallel account, in the apocryphal book 1 Esdras<\/em> 2:13-15, lists 5,469 items, while a list in the Jewish historian Josephus’s Antiquities<\/em> 11.15 lists 5,220 objects. Ezra’s shortened list illustrates the kind of items included but does not include every item. Keeping track of consecrated utensils reduced the possibility of confusing these sacred items with the pagan utensils used in the worship of other gods.<\/p>","content_en":"1:9-11<\/strong> 5,400 articles of gold and silver:<\/em> The numbers listed total only 2,499 items. A parallel account, in the apocryphal book 1 Esdras<\/em> 2:13-15, lists 5,469 items, while a list in the Jewish historian Josephus’s Antiquities<\/em> 11.15 lists 5,220 objects. Ezra’s shortened list illustrates the kind of items included but does not include every item. Keeping track of consecrated utensils reduced the possibility of confusing these sacred items with the pagan utensils used in the worship of other gods.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:9-11 5,400 articles of gold and silver: The numbers listed total only 2,499 items. A parallel account, in the apocryphal book 1 Esdras 2:13-15, lists 5,469 items, while a list in the Jewish historian Josephus’s Antiquities 11.15 lists 5,220 objects. Ezra’s shortened list illustrates the kind of items included but does not include every item. Keeping track of consecrated utensils reduced the possibility of confusing these sacred items with the pagan utensils used in the worship of other gods.","summary_en":"1:9-11 5,400 articles of gold and silver: The numbers listed total only 2,499 items. A parallel account, in the apocryphal book 1 Esdras 2:13-15, lists 5,469 items, while a list in the Jewish historian Josephus’s Antiquities 11.15 lists 5,220 objects. Ezra’s shortened list illustrates the kind of items included but does not include every item. Keeping track of consecrated utensils reduced the possibility of confusing these sacred items with the pagan utensils used in the worship of other gods.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}]},"labels":{"article":"Articol","map":"Hartă","chart":"Diagramă","textbox":"Notă explicativă","picture":"Imagine","profile":"Profil","study_note":"Notă de studiu","theme_note":"Temă biblică"},"icons":{"article":"📖","map":"🗺️","chart":"📊","textbox":"💡","picture":"🖼️","profile":"👤","study_note":"📝","theme_note":"🎯"},"typeColors":{"article":"#d4af37","map":"#2d7d46","chart":"#3b82f6","textbox":"#8b5cf6","picture":"#ec4899","profile":"#f59e0b","study_note":"#06b6d4","theme_note":"#ef4444"}}

Ezra 1

Citește Biblia

Ezra 1

Niciun rezultat

Redare audio

Bine ai venit! 👋