1
Copiii lui Israel au păcătuit cu privire la lucrurile date spre nimicire. Acan, fiul lui Carmi, fiul lui Zabdi, fiul lui Zerah, din seminţia lui Iuda, a luat din lucrurile date spre nimicire. Şi Domnul S-a aprins de mânie împotriva copiilor lui Israel.
2
Iosua a trimes din Ierihon nişte bărbaţi la Ai, care este lângă Bet-Aven, la răsărit de Betel. Şi le-a zis: ,,Suiţi-vă, şi iscodiţi ţara.`` Şi oamenii aceia s-au suit, şi au iscodit cetatea Ai.
3
S-au întors la Iosua, şi i-au spus: ,,Degeaba mai faci să mai meargă tot poporul; două sau trei mii de oameni vor ajunge ca să baţi cetatea Ai; nu osteni tot poporul; căci oamenii aceia sânt puţin la număr.``
4
Aproape trei mii de oameni au pornit, dar au luat-o la fugă dinaintea oamenilor din Ai.
5
Oamenii din Ai le-au omorât aproape treizeci şi şase de oameni; i-au urmărit dela poartă până la Şebarim, şi i-au bătut la vale. Poporul a rămas încremenit şi cu inima moale ca apa.
6
Iosua şi-a sfîşiat hainele, şi s-a aruncat cu faţa la pământ până seara înaintea chivotului Domnului, el şi bătrânii lui Israel, şi şi-au presărat capul cu ţărână.
7
Iosua a zis: ,,Ah! Doamne Dumnezeule, pentruce ai trecut pe poporul acesta Iordanul, ca să ne dai în mânile Amoriţilor şi să ne prăpădeşti? De am fi ştiut să rămânem de cealaltă parte a Iordanului!
8
Dar Doamne, ce voi zice, după ce Israel a dat dosul înaintea vrăjmaşilor lui?
9
Cananiţii şi toţi locuitorii ţării vor afla; ne vor înconjura, şi ne vor şterge numele de pe pământ. Şi ce vei face Tu Numelui Tău celui mare?``
10
Domnul a zis lui Iosua: ,,Scoală-te! Pentruce stai culcat astfel pe faţa ta?
11
Israel a păcătuit; au călcat legământul Meu pe care li l-am dat, au luat din lucrurile date spre nimicire, le-au furat şi au minţit, şi le-au ascuns printre lucrurile lor.
12
De aceea copiii lui Israel nu pot să ţină piept vrăjmaşilor lor: vor da dosul în faţa vrăjmaşilor lor, căci sânt daţi spre nimicire; Eu nu voi mai fi cu voi, dacă nu nimiciţi ce este dat spre nimicire din mijlocul vostru.
13
Scoală-te, sfinţeşte poporul. Spune-le: ,Sfinţiţi-vă pentru mâne. Căci aşa zice Domnul, Dumnezeul lui Israel: ,În mijlocul tău este un lucru dat spre nimicire, Israele; nu vei putea să ţii piept vrăjmaşilor tăi, până nu veţi scoate lucrul dat spre nimicire din mijlocul vostru.
14
Să vă apropiaţi mâne dimineaţă după seminţiile voastre; şi seminţia pe care o va arăta Domnul prin sorţi se va apropia pe familii, şi familia pe care o va arăta Domnul prin sorţi se va apropia pe case, şi casa pe care o va arăta Domnul prin sorţi se va apropia pe bărbaţi.
15
Cine va fi arătat prin sorţi că a luat din ce era dat spre nimicire, va fi ars în foc, el şi tot ce este al lui, pentrucă a călcat legământul Domnului şi a făcut o mişelie în Israel.``
16
Iosua s-a sculat disdedimineaţă, şi a apropiat pe Israel, după seminţiile lui, şi a fost arătată prin sorţi seminţia lui Iuda.
17
A apropiat familiile lui Iuda, şi a fost arătată prin sorţi familia lui Zerah. A apropiat familia lui Zerah pe case, şi a fost arătată prin sorţi casa lui Zabdi.
18
A apropiat casa lui Zabdi pe bărbaţi, şi a fost arătat prin sorţi Acan, fiul lui Carmi, fiul lui Zabdi, fiul lui Zerah, din seminţia lui Iuda.
19
Iosua a zis lui Acan: ,,Fiule, dă slavă Domnului, Dumnezeului lui Israel, mărturiseşte şi spune-mi ce ai făcut, nu-mi ascunde nimic``.
20
Acan a răspuns lui Iosua, şi a zis: ,,Este adevărat că am păcătuit împotriva Domnului, Dumnezeului lui Israel, şi iată ce am făcut.
21
Am văzut în pradă o manta frumoasă de Şinear, două sute de sicli de argint, şi o placă de aur în greutate de cincizeci de sicli; le-am poftit, şi le-am luat; iată, sânt ascunse în pământ în mijlocul cortului meu, şi argintul este pus subt ele``.
22
Iosua a trimes nişte oameni, cari au alergat în cort; şi iată că lucurile erau ascunse în cortul lui Acan, şi argintul era subt ele.
23
Le-au luat din mijlocul cortului, le-au adus lui Iosua şi tuturor copiilor lui Israel, şi le-au pus înaintea Domnului.
24
Iosua şi tot Israelul împreună cu el au luat pe Acan, fiul lui Zerah, argintul, mantaua, placa de aur, pe fiii şi fiicele lui Acan, boii lui, măgarii, oile, cortul lui şi tot ce era al lui; şi i-au suit în valea Acor.
25
Iosua a zis: ,,Pentruce ne-ai nenorocit? Şi pe tine te va nenoroci Domnul azi``. Şi tot Israelul i-a ucis cu pietre. I-au ars în foc, i-au ucis cu pietre,
26
şi au ridicat peste Acan un morman mare de pietre, care se vede până în ziua de azi. Şi Domnul S-a întors din iuţimea mâniei Lui. Din pricina acestei întâmplări s-a dat până în ziua de azi locului aceluia numele de valea Acor (Turburare).
{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":41079,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Joshua","title_en":"Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>Joshua<\/h3>\n<p>Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immediately (Num 13:22–14:9), and as a result, of the twelve spies, only they entered Canaan (Num 14:30, 36-38).<\/p>\n<p>God directed Moses to designate Joshua as his successor (Num 27:15-23; Deut 34:9). After Moses died, Joshua led Israel across the Jordan River (Josh 1:1-18; 3:1–4:24) to the conquest of Jericho (6:1-27). When Israel suffered defeat at Ai, Joshua turned to the Lord and followed his instructions to purge Israel of sin (7:1-26); then Israel conquered Ai (8:1-29). Following God’s instructions to Moses (Deut 11:29-32; 27:1–28:68), Joshua built an altar on Mount Ebal (Josh 8:30-32) and read the blessings and curses of the covenant (8:33-35). Joshua conducted campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings, a southern and a northern coalition (10:1-43; 11:1-15). Joshua’s victories in these campaigns opened the hill country to settlement by the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p>After supervising the allotment of territories to the tribes of Israel, Joshua received his own portion in the land of Ephraim (19:49-50). He established the cities of refuge (20:1-9) and the Levitical cities (ch 21:1-45) and released the 2½ tribes that had settled east of the Jordan River to return home (22:1-9). As he grew old, Joshua charged Israel to remain faithful to God (23:1–24:28). His farewell message at Shechem summarized God’s dealings with Israel and concluded with the familiar challenge, “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . But as for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15). Joshua died at the age of 110 and was buried in Timnath-serah (Josh 24:29-30; Judg 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua demonstrated exceptional faithfulness throughout his life, except in dealing with the Gibeonites (Josh 9:1-27), when he neglected to consult the Lord regarding a decision. Israel served God faithfully under Joshua and the elders Joshua trained (Josh 24:31; Judg 2:7). Stephen mentions Joshua in his martyr’s sermon (Acts 7:45), and the writer of Hebrews uses Joshua’s conquest of Jericho as an illustration of faith (Heb 11:30). It is fitting that Joshua and Jesus are the same name in Hebrew: Joshua led Israel into physical salvation in Canaan; Jesus leads all who believe in him into eternal salvation.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:8-15; Num 13:1–14:38; 27:15-23; 34:17; Deut 34:9; Josh 1:1-18; 4:1–24:33; Judg 2:6-9; Heb 11:30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Joshua<\/h3>\n<p>Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immediately (Num 13:22–14:9), and as a result, of the twelve spies, only they entered Canaan (Num 14:30, 36-38).<\/p>\n<p>God directed Moses to designate Joshua as his successor (Num 27:15-23; Deut 34:9). After Moses died, Joshua led Israel across the Jordan River (Josh 1:1-18; 3:1–4:24) to the conquest of Jericho (6:1-27). When Israel suffered defeat at Ai, Joshua turned to the Lord and followed his instructions to purge Israel of sin (7:1-26); then Israel conquered Ai (8:1-29). Following God’s instructions to Moses (Deut 11:29-32; 27:1–28:68), Joshua built an altar on Mount Ebal (Josh 8:30-32) and read the blessings and curses of the covenant (8:33-35). Joshua conducted campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings, a southern and a northern coalition (10:1-43; 11:1-15). Joshua’s victories in these campaigns opened the hill country to settlement by the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p>After supervising the allotment of territories to the tribes of Israel, Joshua received his own portion in the land of Ephraim (19:49-50). He established the cities of refuge (20:1-9) and the Levitical cities (ch 21:1-45) and released the 2½ tribes that had settled east of the Jordan River to return home (22:1-9). As he grew old, Joshua charged Israel to remain faithful to God (23:1–24:28). His farewell message at Shechem summarized God’s dealings with Israel and concluded with the familiar challenge, “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . But as for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15). Joshua died at the age of 110 and was buried in Timnath-serah (Josh 24:29-30; Judg 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua demonstrated exceptional faithfulness throughout his life, except in dealing with the Gibeonites (Josh 9:1-27), when he neglected to consult the Lord regarding a decision. Israel served God faithfully under Joshua and the elders Joshua trained (Josh 24:31; Judg 2:7). Stephen mentions Joshua in his martyr’s sermon (Acts 7:45), and the writer of Hebrews uses Joshua’s conquest of Jericho as an illustration of faith (Heb 11:30). It is fitting that Joshua and Jesus are the same name in Hebrew: Joshua led Israel into physical salvation in Canaan; Jesus leads all who believe in him into eternal salvation.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:8-15; Num 13:1–14:38; 27:15-23; 34:17; Deut 34:9; Josh 1:1-18; 4:1–24:33; Judg 2:6-9; Heb 11:30<\/p>","summary_ro":"Joshua Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership. Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immed...","summary_en":"Joshua Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership. Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":68705,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Joshua","title_en":"Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>Joshua<\/h3>\n<p>Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immediately (Num 13:22–14:9), and as a result, of the twelve spies, only they entered Canaan (Num 14:30, 36-38).<\/p>\n<p>God directed Moses to designate Joshua as his successor (Num 27:15-23; Deut 34:9). After Moses died, Joshua led Israel across the Jordan River (Josh 1:1-18; 3:1–4:24) to the conquest of Jericho (6:1-27). When Israel suffered defeat at Ai, Joshua turned to the Lord and followed his instructions to purge Israel of sin (7:1-26); then Israel conquered Ai (8:1-29). Following God’s instructions to Moses (Deut 11:29-32; 27:1–28:68), Joshua built an altar on Mount Ebal (Josh 8:30-32) and read the blessings and curses of the covenant (8:33-35). Joshua conducted campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings, a southern and a northern coalition (10:1-43; 11:1-15). Joshua’s victories in these campaigns opened the hill country to settlement by the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p>After supervising the allotment of territories to the tribes of Israel, Joshua received his own portion in the land of Ephraim (19:49-50). He established the cities of refuge (20:1-9) and the Levitical cities (ch 21:1-45) and released the 2½ tribes that had settled east of the Jordan River to return home (22:1-9). As he grew old, Joshua charged Israel to remain faithful to God (23:1–24:28). His farewell message at Shechem summarized God’s dealings with Israel and concluded with the familiar challenge, “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . But as for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15). Joshua died at the age of 110 and was buried in Timnath-serah (Josh 24:29-30; Judg 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua demonstrated exceptional faithfulness throughout his life, except in dealing with the Gibeonites (Josh 9:1-27), when he neglected to consult the Lord regarding a decision. Israel served God faithfully under Joshua and the elders Joshua trained (Josh 24:31; Judg 2:7). Stephen mentions Joshua in his martyr’s sermon (Acts 7:45), and the writer of Hebrews uses Joshua’s conquest of Jericho as an illustration of faith (Heb 11:30). It is fitting that Joshua and Jesus are the same name in Hebrew: Joshua led Israel into physical salvation in Canaan; Jesus leads all who believe in him into eternal salvation.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:8-15; Num 13:1–14:38; 27:15-23; 34:17; Deut 34:9; Josh 1:1-18; 4:1–24:33; Judg 2:6-9; Heb 11:30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Joshua<\/h3>\n<p>Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immediately (Num 13:22–14:9), and as a result, of the twelve spies, only they entered Canaan (Num 14:30, 36-38).<\/p>\n<p>God directed Moses to designate Joshua as his successor (Num 27:15-23; Deut 34:9). After Moses died, Joshua led Israel across the Jordan River (Josh 1:1-18; 3:1–4:24) to the conquest of Jericho (6:1-27). When Israel suffered defeat at Ai, Joshua turned to the Lord and followed his instructions to purge Israel of sin (7:1-26); then Israel conquered Ai (8:1-29). Following God’s instructions to Moses (Deut 11:29-32; 27:1–28:68), Joshua built an altar on Mount Ebal (Josh 8:30-32) and read the blessings and curses of the covenant (8:33-35). Joshua conducted campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings, a southern and a northern coalition (10:1-43; 11:1-15). Joshua’s victories in these campaigns opened the hill country to settlement by the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p>After supervising the allotment of territories to the tribes of Israel, Joshua received his own portion in the land of Ephraim (19:49-50). He established the cities of refuge (20:1-9) and the Levitical cities (ch 21:1-45) and released the 2½ tribes that had settled east of the Jordan River to return home (22:1-9). As he grew old, Joshua charged Israel to remain faithful to God (23:1–24:28). His farewell message at Shechem summarized God’s dealings with Israel and concluded with the familiar challenge, “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . But as for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15). Joshua died at the age of 110 and was buried in Timnath-serah (Josh 24:29-30; Judg 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua demonstrated exceptional faithfulness throughout his life, except in dealing with the Gibeonites (Josh 9:1-27), when he neglected to consult the Lord regarding a decision. Israel served God faithfully under Joshua and the elders Joshua trained (Josh 24:31; Judg 2:7). Stephen mentions Joshua in his martyr’s sermon (Acts 7:45), and the writer of Hebrews uses Joshua’s conquest of Jericho as an illustration of faith (Heb 11:30). It is fitting that Joshua and Jesus are the same name in Hebrew: Joshua led Israel into physical salvation in Canaan; Jesus leads all who believe in him into eternal salvation.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:8-15; Num 13:1–14:38; 27:15-23; 34:17; Deut 34:9; Josh 1:1-18; 4:1–24:33; Judg 2:6-9; Heb 11:30<\/p>","summary_ro":"Joshua Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership. Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immed...","summary_en":"Joshua Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership. Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":96331,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Joshua","title_en":"Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>Joshua<\/h3>\n<p>Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immediately (Num 13:22–14:9), and as a result, of the twelve spies, only they entered Canaan (Num 14:30, 36-38).<\/p>\n<p>God directed Moses to designate Joshua as his successor (Num 27:15-23; Deut 34:9). After Moses died, Joshua led Israel across the Jordan River (Josh 1:1-18; 3:1–4:24) to the conquest of Jericho (6:1-27). When Israel suffered defeat at Ai, Joshua turned to the Lord and followed his instructions to purge Israel of sin (7:1-26); then Israel conquered Ai (8:1-29). Following God’s instructions to Moses (Deut 11:29-32; 27:1–28:68), Joshua built an altar on Mount Ebal (Josh 8:30-32) and read the blessings and curses of the covenant (8:33-35). Joshua conducted campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings, a southern and a northern coalition (10:1-43; 11:1-15). Joshua’s victories in these campaigns opened the hill country to settlement by the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p>After supervising the allotment of territories to the tribes of Israel, Joshua received his own portion in the land of Ephraim (19:49-50). He established the cities of refuge (20:1-9) and the Levitical cities (ch 21:1-45) and released the 2½ tribes that had settled east of the Jordan River to return home (22:1-9). As he grew old, Joshua charged Israel to remain faithful to God (23:1–24:28). His farewell message at Shechem summarized God’s dealings with Israel and concluded with the familiar challenge, “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . But as for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15). Joshua died at the age of 110 and was buried in Timnath-serah (Josh 24:29-30; Judg 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua demonstrated exceptional faithfulness throughout his life, except in dealing with the Gibeonites (Josh 9:1-27), when he neglected to consult the Lord regarding a decision. Israel served God faithfully under Joshua and the elders Joshua trained (Josh 24:31; Judg 2:7). Stephen mentions Joshua in his martyr’s sermon (Acts 7:45), and the writer of Hebrews uses Joshua’s conquest of Jericho as an illustration of faith (Heb 11:30). It is fitting that Joshua and Jesus are the same name in Hebrew: Joshua led Israel into physical salvation in Canaan; Jesus leads all who believe in him into eternal salvation.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:8-15; Num 13:1–14:38; 27:15-23; 34:17; Deut 34:9; Josh 1:1-18; 4:1–24:33; Judg 2:6-9; Heb 11:30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Joshua<\/h3>\n<p>Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immediately (Num 13:22–14:9), and as a result, of the twelve spies, only they entered Canaan (Num 14:30, 36-38).<\/p>\n<p>God directed Moses to designate Joshua as his successor (Num 27:15-23; Deut 34:9). After Moses died, Joshua led Israel across the Jordan River (Josh 1:1-18; 3:1–4:24) to the conquest of Jericho (6:1-27). When Israel suffered defeat at Ai, Joshua turned to the Lord and followed his instructions to purge Israel of sin (7:1-26); then Israel conquered Ai (8:1-29). Following God’s instructions to Moses (Deut 11:29-32; 27:1–28:68), Joshua built an altar on Mount Ebal (Josh 8:30-32) and read the blessings and curses of the covenant (8:33-35). Joshua conducted campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings, a southern and a northern coalition (10:1-43; 11:1-15). Joshua’s victories in these campaigns opened the hill country to settlement by the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p>After supervising the allotment of territories to the tribes of Israel, Joshua received his own portion in the land of Ephraim (19:49-50). He established the cities of refuge (20:1-9) and the Levitical cities (ch 21:1-45) and released the 2½ tribes that had settled east of the Jordan River to return home (22:1-9). As he grew old, Joshua charged Israel to remain faithful to God (23:1–24:28). His farewell message at Shechem summarized God’s dealings with Israel and concluded with the familiar challenge, “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . But as for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15). Joshua died at the age of 110 and was buried in Timnath-serah (Josh 24:29-30; Judg 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua demonstrated exceptional faithfulness throughout his life, except in dealing with the Gibeonites (Josh 9:1-27), when he neglected to consult the Lord regarding a decision. Israel served God faithfully under Joshua and the elders Joshua trained (Josh 24:31; Judg 2:7). Stephen mentions Joshua in his martyr’s sermon (Acts 7:45), and the writer of Hebrews uses Joshua’s conquest of Jericho as an illustration of faith (Heb 11:30). It is fitting that Joshua and Jesus are the same name in Hebrew: Joshua led Israel into physical salvation in Canaan; Jesus leads all who believe in him into eternal salvation.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:8-15; Num 13:1–14:38; 27:15-23; 34:17; Deut 34:9; Josh 1:1-18; 4:1–24:33; Judg 2:6-9; Heb 11:30<\/p>","summary_ro":"Joshua Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership. Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immed...","summary_en":"Joshua Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership. Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":123957,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Joshua","title_en":"Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>Joshua<\/h3>\n<p>Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immediately (Num 13:22–14:9), and as a result, of the twelve spies, only they entered Canaan (Num 14:30, 36-38).<\/p>\n<p>God directed Moses to designate Joshua as his successor (Num 27:15-23; Deut 34:9). After Moses died, Joshua led Israel across the Jordan River (Josh 1:1-18; 3:1–4:24) to the conquest of Jericho (6:1-27). When Israel suffered defeat at Ai, Joshua turned to the Lord and followed his instructions to purge Israel of sin (7:1-26); then Israel conquered Ai (8:1-29). Following God’s instructions to Moses (Deut 11:29-32; 27:1–28:68), Joshua built an altar on Mount Ebal (Josh 8:30-32) and read the blessings and curses of the covenant (8:33-35). Joshua conducted campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings, a southern and a northern coalition (10:1-43; 11:1-15). Joshua’s victories in these campaigns opened the hill country to settlement by the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p>After supervising the allotment of territories to the tribes of Israel, Joshua received his own portion in the land of Ephraim (19:49-50). He established the cities of refuge (20:1-9) and the Levitical cities (ch 21:1-45) and released the 2½ tribes that had settled east of the Jordan River to return home (22:1-9). As he grew old, Joshua charged Israel to remain faithful to God (23:1–24:28). His farewell message at Shechem summarized God’s dealings with Israel and concluded with the familiar challenge, “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . But as for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15). Joshua died at the age of 110 and was buried in Timnath-serah (Josh 24:29-30; Judg 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua demonstrated exceptional faithfulness throughout his life, except in dealing with the Gibeonites (Josh 9:1-27), when he neglected to consult the Lord regarding a decision. Israel served God faithfully under Joshua and the elders Joshua trained (Josh 24:31; Judg 2:7). Stephen mentions Joshua in his martyr’s sermon (Acts 7:45), and the writer of Hebrews uses Joshua’s conquest of Jericho as an illustration of faith (Heb 11:30). It is fitting that Joshua and Jesus are the same name in Hebrew: Joshua led Israel into physical salvation in Canaan; Jesus leads all who believe in him into eternal salvation.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:8-15; Num 13:1–14:38; 27:15-23; 34:17; Deut 34:9; Josh 1:1-18; 4:1–24:33; Judg 2:6-9; Heb 11:30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Joshua<\/h3>\n<p>Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immediately (Num 13:22–14:9), and as a result, of the twelve spies, only they entered Canaan (Num 14:30, 36-38).<\/p>\n<p>God directed Moses to designate Joshua as his successor (Num 27:15-23; Deut 34:9). After Moses died, Joshua led Israel across the Jordan River (Josh 1:1-18; 3:1–4:24) to the conquest of Jericho (6:1-27). When Israel suffered defeat at Ai, Joshua turned to the Lord and followed his instructions to purge Israel of sin (7:1-26); then Israel conquered Ai (8:1-29). Following God’s instructions to Moses (Deut 11:29-32; 27:1–28:68), Joshua built an altar on Mount Ebal (Josh 8:30-32) and read the blessings and curses of the covenant (8:33-35). Joshua conducted campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings, a southern and a northern coalition (10:1-43; 11:1-15). Joshua’s victories in these campaigns opened the hill country to settlement by the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p>After supervising the allotment of territories to the tribes of Israel, Joshua received his own portion in the land of Ephraim (19:49-50). He established the cities of refuge (20:1-9) and the Levitical cities (ch 21:1-45) and released the 2½ tribes that had settled east of the Jordan River to return home (22:1-9). As he grew old, Joshua charged Israel to remain faithful to God (23:1–24:28). His farewell message at Shechem summarized God’s dealings with Israel and concluded with the familiar challenge, “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . But as for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15). Joshua died at the age of 110 and was buried in Timnath-serah (Josh 24:29-30; Judg 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua demonstrated exceptional faithfulness throughout his life, except in dealing with the Gibeonites (Josh 9:1-27), when he neglected to consult the Lord regarding a decision. Israel served God faithfully under Joshua and the elders Joshua trained (Josh 24:31; Judg 2:7). Stephen mentions Joshua in his martyr’s sermon (Acts 7:45), and the writer of Hebrews uses Joshua’s conquest of Jericho as an illustration of faith (Heb 11:30). It is fitting that Joshua and Jesus are the same name in Hebrew: Joshua led Israel into physical salvation in Canaan; Jesus leads all who believe in him into eternal salvation.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:8-15; Num 13:1–14:38; 27:15-23; 34:17; Deut 34:9; Josh 1:1-18; 4:1–24:33; Judg 2:6-9; Heb 11:30<\/p>","summary_ro":"Joshua Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership. Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immed...","summary_en":"Joshua Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership. Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":983,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ai","title_en":"Ai","content_ro":"<h3>AI<\/h3>\n<p>Canaanite city that was settled before the time of Abraham (Gn 12:8; 13:3). The name suggests a “ruin” of special significance or striking appearance. The inhabitants of Ai, as well as those of other Canaanite cities (Shechem, Bethel, Jerusalem), did not hinder Abraham in his meanderings in the hill country throughout the land. Abraham may have met with representatives of those cities and convinced their kings of his peaceful intentions. Or he may have presented such a strong front with his sizable entourage that he forestalled any Canaanite move against him.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel, led by Joshua, entered Canaan, the Promised Land, with the intention of ridding it of its former occupants and claiming it as their inheritance. Ai, the second city to face them, withstood the first Israelite attack against it. After dealing with Achan, a disobedient soldier whose taking of booty from Jericho had caused their defeat, the Israelites attacked Ai a second time and defeated it (Jos 7:1–8:29). Joshua captured the king, executed him, and burned the city, leaving it a heap of ruins (Jos 10:1).<\/p>\n<p>Ai, rebuilt and reoccupied during the monarchy (under Saul, David, and Solomon), seems to have been known under several names. It was evidently called Ayyah, one of the villages of Ephraim (1 Chr 7:28); Aiath, a village through which Assyrian armies marched toward Jerusalem (Is 10:28); and Aija, a village occupied by Benjamin’s descendants during the exilic period (Neh 11:31).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Joshua, Book of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>AI<\/h3>\n<p>Canaanite city that was settled before the time of Abraham (Gn 12:8; 13:3). The name suggests a “ruin” of special significance or striking appearance. The inhabitants of Ai, as well as those of other Canaanite cities (Shechem, Bethel, Jerusalem), did not hinder Abraham in his meanderings in the hill country throughout the land. Abraham may have met with representatives of those cities and convinced their kings of his peaceful intentions. Or he may have presented such a strong front with his sizable entourage that he forestalled any Canaanite move against him.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel, led by Joshua, entered Canaan, the Promised Land, with the intention of ridding it of its former occupants and claiming it as their inheritance. Ai, the second city to face them, withstood the first Israelite attack against it. After dealing with Achan, a disobedient soldier whose taking of booty from Jericho had caused their defeat, the Israelites attacked Ai a second time and defeated it (Jos 7:1–8:29). Joshua captured the king, executed him, and burned the city, leaving it a heap of ruins (Jos 10:1).<\/p>\n<p>Ai, rebuilt and reoccupied during the monarchy (under Saul, David, and Solomon), seems to have been known under several names. It was evidently called Ayyah, one of the villages of Ephraim (1 Chr 7:28); Aiath, a village through which Assyrian armies marched toward Jerusalem (Is 10:28); and Aija, a village occupied by Benjamin’s descendants during the exilic period (Neh 11:31).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Joshua, Book of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"AI Canaanite city that was settled before the time of Abraham (Gn 12:8; 13:3). The name suggests a “ruin” of special significance or striking appearance. The inhabitants of Ai, as well as those of other Canaanite cities (Shechem, Bethel, Jerusalem), did not hinder Abraham in his meanderings in the hill country throughout the land. Abraham may have met with representatives of those cities and convinced their kings of his peaceful intentions. Or he may have presented such a strong front with hi...","summary_en":"AI Canaanite city that was settled before the time of Abraham (Gn 12:8; 13:3). The name suggests a “ruin” of special significance or striking appearance. The inhabitants of Ai, as well as those of other Canaanite cities (Shechem, Bethel, Jerusalem), did not hinder Abraham in his meanderings in the hill country throughout the land. Abraham may have met with representatives of those cities and convinced their kings of his peaceful intentions. Or he may have presented such a strong front with hi...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4850,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Old Testament in the New Testament Bible*, Quotations","title_en":"of the Old Testament in the New Testament Bible*, Quotations","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, Q<span>uotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers.<\/p>\n<p>The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotations in distinctive print, this may not be easily seen, for the NT writers often weave the OT words into their own without indicating they are borrowing from the OT. There are over 400 passages of the OT that are explicitly cited in the NT. Almost half of these are introduced by a statement like “Scripture says” to draw attention to the fact that the authority and thought of the OT is being implemented. For the others, however, the OT words are woven into the fabric of the author’s own statement.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the over 400 passages cited explicitly, there are well over 1,000 places where there is an allusion to an OT text, event, or person. The difference between a quotation and an allusion is sometimes debated for particular texts, but usually the distinction is that in a quotation the author consciously uses the words of an OT passage, whereas with an allusion he has the texts in mind but is not consciously trying to use the words.<\/p>\n<p>Quotations are easy to identify if there is an introductory formula such as “the Scripture says” (as in Rom 10:11; cf. Is 28:16). Where there is no introductory formula, it is easy to overlook explicit quotations (Rom 10:13; cf. Jl 2:32). The allusions are, of course, harder still to recognize, but they often provide the key to interpretation. For example, John 1:14-18—with its mention of glory, grace and truth, Moses, and the fact that no one has seen God—is much more easily and profoundly understood when read in connection with Exodus 33:17–34:8. In the Exodus passage the glory of God and his grace and truth are revealed to Moses. The author was showing that a much more complete revelation of God was given in Jesus than was given Moses in the account recorded in Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, significant light is shed on many NT passages from OT passages with similar ideas and words even where the NT author may not have been consciously alluding to those texts (e.g. Mt 16:19; Is 22:22). What was behind the author’s thinking is not certain, but in such cases the NT reflects the thinking, the culture, and language of the OT period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DistributionofOldTestamentQuotations\">Distribution of Old Testament Quotations<\/p>\n<p>The books of the NT that show the most dependence on the OT are Matthew, John, Romans, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and Revelation. Such a statement can be misleading, however, because the writers have different methods.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew quotes or consciously reflects the wording of OT passages about 62 times, almost half of which have an introductory formula. The book of Revelation, on the other hand, never quotes the OT and never has an introductory formula but is probably more dependent on the OT than any other NT book. The book of Hebrews quotes or consciously reflects the OT about 59 times, again half of which have an introductory formula, but the Gospel of John does so only 18 times, nearly always with an introductory formula. However, the allusions to the OT are present on virtually every page of John’s Gospel, so much so that some scholars have argued that he has modeled his account on the exodus narrative, the Jewish feasts, or OT persons and images. Paul’s Letter to the Romans uses the OT 54 times (about three-fourths of which have introductory formulas), but nowhere else so frequently (e.g., 1 Cor 16 times, Gal 11 times, Phil one time, 1 Thes one time).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the indication that Philippians and 1 Thessalonians use the OT only once each, some other books make explicit use of the OT rarely or never. Colossians, Titus, Philemon, and the Johannine letters do not use the OT at all; 2 Timothy and Jude use the OT only once; while 2 Peter and 1 Timothy make use of it twice.<\/p>\n<p>The important point is to realize that the OT is used most frequently in circumstances where the audience is familiar with the OT or where the OT is essential for describing the events relating to Christ and the church. The books using the OT most frequently (Mt, Jn, Rom, Heb, 1 Pt, Rv) either stem from or are addressed to a Jewish context or, as in the case of Romans and John, deal specifically with the relation of Jews and Christians. The Gospels make rather extensive use of the OT because the language of the OT is necessary to convey the identity and importance of Jesus in the purposes of God. Similarly 1 Peter uses the OT frequently because the author is trying to convey to his persecuted audience that they are the people of God and the inheritors of the promises of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DifficultiesinInterpretation\">Difficulties in Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>Often when people think of quotations of the OT in the NT they think only in terms of prophecy. Some have been guilty of counting up the OT statements that the NT applies to Christ and the church and then claiming these OT texts as predictions that prove Jesus is the Messiah. Such a procedure is filled with problems because it is too simplistic and does not do justice to either the OT or to the way the NT uses it. Of course, the early church used the OT to show that Jesus fulfilled the promises of God and did God’s work, but the use the church made of the OT was quite varied and much of it cannot be classified as predictive prophecy. Prophecy itself is too complex to be limited to predictive thinking.<\/p>\n<p>Some of the most obvious examples of the difficulties appear in Matthew’s Gospel, although they are by no means confined there. Matthew 2:15—“Out of Egypt I called my son”—is a quotation of Hosea 11:1, but in Hosea these words do not refer to the Messiah. They refer to the nation of Israel. Similarly Matthew 2:18 quotes Jeremiah 31:15 (“A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more,” <span>niv<\/span>) as fulfilled in the slaughter of the innocent babies in Bethlehem, but in Jeremiah the weeping is over the destruction of Jerusalem. John 12:40 views Isaiah 6:10 as fulfilled in Jesus’ ministry, but this verse deals with the call of Isaiah and is not a prediction concerning the ministry of the Messiah. The examples could be multiplied but these should be sufficient to illustrate the problem. For this reason the NT writers have often been accused of twisting the Scriptures, but this charge is as simplistic as the thought that all prophecy is predictive and in fact springs from the same error. Therefore, any attempt to understand the use of the OT in the NT will have to deal with the variety of ways in which the OT is used and with the methods employed by the NT writers.<\/p>\n<p>There are other difficulties that are encountered as well. Sometimes the NT writer will indicate that some fact related to Christ is a fulfillment of the OT but the explicit text that he had in mind cannot be identified. For example, John 7:38 introduces the words “Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water” with the statement “as Scripture has said.” No OT text reads this way. Possibly the allusion is to the rock that provided water in the wilderness (Ex 17:1), or to the waters that flowed from the new temple (Zec 14:8) or, more generally, it may be a reference to Isaiah 58:11. Similarly, the difficulty in determining the OT text behind the prophecy that Christ will be called a Nazarene (Mt 2:23) is notorious. Probably the reference is to Isaiah 11:1 and the Hebrew word there translated as “branch,” but the connection is not easily made and is not certain. A third example of this kind of difficulty is in 1 Corinthians 14:34, where Paul indicates that women should be in submission just as the Law says, but there is no OT text expressing this idea. His statement in probably to be understood as a summary rather than a quotation or allusion. Similarly on a few occasions an OT text is seemingly attributed to the wrong OT book. In Mark 1:2-3 an OT quotation is attributed to Isaiah but the quotation is really a conflation (or mixing) of Exodus 23:20, Malachi 3:1, and Isaiah 40:3. Matthew 27:9-10 quotes a passage that is said to be from Jeremiah, when really it is dependent on Zechariah 11:13 and might best be described as a summary of Zechariah 11:12-13, with certain words included from Jeremiah 32:6-9. These two examples do not create a major problem, however, for the determination of the origin of the words may be due to their use in collections of quotations from various prophets, in which case the more prominent prophets would be used to designate origin.<\/p>\n<p>The wording of the quotations of the OT text does not always conform to the modern form of the OT. Just as today there are numerous translations of the Bible, when the NT was being written there were various forms of the OT text. With regard to the Hebrew text (for the OT was written mostly in Hebrew), there were different traditions. Such differences in the Hebrew traditions would have been relatively small. Because of the increasing importance of Aramaic after the Babylonian captivity and of Greek after the conquests of Alexander the Great, the OT was also known and used in both these languages when the NT was being written. In fact, the Jews found it necessary in their synagogue services after reading the Hebrew OT to paraphrase the reading in Aramaic so that all could understand. These paraphrases were later written down and are known as Targums. The Greek translation of the OT that stems from the third century <span>BC<\/span> is known as the Septuagint, but there were also other Greek translations in use. This being the case, the wording of a NT quotation is not identical in every detail to the text of the Hebrew OT.<\/p>\n<p>Added to the fact that there were various forms of the text known in first-century <span>AD<\/span> Palestine is the complicating factor that NT writers often did not intend to quote the OT exactly. The use of formal quotation marks is a modern device, and ancient writers were not so taken by technical precision. They were more concerned with the intention of a text and consequently might copy or quote it verbatim, quote it from memory, use or adapt part of a verse, or even change certain words as they borrowed the verse to express their points. (The NT writers often use the OT words describing God’s actions in the past to explain what he has done in their time.) The importance of any differences between the NT quotation and the OT depends on the use to which the quotation is put and the degree to which the use is dependent on textual differences.<\/p>\n<p>Some examples should illustrate the nature of these difficulties. Ephesians 4:8 quotes Psalm 68:18. Whereas the Hebrew and Septuagint read, “You ascended to the heights, you lead captivity captive, you received gifts among mankind,” Ephesians records the verse as “After he ascended into the heights, <em>he<\/em> led captivity captive; he <em>gave<\/em> gifts to men.” Paul is stressing that Christ has given grace to people for ministry. He has either adapted the wording of the OT to make his point or he quoted a variant reading, <em>“he gave<\/em> gifts.” Some versions do have this reading. In fact, the Targum understands this verse as Moses giving the words of the law to the children of men, and Paul may well be adapting this understanding to the new revelation that has come in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 1:23 quotes Isaiah 7:14, but there are distinct differences between the Hebrew text and the wording in Matthew. The Hebrew reads, “Behold the young woman will become pregnant and will bear a son and you will call his name Immanuel,” whereas Matthew’s text records “Behold, the <em>virgin<\/em> will become pregnant and will bear a son, and <em>they<\/em> will call his name Immanuel.” The Septuagint does have the specific word “virgin,” like Matthew, but is not the source of Matthew’s quotation since other differences exist. Some have argued that the change from “you will call” to “they will call” was made by Matthew when he applied the words to Jesus. However, there are several traditions known for this part of the quotation and partial support for the reading in Matthew is provided by the text of Isaiah found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>Romans 11:26-27 is a conflation of Isaiah 59:20-21 and part of Isaiah 27:9, but there are important differences. One of these is that the OT has “the redeemer will come to Zion,” whereas Romans has “the deliverer will come <em>from<\/em> Zion.” The change to “from Zion” could indicate that Paul had a different textual tradition, could be the result of an intentional change by Paul, or more probably, could reflect the wording of Psalm 14:7.<\/p>\n<p>An awareness of the difficulties involved in the quotations of the OT by the NT writers will prohibit a simplistic approach and will prevent hasty conclusions. Care to ask not only which text was used but also which form of the text was used and how is obviously essential in any serious study. In addition it is necessary to allow for the possibility that the NT writers knew forms of a text that are now lost.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMethodsoftheNewTestamentWriters\">The Methods of the New Testament Writers<\/p>\n<p>The methods used by the NT writers were not unique to them. Many of these methods were also employed in first-century Judaism. In fact, both the technique used in quoting and the understanding of the OT text itself in many cases are paralleled in Judaism. For example, from the standpoint of technique used in quoting, the same kinds of formula introductions are used in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the rabbinic writings, and elsewhere. The rabbinic technique of “pearl stringing,” that is, of applying verses from various parts of the OT (the Law, the Prophets, the Writings) to a subject, can be seen especially in Paul’s writings (note Rom 9:12-19 or 11:8-10). Somewhat related is the practice of using quotations that all contain a key word or key words (note 1 Pt 2:6-8, which draws together quotations using the word “stone,” or Rom 15:9-12, which joins OT verses referring to the “nations”).<\/p>\n<p>The methods used in the NT to interpret an OT text are also displayed in Judaism. Some passages interpret the OT “literally,” such as Jesus’ replies during temptation (see the quotations of Dt 8:3; 6:16; 6:13; in Mt 4:3-10), his teachings on marriage based on Genesis 2:24 (Mt 19:5), or Paul’s use of Habakkuk 2:4 (Rom 1:17) or Genesis 15:6 (Rom 4:3-9). Many such examples could be given. With regard to prophecy, some of these statements are fulfilled in a “literal” or “direct” way in keeping with the intention of the OT (e.g., Mi 5:2, Bethlehem as the birthplace of the Messiah; Mt 2:4-6). Jeremiah 31:31-34, the promise of the new covenant, is viewed as directly fulfilled in Christ (Heb 8:7-13). The prophecy of Joel 2:28-32 concerning the pouring out of the Spirit of the Lord is directly fulfilled in the Pentecost event (Acts 2:17-21), but the changing of the sun to darkness and the moon to blood are certainly not understood literally in connection with this event.<\/p>\n<p>A different method of interpretation is based on the concept of <em>corporate solidarity.<\/em> This technical expression is an attempt to convey the idea that the individuals among God’s people are not merely individuals; they are part of a larger whole. Consequently, what is said about the individual can apply to the whole and vice versa. This is the reason the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah is seen both as the nation (44:1) and as an individual (52:13–53:12). Also the king is sometimes viewed as representative of the nation. The easiest places to see the concept of corporate solidarity are in the effect of the sin of Achan on all the people (Jos 7) or the sin of David in numbering the people (1 Chr 21:3-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>Correspondence in history<\/em> is not so much a method of interpretation as it is a way of thinking about God. It assumes that the things that happen to God’s people are the things that have happened to previous generations and that God is faithful and operates in the present as he has in the past. Consequently, the trials and deliverance of God’s people are often expressed with words borrowed from the previous accounts of God’s people. Isaiah describes the anticipated deliverance in terms of a second exodus (11:15-16). Ezekiel describes the king set up over the people in terms of a second David (Ez 37:25). In the NT, Revelation 22 describes the new heavens and the new earth in terms of the Garden of Eden (Gn 2–3). Sometimes this technique is described as “typology,” but this term has been used for so many questionable interpretations that it is misleading. The most important thing about this concept is that it is a view of God and his working among his people.<\/p>\n<p>With these two concepts, the way that the OT is quoted in the NT can be understood. The conviction that Jesus was the promised deliverer and that the last days had dawned in his ministry are evident everywhere. The quotation of Hosea 11:1 can be used in Matthew 2:15 because of corporate solidarity and correspondence in history. What was said of the nation is true of the one who is its representative, and there is correspondence in their respective histories. Jeremiah 31:15 can be used in Matthew 2:18 because of correspondence in history and especially because Jeremiah looked forward to God’s intention for Israel and prophesied a new covenant (31:17, 31-34). Matthew saw not only the correspondence in history but believed that in Jesus this promised salvation had been granted. John 12:40 can quote Isaiah 6:10 of Jesus’ ministry, not because he twists the meaning of the OT text, but because he saw that what had happened with God’s messenger before happened again and even <em>ultimately<\/em> in Jesus’ ministry. The instances of such correspondences in history are numerous.<\/p>\n<p>There are other texts where there seems to be an <em>actualization<\/em> of the OT text. Some quotations seem to be “lived out” in the ministry of Jesus. Because of their conviction about Jesus and his kingdom, the NT writers often saw certain OT texts as appropriated and made alive by Jesus. Psalm 118:22 was not intended as a prophecy of the Messiah, but Jesus saw it as descriptive of his ministry (Mt 21:42), and the early church saw this verse as actualized in his death and resurrection (Acts 4:11). Isaiah 53 is another text that the NT views as actualized in Jesus’ ministry (see Acts 8:32-35 and 1 Pt 2:22-25). Some Christians would view Psalm 22 as a prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus, but it seems instead to be the lament of a righteous OT sufferer. Through correspondence in history, and because Christians saw so much of the psalmist’s plight actualized in Jesus’ crucifixion, the psalm became the easiest way to describe what once again had happened to God’s righteous sufferer. The words of Isaiah 40:3 describe the ministry of John the Baptist (Mt 3:3). Jews had come to see this verse as a prophecy of God’s end-time salvation, and the early church saw John the Baptist fulfilling this forerunner’s task. Luke made this identification (Lk 3:4-6), but he applied the same role to Jesus’ disciples (9:52; 10:1). This seems to be a further example of actualization and correspondence in history. In other places the church has applied to Christians ideas that were previously understood of Christ (e.g., the stone in 1 Pt 2:4-5; the ministry of the Suffering Servant in Acts 13:46-47).<\/p>\n<p>The most convenient term to describe the way the OT is “fulfilled” in Christ is to say that the OT finds its climax in Jesus. Even where actual quotations are not involved, the OT ideas such as prophet, priest, or king are climaxed in him as the ideal and embodiment of all the OT models. He could tell religious authorities that “one greater than Solomon is here” (Mt 12:42) or “one greater than the temple is here” (Mt 12:6). Those passages involving correspondence in history or actualization also lead to the conviction that he is the climax of the OT Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePurposesoftheUseoftheOldTestament\">The Purposes of the Use of the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The variety of methods of interpretation and application of the OT parallels the fact that the OT was used for a variety of purposes. People tend to think only in terms of the use of the OT to show that Jesus was the Messiah, but there are a number of other uses with a variety of goals. Many OT texts are used to show Jesus is the Messiah, the fulfillment of the OT promises (Lk 4:16-21). Without lessening the fulfillment emphasis, however, other verses are applied to Jesus for other purposes: to evangelize (Acts 8:32-25); to demonstrate or convince (Acts 13:33-35); to rebuke (Mk 7:6-7; Rom 11:7-10); and to describe (Rv 1:12-15). On the other hand, many quotations of the OT in the NT are not directly related to the Messiah. OT passages are adapted to provide a word from God on some aspect of life or ethics. For example, Jesus used Genesis 2:24 to substantiate his teaching on divorce as he attempted to deal with the issues raised by the civil regulation of divorce (Dt 24:1; Mt 19:1-12). The stress on the OT commandments shows their importance for Christians (Mt 19:16-22; Rom 13:8-10). Often OT statements deal with specific problems. The problem of pride at Corinth is solved by the quotation of Jeremiah 9:24 (“Let the one boasting, boast in the Lord,” 1 Cor 1:31). First Peter 3:10-12 incorporates Psalm 34:12-16 as ethical instructions, and 3:14-15 borrows from Isaiah 8:12-13 to address the fear of suffering. The spiritual armor in Ephesians 6:14-17 is derived largely from OT passages. Such examples are so numerous that there can be no doubt that the OT is used to describe Christian existence. In fact, nearly every subject discussed in the NT is presented somewhere via OT terms and quotations. Frequently OT passages are used to describe the church as God’s end-time community. Hosea 2:23 is used to show that those who formerly were not God’s people now are (Rom 9:25-26; 1 Pt 2:10). Several OT texts contribute to the description of the church in 1 Peter 2:9. OT texts that speak of the word of God describe the apostles’ preaching (Rom 10:8; 1 Pt 1:24-25). OT quotations describe the sinful condition of humanity (Rom 3:10-20). Salvation is explained through OT concepts and symbols and is based on OT statements (Jn 6:31-33; Gal 3:6-13). The words of Daniel describe the Second Coming (7:13-14; cf. Mt 24:30). Even the worship of early Christians was expressed through use of the OT (see Acts 4:24; Rom 11:34-35).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, Q<span>uotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers.<\/p>\n<p>The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotations in distinctive print, this may not be easily seen, for the NT writers often weave the OT words into their own without indicating they are borrowing from the OT. There are over 400 passages of the OT that are explicitly cited in the NT. Almost half of these are introduced by a statement like “Scripture says” to draw attention to the fact that the authority and thought of the OT is being implemented. For the others, however, the OT words are woven into the fabric of the author’s own statement.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the over 400 passages cited explicitly, there are well over 1,000 places where there is an allusion to an OT text, event, or person. The difference between a quotation and an allusion is sometimes debated for particular texts, but usually the distinction is that in a quotation the author consciously uses the words of an OT passage, whereas with an allusion he has the texts in mind but is not consciously trying to use the words.<\/p>\n<p>Quotations are easy to identify if there is an introductory formula such as “the Scripture says” (as in Rom 10:11; cf. Is 28:16). Where there is no introductory formula, it is easy to overlook explicit quotations (Rom 10:13; cf. Jl 2:32). The allusions are, of course, harder still to recognize, but they often provide the key to interpretation. For example, John 1:14-18—with its mention of glory, grace and truth, Moses, and the fact that no one has seen God—is much more easily and profoundly understood when read in connection with Exodus 33:17–34:8. In the Exodus passage the glory of God and his grace and truth are revealed to Moses. The author was showing that a much more complete revelation of God was given in Jesus than was given Moses in the account recorded in Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, significant light is shed on many NT passages from OT passages with similar ideas and words even where the NT author may not have been consciously alluding to those texts (e.g. Mt 16:19; Is 22:22). What was behind the author’s thinking is not certain, but in such cases the NT reflects the thinking, the culture, and language of the OT period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DistributionofOldTestamentQuotations\">Distribution of Old Testament Quotations<\/p>\n<p>The books of the NT that show the most dependence on the OT are Matthew, John, Romans, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and Revelation. Such a statement can be misleading, however, because the writers have different methods.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew quotes or consciously reflects the wording of OT passages about 62 times, almost half of which have an introductory formula. The book of Revelation, on the other hand, never quotes the OT and never has an introductory formula but is probably more dependent on the OT than any other NT book. The book of Hebrews quotes or consciously reflects the OT about 59 times, again half of which have an introductory formula, but the Gospel of John does so only 18 times, nearly always with an introductory formula. However, the allusions to the OT are present on virtually every page of John’s Gospel, so much so that some scholars have argued that he has modeled his account on the exodus narrative, the Jewish feasts, or OT persons and images. Paul’s Letter to the Romans uses the OT 54 times (about three-fourths of which have introductory formulas), but nowhere else so frequently (e.g., 1 Cor 16 times, Gal 11 times, Phil one time, 1 Thes one time).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the indication that Philippians and 1 Thessalonians use the OT only once each, some other books make explicit use of the OT rarely or never. Colossians, Titus, Philemon, and the Johannine letters do not use the OT at all; 2 Timothy and Jude use the OT only once; while 2 Peter and 1 Timothy make use of it twice.<\/p>\n<p>The important point is to realize that the OT is used most frequently in circumstances where the audience is familiar with the OT or where the OT is essential for describing the events relating to Christ and the church. The books using the OT most frequently (Mt, Jn, Rom, Heb, 1 Pt, Rv) either stem from or are addressed to a Jewish context or, as in the case of Romans and John, deal specifically with the relation of Jews and Christians. The Gospels make rather extensive use of the OT because the language of the OT is necessary to convey the identity and importance of Jesus in the purposes of God. Similarly 1 Peter uses the OT frequently because the author is trying to convey to his persecuted audience that they are the people of God and the inheritors of the promises of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DifficultiesinInterpretation\">Difficulties in Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>Often when people think of quotations of the OT in the NT they think only in terms of prophecy. Some have been guilty of counting up the OT statements that the NT applies to Christ and the church and then claiming these OT texts as predictions that prove Jesus is the Messiah. Such a procedure is filled with problems because it is too simplistic and does not do justice to either the OT or to the way the NT uses it. Of course, the early church used the OT to show that Jesus fulfilled the promises of God and did God’s work, but the use the church made of the OT was quite varied and much of it cannot be classified as predictive prophecy. Prophecy itself is too complex to be limited to predictive thinking.<\/p>\n<p>Some of the most obvious examples of the difficulties appear in Matthew’s Gospel, although they are by no means confined there. Matthew 2:15—“Out of Egypt I called my son”—is a quotation of Hosea 11:1, but in Hosea these words do not refer to the Messiah. They refer to the nation of Israel. Similarly Matthew 2:18 quotes Jeremiah 31:15 (“A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more,” <span>niv<\/span>) as fulfilled in the slaughter of the innocent babies in Bethlehem, but in Jeremiah the weeping is over the destruction of Jerusalem. John 12:40 views Isaiah 6:10 as fulfilled in Jesus’ ministry, but this verse deals with the call of Isaiah and is not a prediction concerning the ministry of the Messiah. The examples could be multiplied but these should be sufficient to illustrate the problem. For this reason the NT writers have often been accused of twisting the Scriptures, but this charge is as simplistic as the thought that all prophecy is predictive and in fact springs from the same error. Therefore, any attempt to understand the use of the OT in the NT will have to deal with the variety of ways in which the OT is used and with the methods employed by the NT writers.<\/p>\n<p>There are other difficulties that are encountered as well. Sometimes the NT writer will indicate that some fact related to Christ is a fulfillment of the OT but the explicit text that he had in mind cannot be identified. For example, John 7:38 introduces the words “Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water” with the statement “as Scripture has said.” No OT text reads this way. Possibly the allusion is to the rock that provided water in the wilderness (Ex 17:1), or to the waters that flowed from the new temple (Zec 14:8) or, more generally, it may be a reference to Isaiah 58:11. Similarly, the difficulty in determining the OT text behind the prophecy that Christ will be called a Nazarene (Mt 2:23) is notorious. Probably the reference is to Isaiah 11:1 and the Hebrew word there translated as “branch,” but the connection is not easily made and is not certain. A third example of this kind of difficulty is in 1 Corinthians 14:34, where Paul indicates that women should be in submission just as the Law says, but there is no OT text expressing this idea. His statement in probably to be understood as a summary rather than a quotation or allusion. Similarly on a few occasions an OT text is seemingly attributed to the wrong OT book. In Mark 1:2-3 an OT quotation is attributed to Isaiah but the quotation is really a conflation (or mixing) of Exodus 23:20, Malachi 3:1, and Isaiah 40:3. Matthew 27:9-10 quotes a passage that is said to be from Jeremiah, when really it is dependent on Zechariah 11:13 and might best be described as a summary of Zechariah 11:12-13, with certain words included from Jeremiah 32:6-9. These two examples do not create a major problem, however, for the determination of the origin of the words may be due to their use in collections of quotations from various prophets, in which case the more prominent prophets would be used to designate origin.<\/p>\n<p>The wording of the quotations of the OT text does not always conform to the modern form of the OT. Just as today there are numerous translations of the Bible, when the NT was being written there were various forms of the OT text. With regard to the Hebrew text (for the OT was written mostly in Hebrew), there were different traditions. Such differences in the Hebrew traditions would have been relatively small. Because of the increasing importance of Aramaic after the Babylonian captivity and of Greek after the conquests of Alexander the Great, the OT was also known and used in both these languages when the NT was being written. In fact, the Jews found it necessary in their synagogue services after reading the Hebrew OT to paraphrase the reading in Aramaic so that all could understand. These paraphrases were later written down and are known as Targums. The Greek translation of the OT that stems from the third century <span>BC<\/span> is known as the Septuagint, but there were also other Greek translations in use. This being the case, the wording of a NT quotation is not identical in every detail to the text of the Hebrew OT.<\/p>\n<p>Added to the fact that there were various forms of the text known in first-century <span>AD<\/span> Palestine is the complicating factor that NT writers often did not intend to quote the OT exactly. The use of formal quotation marks is a modern device, and ancient writers were not so taken by technical precision. They were more concerned with the intention of a text and consequently might copy or quote it verbatim, quote it from memory, use or adapt part of a verse, or even change certain words as they borrowed the verse to express their points. (The NT writers often use the OT words describing God’s actions in the past to explain what he has done in their time.) The importance of any differences between the NT quotation and the OT depends on the use to which the quotation is put and the degree to which the use is dependent on textual differences.<\/p>\n<p>Some examples should illustrate the nature of these difficulties. Ephesians 4:8 quotes Psalm 68:18. Whereas the Hebrew and Septuagint read, “You ascended to the heights, you lead captivity captive, you received gifts among mankind,” Ephesians records the verse as “After he ascended into the heights, <em>he<\/em> led captivity captive; he <em>gave<\/em> gifts to men.” Paul is stressing that Christ has given grace to people for ministry. He has either adapted the wording of the OT to make his point or he quoted a variant reading, <em>“he gave<\/em> gifts.” Some versions do have this reading. In fact, the Targum understands this verse as Moses giving the words of the law to the children of men, and Paul may well be adapting this understanding to the new revelation that has come in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 1:23 quotes Isaiah 7:14, but there are distinct differences between the Hebrew text and the wording in Matthew. The Hebrew reads, “Behold the young woman will become pregnant and will bear a son and you will call his name Immanuel,” whereas Matthew’s text records “Behold, the <em>virgin<\/em> will become pregnant and will bear a son, and <em>they<\/em> will call his name Immanuel.” The Septuagint does have the specific word “virgin,” like Matthew, but is not the source of Matthew’s quotation since other differences exist. Some have argued that the change from “you will call” to “they will call” was made by Matthew when he applied the words to Jesus. However, there are several traditions known for this part of the quotation and partial support for the reading in Matthew is provided by the text of Isaiah found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>Romans 11:26-27 is a conflation of Isaiah 59:20-21 and part of Isaiah 27:9, but there are important differences. One of these is that the OT has “the redeemer will come to Zion,” whereas Romans has “the deliverer will come <em>from<\/em> Zion.” The change to “from Zion” could indicate that Paul had a different textual tradition, could be the result of an intentional change by Paul, or more probably, could reflect the wording of Psalm 14:7.<\/p>\n<p>An awareness of the difficulties involved in the quotations of the OT by the NT writers will prohibit a simplistic approach and will prevent hasty conclusions. Care to ask not only which text was used but also which form of the text was used and how is obviously essential in any serious study. In addition it is necessary to allow for the possibility that the NT writers knew forms of a text that are now lost.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMethodsoftheNewTestamentWriters\">The Methods of the New Testament Writers<\/p>\n<p>The methods used by the NT writers were not unique to them. Many of these methods were also employed in first-century Judaism. In fact, both the technique used in quoting and the understanding of the OT text itself in many cases are paralleled in Judaism. For example, from the standpoint of technique used in quoting, the same kinds of formula introductions are used in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the rabbinic writings, and elsewhere. The rabbinic technique of “pearl stringing,” that is, of applying verses from various parts of the OT (the Law, the Prophets, the Writings) to a subject, can be seen especially in Paul’s writings (note Rom 9:12-19 or 11:8-10). Somewhat related is the practice of using quotations that all contain a key word or key words (note 1 Pt 2:6-8, which draws together quotations using the word “stone,” or Rom 15:9-12, which joins OT verses referring to the “nations”).<\/p>\n<p>The methods used in the NT to interpret an OT text are also displayed in Judaism. Some passages interpret the OT “literally,” such as Jesus’ replies during temptation (see the quotations of Dt 8:3; 6:16; 6:13; in Mt 4:3-10), his teachings on marriage based on Genesis 2:24 (Mt 19:5), or Paul’s use of Habakkuk 2:4 (Rom 1:17) or Genesis 15:6 (Rom 4:3-9). Many such examples could be given. With regard to prophecy, some of these statements are fulfilled in a “literal” or “direct” way in keeping with the intention of the OT (e.g., Mi 5:2, Bethlehem as the birthplace of the Messiah; Mt 2:4-6). Jeremiah 31:31-34, the promise of the new covenant, is viewed as directly fulfilled in Christ (Heb 8:7-13). The prophecy of Joel 2:28-32 concerning the pouring out of the Spirit of the Lord is directly fulfilled in the Pentecost event (Acts 2:17-21), but the changing of the sun to darkness and the moon to blood are certainly not understood literally in connection with this event.<\/p>\n<p>A different method of interpretation is based on the concept of <em>corporate solidarity.<\/em> This technical expression is an attempt to convey the idea that the individuals among God’s people are not merely individuals; they are part of a larger whole. Consequently, what is said about the individual can apply to the whole and vice versa. This is the reason the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah is seen both as the nation (44:1) and as an individual (52:13–53:12). Also the king is sometimes viewed as representative of the nation. The easiest places to see the concept of corporate solidarity are in the effect of the sin of Achan on all the people (Jos 7) or the sin of David in numbering the people (1 Chr 21:3-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>Correspondence in history<\/em> is not so much a method of interpretation as it is a way of thinking about God. It assumes that the things that happen to God’s people are the things that have happened to previous generations and that God is faithful and operates in the present as he has in the past. Consequently, the trials and deliverance of God’s people are often expressed with words borrowed from the previous accounts of God’s people. Isaiah describes the anticipated deliverance in terms of a second exodus (11:15-16). Ezekiel describes the king set up over the people in terms of a second David (Ez 37:25). In the NT, Revelation 22 describes the new heavens and the new earth in terms of the Garden of Eden (Gn 2–3). Sometimes this technique is described as “typology,” but this term has been used for so many questionable interpretations that it is misleading. The most important thing about this concept is that it is a view of God and his working among his people.<\/p>\n<p>With these two concepts, the way that the OT is quoted in the NT can be understood. The conviction that Jesus was the promised deliverer and that the last days had dawned in his ministry are evident everywhere. The quotation of Hosea 11:1 can be used in Matthew 2:15 because of corporate solidarity and correspondence in history. What was said of the nation is true of the one who is its representative, and there is correspondence in their respective histories. Jeremiah 31:15 can be used in Matthew 2:18 because of correspondence in history and especially because Jeremiah looked forward to God’s intention for Israel and prophesied a new covenant (31:17, 31-34). Matthew saw not only the correspondence in history but believed that in Jesus this promised salvation had been granted. John 12:40 can quote Isaiah 6:10 of Jesus’ ministry, not because he twists the meaning of the OT text, but because he saw that what had happened with God’s messenger before happened again and even <em>ultimately<\/em> in Jesus’ ministry. The instances of such correspondences in history are numerous.<\/p>\n<p>There are other texts where there seems to be an <em>actualization<\/em> of the OT text. Some quotations seem to be “lived out” in the ministry of Jesus. Because of their conviction about Jesus and his kingdom, the NT writers often saw certain OT texts as appropriated and made alive by Jesus. Psalm 118:22 was not intended as a prophecy of the Messiah, but Jesus saw it as descriptive of his ministry (Mt 21:42), and the early church saw this verse as actualized in his death and resurrection (Acts 4:11). Isaiah 53 is another text that the NT views as actualized in Jesus’ ministry (see Acts 8:32-35 and 1 Pt 2:22-25). Some Christians would view Psalm 22 as a prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus, but it seems instead to be the lament of a righteous OT sufferer. Through correspondence in history, and because Christians saw so much of the psalmist’s plight actualized in Jesus’ crucifixion, the psalm became the easiest way to describe what once again had happened to God’s righteous sufferer. The words of Isaiah 40:3 describe the ministry of John the Baptist (Mt 3:3). Jews had come to see this verse as a prophecy of God’s end-time salvation, and the early church saw John the Baptist fulfilling this forerunner’s task. Luke made this identification (Lk 3:4-6), but he applied the same role to Jesus’ disciples (9:52; 10:1). This seems to be a further example of actualization and correspondence in history. In other places the church has applied to Christians ideas that were previously understood of Christ (e.g., the stone in 1 Pt 2:4-5; the ministry of the Suffering Servant in Acts 13:46-47).<\/p>\n<p>The most convenient term to describe the way the OT is “fulfilled” in Christ is to say that the OT finds its climax in Jesus. Even where actual quotations are not involved, the OT ideas such as prophet, priest, or king are climaxed in him as the ideal and embodiment of all the OT models. He could tell religious authorities that “one greater than Solomon is here” (Mt 12:42) or “one greater than the temple is here” (Mt 12:6). Those passages involving correspondence in history or actualization also lead to the conviction that he is the climax of the OT Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePurposesoftheUseoftheOldTestament\">The Purposes of the Use of the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The variety of methods of interpretation and application of the OT parallels the fact that the OT was used for a variety of purposes. People tend to think only in terms of the use of the OT to show that Jesus was the Messiah, but there are a number of other uses with a variety of goals. Many OT texts are used to show Jesus is the Messiah, the fulfillment of the OT promises (Lk 4:16-21). Without lessening the fulfillment emphasis, however, other verses are applied to Jesus for other purposes: to evangelize (Acts 8:32-25); to demonstrate or convince (Acts 13:33-35); to rebuke (Mk 7:6-7; Rom 11:7-10); and to describe (Rv 1:12-15). On the other hand, many quotations of the OT in the NT are not directly related to the Messiah. OT passages are adapted to provide a word from God on some aspect of life or ethics. For example, Jesus used Genesis 2:24 to substantiate his teaching on divorce as he attempted to deal with the issues raised by the civil regulation of divorce (Dt 24:1; Mt 19:1-12). The stress on the OT commandments shows their importance for Christians (Mt 19:16-22; Rom 13:8-10). Often OT statements deal with specific problems. The problem of pride at Corinth is solved by the quotation of Jeremiah 9:24 (“Let the one boasting, boast in the Lord,” 1 Cor 1:31). First Peter 3:10-12 incorporates Psalm 34:12-16 as ethical instructions, and 3:14-15 borrows from Isaiah 8:12-13 to address the fear of suffering. The spiritual armor in Ephesians 6:14-17 is derived largely from OT passages. Such examples are so numerous that there can be no doubt that the OT is used to describe Christian existence. In fact, nearly every subject discussed in the NT is presented somewhere via OT terms and quotations. Frequently OT passages are used to describe the church as God’s end-time community. Hosea 2:23 is used to show that those who formerly were not God’s people now are (Rom 9:25-26; 1 Pt 2:10). Several OT texts contribute to the description of the church in 1 Peter 2:9. OT texts that speak of the word of God describe the apostles’ preaching (Rom 10:8; 1 Pt 1:24-25). OT quotations describe the sinful condition of humanity (Rom 3:10-20). Salvation is explained through OT concepts and symbols and is based on OT statements (Jn 6:31-33; Gal 3:6-13). The words of Daniel describe the Second Coming (7:13-14; cf. Mt 24:30). Even the worship of early Christians was expressed through use of the OT (see Acts 4:24; Rom 11:34-35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings. One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers. The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotation...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings. One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers. The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotation...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":6101,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Carmi","title_en":"Carmi","content_ro":"<h3>CARMI<\/h3>\n<li>1. One of Reuben’s sons; he accompanied his grandfather Jacob into Egypt (Gn 46:9; Ex 6:14; 1 Chr 5:3) and founded the family of Carmites (Nm 26:5-7).<\/li>\n<li>2. Achan’s father and a member of Judah’s tribe (Jos 7:1, 18; 1 Chr 2:7; 4:1).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>CARMI<\/h3>\n<li>1. One of Reuben’s sons; he accompanied his grandfather Jacob into Egypt (Gn 46:9; Ex 6:14; 1 Chr 5:3) and founded the family of Carmites (Nm 26:5-7).<\/li>\n<li>2. Achan’s father and a member of Judah’s tribe (Jos 7:1, 18; 1 Chr 2:7; 4:1).<\/li>","summary_ro":"CARMI 1. One of Reuben’s sons; he accompanied his grandfather Jacob into Egypt (Gn 46:9; Ex 6:14; 1 Chr 5:3) and founded the family of Carmites (Nm 26:5-7). 2. Achan’s father and a member of Judah’s tribe (Jos 7:1, 18; 1 Chr 2:7; 4:1).","summary_en":"CARMI 1. One of Reuben’s sons; he accompanied his grandfather Jacob into Egypt (Gn 46:9; Ex 6:14; 1 Chr 5:3) and founded the family of Carmites (Nm 26:5-7). 2. Achan’s father and a member of Judah’s tribe (Jos 7:1, 18; 1 Chr 2:7; 4:1).","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":8376,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Cursed Curse","title_en":"Cursed Curse","content_ro":"<h3>CURSE, CURSED<\/h3>\n<p>Invocation of evil or injury against one’s enemies. As practiced in Bible times, cursing was the opposite of blessing and should not be confused with profanity in the modern sense.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaganBeliefs\">Pagan Beliefs<\/p>\n<p>Curses and blessings were linked to the ancient pagan belief that spirits of “the gods” could be invoked to act on behalf of a person who repeated certain incantations or performed certain deeds (such as sacrifices). It was thought that a spoken curse possessed an occult power to work calamity on one’s enemies. In some pagan cultures, curses were written on clay jars that were then smashed, symbolically initiating or effecting the intended curse.<\/p>\n<p>Tombs were protected against would-be desecrators by means of curses. Royal inscriptions were protected by maledictions aimed at anyone who might alter, destroy, or defy the written decree (Ezr 6:11-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CursesinOldTestamentTimes\">Curses in Old Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>Among the Hebrews a curse, valid only within a covenant framework overseen by God, was spoken for the sake of justice. In the OT the curse was an integral part of a covenant relationship—between God and the community, between God and an individual, or among members of the community. To break the terms of a covenant was to merit the covenant curse or curses. A curse invoked under other conditions was powerless. “Like a sparrow in its flitting, like a swallow in its flying, a curse that is causeless does not alight” (Prv 26:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). A curse could be retracted by pronouncing a blessing (Ex 12:32; Jgs 17:1-2; 2 Sm 21:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>The Mosaic law forbade the cursing of parents (Ex 21:17; cf. Prv 20:20; Mt 15:4), the ruler (Ex 22:28), and the deaf (Lv 19:14). A man who suspected his wife of unfaithfulness could require that she submit to a test administered by the priest that would result in a curse upon her if she was guilty (Nm 5:11-31). Individuals might pronounce a curse upon themselves to show the truthfulness of their assertions or promises (Nm 5:19-22; Jb 31:7-10, 16-22; Ps 137:5-6). In the NT the apostle Peter followed the OT practice when he used a curse to deny that he knew Jesus (Mk 14:71). Certain men who wished to kill the apostle Paul proved their sincerity by such a solemn curse (Acts 23:12, 14, 21). Cursing God was punishable by death (Lv 24:10-16; cf. Ex 22:28; Is 8:21-22).<\/p>\n<p>Curses in Bible history include God’s curse on the serpent, Adam, and Eve (Gn 3:14-19); on Cain (4:11-12); on those who might curse the patriarch Abraham and his descendants (12:3); and on those who put their trust in human strength instead of in the Lord (Jer 17:5). When the people of Israel passed through Moab on their way to the Promised Land, Moab’s king, Balak, hired Balaam to curse the Israelites; he and Balaam learned, however, that they could not curse those whom God had blessed (Nm 22–24). Joshua cursed anyone who might try to rebuild Jericho (Jos 6:26; fulfilled in 1 Kgs 16:34). King Saul made a curse that almost cost his son Jonathan’s life (1 Sm 14:24, 43-45). Many other curses are mentioned in the OT (see, e.g., Gn 9:25; 49:5-7; Jos 9:22-23; Jgs 9:7-21, 57; 2 Sm 16:5-13; 1 Kgs 21:17-24; 2 Kgs 2:24; Mal 2:2; 4:6). The pronouncement of “woe” (<span>nlt<\/span> “destruction”) is also the language of curse (Is 5:8-23; cf. Mt 23:13-33, where “alas” and “woe” can be used synonymously and may be either an exclamation of sorrow or of impending doom and calamity).<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 109 contains a lengthy imprecation against the psalmist’s enemies, evidently because they had spoken some words against him falsely (see also Pss 58:6-11; 69:19-28; 143:12). The prophet Jeremiah was not averse to calling on God to punish his tormentors (Jer 11:20; 12:3; 15:15; 17:18; 18:21-22; 20:11-12) or asking God not to forgive them (18:23). Such imprecations against one’s enemies are difficult for Christians today to understand because they contrast sharply with the NT commands to “bless those who curse you” (Lk 6:28; cf. Rom 12:14). Jesus’ injunction to “love your enemies” (Mt 5:44) may be intended to point beyond the cursing practiced in the OT to a fuller understanding of God’s command to love one’s neighbor as oneself.<\/p>\n<h5>Covenant Curses<\/h5>\n<p>Protection of a contract or treaty by invoking a curse on the violator was common in OT times. Sometimes a covenant was sealed by cutting up an animal and having the covenanting individuals walk between the severed pieces; the slain animal symbolized the curse to befall the violator. God agreed to submit to such a curse on himself if he broke the covenant he made with the patriarch Abraham (Gn 15:7-21). Later, God accused the leaders and people of Israel of breaking their covenant with him and warned them of the consequences to follow (Jer 34:18-19). An essential part of the covenant God made with Israel at Mt Sinai was the promise of blessings for keeping the covenant and curses for breaking it (Dt 11:26-28; 27:15-26; 28:15-68; 30:19; cf. Lv 26:3-39). Israel suffered those curses in the time of the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel; the covenant breakers, including the king, were threatened with a curse (Jer 11:3; Ez 17:11-21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ban on “Devoted Things”<\/h5>\n<p>A special kind of curse was the ban or anathema. Strictly speaking, it was a vow to devote persons, animals, or objects under such a curse to God. In some cases the priests could use objects that had fallen under the ban (Nm 18:14; Ez 44:29), but that provision did not apply to living beings. All persons or animals under the ban were sacrificed or destroyed (Lv 27:28-29). The ban was commonly used in Israel’s wars against its pagan neighbors. Sometimes everything was declared anathema (Jos 6:17-19), but normally only persons and heathen images were destroyed (Dt 2:34; 3:6; 7:2, 25-26—not even the melted gold of images was to be kept). To violate the ban by preserving any part of the cursed things was to come under the ban oneself. Because Achan did not respect the ban placed upon Jericho, the terms of that curse came upon all Israel until Achan confessed and was executed (Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>After the exile, the Jews did not practice the anathema (or ban) by putting people to death; people who violated a curse were excommunicated and put out of the congregation of Israel (Ezr 10:8). That meant that the person was no longer part of God’s people and was considered “dead.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CursesinNewTestamentTimes\">Curses in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>Jewish synagogues practiced excommunication, or anathema, in the NT period (Lk 6:22; Jn 9:22; 12:42; 16:2). Later, Christians excommunicated persons by declaring them outside of the redeemed community (Mt 18:17) or “delivered to Satan” (1 Cor 5:5; 1 Tm 1:20). Both practices stemmed from the OT ban. Unlike that curse, however, the excommunication could be removed as soon as the person repented.<\/p>\n<p>Since the anathema branded a person as “rejected” or “cursed by God,” Saul of Tarsus, before his conversion, tried to compel Christians to renounce Christ by calling him accursed (cf. Acts 26:11). Later, as an apostle, Paul (Saul) warned that no one speaking by the Spirit of God could call Jesus accursed (1 Cor 12:3). Paul pronounced anathema (destined for judgment and perdition) upon anyone who preached another gospel than the one he and the other apostles preached (Gal 1:8-9). Paul said he wished he could be accursed, cut off from salvation and the people of God, if that could lead to the salvation of his fellow Israelites (Rom 9:3). His desire reflected the love of Christ, who accepted the “curse of the law” upon himself in submitting to suffering and death on the cross in order to redeem human beings from that curse (Gal 3:8-14; cf. Dt 21:22-23). The NT promises that a time will come when “there shall no longer be any curse” (Rv 22:3, <span>nasb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> War, Holy.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CURSE, CURSED<\/h3>\n<p>Invocation of evil or injury against one’s enemies. As practiced in Bible times, cursing was the opposite of blessing and should not be confused with profanity in the modern sense.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaganBeliefs\">Pagan Beliefs<\/p>\n<p>Curses and blessings were linked to the ancient pagan belief that spirits of “the gods” could be invoked to act on behalf of a person who repeated certain incantations or performed certain deeds (such as sacrifices). It was thought that a spoken curse possessed an occult power to work calamity on one’s enemies. In some pagan cultures, curses were written on clay jars that were then smashed, symbolically initiating or effecting the intended curse.<\/p>\n<p>Tombs were protected against would-be desecrators by means of curses. Royal inscriptions were protected by maledictions aimed at anyone who might alter, destroy, or defy the written decree (Ezr 6:11-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CursesinOldTestamentTimes\">Curses in Old Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>Among the Hebrews a curse, valid only within a covenant framework overseen by God, was spoken for the sake of justice. In the OT the curse was an integral part of a covenant relationship—between God and the community, between God and an individual, or among members of the community. To break the terms of a covenant was to merit the covenant curse or curses. A curse invoked under other conditions was powerless. “Like a sparrow in its flitting, like a swallow in its flying, a curse that is causeless does not alight” (Prv 26:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). A curse could be retracted by pronouncing a blessing (Ex 12:32; Jgs 17:1-2; 2 Sm 21:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>The Mosaic law forbade the cursing of parents (Ex 21:17; cf. Prv 20:20; Mt 15:4), the ruler (Ex 22:28), and the deaf (Lv 19:14). A man who suspected his wife of unfaithfulness could require that she submit to a test administered by the priest that would result in a curse upon her if she was guilty (Nm 5:11-31). Individuals might pronounce a curse upon themselves to show the truthfulness of their assertions or promises (Nm 5:19-22; Jb 31:7-10, 16-22; Ps 137:5-6). In the NT the apostle Peter followed the OT practice when he used a curse to deny that he knew Jesus (Mk 14:71). Certain men who wished to kill the apostle Paul proved their sincerity by such a solemn curse (Acts 23:12, 14, 21). Cursing God was punishable by death (Lv 24:10-16; cf. Ex 22:28; Is 8:21-22).<\/p>\n<p>Curses in Bible history include God’s curse on the serpent, Adam, and Eve (Gn 3:14-19); on Cain (4:11-12); on those who might curse the patriarch Abraham and his descendants (12:3); and on those who put their trust in human strength instead of in the Lord (Jer 17:5). When the people of Israel passed through Moab on their way to the Promised Land, Moab’s king, Balak, hired Balaam to curse the Israelites; he and Balaam learned, however, that they could not curse those whom God had blessed (Nm 22–24). Joshua cursed anyone who might try to rebuild Jericho (Jos 6:26; fulfilled in 1 Kgs 16:34). King Saul made a curse that almost cost his son Jonathan’s life (1 Sm 14:24, 43-45). Many other curses are mentioned in the OT (see, e.g., Gn 9:25; 49:5-7; Jos 9:22-23; Jgs 9:7-21, 57; 2 Sm 16:5-13; 1 Kgs 21:17-24; 2 Kgs 2:24; Mal 2:2; 4:6). The pronouncement of “woe” (<span>nlt<\/span> “destruction”) is also the language of curse (Is 5:8-23; cf. Mt 23:13-33, where “alas” and “woe” can be used synonymously and may be either an exclamation of sorrow or of impending doom and calamity).<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 109 contains a lengthy imprecation against the psalmist’s enemies, evidently because they had spoken some words against him falsely (see also Pss 58:6-11; 69:19-28; 143:12). The prophet Jeremiah was not averse to calling on God to punish his tormentors (Jer 11:20; 12:3; 15:15; 17:18; 18:21-22; 20:11-12) or asking God not to forgive them (18:23). Such imprecations against one’s enemies are difficult for Christians today to understand because they contrast sharply with the NT commands to “bless those who curse you” (Lk 6:28; cf. Rom 12:14). Jesus’ injunction to “love your enemies” (Mt 5:44) may be intended to point beyond the cursing practiced in the OT to a fuller understanding of God’s command to love one’s neighbor as oneself.<\/p>\n<h5>Covenant Curses<\/h5>\n<p>Protection of a contract or treaty by invoking a curse on the violator was common in OT times. Sometimes a covenant was sealed by cutting up an animal and having the covenanting individuals walk between the severed pieces; the slain animal symbolized the curse to befall the violator. God agreed to submit to such a curse on himself if he broke the covenant he made with the patriarch Abraham (Gn 15:7-21). Later, God accused the leaders and people of Israel of breaking their covenant with him and warned them of the consequences to follow (Jer 34:18-19). An essential part of the covenant God made with Israel at Mt Sinai was the promise of blessings for keeping the covenant and curses for breaking it (Dt 11:26-28; 27:15-26; 28:15-68; 30:19; cf. Lv 26:3-39). Israel suffered those curses in the time of the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel; the covenant breakers, including the king, were threatened with a curse (Jer 11:3; Ez 17:11-21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ban on “Devoted Things”<\/h5>\n<p>A special kind of curse was the ban or anathema. Strictly speaking, it was a vow to devote persons, animals, or objects under such a curse to God. In some cases the priests could use objects that had fallen under the ban (Nm 18:14; Ez 44:29), but that provision did not apply to living beings. All persons or animals under the ban were sacrificed or destroyed (Lv 27:28-29). The ban was commonly used in Israel’s wars against its pagan neighbors. Sometimes everything was declared anathema (Jos 6:17-19), but normally only persons and heathen images were destroyed (Dt 2:34; 3:6; 7:2, 25-26—not even the melted gold of images was to be kept). To violate the ban by preserving any part of the cursed things was to come under the ban oneself. Because Achan did not respect the ban placed upon Jericho, the terms of that curse came upon all Israel until Achan confessed and was executed (Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>After the exile, the Jews did not practice the anathema (or ban) by putting people to death; people who violated a curse were excommunicated and put out of the congregation of Israel (Ezr 10:8). That meant that the person was no longer part of God’s people and was considered “dead.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CursesinNewTestamentTimes\">Curses in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>Jewish synagogues practiced excommunication, or anathema, in the NT period (Lk 6:22; Jn 9:22; 12:42; 16:2). Later, Christians excommunicated persons by declaring them outside of the redeemed community (Mt 18:17) or “delivered to Satan” (1 Cor 5:5; 1 Tm 1:20). Both practices stemmed from the OT ban. Unlike that curse, however, the excommunication could be removed as soon as the person repented.<\/p>\n<p>Since the anathema branded a person as “rejected” or “cursed by God,” Saul of Tarsus, before his conversion, tried to compel Christians to renounce Christ by calling him accursed (cf. Acts 26:11). Later, as an apostle, Paul (Saul) warned that no one speaking by the Spirit of God could call Jesus accursed (1 Cor 12:3). Paul pronounced anathema (destined for judgment and perdition) upon anyone who preached another gospel than the one he and the other apostles preached (Gal 1:8-9). Paul said he wished he could be accursed, cut off from salvation and the people of God, if that could lead to the salvation of his fellow Israelites (Rom 9:3). His desire reflected the love of Christ, who accepted the “curse of the law” upon himself in submitting to suffering and death on the cross in order to redeem human beings from that curse (Gal 3:8-14; cf. Dt 21:22-23). The NT promises that a time will come when “there shall no longer be any curse” (Rv 22:3, <span>nasb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> War, Holy.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CURSE, CURSED Invocation of evil or injury against one’s enemies. As practiced in Bible times, cursing was the opposite of blessing and should not be confused with profanity in the modern sense. Pagan Beliefs Curses and blessings were linked to the ancient pagan belief that spirits of “the gods” could be invoked to act on behalf of a person who repeated certain incantations or performed certain deeds (such as sacrifices). It was thought that a spoken curse possessed an occult power to work ca...","summary_en":"CURSE, CURSED Invocation of evil or injury against one’s enemies. As practiced in Bible times, cursing was the opposite of blessing and should not be confused with profanity in the modern sense. Pagan Beliefs Curses and blessings were linked to the ancient pagan belief that spirits of “the gods” could be invoked to act on behalf of a person who repeated certain incantations or performed certain deeds (such as sacrifices). It was thought that a spoken curse possessed an occult power to work ca...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20747,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Joshua","title_en":"Book of Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38831,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Zabdi","title_en":"Zabdi","content_ro":"<h3>ZABDI<\/h3>\n<li>1. Zerah’s descendant from Judah’s tribe (Jos 7:1). Achan was a Zerahite of the family of Zabdi (Jos 7:17-18); alternately called Zimri (<span>nlt<\/span> mg, 1 Chr 2:6).<\/li>\n<li>2. Shimei’s son and a descendant of Ehud from Benjamin’s tribe (1 Chr 8:19).<\/li>\n<li>3. David’s officer over the produce of the vineyards for the wine cellars (1 Chr 27:27). He is called a Shiphmite, which likely means that he was a native of Shepham.<\/li>\n<li>4. One of the temple musicians of the order of Asaph (Neh 11:17); alternately called Zicri (1 Chr 9:15).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>ZABDI<\/h3>\n<li>1. Zerah’s descendant from Judah’s tribe (Jos 7:1). Achan was a Zerahite of the family of Zabdi (Jos 7:17-18); alternately called Zimri (<span>nlt<\/span> mg, 1 Chr 2:6).<\/li>\n<li>2. Shimei’s son and a descendant of Ehud from Benjamin’s tribe (1 Chr 8:19).<\/li>\n<li>3. David’s officer over the produce of the vineyards for the wine cellars (1 Chr 27:27). He is called a Shiphmite, which likely means that he was a native of Shepham.<\/li>\n<li>4. One of the temple musicians of the order of Asaph (Neh 11:17); alternately called Zicri (1 Chr 9:15).<\/li>","summary_ro":"ZABDI 1. Zerah’s descendant from Judah’s tribe (Jos 7:1). Achan was a Zerahite of the family of Zabdi (Jos 7:17-18); alternately called Zimri (nlt mg, 1 Chr 2:6). 2. Shimei’s son and a descendant of Ehud from Benjamin’s tribe (1 Chr 8:19). 3. David’s officer over the produce of the vineyards for the wine cellars (1 Chr 27:27). He is called a Shiphmite, which likely means that he was a native of Shepham. 4. One of the temple musicians of the order of Asaph (Neh 11:17); alternately called Zicri...","summary_en":"ZABDI 1. Zerah’s descendant from Judah’s tribe (Jos 7:1). Achan was a Zerahite of the family of Zabdi (Jos 7:17-18); alternately called Zimri (nlt mg, 1 Chr 2:6). 2. Shimei’s son and a descendant of Ehud from Benjamin’s tribe (1 Chr 8:19). 3. David’s officer over the produce of the vineyards for the wine cellars (1 Chr 27:27). He is called a Shiphmite, which likely means that he was a native of Shepham. 4. One of the temple musicians of the order of Asaph (Neh 11:17); alternately called Zicri...","source":"Articles\/Z.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":39233,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Zerah","title_en":"Zerah","content_ro":"<h3>ZERAH<\/h3>\n<li>1. One of the chiefs of the Edomites (Gn 36:17; 1 Chr 1:37), listed as the son of Reuel, Esau’s son by his wife Basemath, and likely the ancestor of Jobab, who later assumed the position of king of the Edomites (Gn 36:13, 33).<\/li>\n<li>2. One of the twin sons of Judah by his daughter-in-law Tamar (Gn 38:30; 46:12; Mt 1:3). Although Zerah thrust out his hand first, he retracted it, allowing his brother, Perez, to be born first. The descendants of Zerah (the Zerahites) became one of the most influential clans of Judah (Nm 26:20; Jos 7:1, 18; 22:20; 1 Chr 2:4-6; 9:6). Because Ethan and Heman are listed as sons of Zerah in 1 Chronicles 2:6, the Ezrahites mentioned in 1 Kings 4:31 and the titles to Psalms 88 and 89 are also considered to be Zerahites. However, Ethan and Heman are listed as Levites in 1 Chronicles 15:17, thus making it more likely that the Ezrahites were a Levite clan.<\/li>\n<li>3. One of the sons of Simeon from whom the Zerahite clan descended (Nm 26:13; 1 Chr 4:24); alternately called Zohar in Genesis 46:10 and Exodus 6:15.<\/li>\n<li>4. One of the sons of Iddo, from the Gershonite branch of Levi’s tribe (1 Chr 6:21).<\/li>\n<li>5. One of the ancestors of Asaph from Levi’s tribe, listed as the son of Adaiah and the father of Ethni (1 Chr 6:41). Several believe him to be the same individual as #4 above.<\/li>\n<li>6. Commander of the Ethiopians (Cushites) who fought against Asa, king of Judah (2 Chr 14:9). It is difficult to identify this individual or the historical event with any certainty. The most common identification has been with Usarkon II of Egypt. The account of the battle agrees with the chronology of Usarkon’s reign in Egypt, as do the number and nationalities of the troops involved in the conflict.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>ZERAH<\/h3>\n<li>1. One of the chiefs of the Edomites (Gn 36:17; 1 Chr 1:37), listed as the son of Reuel, Esau’s son by his wife Basemath, and likely the ancestor of Jobab, who later assumed the position of king of the Edomites (Gn 36:13, 33).<\/li>\n<li>2. One of the twin sons of Judah by his daughter-in-law Tamar (Gn 38:30; 46:12; Mt 1:3). Although Zerah thrust out his hand first, he retracted it, allowing his brother, Perez, to be born first. The descendants of Zerah (the Zerahites) became one of the most influential clans of Judah (Nm 26:20; Jos 7:1, 18; 22:20; 1 Chr 2:4-6; 9:6). Because Ethan and Heman are listed as sons of Zerah in 1 Chronicles 2:6, the Ezrahites mentioned in 1 Kings 4:31 and the titles to Psalms 88 and 89 are also considered to be Zerahites. However, Ethan and Heman are listed as Levites in 1 Chronicles 15:17, thus making it more likely that the Ezrahites were a Levite clan.<\/li>\n<li>3. One of the sons of Simeon from whom the Zerahite clan descended (Nm 26:13; 1 Chr 4:24); alternately called Zohar in Genesis 46:10 and Exodus 6:15.<\/li>\n<li>4. One of the sons of Iddo, from the Gershonite branch of Levi’s tribe (1 Chr 6:21).<\/li>\n<li>5. One of the ancestors of Asaph from Levi’s tribe, listed as the son of Adaiah and the father of Ethni (1 Chr 6:41). Several believe him to be the same individual as #4 above.<\/li>\n<li>6. Commander of the Ethiopians (Cushites) who fought against Asa, king of Judah (2 Chr 14:9). It is difficult to identify this individual or the historical event with any certainty. The most common identification has been with Usarkon II of Egypt. The account of the battle agrees with the chronology of Usarkon’s reign in Egypt, as do the number and nationalities of the troops involved in the conflict.<\/li>","summary_ro":"ZERAH 1. One of the chiefs of the Edomites (Gn 36:17; 1 Chr 1:37), listed as the son of Reuel, Esau’s son by his wife Basemath, and likely the ancestor of Jobab, who later assumed the position of king of the Edomites (Gn 36:13, 33). 2. One of the twin sons of Judah by his daughter-in-law Tamar (Gn 38:30; 46:12; Mt 1:3). Although Zerah thrust out his hand first, he retracted it, allowing his brother, Perez, to be born first. The descendants of Zerah (the Zerahites) became one of the most influ...","summary_en":"ZERAH 1. One of the chiefs of the Edomites (Gn 36:17; 1 Chr 1:37), listed as the son of Reuel, Esau’s son by his wife Basemath, and likely the ancestor of Jobab, who later assumed the position of king of the Edomites (Gn 36:13, 33). 2. One of the twin sons of Judah by his daughter-in-law Tamar (Gn 38:30; 46:12; Mt 1:3). Although Zerah thrust out his hand first, he retracted it, allowing his brother, Perez, to be born first. The descendants of Zerah (the Zerahites) became one of the most influ...","source":"Articles\/Z.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":39347,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Zimri (Person)","title_en":"Zimri (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>ZIMRI (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Clan chief of Simeon’s tribe who was killed by Phinehas for consorting with a Midianite woman at Peor (Nm 25:14). Zimri’s sin was magnified by the fact that he did it openly, that he was a leader within his tribe, and that the woman was the daughter of an important Midianite prince.<\/li>\n<li>2. King of Israel for seven days (885 <span>BC<\/span>) following his assassination of Elah and the rest of the family of Baasha (1 Kgs 16:9-12). Zimri, commander of half of the chariot forces, failed to gain the support of the people, who supported Omri, the commander of the army. When Omri marched against Zimri at Tirzah, Zimri committed suicide by burning his palace down (16:15-18). The cruelty of Zimri’s coup is reflected in Jezebel’s later taunt against Jehu, when she compared his duplicity to that of Zimri (2 Kgs 9:31).<\/li>\n<li>3. One of the sons of Zerah, the son of Judah by Tamar (1 Chr 2:6); alternately called Zabdi in the parallel passage in Joshua 7:1, 17. <em>See<\/em> Zabdi #1.<\/li>\n<li>4. Descendant of Saul from Benjamin’s tribe, listed as the son of Jehoaddah and the father of Moza (1 Chr 8:36). He is likely the same as Zimri the son of Jadah (9:42).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>ZIMRI (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Clan chief of Simeon’s tribe who was killed by Phinehas for consorting with a Midianite woman at Peor (Nm 25:14). Zimri’s sin was magnified by the fact that he did it openly, that he was a leader within his tribe, and that the woman was the daughter of an important Midianite prince.<\/li>\n<li>2. King of Israel for seven days (885 <span>BC<\/span>) following his assassination of Elah and the rest of the family of Baasha (1 Kgs 16:9-12). Zimri, commander of half of the chariot forces, failed to gain the support of the people, who supported Omri, the commander of the army. When Omri marched against Zimri at Tirzah, Zimri committed suicide by burning his palace down (16:15-18). The cruelty of Zimri’s coup is reflected in Jezebel’s later taunt against Jehu, when she compared his duplicity to that of Zimri (2 Kgs 9:31).<\/li>\n<li>3. One of the sons of Zerah, the son of Judah by Tamar (1 Chr 2:6); alternately called Zabdi in the parallel passage in Joshua 7:1, 17. <em>See<\/em> Zabdi #1.<\/li>\n<li>4. Descendant of Saul from Benjamin’s tribe, listed as the son of Jehoaddah and the father of Moza (1 Chr 8:36). He is likely the same as Zimri the son of Jadah (9:42).<\/li>","summary_ro":"ZIMRI (Person) 1. Clan chief of Simeon’s tribe who was killed by Phinehas for consorting with a Midianite woman at Peor (Nm 25:14). Zimri’s sin was magnified by the fact that he did it openly, that he was a leader within his tribe, and that the woman was the daughter of an important Midianite prince. 2. King of Israel for seven days (885 BC) following his assassination of Elah and the rest of the family of Baasha (1 Kgs 16:9-12). Zimri, commander of half of the chariot forces, failed to gain ...","summary_en":"ZIMRI (Person) 1. Clan chief of Simeon’s tribe who was killed by Phinehas for consorting with a Midianite woman at Peor (Nm 25:14). Zimri’s sin was magnified by the fact that he did it openly, that he was a leader within his tribe, and that the woman was the daughter of an important Midianite prince. 2. King of Israel for seven days (885 BC) following his assassination of Elah and the rest of the family of Baasha (1 Kgs 16:9-12). Zimri, commander of half of the chariot forces, failed to gain ...","source":"Articles\/Z.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45396,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:1","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:1-26<\/strong> Now that Jericho belonged to Israel, Joshua’s first military problem involved securing a foothold in the hill country. The conquest of Jericho inspired Israel’s confidence and consigned the people of Canaan to discouragement and despair. Yet everything hinged on Israel’s obedience to God. One man’s sin and its consequences demonstrate how serious was the command to destroy Jericho (see “Complete Dedication” Theme Note).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:1-26<\/strong> Now that Jericho belonged to Israel, Joshua’s first military problem involved securing a foothold in the hill country. The conquest of Jericho inspired Israel’s confidence and consigned the people of Canaan to discouragement and despair. Yet everything hinged on Israel’s obedience to God. One man’s sin and its consequences demonstrate how serious was the command to destroy Jericho (see “Complete Dedication” Theme Note).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:1-26 Now that Jericho belonged to Israel, Joshua’s first military problem involved securing a foothold in the hill country. The conquest of Jericho inspired Israel’s confidence and consigned the people of Canaan to discouragement and despair. Yet everything hinged on Israel’s obedience to God. One man’s sin and its consequences demonstrate how serious was the command to destroy Jericho (see “Complete Dedication” Theme Note).","summary_en":"7:1-26 Now that Jericho belonged to Israel, Joshua’s first military problem involved securing a foothold in the hill country. The conquest of Jericho inspired Israel’s confidence and consigned the people of Canaan to discouragement and despair. Yet everything hinged on Israel’s obedience to God. One man’s sin and its consequences demonstrate how serious was the command to destroy Jericho (see “Complete Dedication” Theme Note).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45397,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:1","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:1<\/strong> <em>things set apart for the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>:<\/em> See Lev 27:28-29; 1 Sam 15:3. • <em>son of Zerah:<\/em> Achan belonged to a prominent family (Num 26:19-20) and was a leader or a potential leader, so his actions would be influential.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:1<\/strong> <em>things set apart for the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>:<\/em> See Lev 27:28-29; 1 Sam 15:3. • <em>son of Zerah:<\/em> Achan belonged to a prominent family (Num 26:19-20) and was a leader or a potential leader, so his actions would be influential.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:1 things set apart for the Lord: See Lev 27:28-29; 1 Sam 15:3. • son of Zerah: Achan belonged to a prominent family (Num 26:19-20) and was a leader or a potential leader, so his actions would be influential.","summary_en":"7:1 things set apart for the Lord: See Lev 27:28-29; 1 Sam 15:3. • son of Zerah: Achan belonged to a prominent family (Num 26:19-20) and was a leader or a potential leader, so his actions would be influential.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73022,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:1","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:1-26<\/strong> Now that Jericho belonged to Israel, Joshua’s first military problem involved securing a foothold in the hill country. The conquest of Jericho inspired Israel’s confidence and consigned the people of Canaan to discouragement and despair. Yet everything hinged on Israel’s obedience to God. One man’s sin and its consequences demonstrate how serious was the command to destroy Jericho (see “Complete Dedication” Theme Note).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:1-26<\/strong> Now that Jericho belonged to Israel, Joshua’s first military problem involved securing a foothold in the hill country. The conquest of Jericho inspired Israel’s confidence and consigned the people of Canaan to discouragement and despair. Yet everything hinged on Israel’s obedience to God. One man’s sin and its consequences demonstrate how serious was the command to destroy Jericho (see “Complete Dedication” Theme Note).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:1-26 Now that Jericho belonged to Israel, Joshua’s first military problem involved securing a foothold in the hill country. The conquest of Jericho inspired Israel’s confidence and consigned the people of Canaan to discouragement and despair. Yet everything hinged on Israel’s obedience to God. One man’s sin and its consequences demonstrate how serious was the command to destroy Jericho (see “Complete Dedication” Theme Note).","summary_en":"7:1-26 Now that Jericho belonged to Israel, Joshua’s first military problem involved securing a foothold in the hill country. The conquest of Jericho inspired Israel’s confidence and consigned the people of Canaan to discouragement and despair. Yet everything hinged on Israel’s obedience to God. One man’s sin and its consequences demonstrate how serious was the command to destroy Jericho (see “Complete Dedication” Theme Note).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73023,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:1","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:1<\/strong> <em>things set apart for the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>:<\/em> See Lev 27:28-29; 1 Sam 15:3. • <em>son of Zerah:<\/em> Achan belonged to a prominent family (Num 26:19-20) and was a leader or a potential leader, so his actions would be influential.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:1<\/strong> <em>things set apart for the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>:<\/em> See Lev 27:28-29; 1 Sam 15:3. • <em>son of Zerah:<\/em> Achan belonged to a prominent family (Num 26:19-20) and was a leader or a potential leader, so his actions would be influential.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:1 things set apart for the Lord: See Lev 27:28-29; 1 Sam 15:3. • son of Zerah: Achan belonged to a prominent family (Num 26:19-20) and was a leader or a potential leader, so his actions would be influential.","summary_en":"7:1 things set apart for the Lord: See Lev 27:28-29; 1 Sam 15:3. • son of Zerah: Achan belonged to a prominent family (Num 26:19-20) and was a leader or a potential leader, so his actions would be influential.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100648,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:1","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:1-26<\/strong> Now that Jericho belonged to Israel, Joshua’s first military problem involved securing a foothold in the hill country. The conquest of Jericho inspired Israel’s confidence and consigned the people of Canaan to discouragement and despair. Yet everything hinged on Israel’s obedience to God. One man’s sin and its consequences demonstrate how serious was the command to destroy Jericho (see “Complete Dedication” Theme Note).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:1-26<\/strong> Now that Jericho belonged to Israel, Joshua’s first military problem involved securing a foothold in the hill country. The conquest of Jericho inspired Israel’s confidence and consigned the people of Canaan to discouragement and despair. Yet everything hinged on Israel’s obedience to God. One man’s sin and its consequences demonstrate how serious was the command to destroy Jericho (see “Complete Dedication” Theme Note).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:1-26 Now that Jericho belonged to Israel, Joshua’s first military problem involved securing a foothold in the hill country. The conquest of Jericho inspired Israel’s confidence and consigned the people of Canaan to discouragement and despair. Yet everything hinged on Israel’s obedience to God. One man’s sin and its consequences demonstrate how serious was the command to destroy Jericho (see “Complete Dedication” Theme Note).","summary_en":"7:1-26 Now that Jericho belonged to Israel, Joshua’s first military problem involved securing a foothold in the hill country. The conquest of Jericho inspired Israel’s confidence and consigned the people of Canaan to discouragement and despair. Yet everything hinged on Israel’s obedience to God. One man’s sin and its consequences demonstrate how serious was the command to destroy Jericho (see “Complete Dedication” Theme Note).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100649,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:1","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:1<\/strong> <em>things set apart for the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>:<\/em> See Lev 27:28-29; 1 Sam 15:3. • <em>son of Zerah:<\/em> Achan belonged to a prominent family (Num 26:19-20) and was a leader or a potential leader, so his actions would be influential.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:1<\/strong> <em>things set apart for the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>:<\/em> See Lev 27:28-29; 1 Sam 15:3. • <em>son of Zerah:<\/em> Achan belonged to a prominent family (Num 26:19-20) and was a leader or a potential leader, so his actions would be influential.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:1 things set apart for the Lord: See Lev 27:28-29; 1 Sam 15:3. • son of Zerah: Achan belonged to a prominent family (Num 26:19-20) and was a leader or a potential leader, so his actions would be influential.","summary_en":"7:1 things set apart for the Lord: See Lev 27:28-29; 1 Sam 15:3. • son of Zerah: Achan belonged to a prominent family (Num 26:19-20) and was a leader or a potential leader, so his actions would be influential.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128274,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:1","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:1-26<\/strong> Now that Jericho belonged to Israel, Joshua’s first military problem involved securing a foothold in the hill country. The conquest of Jericho inspired Israel’s confidence and consigned the people of Canaan to discouragement and despair. Yet everything hinged on Israel’s obedience to God. One man’s sin and its consequences demonstrate how serious was the command to destroy Jericho (see “Complete Dedication” Theme Note).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:1-26<\/strong> Now that Jericho belonged to Israel, Joshua’s first military problem involved securing a foothold in the hill country. The conquest of Jericho inspired Israel’s confidence and consigned the people of Canaan to discouragement and despair. Yet everything hinged on Israel’s obedience to God. One man’s sin and its consequences demonstrate how serious was the command to destroy Jericho (see “Complete Dedication” Theme Note).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:1-26 Now that Jericho belonged to Israel, Joshua’s first military problem involved securing a foothold in the hill country. The conquest of Jericho inspired Israel’s confidence and consigned the people of Canaan to discouragement and despair. Yet everything hinged on Israel’s obedience to God. One man’s sin and its consequences demonstrate how serious was the command to destroy Jericho (see “Complete Dedication” Theme Note).","summary_en":"7:1-26 Now that Jericho belonged to Israel, Joshua’s first military problem involved securing a foothold in the hill country. The conquest of Jericho inspired Israel’s confidence and consigned the people of Canaan to discouragement and despair. Yet everything hinged on Israel’s obedience to God. One man’s sin and its consequences demonstrate how serious was the command to destroy Jericho (see “Complete Dedication” Theme Note).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128275,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:1","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:1<\/strong> <em>things set apart for the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>:<\/em> See Lev 27:28-29; 1 Sam 15:3. • <em>son of Zerah:<\/em> Achan belonged to a prominent family (Num 26:19-20) and was a leader or a potential leader, so his actions would be influential.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:1<\/strong> <em>things set apart for the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>:<\/em> See Lev 27:28-29; 1 Sam 15:3. • <em>son of Zerah:<\/em> Achan belonged to a prominent family (Num 26:19-20) and was a leader or a potential leader, so his actions would be influential.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:1 things set apart for the Lord: See Lev 27:28-29; 1 Sam 15:3. • son of Zerah: Achan belonged to a prominent family (Num 26:19-20) and was a leader or a potential leader, so his actions would be influential.","summary_en":"7:1 things set apart for the Lord: See Lev 27:28-29; 1 Sam 15:3. • son of Zerah: Achan belonged to a prominent family (Num 26:19-20) and was a leader or a potential leader, so his actions would be influential.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":59770,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Retribution","title_en":"Retribution","content_ro":"<h3>Retribution<\/h3>\n<p>God gave humans the commission of procreating and caring for the world (Gen 1:28). But as humanity multiplied, spiritual wickedness, violence, and murder also multiplied (4:8, 23; 6:5, 11-13), resulting in a corrupt world that required cleansing.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the Flood was to enact God’s global cleansing and retribution against evildoers. <em>Retribution<\/em> means “giving what is due” and usually refers to recompense for wrongdoing. Retribution is motivated by the conviction that moral order is woven into the fabric of the world and must be maintained or restored (see Ps 7:14-16; Prov 11:17-21; 26:27).<\/p>\n<p>God maintains moral order by meting out justice, punishing wickedness, and rewarding right behavior (Gal 6:7-8). Since God oversees the world, it is never entirely overwhelmed by moral chaos; God holds people accountable for what they do. The judgment and exile of Adam and Eve (Gen 3:8-24), Cain’s sentence (4:10-15), and the worldwide flood and annihilation (chs 6–7) are examples of God’s retribution. These events reveal a sovereign God who exacts just punishment in the context of his good intentions for the world (see also Num 16; Deut 30:15-20; Josh 7; Mic 2:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Retribution is an application of God’s righteousness; it purifies the world for his kingdom of peace. Through retribution, the divine King proclaims his universal rule and exercises his justice on all who reject his rule or defy his commands (Deut 7:10; Ps 149; Prov 15:25; Mic 5:15; 1 Cor 16:22; Gal 1:8-9; 2 Thes 1:5-10).<\/p>\n<p>For God’s people, retribution serves as his discipline. It is intended to restore covenant fellowship with him (see Isa 44:22; Jer 3:12-14; Lam 3:19-33; Hos 14:1-2; Joel 2:12-13; see also Heb 12:5-11). When God’s people experience his chastening, they can respond in hope because God’s truth and righteousness will triumph (Ps 58:10-11), and God will redeem and restore his people who trust in him (Lev 26:40-45; Hos 2:2-23).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:1–7:24; Lev 26:14-39; Ps 7:6-17; 57:6; 95:8-11; Prov 6:27-35; 26:27; Mic 2:1-3; Rom 2:5-16; Gal 6:7-8; Heb 10:26-31; 12:5-11, 25-29<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Retribution<\/h3>\n<p>God gave humans the commission of procreating and caring for the world (Gen 1:28). But as humanity multiplied, spiritual wickedness, violence, and murder also multiplied (4:8, 23; 6:5, 11-13), resulting in a corrupt world that required cleansing.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the Flood was to enact God’s global cleansing and retribution against evildoers. <em>Retribution<\/em> means “giving what is due” and usually refers to recompense for wrongdoing. Retribution is motivated by the conviction that moral order is woven into the fabric of the world and must be maintained or restored (see Ps 7:14-16; Prov 11:17-21; 26:27).<\/p>\n<p>God maintains moral order by meting out justice, punishing wickedness, and rewarding right behavior (Gal 6:7-8). Since God oversees the world, it is never entirely overwhelmed by moral chaos; God holds people accountable for what they do. The judgment and exile of Adam and Eve (Gen 3:8-24), Cain’s sentence (4:10-15), and the worldwide flood and annihilation (chs 6–7) are examples of God’s retribution. These events reveal a sovereign God who exacts just punishment in the context of his good intentions for the world (see also Num 16; Deut 30:15-20; Josh 7; Mic 2:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Retribution is an application of God’s righteousness; it purifies the world for his kingdom of peace. Through retribution, the divine King proclaims his universal rule and exercises his justice on all who reject his rule or defy his commands (Deut 7:10; Ps 149; Prov 15:25; Mic 5:15; 1 Cor 16:22; Gal 1:8-9; 2 Thes 1:5-10).<\/p>\n<p>For God’s people, retribution serves as his discipline. It is intended to restore covenant fellowship with him (see Isa 44:22; Jer 3:12-14; Lam 3:19-33; Hos 14:1-2; Joel 2:12-13; see also Heb 12:5-11). When God’s people experience his chastening, they can respond in hope because God’s truth and righteousness will triumph (Ps 58:10-11), and God will redeem and restore his people who trust in him (Lev 26:40-45; Hos 2:2-23).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:1–7:24; Lev 26:14-39; Ps 7:6-17; 57:6; 95:8-11; Prov 6:27-35; 26:27; Mic 2:1-3; Rom 2:5-16; Gal 6:7-8; Heb 10:26-31; 12:5-11, 25-29<\/p>","summary_ro":"Retribution God gave humans the commission of procreating and caring for the world (Gen 1:28). But as humanity multiplied, spiritual wickedness, violence, and murder also multiplied (4:8, 23; 6:5, 11-13), resulting in a corrupt world that required cleansing. The purpose of the Flood was to enact God’s global cleansing and retribution against evildoers. Retribution means “giving what is due” and usually refers to recompense for wrongdoing. Retribution is motivated by the conviction that moral ...","summary_en":"Retribution God gave humans the commission of procreating and caring for the world (Gen 1:28). But as humanity multiplied, spiritual wickedness, violence, and murder also multiplied (4:8, 23; 6:5, 11-13), resulting in a corrupt world that required cleansing. The purpose of the Flood was to enact God’s global cleansing and retribution against evildoers. Retribution means “giving what is due” and usually refers to recompense for wrongdoing. Retribution is motivated by the conviction that moral ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60362,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Identity","title_en":"Community Identity","content_ro":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","summary_en":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60812,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Purge the Evil","title_en":"Purge the Evil","content_ro":"<h3>Purge the Evil<\/h3>\n<p>Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2).<\/p>\n<p>God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:14; Heb 12:28-29). Such cleansing is meant to heal the community of believers and deter others from rebelling against the Lord (Deut 17:13).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God’s judgment among his people was often immediate (see, e.g., Num 11:1-3; 16:1-50; Josh 7). God thus made his people keenly aware of his demand for obedience and of the penalty for those who did not comply.<\/p>\n<p>God’s retribution is now reserved for the future day of judgment, when the sins of the unrighteous will be exposed and judged (Rom 14:10; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27; 1 Pet 4:5). However, some instances of calamity can be understood as God’s judgment on his disobedient children (e.g., Acts 5:1-11; see 1 Cor 11:27-30). It is still a “terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb 10:31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 19:1-2; Deut 9:3-6; 13:5; 17:2-13; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Chr 34:3-8; Isa 1:24-26; 4:2-6; 33:14; Ezek 20:32-38; Matt 18:8-9; Acts 5:1-11; Rom 14:10; 1 Cor 11:27-30; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27-28; 10:31; 12:28-29; Jas 5:19-20; 1 Pet 4:5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Purge the Evil<\/h3>\n<p>Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2).<\/p>\n<p>God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:14; Heb 12:28-29). Such cleansing is meant to heal the community of believers and deter others from rebelling against the Lord (Deut 17:13).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God’s judgment among his people was often immediate (see, e.g., Num 11:1-3; 16:1-50; Josh 7). God thus made his people keenly aware of his demand for obedience and of the penalty for those who did not comply.<\/p>\n<p>God’s retribution is now reserved for the future day of judgment, when the sins of the unrighteous will be exposed and judged (Rom 14:10; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27; 1 Pet 4:5). However, some instances of calamity can be understood as God’s judgment on his disobedient children (e.g., Acts 5:1-11; see 1 Cor 11:27-30). It is still a “terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb 10:31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 19:1-2; Deut 9:3-6; 13:5; 17:2-13; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Chr 34:3-8; Isa 1:24-26; 4:2-6; 33:14; Ezek 20:32-38; Matt 18:8-9; Acts 5:1-11; Rom 14:10; 1 Cor 11:27-30; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27-28; 10:31; 12:28-29; Jas 5:19-20; 1 Pet 4:5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Purge the Evil Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2). God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:1...","summary_en":"Purge the Evil Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2). God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60889,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Holy War","title_en":"Holy War","content_ro":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","summary_en":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60936,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","title_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","content_ro":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\n<p>Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\n<p>But what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\n<p>To understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>Because we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\n<p>None of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\n<p>Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\n<p>But what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\n<p>To understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>Because we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\n<p>None of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","summary_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61721,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Dangers of Sin","title_en":"The Dangers of Sin","content_ro":"<h3>The Dangers of Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Choosing sin rather than faithfulness to the only true God invites disaster. This has been true since the very beginning, when Adam and Eve’s disobedience brought curses and banishment from their initial home (Gen 3). And it was true throughout Israel’s history (see, e.g., Num 16; Josh 7; 2 Sam 11:1–12:19). The New Testament offers numerous warnings about the eternal consequences of unrepented sinful behavior (1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:19-21; Rev 22:15).<\/p>\n<p>The sinful acts of God’s people are prominent throughout the late monarchical period. Words such as <em>sin<\/em>, <em>evil<\/em>, and <em>wicked<\/em> appear frequently to assert that the kings of both Israel (2 Kgs 3:2; 13:2, 11; 14:24; 15:9, 18, 24, 28; 17:2) and Judah (8:18, 27; 21:2, 16, 20; 23:32, 37; 24:9, 19) did “what was evil in the <span>Lord<\/span>’s sight.”<\/p>\n<p>The northern kingdom was particularly culpable. Its kings and people were uniformly condemned for their godless ways (17:16-17, 22); the basic sin of apostate worship, introduced by Jeroboam I, continued in Israel until the end (10:29; 17:21-23; 23:15). God repeatedly warned the people through his prophets (17:13) and brought the chastisement of foreign invaders (13:3, 7). Nothing moved the Israelites’ hearts, for they were set in their ways (13:6; 17:14-17). Eventually God allowed foreign invaders to defeat them and occupy their land, sending many into exile (17:18, 20-23).<\/p>\n<p>The people of Judah were not innocent either. Many of their kings were guilty of gross wickedness, and Judean society grew increasingly apostate and followed “the evil practices that Israel had introduced” (17:19). Despite God’s repeated acts of kindness (e.g., 19:32-36) and warnings delivered through his prophets (21:8-15), the people persisted in their sin, and God’s judgment once again fell (21:10-15; 23:26-27; 24:1-4; 25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>Where there is genuine repentance, God will graciously forgive his people and remit the penalty. But how much better to be faithful to God’s Word (2 Kgs 18:5-6; 23:25; Ps 119:9-11, 33-37; 2 Tim 4:7; Rev 2:10), so that God’s blessings (Ps 112:1; 119:1-2; 144:15) might bring success (2 Kgs 18:7; see also 2 Chr 26:4-5; Prov 3:1-10; 2 Cor 3:5). God’s people need to give God first place in their lives (1 Kgs 18:21, 36-39; see Deut 6:13; 10:12-13; Mic 6:8; Matt 6:33), pray for God’s persevering grace (Ps 19:13), and let the word of God be their guide (Ps 119:9; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:20-21; Exod 34:7; Lev 26:14-46; Num 15:30-31; Deut 31:16-18; 1 Kgs 8:46-51; 2 Kgs 8:18, 27; 2 Kgs 13:1-7; 14:23-24; 17:13-23; 18:9-12; 21:8-16; 23:25-27; 24:1-3, 19–25:21; 2 Chr 7:14; 33:12-13; Ps 119:9-11, 33-37; Jer 44:2-6; Mic 6:8; Matt 6:33; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:16; 4:7; Rev 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Dangers of Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Choosing sin rather than faithfulness to the only true God invites disaster. This has been true since the very beginning, when Adam and Eve’s disobedience brought curses and banishment from their initial home (Gen 3). And it was true throughout Israel’s history (see, e.g., Num 16; Josh 7; 2 Sam 11:1–12:19). The New Testament offers numerous warnings about the eternal consequences of unrepented sinful behavior (1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:19-21; Rev 22:15).<\/p>\n<p>The sinful acts of God’s people are prominent throughout the late monarchical period. Words such as <em>sin<\/em>, <em>evil<\/em>, and <em>wicked<\/em> appear frequently to assert that the kings of both Israel (2 Kgs 3:2; 13:2, 11; 14:24; 15:9, 18, 24, 28; 17:2) and Judah (8:18, 27; 21:2, 16, 20; 23:32, 37; 24:9, 19) did “what was evil in the <span>Lord<\/span>’s sight.”<\/p>\n<p>The northern kingdom was particularly culpable. Its kings and people were uniformly condemned for their godless ways (17:16-17, 22); the basic sin of apostate worship, introduced by Jeroboam I, continued in Israel until the end (10:29; 17:21-23; 23:15). God repeatedly warned the people through his prophets (17:13) and brought the chastisement of foreign invaders (13:3, 7). Nothing moved the Israelites’ hearts, for they were set in their ways (13:6; 17:14-17). Eventually God allowed foreign invaders to defeat them and occupy their land, sending many into exile (17:18, 20-23).<\/p>\n<p>The people of Judah were not innocent either. Many of their kings were guilty of gross wickedness, and Judean society grew increasingly apostate and followed “the evil practices that Israel had introduced” (17:19). Despite God’s repeated acts of kindness (e.g., 19:32-36) and warnings delivered through his prophets (21:8-15), the people persisted in their sin, and God’s judgment once again fell (21:10-15; 23:26-27; 24:1-4; 25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>Where there is genuine repentance, God will graciously forgive his people and remit the penalty. But how much better to be faithful to God’s Word (2 Kgs 18:5-6; 23:25; Ps 119:9-11, 33-37; 2 Tim 4:7; Rev 2:10), so that God’s blessings (Ps 112:1; 119:1-2; 144:15) might bring success (2 Kgs 18:7; see also 2 Chr 26:4-5; Prov 3:1-10; 2 Cor 3:5). God’s people need to give God first place in their lives (1 Kgs 18:21, 36-39; see Deut 6:13; 10:12-13; Mic 6:8; Matt 6:33), pray for God’s persevering grace (Ps 19:13), and let the word of God be their guide (Ps 119:9; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:20-21; Exod 34:7; Lev 26:14-46; Num 15:30-31; Deut 31:16-18; 1 Kgs 8:46-51; 2 Kgs 8:18, 27; 2 Kgs 13:1-7; 14:23-24; 17:13-23; 18:9-12; 21:8-16; 23:25-27; 24:1-3, 19–25:21; 2 Chr 7:14; 33:12-13; Ps 119:9-11, 33-37; Jer 44:2-6; Mic 6:8; Matt 6:33; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:16; 4:7; Rev 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Dangers of Sin Choosing sin rather than faithfulness to the only true God invites disaster. This has been true since the very beginning, when Adam and Eve’s disobedience brought curses and banishment from their initial home (Gen 3). And it was true throughout Israel’s history (see, e.g., Num 16; Josh 7; 2 Sam 11:1–12:19). The New Testament offers numerous warnings about the eternal consequences of unrepented sinful behavior (1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:19-21; Rev 22:15). The sinful acts of God’s ...","summary_en":"The Dangers of Sin Choosing sin rather than faithfulness to the only true God invites disaster. This has been true since the very beginning, when Adam and Eve’s disobedience brought curses and banishment from their initial home (Gen 3). And it was true throughout Israel’s history (see, e.g., Num 16; Josh 7; 2 Sam 11:1–12:19). The New Testament offers numerous warnings about the eternal consequences of unrepented sinful behavior (1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:19-21; Rev 22:15). The sinful acts of God’s ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87396,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Retribution","title_en":"Retribution","content_ro":"<h3>Retribution<\/h3>\n<p>God gave humans the commission of procreating and caring for the world (Gen 1:28). But as humanity multiplied, spiritual wickedness, violence, and murder also multiplied (4:8, 23; 6:5, 11-13), resulting in a corrupt world that required cleansing.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the Flood was to enact God’s global cleansing and retribution against evildoers. <em>Retribution<\/em> means “giving what is due” and usually refers to recompense for wrongdoing. Retribution is motivated by the conviction that moral order is woven into the fabric of the world and must be maintained or restored (see Ps 7:14-16; Prov 11:17-21; 26:27).<\/p>\n<p>God maintains moral order by meting out justice, punishing wickedness, and rewarding right behavior (Gal 6:7-8). Since God oversees the world, it is never entirely overwhelmed by moral chaos; God holds people accountable for what they do. The judgment and exile of Adam and Eve (Gen 3:8-24), Cain’s sentence (4:10-15), and the worldwide flood and annihilation (chs 6–7) are examples of God’s retribution. These events reveal a sovereign God who exacts just punishment in the context of his good intentions for the world (see also Num 16; Deut 30:15-20; Josh 7; Mic 2:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Retribution is an application of God’s righteousness; it purifies the world for his kingdom of peace. Through retribution, the divine King proclaims his universal rule and exercises his justice on all who reject his rule or defy his commands (Deut 7:10; Ps 149; Prov 15:25; Mic 5:15; 1 Cor 16:22; Gal 1:8-9; 2 Thes 1:5-10).<\/p>\n<p>For God’s people, retribution serves as his discipline. It is intended to restore covenant fellowship with him (see Isa 44:22; Jer 3:12-14; Lam 3:19-33; Hos 14:1-2; Joel 2:12-13; see also Heb 12:5-11). When God’s people experience his chastening, they can respond in hope because God’s truth and righteousness will triumph (Ps 58:10-11), and God will redeem and restore his people who trust in him (Lev 26:40-45; Hos 2:2-23).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:1–7:24; Lev 26:14-39; Ps 7:6-17; 57:6; 95:8-11; Prov 6:27-35; 26:27; Mic 2:1-3; Rom 2:5-16; Gal 6:7-8; Heb 10:26-31; 12:5-11, 25-29<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Retribution<\/h3>\n<p>God gave humans the commission of procreating and caring for the world (Gen 1:28). But as humanity multiplied, spiritual wickedness, violence, and murder also multiplied (4:8, 23; 6:5, 11-13), resulting in a corrupt world that required cleansing.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the Flood was to enact God’s global cleansing and retribution against evildoers. <em>Retribution<\/em> means “giving what is due” and usually refers to recompense for wrongdoing. Retribution is motivated by the conviction that moral order is woven into the fabric of the world and must be maintained or restored (see Ps 7:14-16; Prov 11:17-21; 26:27).<\/p>\n<p>God maintains moral order by meting out justice, punishing wickedness, and rewarding right behavior (Gal 6:7-8). Since God oversees the world, it is never entirely overwhelmed by moral chaos; God holds people accountable for what they do. The judgment and exile of Adam and Eve (Gen 3:8-24), Cain’s sentence (4:10-15), and the worldwide flood and annihilation (chs 6–7) are examples of God’s retribution. These events reveal a sovereign God who exacts just punishment in the context of his good intentions for the world (see also Num 16; Deut 30:15-20; Josh 7; Mic 2:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Retribution is an application of God’s righteousness; it purifies the world for his kingdom of peace. Through retribution, the divine King proclaims his universal rule and exercises his justice on all who reject his rule or defy his commands (Deut 7:10; Ps 149; Prov 15:25; Mic 5:15; 1 Cor 16:22; Gal 1:8-9; 2 Thes 1:5-10).<\/p>\n<p>For God’s people, retribution serves as his discipline. It is intended to restore covenant fellowship with him (see Isa 44:22; Jer 3:12-14; Lam 3:19-33; Hos 14:1-2; Joel 2:12-13; see also Heb 12:5-11). When God’s people experience his chastening, they can respond in hope because God’s truth and righteousness will triumph (Ps 58:10-11), and God will redeem and restore his people who trust in him (Lev 26:40-45; Hos 2:2-23).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:1–7:24; Lev 26:14-39; Ps 7:6-17; 57:6; 95:8-11; Prov 6:27-35; 26:27; Mic 2:1-3; Rom 2:5-16; Gal 6:7-8; Heb 10:26-31; 12:5-11, 25-29<\/p>","summary_ro":"Retribution God gave humans the commission of procreating and caring for the world (Gen 1:28). But as humanity multiplied, spiritual wickedness, violence, and murder also multiplied (4:8, 23; 6:5, 11-13), resulting in a corrupt world that required cleansing. The purpose of the Flood was to enact God’s global cleansing and retribution against evildoers. Retribution means “giving what is due” and usually refers to recompense for wrongdoing. Retribution is motivated by the conviction that moral ...","summary_en":"Retribution God gave humans the commission of procreating and caring for the world (Gen 1:28). But as humanity multiplied, spiritual wickedness, violence, and murder also multiplied (4:8, 23; 6:5, 11-13), resulting in a corrupt world that required cleansing. The purpose of the Flood was to enact God’s global cleansing and retribution against evildoers. Retribution means “giving what is due” and usually refers to recompense for wrongdoing. Retribution is motivated by the conviction that moral ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87988,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Identity","title_en":"Community Identity","content_ro":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","summary_en":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88438,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Purge the Evil","title_en":"Purge the Evil","content_ro":"<h3>Purge the Evil<\/h3>\n<p>Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2).<\/p>\n<p>God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:14; Heb 12:28-29). Such cleansing is meant to heal the community of believers and deter others from rebelling against the Lord (Deut 17:13).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God’s judgment among his people was often immediate (see, e.g., Num 11:1-3; 16:1-50; Josh 7). God thus made his people keenly aware of his demand for obedience and of the penalty for those who did not comply.<\/p>\n<p>God’s retribution is now reserved for the future day of judgment, when the sins of the unrighteous will be exposed and judged (Rom 14:10; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27; 1 Pet 4:5). However, some instances of calamity can be understood as God’s judgment on his disobedient children (e.g., Acts 5:1-11; see 1 Cor 11:27-30). It is still a “terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb 10:31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 19:1-2; Deut 9:3-6; 13:5; 17:2-13; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Chr 34:3-8; Isa 1:24-26; 4:2-6; 33:14; Ezek 20:32-38; Matt 18:8-9; Acts 5:1-11; Rom 14:10; 1 Cor 11:27-30; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27-28; 10:31; 12:28-29; Jas 5:19-20; 1 Pet 4:5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Purge the Evil<\/h3>\n<p>Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2).<\/p>\n<p>God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:14; Heb 12:28-29). Such cleansing is meant to heal the community of believers and deter others from rebelling against the Lord (Deut 17:13).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God’s judgment among his people was often immediate (see, e.g., Num 11:1-3; 16:1-50; Josh 7). God thus made his people keenly aware of his demand for obedience and of the penalty for those who did not comply.<\/p>\n<p>God’s retribution is now reserved for the future day of judgment, when the sins of the unrighteous will be exposed and judged (Rom 14:10; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27; 1 Pet 4:5). However, some instances of calamity can be understood as God’s judgment on his disobedient children (e.g., Acts 5:1-11; see 1 Cor 11:27-30). It is still a “terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb 10:31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 19:1-2; Deut 9:3-6; 13:5; 17:2-13; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Chr 34:3-8; Isa 1:24-26; 4:2-6; 33:14; Ezek 20:32-38; Matt 18:8-9; Acts 5:1-11; Rom 14:10; 1 Cor 11:27-30; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27-28; 10:31; 12:28-29; Jas 5:19-20; 1 Pet 4:5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Purge the Evil Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2). God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:1...","summary_en":"Purge the Evil Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2). God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88515,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Holy War","title_en":"Holy War","content_ro":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","summary_en":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88562,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","title_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","content_ro":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\n<p>Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\n<p>But what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\n<p>To understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>Because we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\n<p>None of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\n<p>Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\n<p>But what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\n<p>To understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>Because we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\n<p>None of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","summary_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89347,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Dangers of Sin","title_en":"The Dangers of Sin","content_ro":"<h3>The Dangers of Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Choosing sin rather than faithfulness to the only true God invites disaster. This has been true since the very beginning, when Adam and Eve’s disobedience brought curses and banishment from their initial home (Gen 3). And it was true throughout Israel’s history (see, e.g., Num 16; Josh 7; 2 Sam 11:1–12:19). The New Testament offers numerous warnings about the eternal consequences of unrepented sinful behavior (1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:19-21; Rev 22:15).<\/p>\n<p>The sinful acts of God’s people are prominent throughout the late monarchical period. Words such as <em>sin<\/em>, <em>evil<\/em>, and <em>wicked<\/em> appear frequently to assert that the kings of both Israel (2 Kgs 3:2; 13:2, 11; 14:24; 15:9, 18, 24, 28; 17:2) and Judah (8:18, 27; 21:2, 16, 20; 23:32, 37; 24:9, 19) did “what was evil in the <span>Lord<\/span>’s sight.”<\/p>\n<p>The northern kingdom was particularly culpable. Its kings and people were uniformly condemned for their godless ways (17:16-17, 22); the basic sin of apostate worship, introduced by Jeroboam I, continued in Israel until the end (10:29; 17:21-23; 23:15). God repeatedly warned the people through his prophets (17:13) and brought the chastisement of foreign invaders (13:3, 7). Nothing moved the Israelites’ hearts, for they were set in their ways (13:6; 17:14-17). Eventually God allowed foreign invaders to defeat them and occupy their land, sending many into exile (17:18, 20-23).<\/p>\n<p>The people of Judah were not innocent either. Many of their kings were guilty of gross wickedness, and Judean society grew increasingly apostate and followed “the evil practices that Israel had introduced” (17:19). Despite God’s repeated acts of kindness (e.g., 19:32-36) and warnings delivered through his prophets (21:8-15), the people persisted in their sin, and God’s judgment once again fell (21:10-15; 23:26-27; 24:1-4; 25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>Where there is genuine repentance, God will graciously forgive his people and remit the penalty. But how much better to be faithful to God’s Word (2 Kgs 18:5-6; 23:25; Ps 119:9-11, 33-37; 2 Tim 4:7; Rev 2:10), so that God’s blessings (Ps 112:1; 119:1-2; 144:15) might bring success (2 Kgs 18:7; see also 2 Chr 26:4-5; Prov 3:1-10; 2 Cor 3:5). God’s people need to give God first place in their lives (1 Kgs 18:21, 36-39; see Deut 6:13; 10:12-13; Mic 6:8; Matt 6:33), pray for God’s persevering grace (Ps 19:13), and let the word of God be their guide (Ps 119:9; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:20-21; Exod 34:7; Lev 26:14-46; Num 15:30-31; Deut 31:16-18; 1 Kgs 8:46-51; 2 Kgs 8:18, 27; 2 Kgs 13:1-7; 14:23-24; 17:13-23; 18:9-12; 21:8-16; 23:25-27; 24:1-3, 19–25:21; 2 Chr 7:14; 33:12-13; Ps 119:9-11, 33-37; Jer 44:2-6; Mic 6:8; Matt 6:33; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:16; 4:7; Rev 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Dangers of Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Choosing sin rather than faithfulness to the only true God invites disaster. This has been true since the very beginning, when Adam and Eve’s disobedience brought curses and banishment from their initial home (Gen 3). And it was true throughout Israel’s history (see, e.g., Num 16; Josh 7; 2 Sam 11:1–12:19). The New Testament offers numerous warnings about the eternal consequences of unrepented sinful behavior (1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:19-21; Rev 22:15).<\/p>\n<p>The sinful acts of God’s people are prominent throughout the late monarchical period. Words such as <em>sin<\/em>, <em>evil<\/em>, and <em>wicked<\/em> appear frequently to assert that the kings of both Israel (2 Kgs 3:2; 13:2, 11; 14:24; 15:9, 18, 24, 28; 17:2) and Judah (8:18, 27; 21:2, 16, 20; 23:32, 37; 24:9, 19) did “what was evil in the <span>Lord<\/span>’s sight.”<\/p>\n<p>The northern kingdom was particularly culpable. Its kings and people were uniformly condemned for their godless ways (17:16-17, 22); the basic sin of apostate worship, introduced by Jeroboam I, continued in Israel until the end (10:29; 17:21-23; 23:15). God repeatedly warned the people through his prophets (17:13) and brought the chastisement of foreign invaders (13:3, 7). Nothing moved the Israelites’ hearts, for they were set in their ways (13:6; 17:14-17). Eventually God allowed foreign invaders to defeat them and occupy their land, sending many into exile (17:18, 20-23).<\/p>\n<p>The people of Judah were not innocent either. Many of their kings were guilty of gross wickedness, and Judean society grew increasingly apostate and followed “the evil practices that Israel had introduced” (17:19). Despite God’s repeated acts of kindness (e.g., 19:32-36) and warnings delivered through his prophets (21:8-15), the people persisted in their sin, and God’s judgment once again fell (21:10-15; 23:26-27; 24:1-4; 25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>Where there is genuine repentance, God will graciously forgive his people and remit the penalty. But how much better to be faithful to God’s Word (2 Kgs 18:5-6; 23:25; Ps 119:9-11, 33-37; 2 Tim 4:7; Rev 2:10), so that God’s blessings (Ps 112:1; 119:1-2; 144:15) might bring success (2 Kgs 18:7; see also 2 Chr 26:4-5; Prov 3:1-10; 2 Cor 3:5). God’s people need to give God first place in their lives (1 Kgs 18:21, 36-39; see Deut 6:13; 10:12-13; Mic 6:8; Matt 6:33), pray for God’s persevering grace (Ps 19:13), and let the word of God be their guide (Ps 119:9; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:20-21; Exod 34:7; Lev 26:14-46; Num 15:30-31; Deut 31:16-18; 1 Kgs 8:46-51; 2 Kgs 8:18, 27; 2 Kgs 13:1-7; 14:23-24; 17:13-23; 18:9-12; 21:8-16; 23:25-27; 24:1-3, 19–25:21; 2 Chr 7:14; 33:12-13; Ps 119:9-11, 33-37; Jer 44:2-6; Mic 6:8; Matt 6:33; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:16; 4:7; Rev 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Dangers of Sin Choosing sin rather than faithfulness to the only true God invites disaster. This has been true since the very beginning, when Adam and Eve’s disobedience brought curses and banishment from their initial home (Gen 3). And it was true throughout Israel’s history (see, e.g., Num 16; Josh 7; 2 Sam 11:1–12:19). The New Testament offers numerous warnings about the eternal consequences of unrepented sinful behavior (1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:19-21; Rev 22:15). The sinful acts of God’s ...","summary_en":"The Dangers of Sin Choosing sin rather than faithfulness to the only true God invites disaster. This has been true since the very beginning, when Adam and Eve’s disobedience brought curses and banishment from their initial home (Gen 3). And it was true throughout Israel’s history (see, e.g., Num 16; Josh 7; 2 Sam 11:1–12:19). The New Testament offers numerous warnings about the eternal consequences of unrepented sinful behavior (1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:19-21; Rev 22:15). The sinful acts of God’s ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115022,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Retribution","title_en":"Retribution","content_ro":"<h3>Retribution<\/h3>\n<p>God gave humans the commission of procreating and caring for the world (Gen 1:28). But as humanity multiplied, spiritual wickedness, violence, and murder also multiplied (4:8, 23; 6:5, 11-13), resulting in a corrupt world that required cleansing.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the Flood was to enact God’s global cleansing and retribution against evildoers. <em>Retribution<\/em> means “giving what is due” and usually refers to recompense for wrongdoing. Retribution is motivated by the conviction that moral order is woven into the fabric of the world and must be maintained or restored (see Ps 7:14-16; Prov 11:17-21; 26:27).<\/p>\n<p>God maintains moral order by meting out justice, punishing wickedness, and rewarding right behavior (Gal 6:7-8). Since God oversees the world, it is never entirely overwhelmed by moral chaos; God holds people accountable for what they do. The judgment and exile of Adam and Eve (Gen 3:8-24), Cain’s sentence (4:10-15), and the worldwide flood and annihilation (chs 6–7) are examples of God’s retribution. These events reveal a sovereign God who exacts just punishment in the context of his good intentions for the world (see also Num 16; Deut 30:15-20; Josh 7; Mic 2:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Retribution is an application of God’s righteousness; it purifies the world for his kingdom of peace. Through retribution, the divine King proclaims his universal rule and exercises his justice on all who reject his rule or defy his commands (Deut 7:10; Ps 149; Prov 15:25; Mic 5:15; 1 Cor 16:22; Gal 1:8-9; 2 Thes 1:5-10).<\/p>\n<p>For God’s people, retribution serves as his discipline. It is intended to restore covenant fellowship with him (see Isa 44:22; Jer 3:12-14; Lam 3:19-33; Hos 14:1-2; Joel 2:12-13; see also Heb 12:5-11). When God’s people experience his chastening, they can respond in hope because God’s truth and righteousness will triumph (Ps 58:10-11), and God will redeem and restore his people who trust in him (Lev 26:40-45; Hos 2:2-23).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:1–7:24; Lev 26:14-39; Ps 7:6-17; 57:6; 95:8-11; Prov 6:27-35; 26:27; Mic 2:1-3; Rom 2:5-16; Gal 6:7-8; Heb 10:26-31; 12:5-11, 25-29<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Retribution<\/h3>\n<p>God gave humans the commission of procreating and caring for the world (Gen 1:28). But as humanity multiplied, spiritual wickedness, violence, and murder also multiplied (4:8, 23; 6:5, 11-13), resulting in a corrupt world that required cleansing.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the Flood was to enact God’s global cleansing and retribution against evildoers. <em>Retribution<\/em> means “giving what is due” and usually refers to recompense for wrongdoing. Retribution is motivated by the conviction that moral order is woven into the fabric of the world and must be maintained or restored (see Ps 7:14-16; Prov 11:17-21; 26:27).<\/p>\n<p>God maintains moral order by meting out justice, punishing wickedness, and rewarding right behavior (Gal 6:7-8). Since God oversees the world, it is never entirely overwhelmed by moral chaos; God holds people accountable for what they do. The judgment and exile of Adam and Eve (Gen 3:8-24), Cain’s sentence (4:10-15), and the worldwide flood and annihilation (chs 6–7) are examples of God’s retribution. These events reveal a sovereign God who exacts just punishment in the context of his good intentions for the world (see also Num 16; Deut 30:15-20; Josh 7; Mic 2:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Retribution is an application of God’s righteousness; it purifies the world for his kingdom of peace. Through retribution, the divine King proclaims his universal rule and exercises his justice on all who reject his rule or defy his commands (Deut 7:10; Ps 149; Prov 15:25; Mic 5:15; 1 Cor 16:22; Gal 1:8-9; 2 Thes 1:5-10).<\/p>\n<p>For God’s people, retribution serves as his discipline. It is intended to restore covenant fellowship with him (see Isa 44:22; Jer 3:12-14; Lam 3:19-33; Hos 14:1-2; Joel 2:12-13; see also Heb 12:5-11). When God’s people experience his chastening, they can respond in hope because God’s truth and righteousness will triumph (Ps 58:10-11), and God will redeem and restore his people who trust in him (Lev 26:40-45; Hos 2:2-23).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:1–7:24; Lev 26:14-39; Ps 7:6-17; 57:6; 95:8-11; Prov 6:27-35; 26:27; Mic 2:1-3; Rom 2:5-16; Gal 6:7-8; Heb 10:26-31; 12:5-11, 25-29<\/p>","summary_ro":"Retribution God gave humans the commission of procreating and caring for the world (Gen 1:28). But as humanity multiplied, spiritual wickedness, violence, and murder also multiplied (4:8, 23; 6:5, 11-13), resulting in a corrupt world that required cleansing. The purpose of the Flood was to enact God’s global cleansing and retribution against evildoers. Retribution means “giving what is due” and usually refers to recompense for wrongdoing. Retribution is motivated by the conviction that moral ...","summary_en":"Retribution God gave humans the commission of procreating and caring for the world (Gen 1:28). But as humanity multiplied, spiritual wickedness, violence, and murder also multiplied (4:8, 23; 6:5, 11-13), resulting in a corrupt world that required cleansing. The purpose of the Flood was to enact God’s global cleansing and retribution against evildoers. Retribution means “giving what is due” and usually refers to recompense for wrongdoing. Retribution is motivated by the conviction that moral ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115614,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Identity","title_en":"Community Identity","content_ro":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","summary_en":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116064,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Purge the Evil","title_en":"Purge the Evil","content_ro":"<h3>Purge the Evil<\/h3>\n<p>Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2).<\/p>\n<p>God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:14; Heb 12:28-29). Such cleansing is meant to heal the community of believers and deter others from rebelling against the Lord (Deut 17:13).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God’s judgment among his people was often immediate (see, e.g., Num 11:1-3; 16:1-50; Josh 7). God thus made his people keenly aware of his demand for obedience and of the penalty for those who did not comply.<\/p>\n<p>God’s retribution is now reserved for the future day of judgment, when the sins of the unrighteous will be exposed and judged (Rom 14:10; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27; 1 Pet 4:5). However, some instances of calamity can be understood as God’s judgment on his disobedient children (e.g., Acts 5:1-11; see 1 Cor 11:27-30). It is still a “terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb 10:31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 19:1-2; Deut 9:3-6; 13:5; 17:2-13; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Chr 34:3-8; Isa 1:24-26; 4:2-6; 33:14; Ezek 20:32-38; Matt 18:8-9; Acts 5:1-11; Rom 14:10; 1 Cor 11:27-30; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27-28; 10:31; 12:28-29; Jas 5:19-20; 1 Pet 4:5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Purge the Evil<\/h3>\n<p>Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2).<\/p>\n<p>God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:14; Heb 12:28-29). Such cleansing is meant to heal the community of believers and deter others from rebelling against the Lord (Deut 17:13).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God’s judgment among his people was often immediate (see, e.g., Num 11:1-3; 16:1-50; Josh 7). God thus made his people keenly aware of his demand for obedience and of the penalty for those who did not comply.<\/p>\n<p>God’s retribution is now reserved for the future day of judgment, when the sins of the unrighteous will be exposed and judged (Rom 14:10; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27; 1 Pet 4:5). However, some instances of calamity can be understood as God’s judgment on his disobedient children (e.g., Acts 5:1-11; see 1 Cor 11:27-30). It is still a “terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb 10:31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 19:1-2; Deut 9:3-6; 13:5; 17:2-13; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Chr 34:3-8; Isa 1:24-26; 4:2-6; 33:14; Ezek 20:32-38; Matt 18:8-9; Acts 5:1-11; Rom 14:10; 1 Cor 11:27-30; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27-28; 10:31; 12:28-29; Jas 5:19-20; 1 Pet 4:5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Purge the Evil Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2). God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:1...","summary_en":"Purge the Evil Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2). God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116141,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Holy War","title_en":"Holy War","content_ro":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","summary_en":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116188,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","title_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","content_ro":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\n<p>Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\n<p>But what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\n<p>To understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>Because we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\n<p>None of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\n<p>Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\n<p>But what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\n<p>To understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>Because we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\n<p>None of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","summary_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116973,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Dangers of Sin","title_en":"The Dangers of Sin","content_ro":"<h3>The Dangers of Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Choosing sin rather than faithfulness to the only true God invites disaster. This has been true since the very beginning, when Adam and Eve’s disobedience brought curses and banishment from their initial home (Gen 3). And it was true throughout Israel’s history (see, e.g., Num 16; Josh 7; 2 Sam 11:1–12:19). The New Testament offers numerous warnings about the eternal consequences of unrepented sinful behavior (1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:19-21; Rev 22:15).<\/p>\n<p>The sinful acts of God’s people are prominent throughout the late monarchical period. Words such as <em>sin<\/em>, <em>evil<\/em>, and <em>wicked<\/em> appear frequently to assert that the kings of both Israel (2 Kgs 3:2; 13:2, 11; 14:24; 15:9, 18, 24, 28; 17:2) and Judah (8:18, 27; 21:2, 16, 20; 23:32, 37; 24:9, 19) did “what was evil in the <span>Lord<\/span>’s sight.”<\/p>\n<p>The northern kingdom was particularly culpable. Its kings and people were uniformly condemned for their godless ways (17:16-17, 22); the basic sin of apostate worship, introduced by Jeroboam I, continued in Israel until the end (10:29; 17:21-23; 23:15). God repeatedly warned the people through his prophets (17:13) and brought the chastisement of foreign invaders (13:3, 7). Nothing moved the Israelites’ hearts, for they were set in their ways (13:6; 17:14-17). Eventually God allowed foreign invaders to defeat them and occupy their land, sending many into exile (17:18, 20-23).<\/p>\n<p>The people of Judah were not innocent either. Many of their kings were guilty of gross wickedness, and Judean society grew increasingly apostate and followed “the evil practices that Israel had introduced” (17:19). Despite God’s repeated acts of kindness (e.g., 19:32-36) and warnings delivered through his prophets (21:8-15), the people persisted in their sin, and God’s judgment once again fell (21:10-15; 23:26-27; 24:1-4; 25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>Where there is genuine repentance, God will graciously forgive his people and remit the penalty. But how much better to be faithful to God’s Word (2 Kgs 18:5-6; 23:25; Ps 119:9-11, 33-37; 2 Tim 4:7; Rev 2:10), so that God’s blessings (Ps 112:1; 119:1-2; 144:15) might bring success (2 Kgs 18:7; see also 2 Chr 26:4-5; Prov 3:1-10; 2 Cor 3:5). God’s people need to give God first place in their lives (1 Kgs 18:21, 36-39; see Deut 6:13; 10:12-13; Mic 6:8; Matt 6:33), pray for God’s persevering grace (Ps 19:13), and let the word of God be their guide (Ps 119:9; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:20-21; Exod 34:7; Lev 26:14-46; Num 15:30-31; Deut 31:16-18; 1 Kgs 8:46-51; 2 Kgs 8:18, 27; 2 Kgs 13:1-7; 14:23-24; 17:13-23; 18:9-12; 21:8-16; 23:25-27; 24:1-3, 19–25:21; 2 Chr 7:14; 33:12-13; Ps 119:9-11, 33-37; Jer 44:2-6; Mic 6:8; Matt 6:33; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:16; 4:7; Rev 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Dangers of Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Choosing sin rather than faithfulness to the only true God invites disaster. This has been true since the very beginning, when Adam and Eve’s disobedience brought curses and banishment from their initial home (Gen 3). And it was true throughout Israel’s history (see, e.g., Num 16; Josh 7; 2 Sam 11:1–12:19). The New Testament offers numerous warnings about the eternal consequences of unrepented sinful behavior (1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:19-21; Rev 22:15).<\/p>\n<p>The sinful acts of God’s people are prominent throughout the late monarchical period. Words such as <em>sin<\/em>, <em>evil<\/em>, and <em>wicked<\/em> appear frequently to assert that the kings of both Israel (2 Kgs 3:2; 13:2, 11; 14:24; 15:9, 18, 24, 28; 17:2) and Judah (8:18, 27; 21:2, 16, 20; 23:32, 37; 24:9, 19) did “what was evil in the <span>Lord<\/span>’s sight.”<\/p>\n<p>The northern kingdom was particularly culpable. Its kings and people were uniformly condemned for their godless ways (17:16-17, 22); the basic sin of apostate worship, introduced by Jeroboam I, continued in Israel until the end (10:29; 17:21-23; 23:15). God repeatedly warned the people through his prophets (17:13) and brought the chastisement of foreign invaders (13:3, 7). Nothing moved the Israelites’ hearts, for they were set in their ways (13:6; 17:14-17). Eventually God allowed foreign invaders to defeat them and occupy their land, sending many into exile (17:18, 20-23).<\/p>\n<p>The people of Judah were not innocent either. Many of their kings were guilty of gross wickedness, and Judean society grew increasingly apostate and followed “the evil practices that Israel had introduced” (17:19). Despite God’s repeated acts of kindness (e.g., 19:32-36) and warnings delivered through his prophets (21:8-15), the people persisted in their sin, and God’s judgment once again fell (21:10-15; 23:26-27; 24:1-4; 25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>Where there is genuine repentance, God will graciously forgive his people and remit the penalty. But how much better to be faithful to God’s Word (2 Kgs 18:5-6; 23:25; Ps 119:9-11, 33-37; 2 Tim 4:7; Rev 2:10), so that God’s blessings (Ps 112:1; 119:1-2; 144:15) might bring success (2 Kgs 18:7; see also 2 Chr 26:4-5; Prov 3:1-10; 2 Cor 3:5). God’s people need to give God first place in their lives (1 Kgs 18:21, 36-39; see Deut 6:13; 10:12-13; Mic 6:8; Matt 6:33), pray for God’s persevering grace (Ps 19:13), and let the word of God be their guide (Ps 119:9; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:20-21; Exod 34:7; Lev 26:14-46; Num 15:30-31; Deut 31:16-18; 1 Kgs 8:46-51; 2 Kgs 8:18, 27; 2 Kgs 13:1-7; 14:23-24; 17:13-23; 18:9-12; 21:8-16; 23:25-27; 24:1-3, 19–25:21; 2 Chr 7:14; 33:12-13; Ps 119:9-11, 33-37; Jer 44:2-6; Mic 6:8; Matt 6:33; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:16; 4:7; Rev 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Dangers of Sin Choosing sin rather than faithfulness to the only true God invites disaster. This has been true since the very beginning, when Adam and Eve’s disobedience brought curses and banishment from their initial home (Gen 3). And it was true throughout Israel’s history (see, e.g., Num 16; Josh 7; 2 Sam 11:1–12:19). The New Testament offers numerous warnings about the eternal consequences of unrepented sinful behavior (1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:19-21; Rev 22:15). The sinful acts of God’s ...","summary_en":"The Dangers of Sin Choosing sin rather than faithfulness to the only true God invites disaster. This has been true since the very beginning, when Adam and Eve’s disobedience brought curses and banishment from their initial home (Gen 3). And it was true throughout Israel’s history (see, e.g., Num 16; Josh 7; 2 Sam 11:1–12:19). The New Testament offers numerous warnings about the eternal consequences of unrepented sinful behavior (1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:19-21; Rev 22:15). The sinful acts of God’s ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":142648,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Retribution","title_en":"Retribution","content_ro":"<h3>Retribution<\/h3>\n<p>God gave humans the commission of procreating and caring for the world (Gen 1:28). But as humanity multiplied, spiritual wickedness, violence, and murder also multiplied (4:8, 23; 6:5, 11-13), resulting in a corrupt world that required cleansing.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the Flood was to enact God’s global cleansing and retribution against evildoers. <em>Retribution<\/em> means “giving what is due” and usually refers to recompense for wrongdoing. Retribution is motivated by the conviction that moral order is woven into the fabric of the world and must be maintained or restored (see Ps 7:14-16; Prov 11:17-21; 26:27).<\/p>\n<p>God maintains moral order by meting out justice, punishing wickedness, and rewarding right behavior (Gal 6:7-8). Since God oversees the world, it is never entirely overwhelmed by moral chaos; God holds people accountable for what they do. The judgment and exile of Adam and Eve (Gen 3:8-24), Cain’s sentence (4:10-15), and the worldwide flood and annihilation (chs 6–7) are examples of God’s retribution. These events reveal a sovereign God who exacts just punishment in the context of his good intentions for the world (see also Num 16; Deut 30:15-20; Josh 7; Mic 2:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Retribution is an application of God’s righteousness; it purifies the world for his kingdom of peace. Through retribution, the divine King proclaims his universal rule and exercises his justice on all who reject his rule or defy his commands (Deut 7:10; Ps 149; Prov 15:25; Mic 5:15; 1 Cor 16:22; Gal 1:8-9; 2 Thes 1:5-10).<\/p>\n<p>For God’s people, retribution serves as his discipline. It is intended to restore covenant fellowship with him (see Isa 44:22; Jer 3:12-14; Lam 3:19-33; Hos 14:1-2; Joel 2:12-13; see also Heb 12:5-11). When God’s people experience his chastening, they can respond in hope because God’s truth and righteousness will triumph (Ps 58:10-11), and God will redeem and restore his people who trust in him (Lev 26:40-45; Hos 2:2-23).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:1–7:24; Lev 26:14-39; Ps 7:6-17; 57:6; 95:8-11; Prov 6:27-35; 26:27; Mic 2:1-3; Rom 2:5-16; Gal 6:7-8; Heb 10:26-31; 12:5-11, 25-29<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Retribution<\/h3>\n<p>God gave humans the commission of procreating and caring for the world (Gen 1:28). But as humanity multiplied, spiritual wickedness, violence, and murder also multiplied (4:8, 23; 6:5, 11-13), resulting in a corrupt world that required cleansing.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the Flood was to enact God’s global cleansing and retribution against evildoers. <em>Retribution<\/em> means “giving what is due” and usually refers to recompense for wrongdoing. Retribution is motivated by the conviction that moral order is woven into the fabric of the world and must be maintained or restored (see Ps 7:14-16; Prov 11:17-21; 26:27).<\/p>\n<p>God maintains moral order by meting out justice, punishing wickedness, and rewarding right behavior (Gal 6:7-8). Since God oversees the world, it is never entirely overwhelmed by moral chaos; God holds people accountable for what they do. The judgment and exile of Adam and Eve (Gen 3:8-24), Cain’s sentence (4:10-15), and the worldwide flood and annihilation (chs 6–7) are examples of God’s retribution. These events reveal a sovereign God who exacts just punishment in the context of his good intentions for the world (see also Num 16; Deut 30:15-20; Josh 7; Mic 2:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Retribution is an application of God’s righteousness; it purifies the world for his kingdom of peace. Through retribution, the divine King proclaims his universal rule and exercises his justice on all who reject his rule or defy his commands (Deut 7:10; Ps 149; Prov 15:25; Mic 5:15; 1 Cor 16:22; Gal 1:8-9; 2 Thes 1:5-10).<\/p>\n<p>For God’s people, retribution serves as his discipline. It is intended to restore covenant fellowship with him (see Isa 44:22; Jer 3:12-14; Lam 3:19-33; Hos 14:1-2; Joel 2:12-13; see also Heb 12:5-11). When God’s people experience his chastening, they can respond in hope because God’s truth and righteousness will triumph (Ps 58:10-11), and God will redeem and restore his people who trust in him (Lev 26:40-45; Hos 2:2-23).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:1–7:24; Lev 26:14-39; Ps 7:6-17; 57:6; 95:8-11; Prov 6:27-35; 26:27; Mic 2:1-3; Rom 2:5-16; Gal 6:7-8; Heb 10:26-31; 12:5-11, 25-29<\/p>","summary_ro":"Retribution God gave humans the commission of procreating and caring for the world (Gen 1:28). But as humanity multiplied, spiritual wickedness, violence, and murder also multiplied (4:8, 23; 6:5, 11-13), resulting in a corrupt world that required cleansing. The purpose of the Flood was to enact God’s global cleansing and retribution against evildoers. Retribution means “giving what is due” and usually refers to recompense for wrongdoing. Retribution is motivated by the conviction that moral ...","summary_en":"Retribution God gave humans the commission of procreating and caring for the world (Gen 1:28). But as humanity multiplied, spiritual wickedness, violence, and murder also multiplied (4:8, 23; 6:5, 11-13), resulting in a corrupt world that required cleansing. The purpose of the Flood was to enact God’s global cleansing and retribution against evildoers. Retribution means “giving what is due” and usually refers to recompense for wrongdoing. Retribution is motivated by the conviction that moral ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143240,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Identity","title_en":"Community Identity","content_ro":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","summary_en":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143690,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Purge the Evil","title_en":"Purge the Evil","content_ro":"<h3>Purge the Evil<\/h3>\n<p>Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2).<\/p>\n<p>God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:14; Heb 12:28-29). Such cleansing is meant to heal the community of believers and deter others from rebelling against the Lord (Deut 17:13).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God’s judgment among his people was often immediate (see, e.g., Num 11:1-3; 16:1-50; Josh 7). God thus made his people keenly aware of his demand for obedience and of the penalty for those who did not comply.<\/p>\n<p>God’s retribution is now reserved for the future day of judgment, when the sins of the unrighteous will be exposed and judged (Rom 14:10; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27; 1 Pet 4:5). However, some instances of calamity can be understood as God’s judgment on his disobedient children (e.g., Acts 5:1-11; see 1 Cor 11:27-30). It is still a “terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb 10:31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 19:1-2; Deut 9:3-6; 13:5; 17:2-13; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Chr 34:3-8; Isa 1:24-26; 4:2-6; 33:14; Ezek 20:32-38; Matt 18:8-9; Acts 5:1-11; Rom 14:10; 1 Cor 11:27-30; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27-28; 10:31; 12:28-29; Jas 5:19-20; 1 Pet 4:5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Purge the Evil<\/h3>\n<p>Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2).<\/p>\n<p>God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:14; Heb 12:28-29). Such cleansing is meant to heal the community of believers and deter others from rebelling against the Lord (Deut 17:13).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God’s judgment among his people was often immediate (see, e.g., Num 11:1-3; 16:1-50; Josh 7). God thus made his people keenly aware of his demand for obedience and of the penalty for those who did not comply.<\/p>\n<p>God’s retribution is now reserved for the future day of judgment, when the sins of the unrighteous will be exposed and judged (Rom 14:10; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27; 1 Pet 4:5). However, some instances of calamity can be understood as God’s judgment on his disobedient children (e.g., Acts 5:1-11; see 1 Cor 11:27-30). It is still a “terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb 10:31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 19:1-2; Deut 9:3-6; 13:5; 17:2-13; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Chr 34:3-8; Isa 1:24-26; 4:2-6; 33:14; Ezek 20:32-38; Matt 18:8-9; Acts 5:1-11; Rom 14:10; 1 Cor 11:27-30; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27-28; 10:31; 12:28-29; Jas 5:19-20; 1 Pet 4:5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Purge the Evil Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2). God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:1...","summary_en":"Purge the Evil Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2). God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143767,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Holy War","title_en":"Holy War","content_ro":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","summary_en":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143814,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","title_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","content_ro":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\n<p>Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\n<p>But what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\n<p>To understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>Because we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\n<p>None of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\n<p>Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\n<p>But what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\n<p>To understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>Because we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\n<p>None of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","summary_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144599,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Dangers of Sin","title_en":"The Dangers of Sin","content_ro":"<h3>The Dangers of Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Choosing sin rather than faithfulness to the only true God invites disaster. This has been true since the very beginning, when Adam and Eve’s disobedience brought curses and banishment from their initial home (Gen 3). And it was true throughout Israel’s history (see, e.g., Num 16; Josh 7; 2 Sam 11:1–12:19). The New Testament offers numerous warnings about the eternal consequences of unrepented sinful behavior (1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:19-21; Rev 22:15).<\/p>\n<p>The sinful acts of God’s people are prominent throughout the late monarchical period. Words such as <em>sin<\/em>, <em>evil<\/em>, and <em>wicked<\/em> appear frequently to assert that the kings of both Israel (2 Kgs 3:2; 13:2, 11; 14:24; 15:9, 18, 24, 28; 17:2) and Judah (8:18, 27; 21:2, 16, 20; 23:32, 37; 24:9, 19) did “what was evil in the <span>Lord<\/span>’s sight.”<\/p>\n<p>The northern kingdom was particularly culpable. Its kings and people were uniformly condemned for their godless ways (17:16-17, 22); the basic sin of apostate worship, introduced by Jeroboam I, continued in Israel until the end (10:29; 17:21-23; 23:15). God repeatedly warned the people through his prophets (17:13) and brought the chastisement of foreign invaders (13:3, 7). Nothing moved the Israelites’ hearts, for they were set in their ways (13:6; 17:14-17). Eventually God allowed foreign invaders to defeat them and occupy their land, sending many into exile (17:18, 20-23).<\/p>\n<p>The people of Judah were not innocent either. Many of their kings were guilty of gross wickedness, and Judean society grew increasingly apostate and followed “the evil practices that Israel had introduced” (17:19). Despite God’s repeated acts of kindness (e.g., 19:32-36) and warnings delivered through his prophets (21:8-15), the people persisted in their sin, and God’s judgment once again fell (21:10-15; 23:26-27; 24:1-4; 25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>Where there is genuine repentance, God will graciously forgive his people and remit the penalty. But how much better to be faithful to God’s Word (2 Kgs 18:5-6; 23:25; Ps 119:9-11, 33-37; 2 Tim 4:7; Rev 2:10), so that God’s blessings (Ps 112:1; 119:1-2; 144:15) might bring success (2 Kgs 18:7; see also 2 Chr 26:4-5; Prov 3:1-10; 2 Cor 3:5). God’s people need to give God first place in their lives (1 Kgs 18:21, 36-39; see Deut 6:13; 10:12-13; Mic 6:8; Matt 6:33), pray for God’s persevering grace (Ps 19:13), and let the word of God be their guide (Ps 119:9; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:20-21; Exod 34:7; Lev 26:14-46; Num 15:30-31; Deut 31:16-18; 1 Kgs 8:46-51; 2 Kgs 8:18, 27; 2 Kgs 13:1-7; 14:23-24; 17:13-23; 18:9-12; 21:8-16; 23:25-27; 24:1-3, 19–25:21; 2 Chr 7:14; 33:12-13; Ps 119:9-11, 33-37; Jer 44:2-6; Mic 6:8; Matt 6:33; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:16; 4:7; Rev 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Dangers of Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Choosing sin rather than faithfulness to the only true God invites disaster. This has been true since the very beginning, when Adam and Eve’s disobedience brought curses and banishment from their initial home (Gen 3). And it was true throughout Israel’s history (see, e.g., Num 16; Josh 7; 2 Sam 11:1–12:19). The New Testament offers numerous warnings about the eternal consequences of unrepented sinful behavior (1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:19-21; Rev 22:15).<\/p>\n<p>The sinful acts of God’s people are prominent throughout the late monarchical period. Words such as <em>sin<\/em>, <em>evil<\/em>, and <em>wicked<\/em> appear frequently to assert that the kings of both Israel (2 Kgs 3:2; 13:2, 11; 14:24; 15:9, 18, 24, 28; 17:2) and Judah (8:18, 27; 21:2, 16, 20; 23:32, 37; 24:9, 19) did “what was evil in the <span>Lord<\/span>’s sight.”<\/p>\n<p>The northern kingdom was particularly culpable. Its kings and people were uniformly condemned for their godless ways (17:16-17, 22); the basic sin of apostate worship, introduced by Jeroboam I, continued in Israel until the end (10:29; 17:21-23; 23:15). God repeatedly warned the people through his prophets (17:13) and brought the chastisement of foreign invaders (13:3, 7). Nothing moved the Israelites’ hearts, for they were set in their ways (13:6; 17:14-17). Eventually God allowed foreign invaders to defeat them and occupy their land, sending many into exile (17:18, 20-23).<\/p>\n<p>The people of Judah were not innocent either. Many of their kings were guilty of gross wickedness, and Judean society grew increasingly apostate and followed “the evil practices that Israel had introduced” (17:19). Despite God’s repeated acts of kindness (e.g., 19:32-36) and warnings delivered through his prophets (21:8-15), the people persisted in their sin, and God’s judgment once again fell (21:10-15; 23:26-27; 24:1-4; 25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>Where there is genuine repentance, God will graciously forgive his people and remit the penalty. But how much better to be faithful to God’s Word (2 Kgs 18:5-6; 23:25; Ps 119:9-11, 33-37; 2 Tim 4:7; Rev 2:10), so that God’s blessings (Ps 112:1; 119:1-2; 144:15) might bring success (2 Kgs 18:7; see also 2 Chr 26:4-5; Prov 3:1-10; 2 Cor 3:5). God’s people need to give God first place in their lives (1 Kgs 18:21, 36-39; see Deut 6:13; 10:12-13; Mic 6:8; Matt 6:33), pray for God’s persevering grace (Ps 19:13), and let the word of God be their guide (Ps 119:9; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:20-21; Exod 34:7; Lev 26:14-46; Num 15:30-31; Deut 31:16-18; 1 Kgs 8:46-51; 2 Kgs 8:18, 27; 2 Kgs 13:1-7; 14:23-24; 17:13-23; 18:9-12; 21:8-16; 23:25-27; 24:1-3, 19–25:21; 2 Chr 7:14; 33:12-13; Ps 119:9-11, 33-37; Jer 44:2-6; Mic 6:8; Matt 6:33; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:16; 4:7; Rev 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Dangers of Sin Choosing sin rather than faithfulness to the only true God invites disaster. This has been true since the very beginning, when Adam and Eve’s disobedience brought curses and banishment from their initial home (Gen 3). And it was true throughout Israel’s history (see, e.g., Num 16; Josh 7; 2 Sam 11:1–12:19). The New Testament offers numerous warnings about the eternal consequences of unrepented sinful behavior (1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:19-21; Rev 22:15). The sinful acts of God’s ...","summary_en":"The Dangers of Sin Choosing sin rather than faithfulness to the only true God invites disaster. This has been true since the very beginning, when Adam and Eve’s disobedience brought curses and banishment from their initial home (Gen 3). And it was true throughout Israel’s history (see, e.g., Num 16; Josh 7; 2 Sam 11:1–12:19). The New Testament offers numerous warnings about the eternal consequences of unrepented sinful behavior (1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:19-21; Rev 22:15). The sinful acts of God’s ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":4411,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Beth-Aven","title_en":"Beth-Aven","content_ro":"<h3>BETH-AVEN<\/h3>\n<li>1. Town in Benjamin’s territory, located west of Michmash on the border of the wilderness, near Ai, to the east of Bethel (Jos 7:2; 18:12; 1 Sm 13:5; 14:23).<\/li>\n<li>2. Term used by Hosea contemptuously to refer to Bethel, an ancient center of worship, because the “House of God” (Bethel) had become a “house of wickedness” (Beth-aven or just Aven; Hos 4:15; 5:8; 10:5). <em>See<\/em> Aven #2.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>BETH-AVEN<\/h3>\n<li>1. Town in Benjamin’s territory, located west of Michmash on the border of the wilderness, near Ai, to the east of Bethel (Jos 7:2; 18:12; 1 Sm 13:5; 14:23).<\/li>\n<li>2. Term used by Hosea contemptuously to refer to Bethel, an ancient center of worship, because the “House of God” (Bethel) had become a “house of wickedness” (Beth-aven or just Aven; Hos 4:15; 5:8; 10:5). <em>See<\/em> Aven #2.<\/li>","summary_ro":"BETH-AVEN 1. Town in Benjamin’s territory, located west of Michmash on the border of the wilderness, near Ai, to the east of Bethel (Jos 7:2; 18:12; 1 Sm 13:5; 14:23). 2. Term used by Hosea contemptuously to refer to Bethel, an ancient center of worship, because the “House of God” (Bethel) had become a “house of wickedness” (Beth-aven or just Aven; Hos 4:15; 5:8; 10:5). See Aven #2.","summary_en":"BETH-AVEN 1. Town in Benjamin’s territory, located west of Michmash on the border of the wilderness, near Ai, to the east of Bethel (Jos 7:2; 18:12; 1 Sm 13:5; 14:23). 2. Term used by Hosea contemptuously to refer to Bethel, an ancient center of worship, because the “House of God” (Bethel) had become a “house of wickedness” (Beth-aven or just Aven; Hos 4:15; 5:8; 10:5). See Aven #2.","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20749,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Joshua","title_en":"Book of Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38140,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Warfare","title_en":"Warfare","content_ro":"<h3>WARFARE<\/h3>\n<p>The means by which one nation seeks to impose its will upon another by force. An index to the importance of warfare in antiquity is provided by the amount of technical skill directed to perfecting devices for destruction and defense.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MethodsofWarfare\">Methods of Warfare<\/p>\n<h5>Standard Combat<\/h5>\n<p>Cavalry units were introduced at the close of the second millennium <span>BC<\/span> and the beginning of the first. The cavalry charge provided a shock force to the great armies, and the cavalry’s mobility permitted concentration of firepower at decisive points. When the Assyrians coordinated their infantry, cavalry, and chariot corps into a powerful battle machine, smaller neighboring nations were more and more compelled to retreat behind their fortifications. They could not hope to engage the massive Assyrian army in standard combat in open terrain. No period is richer in illustrated monuments than Iron Age II; the Assyrian war reliefs present detailed illustrations of their conquests and the size of fortified cities. The few scenes depicting standard combat in open terrain show chariots charging from all directions and engaging the enemy at all stages of a battle. Other formations carry out mopping-up operations, finishing off pockets of enemy resistance remaining after the chariot charge.<\/p>\n<p>The factor of terrain was always very important. In standard combat on open terrain it became conventional to place the best troops on the right side of the line. A Greek commander, Epaminodas (d. 362 <span>BC<\/span>), introduced the variant of a slanting attack by a strengthened left wing, taking the Spartan army completely by surprise. Philip of Macedon and his son Alexander continued to surprise their enemies with variations on a plan of attack based on the phalanx.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Battle in Open Terrain: The Duel<\/h5>\n<p>During certain periods in the ancient Near East, the duel presented an alternative to standard combat. The duel was a contest between two champions who represented the contending forces. The two armies would agree in advance to abide by the outcome of the fight. The duel was meant to avoid the heavy casualties of full-scale warfare. The earliest detailed written account of this unique form of warfare occurs in the Tale of Sinuhe. A chamberlain in the royal court of the 12th dynasty, Sinuhe voluntarily went into exile and traveled to northern Palestine and Syria, where he lived among Semitic tribes. There he was challenged to a duel by a local champion, whom he defeated and whose goods he then plundered.<\/p>\n<p>Although the duel was common among other armies in subsequent periods, it was evidently unknown to Israel before the encounter between David and Goliath (1 Sm 17). The Philistine army had penetrated Judah as far as Socoh and were arrayed on one hill. Drawn up against them on an opposite hill was the army of Saul. The valley of Elah separated the two camps. The Israelites were challenged daily by the Philistine champion, Goliath, who proposed that the battle be decided through combat between two warriors. David accepted his proposal, but when he killed Goliath, the Philistines fled, unwilling to honor the terms of the prior agreement. The Israelite army then entered the contest, pursuing the Philistines and inflicting heavy casualties.<\/p>\n<h5>Assaults on Fortified Cities<\/h5>\n<p>Most cities in the ancient Near East were located at sites that could be defended against attack and that possessed economic advantages. An assault on a fortified city presented opposite problems for attacker and defender. The actions of one were a direct response to the actions of the other. Systems of defense were intended to thwart methods of attack, which in turn were designed to penetrate systems of defense.<\/p>\n<p>There were five possible ways of conquering a fortified city: penetration from above the fortifications; direct penetration through the fortifications; penetration from below the fortifications; siege; and penetration by ruse. On many occasions, a combination of two or more methods was necessary to breach the defensive network.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical narrative of the conquest of Shechem by Abimelech (Jgs 9) gives an account of an assault on a fortified city in the period of the judges (Iron Age I). When the people of Shechem and their allies rebelled against Abimelech, he retaliated by attacking the city, advancing his army of mercenaries by night and launching an assault from ambush positions at dawn (9:32-35). The men of Shechem engaged in open battle outside the city gates but were forced to retreat behind the security of the city walls. The next day Abimelech directed his assault against the city itself. Dividing his forces into three groups, he assumed direct command of one, which he committed to an attack on the city gates at the decisive moment of battle (vv 43-44). The gate was breached and the main walls seized, but the city’s surviving defenders fled to an inner citadel, the temple of Baal-berith.<\/p>\n<p>Many reliefs depict groups of soldiers defending an inner citadel after a city’s wall was breached. Archaeological excavations at Shechem confirm that its temple, like those in other Canaanite cities, was built in the form of a fortified tower, supported by stout bastions near the entrance. The tower of Shechem was thus strongly fortified and occupied only a small area, enabling its defenders to concentrate their firepower on Abimelech’s troops. Since it could not be taken by storm, Abimelech ordered his soldiers to use their battle-axes to cut brushwood, which was piled against the stronghold and set on fire (Jgs 9:48-49). All of the defenders within the tower died.<\/p>\n<p>An assault on an inner citadel was always a hazardous undertaking for an attacking army, as shown in the sequel to the capture of Shechem’s tower. Abimelech turned his attention next to the city of Thebez and followed the same plan of assault that had proved successful at Shechem. But as he was preparing to burn the door of the tower to which the defenders had fled, his skull was crushed by a piece of millstone dropped on him by a woman (Jgs 9:50-53). The incident was remembered and became proverbial for the danger of approaching too closely the walls of a fortified tower (2 Sm 11:19-21).<\/p>\n<h5>Communications and Intelligence<\/h5>\n<p>From the patriarchal period (middle Bronze period), we have detailed written information on the use of communications systems in wartime. The documents from Mari on the Euphrates provide evidence for a well-developed communications system based on signaling. Signals were flashed by torches or firebrands at night in accordance with a prearranged code. The system was widely used in Mesopotamia and elsewhere to call for immediate help when a city was under attack.<\/p>\n<p>In the late Bronze period horsemen were sometimes employed for isolated communication functions. Intelligence services played a role in planning and executing military operations. The importance of intelligence and the use of spies or scouts is stressed in the biblical accounts of the conquest of the land of Canaan. Before entering the land, Moses sent men on an espionage mission. He instructed them to gather information on the topography of the land, to observe the relative strength of its inhabitants, to determine whether the land was fertile, to survey the cities and see if they were fortified, and to report on the character of the land—whether it was capable of sustaining a large population (Nm 13:17-20).<\/p>\n<p>Tactical intelligence was very important. Joshua dispatched spies to Jericho and to Ai before beginning military operations against them (Jos 2:1; 7:2). The reports he received about the offensive spirit and strength of the Canaanites enabled him to formulate an attack plan. In the period of the judges the conquest of Bethel (Jgs 1:22-26) was due directly to intelligence gathered by a reconnaissance patrol. The tribes of Joseph sent out scouts to keep the city under observation. It was strongly fortified and seemed impregnable. The scouts captured a man who emerged from the city—presumably not through the main gate, which was shut tight, but through a concealed postern or tunnel. In exchange for his own life and the safety of his family, he disclosed the location of the passage leading beneath the walls. The city was penetrated through the tunnel and captured.<\/p>\n<h5>Attack and Penetration: The Breach<\/h5>\n<p>Direct penetration through the fortifications of an ancient city meant breaching the gate or the main walls by using hammers, axes, pikes, spears, swords, or a battering ram. Illustrated monuments and written documents indicate that early in the middle Bronze period fortified cities were being attacked with battering rams. The earliest known illustration of a ram appears in a siege scene in the wall paintings from Beni Hasan (20th century <span>BC<\/span>). The ram pictured is a relatively simple device, consisting of a hutlike structure with a slightly pointed roof, which could be moved near a fortress with the help of two parallel crossbars. The structure provided cover for two or three soldiers who operated by hand a very long pole with a sharp tip, presumably of metal.<\/p>\n<p>The Mari documents provide information for the period 200 years later. They mention the effectiveness of battering rams constructed largely of wood. Although very heavy, the siege weapon could be moved over long distances. One document speaks of the use of a wagon drawn by draft animals and of a boat to transport a battering ram to the site of a besieged city.<\/p>\n<p>Moving a battering ram into position always exposed the demolition unit to heavy fire from defenders on the walls above them. Its heaviness made it cumbersome to move. Moreover, the ground adjacent to the walls was usually rough, rocky, and steep. When the chosen point of penetration was a section of the wall, an assault force had to construct an earthen ramp, occasionally strengthened on the top surface and sides with wooden planks or stones. The ramp provided a track along which the battering ram could be moved from the foot of the slope to the outer wall. Once moved into operational position, the ram had to be braked to prevent it from rolling back. The building of such a ramp was evidently necessary in Joab’s campaign against the fortified city of Abel in Beth-maacah (2 Sm 20:15). The biblical account indicates that some sort of battering ram was in use in Israel under King David during the early monarchy.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest Assyrian reliefs show that protection of the penetration units was a major consideration. High, mobile assault towers constructed of wood operated in tandem with a battering ram. Such towers, moved into position near a breach operation and manned by archers, provided covering fire directed against the defenders on the wall. Siege towers neutralized the defenders’ advantage in firepower and drew fire away from the crew engaged in breaching the walls.<\/p>\n<p>The details of the Assyrian reliefs make it possible to visualize clearly the fate of Jerusalem, as announced to the prophet Ezekiel (Ez 4:1-3; 21:22). The gate was the focal point of attack because it was the weakest point in the wall. Moreover, the path leading up to the gate made construction of a special ramp unnecessary. In the demolition of a gate, swords were sometimes used to pry the doors loose and to tear down hinges. Wooden doors unprotected by metal were often set on fire.<\/p>\n<p>The battering ram continued to be used as an engine for breaching walls in the Hellenistic-Roman period. In 63 <span>BC<\/span> the Roman commander Pompey brought up battering rams from Tyre against the defenders of Jerusalem, and with them penetrated the fortified wall that enclosed the temple. The siege machine shown on Trajan’s column had a beam with an iron head shaped like a ram. It was moved up to a wall in a frame protected by a wooden roof covered with clay or hides. A variation equipped for boring into a wall was used by Titus when besieging Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The battering ram was not the only device used to effect a breach in a wall. Troops trained as sappers would tear down a section of the wall by using sharp-headed levers (pikes, swords, spears) or even sledgehammers (cf. Ez 26:8-9). In Ashurnasirpal’s army such men were issued full-length coats of mail to cover their whole bodies. Under later Assyrian kings, they were protected by both round and rectangular shields, which they carried on their backs when engaged in demolition. Later, Ashurbanipal relied exclusively on such sappers for direct penetration of a fortified city. He designed for their protection a huge shield, the curved head of which could be propped against the wall, screening the sapper from missiles while he worked beneath it.<\/p>\n<h5>Scaling the Walls<\/h5>\n<p>A battle scene depicted on limestone in the tomb of Anta at Dashashe in Upper Egypt (24th century <span>BC<\/span>) provides the earliest known representation of siege activities. It shows the Egyptians raising a scaling ladder against the walls of a fortified city. By the time of Sargon, the thickness of walls was increased considerably, which permitted construction of much higher walls, more resistant to scaling. Such solid, massive walls also tended to blunt the effectiveness of a battering ram. Sargon, and especially his successor Ashurbanipal, responded by constructing longer scaling ladders, some of which could reach a height of from 25 to 30 feet (7.6 to 9.1 meters), judging from the number of rungs.<\/p>\n<h5>Penetration beneath the Walls<\/h5>\n<p>A tunneling operation could be started beyond the range of any weapons at the disposal of the defenders. Once underground, the penetration unit was shielded from enemy fire. The tunneling could be accomplished under cover of night, so that the element of surprise could be exploited to the maximum. It was, however, a lengthy process requiring considerable technical skill. Moreover, if the operation was detected by the defenders before its completion, they could destroy the penetration unit as it emerged from the tunnel. Attempts to penetrate fortified cities by tunneling beneath the walls was a characteristic feature of warfare in Iron Age II. That is confirmed by reliefs, written documents, and archaeological excavation of sites dating to this period, where the remains of attack tunnels have been discovered.<\/p>\n<h5>Siege<\/h5>\n<p>Particularly when a walled city was situated on a high hill, an extended siege provided an alternate method of conquering it. By encircling the city and preventing aid or supplies from reaching its defenders, the attacking army could starve the inhabitants out. That procedure minimized the element of risk for the attacking army. Its success depended upon their capacity to prevent outside assistance from reaching the city and the defenders from leaving it. An army would generally resort to siege when a city’s fortifications were too powerful for direct penetration. The siege of Samaria by the Assyrians lasted for three years (2 Kgs 18:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>The peculiar conditions of siege produced the catapult, a major innovation of Greek artillery and a logical improvement on the bow and the sling. Designed originally as a strengthened bow mounted on a stand and used to fire arrows only, it was introduced around 400 <span>BC<\/span> by Demetrius I. He may have borrowed the idea from the Phoenicians at Carthage.<\/p>\n<p>In the course of time the instrument was improved. The perfect weapon, called the torsion catapult, derived its power from many tightly twisted strands of elastic material, frequently supplied by women’s hair, which could be tightened with a windlass and then released suddenly. Firing arrows, large stones, or fire-baskets with an effective range of 200 yards (182.9 meters), a catapult could clear a wall of its defenders while a battering ram breached it or a boarding party attacked from a mobile tower.<\/p>\n<p>For those in a besieged city, the critical problems were food and water supplies. The horror of famine is stressed in the biblical account of the siege of Samaria by the Syrian Ben-hadad in the days of the prophet Elisha. On that occasion women were reduced to eating their children (2 Kgs 6:26-29). A besieging army would do everything in its power to aggravate such conditions. In one of the siege reliefs of Ashurnasirpal II, a defender has lowered a bucket from the wall to draw water from a stream below; an Assyrian soldier is shown cutting the rope with his dagger.<\/p>\n<h5>Ruses and Stratagems<\/h5>\n<p>Various ruses and stratagems could draw the defenders out of a city or infiltrate troops into the city. If a small force could enter a city by a cunning stratagem, it could overpower the guards and open the city gates to an attacking army. A city’s fortifications were of little value once an enemy had entered the city. Moreover, penetrating a city’s defenses at any one point frequently caused the entire defense system to collapse. The story of the Trojan horse is probably the most celebrated account of a stratagem circumventing the defense of a strongly fortified ancient city.<\/p>\n<p>In the biblical account of the siege of Samaria by Ben-hadad, a sudden lifting of the Syrian siege led Joram, the king of Israel, to suspect a ruse. He refused to believe the report of four lepers that the Syrians had gone, leaving behind large food supplies (2 Kgs 7:12). That was the same kind of tactic that Joshua had employed at Ai (Jos 8:3-8).<\/p>\n<p>On other occasions, powerful armies sought to break down resistance by psychological warfare, as in the unsuccessful attempt by Sennacherib to capture Jerusalem in the time of Hezekiah (2 Kgs 18–19). The dialogue between the Assyrian general and Hezekiah’s delegates reveals that the Assyrian was trying to shake the confidence of the city’s defenders.<\/p>\n<p>The ambush was a type of ruse used to trap and destroy an enemy at a moment when he was least able to counter a sudden, unexpected blow. Its effectiveness depended almost entirely on the element of surprise. By taking advantage of good intelligence, knowledge of the terrain, and the cover of night, a small force could stage a devastating ambush against vastly superior numbers.<\/p>\n<p>The ambush was a standard method of combat during the period of the conquest of Canaan. The fall of Ai, for example, was due directly to the tactical success of an ambush (Jos 8:1-23). Under cover of night, Joshua was able to move a large force to a concealed position behind the city. He then led the remainder of the Israelite army to the edge of a valley north of the fortified city, giving the appearance of a planned assault on the city. The diversion, as calculated, drew the main force of Ai away from the city to engage Israel on the plain of Arabah. When the Israelites fell back, appearing to be badly beaten, the remaining defenders of the city were summoned to pursue Joshua’s fleeing army. With the city left undefended, the main Israelite strike force rose from its ambush position, poured into the city, and set it on fire. Too late, the men of Ai saw the smoke from their burning city and realized the stratagem. Joshua’s army turned to counterattack their pursuers, who found themselves trapped between two bodies of Israelite forces. Assaulted from both front and rear, the king of Ai’s army was annihilated, victim of an effectively laid ambush.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FortificationsandDefense\">Fortifications and Defense<\/p>\n<p>The earliest known fortifications in the world, dated by some to about 7000 <span>BC<\/span>, were discovered in 1954 at Jericho. They were impressive in conception and construction. The core of the defense system was a wall, part of which, bordering the western edge of the ancient city, was still standing to a height of 21 feet (6.4 meters). Further excavation uncovered a large moat that had been carved out of solid rock at the base of the wall, 27 feet (8.2 meters) wide and 9 feet (2.7 meters) deep. How that feat was accomplished when the only tools assumed to have been available were made of stone is a complete mystery. A third component of Jericho’s defense system was a huge stone circular tower 30 feet (9.1 meters) high, once evidently attached to the inner side of the western part of the wall. The exact purpose of the tower has not yet been determined, but Neolithic Jericho provides the earliest evidence of a fortified city supported by a wall, tower, and moat.<\/p>\n<p>By the middle Bronze period, there were four components in a standard defense system: a moat, an advance (outer) wall, the main (inner) wall, and a well-fortified gate structure. The moat, advance wall, and subsidiary fortifications protecting the steep slope and lower portion of the main wall were intended to prevent breaching by a battering ram.<\/p>\n<h5>City Walls<\/h5>\n<p>Erection of a simple wall could halt a hostile advance only temporarily, since walls could be scaled or breached. Walls therefore provided a firing platform so defenders could repel attacks. The wall system consisted of three principal components: the wall itself, constituting the barrier; an upper structure, which provided the firing platform and cover for the defenders; and a series of obstacles and traps erected in front of the wall to keep archers at a distance and to prevent operation of a battering ram.<\/p>\n<p>The battlement—a parapet built along the outer top edge of the wall—provided the defenders with a measure of security, freedom for mobility, and openings through which fire could be directed. From a distance the square notches looked like a row of teeth with gaps between them. The teeth, called merlons, provided a protective barrier against hostile missiles. The gaps, called embrasures or crenels, supplied openings through which the defenders could discharge their weapons. Special towers protruded from the outer face of the wall, spaced at a distance no greater than the double range of a bow. Such towers enabled the defenders to fire at troops who managed to reach the walls. One way of protecting the main wall was to construct an outer or advance wall that could be breached or climbed only under heavy fire from defending units on the battlements of the main wall. Another method was to dig a wide, deep moat around the base of the main wall. A moat kept the enemy from using a battering ram unless they could bridge the moat or fill it up at certain points, under concentrated fire from the defenders.<\/p>\n<p>Casemate fortifications, introduced in the middle Bronze period, were developed from double walls built of dressed stones. The space between the walls was divided into chambers, or casemates, used for storage or dwellings. The Hittite casemate system, introduced into Palestine at least as early as the time of Saul, was widely adopted in Syria and Palestine. A fine example has been discovered at Gibeah, where Saul’s citadel was located, dating to the end of the 11th century <span>BC<\/span>. The overall thickness of the double walls, including the casemates, reaches 15 feet (4.6 meters). The same type of construction has been found in excavations of three Solomonic cities—Hazor, Gezer, and Megiddo (cf. 1 Kgs 9:15)—where the casemate walls have an overall thickness of 18 feet (5.5 meters).<\/p>\n<p>Although the divided kingdoms of Judah and Israel were not noted for technical advancements in offensive warfare, a number of their kings worked at improving fortifications and means of defense. Uzziah was especially remembered for his accomplishments in defensive warfare. Along with other measures, “he produced machines mounted on the walls of Jerusalem, designed by brilliant men to shoot arrows and hurl stones from the towers and the corners of the wall” (2 Chr 26:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). Those “machines” were special protective structures built to facilitate the task of the archers and to permit huge stones to be dropped on the heads of assaulting troops.<\/p>\n<h5>Gate<\/h5>\n<p>It was inevitable that the gate would be the focus of action in any assault on a fortified city. City gates were therefore designed to expose an attacking army to the greatest risk while providing maximum security to the defenders. The road approaching a city on a hill would wind up the slope, climbing obliquely to the left or the right. Such roads were usually laid out to reach the gate from the right, so an attacker would have to expose the right side of his body to the defenders on the wall. Since he carried his shield in his left hand, that made him more vulnerable.<\/p>\n<p>To prevent the heavy wooden doors of the gate from being set on fire, they were usually plated with metal. A gate wide enough for chariots required double doors, making the line at the center where the two doors met the weakest point in the barrier. Double doors were therefore fitted with huge bolts and fortified with a heavy beam running across the back of both door panels and held in place by sockets set in the doorposts.<\/p>\n<p>Another component in the defense complex at a gate consisted of towers erected on either side of the gate and protruding from the outer face of the wall. Enemy soldiers trying to smash the doors with axes or set them on fire with torches were thus exposed to heavy flanking fire from defensive units on the towers. From a roof over the gate having a balcony, concentrated firepower could be poured down on attackers’ heads. The addition of such auxiliary structures transformed a gate into a small fortress.<\/p>\n<h5>Inner Citadel<\/h5>\n<p>A major weakness of a city’s walls and gate was the magnitude of the circumference. An average-size city might have a perimeter of half a mile (.8 kilometer); a larger city, a perimeter of over a mile (1.6 kilometers). Yet the entire wall had to be defended against breaching, scaling, or tunneling. An attacking army would use diversionary tactics to keep defenders dispersed along the entire perimeter but concentrate their primary assault at one point in the wall. Once the wall was breached, perimeter fortifications served no further defensive purpose. Therefore, internal walls were often added to subdivide a city into several sections, each capable of independent defense. Also, on the highest point of land within the city a citadel would be constructed as a self-contained defensive unit.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest examples of such fortifications, called migdols, are found in the late Bronze Age. They were originally small citadels built to guard important military targets such as sources of water, strategic routes, cultivated farmlands, or frontiers. A migdol of that type was discovered in Israel, not far from Ashdod, in 1960. It was square in plan, with rectangular bastions, and was two stories high, just like structures depicted in Egyptian reliefs from the same period. The same design was used to fortify temples inside of cities. Such fortified temples served as places of refuge and as a city’s final defense once its walls had been breached (cf. Jgs 9:45-51).<\/p>\n<p>In a later period an inner citadel could embrace a complex consisting of the fortified palace of the governor, dwellings of his chief ministers, and sometimes the temple. Such citadels resembled fortified cities, possessing a main wall, a gateway, an outer wall, and occasionally a moat. Being small in area and heavily fortified, citadels could be defended in a final effort by the governor and remaining inhabitants. Presumably Zimri could have held out against Omri’s army for an extended period in the citadel of Tirzah, had he not committed suicide by setting it on fire (1 Kgs 16:17-18).<\/p>\n<h5>Water Supply under Siege<\/h5>\n<p>Unless provision was made to keep a city’s inhabitants supplied with food and water during a protracted siege, no defense system could be effective. Several Judean kings made efforts to solve the food-storage problem. Rehoboam, for example, fortified a number of cities located on the western, eastern, and southern borders of his kingdom and made them centers for the storage of food, oil, and wine (2 Chr 11:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Storage of food was easier than storage of water. Cisterns built to collect rainwater were a partial answer, but cisterns often ran dry, particularly in times of drought. Cities were sometimes built on the banks of a stream or river, using the stream as part of the city’s defense system. But for a city built on a hill, the source of water might be a spring located at the foot of the slope and outside the city walls. Sometimes the mouth of the spring could be blocked and its location concealed from the enemy while still allowing access by the inhabitants. At Megiddo a vertical shaft 100 feet (274.3 meters) deep was connected by a horizontal tunnel about 200 feet (548.6 meters) long to the water supply at the western end of the city, beyond the fortifications. The work was undertaken in the time of either Solomon or Ahab.<\/p>\n<p>The most celebrated measures to guarantee a supply of fresh water in a time of siege were those taken by Hezekiah at Jerusalem. That engineering achievement is recalled in all the summaries of his reign, both in the Bible and in the “Praise of Famous Men” in the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus (2 Kgs 20:20; 2 Chr 32:30; Ecclus 48:17). The prodigious feat commemorated in those references was the sealing of the spring of Gihon and the cutting of an 1,800-foot (548.6-meter) channel through solid rock in order to bring water into a reservoir in the city. How it was accomplished was reported by Hezekiah himself in the famous Siloam inscription. Two crews, working with hammers, wedges, and pickaxes, began at opposite ends. The crew that began at the spring was able to take advantage of the older tunnel (cf. Is 22:11). They turned due south, in the direction of the city. The other crew, starting from the reservoir, began in a northeasterly direction. They then turned southeast until they reached the north-south line followed by the crew tunneling from the spring, when they turned due north to meet them. The two crews almost passed each other, being about five feet (1.5 meters) apart, but a shout from one was heard through a crevice in the rock by the other. Both parties turned sharply right, and the tunnel was completed. Hezekiah’s precautionary step, taken before Sennacherib’s invasion of Judah, helps to explain why the Assyrians were unable to subdue Jerusalem by the siege tactics that had earlier subdued Samaria in the time of Sargon.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HebrewMilitaryOrganization\">Hebrew Military Organization<\/p>\n<h5>Tribal Army<\/h5>\n<p>In their exodus from Egypt the Israelites were organized by tribes and divisions. That systematic arrangement for their trek through the wilderness provided a precedent for military organization. After the sojourn at Mt Sinai, the 12 tribes were divided into divisions or army corps, and certain grades in military rank began to appear. The “officers of the army” (Nm 31:14) had command over units of 1,000 or 100 men, which suggests that the tribal army was divided into decimal units. At a later period there is reference to units of 1,000 (the division), 100 (the company), 50 (the platoon), and 10 (the section). Except for the Levites, who were assigned as a tribe to the care of the tabernacle (Nm 2:33), men from 20 years of age who were physically able to fight were assigned to a unit in the tribal army. Certain individuals, however, were exempted from military service (cf. Dt 20:5-9; 24:5; Jgs 7:3).<\/p>\n<p>Until after the conquest of Canaan, the tribal army was essentially a militia recruited in an emergency. Internal organization of the militia was the responsibility of the tribe; each clan and family sent their quota of warriors when summoned to battle by tribal leaders. Because the clan formed the basic unit, recruits were under the command of their own leaders. David’s brothers, for example, served in a division composed of the fighting men from their clan under the command of a captain (1 Sm 17:18; 18:13). When the emergency passed, the militia was disbanded and the soldiers returned to their home districts.<\/p>\n<p>Because the land was divided among the tribes, no tribal or clan leader before Saul commanded the entire tribal confederation (cf. 1 Sm 11:1-11). In fact, tribal jealousies and rivalries threatened national solidarity and jeopardized united action even in a critical period. On some occasions, however, the severity of a crisis caused the armies of the various tribes to unite in common action. The multitribal armies were divided into companies of 1,000, 100, and 50, and still further into families under appointed officers. There is evidence of organization into units according to weaponry (1 Chr 12:24-38). Benjamin’s tribe specialized in the bow and sling. The tribes of Gad, Judah, and Naphtali were expert with the spear and shield.<\/p>\n<p>Provisioning the tribal army was the responsibility of each tribe (Jgs 20:9-10). One out of every ten soldiers was appointed to secure food for the others, either from wealthy landowners (cf. 1 Sm 25) or from the natural resources of the land. In that early stage of military organization, a soldier’s pay generally consisted only of supplies and a portion of the spoils of battle (cf. 30:21-25).<\/p>\n<h5>Professional Army<\/h5>\n<p>Not until the time of the united monarchy did Israel have a regular army. Transition from a people’s militia to a professional army took place under Saul, whose reign changed the tribal confederacy into a monarchy (1 Sm 13:2). Philistine harassment of Israel encouraged establishment of a strong standing army. The army, however, was not large; it consisted of 3,000 men organized in three formations of 1,000 each (1 Sm 13:2; 24:2). Pay for those career soldiers was sometimes in the form of a land grant (8:14) as well as a share of booty. In the organization of Saul’s army, Abner, Jonathan, and David were given particular responsibilities. Abner was named commander of the army (17:55) and was probably also given direct command of one of the divisions. David’s band of valorous men, “the thirty,” provided the leadership core for his own military organization when he became king.<\/p>\n<p>David continued the practice of maintaining a professional army. But he also developed a national militia of 12 regiments, each being called up for duty for one month of the year under professional officers (1 Chr 27:1-15). Each regiment, recruited across tribal lines, consisted of 24,000 soldiers. David’s innovation provided him with a large reserve force that could be mustered for war in times of emergency. The reserves, and presumably the professional army as well, were organized into units of 1,000, 100, 50, and 10. Joab, a specialist in siege warfare (2 Sm 20:15), commanded the professional army, and Amasa was over the citizens’ militia. David, however, remained commander-in-chief of the military organization.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelite group in King David’s professional army was an outgrowth of the small band of fighting men who had served with him during the period of conflict with Saul. That veteran group consisted of David’s family and clansmen, and others who felt themselves oppressed by the central authority under Saul (1 Sm 22:1-2). It ranged in size between 400 and 600 men (1 Sm 22:2; 23:13; 27:2). The presence of mercenaries in David’s army is clearly recorded. Uriah the Hittite and Ittai of Gath are conspicuous examples, along with many career soldiers of Philistine origin, such as the Cherethites and the Pelethites under Benaiah (2 Sm 8:18; 15:19-22; 23:22-23).<\/p>\n<p>The Davidic dynasty maintained a permanent mercenary army until 701 <span>BC<\/span>, after which it was considered too costly. The oppressive cost of maintaining a professional army, financed by burdensome taxes and forced labor, was in fact a major factor contributing to the disruption of the monarchy after Solomon’s death (cf. 1 Kgs 10:26-29; 12:4-19). After Sennacherib’s invasion in 701 <span>BC<\/span>, the southern kingdom of Judah depended entirely on a citizens’ militia for its defense. It is commonly held that the northern kingdom of Israel did not employ a professional army, but it is evident that King Ahab used at least some mercenary soldiers in his defense against Ben-hadad of Syria (1 Kgs 20:15-20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Armor and Weapons.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WARFARE<\/h3>\n<p>The means by which one nation seeks to impose its will upon another by force. An index to the importance of warfare in antiquity is provided by the amount of technical skill directed to perfecting devices for destruction and defense.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MethodsofWarfare\">Methods of Warfare<\/p>\n<h5>Standard Combat<\/h5>\n<p>Cavalry units were introduced at the close of the second millennium <span>BC<\/span> and the beginning of the first. The cavalry charge provided a shock force to the great armies, and the cavalry’s mobility permitted concentration of firepower at decisive points. When the Assyrians coordinated their infantry, cavalry, and chariot corps into a powerful battle machine, smaller neighboring nations were more and more compelled to retreat behind their fortifications. They could not hope to engage the massive Assyrian army in standard combat in open terrain. No period is richer in illustrated monuments than Iron Age II; the Assyrian war reliefs present detailed illustrations of their conquests and the size of fortified cities. The few scenes depicting standard combat in open terrain show chariots charging from all directions and engaging the enemy at all stages of a battle. Other formations carry out mopping-up operations, finishing off pockets of enemy resistance remaining after the chariot charge.<\/p>\n<p>The factor of terrain was always very important. In standard combat on open terrain it became conventional to place the best troops on the right side of the line. A Greek commander, Epaminodas (d. 362 <span>BC<\/span>), introduced the variant of a slanting attack by a strengthened left wing, taking the Spartan army completely by surprise. Philip of Macedon and his son Alexander continued to surprise their enemies with variations on a plan of attack based on the phalanx.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Battle in Open Terrain: The Duel<\/h5>\n<p>During certain periods in the ancient Near East, the duel presented an alternative to standard combat. The duel was a contest between two champions who represented the contending forces. The two armies would agree in advance to abide by the outcome of the fight. The duel was meant to avoid the heavy casualties of full-scale warfare. The earliest detailed written account of this unique form of warfare occurs in the Tale of Sinuhe. A chamberlain in the royal court of the 12th dynasty, Sinuhe voluntarily went into exile and traveled to northern Palestine and Syria, where he lived among Semitic tribes. There he was challenged to a duel by a local champion, whom he defeated and whose goods he then plundered.<\/p>\n<p>Although the duel was common among other armies in subsequent periods, it was evidently unknown to Israel before the encounter between David and Goliath (1 Sm 17). The Philistine army had penetrated Judah as far as Socoh and were arrayed on one hill. Drawn up against them on an opposite hill was the army of Saul. The valley of Elah separated the two camps. The Israelites were challenged daily by the Philistine champion, Goliath, who proposed that the battle be decided through combat between two warriors. David accepted his proposal, but when he killed Goliath, the Philistines fled, unwilling to honor the terms of the prior agreement. The Israelite army then entered the contest, pursuing the Philistines and inflicting heavy casualties.<\/p>\n<h5>Assaults on Fortified Cities<\/h5>\n<p>Most cities in the ancient Near East were located at sites that could be defended against attack and that possessed economic advantages. An assault on a fortified city presented opposite problems for attacker and defender. The actions of one were a direct response to the actions of the other. Systems of defense were intended to thwart methods of attack, which in turn were designed to penetrate systems of defense.<\/p>\n<p>There were five possible ways of conquering a fortified city: penetration from above the fortifications; direct penetration through the fortifications; penetration from below the fortifications; siege; and penetration by ruse. On many occasions, a combination of two or more methods was necessary to breach the defensive network.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical narrative of the conquest of Shechem by Abimelech (Jgs 9) gives an account of an assault on a fortified city in the period of the judges (Iron Age I). When the people of Shechem and their allies rebelled against Abimelech, he retaliated by attacking the city, advancing his army of mercenaries by night and launching an assault from ambush positions at dawn (9:32-35). The men of Shechem engaged in open battle outside the city gates but were forced to retreat behind the security of the city walls. The next day Abimelech directed his assault against the city itself. Dividing his forces into three groups, he assumed direct command of one, which he committed to an attack on the city gates at the decisive moment of battle (vv 43-44). The gate was breached and the main walls seized, but the city’s surviving defenders fled to an inner citadel, the temple of Baal-berith.<\/p>\n<p>Many reliefs depict groups of soldiers defending an inner citadel after a city’s wall was breached. Archaeological excavations at Shechem confirm that its temple, like those in other Canaanite cities, was built in the form of a fortified tower, supported by stout bastions near the entrance. The tower of Shechem was thus strongly fortified and occupied only a small area, enabling its defenders to concentrate their firepower on Abimelech’s troops. Since it could not be taken by storm, Abimelech ordered his soldiers to use their battle-axes to cut brushwood, which was piled against the stronghold and set on fire (Jgs 9:48-49). All of the defenders within the tower died.<\/p>\n<p>An assault on an inner citadel was always a hazardous undertaking for an attacking army, as shown in the sequel to the capture of Shechem’s tower. Abimelech turned his attention next to the city of Thebez and followed the same plan of assault that had proved successful at Shechem. But as he was preparing to burn the door of the tower to which the defenders had fled, his skull was crushed by a piece of millstone dropped on him by a woman (Jgs 9:50-53). The incident was remembered and became proverbial for the danger of approaching too closely the walls of a fortified tower (2 Sm 11:19-21).<\/p>\n<h5>Communications and Intelligence<\/h5>\n<p>From the patriarchal period (middle Bronze period), we have detailed written information on the use of communications systems in wartime. The documents from Mari on the Euphrates provide evidence for a well-developed communications system based on signaling. Signals were flashed by torches or firebrands at night in accordance with a prearranged code. The system was widely used in Mesopotamia and elsewhere to call for immediate help when a city was under attack.<\/p>\n<p>In the late Bronze period horsemen were sometimes employed for isolated communication functions. Intelligence services played a role in planning and executing military operations. The importance of intelligence and the use of spies or scouts is stressed in the biblical accounts of the conquest of the land of Canaan. Before entering the land, Moses sent men on an espionage mission. He instructed them to gather information on the topography of the land, to observe the relative strength of its inhabitants, to determine whether the land was fertile, to survey the cities and see if they were fortified, and to report on the character of the land—whether it was capable of sustaining a large population (Nm 13:17-20).<\/p>\n<p>Tactical intelligence was very important. Joshua dispatched spies to Jericho and to Ai before beginning military operations against them (Jos 2:1; 7:2). The reports he received about the offensive spirit and strength of the Canaanites enabled him to formulate an attack plan. In the period of the judges the conquest of Bethel (Jgs 1:22-26) was due directly to intelligence gathered by a reconnaissance patrol. The tribes of Joseph sent out scouts to keep the city under observation. It was strongly fortified and seemed impregnable. The scouts captured a man who emerged from the city—presumably not through the main gate, which was shut tight, but through a concealed postern or tunnel. In exchange for his own life and the safety of his family, he disclosed the location of the passage leading beneath the walls. The city was penetrated through the tunnel and captured.<\/p>\n<h5>Attack and Penetration: The Breach<\/h5>\n<p>Direct penetration through the fortifications of an ancient city meant breaching the gate or the main walls by using hammers, axes, pikes, spears, swords, or a battering ram. Illustrated monuments and written documents indicate that early in the middle Bronze period fortified cities were being attacked with battering rams. The earliest known illustration of a ram appears in a siege scene in the wall paintings from Beni Hasan (20th century <span>BC<\/span>). The ram pictured is a relatively simple device, consisting of a hutlike structure with a slightly pointed roof, which could be moved near a fortress with the help of two parallel crossbars. The structure provided cover for two or three soldiers who operated by hand a very long pole with a sharp tip, presumably of metal.<\/p>\n<p>The Mari documents provide information for the period 200 years later. They mention the effectiveness of battering rams constructed largely of wood. Although very heavy, the siege weapon could be moved over long distances. One document speaks of the use of a wagon drawn by draft animals and of a boat to transport a battering ram to the site of a besieged city.<\/p>\n<p>Moving a battering ram into position always exposed the demolition unit to heavy fire from defenders on the walls above them. Its heaviness made it cumbersome to move. Moreover, the ground adjacent to the walls was usually rough, rocky, and steep. When the chosen point of penetration was a section of the wall, an assault force had to construct an earthen ramp, occasionally strengthened on the top surface and sides with wooden planks or stones. The ramp provided a track along which the battering ram could be moved from the foot of the slope to the outer wall. Once moved into operational position, the ram had to be braked to prevent it from rolling back. The building of such a ramp was evidently necessary in Joab’s campaign against the fortified city of Abel in Beth-maacah (2 Sm 20:15). The biblical account indicates that some sort of battering ram was in use in Israel under King David during the early monarchy.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest Assyrian reliefs show that protection of the penetration units was a major consideration. High, mobile assault towers constructed of wood operated in tandem with a battering ram. Such towers, moved into position near a breach operation and manned by archers, provided covering fire directed against the defenders on the wall. Siege towers neutralized the defenders’ advantage in firepower and drew fire away from the crew engaged in breaching the walls.<\/p>\n<p>The details of the Assyrian reliefs make it possible to visualize clearly the fate of Jerusalem, as announced to the prophet Ezekiel (Ez 4:1-3; 21:22). The gate was the focal point of attack because it was the weakest point in the wall. Moreover, the path leading up to the gate made construction of a special ramp unnecessary. In the demolition of a gate, swords were sometimes used to pry the doors loose and to tear down hinges. Wooden doors unprotected by metal were often set on fire.<\/p>\n<p>The battering ram continued to be used as an engine for breaching walls in the Hellenistic-Roman period. In 63 <span>BC<\/span> the Roman commander Pompey brought up battering rams from Tyre against the defenders of Jerusalem, and with them penetrated the fortified wall that enclosed the temple. The siege machine shown on Trajan’s column had a beam with an iron head shaped like a ram. It was moved up to a wall in a frame protected by a wooden roof covered with clay or hides. A variation equipped for boring into a wall was used by Titus when besieging Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The battering ram was not the only device used to effect a breach in a wall. Troops trained as sappers would tear down a section of the wall by using sharp-headed levers (pikes, swords, spears) or even sledgehammers (cf. Ez 26:8-9). In Ashurnasirpal’s army such men were issued full-length coats of mail to cover their whole bodies. Under later Assyrian kings, they were protected by both round and rectangular shields, which they carried on their backs when engaged in demolition. Later, Ashurbanipal relied exclusively on such sappers for direct penetration of a fortified city. He designed for their protection a huge shield, the curved head of which could be propped against the wall, screening the sapper from missiles while he worked beneath it.<\/p>\n<h5>Scaling the Walls<\/h5>\n<p>A battle scene depicted on limestone in the tomb of Anta at Dashashe in Upper Egypt (24th century <span>BC<\/span>) provides the earliest known representation of siege activities. It shows the Egyptians raising a scaling ladder against the walls of a fortified city. By the time of Sargon, the thickness of walls was increased considerably, which permitted construction of much higher walls, more resistant to scaling. Such solid, massive walls also tended to blunt the effectiveness of a battering ram. Sargon, and especially his successor Ashurbanipal, responded by constructing longer scaling ladders, some of which could reach a height of from 25 to 30 feet (7.6 to 9.1 meters), judging from the number of rungs.<\/p>\n<h5>Penetration beneath the Walls<\/h5>\n<p>A tunneling operation could be started beyond the range of any weapons at the disposal of the defenders. Once underground, the penetration unit was shielded from enemy fire. The tunneling could be accomplished under cover of night, so that the element of surprise could be exploited to the maximum. It was, however, a lengthy process requiring considerable technical skill. Moreover, if the operation was detected by the defenders before its completion, they could destroy the penetration unit as it emerged from the tunnel. Attempts to penetrate fortified cities by tunneling beneath the walls was a characteristic feature of warfare in Iron Age II. That is confirmed by reliefs, written documents, and archaeological excavation of sites dating to this period, where the remains of attack tunnels have been discovered.<\/p>\n<h5>Siege<\/h5>\n<p>Particularly when a walled city was situated on a high hill, an extended siege provided an alternate method of conquering it. By encircling the city and preventing aid or supplies from reaching its defenders, the attacking army could starve the inhabitants out. That procedure minimized the element of risk for the attacking army. Its success depended upon their capacity to prevent outside assistance from reaching the city and the defenders from leaving it. An army would generally resort to siege when a city’s fortifications were too powerful for direct penetration. The siege of Samaria by the Assyrians lasted for three years (2 Kgs 18:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>The peculiar conditions of siege produced the catapult, a major innovation of Greek artillery and a logical improvement on the bow and the sling. Designed originally as a strengthened bow mounted on a stand and used to fire arrows only, it was introduced around 400 <span>BC<\/span> by Demetrius I. He may have borrowed the idea from the Phoenicians at Carthage.<\/p>\n<p>In the course of time the instrument was improved. The perfect weapon, called the torsion catapult, derived its power from many tightly twisted strands of elastic material, frequently supplied by women’s hair, which could be tightened with a windlass and then released suddenly. Firing arrows, large stones, or fire-baskets with an effective range of 200 yards (182.9 meters), a catapult could clear a wall of its defenders while a battering ram breached it or a boarding party attacked from a mobile tower.<\/p>\n<p>For those in a besieged city, the critical problems were food and water supplies. The horror of famine is stressed in the biblical account of the siege of Samaria by the Syrian Ben-hadad in the days of the prophet Elisha. On that occasion women were reduced to eating their children (2 Kgs 6:26-29). A besieging army would do everything in its power to aggravate such conditions. In one of the siege reliefs of Ashurnasirpal II, a defender has lowered a bucket from the wall to draw water from a stream below; an Assyrian soldier is shown cutting the rope with his dagger.<\/p>\n<h5>Ruses and Stratagems<\/h5>\n<p>Various ruses and stratagems could draw the defenders out of a city or infiltrate troops into the city. If a small force could enter a city by a cunning stratagem, it could overpower the guards and open the city gates to an attacking army. A city’s fortifications were of little value once an enemy had entered the city. Moreover, penetrating a city’s defenses at any one point frequently caused the entire defense system to collapse. The story of the Trojan horse is probably the most celebrated account of a stratagem circumventing the defense of a strongly fortified ancient city.<\/p>\n<p>In the biblical account of the siege of Samaria by Ben-hadad, a sudden lifting of the Syrian siege led Joram, the king of Israel, to suspect a ruse. He refused to believe the report of four lepers that the Syrians had gone, leaving behind large food supplies (2 Kgs 7:12). That was the same kind of tactic that Joshua had employed at Ai (Jos 8:3-8).<\/p>\n<p>On other occasions, powerful armies sought to break down resistance by psychological warfare, as in the unsuccessful attempt by Sennacherib to capture Jerusalem in the time of Hezekiah (2 Kgs 18–19). The dialogue between the Assyrian general and Hezekiah’s delegates reveals that the Assyrian was trying to shake the confidence of the city’s defenders.<\/p>\n<p>The ambush was a type of ruse used to trap and destroy an enemy at a moment when he was least able to counter a sudden, unexpected blow. Its effectiveness depended almost entirely on the element of surprise. By taking advantage of good intelligence, knowledge of the terrain, and the cover of night, a small force could stage a devastating ambush against vastly superior numbers.<\/p>\n<p>The ambush was a standard method of combat during the period of the conquest of Canaan. The fall of Ai, for example, was due directly to the tactical success of an ambush (Jos 8:1-23). Under cover of night, Joshua was able to move a large force to a concealed position behind the city. He then led the remainder of the Israelite army to the edge of a valley north of the fortified city, giving the appearance of a planned assault on the city. The diversion, as calculated, drew the main force of Ai away from the city to engage Israel on the plain of Arabah. When the Israelites fell back, appearing to be badly beaten, the remaining defenders of the city were summoned to pursue Joshua’s fleeing army. With the city left undefended, the main Israelite strike force rose from its ambush position, poured into the city, and set it on fire. Too late, the men of Ai saw the smoke from their burning city and realized the stratagem. Joshua’s army turned to counterattack their pursuers, who found themselves trapped between two bodies of Israelite forces. Assaulted from both front and rear, the king of Ai’s army was annihilated, victim of an effectively laid ambush.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FortificationsandDefense\">Fortifications and Defense<\/p>\n<p>The earliest known fortifications in the world, dated by some to about 7000 <span>BC<\/span>, were discovered in 1954 at Jericho. They were impressive in conception and construction. The core of the defense system was a wall, part of which, bordering the western edge of the ancient city, was still standing to a height of 21 feet (6.4 meters). Further excavation uncovered a large moat that had been carved out of solid rock at the base of the wall, 27 feet (8.2 meters) wide and 9 feet (2.7 meters) deep. How that feat was accomplished when the only tools assumed to have been available were made of stone is a complete mystery. A third component of Jericho’s defense system was a huge stone circular tower 30 feet (9.1 meters) high, once evidently attached to the inner side of the western part of the wall. The exact purpose of the tower has not yet been determined, but Neolithic Jericho provides the earliest evidence of a fortified city supported by a wall, tower, and moat.<\/p>\n<p>By the middle Bronze period, there were four components in a standard defense system: a moat, an advance (outer) wall, the main (inner) wall, and a well-fortified gate structure. The moat, advance wall, and subsidiary fortifications protecting the steep slope and lower portion of the main wall were intended to prevent breaching by a battering ram.<\/p>\n<h5>City Walls<\/h5>\n<p>Erection of a simple wall could halt a hostile advance only temporarily, since walls could be scaled or breached. Walls therefore provided a firing platform so defenders could repel attacks. The wall system consisted of three principal components: the wall itself, constituting the barrier; an upper structure, which provided the firing platform and cover for the defenders; and a series of obstacles and traps erected in front of the wall to keep archers at a distance and to prevent operation of a battering ram.<\/p>\n<p>The battlement—a parapet built along the outer top edge of the wall—provided the defenders with a measure of security, freedom for mobility, and openings through which fire could be directed. From a distance the square notches looked like a row of teeth with gaps between them. The teeth, called merlons, provided a protective barrier against hostile missiles. The gaps, called embrasures or crenels, supplied openings through which the defenders could discharge their weapons. Special towers protruded from the outer face of the wall, spaced at a distance no greater than the double range of a bow. Such towers enabled the defenders to fire at troops who managed to reach the walls. One way of protecting the main wall was to construct an outer or advance wall that could be breached or climbed only under heavy fire from defending units on the battlements of the main wall. Another method was to dig a wide, deep moat around the base of the main wall. A moat kept the enemy from using a battering ram unless they could bridge the moat or fill it up at certain points, under concentrated fire from the defenders.<\/p>\n<p>Casemate fortifications, introduced in the middle Bronze period, were developed from double walls built of dressed stones. The space between the walls was divided into chambers, or casemates, used for storage or dwellings. The Hittite casemate system, introduced into Palestine at least as early as the time of Saul, was widely adopted in Syria and Palestine. A fine example has been discovered at Gibeah, where Saul’s citadel was located, dating to the end of the 11th century <span>BC<\/span>. The overall thickness of the double walls, including the casemates, reaches 15 feet (4.6 meters). The same type of construction has been found in excavations of three Solomonic cities—Hazor, Gezer, and Megiddo (cf. 1 Kgs 9:15)—where the casemate walls have an overall thickness of 18 feet (5.5 meters).<\/p>\n<p>Although the divided kingdoms of Judah and Israel were not noted for technical advancements in offensive warfare, a number of their kings worked at improving fortifications and means of defense. Uzziah was especially remembered for his accomplishments in defensive warfare. Along with other measures, “he produced machines mounted on the walls of Jerusalem, designed by brilliant men to shoot arrows and hurl stones from the towers and the corners of the wall” (2 Chr 26:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). Those “machines” were special protective structures built to facilitate the task of the archers and to permit huge stones to be dropped on the heads of assaulting troops.<\/p>\n<h5>Gate<\/h5>\n<p>It was inevitable that the gate would be the focus of action in any assault on a fortified city. City gates were therefore designed to expose an attacking army to the greatest risk while providing maximum security to the defenders. The road approaching a city on a hill would wind up the slope, climbing obliquely to the left or the right. Such roads were usually laid out to reach the gate from the right, so an attacker would have to expose the right side of his body to the defenders on the wall. Since he carried his shield in his left hand, that made him more vulnerable.<\/p>\n<p>To prevent the heavy wooden doors of the gate from being set on fire, they were usually plated with metal. A gate wide enough for chariots required double doors, making the line at the center where the two doors met the weakest point in the barrier. Double doors were therefore fitted with huge bolts and fortified with a heavy beam running across the back of both door panels and held in place by sockets set in the doorposts.<\/p>\n<p>Another component in the defense complex at a gate consisted of towers erected on either side of the gate and protruding from the outer face of the wall. Enemy soldiers trying to smash the doors with axes or set them on fire with torches were thus exposed to heavy flanking fire from defensive units on the towers. From a roof over the gate having a balcony, concentrated firepower could be poured down on attackers’ heads. The addition of such auxiliary structures transformed a gate into a small fortress.<\/p>\n<h5>Inner Citadel<\/h5>\n<p>A major weakness of a city’s walls and gate was the magnitude of the circumference. An average-size city might have a perimeter of half a mile (.8 kilometer); a larger city, a perimeter of over a mile (1.6 kilometers). Yet the entire wall had to be defended against breaching, scaling, or tunneling. An attacking army would use diversionary tactics to keep defenders dispersed along the entire perimeter but concentrate their primary assault at one point in the wall. Once the wall was breached, perimeter fortifications served no further defensive purpose. Therefore, internal walls were often added to subdivide a city into several sections, each capable of independent defense. Also, on the highest point of land within the city a citadel would be constructed as a self-contained defensive unit.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest examples of such fortifications, called migdols, are found in the late Bronze Age. They were originally small citadels built to guard important military targets such as sources of water, strategic routes, cultivated farmlands, or frontiers. A migdol of that type was discovered in Israel, not far from Ashdod, in 1960. It was square in plan, with rectangular bastions, and was two stories high, just like structures depicted in Egyptian reliefs from the same period. The same design was used to fortify temples inside of cities. Such fortified temples served as places of refuge and as a city’s final defense once its walls had been breached (cf. Jgs 9:45-51).<\/p>\n<p>In a later period an inner citadel could embrace a complex consisting of the fortified palace of the governor, dwellings of his chief ministers, and sometimes the temple. Such citadels resembled fortified cities, possessing a main wall, a gateway, an outer wall, and occasionally a moat. Being small in area and heavily fortified, citadels could be defended in a final effort by the governor and remaining inhabitants. Presumably Zimri could have held out against Omri’s army for an extended period in the citadel of Tirzah, had he not committed suicide by setting it on fire (1 Kgs 16:17-18).<\/p>\n<h5>Water Supply under Siege<\/h5>\n<p>Unless provision was made to keep a city’s inhabitants supplied with food and water during a protracted siege, no defense system could be effective. Several Judean kings made efforts to solve the food-storage problem. Rehoboam, for example, fortified a number of cities located on the western, eastern, and southern borders of his kingdom and made them centers for the storage of food, oil, and wine (2 Chr 11:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Storage of food was easier than storage of water. Cisterns built to collect rainwater were a partial answer, but cisterns often ran dry, particularly in times of drought. Cities were sometimes built on the banks of a stream or river, using the stream as part of the city’s defense system. But for a city built on a hill, the source of water might be a spring located at the foot of the slope and outside the city walls. Sometimes the mouth of the spring could be blocked and its location concealed from the enemy while still allowing access by the inhabitants. At Megiddo a vertical shaft 100 feet (274.3 meters) deep was connected by a horizontal tunnel about 200 feet (548.6 meters) long to the water supply at the western end of the city, beyond the fortifications. The work was undertaken in the time of either Solomon or Ahab.<\/p>\n<p>The most celebrated measures to guarantee a supply of fresh water in a time of siege were those taken by Hezekiah at Jerusalem. That engineering achievement is recalled in all the summaries of his reign, both in the Bible and in the “Praise of Famous Men” in the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus (2 Kgs 20:20; 2 Chr 32:30; Ecclus 48:17). The prodigious feat commemorated in those references was the sealing of the spring of Gihon and the cutting of an 1,800-foot (548.6-meter) channel through solid rock in order to bring water into a reservoir in the city. How it was accomplished was reported by Hezekiah himself in the famous Siloam inscription. Two crews, working with hammers, wedges, and pickaxes, began at opposite ends. The crew that began at the spring was able to take advantage of the older tunnel (cf. Is 22:11). They turned due south, in the direction of the city. The other crew, starting from the reservoir, began in a northeasterly direction. They then turned southeast until they reached the north-south line followed by the crew tunneling from the spring, when they turned due north to meet them. The two crews almost passed each other, being about five feet (1.5 meters) apart, but a shout from one was heard through a crevice in the rock by the other. Both parties turned sharply right, and the tunnel was completed. Hezekiah’s precautionary step, taken before Sennacherib’s invasion of Judah, helps to explain why the Assyrians were unable to subdue Jerusalem by the siege tactics that had earlier subdued Samaria in the time of Sargon.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HebrewMilitaryOrganization\">Hebrew Military Organization<\/p>\n<h5>Tribal Army<\/h5>\n<p>In their exodus from Egypt the Israelites were organized by tribes and divisions. That systematic arrangement for their trek through the wilderness provided a precedent for military organization. After the sojourn at Mt Sinai, the 12 tribes were divided into divisions or army corps, and certain grades in military rank began to appear. The “officers of the army” (Nm 31:14) had command over units of 1,000 or 100 men, which suggests that the tribal army was divided into decimal units. At a later period there is reference to units of 1,000 (the division), 100 (the company), 50 (the platoon), and 10 (the section). Except for the Levites, who were assigned as a tribe to the care of the tabernacle (Nm 2:33), men from 20 years of age who were physically able to fight were assigned to a unit in the tribal army. Certain individuals, however, were exempted from military service (cf. Dt 20:5-9; 24:5; Jgs 7:3).<\/p>\n<p>Until after the conquest of Canaan, the tribal army was essentially a militia recruited in an emergency. Internal organization of the militia was the responsibility of the tribe; each clan and family sent their quota of warriors when summoned to battle by tribal leaders. Because the clan formed the basic unit, recruits were under the command of their own leaders. David’s brothers, for example, served in a division composed of the fighting men from their clan under the command of a captain (1 Sm 17:18; 18:13). When the emergency passed, the militia was disbanded and the soldiers returned to their home districts.<\/p>\n<p>Because the land was divided among the tribes, no tribal or clan leader before Saul commanded the entire tribal confederation (cf. 1 Sm 11:1-11). In fact, tribal jealousies and rivalries threatened national solidarity and jeopardized united action even in a critical period. On some occasions, however, the severity of a crisis caused the armies of the various tribes to unite in common action. The multitribal armies were divided into companies of 1,000, 100, and 50, and still further into families under appointed officers. There is evidence of organization into units according to weaponry (1 Chr 12:24-38). Benjamin’s tribe specialized in the bow and sling. The tribes of Gad, Judah, and Naphtali were expert with the spear and shield.<\/p>\n<p>Provisioning the tribal army was the responsibility of each tribe (Jgs 20:9-10). One out of every ten soldiers was appointed to secure food for the others, either from wealthy landowners (cf. 1 Sm 25) or from the natural resources of the land. In that early stage of military organization, a soldier’s pay generally consisted only of supplies and a portion of the spoils of battle (cf. 30:21-25).<\/p>\n<h5>Professional Army<\/h5>\n<p>Not until the time of the united monarchy did Israel have a regular army. Transition from a people’s militia to a professional army took place under Saul, whose reign changed the tribal confederacy into a monarchy (1 Sm 13:2). Philistine harassment of Israel encouraged establishment of a strong standing army. The army, however, was not large; it consisted of 3,000 men organized in three formations of 1,000 each (1 Sm 13:2; 24:2). Pay for those career soldiers was sometimes in the form of a land grant (8:14) as well as a share of booty. In the organization of Saul’s army, Abner, Jonathan, and David were given particular responsibilities. Abner was named commander of the army (17:55) and was probably also given direct command of one of the divisions. David’s band of valorous men, “the thirty,” provided the leadership core for his own military organization when he became king.<\/p>\n<p>David continued the practice of maintaining a professional army. But he also developed a national militia of 12 regiments, each being called up for duty for one month of the year under professional officers (1 Chr 27:1-15). Each regiment, recruited across tribal lines, consisted of 24,000 soldiers. David’s innovation provided him with a large reserve force that could be mustered for war in times of emergency. The reserves, and presumably the professional army as well, were organized into units of 1,000, 100, 50, and 10. Joab, a specialist in siege warfare (2 Sm 20:15), commanded the professional army, and Amasa was over the citizens’ militia. David, however, remained commander-in-chief of the military organization.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelite group in King David’s professional army was an outgrowth of the small band of fighting men who had served with him during the period of conflict with Saul. That veteran group consisted of David’s family and clansmen, and others who felt themselves oppressed by the central authority under Saul (1 Sm 22:1-2). It ranged in size between 400 and 600 men (1 Sm 22:2; 23:13; 27:2). The presence of mercenaries in David’s army is clearly recorded. Uriah the Hittite and Ittai of Gath are conspicuous examples, along with many career soldiers of Philistine origin, such as the Cherethites and the Pelethites under Benaiah (2 Sm 8:18; 15:19-22; 23:22-23).<\/p>\n<p>The Davidic dynasty maintained a permanent mercenary army until 701 <span>BC<\/span>, after which it was considered too costly. The oppressive cost of maintaining a professional army, financed by burdensome taxes and forced labor, was in fact a major factor contributing to the disruption of the monarchy after Solomon’s death (cf. 1 Kgs 10:26-29; 12:4-19). After Sennacherib’s invasion in 701 <span>BC<\/span>, the southern kingdom of Judah depended entirely on a citizens’ militia for its defense. It is commonly held that the northern kingdom of Israel did not employ a professional army, but it is evident that King Ahab used at least some mercenary soldiers in his defense against Ben-hadad of Syria (1 Kgs 20:15-20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Armor and Weapons.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WARFARE The means by which one nation seeks to impose its will upon another by force. An index to the importance of warfare in antiquity is provided by the amount of technical skill directed to perfecting devices for destruction and defense. Methods of Warfare Standard Combat Cavalry units were introduced at the close of the second millennium BC and the beginning of the first. The cavalry charge provided a shock force to the great armies, and the cavalry’s mobility permitted concentration of ...","summary_en":"WARFARE The means by which one nation seeks to impose its will upon another by force. An index to the importance of warfare in antiquity is provided by the amount of technical skill directed to perfecting devices for destruction and defense. Methods of Warfare Standard Combat Cavalry units were introduced at the close of the second millennium BC and the beginning of the first. The cavalry charge provided a shock force to the great armies, and the cavalry’s mobility permitted concentration of ...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45398,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:2","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:2<\/strong> As he did before the battle for Jericho, <em>Joshua sent some of his men<\/em> to assess the situation at <em>Ai.<\/em> This town stood about ten miles west of Jericho at the entrance to a plateau north of Jerusalem called the Plateau of Benjamin; conquering Ai would open the way for Israel to control the hill country. • <em>Beth-aven,<\/em> “house of iniquity,” was probably an intentionally derogatory wordplay on the name <em>Bethel,<\/em> the “house of God.” A pagan shrine stood on this site later in Israel’s history (1 Kgs 12:28-33).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:2<\/strong> As he did before the battle for Jericho, <em>Joshua sent some of his men<\/em> to assess the situation at <em>Ai.<\/em> This town stood about ten miles west of Jericho at the entrance to a plateau north of Jerusalem called the Plateau of Benjamin; conquering Ai would open the way for Israel to control the hill country. • <em>Beth-aven,<\/em> “house of iniquity,” was probably an intentionally derogatory wordplay on the name <em>Bethel,<\/em> the “house of God.” A pagan shrine stood on this site later in Israel’s history (1 Kgs 12:28-33).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:2 As he did before the battle for Jericho, Joshua sent some of his men to assess the situation at Ai. This town stood about ten miles west of Jericho at the entrance to a plateau north of Jerusalem called the Plateau of Benjamin; conquering Ai would open the way for Israel to control the hill country. • Beth-aven, “house of iniquity,” was probably an intentionally derogatory wordplay on the name Bethel, the “house of God.” A pagan shrine stood on this site later in Israel’s history (1 Kgs 1...","summary_en":"7:2 As he did before the battle for Jericho, Joshua sent some of his men to assess the situation at Ai. This town stood about ten miles west of Jericho at the entrance to a plateau north of Jerusalem called the Plateau of Benjamin; conquering Ai would open the way for Israel to control the hill country. • Beth-aven, “house of iniquity,” was probably an intentionally derogatory wordplay on the name Bethel, the “house of God.” A pagan shrine stood on this site later in Israel’s history (1 Kgs 1...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73024,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:2","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:2<\/strong> As he did before the battle for Jericho, <em>Joshua sent some of his men<\/em> to assess the situation at <em>Ai.<\/em> This town stood about ten miles west of Jericho at the entrance to a plateau north of Jerusalem called the Plateau of Benjamin; conquering Ai would open the way for Israel to control the hill country. • <em>Beth-aven,<\/em> “house of iniquity,” was probably an intentionally derogatory wordplay on the name <em>Bethel,<\/em> the “house of God.” A pagan shrine stood on this site later in Israel’s history (1 Kgs 12:28-33).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:2<\/strong> As he did before the battle for Jericho, <em>Joshua sent some of his men<\/em> to assess the situation at <em>Ai.<\/em> This town stood about ten miles west of Jericho at the entrance to a plateau north of Jerusalem called the Plateau of Benjamin; conquering Ai would open the way for Israel to control the hill country. • <em>Beth-aven,<\/em> “house of iniquity,” was probably an intentionally derogatory wordplay on the name <em>Bethel,<\/em> the “house of God.” A pagan shrine stood on this site later in Israel’s history (1 Kgs 12:28-33).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:2 As he did before the battle for Jericho, Joshua sent some of his men to assess the situation at Ai. This town stood about ten miles west of Jericho at the entrance to a plateau north of Jerusalem called the Plateau of Benjamin; conquering Ai would open the way for Israel to control the hill country. • Beth-aven, “house of iniquity,” was probably an intentionally derogatory wordplay on the name Bethel, the “house of God.” A pagan shrine stood on this site later in Israel’s history (1 Kgs 1...","summary_en":"7:2 As he did before the battle for Jericho, Joshua sent some of his men to assess the situation at Ai. This town stood about ten miles west of Jericho at the entrance to a plateau north of Jerusalem called the Plateau of Benjamin; conquering Ai would open the way for Israel to control the hill country. • Beth-aven, “house of iniquity,” was probably an intentionally derogatory wordplay on the name Bethel, the “house of God.” A pagan shrine stood on this site later in Israel’s history (1 Kgs 1...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100650,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:2","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:2<\/strong> As he did before the battle for Jericho, <em>Joshua sent some of his men<\/em> to assess the situation at <em>Ai.<\/em> This town stood about ten miles west of Jericho at the entrance to a plateau north of Jerusalem called the Plateau of Benjamin; conquering Ai would open the way for Israel to control the hill country. • <em>Beth-aven,<\/em> “house of iniquity,” was probably an intentionally derogatory wordplay on the name <em>Bethel,<\/em> the “house of God.” A pagan shrine stood on this site later in Israel’s history (1 Kgs 12:28-33).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:2<\/strong> As he did before the battle for Jericho, <em>Joshua sent some of his men<\/em> to assess the situation at <em>Ai.<\/em> This town stood about ten miles west of Jericho at the entrance to a plateau north of Jerusalem called the Plateau of Benjamin; conquering Ai would open the way for Israel to control the hill country. • <em>Beth-aven,<\/em> “house of iniquity,” was probably an intentionally derogatory wordplay on the name <em>Bethel,<\/em> the “house of God.” A pagan shrine stood on this site later in Israel’s history (1 Kgs 12:28-33).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:2 As he did before the battle for Jericho, Joshua sent some of his men to assess the situation at Ai. This town stood about ten miles west of Jericho at the entrance to a plateau north of Jerusalem called the Plateau of Benjamin; conquering Ai would open the way for Israel to control the hill country. • Beth-aven, “house of iniquity,” was probably an intentionally derogatory wordplay on the name Bethel, the “house of God.” A pagan shrine stood on this site later in Israel’s history (1 Kgs 1...","summary_en":"7:2 As he did before the battle for Jericho, Joshua sent some of his men to assess the situation at Ai. This town stood about ten miles west of Jericho at the entrance to a plateau north of Jerusalem called the Plateau of Benjamin; conquering Ai would open the way for Israel to control the hill country. • Beth-aven, “house of iniquity,” was probably an intentionally derogatory wordplay on the name Bethel, the “house of God.” A pagan shrine stood on this site later in Israel’s history (1 Kgs 1...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128276,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:2","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:2<\/strong> As he did before the battle for Jericho, <em>Joshua sent some of his men<\/em> to assess the situation at <em>Ai.<\/em> This town stood about ten miles west of Jericho at the entrance to a plateau north of Jerusalem called the Plateau of Benjamin; conquering Ai would open the way for Israel to control the hill country. • <em>Beth-aven,<\/em> “house of iniquity,” was probably an intentionally derogatory wordplay on the name <em>Bethel,<\/em> the “house of God.” A pagan shrine stood on this site later in Israel’s history (1 Kgs 12:28-33).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:2<\/strong> As he did before the battle for Jericho, <em>Joshua sent some of his men<\/em> to assess the situation at <em>Ai.<\/em> This town stood about ten miles west of Jericho at the entrance to a plateau north of Jerusalem called the Plateau of Benjamin; conquering Ai would open the way for Israel to control the hill country. • <em>Beth-aven,<\/em> “house of iniquity,” was probably an intentionally derogatory wordplay on the name <em>Bethel,<\/em> the “house of God.” A pagan shrine stood on this site later in Israel’s history (1 Kgs 12:28-33).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:2 As he did before the battle for Jericho, Joshua sent some of his men to assess the situation at Ai. This town stood about ten miles west of Jericho at the entrance to a plateau north of Jerusalem called the Plateau of Benjamin; conquering Ai would open the way for Israel to control the hill country. • Beth-aven, “house of iniquity,” was probably an intentionally derogatory wordplay on the name Bethel, the “house of God.” A pagan shrine stood on this site later in Israel’s history (1 Kgs 1...","summary_en":"7:2 As he did before the battle for Jericho, Joshua sent some of his men to assess the situation at Ai. This town stood about ten miles west of Jericho at the entrance to a plateau north of Jerusalem called the Plateau of Benjamin; conquering Ai would open the way for Israel to control the hill country. • Beth-aven, “house of iniquity,” was probably an intentionally derogatory wordplay on the name Bethel, the “house of God.” A pagan shrine stood on this site later in Israel’s history (1 Kgs 1...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":45399,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:3","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:3-4<\/strong> God’s provision of victory at Jericho apparently bred complacency and overconfidence; Joshua did not even consult with God before sending a small contingent of troops to Ai.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:3-4<\/strong> God’s provision of victory at Jericho apparently bred complacency and overconfidence; Joshua did not even consult with God before sending a small contingent of troops to Ai.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:3-4 God’s provision of victory at Jericho apparently bred complacency and overconfidence; Joshua did not even consult with God before sending a small contingent of troops to Ai.","summary_en":"7:3-4 God’s provision of victory at Jericho apparently bred complacency and overconfidence; Joshua did not even consult with God before sending a small contingent of troops to Ai.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73025,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:3","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:3-4<\/strong> God’s provision of victory at Jericho apparently bred complacency and overconfidence; Joshua did not even consult with God before sending a small contingent of troops to Ai.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:3-4<\/strong> God’s provision of victory at Jericho apparently bred complacency and overconfidence; Joshua did not even consult with God before sending a small contingent of troops to Ai.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:3-4 God’s provision of victory at Jericho apparently bred complacency and overconfidence; Joshua did not even consult with God before sending a small contingent of troops to Ai.","summary_en":"7:3-4 God’s provision of victory at Jericho apparently bred complacency and overconfidence; Joshua did not even consult with God before sending a small contingent of troops to Ai.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100651,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:3","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:3-4<\/strong> God’s provision of victory at Jericho apparently bred complacency and overconfidence; Joshua did not even consult with God before sending a small contingent of troops to Ai.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:3-4<\/strong> God’s provision of victory at Jericho apparently bred complacency and overconfidence; Joshua did not even consult with God before sending a small contingent of troops to Ai.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:3-4 God’s provision of victory at Jericho apparently bred complacency and overconfidence; Joshua did not even consult with God before sending a small contingent of troops to Ai.","summary_en":"7:3-4 God’s provision of victory at Jericho apparently bred complacency and overconfidence; Joshua did not even consult with God before sending a small contingent of troops to Ai.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128277,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:3","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:3-4<\/strong> God’s provision of victory at Jericho apparently bred complacency and overconfidence; Joshua did not even consult with God before sending a small contingent of troops to Ai.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:3-4<\/strong> God’s provision of victory at Jericho apparently bred complacency and overconfidence; Joshua did not even consult with God before sending a small contingent of troops to Ai.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:3-4 God’s provision of victory at Jericho apparently bred complacency and overconfidence; Joshua did not even consult with God before sending a small contingent of troops to Ai.","summary_en":"7:3-4 God’s provision of victory at Jericho apparently bred complacency and overconfidence; Joshua did not even consult with God before sending a small contingent of troops to Ai.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":20678,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Joshua","title_en":"Book of Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":27715,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and Numerology*, Numbers","title_en":"and Numerology*, Numbers","content_ro":"<h3>NUMBERS AND NUMEROLOGY*<\/h3>\n<p>Individual numbers have a symbolic as well as a literal sense in the Bible. In Daniel, and to a lesser extent in Revelation, there is a developed system of numerology where interrelated systems of numbers are used in a definite pattern.<\/p>\n<p>Traditionally, conservative Christians have been suspicious of numerology because of its unwise use by groups of Christians who see theological symbolism in every number in the OT, even the most factual. This view was inherited from mystical, pre-Christian Jewish groups, and later carried to extremes by the Kabbalists.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Expression of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Ways of Writing Numerals<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Large Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Counting by Generations<\/p>\n<p>• Approximate Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Symbolic Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Exact Statistics<\/p>\n<p>• Numerology<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExpressionofNumbers\">Expression of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew, and indeed any other Semitic language, has a simple but adequate system of numeration. The number one is an adjective. After that, the numerals are nouns, in parallel masculine and feminine forms, although the masculine is used with the feminine noun and vice versa. Ordinal numbers (first, second, third, etc.) exist alongside cardinal numbers (one, two, three), but as in most languages, the second set can be used instead of the first (“day two” instead of “second day”). From ten to nineteen, there is one composite form built like English “thirteen” (“three-ten”), but “twenty” is literally “tens” (the plural of “ten”). Thirty, forty, and so on are literally “threes,” “fours” (the plural of the words “three” and “four,” respectively) and so on, up to a hundred, which is a new word. There are also separate words for “thousand” and for “ten thousand,” as in Greek, Chinese, and many other languages. Larger numbers must be expressed by multiples of these (“ten thousand times ten thousand” and “thousands of thousands”), suggesting that large figures, rarely needed for small populations and tiny kingdoms, were expressed approximately. Hebrew has not only a singular and plural but also a dual form to express two of anything (two hundred, two thousand). Fractions (a half, a third, a tenth, etc.) could be expressed, and multiplication, division, addition, and subtraction were used. Indeed, instances of all four operations can be found in the Bible. The Hebrew mathematical system was basically part of the larger western Asian mathematical system, of which we know a great deal from Mesopotamia and Egypt. These countries, however, used a more highly developed mathematical system than Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WaysofWritingNumerals\">Ways of Writing Numerals<\/p>\n<p>In the Bible, numbers are always written out in words, as on the famous Moabite Stone and the Siloam Inscription. But every nation in the ancient world could also express numbers by using figures or ciphers of various kinds (like our 1, 2, 3, . . .). Because of this danger of error, in later days numbers were normally written out in full, in words, where confusion, although still possible, was not nearly so likely. An additional way of writing numbers, known both to the Hebrews and the Greeks, was the use of consecutive letters of the alphabet instead of consecutive numerals (as if we used A for 1, B for 2, etc.). This system, in wide use by NT times, is the usual system in modern Hebrew and has the advantage that numerical combinations can be pronounced by inserting arbitrary vowels, thus making artificial words. For example, if the number of the beast (Rv 13:18), 666, is expressed in alphabetical letters, it can spell out the consonants of “Nero Caesar,” although other names are possible, especially if the variant reading 616 is used.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofLargeNumbers\">Problems of Large Numbers<\/p>\n<p>Even allowing for all these possibilities, there remain certain problems connected with large numbers, particularly in the OT. The most obvious is that of the ten long-lived patriarchs, whose ages are recorded in Genesis 5. Different figures (varying by whole centuries) are recorded for their ages in the Hebrew text, the Samaritan text, and the earliest Greek translation (known as the Septuagint), but all figures are very large. Some interpret these figures literally and point out that there is a steady reduction from the ages attained by these patriarchs to the more modest 120 years allotted to man in Noah’s time (Gn 6:3) and the 70 years accepted later as the human life span (Ps 90:10). This would correspond to the progressive spiritual deterioration of mankind after the fall, from the perfect state of Adam to the present condition. Whatever the explanation of the figures, there is no doubt that this is the theological intent of the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>The large number of Israelites who left Egypt is also problematic. If there were actually 600,000 fighting men (Nm 1:46), this would correspond to a whole nation of some 2 million or more. Possibly the word translated “thousand” means “clan units”; it would clearly be a much smaller total body, whatever its exact size. Of course, God could have maintained any number of people in the desert. The evidence of archaeology as to the population of Canaan both before and after the Israelite onslaught seems to support a lower number. The same principle might explain the large numbers given for the fighting men of the various Israelite tribes, and the huge totals for Israel and Judah’s military strength given at later times in the historical books of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>To the ordinary Bible reader, perhaps one of the biggest problems is the different numbers recorded in Chronicles and Kings, when the same incidents are being described. Manuscript errors, or confusion of numbers written by signs or single letters of the alphabet, may account for numerous individual inconsistencies, but not for wholesale differences, particularly as the figures in Chronicles are consistently much larger. These very large round numbers may have symbolic significance and may not be intended to be taken in their literal sense at all. Indeed, since the Jews had before them the book of Kings and the book of Chronicles at the same time, they can hardly have taken both sets of numbers literally themselves.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CountingbyGenerations\">Counting by Generations<\/p>\n<p>One of the problems of the OT is that of the dating of events. Even with an exact number system, there is no absolute fixed point from which to reckon. Later Jews and Christians counted from the presumed date of the Creation. Not until after the time of David and Solomon are both internal reference between the comparative dates of kings of Judah and Israel and external reference to monarchs outside Israel used. This open-endedness accounts for the vague period of “forty years” used so often in the OT (e.g., the book of Judges) for any long but indeterminate period of time, almost certainly corresponding to a generation (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">dor<\/span>). Counting by generations is specific in some places in the Bible and may be implicit in others. For instance, Abraham’s descendants are to return to Canaan “in the fourth generation” (Gn 15:16), and the genealogy of Christ is neatly constructed on a pattern of three groups of fourteen generations (Mt 1:17), rather than on periods of years. Wherever people use and recite genealogies, such counting by generations is natural. But Abraham’s descendants are said to have returned to Canaan approximately four centuries later (Gal 3:17), and therefore the word “generation” sometimes stands for 100 years. The Hebrew word for “generation” may mean 120 years (Gn 6:3). Usually, the ancient Hebrews used vague phrases like “in those days” or “after those days” or “the days are coming,” which expressed past, present, and future without any specific mention of number. In other words, the Bible writers were more concerned with theology than with mathematics.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ApproximateUseofNumbers\">Approximate Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, Israel’s 40 years in the desert is a good example of the approximate use of numbers (Nm 14:33). In the NT, Jesus was in the wilderness 40 days during the temptation (Mt 4:2), and there were 40 days between his resurrection and ascension (Acts 1:3). Moses was 40 years old at his call (Acts 7:23), apparently lived 40 years in Midian (Ex 7:7), and spent 40 years leading Israel out of Egypt and through the desert (Dt 34:7), for he is said to be 120 years old at his death. However, two generations of 40 years is the normal maximum for a healthy man (Ps 90:10), and even this is often shortened to 70 years by the rigors of life. Seventy is also used at times in this approximate sense.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolicUseofNumbers\">Symbolic Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture, seven symbolizes completeness or perfection. On the seventh day God rested from his labors and creation is finished (Gn 2:2). Pharaoh in his dream saw seven cattle coming from the Nile (41:2). Samson’s sacred Nazirite locks were braided in seven plaits (Jgs 16:13). Seven devils left Mary of Magdala, signifying the totality of her previous possession by Satan (Lk 8:2); “seven other devils” will enter the purified but vacant life of a person (Mt 12:45). However, on the positive side, there were the seven spirits of God (Rv 3:1). In the seventh year the Hebrew slave was to be freed (Ex 21:2), having completed his time of captivity and service. Every seventh year was a sabbatical year (Lv 25:4). Seven times seven reiterates the sense of completeness. In the Year of Jubilee (at the completion of 7 x 7 years = the 50th year), all land is freed and returns to the original owners (Lv 25:10). Pentecost, the Feast of Weeks, is seven times seven days after Passover. “Seventy,” which is literally “sevens” in Hebrew, strengthens the concept of perfection. There are 70 elders (Ex 24:1) in Israel. Israel was exiled to Babylon for 70 years (Jer 25:12) to complete its punishment. “Seventy times seven” (Mt 18:22) reiterates this still further. The Lord was not giving Peter a mathematical number of times that he should forgive another person, but rather was insisting on limitless forgiveness for a brother’s sin.<\/p>\n<p>“Three” may well share in this meaning of completion or perfection, although not so forcibly (2 Kgs 13:18). Many things happen “on the third day” (Hos 6:2). Jonah spent three days in the stomach of the fish (Mt 12:40), and the Lord rose again on the third day (1 Cor 15:4). David was offered a choice of divine punishments—three years, three months, three days (2 Sm 24:13). For the Christian, “three” takes on a far deeper significance as the number of Persons of the Trinity. The three Persons are clearly expressed, for instance, in the Great Commission (Mt 28:19) and in the Pauline benediction (2 Cor 13:13). Many echoes of this threefold expression are in the NT, and many anticipations of it in the OT, of which the thrice-repeated “Holy” in Isaiah 6:3 is the most famous.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars see four as another symbol of completeness (four winds of heaven, Dn 7:2; four horsemen, Rv 6:1-7; four living creatures around the throne of God, Rv 4:6). Five is certainly used in an indefinite sense as a small number (Is 19:18; 30:17). Nor do eight or nine seem to have any special significance, although, like other numbers, they may be used in a factual sense to describe any of God’s activities (nine plagues on Egypt, Ex 7–10). “Ten” does have significance because of the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1-17), but not any special symbolism earlier in the Bible. If anything, “ten” is elsewhere used in a vague way. Laban changes Jacob’s wages ten times (Gn 31:7); Daniel and his friends are ten times better than all other students (Dn 1:20); ten times over, the Jewish settlers will be warned of impending enemy attacks (Neh 4:12).<\/p>\n<p>Eleven appears to have no special biblical significance, but 12 certainly has. The clearest proof of this is the existence of the 12 tribes in Israel. In Revelation 7:4-8, where it is mathematically important that the number of tribes be limited to 12, the tribe of Dan is altogether omitted—probably on account of Dan’s sin of idolatry (Jgs 18:14-20). Ishmael’s descendants were also divided into 12 clans (Gn 17:20), so that the number 12 was apparently significant outside Israel as well. In the NT Christ chose 12 apostles (Mt 10:1-4). The link with the number of tribes is made specific when Christ tells the apostles that they will sit on 12 thrones, judging the 12 tribes (Mt 19:28). However, it is interesting that, after the election and appointment of Matthias (Acts 1:26), the Christian church apparently made no subsequent efforts to maintain the number of apostles. Like “seven times seven,” “twelve times twelve” increases the force of the number. When this is further multiplied by a thousand, the figure becomes the 144,000 redeemed (Rv 7:4), who were sealed “out of all the tribes of Israel.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExactStatistics\">Exact Statistics<\/p>\n<p>As distinct from the metaphorical use of numbers to denote completion, immensity, and the like, numbers in Hebrew were often used to give exact tallies or measurements. Such usage is known to us only from clay tablets and ostraca (broken pieces of potsherd engraved in ink, used as rough notebooks). However, ascertaining exactly what the text was in its earliest form and what that text means is difficult.<\/p>\n<p>An example is the number of the sons of Jeconiah among the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh. They were struck down by the Lord because of their failure to rejoice with the others when God’s ark returned to Israel from the Philistine country (1 Sm 6:19). The Greek text (LXX) reads “seventy”; the later Hebrew manuscripts add “fifty thousand.” But, as Beth-shemesh itself was only a small frontier town, and the “sons of Jeconiah” was presumably only one clan among several, the smaller number is obviously the original, and the large addition due to some later manuscript confusion.<\/p>\n<p>A good rule in trying to decide whether a number is statistical or impressionistic is to determine whether it is a small number, or an unusual number for which there is no obvious theological explanation. When the men of Ai killed some 36 Israelites at the first assault on the city (Jos 7:5), the smallness of the number is evidence that this is a vividly remembered factual detail. Similarly, in the case of the number of Abraham’s 318 men (Gn 14:14) or the catch of 153 fish after the resurrection (Jn 21:11), the numbers, though large, are not round numbers but unusual combinations, and are obviously meant in a literal or statistical sense. Irrelevant details like this have a habit of remaining in the memory, and are the best guarantee of the trustworthiness of the narrative.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Numerology\">Numerology<\/p>\n<p>Numerology may be said to be an extended application of the metaphorical significance of numbers (7, 40, etc.) already discussed. In the Bible, this systematization of numbers always goes with a strong sense of the sovereignty of God, his control over human history, and a belief in his ongoing purpose and its triumphant conclusion.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the first clear instance of numerology in the Bible is 1 Kings 6:1, where Solomon began to build the temple 480 years after the exodus, a period 5 times 10 times 12, or 4 times 120, the ideal life span of man in early days (Gn 6:3). First Chronicles 6:3-8 gives 12 generations of men (presumably 40 years each) to cover the same period, so “twelve generations” is probably the real basis for the computation, rather than any exact year-by-year tally. A tally would have been impossible in the days of the judges and unlikely before the monarchy. David was the first to establish an official scribe or recorder to keep daily annals in Israel (2 Sm 8:16-17), as was common in the great kingdoms from far earlier times. Such Israelite annals are later mentioned as sources of the books of the kings (2 Kgs 14:18). The number 480 is probably a rough approximation rather than exact and denotes the end of one of God’s epochs.<\/p>\n<p>When Jeremiah prophesies an exile of 70 years for Judah (Jer 25:11; 29:10), it is not only a historical prediction that was literally fulfilled but also a symbol of completeness; Judah’s punishment is complete (cf. Is 40:2). Isaiah (Is 23:15) had made a similar prophecy of a 70-year punishment for Tyre, and Ezekiel (Ez 29:11-13) prophesied a 40-year “exile” for Egypt. When these 70 years are regarded as sabbatical years, where the land must lie untilled to compensate for the 7 times 70 years of sin before, then true numerology begins (2 Chr 36:21). Here numerology is used only as an explanation of past and present, but it can also be used to explain the future, especially in the book of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>Daniel (Dn 9:2) refers to the literal 70 years of the exile as foretold by Jeremiah. In Daniel 9:24, this has been extended to 70 weeks of years (490 years) applied to the distant future. Daniel 9:25 sees 69 of these (483 years) as elapsing before Messiah appears. Presumably, the last week of the 70 is therefore thought of as the time of his activity. However this may be interpreted in terms of actual dates, it must be harmonized with 9:26, where the Messiah is “cut off” after 62 weeks of years (434 years). The difficulty lies in establishing the starting point for this long period. This is an example of an elaborate numerology, embracing centuries of history, all ultimately based on the 70 years of Jeremiah. According to biblical principles, this can have both an “immediate” fulfillment in the return from exile, and a “prophetic” fulfillment in the far distant future in connection with the coming of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The other major example of extended numerology in Daniel is in connection with the “time, times, and half a time” (7:25). This must stand for three and a half “times,” that is, half of seven “times.” Thus, it refers either to three and a half years (half a “week” of years) or three and a half “weeks” of years (cf. “seven times” in 4:16, where “seven years” is clearly meant). Whatever may be its ultimate prophetic fulfillment in Christ, the “initial” or “partial” fulfillment is the roughly three and a half years of bitter persecution of God’s people by Antiochus Epiphanes (167–164 <span>BC<\/span>). This figure of three and a half years reappears in Revelation 11:2 (“forty-two months”), and 12:14 (“a time, and times, and half a time”), to describe the period of Rome’s persecution of the Christian church. The figure had possibly become a symbol of any bitter but limited persecution. The “two thousand three hundred evenings and mornings” of Daniel 8:14 may mean 1,150 days, which is approximately the same length of time.<\/p>\n<p>The three and a half years of Daniel 7:25 reappear in Revelation 11 in the form of “forty-two months,” the time when the heathen will trample down Jerusalem (Rv 11:2). The 1,290 days of Daniel 12:11 reappear here (in the slightly different form of 1,260 days) as the time that God’s two witnesses will prophesy (Rv 11:3). The 42 months reappear in Revelation 13:5 as the period that the wild beast will be allowed to blaspheme. While the “thousand years” of 20:6 is not derived from Daniel at all, the metaphorical use of “thousand” is familiar to the OT. The closest direct parallel is in Deuteronomy 7:9, where God’s covenant will be kept with a “thousand generations” to come.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NUMBERS AND NUMEROLOGY*<\/h3>\n<p>Individual numbers have a symbolic as well as a literal sense in the Bible. In Daniel, and to a lesser extent in Revelation, there is a developed system of numerology where interrelated systems of numbers are used in a definite pattern.<\/p>\n<p>Traditionally, conservative Christians have been suspicious of numerology because of its unwise use by groups of Christians who see theological symbolism in every number in the OT, even the most factual. This view was inherited from mystical, pre-Christian Jewish groups, and later carried to extremes by the Kabbalists.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Expression of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Ways of Writing Numerals<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Large Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Counting by Generations<\/p>\n<p>• Approximate Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Symbolic Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Exact Statistics<\/p>\n<p>• Numerology<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExpressionofNumbers\">Expression of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew, and indeed any other Semitic language, has a simple but adequate system of numeration. The number one is an adjective. After that, the numerals are nouns, in parallel masculine and feminine forms, although the masculine is used with the feminine noun and vice versa. Ordinal numbers (first, second, third, etc.) exist alongside cardinal numbers (one, two, three), but as in most languages, the second set can be used instead of the first (“day two” instead of “second day”). From ten to nineteen, there is one composite form built like English “thirteen” (“three-ten”), but “twenty” is literally “tens” (the plural of “ten”). Thirty, forty, and so on are literally “threes,” “fours” (the plural of the words “three” and “four,” respectively) and so on, up to a hundred, which is a new word. There are also separate words for “thousand” and for “ten thousand,” as in Greek, Chinese, and many other languages. Larger numbers must be expressed by multiples of these (“ten thousand times ten thousand” and “thousands of thousands”), suggesting that large figures, rarely needed for small populations and tiny kingdoms, were expressed approximately. Hebrew has not only a singular and plural but also a dual form to express two of anything (two hundred, two thousand). Fractions (a half, a third, a tenth, etc.) could be expressed, and multiplication, division, addition, and subtraction were used. Indeed, instances of all four operations can be found in the Bible. The Hebrew mathematical system was basically part of the larger western Asian mathematical system, of which we know a great deal from Mesopotamia and Egypt. These countries, however, used a more highly developed mathematical system than Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WaysofWritingNumerals\">Ways of Writing Numerals<\/p>\n<p>In the Bible, numbers are always written out in words, as on the famous Moabite Stone and the Siloam Inscription. But every nation in the ancient world could also express numbers by using figures or ciphers of various kinds (like our 1, 2, 3, . . .). Because of this danger of error, in later days numbers were normally written out in full, in words, where confusion, although still possible, was not nearly so likely. An additional way of writing numbers, known both to the Hebrews and the Greeks, was the use of consecutive letters of the alphabet instead of consecutive numerals (as if we used A for 1, B for 2, etc.). This system, in wide use by NT times, is the usual system in modern Hebrew and has the advantage that numerical combinations can be pronounced by inserting arbitrary vowels, thus making artificial words. For example, if the number of the beast (Rv 13:18), 666, is expressed in alphabetical letters, it can spell out the consonants of “Nero Caesar,” although other names are possible, especially if the variant reading 616 is used.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofLargeNumbers\">Problems of Large Numbers<\/p>\n<p>Even allowing for all these possibilities, there remain certain problems connected with large numbers, particularly in the OT. The most obvious is that of the ten long-lived patriarchs, whose ages are recorded in Genesis 5. Different figures (varying by whole centuries) are recorded for their ages in the Hebrew text, the Samaritan text, and the earliest Greek translation (known as the Septuagint), but all figures are very large. Some interpret these figures literally and point out that there is a steady reduction from the ages attained by these patriarchs to the more modest 120 years allotted to man in Noah’s time (Gn 6:3) and the 70 years accepted later as the human life span (Ps 90:10). This would correspond to the progressive spiritual deterioration of mankind after the fall, from the perfect state of Adam to the present condition. Whatever the explanation of the figures, there is no doubt that this is the theological intent of the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>The large number of Israelites who left Egypt is also problematic. If there were actually 600,000 fighting men (Nm 1:46), this would correspond to a whole nation of some 2 million or more. Possibly the word translated “thousand” means “clan units”; it would clearly be a much smaller total body, whatever its exact size. Of course, God could have maintained any number of people in the desert. The evidence of archaeology as to the population of Canaan both before and after the Israelite onslaught seems to support a lower number. The same principle might explain the large numbers given for the fighting men of the various Israelite tribes, and the huge totals for Israel and Judah’s military strength given at later times in the historical books of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>To the ordinary Bible reader, perhaps one of the biggest problems is the different numbers recorded in Chronicles and Kings, when the same incidents are being described. Manuscript errors, or confusion of numbers written by signs or single letters of the alphabet, may account for numerous individual inconsistencies, but not for wholesale differences, particularly as the figures in Chronicles are consistently much larger. These very large round numbers may have symbolic significance and may not be intended to be taken in their literal sense at all. Indeed, since the Jews had before them the book of Kings and the book of Chronicles at the same time, they can hardly have taken both sets of numbers literally themselves.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CountingbyGenerations\">Counting by Generations<\/p>\n<p>One of the problems of the OT is that of the dating of events. Even with an exact number system, there is no absolute fixed point from which to reckon. Later Jews and Christians counted from the presumed date of the Creation. Not until after the time of David and Solomon are both internal reference between the comparative dates of kings of Judah and Israel and external reference to monarchs outside Israel used. This open-endedness accounts for the vague period of “forty years” used so often in the OT (e.g., the book of Judges) for any long but indeterminate period of time, almost certainly corresponding to a generation (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">dor<\/span>). Counting by generations is specific in some places in the Bible and may be implicit in others. For instance, Abraham’s descendants are to return to Canaan “in the fourth generation” (Gn 15:16), and the genealogy of Christ is neatly constructed on a pattern of three groups of fourteen generations (Mt 1:17), rather than on periods of years. Wherever people use and recite genealogies, such counting by generations is natural. But Abraham’s descendants are said to have returned to Canaan approximately four centuries later (Gal 3:17), and therefore the word “generation” sometimes stands for 100 years. The Hebrew word for “generation” may mean 120 years (Gn 6:3). Usually, the ancient Hebrews used vague phrases like “in those days” or “after those days” or “the days are coming,” which expressed past, present, and future without any specific mention of number. In other words, the Bible writers were more concerned with theology than with mathematics.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ApproximateUseofNumbers\">Approximate Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, Israel’s 40 years in the desert is a good example of the approximate use of numbers (Nm 14:33). In the NT, Jesus was in the wilderness 40 days during the temptation (Mt 4:2), and there were 40 days between his resurrection and ascension (Acts 1:3). Moses was 40 years old at his call (Acts 7:23), apparently lived 40 years in Midian (Ex 7:7), and spent 40 years leading Israel out of Egypt and through the desert (Dt 34:7), for he is said to be 120 years old at his death. However, two generations of 40 years is the normal maximum for a healthy man (Ps 90:10), and even this is often shortened to 70 years by the rigors of life. Seventy is also used at times in this approximate sense.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolicUseofNumbers\">Symbolic Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture, seven symbolizes completeness or perfection. On the seventh day God rested from his labors and creation is finished (Gn 2:2). Pharaoh in his dream saw seven cattle coming from the Nile (41:2). Samson’s sacred Nazirite locks were braided in seven plaits (Jgs 16:13). Seven devils left Mary of Magdala, signifying the totality of her previous possession by Satan (Lk 8:2); “seven other devils” will enter the purified but vacant life of a person (Mt 12:45). However, on the positive side, there were the seven spirits of God (Rv 3:1). In the seventh year the Hebrew slave was to be freed (Ex 21:2), having completed his time of captivity and service. Every seventh year was a sabbatical year (Lv 25:4). Seven times seven reiterates the sense of completeness. In the Year of Jubilee (at the completion of 7 x 7 years = the 50th year), all land is freed and returns to the original owners (Lv 25:10). Pentecost, the Feast of Weeks, is seven times seven days after Passover. “Seventy,” which is literally “sevens” in Hebrew, strengthens the concept of perfection. There are 70 elders (Ex 24:1) in Israel. Israel was exiled to Babylon for 70 years (Jer 25:12) to complete its punishment. “Seventy times seven” (Mt 18:22) reiterates this still further. The Lord was not giving Peter a mathematical number of times that he should forgive another person, but rather was insisting on limitless forgiveness for a brother’s sin.<\/p>\n<p>“Three” may well share in this meaning of completion or perfection, although not so forcibly (2 Kgs 13:18). Many things happen “on the third day” (Hos 6:2). Jonah spent three days in the stomach of the fish (Mt 12:40), and the Lord rose again on the third day (1 Cor 15:4). David was offered a choice of divine punishments—three years, three months, three days (2 Sm 24:13). For the Christian, “three” takes on a far deeper significance as the number of Persons of the Trinity. The three Persons are clearly expressed, for instance, in the Great Commission (Mt 28:19) and in the Pauline benediction (2 Cor 13:13). Many echoes of this threefold expression are in the NT, and many anticipations of it in the OT, of which the thrice-repeated “Holy” in Isaiah 6:3 is the most famous.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars see four as another symbol of completeness (four winds of heaven, Dn 7:2; four horsemen, Rv 6:1-7; four living creatures around the throne of God, Rv 4:6). Five is certainly used in an indefinite sense as a small number (Is 19:18; 30:17). Nor do eight or nine seem to have any special significance, although, like other numbers, they may be used in a factual sense to describe any of God’s activities (nine plagues on Egypt, Ex 7–10). “Ten” does have significance because of the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1-17), but not any special symbolism earlier in the Bible. If anything, “ten” is elsewhere used in a vague way. Laban changes Jacob’s wages ten times (Gn 31:7); Daniel and his friends are ten times better than all other students (Dn 1:20); ten times over, the Jewish settlers will be warned of impending enemy attacks (Neh 4:12).<\/p>\n<p>Eleven appears to have no special biblical significance, but 12 certainly has. The clearest proof of this is the existence of the 12 tribes in Israel. In Revelation 7:4-8, where it is mathematically important that the number of tribes be limited to 12, the tribe of Dan is altogether omitted—probably on account of Dan’s sin of idolatry (Jgs 18:14-20). Ishmael’s descendants were also divided into 12 clans (Gn 17:20), so that the number 12 was apparently significant outside Israel as well. In the NT Christ chose 12 apostles (Mt 10:1-4). The link with the number of tribes is made specific when Christ tells the apostles that they will sit on 12 thrones, judging the 12 tribes (Mt 19:28). However, it is interesting that, after the election and appointment of Matthias (Acts 1:26), the Christian church apparently made no subsequent efforts to maintain the number of apostles. Like “seven times seven,” “twelve times twelve” increases the force of the number. When this is further multiplied by a thousand, the figure becomes the 144,000 redeemed (Rv 7:4), who were sealed “out of all the tribes of Israel.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExactStatistics\">Exact Statistics<\/p>\n<p>As distinct from the metaphorical use of numbers to denote completion, immensity, and the like, numbers in Hebrew were often used to give exact tallies or measurements. Such usage is known to us only from clay tablets and ostraca (broken pieces of potsherd engraved in ink, used as rough notebooks). However, ascertaining exactly what the text was in its earliest form and what that text means is difficult.<\/p>\n<p>An example is the number of the sons of Jeconiah among the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh. They were struck down by the Lord because of their failure to rejoice with the others when God’s ark returned to Israel from the Philistine country (1 Sm 6:19). The Greek text (LXX) reads “seventy”; the later Hebrew manuscripts add “fifty thousand.” But, as Beth-shemesh itself was only a small frontier town, and the “sons of Jeconiah” was presumably only one clan among several, the smaller number is obviously the original, and the large addition due to some later manuscript confusion.<\/p>\n<p>A good rule in trying to decide whether a number is statistical or impressionistic is to determine whether it is a small number, or an unusual number for which there is no obvious theological explanation. When the men of Ai killed some 36 Israelites at the first assault on the city (Jos 7:5), the smallness of the number is evidence that this is a vividly remembered factual detail. Similarly, in the case of the number of Abraham’s 318 men (Gn 14:14) or the catch of 153 fish after the resurrection (Jn 21:11), the numbers, though large, are not round numbers but unusual combinations, and are obviously meant in a literal or statistical sense. Irrelevant details like this have a habit of remaining in the memory, and are the best guarantee of the trustworthiness of the narrative.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Numerology\">Numerology<\/p>\n<p>Numerology may be said to be an extended application of the metaphorical significance of numbers (7, 40, etc.) already discussed. In the Bible, this systematization of numbers always goes with a strong sense of the sovereignty of God, his control over human history, and a belief in his ongoing purpose and its triumphant conclusion.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the first clear instance of numerology in the Bible is 1 Kings 6:1, where Solomon began to build the temple 480 years after the exodus, a period 5 times 10 times 12, or 4 times 120, the ideal life span of man in early days (Gn 6:3). First Chronicles 6:3-8 gives 12 generations of men (presumably 40 years each) to cover the same period, so “twelve generations” is probably the real basis for the computation, rather than any exact year-by-year tally. A tally would have been impossible in the days of the judges and unlikely before the monarchy. David was the first to establish an official scribe or recorder to keep daily annals in Israel (2 Sm 8:16-17), as was common in the great kingdoms from far earlier times. Such Israelite annals are later mentioned as sources of the books of the kings (2 Kgs 14:18). The number 480 is probably a rough approximation rather than exact and denotes the end of one of God’s epochs.<\/p>\n<p>When Jeremiah prophesies an exile of 70 years for Judah (Jer 25:11; 29:10), it is not only a historical prediction that was literally fulfilled but also a symbol of completeness; Judah’s punishment is complete (cf. Is 40:2). Isaiah (Is 23:15) had made a similar prophecy of a 70-year punishment for Tyre, and Ezekiel (Ez 29:11-13) prophesied a 40-year “exile” for Egypt. When these 70 years are regarded as sabbatical years, where the land must lie untilled to compensate for the 7 times 70 years of sin before, then true numerology begins (2 Chr 36:21). Here numerology is used only as an explanation of past and present, but it can also be used to explain the future, especially in the book of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>Daniel (Dn 9:2) refers to the literal 70 years of the exile as foretold by Jeremiah. In Daniel 9:24, this has been extended to 70 weeks of years (490 years) applied to the distant future. Daniel 9:25 sees 69 of these (483 years) as elapsing before Messiah appears. Presumably, the last week of the 70 is therefore thought of as the time of his activity. However this may be interpreted in terms of actual dates, it must be harmonized with 9:26, where the Messiah is “cut off” after 62 weeks of years (434 years). The difficulty lies in establishing the starting point for this long period. This is an example of an elaborate numerology, embracing centuries of history, all ultimately based on the 70 years of Jeremiah. According to biblical principles, this can have both an “immediate” fulfillment in the return from exile, and a “prophetic” fulfillment in the far distant future in connection with the coming of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The other major example of extended numerology in Daniel is in connection with the “time, times, and half a time” (7:25). This must stand for three and a half “times,” that is, half of seven “times.” Thus, it refers either to three and a half years (half a “week” of years) or three and a half “weeks” of years (cf. “seven times” in 4:16, where “seven years” is clearly meant). Whatever may be its ultimate prophetic fulfillment in Christ, the “initial” or “partial” fulfillment is the roughly three and a half years of bitter persecution of God’s people by Antiochus Epiphanes (167–164 <span>BC<\/span>). This figure of three and a half years reappears in Revelation 11:2 (“forty-two months”), and 12:14 (“a time, and times, and half a time”), to describe the period of Rome’s persecution of the Christian church. The figure had possibly become a symbol of any bitter but limited persecution. The “two thousand three hundred evenings and mornings” of Daniel 8:14 may mean 1,150 days, which is approximately the same length of time.<\/p>\n<p>The three and a half years of Daniel 7:25 reappear in Revelation 11 in the form of “forty-two months,” the time when the heathen will trample down Jerusalem (Rv 11:2). The 1,290 days of Daniel 12:11 reappear here (in the slightly different form of 1,260 days) as the time that God’s two witnesses will prophesy (Rv 11:3). The 42 months reappear in Revelation 13:5 as the period that the wild beast will be allowed to blaspheme. While the “thousand years” of 20:6 is not derived from Daniel at all, the metaphorical use of “thousand” is familiar to the OT. The closest direct parallel is in Deuteronomy 7:9, where God’s covenant will be kept with a “thousand generations” to come.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NUMBERS AND NUMEROLOGY* Individual numbers have a symbolic as well as a literal sense in the Bible. In Daniel, and to a lesser extent in Revelation, there is a developed system of numerology where interrelated systems of numbers are used in a definite pattern. Traditionally, conservative Christians have been suspicious of numerology because of its unwise use by groups of Christians who see theological symbolism in every number in the OT, even the most factual. This view was inherited from mys...","summary_en":"NUMBERS AND NUMEROLOGY* Individual numbers have a symbolic as well as a literal sense in the Bible. In Daniel, and to a lesser extent in Revelation, there is a developed system of numerology where interrelated systems of numbers are used in a definite pattern. Traditionally, conservative Christians have been suspicious of numerology because of its unwise use by groups of Christians who see theological symbolism in every number in the OT, even the most factual. This view was inherited from mys...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34731,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Shebarim*","title_en":"Shebarim*","content_ro":"<h3>SHEBARIM*<\/h3>\n<p>Location between Ai and Jericho to which the men of Ai pursued the fleeing Israelites. This region was evidently situated near the place of descent from the hill country to the lowlands (Jos 7:5, see <span>nlt<\/span> mg). Shebarim means “breaches” or “ruins” and might possibly refer to the rough, rocky conditions that would characterize the region at the top of a steep mountain slope. Its location is unknown.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SHEBARIM*<\/h3>\n<p>Location between Ai and Jericho to which the men of Ai pursued the fleeing Israelites. This region was evidently situated near the place of descent from the hill country to the lowlands (Jos 7:5, see <span>nlt<\/span> mg). Shebarim means “breaches” or “ruins” and might possibly refer to the rough, rocky conditions that would characterize the region at the top of a steep mountain slope. Its location is unknown.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SHEBARIM* Location between Ai and Jericho to which the men of Ai pursued the fleeing Israelites. This region was evidently situated near the place of descent from the hill country to the lowlands (Jos 7:5, see nlt mg). Shebarim means “breaches” or “ruins” and might possibly refer to the rough, rocky conditions that would characterize the region at the top of a steep mountain slope. Its location is unknown.","summary_en":"SHEBARIM* Location between Ai and Jericho to which the men of Ai pursued the fleeing Israelites. This region was evidently situated near the place of descent from the hill country to the lowlands (Jos 7:5, see nlt mg). Shebarim means “breaches” or “ruins” and might possibly refer to the rough, rocky conditions that would characterize the region at the top of a steep mountain slope. Its location is unknown.","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45400,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:5","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:5<\/strong> Ai’s defenders left through <em>the town gate<\/em> and attacked Israel’s troops directly (see 8:5). • <em>as far as the quarries:<\/em> An otherwise unknown place.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:5<\/strong> Ai’s defenders left through <em>the town gate<\/em> and attacked Israel’s troops directly (see 8:5). • <em>as far as the quarries:<\/em> An otherwise unknown place.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:5 Ai’s defenders left through the town gate and attacked Israel’s troops directly (see 8:5). • as far as the quarries: An otherwise unknown place.","summary_en":"7:5 Ai’s defenders left through the town gate and attacked Israel’s troops directly (see 8:5). • as far as the quarries: An otherwise unknown place.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73026,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:5","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:5<\/strong> Ai’s defenders left through <em>the town gate<\/em> and attacked Israel’s troops directly (see 8:5). • <em>as far as the quarries:<\/em> An otherwise unknown place.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:5<\/strong> Ai’s defenders left through <em>the town gate<\/em> and attacked Israel’s troops directly (see 8:5). • <em>as far as the quarries:<\/em> An otherwise unknown place.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:5 Ai’s defenders left through the town gate and attacked Israel’s troops directly (see 8:5). • as far as the quarries: An otherwise unknown place.","summary_en":"7:5 Ai’s defenders left through the town gate and attacked Israel’s troops directly (see 8:5). • as far as the quarries: An otherwise unknown place.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100652,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:5","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:5<\/strong> Ai’s defenders left through <em>the town gate<\/em> and attacked Israel’s troops directly (see 8:5). • <em>as far as the quarries:<\/em> An otherwise unknown place.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:5<\/strong> Ai’s defenders left through <em>the town gate<\/em> and attacked Israel’s troops directly (see 8:5). • <em>as far as the quarries:<\/em> An otherwise unknown place.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:5 Ai’s defenders left through the town gate and attacked Israel’s troops directly (see 8:5). • as far as the quarries: An otherwise unknown place.","summary_en":"7:5 Ai’s defenders left through the town gate and attacked Israel’s troops directly (see 8:5). • as far as the quarries: An otherwise unknown place.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128278,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:5","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:5<\/strong> Ai’s defenders left through <em>the town gate<\/em> and attacked Israel’s troops directly (see 8:5). • <em>as far as the quarries:<\/em> An otherwise unknown place.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:5<\/strong> Ai’s defenders left through <em>the town gate<\/em> and attacked Israel’s troops directly (see 8:5). • <em>as far as the quarries:<\/em> An otherwise unknown place.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:5 Ai’s defenders left through the town gate and attacked Israel’s troops directly (see 8:5). • as far as the quarries: An otherwise unknown place.","summary_en":"7:5 Ai’s defenders left through the town gate and attacked Israel’s troops directly (see 8:5). • as far as the quarries: An otherwise unknown place.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":20750,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Joshua","title_en":"Book of Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":26468,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Mourning","title_en":"Mourning","content_ro":"<h3>MOURNING<\/h3>\n<p>Established ritual for grieving, observed by a dead person’s relatives and friends. It began with the closing of the eyes of the dead (Gn 46:4), the embracing of the body (50:1), and its preparation for burial. The hot climate necessitated that burial take place immediately (Acts 5:1-10). But detailed information about burial earlier than NT times (Mt 27:59; Jn 11:44; 19:39-40) is extremely meager. Excavations suggest that the dead were buried fully clothed but not in coffins. The Israelites practiced neither embalming nor cremation, but decent burial was essential.<\/p>\n<p>At the news of a death, it was customary to tear one’s garments (Gn 37:34; 2 Sm 1:11; Jb 1:20), put on sackcloth (2 Sm 3:31), and take off one’s shoes (2 Sm 15:30; Mi 1:8) and headdress; a man might cover his beard or veil his face (Ez 24:17, 23). Mourners put earth on their heads (Jos 7:6; 1 Sm 4:12; Neh 9:1; Jb 2:12; Ez 27:30) or rolled themselves in the dust (Jb 16:15; Mi 1:10) or sat on a heap of ashes (Est 4:3; Is 58:5; Jer 6:26; Ez 27:30). Such mourning rites as shaving the hair and the beard and making cuts on the body (Jb 1:20; Is 22:12; Jer 16:6; 41:5; 47:5; 48:37; Ez 7:18; Am 8:10) were condemned (Lv 19:27-28; Dt 14:1) because of pagan associations. Mourners refrained from washing and discontinued the use of perfumes (2 Sm 12:20; 14:2).<\/p>\n<p>Fasting was also a mourning rite (1 Sm 31:13; 2 Sm 1:12). Neighbors or friends brought mourning bread and the “cup of consolation” to the relatives of the deceased (Jer 16:7; Ez 24:17, 22). Food could not be prepared at the house of the dead because death rendered a place unclean. The dead were unclean to the extent that a priest could “profane” himself by taking part in mourning rites, except for his nearest blood relatives (mother, father, son, daughter, brother, and sister, provided she was still a virgin; Lv 21:1-4, 10-11). These mourning rites were not acts of worship directed toward the dead, nor did they constitute a cult for the dead, but rather they were expressions of grief and affection.<\/p>\n<p>At the graveside, lamentation for the dead was made (1 Kgs 13:30; Jer 6:26; Am 5:16; 8:10; Zec 12:10) by men and women in separate groups (Zec 12:11-14). These exclamations of sorrow might develop into a rhythmic lament (2 Sm 1:17-27; Am 8:10). However, professional mourners, men and especially women (Jer 9:17-19; Am 5:16), were employed. The book of Lamentations is a fine example of laments and is a reminder that among Jews mourning was not always associated with death. It expressed brokenness of spirit for sin, individual and national. National calamity also evoked great lamentation.<\/p>\n<p>These mourning rites were expressive of great grief. But some of them—tearing clothes, wearing sackcloth, disfiguring oneself with dust and ashes, self-mutilation—point to paroxysms of grief, the religious significance of which now escapes us. This was far removed from mourning as an inner feeling or a mood of the mind. It was not just an involuntary outburst of feeling but rather a deliberate, established ritual. When death occurred, the Israelite wept because it was customary and seemly. The erection of monuments or memorials was not unknown (2 Sm 18:18), but the average Israelite was too poor for this to be a common practice.<\/p>\n<p>Mourning practices in NT times differed little from those described in the OT. Mourning was associated with Christ’s second advent (Mt 24:30), with repentance (Jas 4:8-10), with Christ’s leaving the 12 (Mt 9:15), with deep spirituality (5:4), as well as with death (Mk 5:38-39; Lk 7:13; Jn 11:33).<\/p>\n<p>True, the overthrow of death by Jesus Christ robbed death of its sting and the grave of its victory (1 Cor 15:54-57), but the Christian still mourns, though not as those who have no hope (1 Thes 4:13; Rv 21:4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Burial, Burial Customs; Funeral Customs.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MOURNING<\/h3>\n<p>Established ritual for grieving, observed by a dead person’s relatives and friends. It began with the closing of the eyes of the dead (Gn 46:4), the embracing of the body (50:1), and its preparation for burial. The hot climate necessitated that burial take place immediately (Acts 5:1-10). But detailed information about burial earlier than NT times (Mt 27:59; Jn 11:44; 19:39-40) is extremely meager. Excavations suggest that the dead were buried fully clothed but not in coffins. The Israelites practiced neither embalming nor cremation, but decent burial was essential.<\/p>\n<p>At the news of a death, it was customary to tear one’s garments (Gn 37:34; 2 Sm 1:11; Jb 1:20), put on sackcloth (2 Sm 3:31), and take off one’s shoes (2 Sm 15:30; Mi 1:8) and headdress; a man might cover his beard or veil his face (Ez 24:17, 23). Mourners put earth on their heads (Jos 7:6; 1 Sm 4:12; Neh 9:1; Jb 2:12; Ez 27:30) or rolled themselves in the dust (Jb 16:15; Mi 1:10) or sat on a heap of ashes (Est 4:3; Is 58:5; Jer 6:26; Ez 27:30). Such mourning rites as shaving the hair and the beard and making cuts on the body (Jb 1:20; Is 22:12; Jer 16:6; 41:5; 47:5; 48:37; Ez 7:18; Am 8:10) were condemned (Lv 19:27-28; Dt 14:1) because of pagan associations. Mourners refrained from washing and discontinued the use of perfumes (2 Sm 12:20; 14:2).<\/p>\n<p>Fasting was also a mourning rite (1 Sm 31:13; 2 Sm 1:12). Neighbors or friends brought mourning bread and the “cup of consolation” to the relatives of the deceased (Jer 16:7; Ez 24:17, 22). Food could not be prepared at the house of the dead because death rendered a place unclean. The dead were unclean to the extent that a priest could “profane” himself by taking part in mourning rites, except for his nearest blood relatives (mother, father, son, daughter, brother, and sister, provided she was still a virgin; Lv 21:1-4, 10-11). These mourning rites were not acts of worship directed toward the dead, nor did they constitute a cult for the dead, but rather they were expressions of grief and affection.<\/p>\n<p>At the graveside, lamentation for the dead was made (1 Kgs 13:30; Jer 6:26; Am 5:16; 8:10; Zec 12:10) by men and women in separate groups (Zec 12:11-14). These exclamations of sorrow might develop into a rhythmic lament (2 Sm 1:17-27; Am 8:10). However, professional mourners, men and especially women (Jer 9:17-19; Am 5:16), were employed. The book of Lamentations is a fine example of laments and is a reminder that among Jews mourning was not always associated with death. It expressed brokenness of spirit for sin, individual and national. National calamity also evoked great lamentation.<\/p>\n<p>These mourning rites were expressive of great grief. But some of them—tearing clothes, wearing sackcloth, disfiguring oneself with dust and ashes, self-mutilation—point to paroxysms of grief, the religious significance of which now escapes us. This was far removed from mourning as an inner feeling or a mood of the mind. It was not just an involuntary outburst of feeling but rather a deliberate, established ritual. When death occurred, the Israelite wept because it was customary and seemly. The erection of monuments or memorials was not unknown (2 Sm 18:18), but the average Israelite was too poor for this to be a common practice.<\/p>\n<p>Mourning practices in NT times differed little from those described in the OT. Mourning was associated with Christ’s second advent (Mt 24:30), with repentance (Jas 4:8-10), with Christ’s leaving the 12 (Mt 9:15), with deep spirituality (5:4), as well as with death (Mk 5:38-39; Lk 7:13; Jn 11:33).<\/p>\n<p>True, the overthrow of death by Jesus Christ robbed death of its sting and the grave of its victory (1 Cor 15:54-57), but the Christian still mourns, though not as those who have no hope (1 Thes 4:13; Rv 21:4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Burial, Burial Customs; Funeral Customs.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MOURNING Established ritual for grieving, observed by a dead person’s relatives and friends. It began with the closing of the eyes of the dead (Gn 46:4), the embracing of the body (50:1), and its preparation for burial. The hot climate necessitated that burial take place immediately (Acts 5:1-10). But detailed information about burial earlier than NT times (Mt 27:59; Jn 11:44; 19:39-40) is extremely meager. Excavations suggest that the dead were buried fully clothed but not in coffins. The Is...","summary_en":"MOURNING Established ritual for grieving, observed by a dead person’s relatives and friends. It began with the closing of the eyes of the dead (Gn 46:4), the embracing of the body (50:1), and its preparation for burial. The hot climate necessitated that burial take place immediately (Acts 5:1-10). But detailed information about burial earlier than NT times (Mt 27:59; Jn 11:44; 19:39-40) is extremely meager. Excavations suggest that the dead were buried fully clothed but not in coffins. The Is...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45401,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:6","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:6<\/strong> Israel’s leaders <em>tore their clothing<\/em> and <em>threw dust on their heads,<\/em> common public gestures of grief or despair in the ancient Near East. By falling face down <em>before the Ark of the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>,<\/em> Joshua belatedly acknowledged that Israel needed God’s direction in the battle against Ai.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:6<\/strong> Israel’s leaders <em>tore their clothing<\/em> and <em>threw dust on their heads,<\/em> common public gestures of grief or despair in the ancient Near East. By falling face down <em>before the Ark of the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>,<\/em> Joshua belatedly acknowledged that Israel needed God’s direction in the battle against Ai.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:6 Israel’s leaders tore their clothing and threw dust on their heads, common public gestures of grief or despair in the ancient Near East. By falling face down before the Ark of the Lord, Joshua belatedly acknowledged that Israel needed God’s direction in the battle against Ai.","summary_en":"7:6 Israel’s leaders tore their clothing and threw dust on their heads, common public gestures of grief or despair in the ancient Near East. By falling face down before the Ark of the Lord, Joshua belatedly acknowledged that Israel needed God’s direction in the battle against Ai.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73027,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:6","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:6<\/strong> Israel’s leaders <em>tore their clothing<\/em> and <em>threw dust on their heads,<\/em> common public gestures of grief or despair in the ancient Near East. By falling face down <em>before the Ark of the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>,<\/em> Joshua belatedly acknowledged that Israel needed God’s direction in the battle against Ai.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:6<\/strong> Israel’s leaders <em>tore their clothing<\/em> and <em>threw dust on their heads,<\/em> common public gestures of grief or despair in the ancient Near East. By falling face down <em>before the Ark of the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>,<\/em> Joshua belatedly acknowledged that Israel needed God’s direction in the battle against Ai.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:6 Israel’s leaders tore their clothing and threw dust on their heads, common public gestures of grief or despair in the ancient Near East. By falling face down before the Ark of the Lord, Joshua belatedly acknowledged that Israel needed God’s direction in the battle against Ai.","summary_en":"7:6 Israel’s leaders tore their clothing and threw dust on their heads, common public gestures of grief or despair in the ancient Near East. By falling face down before the Ark of the Lord, Joshua belatedly acknowledged that Israel needed God’s direction in the battle against Ai.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100653,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:6","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:6<\/strong> Israel’s leaders <em>tore their clothing<\/em> and <em>threw dust on their heads,<\/em> common public gestures of grief or despair in the ancient Near East. By falling face down <em>before the Ark of the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>,<\/em> Joshua belatedly acknowledged that Israel needed God’s direction in the battle against Ai.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:6<\/strong> Israel’s leaders <em>tore their clothing<\/em> and <em>threw dust on their heads,<\/em> common public gestures of grief or despair in the ancient Near East. By falling face down <em>before the Ark of the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>,<\/em> Joshua belatedly acknowledged that Israel needed God’s direction in the battle against Ai.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:6 Israel’s leaders tore their clothing and threw dust on their heads, common public gestures of grief or despair in the ancient Near East. By falling face down before the Ark of the Lord, Joshua belatedly acknowledged that Israel needed God’s direction in the battle against Ai.","summary_en":"7:6 Israel’s leaders tore their clothing and threw dust on their heads, common public gestures of grief or despair in the ancient Near East. By falling face down before the Ark of the Lord, Joshua belatedly acknowledged that Israel needed God’s direction in the battle against Ai.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128279,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:6","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:6<\/strong> Israel’s leaders <em>tore their clothing<\/em> and <em>threw dust on their heads,<\/em> common public gestures of grief or despair in the ancient Near East. By falling face down <em>before the Ark of the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>,<\/em> Joshua belatedly acknowledged that Israel needed God’s direction in the battle against Ai.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:6<\/strong> Israel’s leaders <em>tore their clothing<\/em> and <em>threw dust on their heads,<\/em> common public gestures of grief or despair in the ancient Near East. By falling face down <em>before the Ark of the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>,<\/em> Joshua belatedly acknowledged that Israel needed God’s direction in the battle against Ai.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:6 Israel’s leaders tore their clothing and threw dust on their heads, common public gestures of grief or despair in the ancient Near East. By falling face down before the Ark of the Lord, Joshua belatedly acknowledged that Israel needed God’s direction in the battle against Ai.","summary_en":"7:6 Israel’s leaders tore their clothing and threw dust on their heads, common public gestures of grief or despair in the ancient Near East. By falling face down before the Ark of the Lord, Joshua belatedly acknowledged that Israel needed God’s direction in the battle against Ai.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":1415,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Amorites","title_en":"Amorites","content_ro":"<h3>AMORITES<\/h3>\n<p>Semitic people found throughout the Fertile Crescent of the Near East at the beginning of the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Amorites are first mentioned in the Bible as descendants of Canaan in a list of ancient peoples (Gn 10:16; cf. 1 Chr 1:13-16). Some of these nomadic people seem to have migrated from the Syrian Desert into Mesopotamia, others into Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Akkadian cuneiform inscriptions mention a relatively uncivilized people called <em>Amurru<\/em> (translation of the Sumerian <em>Mar-tu<\/em>), perhaps named for a storm god. They overran the Sumerians and eventually most of Mesopotamia. The city of Mari, on the upper Euphrates River, fell to them about 2000 <span>BC<\/span>; Eshunna a short time later; Babylon by 1830 <span>BC<\/span>; and finally Assur around 1750 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Farther to the west, Amorites had been in Palestine and Syria as early as the third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Egyptian texts of the early part of the 19th century <span>BC<\/span> show that additional waves of Amorite nomads were entering Canaan at that time. Many of their names are similar to the Amorite names from upper Mesopotamia. In fact, many names from the Mari tablets are identical with or similar to names in the patriarchal accounts in Genesis. People named Jacob, Abraham, Levi, and Ishmael were known at Mari, and names similar to Gad and Dan have been found there. Benjamin was known as the name of a tribe. Nahor was found to be the name of a city near Haran. According to Genesis, Abraham lived in Haran many years before going to Canaan. Jacob spent 20 years there and married two women from Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Amorites appear prominently in the OT as major obstacles to the occupation of Canaan (the Promised Land) by the Israelites after the exodus. Calling Moses to lead Israel out of Egypt, the Lord spoke of Canaan, then occupied by Amorites and others, as a good land (Ex 3:8, 17; 13:5). When the Israelites were in the wilderness, God promised to destroy those nations (Ex 23:23) and drive them out of the land (Ex 33:2). The Hebrew people were warned not to make covenants with any of them, to intermarry with them, or to tolerate their idol worship (Ex 34:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>Spies sent into the land found Amalekites in the south; Hittites, Jebusites, and Amorites in the northern mountains and to the west of the Jordan River; and Canaanites by the sea and along the Jordan (Nm 13:25-29). At that time there were Amorites east of the Jordan as well (Nm 21:13).<\/p>\n<p>God had instructed Israel to go up from Horeb and conquer the mountain Amorites on the west side of the Jordan all the way to the Mediterranean Sea (Dt 1:7). When they arrived at Kadesh-barnea they were at the foot of those mountains (Dt 1:19-20). But the people murmured and complained that God had brought them from Egypt only to be slaughtered by the Amorites. From the spies’ reports, they pictured the Amorites as an awesome people, greater and taller than the Israelites (Dt 1:26-28). At first they refused to trust God enough to go in, so God told them to turn around and head back into the wilderness. Then they changed their minds, stubbornly attacked the Amorites against God’s command, and were badly beaten (Dt 1:34-44). Finally, after 38 additional years in the wilderness, the Israelites once again faced the Amorites, but this time on the east side of the Dead Sea (Nm 21:13). The Amorite king, Sihon, refused to let them pass through his land. The Israelites were drawn up at the Arnon River, which flows into the Dead Sea about two-thirds of the way up its eastern shore.<\/p>\n<p>Transjordan was controlled by two Amorite kings, Sihon and Og. Israel had to face Sihon first. His city, Heshbon, lay due east of the north end of the Dead Sea (Nm 21:21-26). Sihon himself had taken this land from the Moabites. Moses knew of Sihon’s reputation and quoted a poem that boasted of Sihon’s victory over Moab (Nm 21:27-30). Nevertheless, the Israelites defeated Sihon and devastated his kingdom from Dibon, four miles (6.4 kilometers) north of the Arnon, to Medeba, seven miles (11.2 kilometers) south of Heshbon. King Og, farther to the north, received the same treatment (Nm 21:31-35). King Balak of Moab heard of the Israelite victories and was terrified (Nm 22:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses reminded the people that by relying on God’s promises they had taken all of the land of the Amorites east of the Jordan (Dt 2:24–3:10). The conquered territory was given to the tribes of Gad and Reuben and to the half-tribe of Manasseh (Nm 32:33). Then, 40 years after the exodus began, Israel was standing on the east side of the Jordan, having dispossessed the two great Amorite nations there (Dt 1:1-4). But there were other Amorite kingdoms in the hills west of the Jordan, along with other nations (Dt 7:1-2). They were to be destroyed in the same way Sihon and Og had been defeated (Dt 31:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>So famous was the victory of Israel east of the Jordan that Rahab and others in Jericho, west of the Jordan, knew of it and were frightened (Jos 2:8-11). The Israelites crossed the Jordan and took Jericho but were defeated at the smaller city of Ai in the hill country west of Jericho. They immediately assumed that they would be wiped out by the Amorites in those hills (Jos 7:7).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites regained God’s favor, however, and defeated Ai. Their victory made an impression on the other kingdoms west of the Jordan in the hills, valleys, and coastlands up to Lebanon, who allied to fight Joshua (Jos 9:1-2). Gibeon, an Amorite city seven miles (11.2 kilometers) southwest of Ai, made peace with Israel, putting more fear in the hearts of the remaining kings (Jos 10:1-2). Adoni-zedek, king of Jerusalem, was evidently the leader of the Amorite kings west of the Jordan (Jos 10:3). Jerusalem was only eight miles (12.8 kilometers) southeast of Gibeon. Adoni-zedek called together the kings of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon, all within 50 miles (80.4 kilometers) of Jerusalem, to fight against Gibeon and Joshua (Jos 10:3-5).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua came to Gibeon’s defense and routed the Amorites, chasing them to the northwest and southwest. The Lord fought for Israel, raining hailstones on the Amorites at Azekah, southwest of Gibeon, and causing the sun to stand still in order to provide a longer battle day (Jos 10:6-14).<\/p>\n<p>In the far north, Jabin, king of Hazor, rallied the Canaanites and remaining Amorites all the way north to Mt Hermon (Jos 11:1-5). But they too were overcome (Jos 11:10-23). Toward the end of Joshua’s career, he reminded the people that it was the Lord who had given them the land of the Amorites (Jos 24:1-18).<\/p>\n<p>After the occupation of Canaan by Israel, Amorites still present in the land chased Dan’s tribe into the mountains and continued to live near Aijalon, 17 miles (27.4 kilometers) west of Jerusalem. They still held the slopes toward the south end of the Dead Sea as well (Jgs 1:34-36). In the period of the judges, the Amorites and their gods posed a constant threat to Israel’s well-being (Jgs 6:10).<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the period of the judges, relations between Israel and the Amorites improved (1 Sm 7:14). David continued to honor Joshua’s treaty with the Amorite remnant of Gibeon (2 Sm 21:2-6). Solomon conscripted his labor forces from the Amorites and other peoples still surviving from Israelite conquest (1 Kgs 9:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The OT treats the deliverance of the Amorites and their land into the hands of Israel as a great event comparable with the exodus itself, a victory to be remembered and celebrated (Pss 135:9-12; 136:13-26). If the people forgot, the Lord reminded them through his prophets (Am 2:9-10). Long after Sihon and Og had been defeated, the area east of the Jordan was still remembered as the land of “Sihon king of the Amorites” (1 Kgs 4:19). When the kings of Israel and Judah began to fail God, the memory of the Amorites provided a standard of comparison of evil. The Jews’ continuing fascination with idolatry led God to address Jerusalem, representing the Jewish people, through the prophet Ezekiel: “Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite” (Ez 16:45). In the biblical view, the Amorites stood for everything that is abominable in the sight of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>AMORITES<\/h3>\n<p>Semitic people found throughout the Fertile Crescent of the Near East at the beginning of the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Amorites are first mentioned in the Bible as descendants of Canaan in a list of ancient peoples (Gn 10:16; cf. 1 Chr 1:13-16). Some of these nomadic people seem to have migrated from the Syrian Desert into Mesopotamia, others into Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Akkadian cuneiform inscriptions mention a relatively uncivilized people called <em>Amurru<\/em> (translation of the Sumerian <em>Mar-tu<\/em>), perhaps named for a storm god. They overran the Sumerians and eventually most of Mesopotamia. The city of Mari, on the upper Euphrates River, fell to them about 2000 <span>BC<\/span>; Eshunna a short time later; Babylon by 1830 <span>BC<\/span>; and finally Assur around 1750 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Farther to the west, Amorites had been in Palestine and Syria as early as the third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Egyptian texts of the early part of the 19th century <span>BC<\/span> show that additional waves of Amorite nomads were entering Canaan at that time. Many of their names are similar to the Amorite names from upper Mesopotamia. In fact, many names from the Mari tablets are identical with or similar to names in the patriarchal accounts in Genesis. People named Jacob, Abraham, Levi, and Ishmael were known at Mari, and names similar to Gad and Dan have been found there. Benjamin was known as the name of a tribe. Nahor was found to be the name of a city near Haran. According to Genesis, Abraham lived in Haran many years before going to Canaan. Jacob spent 20 years there and married two women from Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Amorites appear prominently in the OT as major obstacles to the occupation of Canaan (the Promised Land) by the Israelites after the exodus. Calling Moses to lead Israel out of Egypt, the Lord spoke of Canaan, then occupied by Amorites and others, as a good land (Ex 3:8, 17; 13:5). When the Israelites were in the wilderness, God promised to destroy those nations (Ex 23:23) and drive them out of the land (Ex 33:2). The Hebrew people were warned not to make covenants with any of them, to intermarry with them, or to tolerate their idol worship (Ex 34:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>Spies sent into the land found Amalekites in the south; Hittites, Jebusites, and Amorites in the northern mountains and to the west of the Jordan River; and Canaanites by the sea and along the Jordan (Nm 13:25-29). At that time there were Amorites east of the Jordan as well (Nm 21:13).<\/p>\n<p>God had instructed Israel to go up from Horeb and conquer the mountain Amorites on the west side of the Jordan all the way to the Mediterranean Sea (Dt 1:7). When they arrived at Kadesh-barnea they were at the foot of those mountains (Dt 1:19-20). But the people murmured and complained that God had brought them from Egypt only to be slaughtered by the Amorites. From the spies’ reports, they pictured the Amorites as an awesome people, greater and taller than the Israelites (Dt 1:26-28). At first they refused to trust God enough to go in, so God told them to turn around and head back into the wilderness. Then they changed their minds, stubbornly attacked the Amorites against God’s command, and were badly beaten (Dt 1:34-44). Finally, after 38 additional years in the wilderness, the Israelites once again faced the Amorites, but this time on the east side of the Dead Sea (Nm 21:13). The Amorite king, Sihon, refused to let them pass through his land. The Israelites were drawn up at the Arnon River, which flows into the Dead Sea about two-thirds of the way up its eastern shore.<\/p>\n<p>Transjordan was controlled by two Amorite kings, Sihon and Og. Israel had to face Sihon first. His city, Heshbon, lay due east of the north end of the Dead Sea (Nm 21:21-26). Sihon himself had taken this land from the Moabites. Moses knew of Sihon’s reputation and quoted a poem that boasted of Sihon’s victory over Moab (Nm 21:27-30). Nevertheless, the Israelites defeated Sihon and devastated his kingdom from Dibon, four miles (6.4 kilometers) north of the Arnon, to Medeba, seven miles (11.2 kilometers) south of Heshbon. King Og, farther to the north, received the same treatment (Nm 21:31-35). King Balak of Moab heard of the Israelite victories and was terrified (Nm 22:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses reminded the people that by relying on God’s promises they had taken all of the land of the Amorites east of the Jordan (Dt 2:24–3:10). The conquered territory was given to the tribes of Gad and Reuben and to the half-tribe of Manasseh (Nm 32:33). Then, 40 years after the exodus began, Israel was standing on the east side of the Jordan, having dispossessed the two great Amorite nations there (Dt 1:1-4). But there were other Amorite kingdoms in the hills west of the Jordan, along with other nations (Dt 7:1-2). They were to be destroyed in the same way Sihon and Og had been defeated (Dt 31:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>So famous was the victory of Israel east of the Jordan that Rahab and others in Jericho, west of the Jordan, knew of it and were frightened (Jos 2:8-11). The Israelites crossed the Jordan and took Jericho but were defeated at the smaller city of Ai in the hill country west of Jericho. They immediately assumed that they would be wiped out by the Amorites in those hills (Jos 7:7).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites regained God’s favor, however, and defeated Ai. Their victory made an impression on the other kingdoms west of the Jordan in the hills, valleys, and coastlands up to Lebanon, who allied to fight Joshua (Jos 9:1-2). Gibeon, an Amorite city seven miles (11.2 kilometers) southwest of Ai, made peace with Israel, putting more fear in the hearts of the remaining kings (Jos 10:1-2). Adoni-zedek, king of Jerusalem, was evidently the leader of the Amorite kings west of the Jordan (Jos 10:3). Jerusalem was only eight miles (12.8 kilometers) southeast of Gibeon. Adoni-zedek called together the kings of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon, all within 50 miles (80.4 kilometers) of Jerusalem, to fight against Gibeon and Joshua (Jos 10:3-5).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua came to Gibeon’s defense and routed the Amorites, chasing them to the northwest and southwest. The Lord fought for Israel, raining hailstones on the Amorites at Azekah, southwest of Gibeon, and causing the sun to stand still in order to provide a longer battle day (Jos 10:6-14).<\/p>\n<p>In the far north, Jabin, king of Hazor, rallied the Canaanites and remaining Amorites all the way north to Mt Hermon (Jos 11:1-5). But they too were overcome (Jos 11:10-23). Toward the end of Joshua’s career, he reminded the people that it was the Lord who had given them the land of the Amorites (Jos 24:1-18).<\/p>\n<p>After the occupation of Canaan by Israel, Amorites still present in the land chased Dan’s tribe into the mountains and continued to live near Aijalon, 17 miles (27.4 kilometers) west of Jerusalem. They still held the slopes toward the south end of the Dead Sea as well (Jgs 1:34-36). In the period of the judges, the Amorites and their gods posed a constant threat to Israel’s well-being (Jgs 6:10).<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the period of the judges, relations between Israel and the Amorites improved (1 Sm 7:14). David continued to honor Joshua’s treaty with the Amorite remnant of Gibeon (2 Sm 21:2-6). Solomon conscripted his labor forces from the Amorites and other peoples still surviving from Israelite conquest (1 Kgs 9:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The OT treats the deliverance of the Amorites and their land into the hands of Israel as a great event comparable with the exodus itself, a victory to be remembered and celebrated (Pss 135:9-12; 136:13-26). If the people forgot, the Lord reminded them through his prophets (Am 2:9-10). Long after Sihon and Og had been defeated, the area east of the Jordan was still remembered as the land of “Sihon king of the Amorites” (1 Kgs 4:19). When the kings of Israel and Judah began to fail God, the memory of the Amorites provided a standard of comparison of evil. The Jews’ continuing fascination with idolatry led God to address Jerusalem, representing the Jewish people, through the prophet Ezekiel: “Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite” (Ez 16:45). In the biblical view, the Amorites stood for everything that is abominable in the sight of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"AMORITES Semitic people found throughout the Fertile Crescent of the Near East at the beginning of the second millennium BC. Amorites are first mentioned in the Bible as descendants of Canaan in a list of ancient peoples (Gn 10:16; cf. 1 Chr 1:13-16). Some of these nomadic people seem to have migrated from the Syrian Desert into Mesopotamia, others into Palestine. Akkadian cuneiform inscriptions mention a relatively uncivilized people called Amurru (translation of the Sumerian Mar-tu), perhap...","summary_en":"AMORITES Semitic people found throughout the Fertile Crescent of the Near East at the beginning of the second millennium BC. Amorites are first mentioned in the Bible as descendants of Canaan in a list of ancient peoples (Gn 10:16; cf. 1 Chr 1:13-16). Some of these nomadic people seem to have migrated from the Syrian Desert into Mesopotamia, others into Palestine. Akkadian cuneiform inscriptions mention a relatively uncivilized people called Amurru (translation of the Sumerian Mar-tu), perhap...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45402,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:7","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:7<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> expressed his anger toward God; this explains the sharp tone of God’s reply (7:10-15). Though the battle had been lost because of Achan’s sin, Joshua and Israel’s elders had neglected to seek God’s guidance (7:3). • Joshua did not really believe that Israel should have stayed <em>on the other side<\/em> of the Jordan. Rather, he used hyperbole to show that he was at a loss over what to do next.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:7<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> expressed his anger toward God; this explains the sharp tone of God’s reply (7:10-15). Though the battle had been lost because of Achan’s sin, Joshua and Israel’s elders had neglected to seek God’s guidance (7:3). • Joshua did not really believe that Israel should have stayed <em>on the other side<\/em> of the Jordan. Rather, he used hyperbole to show that he was at a loss over what to do next.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:7 Joshua expressed his anger toward God; this explains the sharp tone of God’s reply (7:10-15). Though the battle had been lost because of Achan’s sin, Joshua and Israel’s elders had neglected to seek God’s guidance (7:3). • Joshua did not really believe that Israel should have stayed on the other side of the Jordan. Rather, he used hyperbole to show that he was at a loss over what to do next.","summary_en":"7:7 Joshua expressed his anger toward God; this explains the sharp tone of God’s reply (7:10-15). Though the battle had been lost because of Achan’s sin, Joshua and Israel’s elders had neglected to seek God’s guidance (7:3). • Joshua did not really believe that Israel should have stayed on the other side of the Jordan. Rather, he used hyperbole to show that he was at a loss over what to do next.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73028,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:7","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:7<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> expressed his anger toward God; this explains the sharp tone of God’s reply (7:10-15). Though the battle had been lost because of Achan’s sin, Joshua and Israel’s elders had neglected to seek God’s guidance (7:3). • Joshua did not really believe that Israel should have stayed <em>on the other side<\/em> of the Jordan. Rather, he used hyperbole to show that he was at a loss over what to do next.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:7<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> expressed his anger toward God; this explains the sharp tone of God’s reply (7:10-15). Though the battle had been lost because of Achan’s sin, Joshua and Israel’s elders had neglected to seek God’s guidance (7:3). • Joshua did not really believe that Israel should have stayed <em>on the other side<\/em> of the Jordan. Rather, he used hyperbole to show that he was at a loss over what to do next.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:7 Joshua expressed his anger toward God; this explains the sharp tone of God’s reply (7:10-15). Though the battle had been lost because of Achan’s sin, Joshua and Israel’s elders had neglected to seek God’s guidance (7:3). • Joshua did not really believe that Israel should have stayed on the other side of the Jordan. Rather, he used hyperbole to show that he was at a loss over what to do next.","summary_en":"7:7 Joshua expressed his anger toward God; this explains the sharp tone of God’s reply (7:10-15). Though the battle had been lost because of Achan’s sin, Joshua and Israel’s elders had neglected to seek God’s guidance (7:3). • Joshua did not really believe that Israel should have stayed on the other side of the Jordan. Rather, he used hyperbole to show that he was at a loss over what to do next.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100654,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:7","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:7<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> expressed his anger toward God; this explains the sharp tone of God’s reply (7:10-15). Though the battle had been lost because of Achan’s sin, Joshua and Israel’s elders had neglected to seek God’s guidance (7:3). • Joshua did not really believe that Israel should have stayed <em>on the other side<\/em> of the Jordan. Rather, he used hyperbole to show that he was at a loss over what to do next.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:7<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> expressed his anger toward God; this explains the sharp tone of God’s reply (7:10-15). Though the battle had been lost because of Achan’s sin, Joshua and Israel’s elders had neglected to seek God’s guidance (7:3). • Joshua did not really believe that Israel should have stayed <em>on the other side<\/em> of the Jordan. Rather, he used hyperbole to show that he was at a loss over what to do next.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:7 Joshua expressed his anger toward God; this explains the sharp tone of God’s reply (7:10-15). Though the battle had been lost because of Achan’s sin, Joshua and Israel’s elders had neglected to seek God’s guidance (7:3). • Joshua did not really believe that Israel should have stayed on the other side of the Jordan. Rather, he used hyperbole to show that he was at a loss over what to do next.","summary_en":"7:7 Joshua expressed his anger toward God; this explains the sharp tone of God’s reply (7:10-15). Though the battle had been lost because of Achan’s sin, Joshua and Israel’s elders had neglected to seek God’s guidance (7:3). • Joshua did not really believe that Israel should have stayed on the other side of the Jordan. Rather, he used hyperbole to show that he was at a loss over what to do next.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128280,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:7","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:7<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> expressed his anger toward God; this explains the sharp tone of God’s reply (7:10-15). Though the battle had been lost because of Achan’s sin, Joshua and Israel’s elders had neglected to seek God’s guidance (7:3). • Joshua did not really believe that Israel should have stayed <em>on the other side<\/em> of the Jordan. Rather, he used hyperbole to show that he was at a loss over what to do next.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:7<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> expressed his anger toward God; this explains the sharp tone of God’s reply (7:10-15). Though the battle had been lost because of Achan’s sin, Joshua and Israel’s elders had neglected to seek God’s guidance (7:3). • Joshua did not really believe that Israel should have stayed <em>on the other side<\/em> of the Jordan. Rather, he used hyperbole to show that he was at a loss over what to do next.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:7 Joshua expressed his anger toward God; this explains the sharp tone of God’s reply (7:10-15). Though the battle had been lost because of Achan’s sin, Joshua and Israel’s elders had neglected to seek God’s guidance (7:3). • Joshua did not really believe that Israel should have stayed on the other side of the Jordan. Rather, he used hyperbole to show that he was at a loss over what to do next.","summary_en":"7:7 Joshua expressed his anger toward God; this explains the sharp tone of God’s reply (7:10-15). Though the battle had been lost because of Achan’s sin, Joshua and Israel’s elders had neglected to seek God’s guidance (7:3). • Joshua did not really believe that Israel should have stayed on the other side of the Jordan. Rather, he used hyperbole to show that he was at a loss over what to do next.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":45403,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:8","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:8-9<\/strong> Joshua’s fears were realistic. All Canaan had thought that Israel was invincible. However, because tiny Ai had defeated Israel, the Canaanites might think it could happen again. • If God allowed the wicked to <em>wipe<\/em> his people <em>off the face of the earth,<\/em> the nations would not have a witness that God continues to be involved with his world. • <em>your great name:<\/em> Cp. Exod 32:11-12; Num 14:13-19.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:8-9<\/strong> Joshua’s fears were realistic. All Canaan had thought that Israel was invincible. However, because tiny Ai had defeated Israel, the Canaanites might think it could happen again. • If God allowed the wicked to <em>wipe<\/em> his people <em>off the face of the earth,<\/em> the nations would not have a witness that God continues to be involved with his world. • <em>your great name:<\/em> Cp. Exod 32:11-12; Num 14:13-19.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:8-9 Joshua’s fears were realistic. All Canaan had thought that Israel was invincible. However, because tiny Ai had defeated Israel, the Canaanites might think it could happen again. • If God allowed the wicked to wipe his people off the face of the earth, the nations would not have a witness that God continues to be involved with his world. • your great name: Cp. Exod 32:11-12; Num 14:13-19.","summary_en":"7:8-9 Joshua’s fears were realistic. All Canaan had thought that Israel was invincible. However, because tiny Ai had defeated Israel, the Canaanites might think it could happen again. • If God allowed the wicked to wipe his people off the face of the earth, the nations would not have a witness that God continues to be involved with his world. • your great name: Cp. Exod 32:11-12; Num 14:13-19.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73029,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:8","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:8-9<\/strong> Joshua’s fears were realistic. All Canaan had thought that Israel was invincible. However, because tiny Ai had defeated Israel, the Canaanites might think it could happen again. • If God allowed the wicked to <em>wipe<\/em> his people <em>off the face of the earth,<\/em> the nations would not have a witness that God continues to be involved with his world. • <em>your great name:<\/em> Cp. Exod 32:11-12; Num 14:13-19.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:8-9<\/strong> Joshua’s fears were realistic. All Canaan had thought that Israel was invincible. However, because tiny Ai had defeated Israel, the Canaanites might think it could happen again. • If God allowed the wicked to <em>wipe<\/em> his people <em>off the face of the earth,<\/em> the nations would not have a witness that God continues to be involved with his world. • <em>your great name:<\/em> Cp. Exod 32:11-12; Num 14:13-19.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:8-9 Joshua’s fears were realistic. All Canaan had thought that Israel was invincible. However, because tiny Ai had defeated Israel, the Canaanites might think it could happen again. • If God allowed the wicked to wipe his people off the face of the earth, the nations would not have a witness that God continues to be involved with his world. • your great name: Cp. Exod 32:11-12; Num 14:13-19.","summary_en":"7:8-9 Joshua’s fears were realistic. All Canaan had thought that Israel was invincible. However, because tiny Ai had defeated Israel, the Canaanites might think it could happen again. • If God allowed the wicked to wipe his people off the face of the earth, the nations would not have a witness that God continues to be involved with his world. • your great name: Cp. Exod 32:11-12; Num 14:13-19.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100655,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:8","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:8-9<\/strong> Joshua’s fears were realistic. All Canaan had thought that Israel was invincible. However, because tiny Ai had defeated Israel, the Canaanites might think it could happen again. • If God allowed the wicked to <em>wipe<\/em> his people <em>off the face of the earth,<\/em> the nations would not have a witness that God continues to be involved with his world. • <em>your great name:<\/em> Cp. Exod 32:11-12; Num 14:13-19.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:8-9<\/strong> Joshua’s fears were realistic. All Canaan had thought that Israel was invincible. However, because tiny Ai had defeated Israel, the Canaanites might think it could happen again. • If God allowed the wicked to <em>wipe<\/em> his people <em>off the face of the earth,<\/em> the nations would not have a witness that God continues to be involved with his world. • <em>your great name:<\/em> Cp. Exod 32:11-12; Num 14:13-19.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:8-9 Joshua’s fears were realistic. All Canaan had thought that Israel was invincible. However, because tiny Ai had defeated Israel, the Canaanites might think it could happen again. • If God allowed the wicked to wipe his people off the face of the earth, the nations would not have a witness that God continues to be involved with his world. • your great name: Cp. Exod 32:11-12; Num 14:13-19.","summary_en":"7:8-9 Joshua’s fears were realistic. All Canaan had thought that Israel was invincible. However, because tiny Ai had defeated Israel, the Canaanites might think it could happen again. • If God allowed the wicked to wipe his people off the face of the earth, the nations would not have a witness that God continues to be involved with his world. • your great name: Cp. Exod 32:11-12; Num 14:13-19.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128281,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:8","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:8-9<\/strong> Joshua’s fears were realistic. All Canaan had thought that Israel was invincible. However, because tiny Ai had defeated Israel, the Canaanites might think it could happen again. • If God allowed the wicked to <em>wipe<\/em> his people <em>off the face of the earth,<\/em> the nations would not have a witness that God continues to be involved with his world. • <em>your great name:<\/em> Cp. Exod 32:11-12; Num 14:13-19.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:8-9<\/strong> Joshua’s fears were realistic. All Canaan had thought that Israel was invincible. However, because tiny Ai had defeated Israel, the Canaanites might think it could happen again. • If God allowed the wicked to <em>wipe<\/em> his people <em>off the face of the earth,<\/em> the nations would not have a witness that God continues to be involved with his world. • <em>your great name:<\/em> Cp. Exod 32:11-12; Num 14:13-19.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:8-9 Joshua’s fears were realistic. All Canaan had thought that Israel was invincible. However, because tiny Ai had defeated Israel, the Canaanites might think it could happen again. • If God allowed the wicked to wipe his people off the face of the earth, the nations would not have a witness that God continues to be involved with his world. • your great name: Cp. Exod 32:11-12; Num 14:13-19.","summary_en":"7:8-9 Joshua’s fears were realistic. All Canaan had thought that Israel was invincible. However, because tiny Ai had defeated Israel, the Canaanites might think it could happen again. • If God allowed the wicked to wipe his people off the face of the earth, the nations would not have a witness that God continues to be involved with his world. • your great name: Cp. Exod 32:11-12; Num 14:13-19.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"9":[{"id":6029,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Canaanite Canaan","title_en":"Canaanite Canaan","content_ro":"<h3>CANAAN, CANAANITE<\/h3>\n<p>Palestinian territory (the Promised Land) west of the Jordan River, settled by the Israelites at the time of Joshua’s leadership. Portions of southern Syria were also frequently considered part of Canaanite territory, the northern borders of which were never clearly defined. The pre-Israelite peoples of western Palestine, excluding northern Syria and such places as Ugarit (Ras Shamra) on the Mediterranean coast of Syria, carried the broad designation of Canaanites.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Land and People<\/p>\n<p>• Language<\/p>\n<p>• Literature<\/p>\n<p>• History<\/p>\n<p>• Religion<\/p>\n<p>• Influence on Israel<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LandandPeople\">Land and People<\/p>\n<p>In the “table of nations” (Gn 10:15-19), Noah’s grandson Canaan was progenitor of 11 groups that lived in the area of Syria and Palestine. The first six evidently occupied territory at or south of Sidon, whereas the others lived farther north. The northerners mostly settled on the edge of the coastal plain; in the south, settlement spread eastward to the upland areas. OT references specifically placed the Canaanites in western Palestine’s valleys and coastal areas; the upland country was occupied by Amorites and other peoples (Nm 13:29; Jos 5:1; 7:9; Jgs 1:27-36).<\/p>\n<p>One of the earliest known references to the people of Canaan is in a tablet from Mari (15th century <span>BC<\/span>), in which a military officer reported his surveillance of “thieves and Canaanites.” The Canaanites were listed as a group on the Memphis Stele (inscribed column) of the Egyptian pharaoh Amenophis II (c. 1440 <span>BC<\/span>). The land of Canaan was mentioned in a 15th-century inscription of Idrimi, king of Aleppo (west of Ugarit), who fled to the Canaanite seaport of Ammiya and then became ruler of Alalakh (north of Ugarit). During the Amarna Age (15th–14th centuries <span>BC<\/span>), Palestine was politically dominated by Egypt, according to the Egyptian Amarna tablets.<\/p>\n<p>Just as “Canaan” designated the whole western Palestinian area, so “Canaanite” described its pre-Israelite inhabitants without specifying race. Among the peoples who lived in Palestine, the Amorites first appeared in the second millennium <span>BC<\/span> as immigrants from Mesopotamia.<\/p>\n<p>Several OT references seem to equate Amorite territory and the land of Canaan (Gn 12:5-6; 15:18-21; 48:22), a tradition reflected in the 18th-century <span>BC<\/span> Alalakh tablets, which depicted “Amurru” as part of Syria-Palestine. Tablets from Mari from about the same period speak of an Amorite ruler of Hazor in northern Palestine. The Tell el-Amarna texts (14th–13th centuries <span>BC<\/span>) indicate that the Amurru kingdom of the Lebanon region was monopolizing coastal trade and commerce; therefore, references to the two peoples (Amorites and Canaanites) together in Moses’ time and throughout the late Bronze Age (c. 1550–1200 <span>BC<\/span>) are not surprising.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of that period, the “Sea Peoples” (largely Philistines) destroyed the Hittite Empire, and in the time of Ramses III (c. 1180 <span>BC<\/span>) occupied western Palestine. The Israelite conquest of Palestine broke the power of many Canaanite and Amorite city-states, while the rise of a Philistine confederacy on the southern Palestinian coast restricted further the range of specifically Canaanite territory. From the beginning of the Iron Age the cultural heirs of the Canaanites were the Phoenicians, centered in the city-states of Tyre and Sidon, who themselves liked to be known as Canaanites (cf. Mt 15:21-22; Mk 7:24-26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Language\">Language<\/p>\n<p>The various groups that inhabited western Palestine in the pre-Israelite period probably spoke related dialects of the Northwest Semitic linguistic family. The large territory covered by those peoples and the possible influence of Amorite, Hurrian, and Ugaritic languages complicate modern theories about what is properly meant by “Canaanite” as a language.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Literature\">Literature<\/p>\n<p>As with language, it is difficult to be specific about Canaanite literature. One clear fact is that our own alphabet originated in middle Bronze Age Canaan. Before that time, writing was either pictographic (words or ideas represented by pictures), cuneiform (wedge-shaped impressions in soft clay representing syllables and whole words), or hieroglyphic (Egyptian pictorial writing). Alphabetical writing was passed on through the Hebrews and Phoenicians to the Greeks, who gave our present alphabet its classical form.<\/p>\n<p>Until 1929 little Canaanite literature was known, but with the discoveries at Ugarit a large body of literary material came to light. The discoveries included portions of an epic poem about the god Baal and his consort Anath (possibly from c. 2000 <span>BC<\/span>), a legend about a royal personage named Aqhat (from c. 1800 <span>BC<\/span>), the legendary activities of King Keret (written c. 1500 <span>BC<\/span>), and fragmentary religious, medical, and administrative material.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>Archaeological evidence shows that western Palestine was occupied as far back as the Old Stone Age. Mesolithic, Neolithic, and Chalcolithic deposits have also been found at several sites. It is possible that Semitic-speaking peoples inhabited places such as Jericho, Megiddo, and Byblos around 3000 <span>BC<\/span>. Discoveries at Tell Mardikh (Ebla) show that a vigorous Canaanite Empire existed in Syria about 2500 <span>BC<\/span>, and there is no doubt that both Amorite and Canaanite peoples were firmly settled in Syria and Palestine by 2000 <span>BC<\/span>. The best evidence for Canaanite occupation of western Palestine has come from the middle and late Bronze Age (c. 1950–1200 <span>BC<\/span>), when the land was dotted with Canaanite and Amorite city-states.<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptians made periodic forays into Palestine during their 5th and 6th dynasties; in the 13th dynasty (second millennium <span>BC<\/span>) they controlled much of Syria-Palestine both politically and economically.<\/p>\n<p>Canaanite contacts with Mesopotamia from about 2000 <span>BC<\/span> are indicated in texts discovered at Mari and Ugarit. Evidently Amorites, Hurrians, early Assyrians, and other peoples periodically migrated to Canaan, bringing with them a diversity of political and social forms. By the late 16th century <span>BC<\/span>, most of the small Canaanite kingdoms were firmly under Egyptian control. Within two centuries the most northerly ones were subject to Hittite political influence.<\/p>\n<p>Canaanite history is further complicated by the activities of the Hyksos people between about 1800 and 1500 <span>BC<\/span>. Of mixed Asiatic origin, the Hyksos owed much of their political influence to their military use of iron-fitted chariots and the compound Asiatic bow. From Canaanite locations like Hazor and Jericho, they invaded Egypt and established control there from about 1776 to about 1570 <span>BC<\/span>. When they were expelled at the start of Egypt’s New Kingdom (1570–1100 <span>BC<\/span>), they retreated to fortified sites in southern Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>Egyptian control over western Palestine had disappeared by the time of the Israelite conquest of Canaan; Joshua met predominantly Canaanite and Amorite opposition. The Israelite occupation of Canaan was aided by the state of decay into which the small Palestinian kingdoms had fallen. With the destruction of Hittite culture by the Sea Peoples and their occupation of the northern and coastal regions, the traditional city-states collapsed. From about 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, Canaanite culture was restricted to Tyre, Sidon, and a few other places.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Religion\">Religion<\/p>\n<p>Before the Ugaritic discoveries, little was known about Canaanite religion apart from OT references to it. From what is now known of Canaanite culture, the head of the Canaanite list of gods was a shadowy personage named El, who was worshiped as the “father of man.” His consorts were Athirat, known to the Israelites as Asherah, Astarte, and Baaltis. El had a son, Baal, a fertility god described in myths as the lord of rain and storm. Baal succeeded his father as head of the pantheon (list of gods) and supposedly resided in the distant northern heavens. A monument found at Ugarit represented him carrying a thunderbolt at his left side and a mace in his right hand.<\/p>\n<p>Many small terra-cotta figurines with exaggerated secondary sexual characteristics, representing one or the other of the female deities, have been recovered from middle and late Bronze Age sites in western Palestine. A center devoted to the Anath cult, excavated at Byblos in Phoenicia, was evidently notorious for religious prostitution and sexual fertility rites; many naked female figures were found there. Other Canaanite cult objects included a sacred pillar of some sort <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">massebah<\/span><em>)<\/em> and a wooden image <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">asherah<\/span><em>),<\/em> probably of the goddess herself.<\/p>\n<p>In the Amarna Age, Canaanite orgiastic religion was especially influential in the Near East; it infiltrated to some extent even the conservative religions of Egypt and Babylonia. Four principal festivals associated with agriculture seem to have been celebrated by the Canaanites, invariably occasions of revelry, drunkenness, and sexual excess. Canaanite religion was evidently the most sexually depraved of any in the ancient world.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InfluenceonIsrael\">Influence on Israel<\/p>\n<p>Israelite morality, as defined by the covenant laws of Mt Sinai, was very different from the cultic traditions of Canaanite life. Hebrew ethical monotheism was in many ways opposite to the depraved polytheistic nature worship of Canaanite religion. It was clear that the two systems could not coexist. Hence the law contained strict instructions that the Canaanites and their ways were to be eliminated from the Promised Land (Ex 23:24; 34:13-16; Dt 7:1-5) and that the Hebrews were to remain separate from Canaanite religion in loyalty to God’s covenant. That was far from easy, if only because both peoples spoke closely related dialects and therefore used similar expressions of speech. Further, the invading Israelites under Joshua found that the Canaanites were superior to them in building stone structures and in making metal tools, implements, and weapons. The Hebrews, at a disadvantage, must have faced the prospect of requiring technical help from the Canaanites. In the time of King Solomon, Canaanites from Phoenicia were enlisted to design and construct the temple of the Lord in Jerusalem. A superficial resemblance between some aspects of Canaanite and Hebrew religion, such as peace offerings and certain divine titles, also made it difficult to maintain Israel’s cultural distinctiveness.<\/p>\n<p>Except for the “ban” imposed at Jericho, the Israelites were able to use Canaanite equipment captured in battle. Hence their determination to destroy all traces of the Canaanites, including their corrupt religion, was gradually weakened. By the time of King Ahab, when the worship of the Tyrian Baal was firmly entrenched in the northern kingdom of Israel, the Hebrews were in serious danger of losing their spiritual and theological distinctiveness. Their priests, who should have played a major part in maintaining the uniqueness of the covenant faith, often lapsed into Canaanite ways, emulating the immorality of their pagan neighbors and encouraging the Israelite people to do likewise (cf. 1 Sm 2:22).<\/p>\n<p>As a result, Hebrew prophets proclaimed that their nation, which had almost completely succumbed to Canaanite blandishments, would have to be purified by exile before a renewed faith could become a possibility for Israel.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion; Israel, History of; Palestine.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CANAAN, CANAANITE<\/h3>\n<p>Palestinian territory (the Promised Land) west of the Jordan River, settled by the Israelites at the time of Joshua’s leadership. Portions of southern Syria were also frequently considered part of Canaanite territory, the northern borders of which were never clearly defined. The pre-Israelite peoples of western Palestine, excluding northern Syria and such places as Ugarit (Ras Shamra) on the Mediterranean coast of Syria, carried the broad designation of Canaanites.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Land and People<\/p>\n<p>• Language<\/p>\n<p>• Literature<\/p>\n<p>• History<\/p>\n<p>• Religion<\/p>\n<p>• Influence on Israel<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LandandPeople\">Land and People<\/p>\n<p>In the “table of nations” (Gn 10:15-19), Noah’s grandson Canaan was progenitor of 11 groups that lived in the area of Syria and Palestine. The first six evidently occupied territory at or south of Sidon, whereas the others lived farther north. The northerners mostly settled on the edge of the coastal plain; in the south, settlement spread eastward to the upland areas. OT references specifically placed the Canaanites in western Palestine’s valleys and coastal areas; the upland country was occupied by Amorites and other peoples (Nm 13:29; Jos 5:1; 7:9; Jgs 1:27-36).<\/p>\n<p>One of the earliest known references to the people of Canaan is in a tablet from Mari (15th century <span>BC<\/span>), in which a military officer reported his surveillance of “thieves and Canaanites.” The Canaanites were listed as a group on the Memphis Stele (inscribed column) of the Egyptian pharaoh Amenophis II (c. 1440 <span>BC<\/span>). The land of Canaan was mentioned in a 15th-century inscription of Idrimi, king of Aleppo (west of Ugarit), who fled to the Canaanite seaport of Ammiya and then became ruler of Alalakh (north of Ugarit). During the Amarna Age (15th–14th centuries <span>BC<\/span>), Palestine was politically dominated by Egypt, according to the Egyptian Amarna tablets.<\/p>\n<p>Just as “Canaan” designated the whole western Palestinian area, so “Canaanite” described its pre-Israelite inhabitants without specifying race. Among the peoples who lived in Palestine, the Amorites first appeared in the second millennium <span>BC<\/span> as immigrants from Mesopotamia.<\/p>\n<p>Several OT references seem to equate Amorite territory and the land of Canaan (Gn 12:5-6; 15:18-21; 48:22), a tradition reflected in the 18th-century <span>BC<\/span> Alalakh tablets, which depicted “Amurru” as part of Syria-Palestine. Tablets from Mari from about the same period speak of an Amorite ruler of Hazor in northern Palestine. The Tell el-Amarna texts (14th–13th centuries <span>BC<\/span>) indicate that the Amurru kingdom of the Lebanon region was monopolizing coastal trade and commerce; therefore, references to the two peoples (Amorites and Canaanites) together in Moses’ time and throughout the late Bronze Age (c. 1550–1200 <span>BC<\/span>) are not surprising.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of that period, the “Sea Peoples” (largely Philistines) destroyed the Hittite Empire, and in the time of Ramses III (c. 1180 <span>BC<\/span>) occupied western Palestine. The Israelite conquest of Palestine broke the power of many Canaanite and Amorite city-states, while the rise of a Philistine confederacy on the southern Palestinian coast restricted further the range of specifically Canaanite territory. From the beginning of the Iron Age the cultural heirs of the Canaanites were the Phoenicians, centered in the city-states of Tyre and Sidon, who themselves liked to be known as Canaanites (cf. Mt 15:21-22; Mk 7:24-26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Language\">Language<\/p>\n<p>The various groups that inhabited western Palestine in the pre-Israelite period probably spoke related dialects of the Northwest Semitic linguistic family. The large territory covered by those peoples and the possible influence of Amorite, Hurrian, and Ugaritic languages complicate modern theories about what is properly meant by “Canaanite” as a language.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Literature\">Literature<\/p>\n<p>As with language, it is difficult to be specific about Canaanite literature. One clear fact is that our own alphabet originated in middle Bronze Age Canaan. Before that time, writing was either pictographic (words or ideas represented by pictures), cuneiform (wedge-shaped impressions in soft clay representing syllables and whole words), or hieroglyphic (Egyptian pictorial writing). Alphabetical writing was passed on through the Hebrews and Phoenicians to the Greeks, who gave our present alphabet its classical form.<\/p>\n<p>Until 1929 little Canaanite literature was known, but with the discoveries at Ugarit a large body of literary material came to light. The discoveries included portions of an epic poem about the god Baal and his consort Anath (possibly from c. 2000 <span>BC<\/span>), a legend about a royal personage named Aqhat (from c. 1800 <span>BC<\/span>), the legendary activities of King Keret (written c. 1500 <span>BC<\/span>), and fragmentary religious, medical, and administrative material.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>Archaeological evidence shows that western Palestine was occupied as far back as the Old Stone Age. Mesolithic, Neolithic, and Chalcolithic deposits have also been found at several sites. It is possible that Semitic-speaking peoples inhabited places such as Jericho, Megiddo, and Byblos around 3000 <span>BC<\/span>. Discoveries at Tell Mardikh (Ebla) show that a vigorous Canaanite Empire existed in Syria about 2500 <span>BC<\/span>, and there is no doubt that both Amorite and Canaanite peoples were firmly settled in Syria and Palestine by 2000 <span>BC<\/span>. The best evidence for Canaanite occupation of western Palestine has come from the middle and late Bronze Age (c. 1950–1200 <span>BC<\/span>), when the land was dotted with Canaanite and Amorite city-states.<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptians made periodic forays into Palestine during their 5th and 6th dynasties; in the 13th dynasty (second millennium <span>BC<\/span>) they controlled much of Syria-Palestine both politically and economically.<\/p>\n<p>Canaanite contacts with Mesopotamia from about 2000 <span>BC<\/span> are indicated in texts discovered at Mari and Ugarit. Evidently Amorites, Hurrians, early Assyrians, and other peoples periodically migrated to Canaan, bringing with them a diversity of political and social forms. By the late 16th century <span>BC<\/span>, most of the small Canaanite kingdoms were firmly under Egyptian control. Within two centuries the most northerly ones were subject to Hittite political influence.<\/p>\n<p>Canaanite history is further complicated by the activities of the Hyksos people between about 1800 and 1500 <span>BC<\/span>. Of mixed Asiatic origin, the Hyksos owed much of their political influence to their military use of iron-fitted chariots and the compound Asiatic bow. From Canaanite locations like Hazor and Jericho, they invaded Egypt and established control there from about 1776 to about 1570 <span>BC<\/span>. When they were expelled at the start of Egypt’s New Kingdom (1570–1100 <span>BC<\/span>), they retreated to fortified sites in southern Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>Egyptian control over western Palestine had disappeared by the time of the Israelite conquest of Canaan; Joshua met predominantly Canaanite and Amorite opposition. The Israelite occupation of Canaan was aided by the state of decay into which the small Palestinian kingdoms had fallen. With the destruction of Hittite culture by the Sea Peoples and their occupation of the northern and coastal regions, the traditional city-states collapsed. From about 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, Canaanite culture was restricted to Tyre, Sidon, and a few other places.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Religion\">Religion<\/p>\n<p>Before the Ugaritic discoveries, little was known about Canaanite religion apart from OT references to it. From what is now known of Canaanite culture, the head of the Canaanite list of gods was a shadowy personage named El, who was worshiped as the “father of man.” His consorts were Athirat, known to the Israelites as Asherah, Astarte, and Baaltis. El had a son, Baal, a fertility god described in myths as the lord of rain and storm. Baal succeeded his father as head of the pantheon (list of gods) and supposedly resided in the distant northern heavens. A monument found at Ugarit represented him carrying a thunderbolt at his left side and a mace in his right hand.<\/p>\n<p>Many small terra-cotta figurines with exaggerated secondary sexual characteristics, representing one or the other of the female deities, have been recovered from middle and late Bronze Age sites in western Palestine. A center devoted to the Anath cult, excavated at Byblos in Phoenicia, was evidently notorious for religious prostitution and sexual fertility rites; many naked female figures were found there. Other Canaanite cult objects included a sacred pillar of some sort <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">massebah<\/span><em>)<\/em> and a wooden image <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">asherah<\/span><em>),<\/em> probably of the goddess herself.<\/p>\n<p>In the Amarna Age, Canaanite orgiastic religion was especially influential in the Near East; it infiltrated to some extent even the conservative religions of Egypt and Babylonia. Four principal festivals associated with agriculture seem to have been celebrated by the Canaanites, invariably occasions of revelry, drunkenness, and sexual excess. Canaanite religion was evidently the most sexually depraved of any in the ancient world.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InfluenceonIsrael\">Influence on Israel<\/p>\n<p>Israelite morality, as defined by the covenant laws of Mt Sinai, was very different from the cultic traditions of Canaanite life. Hebrew ethical monotheism was in many ways opposite to the depraved polytheistic nature worship of Canaanite religion. It was clear that the two systems could not coexist. Hence the law contained strict instructions that the Canaanites and their ways were to be eliminated from the Promised Land (Ex 23:24; 34:13-16; Dt 7:1-5) and that the Hebrews were to remain separate from Canaanite religion in loyalty to God’s covenant. That was far from easy, if only because both peoples spoke closely related dialects and therefore used similar expressions of speech. Further, the invading Israelites under Joshua found that the Canaanites were superior to them in building stone structures and in making metal tools, implements, and weapons. The Hebrews, at a disadvantage, must have faced the prospect of requiring technical help from the Canaanites. In the time of King Solomon, Canaanites from Phoenicia were enlisted to design and construct the temple of the Lord in Jerusalem. A superficial resemblance between some aspects of Canaanite and Hebrew religion, such as peace offerings and certain divine titles, also made it difficult to maintain Israel’s cultural distinctiveness.<\/p>\n<p>Except for the “ban” imposed at Jericho, the Israelites were able to use Canaanite equipment captured in battle. Hence their determination to destroy all traces of the Canaanites, including their corrupt religion, was gradually weakened. By the time of King Ahab, when the worship of the Tyrian Baal was firmly entrenched in the northern kingdom of Israel, the Hebrews were in serious danger of losing their spiritual and theological distinctiveness. Their priests, who should have played a major part in maintaining the uniqueness of the covenant faith, often lapsed into Canaanite ways, emulating the immorality of their pagan neighbors and encouraging the Israelite people to do likewise (cf. 1 Sm 2:22).<\/p>\n<p>As a result, Hebrew prophets proclaimed that their nation, which had almost completely succumbed to Canaanite blandishments, would have to be purified by exile before a renewed faith could become a possibility for Israel.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion; Israel, History of; Palestine.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CANAAN, CANAANITE Palestinian territory (the Promised Land) west of the Jordan River, settled by the Israelites at the time of Joshua’s leadership. Portions of southern Syria were also frequently considered part of Canaanite territory, the northern borders of which were never clearly defined. The pre-Israelite peoples of western Palestine, excluding northern Syria and such places as Ugarit (Ras Shamra) on the Mediterranean coast of Syria, carried the broad designation of Canaanites. Preview •...","summary_en":"CANAAN, CANAANITE Palestinian territory (the Promised Land) west of the Jordan River, settled by the Israelites at the time of Joshua’s leadership. Portions of southern Syria were also frequently considered part of Canaanite territory, the northern borders of which were never clearly defined. The pre-Israelite peoples of western Palestine, excluding northern Syria and such places as Ugarit (Ras Shamra) on the Mediterranean coast of Syria, carried the broad designation of Canaanites. Preview •...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20751,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Joshua","title_en":"Book of Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":20624,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Joshua (Person)","title_en":"Joshua (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Son of Nun, Moses’ assistant and successor, and the military leader whom God chose to lead the Israelites in the conquest of Canaan (Nm 13:16, <span>kjv<\/span> “Jehoshua”; also spelled “Jehoshuah” in 1 Chr 7:27 and “Jeshua” in Neh 8:17).<\/li>\n<p>Early in the exodus, Joshua was sent by Moses to fight against the Amalekites (Ex 17:8-15). Joshua defeated Amalek, and Moses wrote of the event and built an altar that he called “The <span>Lord<\/span> Is My Banner” (v 15).<\/p>\n<p>When Moses sent 12 men from Kadesh-barnea to spy out the land of Canaan, Joshua represented the tribe of Ephraim (Nm 13:8). At that time Joshua was called Hoshea, but Moses changed his name to Joshua (vv 8, 16). Joshua and Caleb were the only two spies to bring back an affirmative report concerning an Israelite invasion of the land (14:6-9). Consequently, of all the adult Israelite males to leave Egypt in the exodus, only these two crossed the Jordan River and entered the Promised Land (v 30).<\/p>\n<p>When the Lord announced to Moses his impending death, Moses asked about his successor, and the Lord appointed Joshua to that position (Nm 27:12-23). After the death of Moses on Mt Nebo, Joshua’s leadership was confirmed (34:17), and the Lord told Joshua to go over the Jordan and take the land (Jos 1:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>From the Transjordan, Joshua sent two men across the river to reconnoiter Jericho (ch 2). In Jericho they were concealed by Rahab and later safely made their way back to Joshua to report that the people of the land were fainthearted because of the Israelites (vv 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>When Israel had crossed the river, the Lord instructed Joshua to set up a circle of 12 stones at Gilgal to commemorate this passage (Jos 4:1-7). The Lord then commanded all of the males who had been born during the exodus to be circumcised (5:2-9).<\/p>\n<p>While camped at Gilgal, near Jericho, Joshua was confronted by a man with a drawn sword. When Joshua challenged the man, he learned that it was the Lord, who told him to remove his shoes, for the ground was holy (Jos 5:13-15). The Lord gave Joshua directions for the destruction of Jericho; these were followed explicitly and the city fell (ch 6). The attack on Ai ended in temporary defeat, until the matter of Achan’s sin was discovered and judged (7:10-26). Then Ai was taken and destroyed.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua built an altar on Mt Ebal (Jos 8:30-32), and the blessings and curses were read, as commanded by God through Moses (Jos 8:33-35; cf. Dt 27–28).<\/p>\n<p>Because the Israelites failed to ask direction from the Lord (Jos 9:14), Joshua was tricked into making a covenant of peace with the Hivites of Gibeon. Joshua then reduced them to doing menial tasks in Israel (vv 21-27).<\/p>\n<p>The kings of the various Canaanite cities allied themselves against the Israelite threat (Jos 9:1-2) and a league of five Amorite cities (Jerusalem, Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon) attacked Gibeon (10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Joshua for help; he responded quickly against this Amorite confederation and routed the Amorite forces. It was on this occasion that Joshua commanded the sun and the moon to stand still so that Israel could have more time to defeat these adversaries (vv 12-14). This victory was followed by a series of successful attacks on enemy towns (vv 28-43).<\/p>\n<p>A northern alliance headed by Jabin, king of Hazor, was the next opposition (Jos 11:1-5). The Lord assured Joshua of success, and the city of Hazor was taken and destroyed by fire (vv 6-15). Joshua 11:23 summarizes the conquest of the land, and chapter 12 enumerates the kings who were conquered.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua was now old, and the Lord told him that much land remained to be possessed. These territories are listed, but the Lord directed Joshua to proceed with the division of the land among the nine and a half tribes (Jos 13:7; cf. 13:8–18:28). Joshua himself was given the city he asked for, Timnath-serah, in the hill country of Ephraim, which he rebuilt and settled (19:49-50).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord told Joshua to appoint cities of refuge to which a person guilty of manslaughter could flee to escape the avenger of blood (Jos 20). Then the Levites came to Eleazar the priest and Joshua to request that they be given their cities, as the Lord had commanded through Moses (21:1-42).<\/p>\n\n<p>In his advanced years Joshua summoned all Israel and solemnly charged them to continue in faithfulness to the Lord (Jos 23). Finally, he called all Israel to Shechem, where he gave them his farewell message. He summed up the Lord’s dealings with them from the time of Abraham and again challenged them to serve the Lord, putting before them the well-known choice and decision: “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . As for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua died at the age of 110 years and was buried in the land of his inheritance at Timnath-serah (Jos 24:29-30; the parallel account in Jgs 2:8-9 reads “Timnath-heres,” <span>nlt<\/span> mg). Israel served the Lord during all the days of Joshua and the elders who outlived him (Jos 24:31; Jgs 2:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua, Book of.<\/p>\n<li>2. Inhabitant of Beth-shemesh. It was his grainfield into which the cart carrying the ark sent by the Philistines came. It stopped by a large stone which was then used to commemorate this event (1 Sm 6:14, 18).<\/li>\n<li>3. Governor of Jerusalem during King Josiah’s reign (2 Kgs 23:8).<\/li>\n<li>4. Jozadak’s son and high priest during the days of Zerubbabel in postexilic Jerusalem (Hg 1:1-14; 2:2-4; Zec 3:1-9; 6:11; <span>nlt<\/span> “Jeshua”). Joshua is alternately called Jeshua in Ezra and Nehemiah. <em>See<\/em> Jeshua (Person) #3.<\/li>\n<li>5. Eliezer’s son and an ancestor of Jesus Christ (Lk 3:29). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Son of Nun, Moses’ assistant and successor, and the military leader whom God chose to lead the Israelites in the conquest of Canaan (Nm 13:16, <span>kjv<\/span> “Jehoshua”; also spelled “Jehoshuah” in 1 Chr 7:27 and “Jeshua” in Neh 8:17).<\/li>\n<p>Early in the exodus, Joshua was sent by Moses to fight against the Amalekites (Ex 17:8-15). Joshua defeated Amalek, and Moses wrote of the event and built an altar that he called “The <span>Lord<\/span> Is My Banner” (v 15).<\/p>\n<p>When Moses sent 12 men from Kadesh-barnea to spy out the land of Canaan, Joshua represented the tribe of Ephraim (Nm 13:8). At that time Joshua was called Hoshea, but Moses changed his name to Joshua (vv 8, 16). Joshua and Caleb were the only two spies to bring back an affirmative report concerning an Israelite invasion of the land (14:6-9). Consequently, of all the adult Israelite males to leave Egypt in the exodus, only these two crossed the Jordan River and entered the Promised Land (v 30).<\/p>\n<p>When the Lord announced to Moses his impending death, Moses asked about his successor, and the Lord appointed Joshua to that position (Nm 27:12-23). After the death of Moses on Mt Nebo, Joshua’s leadership was confirmed (34:17), and the Lord told Joshua to go over the Jordan and take the land (Jos 1:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>From the Transjordan, Joshua sent two men across the river to reconnoiter Jericho (ch 2). In Jericho they were concealed by Rahab and later safely made their way back to Joshua to report that the people of the land were fainthearted because of the Israelites (vv 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>When Israel had crossed the river, the Lord instructed Joshua to set up a circle of 12 stones at Gilgal to commemorate this passage (Jos 4:1-7). The Lord then commanded all of the males who had been born during the exodus to be circumcised (5:2-9).<\/p>\n<p>While camped at Gilgal, near Jericho, Joshua was confronted by a man with a drawn sword. When Joshua challenged the man, he learned that it was the Lord, who told him to remove his shoes, for the ground was holy (Jos 5:13-15). The Lord gave Joshua directions for the destruction of Jericho; these were followed explicitly and the city fell (ch 6). The attack on Ai ended in temporary defeat, until the matter of Achan’s sin was discovered and judged (7:10-26). Then Ai was taken and destroyed.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua built an altar on Mt Ebal (Jos 8:30-32), and the blessings and curses were read, as commanded by God through Moses (Jos 8:33-35; cf. Dt 27–28).<\/p>\n<p>Because the Israelites failed to ask direction from the Lord (Jos 9:14), Joshua was tricked into making a covenant of peace with the Hivites of Gibeon. Joshua then reduced them to doing menial tasks in Israel (vv 21-27).<\/p>\n<p>The kings of the various Canaanite cities allied themselves against the Israelite threat (Jos 9:1-2) and a league of five Amorite cities (Jerusalem, Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon) attacked Gibeon (10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Joshua for help; he responded quickly against this Amorite confederation and routed the Amorite forces. It was on this occasion that Joshua commanded the sun and the moon to stand still so that Israel could have more time to defeat these adversaries (vv 12-14). This victory was followed by a series of successful attacks on enemy towns (vv 28-43).<\/p>\n<p>A northern alliance headed by Jabin, king of Hazor, was the next opposition (Jos 11:1-5). The Lord assured Joshua of success, and the city of Hazor was taken and destroyed by fire (vv 6-15). Joshua 11:23 summarizes the conquest of the land, and chapter 12 enumerates the kings who were conquered.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua was now old, and the Lord told him that much land remained to be possessed. These territories are listed, but the Lord directed Joshua to proceed with the division of the land among the nine and a half tribes (Jos 13:7; cf. 13:8–18:28). Joshua himself was given the city he asked for, Timnath-serah, in the hill country of Ephraim, which he rebuilt and settled (19:49-50).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord told Joshua to appoint cities of refuge to which a person guilty of manslaughter could flee to escape the avenger of blood (Jos 20). Then the Levites came to Eleazar the priest and Joshua to request that they be given their cities, as the Lord had commanded through Moses (21:1-42).<\/p>\n\n<p>In his advanced years Joshua summoned all Israel and solemnly charged them to continue in faithfulness to the Lord (Jos 23). Finally, he called all Israel to Shechem, where he gave them his farewell message. He summed up the Lord’s dealings with them from the time of Abraham and again challenged them to serve the Lord, putting before them the well-known choice and decision: “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . As for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua died at the age of 110 years and was buried in the land of his inheritance at Timnath-serah (Jos 24:29-30; the parallel account in Jgs 2:8-9 reads “Timnath-heres,” <span>nlt<\/span> mg). Israel served the Lord during all the days of Joshua and the elders who outlived him (Jos 24:31; Jgs 2:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua, Book of.<\/p>\n<li>2. Inhabitant of Beth-shemesh. It was his grainfield into which the cart carrying the ark sent by the Philistines came. It stopped by a large stone which was then used to commemorate this event (1 Sm 6:14, 18).<\/li>\n<li>3. Governor of Jerusalem during King Josiah’s reign (2 Kgs 23:8).<\/li>\n<li>4. Jozadak’s son and high priest during the days of Zerubbabel in postexilic Jerusalem (Hg 1:1-14; 2:2-4; Zec 3:1-9; 6:11; <span>nlt<\/span> “Jeshua”). Joshua is alternately called Jeshua in Ezra and Nehemiah. <em>See<\/em> Jeshua (Person) #3.<\/li>\n<li>5. Eliezer’s son and an ancestor of Jesus Christ (Lk 3:29). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA (Person) 1. Son of Nun, Moses’ assistant and successor, and the military leader whom God chose to lead the Israelites in the conquest of Canaan (Nm 13:16, kjv “Jehoshua”; also spelled “Jehoshuah” in 1 Chr 7:27 and “Jeshua” in Neh 8:17). Early in the exodus, Joshua was sent by Moses to fight against the Amalekites (Ex 17:8-15). Joshua defeated Amalek, and Moses wrote of the event and built an altar that he called “The Lord Is My Banner” (v 15). When Moses sent 12 men from Kadesh-barnea ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA (Person) 1. Son of Nun, Moses’ assistant and successor, and the military leader whom God chose to lead the Israelites in the conquest of Canaan (Nm 13:16, kjv “Jehoshua”; also spelled “Jehoshuah” in 1 Chr 7:27 and “Jeshua” in Neh 8:17). Early in the exodus, Joshua was sent by Moses to fight against the Amalekites (Ex 17:8-15). Joshua defeated Amalek, and Moses wrote of the event and built an altar that he called “The Lord Is My Banner” (v 15). When Moses sent 12 men from Kadesh-barnea ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45404,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:10","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:10-11<\/strong> <em>Get up!<\/em> God’s command was abrupt, stern, and outwardly unsympathetic. For Israel to regain God’s favor, Joshua needed to act swiftly and decisively.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:10-11<\/strong> <em>Get up!<\/em> God’s command was abrupt, stern, and outwardly unsympathetic. For Israel to regain God’s favor, Joshua needed to act swiftly and decisively.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:10-11 Get up! God’s command was abrupt, stern, and outwardly unsympathetic. For Israel to regain God’s favor, Joshua needed to act swiftly and decisively.","summary_en":"7:10-11 Get up! God’s command was abrupt, stern, and outwardly unsympathetic. For Israel to regain God’s favor, Joshua needed to act swiftly and decisively.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73030,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:10","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:10-11<\/strong> <em>Get up!<\/em> God’s command was abrupt, stern, and outwardly unsympathetic. For Israel to regain God’s favor, Joshua needed to act swiftly and decisively.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:10-11<\/strong> <em>Get up!<\/em> God’s command was abrupt, stern, and outwardly unsympathetic. For Israel to regain God’s favor, Joshua needed to act swiftly and decisively.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:10-11 Get up! God’s command was abrupt, stern, and outwardly unsympathetic. For Israel to regain God’s favor, Joshua needed to act swiftly and decisively.","summary_en":"7:10-11 Get up! God’s command was abrupt, stern, and outwardly unsympathetic. For Israel to regain God’s favor, Joshua needed to act swiftly and decisively.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100656,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:10","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:10-11<\/strong> <em>Get up!<\/em> God’s command was abrupt, stern, and outwardly unsympathetic. For Israel to regain God’s favor, Joshua needed to act swiftly and decisively.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:10-11<\/strong> <em>Get up!<\/em> God’s command was abrupt, stern, and outwardly unsympathetic. For Israel to regain God’s favor, Joshua needed to act swiftly and decisively.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:10-11 Get up! God’s command was abrupt, stern, and outwardly unsympathetic. For Israel to regain God’s favor, Joshua needed to act swiftly and decisively.","summary_en":"7:10-11 Get up! God’s command was abrupt, stern, and outwardly unsympathetic. For Israel to regain God’s favor, Joshua needed to act swiftly and decisively.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128282,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:10","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:10-11<\/strong> <em>Get up!<\/em> God’s command was abrupt, stern, and outwardly unsympathetic. For Israel to regain God’s favor, Joshua needed to act swiftly and decisively.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:10-11<\/strong> <em>Get up!<\/em> God’s command was abrupt, stern, and outwardly unsympathetic. For Israel to regain God’s favor, Joshua needed to act swiftly and decisively.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:10-11 Get up! God’s command was abrupt, stern, and outwardly unsympathetic. For Israel to regain God’s favor, Joshua needed to act swiftly and decisively.","summary_en":"7:10-11 Get up! God’s command was abrupt, stern, and outwardly unsympathetic. For Israel to regain God’s favor, Joshua needed to act swiftly and decisively.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"11":[{"id":60551,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Complete Dedication","title_en":"Complete Dedication","content_ro":"<h3>Complete Dedication<\/h3>\n<p>The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> (“specially set apart”) is difficult to translate because it represents a concept for which there is no exact parallel in modern English. In the conquest of Canaan under Joshua, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> designated something that was dedicated to a pagan god and therefore hostile to the Lord. Such things were to be destroyed (see Josh 6:18). In the case of valuable metal items, they were brought to the sanctuary, where they became holy to the Lord (Lev 27:28; see also Josh 6:19, 24). The concept of being “specially set apart” was also applied to Israel’s enemies when they and their property were destroyed (Josh 6:17-19; 1 Sam 15:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>In Leviticus 27:21, 28, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> indicates an acceptable vow devoting something to the Lord for use in the sanctuary (see Num 18:14). This made the item, land, or person holy. The thing or person could not be bought back; it remained in the Lord’s service permanently.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of complete dedication through total destruction underlies several passages in the apostle Paul’s writings. In Romans 9:3, Paul was even willing to be declared <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anathema<\/span> (the Greek equivalent of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span>) if it would bring about the salvation of his fellow Jews. In Galatians 1:8-9, the same Greek word indicates an appropriate end for those who preach a false gospel. In 1 Corinthians 12:3, Paul warns that no one speaking in the Spirit can call Jesus <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anathema<\/span><em>,<\/em> that is, no one who has God’s Spirit will interpret Jesus’ crucifixion as a sign of God’s rejection of him, as the Jews of Paul’s day did. Instead, they will recognize it as an act of atonement for sinful humanity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:20; Lev 27:28-29; Num 18:8-14; 21:2-3; Deut 7:1-6, 26; 13:12-18; Josh 6:17-19, 24; 7:11-15; 1 Sam 15:2-3; 1 Kgs 20:42; Isa 43:26-28; Mal 4:5-6; Rom 9:3; 1 Cor 16:22; Gal 1:8-9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Complete Dedication<\/h3>\n<p>The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> (“specially set apart”) is difficult to translate because it represents a concept for which there is no exact parallel in modern English. In the conquest of Canaan under Joshua, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> designated something that was dedicated to a pagan god and therefore hostile to the Lord. Such things were to be destroyed (see Josh 6:18). In the case of valuable metal items, they were brought to the sanctuary, where they became holy to the Lord (Lev 27:28; see also Josh 6:19, 24). The concept of being “specially set apart” was also applied to Israel’s enemies when they and their property were destroyed (Josh 6:17-19; 1 Sam 15:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>In Leviticus 27:21, 28, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> indicates an acceptable vow devoting something to the Lord for use in the sanctuary (see Num 18:14). This made the item, land, or person holy. The thing or person could not be bought back; it remained in the Lord’s service permanently.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of complete dedication through total destruction underlies several passages in the apostle Paul’s writings. In Romans 9:3, Paul was even willing to be declared <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anathema<\/span> (the Greek equivalent of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span>) if it would bring about the salvation of his fellow Jews. In Galatians 1:8-9, the same Greek word indicates an appropriate end for those who preach a false gospel. In 1 Corinthians 12:3, Paul warns that no one speaking in the Spirit can call Jesus <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anathema<\/span><em>,<\/em> that is, no one who has God’s Spirit will interpret Jesus’ crucifixion as a sign of God’s rejection of him, as the Jews of Paul’s day did. Instead, they will recognize it as an act of atonement for sinful humanity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:20; Lev 27:28-29; Num 18:8-14; 21:2-3; Deut 7:1-6, 26; 13:12-18; Josh 6:17-19, 24; 7:11-15; 1 Sam 15:2-3; 1 Kgs 20:42; Isa 43:26-28; Mal 4:5-6; Rom 9:3; 1 Cor 16:22; Gal 1:8-9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Complete Dedication The Hebrew word kherem (“specially set apart”) is difficult to translate because it represents a concept for which there is no exact parallel in modern English. In the conquest of Canaan under Joshua, kherem designated something that was dedicated to a pagan god and therefore hostile to the Lord. Such things were to be destroyed (see Josh 6:18). In the case of valuable metal items, they were brought to the sanctuary, where they became holy to the Lord (Lev 27:28; see also ...","summary_en":"Complete Dedication The Hebrew word kherem (“specially set apart”) is difficult to translate because it represents a concept for which there is no exact parallel in modern English. In the conquest of Canaan under Joshua, kherem designated something that was dedicated to a pagan god and therefore hostile to the Lord. Such things were to be destroyed (see Josh 6:18). In the case of valuable metal items, they were brought to the sanctuary, where they became holy to the Lord (Lev 27:28; see also ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61184,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Complete Destruction","title_en":"Complete Destruction","content_ro":"<h3>Complete Destruction<\/h3>\n<p>God instructed Saul to “completely destroy” the Amalekites, who had ambushed the Israelites after the Exodus (see Exod 17:8-16; Deut 25:17-19). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kharam<\/span> (“completely destroy”) often means dedicating something or someone completely to the Lord, either by destroying it (1 Sam 15:3; Josh 6:17-18) or by giving it as an offering (see Lev 27:28-29; Josh 6:19).<\/p>\n<p>Complete destruction was called for in cases where those to be destroyed had committed a severe offense against God, such as worshiping false gods (Deut 7:1-6; 13:12-18). In 1 Samuel 15:3, complete destruction is prescribed as God’s judgment on a nation that mistreated his chosen people. Those who curse God’s family are, in turn, cursed (Gen 12:3).<\/p>\n<p>God still judges the godless and impenitent. But in the new covenant, Christians are not called to be agents of such judgment. God calls us to exercise his mercy toward those who wrong us (see Luke 9:51-56). We must completely destroy whatever within ourselves wars against Christ (Rom 8:12-13; Col 3:5). And we must overcome the enemies of Christ by our faith, by the Good News, and by our love (Eph 6:10-20; 1 Jn 2:9-17). God will mete out judgment according to his justice and in his time (Rom 12:19; 2 Thes 1:6-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:20; Lev 27:28-29; Num 21:2-3; Deut 7:1-6, 26; 13:12-18; Josh 6:17-19; 7:11-26; 1 Sam 15:3; 1 Kgs 20:42; Isa 43:26-28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Complete Destruction<\/h3>\n<p>God instructed Saul to “completely destroy” the Amalekites, who had ambushed the Israelites after the Exodus (see Exod 17:8-16; Deut 25:17-19). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kharam<\/span> (“completely destroy”) often means dedicating something or someone completely to the Lord, either by destroying it (1 Sam 15:3; Josh 6:17-18) or by giving it as an offering (see Lev 27:28-29; Josh 6:19).<\/p>\n<p>Complete destruction was called for in cases where those to be destroyed had committed a severe offense against God, such as worshiping false gods (Deut 7:1-6; 13:12-18). In 1 Samuel 15:3, complete destruction is prescribed as God’s judgment on a nation that mistreated his chosen people. Those who curse God’s family are, in turn, cursed (Gen 12:3).<\/p>\n<p>God still judges the godless and impenitent. But in the new covenant, Christians are not called to be agents of such judgment. God calls us to exercise his mercy toward those who wrong us (see Luke 9:51-56). We must completely destroy whatever within ourselves wars against Christ (Rom 8:12-13; Col 3:5). And we must overcome the enemies of Christ by our faith, by the Good News, and by our love (Eph 6:10-20; 1 Jn 2:9-17). God will mete out judgment according to his justice and in his time (Rom 12:19; 2 Thes 1:6-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:20; Lev 27:28-29; Num 21:2-3; Deut 7:1-6, 26; 13:12-18; Josh 6:17-19; 7:11-26; 1 Sam 15:3; 1 Kgs 20:42; Isa 43:26-28<\/p>","summary_ro":"Complete Destruction God instructed Saul to “completely destroy” the Amalekites, who had ambushed the Israelites after the Exodus (see Exod 17:8-16; Deut 25:17-19). The Hebrew word kharam (“completely destroy”) often means dedicating something or someone completely to the Lord, either by destroying it (1 Sam 15:3; Josh 6:17-18) or by giving it as an offering (see Lev 27:28-29; Josh 6:19). Complete destruction was called for in cases where those to be destroyed had committed a severe offense a...","summary_en":"Complete Destruction God instructed Saul to “completely destroy” the Amalekites, who had ambushed the Israelites after the Exodus (see Exod 17:8-16; Deut 25:17-19). The Hebrew word kharam (“completely destroy”) often means dedicating something or someone completely to the Lord, either by destroying it (1 Sam 15:3; Josh 6:17-18) or by giving it as an offering (see Lev 27:28-29; Josh 6:19). Complete destruction was called for in cases where those to be destroyed had committed a severe offense a...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66020,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Remaining in Christ","title_en":"Remaining in Christ","content_ro":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","summary_en":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88177,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Complete Dedication","title_en":"Complete Dedication","content_ro":"<h3>Complete Dedication<\/h3>\n<p>The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> (“specially set apart”) is difficult to translate because it represents a concept for which there is no exact parallel in modern English. In the conquest of Canaan under Joshua, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> designated something that was dedicated to a pagan god and therefore hostile to the Lord. Such things were to be destroyed (see Josh 6:18). In the case of valuable metal items, they were brought to the sanctuary, where they became holy to the Lord (Lev 27:28; see also Josh 6:19, 24). The concept of being “specially set apart” was also applied to Israel’s enemies when they and their property were destroyed (Josh 6:17-19; 1 Sam 15:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>In Leviticus 27:21, 28, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> indicates an acceptable vow devoting something to the Lord for use in the sanctuary (see Num 18:14). This made the item, land, or person holy. The thing or person could not be bought back; it remained in the Lord’s service permanently.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of complete dedication through total destruction underlies several passages in the apostle Paul’s writings. In Romans 9:3, Paul was even willing to be declared <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anathema<\/span> (the Greek equivalent of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span>) if it would bring about the salvation of his fellow Jews. In Galatians 1:8-9, the same Greek word indicates an appropriate end for those who preach a false gospel. In 1 Corinthians 12:3, Paul warns that no one speaking in the Spirit can call Jesus <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anathema<\/span><em>,<\/em> that is, no one who has God’s Spirit will interpret Jesus’ crucifixion as a sign of God’s rejection of him, as the Jews of Paul’s day did. Instead, they will recognize it as an act of atonement for sinful humanity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:20; Lev 27:28-29; Num 18:8-14; 21:2-3; Deut 7:1-6, 26; 13:12-18; Josh 6:17-19, 24; 7:11-15; 1 Sam 15:2-3; 1 Kgs 20:42; Isa 43:26-28; Mal 4:5-6; Rom 9:3; 1 Cor 16:22; Gal 1:8-9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Complete Dedication<\/h3>\n<p>The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> (“specially set apart”) is difficult to translate because it represents a concept for which there is no exact parallel in modern English. In the conquest of Canaan under Joshua, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> designated something that was dedicated to a pagan god and therefore hostile to the Lord. Such things were to be destroyed (see Josh 6:18). In the case of valuable metal items, they were brought to the sanctuary, where they became holy to the Lord (Lev 27:28; see also Josh 6:19, 24). The concept of being “specially set apart” was also applied to Israel’s enemies when they and their property were destroyed (Josh 6:17-19; 1 Sam 15:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>In Leviticus 27:21, 28, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> indicates an acceptable vow devoting something to the Lord for use in the sanctuary (see Num 18:14). This made the item, land, or person holy. The thing or person could not be bought back; it remained in the Lord’s service permanently.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of complete dedication through total destruction underlies several passages in the apostle Paul’s writings. In Romans 9:3, Paul was even willing to be declared <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anathema<\/span> (the Greek equivalent of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span>) if it would bring about the salvation of his fellow Jews. In Galatians 1:8-9, the same Greek word indicates an appropriate end for those who preach a false gospel. In 1 Corinthians 12:3, Paul warns that no one speaking in the Spirit can call Jesus <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anathema<\/span><em>,<\/em> that is, no one who has God’s Spirit will interpret Jesus’ crucifixion as a sign of God’s rejection of him, as the Jews of Paul’s day did. Instead, they will recognize it as an act of atonement for sinful humanity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:20; Lev 27:28-29; Num 18:8-14; 21:2-3; Deut 7:1-6, 26; 13:12-18; Josh 6:17-19, 24; 7:11-15; 1 Sam 15:2-3; 1 Kgs 20:42; Isa 43:26-28; Mal 4:5-6; Rom 9:3; 1 Cor 16:22; Gal 1:8-9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Complete Dedication The Hebrew word kherem (“specially set apart”) is difficult to translate because it represents a concept for which there is no exact parallel in modern English. In the conquest of Canaan under Joshua, kherem designated something that was dedicated to a pagan god and therefore hostile to the Lord. Such things were to be destroyed (see Josh 6:18). In the case of valuable metal items, they were brought to the sanctuary, where they became holy to the Lord (Lev 27:28; see also ...","summary_en":"Complete Dedication The Hebrew word kherem (“specially set apart”) is difficult to translate because it represents a concept for which there is no exact parallel in modern English. In the conquest of Canaan under Joshua, kherem designated something that was dedicated to a pagan god and therefore hostile to the Lord. Such things were to be destroyed (see Josh 6:18). In the case of valuable metal items, they were brought to the sanctuary, where they became holy to the Lord (Lev 27:28; see also ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88810,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Complete Destruction","title_en":"Complete Destruction","content_ro":"<h3>Complete Destruction<\/h3>\n<p>God instructed Saul to “completely destroy” the Amalekites, who had ambushed the Israelites after the Exodus (see Exod 17:8-16; Deut 25:17-19). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kharam<\/span> (“completely destroy”) often means dedicating something or someone completely to the Lord, either by destroying it (1 Sam 15:3; Josh 6:17-18) or by giving it as an offering (see Lev 27:28-29; Josh 6:19).<\/p>\n<p>Complete destruction was called for in cases where those to be destroyed had committed a severe offense against God, such as worshiping false gods (Deut 7:1-6; 13:12-18). In 1 Samuel 15:3, complete destruction is prescribed as God’s judgment on a nation that mistreated his chosen people. Those who curse God’s family are, in turn, cursed (Gen 12:3).<\/p>\n<p>God still judges the godless and impenitent. But in the new covenant, Christians are not called to be agents of such judgment. God calls us to exercise his mercy toward those who wrong us (see Luke 9:51-56). We must completely destroy whatever within ourselves wars against Christ (Rom 8:12-13; Col 3:5). And we must overcome the enemies of Christ by our faith, by the Good News, and by our love (Eph 6:10-20; 1 Jn 2:9-17). God will mete out judgment according to his justice and in his time (Rom 12:19; 2 Thes 1:6-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:20; Lev 27:28-29; Num 21:2-3; Deut 7:1-6, 26; 13:12-18; Josh 6:17-19; 7:11-26; 1 Sam 15:3; 1 Kgs 20:42; Isa 43:26-28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Complete Destruction<\/h3>\n<p>God instructed Saul to “completely destroy” the Amalekites, who had ambushed the Israelites after the Exodus (see Exod 17:8-16; Deut 25:17-19). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kharam<\/span> (“completely destroy”) often means dedicating something or someone completely to the Lord, either by destroying it (1 Sam 15:3; Josh 6:17-18) or by giving it as an offering (see Lev 27:28-29; Josh 6:19).<\/p>\n<p>Complete destruction was called for in cases where those to be destroyed had committed a severe offense against God, such as worshiping false gods (Deut 7:1-6; 13:12-18). In 1 Samuel 15:3, complete destruction is prescribed as God’s judgment on a nation that mistreated his chosen people. Those who curse God’s family are, in turn, cursed (Gen 12:3).<\/p>\n<p>God still judges the godless and impenitent. But in the new covenant, Christians are not called to be agents of such judgment. God calls us to exercise his mercy toward those who wrong us (see Luke 9:51-56). We must completely destroy whatever within ourselves wars against Christ (Rom 8:12-13; Col 3:5). And we must overcome the enemies of Christ by our faith, by the Good News, and by our love (Eph 6:10-20; 1 Jn 2:9-17). God will mete out judgment according to his justice and in his time (Rom 12:19; 2 Thes 1:6-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:20; Lev 27:28-29; Num 21:2-3; Deut 7:1-6, 26; 13:12-18; Josh 6:17-19; 7:11-26; 1 Sam 15:3; 1 Kgs 20:42; Isa 43:26-28<\/p>","summary_ro":"Complete Destruction God instructed Saul to “completely destroy” the Amalekites, who had ambushed the Israelites after the Exodus (see Exod 17:8-16; Deut 25:17-19). The Hebrew word kharam (“completely destroy”) often means dedicating something or someone completely to the Lord, either by destroying it (1 Sam 15:3; Josh 6:17-18) or by giving it as an offering (see Lev 27:28-29; Josh 6:19). Complete destruction was called for in cases where those to be destroyed had committed a severe offense a...","summary_en":"Complete Destruction God instructed Saul to “completely destroy” the Amalekites, who had ambushed the Israelites after the Exodus (see Exod 17:8-16; Deut 25:17-19). The Hebrew word kharam (“completely destroy”) often means dedicating something or someone completely to the Lord, either by destroying it (1 Sam 15:3; Josh 6:17-18) or by giving it as an offering (see Lev 27:28-29; Josh 6:19). Complete destruction was called for in cases where those to be destroyed had committed a severe offense a...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93646,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Remaining in Christ","title_en":"Remaining in Christ","content_ro":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","summary_en":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115803,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Complete Dedication","title_en":"Complete Dedication","content_ro":"<h3>Complete Dedication<\/h3>\n<p>The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> (“specially set apart”) is difficult to translate because it represents a concept for which there is no exact parallel in modern English. In the conquest of Canaan under Joshua, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> designated something that was dedicated to a pagan god and therefore hostile to the Lord. Such things were to be destroyed (see Josh 6:18). In the case of valuable metal items, they were brought to the sanctuary, where they became holy to the Lord (Lev 27:28; see also Josh 6:19, 24). The concept of being “specially set apart” was also applied to Israel’s enemies when they and their property were destroyed (Josh 6:17-19; 1 Sam 15:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>In Leviticus 27:21, 28, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> indicates an acceptable vow devoting something to the Lord for use in the sanctuary (see Num 18:14). This made the item, land, or person holy. The thing or person could not be bought back; it remained in the Lord’s service permanently.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of complete dedication through total destruction underlies several passages in the apostle Paul’s writings. In Romans 9:3, Paul was even willing to be declared <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anathema<\/span> (the Greek equivalent of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span>) if it would bring about the salvation of his fellow Jews. In Galatians 1:8-9, the same Greek word indicates an appropriate end for those who preach a false gospel. In 1 Corinthians 12:3, Paul warns that no one speaking in the Spirit can call Jesus <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anathema<\/span><em>,<\/em> that is, no one who has God’s Spirit will interpret Jesus’ crucifixion as a sign of God’s rejection of him, as the Jews of Paul’s day did. Instead, they will recognize it as an act of atonement for sinful humanity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:20; Lev 27:28-29; Num 18:8-14; 21:2-3; Deut 7:1-6, 26; 13:12-18; Josh 6:17-19, 24; 7:11-15; 1 Sam 15:2-3; 1 Kgs 20:42; Isa 43:26-28; Mal 4:5-6; Rom 9:3; 1 Cor 16:22; Gal 1:8-9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Complete Dedication<\/h3>\n<p>The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> (“specially set apart”) is difficult to translate because it represents a concept for which there is no exact parallel in modern English. In the conquest of Canaan under Joshua, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> designated something that was dedicated to a pagan god and therefore hostile to the Lord. Such things were to be destroyed (see Josh 6:18). In the case of valuable metal items, they were brought to the sanctuary, where they became holy to the Lord (Lev 27:28; see also Josh 6:19, 24). The concept of being “specially set apart” was also applied to Israel’s enemies when they and their property were destroyed (Josh 6:17-19; 1 Sam 15:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>In Leviticus 27:21, 28, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> indicates an acceptable vow devoting something to the Lord for use in the sanctuary (see Num 18:14). This made the item, land, or person holy. The thing or person could not be bought back; it remained in the Lord’s service permanently.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of complete dedication through total destruction underlies several passages in the apostle Paul’s writings. In Romans 9:3, Paul was even willing to be declared <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anathema<\/span> (the Greek equivalent of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span>) if it would bring about the salvation of his fellow Jews. In Galatians 1:8-9, the same Greek word indicates an appropriate end for those who preach a false gospel. In 1 Corinthians 12:3, Paul warns that no one speaking in the Spirit can call Jesus <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anathema<\/span><em>,<\/em> that is, no one who has God’s Spirit will interpret Jesus’ crucifixion as a sign of God’s rejection of him, as the Jews of Paul’s day did. Instead, they will recognize it as an act of atonement for sinful humanity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:20; Lev 27:28-29; Num 18:8-14; 21:2-3; Deut 7:1-6, 26; 13:12-18; Josh 6:17-19, 24; 7:11-15; 1 Sam 15:2-3; 1 Kgs 20:42; Isa 43:26-28; Mal 4:5-6; Rom 9:3; 1 Cor 16:22; Gal 1:8-9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Complete Dedication The Hebrew word kherem (“specially set apart”) is difficult to translate because it represents a concept for which there is no exact parallel in modern English. In the conquest of Canaan under Joshua, kherem designated something that was dedicated to a pagan god and therefore hostile to the Lord. Such things were to be destroyed (see Josh 6:18). In the case of valuable metal items, they were brought to the sanctuary, where they became holy to the Lord (Lev 27:28; see also ...","summary_en":"Complete Dedication The Hebrew word kherem (“specially set apart”) is difficult to translate because it represents a concept for which there is no exact parallel in modern English. In the conquest of Canaan under Joshua, kherem designated something that was dedicated to a pagan god and therefore hostile to the Lord. Such things were to be destroyed (see Josh 6:18). In the case of valuable metal items, they were brought to the sanctuary, where they became holy to the Lord (Lev 27:28; see also ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116436,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Complete Destruction","title_en":"Complete Destruction","content_ro":"<h3>Complete Destruction<\/h3>\n<p>God instructed Saul to “completely destroy” the Amalekites, who had ambushed the Israelites after the Exodus (see Exod 17:8-16; Deut 25:17-19). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kharam<\/span> (“completely destroy”) often means dedicating something or someone completely to the Lord, either by destroying it (1 Sam 15:3; Josh 6:17-18) or by giving it as an offering (see Lev 27:28-29; Josh 6:19).<\/p>\n<p>Complete destruction was called for in cases where those to be destroyed had committed a severe offense against God, such as worshiping false gods (Deut 7:1-6; 13:12-18). In 1 Samuel 15:3, complete destruction is prescribed as God’s judgment on a nation that mistreated his chosen people. Those who curse God’s family are, in turn, cursed (Gen 12:3).<\/p>\n<p>God still judges the godless and impenitent. But in the new covenant, Christians are not called to be agents of such judgment. God calls us to exercise his mercy toward those who wrong us (see Luke 9:51-56). We must completely destroy whatever within ourselves wars against Christ (Rom 8:12-13; Col 3:5). And we must overcome the enemies of Christ by our faith, by the Good News, and by our love (Eph 6:10-20; 1 Jn 2:9-17). God will mete out judgment according to his justice and in his time (Rom 12:19; 2 Thes 1:6-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:20; Lev 27:28-29; Num 21:2-3; Deut 7:1-6, 26; 13:12-18; Josh 6:17-19; 7:11-26; 1 Sam 15:3; 1 Kgs 20:42; Isa 43:26-28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Complete Destruction<\/h3>\n<p>God instructed Saul to “completely destroy” the Amalekites, who had ambushed the Israelites after the Exodus (see Exod 17:8-16; Deut 25:17-19). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kharam<\/span> (“completely destroy”) often means dedicating something or someone completely to the Lord, either by destroying it (1 Sam 15:3; Josh 6:17-18) or by giving it as an offering (see Lev 27:28-29; Josh 6:19).<\/p>\n<p>Complete destruction was called for in cases where those to be destroyed had committed a severe offense against God, such as worshiping false gods (Deut 7:1-6; 13:12-18). In 1 Samuel 15:3, complete destruction is prescribed as God’s judgment on a nation that mistreated his chosen people. Those who curse God’s family are, in turn, cursed (Gen 12:3).<\/p>\n<p>God still judges the godless and impenitent. But in the new covenant, Christians are not called to be agents of such judgment. God calls us to exercise his mercy toward those who wrong us (see Luke 9:51-56). We must completely destroy whatever within ourselves wars against Christ (Rom 8:12-13; Col 3:5). And we must overcome the enemies of Christ by our faith, by the Good News, and by our love (Eph 6:10-20; 1 Jn 2:9-17). God will mete out judgment according to his justice and in his time (Rom 12:19; 2 Thes 1:6-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:20; Lev 27:28-29; Num 21:2-3; Deut 7:1-6, 26; 13:12-18; Josh 6:17-19; 7:11-26; 1 Sam 15:3; 1 Kgs 20:42; Isa 43:26-28<\/p>","summary_ro":"Complete Destruction God instructed Saul to “completely destroy” the Amalekites, who had ambushed the Israelites after the Exodus (see Exod 17:8-16; Deut 25:17-19). The Hebrew word kharam (“completely destroy”) often means dedicating something or someone completely to the Lord, either by destroying it (1 Sam 15:3; Josh 6:17-18) or by giving it as an offering (see Lev 27:28-29; Josh 6:19). Complete destruction was called for in cases where those to be destroyed had committed a severe offense a...","summary_en":"Complete Destruction God instructed Saul to “completely destroy” the Amalekites, who had ambushed the Israelites after the Exodus (see Exod 17:8-16; Deut 25:17-19). The Hebrew word kharam (“completely destroy”) often means dedicating something or someone completely to the Lord, either by destroying it (1 Sam 15:3; Josh 6:17-18) or by giving it as an offering (see Lev 27:28-29; Josh 6:19). Complete destruction was called for in cases where those to be destroyed had committed a severe offense a...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121272,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Remaining in Christ","title_en":"Remaining in Christ","content_ro":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","summary_en":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143429,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Complete Dedication","title_en":"Complete Dedication","content_ro":"<h3>Complete Dedication<\/h3>\n<p>The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> (“specially set apart”) is difficult to translate because it represents a concept for which there is no exact parallel in modern English. In the conquest of Canaan under Joshua, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> designated something that was dedicated to a pagan god and therefore hostile to the Lord. Such things were to be destroyed (see Josh 6:18). In the case of valuable metal items, they were brought to the sanctuary, where they became holy to the Lord (Lev 27:28; see also Josh 6:19, 24). The concept of being “specially set apart” was also applied to Israel’s enemies when they and their property were destroyed (Josh 6:17-19; 1 Sam 15:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>In Leviticus 27:21, 28, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> indicates an acceptable vow devoting something to the Lord for use in the sanctuary (see Num 18:14). This made the item, land, or person holy. The thing or person could not be bought back; it remained in the Lord’s service permanently.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of complete dedication through total destruction underlies several passages in the apostle Paul’s writings. In Romans 9:3, Paul was even willing to be declared <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anathema<\/span> (the Greek equivalent of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span>) if it would bring about the salvation of his fellow Jews. In Galatians 1:8-9, the same Greek word indicates an appropriate end for those who preach a false gospel. In 1 Corinthians 12:3, Paul warns that no one speaking in the Spirit can call Jesus <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anathema<\/span><em>,<\/em> that is, no one who has God’s Spirit will interpret Jesus’ crucifixion as a sign of God’s rejection of him, as the Jews of Paul’s day did. Instead, they will recognize it as an act of atonement for sinful humanity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:20; Lev 27:28-29; Num 18:8-14; 21:2-3; Deut 7:1-6, 26; 13:12-18; Josh 6:17-19, 24; 7:11-15; 1 Sam 15:2-3; 1 Kgs 20:42; Isa 43:26-28; Mal 4:5-6; Rom 9:3; 1 Cor 16:22; Gal 1:8-9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Complete Dedication<\/h3>\n<p>The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> (“specially set apart”) is difficult to translate because it represents a concept for which there is no exact parallel in modern English. In the conquest of Canaan under Joshua, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> designated something that was dedicated to a pagan god and therefore hostile to the Lord. Such things were to be destroyed (see Josh 6:18). In the case of valuable metal items, they were brought to the sanctuary, where they became holy to the Lord (Lev 27:28; see also Josh 6:19, 24). The concept of being “specially set apart” was also applied to Israel’s enemies when they and their property were destroyed (Josh 6:17-19; 1 Sam 15:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>In Leviticus 27:21, 28, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span> indicates an acceptable vow devoting something to the Lord for use in the sanctuary (see Num 18:14). This made the item, land, or person holy. The thing or person could not be bought back; it remained in the Lord’s service permanently.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of complete dedication through total destruction underlies several passages in the apostle Paul’s writings. In Romans 9:3, Paul was even willing to be declared <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anathema<\/span> (the Greek equivalent of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kherem<\/span>) if it would bring about the salvation of his fellow Jews. In Galatians 1:8-9, the same Greek word indicates an appropriate end for those who preach a false gospel. In 1 Corinthians 12:3, Paul warns that no one speaking in the Spirit can call Jesus <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anathema<\/span><em>,<\/em> that is, no one who has God’s Spirit will interpret Jesus’ crucifixion as a sign of God’s rejection of him, as the Jews of Paul’s day did. Instead, they will recognize it as an act of atonement for sinful humanity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:20; Lev 27:28-29; Num 18:8-14; 21:2-3; Deut 7:1-6, 26; 13:12-18; Josh 6:17-19, 24; 7:11-15; 1 Sam 15:2-3; 1 Kgs 20:42; Isa 43:26-28; Mal 4:5-6; Rom 9:3; 1 Cor 16:22; Gal 1:8-9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Complete Dedication The Hebrew word kherem (“specially set apart”) is difficult to translate because it represents a concept for which there is no exact parallel in modern English. In the conquest of Canaan under Joshua, kherem designated something that was dedicated to a pagan god and therefore hostile to the Lord. Such things were to be destroyed (see Josh 6:18). In the case of valuable metal items, they were brought to the sanctuary, where they became holy to the Lord (Lev 27:28; see also ...","summary_en":"Complete Dedication The Hebrew word kherem (“specially set apart”) is difficult to translate because it represents a concept for which there is no exact parallel in modern English. In the conquest of Canaan under Joshua, kherem designated something that was dedicated to a pagan god and therefore hostile to the Lord. Such things were to be destroyed (see Josh 6:18). In the case of valuable metal items, they were brought to the sanctuary, where they became holy to the Lord (Lev 27:28; see also ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144062,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Complete Destruction","title_en":"Complete Destruction","content_ro":"<h3>Complete Destruction<\/h3>\n<p>God instructed Saul to “completely destroy” the Amalekites, who had ambushed the Israelites after the Exodus (see Exod 17:8-16; Deut 25:17-19). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kharam<\/span> (“completely destroy”) often means dedicating something or someone completely to the Lord, either by destroying it (1 Sam 15:3; Josh 6:17-18) or by giving it as an offering (see Lev 27:28-29; Josh 6:19).<\/p>\n<p>Complete destruction was called for in cases where those to be destroyed had committed a severe offense against God, such as worshiping false gods (Deut 7:1-6; 13:12-18). In 1 Samuel 15:3, complete destruction is prescribed as God’s judgment on a nation that mistreated his chosen people. Those who curse God’s family are, in turn, cursed (Gen 12:3).<\/p>\n<p>God still judges the godless and impenitent. But in the new covenant, Christians are not called to be agents of such judgment. God calls us to exercise his mercy toward those who wrong us (see Luke 9:51-56). We must completely destroy whatever within ourselves wars against Christ (Rom 8:12-13; Col 3:5). And we must overcome the enemies of Christ by our faith, by the Good News, and by our love (Eph 6:10-20; 1 Jn 2:9-17). God will mete out judgment according to his justice and in his time (Rom 12:19; 2 Thes 1:6-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:20; Lev 27:28-29; Num 21:2-3; Deut 7:1-6, 26; 13:12-18; Josh 6:17-19; 7:11-26; 1 Sam 15:3; 1 Kgs 20:42; Isa 43:26-28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Complete Destruction<\/h3>\n<p>God instructed Saul to “completely destroy” the Amalekites, who had ambushed the Israelites after the Exodus (see Exod 17:8-16; Deut 25:17-19). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kharam<\/span> (“completely destroy”) often means dedicating something or someone completely to the Lord, either by destroying it (1 Sam 15:3; Josh 6:17-18) or by giving it as an offering (see Lev 27:28-29; Josh 6:19).<\/p>\n<p>Complete destruction was called for in cases where those to be destroyed had committed a severe offense against God, such as worshiping false gods (Deut 7:1-6; 13:12-18). In 1 Samuel 15:3, complete destruction is prescribed as God’s judgment on a nation that mistreated his chosen people. Those who curse God’s family are, in turn, cursed (Gen 12:3).<\/p>\n<p>God still judges the godless and impenitent. But in the new covenant, Christians are not called to be agents of such judgment. God calls us to exercise his mercy toward those who wrong us (see Luke 9:51-56). We must completely destroy whatever within ourselves wars against Christ (Rom 8:12-13; Col 3:5). And we must overcome the enemies of Christ by our faith, by the Good News, and by our love (Eph 6:10-20; 1 Jn 2:9-17). God will mete out judgment according to his justice and in his time (Rom 12:19; 2 Thes 1:6-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:20; Lev 27:28-29; Num 21:2-3; Deut 7:1-6, 26; 13:12-18; Josh 6:17-19; 7:11-26; 1 Sam 15:3; 1 Kgs 20:42; Isa 43:26-28<\/p>","summary_ro":"Complete Destruction God instructed Saul to “completely destroy” the Amalekites, who had ambushed the Israelites after the Exodus (see Exod 17:8-16; Deut 25:17-19). The Hebrew word kharam (“completely destroy”) often means dedicating something or someone completely to the Lord, either by destroying it (1 Sam 15:3; Josh 6:17-18) or by giving it as an offering (see Lev 27:28-29; Josh 6:19). Complete destruction was called for in cases where those to be destroyed had committed a severe offense a...","summary_en":"Complete Destruction God instructed Saul to “completely destroy” the Amalekites, who had ambushed the Israelites after the Exodus (see Exod 17:8-16; Deut 25:17-19). The Hebrew word kharam (“completely destroy”) often means dedicating something or someone completely to the Lord, either by destroying it (1 Sam 15:3; Josh 6:17-18) or by giving it as an offering (see Lev 27:28-29; Josh 6:19). Complete destruction was called for in cases where those to be destroyed had committed a severe offense a...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148898,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Remaining in Christ","title_en":"Remaining in Christ","content_ro":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","summary_en":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":45405,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:12","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:12<\/strong> <em>Israel itself has been set apart for destruction:<\/em> With his individual sin, Achan made all Israel liable to destruction.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:12<\/strong> <em>Israel itself has been set apart for destruction:<\/em> With his individual sin, Achan made all Israel liable to destruction.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:12 Israel itself has been set apart for destruction: With his individual sin, Achan made all Israel liable to destruction.","summary_en":"7:12 Israel itself has been set apart for destruction: With his individual sin, Achan made all Israel liable to destruction.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73031,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:12","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:12<\/strong> <em>Israel itself has been set apart for destruction:<\/em> With his individual sin, Achan made all Israel liable to destruction.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:12<\/strong> <em>Israel itself has been set apart for destruction:<\/em> With his individual sin, Achan made all Israel liable to destruction.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:12 Israel itself has been set apart for destruction: With his individual sin, Achan made all Israel liable to destruction.","summary_en":"7:12 Israel itself has been set apart for destruction: With his individual sin, Achan made all Israel liable to destruction.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100657,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:12","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:12<\/strong> <em>Israel itself has been set apart for destruction:<\/em> With his individual sin, Achan made all Israel liable to destruction.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:12<\/strong> <em>Israel itself has been set apart for destruction:<\/em> With his individual sin, Achan made all Israel liable to destruction.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:12 Israel itself has been set apart for destruction: With his individual sin, Achan made all Israel liable to destruction.","summary_en":"7:12 Israel itself has been set apart for destruction: With his individual sin, Achan made all Israel liable to destruction.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128283,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:12","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:12<\/strong> <em>Israel itself has been set apart for destruction:<\/em> With his individual sin, Achan made all Israel liable to destruction.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:12<\/strong> <em>Israel itself has been set apart for destruction:<\/em> With his individual sin, Achan made all Israel liable to destruction.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:12 Israel itself has been set apart for destruction: With his individual sin, Achan made all Israel liable to destruction.","summary_en":"7:12 Israel itself has been set apart for destruction: With his individual sin, Achan made all Israel liable to destruction.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"13":[{"id":20752,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Joshua","title_en":"Book of Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45406,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:13","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:13<\/strong> <em>Command the people to purify themselves:<\/em> See study note on 3:5.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:13<\/strong> <em>Command the people to purify themselves:<\/em> See study note on 3:5.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:13 Command the people to purify themselves: See study note on 3:5.","summary_en":"7:13 Command the people to purify themselves: See study note on 3:5.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73032,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:13","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:13<\/strong> <em>Command the people to purify themselves:<\/em> See study note on 3:5.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:13<\/strong> <em>Command the people to purify themselves:<\/em> See study note on 3:5.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:13 Command the people to purify themselves: See study note on 3:5.","summary_en":"7:13 Command the people to purify themselves: See study note on 3:5.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100658,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:13","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:13<\/strong> <em>Command the people to purify themselves:<\/em> See study note on 3:5.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:13<\/strong> <em>Command the people to purify themselves:<\/em> See study note on 3:5.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:13 Command the people to purify themselves: See study note on 3:5.","summary_en":"7:13 Command the people to purify themselves: See study note on 3:5.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128284,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:13","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:13<\/strong> <em>Command the people to purify themselves:<\/em> See study note on 3:5.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:13<\/strong> <em>Command the people to purify themselves:<\/em> See study note on 3:5.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:13 Command the people to purify themselves: See study note on 3:5.","summary_en":"7:13 Command the people to purify themselves: See study note on 3:5.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"14":[{"id":23543,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Casting of Lots","title_en":"Casting of Lots","content_ro":"<h3>LOTS, Casting of<\/h3>\n<p>Practice common in the OT, less common in the NT prior to Pentecost, and absent in the biblical narrative after Pentecost.<\/p>\n<p>In the Bible the practice was used in a variety of circumstances, including (1) the selection of the scapegoat (Lv 16:8-10); (2) the allocation of the tribal inheritance in the Promised Land (Nm 26:55-56; Jos 14:2; Jgs 1:3); (3) the determination of the families who had to relocate to give a proper distribution of the populace or of those warriors who had to go to war where only a percentage was required (Jgs 20:9; Neh 11:1); (4) the order of the priests and their duties (1 Chr 24:5-19; Neh 10:34); (5) the determination of an offender (Jos 7:14-18; cf. Prv 18:18).<\/p>\n<p>According to biblical usage, lots seem to have been used only when the decision was important and where wisdom or biblical injunctions did not give sufficient guidance. One of the advantages of the casting of lots was the impartiality of the choice. It was held that the Lord directed the lots (Prv 16:33). The method of casting lots is not specified or described and seems to have varied according to the need of the situation (cf. Lv 16:8; Nm 26:55-56; Jgs 20:9).<\/p>\n<p>The practice of casting lots was never condemned by God and on several occasions was sanctioned by him (Lv 16:8; Prv 18:18; Is 34:17). The principle behind the procedure is set forth in Proverbs 16:33, which affirms that the disposition or result of the lot is determined by God; therefore, the theory was that the lot pronounced the will of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the soldiers cast lots over Jesus’ garments (Mt 27:35), and the disciples cast lots when they selected Matthias to the apostleship in place of Judas (Acts 1:26). After the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the church, the practice of casting lots ceased. Some scholars think that there was no further need for the practice to continue, as the Holy Spirit guided the church in its decisions.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Urim and Thummim.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LOTS, Casting of<\/h3>\n<p>Practice common in the OT, less common in the NT prior to Pentecost, and absent in the biblical narrative after Pentecost.<\/p>\n<p>In the Bible the practice was used in a variety of circumstances, including (1) the selection of the scapegoat (Lv 16:8-10); (2) the allocation of the tribal inheritance in the Promised Land (Nm 26:55-56; Jos 14:2; Jgs 1:3); (3) the determination of the families who had to relocate to give a proper distribution of the populace or of those warriors who had to go to war where only a percentage was required (Jgs 20:9; Neh 11:1); (4) the order of the priests and their duties (1 Chr 24:5-19; Neh 10:34); (5) the determination of an offender (Jos 7:14-18; cf. Prv 18:18).<\/p>\n<p>According to biblical usage, lots seem to have been used only when the decision was important and where wisdom or biblical injunctions did not give sufficient guidance. One of the advantages of the casting of lots was the impartiality of the choice. It was held that the Lord directed the lots (Prv 16:33). The method of casting lots is not specified or described and seems to have varied according to the need of the situation (cf. Lv 16:8; Nm 26:55-56; Jgs 20:9).<\/p>\n<p>The practice of casting lots was never condemned by God and on several occasions was sanctioned by him (Lv 16:8; Prv 18:18; Is 34:17). The principle behind the procedure is set forth in Proverbs 16:33, which affirms that the disposition or result of the lot is determined by God; therefore, the theory was that the lot pronounced the will of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the soldiers cast lots over Jesus’ garments (Mt 27:35), and the disciples cast lots when they selected Matthias to the apostleship in place of Judas (Acts 1:26). After the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the church, the practice of casting lots ceased. Some scholars think that there was no further need for the practice to continue, as the Holy Spirit guided the church in its decisions.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Urim and Thummim.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LOTS, Casting of Practice common in the OT, less common in the NT prior to Pentecost, and absent in the biblical narrative after Pentecost. In the Bible the practice was used in a variety of circumstances, including (1) the selection of the scapegoat (Lv 16:8-10); (2) the allocation of the tribal inheritance in the Promised Land (Nm 26:55-56; Jos 14:2; Jgs 1:3); (3) the determination of the families who had to relocate to give a proper distribution of the populace or of those warriors who had...","summary_en":"LOTS, Casting of Practice common in the OT, less common in the NT prior to Pentecost, and absent in the biblical narrative after Pentecost. In the Bible the practice was used in a variety of circumstances, including (1) the selection of the scapegoat (Lv 16:8-10); (2) the allocation of the tribal inheritance in the Promised Land (Nm 26:55-56; Jos 14:2; Jgs 1:3); (3) the determination of the families who had to relocate to give a proper distribution of the populace or of those warriors who had...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45407,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:14","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:14<\/strong> Israel’s twelve <em>tribes<\/em> were descendants of Jacob’s sons. A <em>clan<\/em> represented a smaller unit within the tribes; later, as Israel’s allotments in the land were distributed, a clan usually received possession of a town and its surrounding fields, forest, and pastureland. A man’s <em>family<\/em> included his sons and their dependents.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:14<\/strong> Israel’s twelve <em>tribes<\/em> were descendants of Jacob’s sons. A <em>clan<\/em> represented a smaller unit within the tribes; later, as Israel’s allotments in the land were distributed, a clan usually received possession of a town and its surrounding fields, forest, and pastureland. A man’s <em>family<\/em> included his sons and their dependents.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:14 Israel’s twelve tribes were descendants of Jacob’s sons. A clan represented a smaller unit within the tribes; later, as Israel’s allotments in the land were distributed, a clan usually received possession of a town and its surrounding fields, forest, and pastureland. A man’s family included his sons and their dependents.","summary_en":"7:14 Israel’s twelve tribes were descendants of Jacob’s sons. A clan represented a smaller unit within the tribes; later, as Israel’s allotments in the land were distributed, a clan usually received possession of a town and its surrounding fields, forest, and pastureland. A man’s family included his sons and their dependents.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73033,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:14","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:14<\/strong> Israel’s twelve <em>tribes<\/em> were descendants of Jacob’s sons. A <em>clan<\/em> represented a smaller unit within the tribes; later, as Israel’s allotments in the land were distributed, a clan usually received possession of a town and its surrounding fields, forest, and pastureland. A man’s <em>family<\/em> included his sons and their dependents.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:14<\/strong> Israel’s twelve <em>tribes<\/em> were descendants of Jacob’s sons. A <em>clan<\/em> represented a smaller unit within the tribes; later, as Israel’s allotments in the land were distributed, a clan usually received possession of a town and its surrounding fields, forest, and pastureland. A man’s <em>family<\/em> included his sons and their dependents.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:14 Israel’s twelve tribes were descendants of Jacob’s sons. A clan represented a smaller unit within the tribes; later, as Israel’s allotments in the land were distributed, a clan usually received possession of a town and its surrounding fields, forest, and pastureland. A man’s family included his sons and their dependents.","summary_en":"7:14 Israel’s twelve tribes were descendants of Jacob’s sons. A clan represented a smaller unit within the tribes; later, as Israel’s allotments in the land were distributed, a clan usually received possession of a town and its surrounding fields, forest, and pastureland. A man’s family included his sons and their dependents.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100659,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:14","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:14<\/strong> Israel’s twelve <em>tribes<\/em> were descendants of Jacob’s sons. A <em>clan<\/em> represented a smaller unit within the tribes; later, as Israel’s allotments in the land were distributed, a clan usually received possession of a town and its surrounding fields, forest, and pastureland. A man’s <em>family<\/em> included his sons and their dependents.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:14<\/strong> Israel’s twelve <em>tribes<\/em> were descendants of Jacob’s sons. A <em>clan<\/em> represented a smaller unit within the tribes; later, as Israel’s allotments in the land were distributed, a clan usually received possession of a town and its surrounding fields, forest, and pastureland. A man’s <em>family<\/em> included his sons and their dependents.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:14 Israel’s twelve tribes were descendants of Jacob’s sons. A clan represented a smaller unit within the tribes; later, as Israel’s allotments in the land were distributed, a clan usually received possession of a town and its surrounding fields, forest, and pastureland. A man’s family included his sons and their dependents.","summary_en":"7:14 Israel’s twelve tribes were descendants of Jacob’s sons. A clan represented a smaller unit within the tribes; later, as Israel’s allotments in the land were distributed, a clan usually received possession of a town and its surrounding fields, forest, and pastureland. A man’s family included his sons and their dependents.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128285,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:14","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:14<\/strong> Israel’s twelve <em>tribes<\/em> were descendants of Jacob’s sons. A <em>clan<\/em> represented a smaller unit within the tribes; later, as Israel’s allotments in the land were distributed, a clan usually received possession of a town and its surrounding fields, forest, and pastureland. A man’s <em>family<\/em> included his sons and their dependents.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:14<\/strong> Israel’s twelve <em>tribes<\/em> were descendants of Jacob’s sons. A <em>clan<\/em> represented a smaller unit within the tribes; later, as Israel’s allotments in the land were distributed, a clan usually received possession of a town and its surrounding fields, forest, and pastureland. A man’s <em>family<\/em> included his sons and their dependents.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:14 Israel’s twelve tribes were descendants of Jacob’s sons. A clan represented a smaller unit within the tribes; later, as Israel’s allotments in the land were distributed, a clan usually received possession of a town and its surrounding fields, forest, and pastureland. A man’s family included his sons and their dependents.","summary_en":"7:14 Israel’s twelve tribes were descendants of Jacob’s sons. A clan represented a smaller unit within the tribes; later, as Israel’s allotments in the land were distributed, a clan usually received possession of a town and its surrounding fields, forest, and pastureland. A man’s family included his sons and their dependents.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":45408,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:15","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:15<\/strong> God had commanded that all the stolen goods were to be destroyed by fire. Now they would be, because Achan and <em>everything<\/em> he had would <em>be burned with fire<\/em>. Breaking <em>the covenant of the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> was treason, a capital offense (e.g., Exod 22:20; Deut 4:25-27).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:15<\/strong> God had commanded that all the stolen goods were to be destroyed by fire. Now they would be, because Achan and <em>everything<\/em> he had would <em>be burned with fire<\/em>. Breaking <em>the covenant of the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> was treason, a capital offense (e.g., Exod 22:20; Deut 4:25-27).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:15 God had commanded that all the stolen goods were to be destroyed by fire. Now they would be, because Achan and everything he had would be burned with fire. Breaking the covenant of the Lord was treason, a capital offense (e.g., Exod 22:20; Deut 4:25-27).","summary_en":"7:15 God had commanded that all the stolen goods were to be destroyed by fire. Now they would be, because Achan and everything he had would be burned with fire. Breaking the covenant of the Lord was treason, a capital offense (e.g., Exod 22:20; Deut 4:25-27).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73034,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:15","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:15<\/strong> God had commanded that all the stolen goods were to be destroyed by fire. Now they would be, because Achan and <em>everything<\/em> he had would <em>be burned with fire<\/em>. Breaking <em>the covenant of the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> was treason, a capital offense (e.g., Exod 22:20; Deut 4:25-27).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:15<\/strong> God had commanded that all the stolen goods were to be destroyed by fire. Now they would be, because Achan and <em>everything<\/em> he had would <em>be burned with fire<\/em>. Breaking <em>the covenant of the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> was treason, a capital offense (e.g., Exod 22:20; Deut 4:25-27).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:15 God had commanded that all the stolen goods were to be destroyed by fire. Now they would be, because Achan and everything he had would be burned with fire. Breaking the covenant of the Lord was treason, a capital offense (e.g., Exod 22:20; Deut 4:25-27).","summary_en":"7:15 God had commanded that all the stolen goods were to be destroyed by fire. Now they would be, because Achan and everything he had would be burned with fire. Breaking the covenant of the Lord was treason, a capital offense (e.g., Exod 22:20; Deut 4:25-27).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100660,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:15","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:15<\/strong> God had commanded that all the stolen goods were to be destroyed by fire. Now they would be, because Achan and <em>everything<\/em> he had would <em>be burned with fire<\/em>. Breaking <em>the covenant of the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> was treason, a capital offense (e.g., Exod 22:20; Deut 4:25-27).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:15<\/strong> God had commanded that all the stolen goods were to be destroyed by fire. Now they would be, because Achan and <em>everything<\/em> he had would <em>be burned with fire<\/em>. Breaking <em>the covenant of the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> was treason, a capital offense (e.g., Exod 22:20; Deut 4:25-27).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:15 God had commanded that all the stolen goods were to be destroyed by fire. Now they would be, because Achan and everything he had would be burned with fire. Breaking the covenant of the Lord was treason, a capital offense (e.g., Exod 22:20; Deut 4:25-27).","summary_en":"7:15 God had commanded that all the stolen goods were to be destroyed by fire. Now they would be, because Achan and everything he had would be burned with fire. Breaking the covenant of the Lord was treason, a capital offense (e.g., Exod 22:20; Deut 4:25-27).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128286,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:15","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:15<\/strong> God had commanded that all the stolen goods were to be destroyed by fire. Now they would be, because Achan and <em>everything<\/em> he had would <em>be burned with fire<\/em>. Breaking <em>the covenant of the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> was treason, a capital offense (e.g., Exod 22:20; Deut 4:25-27).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:15<\/strong> God had commanded that all the stolen goods were to be destroyed by fire. Now they would be, because Achan and <em>everything<\/em> he had would <em>be burned with fire<\/em>. Breaking <em>the covenant of the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> was treason, a capital offense (e.g., Exod 22:20; Deut 4:25-27).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:15 God had commanded that all the stolen goods were to be destroyed by fire. Now they would be, because Achan and everything he had would be burned with fire. Breaking the covenant of the Lord was treason, a capital offense (e.g., Exod 22:20; Deut 4:25-27).","summary_en":"7:15 God had commanded that all the stolen goods were to be destroyed by fire. Now they would be, because Achan and everything he had would be burned with fire. Breaking the covenant of the Lord was treason, a capital offense (e.g., Exod 22:20; Deut 4:25-27).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":45409,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:16","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:16-18<\/strong> Achan might have been <em>singled out<\/em> by use of the Urim and Thummim, a God-given system of sacred lots. These items remained in the care of the high priest, probably in a bag or a pouch (see Exod 28:30; Num 27:21). They might have been two different-colored objects, perhaps stones or gems. Inquiries were phrased as “yes” or “no” questions.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:16-18<\/strong> Achan might have been <em>singled out<\/em> by use of the Urim and Thummim, a God-given system of sacred lots. These items remained in the care of the high priest, probably in a bag or a pouch (see Exod 28:30; Num 27:21). They might have been two different-colored objects, perhaps stones or gems. Inquiries were phrased as “yes” or “no” questions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:16-18 Achan might have been singled out by use of the Urim and Thummim, a God-given system of sacred lots. These items remained in the care of the high priest, probably in a bag or a pouch (see Exod 28:30; Num 27:21). They might have been two different-colored objects, perhaps stones or gems. Inquiries were phrased as “yes” or “no” questions.","summary_en":"7:16-18 Achan might have been singled out by use of the Urim and Thummim, a God-given system of sacred lots. These items remained in the care of the high priest, probably in a bag or a pouch (see Exod 28:30; Num 27:21). They might have been two different-colored objects, perhaps stones or gems. Inquiries were phrased as “yes” or “no” questions.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73035,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:16","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:16-18<\/strong> Achan might have been <em>singled out<\/em> by use of the Urim and Thummim, a God-given system of sacred lots. These items remained in the care of the high priest, probably in a bag or a pouch (see Exod 28:30; Num 27:21). They might have been two different-colored objects, perhaps stones or gems. Inquiries were phrased as “yes” or “no” questions.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:16-18<\/strong> Achan might have been <em>singled out<\/em> by use of the Urim and Thummim, a God-given system of sacred lots. These items remained in the care of the high priest, probably in a bag or a pouch (see Exod 28:30; Num 27:21). They might have been two different-colored objects, perhaps stones or gems. Inquiries were phrased as “yes” or “no” questions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:16-18 Achan might have been singled out by use of the Urim and Thummim, a God-given system of sacred lots. These items remained in the care of the high priest, probably in a bag or a pouch (see Exod 28:30; Num 27:21). They might have been two different-colored objects, perhaps stones or gems. Inquiries were phrased as “yes” or “no” questions.","summary_en":"7:16-18 Achan might have been singled out by use of the Urim and Thummim, a God-given system of sacred lots. These items remained in the care of the high priest, probably in a bag or a pouch (see Exod 28:30; Num 27:21). They might have been two different-colored objects, perhaps stones or gems. Inquiries were phrased as “yes” or “no” questions.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100661,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:16","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:16-18<\/strong> Achan might have been <em>singled out<\/em> by use of the Urim and Thummim, a God-given system of sacred lots. These items remained in the care of the high priest, probably in a bag or a pouch (see Exod 28:30; Num 27:21). They might have been two different-colored objects, perhaps stones or gems. Inquiries were phrased as “yes” or “no” questions.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:16-18<\/strong> Achan might have been <em>singled out<\/em> by use of the Urim and Thummim, a God-given system of sacred lots. These items remained in the care of the high priest, probably in a bag or a pouch (see Exod 28:30; Num 27:21). They might have been two different-colored objects, perhaps stones or gems. Inquiries were phrased as “yes” or “no” questions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:16-18 Achan might have been singled out by use of the Urim and Thummim, a God-given system of sacred lots. These items remained in the care of the high priest, probably in a bag or a pouch (see Exod 28:30; Num 27:21). They might have been two different-colored objects, perhaps stones or gems. Inquiries were phrased as “yes” or “no” questions.","summary_en":"7:16-18 Achan might have been singled out by use of the Urim and Thummim, a God-given system of sacred lots. These items remained in the care of the high priest, probably in a bag or a pouch (see Exod 28:30; Num 27:21). They might have been two different-colored objects, perhaps stones or gems. Inquiries were phrased as “yes” or “no” questions.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128287,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:16","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:16-18<\/strong> Achan might have been <em>singled out<\/em> by use of the Urim and Thummim, a God-given system of sacred lots. These items remained in the care of the high priest, probably in a bag or a pouch (see Exod 28:30; Num 27:21). They might have been two different-colored objects, perhaps stones or gems. Inquiries were phrased as “yes” or “no” questions.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:16-18<\/strong> Achan might have been <em>singled out<\/em> by use of the Urim and Thummim, a God-given system of sacred lots. These items remained in the care of the high priest, probably in a bag or a pouch (see Exod 28:30; Num 27:21). They might have been two different-colored objects, perhaps stones or gems. Inquiries were phrased as “yes” or “no” questions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:16-18 Achan might have been singled out by use of the Urim and Thummim, a God-given system of sacred lots. These items remained in the care of the high priest, probably in a bag or a pouch (see Exod 28:30; Num 27:21). They might have been two different-colored objects, perhaps stones or gems. Inquiries were phrased as “yes” or “no” questions.","summary_en":"7:16-18 Achan might have been singled out by use of the Urim and Thummim, a God-given system of sacred lots. These items remained in the care of the high priest, probably in a bag or a pouch (see Exod 28:30; Num 27:21). They might have been two different-colored objects, perhaps stones or gems. Inquiries were phrased as “yes” or “no” questions.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"17":[{"id":38832,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Zabdi","title_en":"Zabdi","content_ro":"<h3>ZABDI<\/h3>\n<li>1. Zerah’s descendant from Judah’s tribe (Jos 7:1). Achan was a Zerahite of the family of Zabdi (Jos 7:17-18); alternately called Zimri (<span>nlt<\/span> mg, 1 Chr 2:6).<\/li>\n<li>2. Shimei’s son and a descendant of Ehud from Benjamin’s tribe (1 Chr 8:19).<\/li>\n<li>3. David’s officer over the produce of the vineyards for the wine cellars (1 Chr 27:27). He is called a Shiphmite, which likely means that he was a native of Shepham.<\/li>\n<li>4. One of the temple musicians of the order of Asaph (Neh 11:17); alternately called Zicri (1 Chr 9:15).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>ZABDI<\/h3>\n<li>1. Zerah’s descendant from Judah’s tribe (Jos 7:1). Achan was a Zerahite of the family of Zabdi (Jos 7:17-18); alternately called Zimri (<span>nlt<\/span> mg, 1 Chr 2:6).<\/li>\n<li>2. Shimei’s son and a descendant of Ehud from Benjamin’s tribe (1 Chr 8:19).<\/li>\n<li>3. David’s officer over the produce of the vineyards for the wine cellars (1 Chr 27:27). He is called a Shiphmite, which likely means that he was a native of Shepham.<\/li>\n<li>4. One of the temple musicians of the order of Asaph (Neh 11:17); alternately called Zicri (1 Chr 9:15).<\/li>","summary_ro":"ZABDI 1. Zerah’s descendant from Judah’s tribe (Jos 7:1). Achan was a Zerahite of the family of Zabdi (Jos 7:17-18); alternately called Zimri (nlt mg, 1 Chr 2:6). 2. Shimei’s son and a descendant of Ehud from Benjamin’s tribe (1 Chr 8:19). 3. David’s officer over the produce of the vineyards for the wine cellars (1 Chr 27:27). He is called a Shiphmite, which likely means that he was a native of Shepham. 4. One of the temple musicians of the order of Asaph (Neh 11:17); alternately called Zicri...","summary_en":"ZABDI 1. Zerah’s descendant from Judah’s tribe (Jos 7:1). Achan was a Zerahite of the family of Zabdi (Jos 7:17-18); alternately called Zimri (nlt mg, 1 Chr 2:6). 2. Shimei’s son and a descendant of Ehud from Benjamin’s tribe (1 Chr 8:19). 3. David’s officer over the produce of the vineyards for the wine cellars (1 Chr 27:27). He is called a Shiphmite, which likely means that he was a native of Shepham. 4. One of the temple musicians of the order of Asaph (Neh 11:17); alternately called Zicri...","source":"Articles\/Z.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":45410,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:19","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:19-20<\/strong> <em>My son:<\/em> This gentle, compassionate form of address reveals Joshua as a caring leader, sorry for this young man trapped by impulsive greed. Although Joshua and Achan both knew that Achan would die for his crime, Joshua entreated him to repent. Achan responded with a full confession.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:19-20<\/strong> <em>My son:<\/em> This gentle, compassionate form of address reveals Joshua as a caring leader, sorry for this young man trapped by impulsive greed. Although Joshua and Achan both knew that Achan would die for his crime, Joshua entreated him to repent. Achan responded with a full confession.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:19-20 My son: This gentle, compassionate form of address reveals Joshua as a caring leader, sorry for this young man trapped by impulsive greed. Although Joshua and Achan both knew that Achan would die for his crime, Joshua entreated him to repent. Achan responded with a full confession.","summary_en":"7:19-20 My son: This gentle, compassionate form of address reveals Joshua as a caring leader, sorry for this young man trapped by impulsive greed. Although Joshua and Achan both knew that Achan would die for his crime, Joshua entreated him to repent. Achan responded with a full confession.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73036,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:19","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:19-20<\/strong> <em>My son:<\/em> This gentle, compassionate form of address reveals Joshua as a caring leader, sorry for this young man trapped by impulsive greed. Although Joshua and Achan both knew that Achan would die for his crime, Joshua entreated him to repent. Achan responded with a full confession.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:19-20<\/strong> <em>My son:<\/em> This gentle, compassionate form of address reveals Joshua as a caring leader, sorry for this young man trapped by impulsive greed. Although Joshua and Achan both knew that Achan would die for his crime, Joshua entreated him to repent. Achan responded with a full confession.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:19-20 My son: This gentle, compassionate form of address reveals Joshua as a caring leader, sorry for this young man trapped by impulsive greed. Although Joshua and Achan both knew that Achan would die for his crime, Joshua entreated him to repent. Achan responded with a full confession.","summary_en":"7:19-20 My son: This gentle, compassionate form of address reveals Joshua as a caring leader, sorry for this young man trapped by impulsive greed. Although Joshua and Achan both knew that Achan would die for his crime, Joshua entreated him to repent. Achan responded with a full confession.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100662,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:19","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:19-20<\/strong> <em>My son:<\/em> This gentle, compassionate form of address reveals Joshua as a caring leader, sorry for this young man trapped by impulsive greed. Although Joshua and Achan both knew that Achan would die for his crime, Joshua entreated him to repent. Achan responded with a full confession.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:19-20<\/strong> <em>My son:<\/em> This gentle, compassionate form of address reveals Joshua as a caring leader, sorry for this young man trapped by impulsive greed. Although Joshua and Achan both knew that Achan would die for his crime, Joshua entreated him to repent. Achan responded with a full confession.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:19-20 My son: This gentle, compassionate form of address reveals Joshua as a caring leader, sorry for this young man trapped by impulsive greed. Although Joshua and Achan both knew that Achan would die for his crime, Joshua entreated him to repent. Achan responded with a full confession.","summary_en":"7:19-20 My son: This gentle, compassionate form of address reveals Joshua as a caring leader, sorry for this young man trapped by impulsive greed. Although Joshua and Achan both knew that Achan would die for his crime, Joshua entreated him to repent. Achan responded with a full confession.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128288,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:19","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:19-20<\/strong> <em>My son:<\/em> This gentle, compassionate form of address reveals Joshua as a caring leader, sorry for this young man trapped by impulsive greed. Although Joshua and Achan both knew that Achan would die for his crime, Joshua entreated him to repent. Achan responded with a full confession.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:19-20<\/strong> <em>My son:<\/em> This gentle, compassionate form of address reveals Joshua as a caring leader, sorry for this young man trapped by impulsive greed. Although Joshua and Achan both knew that Achan would die for his crime, Joshua entreated him to repent. Achan responded with a full confession.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:19-20 My son: This gentle, compassionate form of address reveals Joshua as a caring leader, sorry for this young man trapped by impulsive greed. Although Joshua and Achan both knew that Achan would die for his crime, Joshua entreated him to repent. Achan responded with a full confession.","summary_en":"7:19-20 My son: This gentle, compassionate form of address reveals Joshua as a caring leader, sorry for this young man trapped by impulsive greed. Although Joshua and Achan both knew that Achan would die for his crime, Joshua entreated him to repent. Achan responded with a full confession.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60271,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Glory of God","title_en":"The Glory of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Glory of God<\/h3>\n<p><em>Glory<\/em> has a rather different connotation in the Old Testament than it does in English usage. The English word suggests something thin and passing—the glory of a sunset, the glory of last year’s winning team. The root idea of the Hebrew word for <em>glory<\/em> is “heaviness” or “solidity.” It connotes “significance” or “worth,” the absolute opposite of “vanity” or “nothingness.” When God’s glory appears, it is not merely a bright light or a glittering cloud, but a visible expression of his absolute reality.<\/p>\n<p>God’s glory is the manifestation of his person, his power, and his majesty (see Ezek 1:28; 10:4). God’s glory may be revealed in nature, such as in a thunderstorm (Job 37:2-5; Ps 29:3, 7) or in the plagues sent on the Egyptians (Num 14:21-22). God’s glory can also be a unique manifestation, such as the revelation on Mount Sinai (Deut 5:24). When the Tabernacle and Solomon’s Temple were dedicated, God’s glory filled those structures (Exod 40:34-35; 1 Kgs 8:10-11), indicating his approval of them and that his presence would now reside there. Similarly, the glory of the Lord sent the fire that kindled the first sacrifices of the sanctuary (Lev 9:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>When God reveals his glory to his creation (see, e.g., Exod 24:16-18), it is often called a <em>theophany<\/em>. God gives limited (or veiled) glimpses of his glory because no one can see God and live (Exod 33:18-23; see also Isa 6:5). To “give glory” to God (Josh 7:19; Isa 24:15; Jer 13:16) means to speak or act in a manner that acknowledges who God is.<\/p>\n<p>Christ is the glory and image of God (2 Cor 4:4), and he was glorified in his death and resurrection (John 17:1-5). When Christ appears again at last, he will further manifest God’s glory in his restored Kingdom (Rev 21:11, 23). Paul declares that the presence of Christ in the lives of believers provides assurance that we will share in that glory (Rom 5:2; Col 1:27).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 14:17-18; 16:6-12; 33:17-23; 40:34-38; Lev 9:23-24; 10:1-3; Num 14:21-22; Deut 5:24; Josh 7:19; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 7:1-3; Job 37:2-5; Pss 3:3; 8:4-6; 19:1; 29:3, 7-9; 48:8; Isa 6:3-5; 42:8; 43:7; 66:18-19; Jer 13:16; Ezek 1:28; 10:4; Hos 4:7; John 17:1-5; Rom 5:2; 2 Cor 4:4; Col 1:27; Rev 21:10-11, 23-25<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Glory of God<\/h3>\n<p><em>Glory<\/em> has a rather different connotation in the Old Testament than it does in English usage. The English word suggests something thin and passing—the glory of a sunset, the glory of last year’s winning team. The root idea of the Hebrew word for <em>glory<\/em> is “heaviness” or “solidity.” It connotes “significance” or “worth,” the absolute opposite of “vanity” or “nothingness.” When God’s glory appears, it is not merely a bright light or a glittering cloud, but a visible expression of his absolute reality.<\/p>\n<p>God’s glory is the manifestation of his person, his power, and his majesty (see Ezek 1:28; 10:4). God’s glory may be revealed in nature, such as in a thunderstorm (Job 37:2-5; Ps 29:3, 7) or in the plagues sent on the Egyptians (Num 14:21-22). God’s glory can also be a unique manifestation, such as the revelation on Mount Sinai (Deut 5:24). When the Tabernacle and Solomon’s Temple were dedicated, God’s glory filled those structures (Exod 40:34-35; 1 Kgs 8:10-11), indicating his approval of them and that his presence would now reside there. Similarly, the glory of the Lord sent the fire that kindled the first sacrifices of the sanctuary (Lev 9:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>When God reveals his glory to his creation (see, e.g., Exod 24:16-18), it is often called a <em>theophany<\/em>. God gives limited (or veiled) glimpses of his glory because no one can see God and live (Exod 33:18-23; see also Isa 6:5). To “give glory” to God (Josh 7:19; Isa 24:15; Jer 13:16) means to speak or act in a manner that acknowledges who God is.<\/p>\n<p>Christ is the glory and image of God (2 Cor 4:4), and he was glorified in his death and resurrection (John 17:1-5). When Christ appears again at last, he will further manifest God’s glory in his restored Kingdom (Rev 21:11, 23). Paul declares that the presence of Christ in the lives of believers provides assurance that we will share in that glory (Rom 5:2; Col 1:27).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 14:17-18; 16:6-12; 33:17-23; 40:34-38; Lev 9:23-24; 10:1-3; Num 14:21-22; Deut 5:24; Josh 7:19; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 7:1-3; Job 37:2-5; Pss 3:3; 8:4-6; 19:1; 29:3, 7-9; 48:8; Isa 6:3-5; 42:8; 43:7; 66:18-19; Jer 13:16; Ezek 1:28; 10:4; Hos 4:7; John 17:1-5; Rom 5:2; 2 Cor 4:4; Col 1:27; Rev 21:10-11, 23-25<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Glory of God Glory has a rather different connotation in the Old Testament than it does in English usage. The English word suggests something thin and passing—the glory of a sunset, the glory of last year’s winning team. The root idea of the Hebrew word for glory is “heaviness” or “solidity.” It connotes “significance” or “worth,” the absolute opposite of “vanity” or “nothingness.” When God’s glory appears, it is not merely a bright light or a glittering cloud, but a visible expression of...","summary_en":"The Glory of God Glory has a rather different connotation in the Old Testament than it does in English usage. The English word suggests something thin and passing—the glory of a sunset, the glory of last year’s winning team. The root idea of the Hebrew word for glory is “heaviness” or “solidity.” It connotes “significance” or “worth,” the absolute opposite of “vanity” or “nothingness.” When God’s glory appears, it is not merely a bright light or a glittering cloud, but a visible expression of...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87897,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Glory of God","title_en":"The Glory of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Glory of God<\/h3>\n<p><em>Glory<\/em> has a rather different connotation in the Old Testament than it does in English usage. The English word suggests something thin and passing—the glory of a sunset, the glory of last year’s winning team. The root idea of the Hebrew word for <em>glory<\/em> is “heaviness” or “solidity.” It connotes “significance” or “worth,” the absolute opposite of “vanity” or “nothingness.” When God’s glory appears, it is not merely a bright light or a glittering cloud, but a visible expression of his absolute reality.<\/p>\n<p>God’s glory is the manifestation of his person, his power, and his majesty (see Ezek 1:28; 10:4). God’s glory may be revealed in nature, such as in a thunderstorm (Job 37:2-5; Ps 29:3, 7) or in the plagues sent on the Egyptians (Num 14:21-22). God’s glory can also be a unique manifestation, such as the revelation on Mount Sinai (Deut 5:24). When the Tabernacle and Solomon’s Temple were dedicated, God’s glory filled those structures (Exod 40:34-35; 1 Kgs 8:10-11), indicating his approval of them and that his presence would now reside there. Similarly, the glory of the Lord sent the fire that kindled the first sacrifices of the sanctuary (Lev 9:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>When God reveals his glory to his creation (see, e.g., Exod 24:16-18), it is often called a <em>theophany<\/em>. God gives limited (or veiled) glimpses of his glory because no one can see God and live (Exod 33:18-23; see also Isa 6:5). To “give glory” to God (Josh 7:19; Isa 24:15; Jer 13:16) means to speak or act in a manner that acknowledges who God is.<\/p>\n<p>Christ is the glory and image of God (2 Cor 4:4), and he was glorified in his death and resurrection (John 17:1-5). When Christ appears again at last, he will further manifest God’s glory in his restored Kingdom (Rev 21:11, 23). Paul declares that the presence of Christ in the lives of believers provides assurance that we will share in that glory (Rom 5:2; Col 1:27).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 14:17-18; 16:6-12; 33:17-23; 40:34-38; Lev 9:23-24; 10:1-3; Num 14:21-22; Deut 5:24; Josh 7:19; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 7:1-3; Job 37:2-5; Pss 3:3; 8:4-6; 19:1; 29:3, 7-9; 48:8; Isa 6:3-5; 42:8; 43:7; 66:18-19; Jer 13:16; Ezek 1:28; 10:4; Hos 4:7; John 17:1-5; Rom 5:2; 2 Cor 4:4; Col 1:27; Rev 21:10-11, 23-25<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Glory of God<\/h3>\n<p><em>Glory<\/em> has a rather different connotation in the Old Testament than it does in English usage. The English word suggests something thin and passing—the glory of a sunset, the glory of last year’s winning team. The root idea of the Hebrew word for <em>glory<\/em> is “heaviness” or “solidity.” It connotes “significance” or “worth,” the absolute opposite of “vanity” or “nothingness.” When God’s glory appears, it is not merely a bright light or a glittering cloud, but a visible expression of his absolute reality.<\/p>\n<p>God’s glory is the manifestation of his person, his power, and his majesty (see Ezek 1:28; 10:4). God’s glory may be revealed in nature, such as in a thunderstorm (Job 37:2-5; Ps 29:3, 7) or in the plagues sent on the Egyptians (Num 14:21-22). God’s glory can also be a unique manifestation, such as the revelation on Mount Sinai (Deut 5:24). When the Tabernacle and Solomon’s Temple were dedicated, God’s glory filled those structures (Exod 40:34-35; 1 Kgs 8:10-11), indicating his approval of them and that his presence would now reside there. Similarly, the glory of the Lord sent the fire that kindled the first sacrifices of the sanctuary (Lev 9:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>When God reveals his glory to his creation (see, e.g., Exod 24:16-18), it is often called a <em>theophany<\/em>. God gives limited (or veiled) glimpses of his glory because no one can see God and live (Exod 33:18-23; see also Isa 6:5). To “give glory” to God (Josh 7:19; Isa 24:15; Jer 13:16) means to speak or act in a manner that acknowledges who God is.<\/p>\n<p>Christ is the glory and image of God (2 Cor 4:4), and he was glorified in his death and resurrection (John 17:1-5). When Christ appears again at last, he will further manifest God’s glory in his restored Kingdom (Rev 21:11, 23). Paul declares that the presence of Christ in the lives of believers provides assurance that we will share in that glory (Rom 5:2; Col 1:27).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 14:17-18; 16:6-12; 33:17-23; 40:34-38; Lev 9:23-24; 10:1-3; Num 14:21-22; Deut 5:24; Josh 7:19; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 7:1-3; Job 37:2-5; Pss 3:3; 8:4-6; 19:1; 29:3, 7-9; 48:8; Isa 6:3-5; 42:8; 43:7; 66:18-19; Jer 13:16; Ezek 1:28; 10:4; Hos 4:7; John 17:1-5; Rom 5:2; 2 Cor 4:4; Col 1:27; Rev 21:10-11, 23-25<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Glory of God Glory has a rather different connotation in the Old Testament than it does in English usage. The English word suggests something thin and passing—the glory of a sunset, the glory of last year’s winning team. The root idea of the Hebrew word for glory is “heaviness” or “solidity.” It connotes “significance” or “worth,” the absolute opposite of “vanity” or “nothingness.” When God’s glory appears, it is not merely a bright light or a glittering cloud, but a visible expression of...","summary_en":"The Glory of God Glory has a rather different connotation in the Old Testament than it does in English usage. The English word suggests something thin and passing—the glory of a sunset, the glory of last year’s winning team. The root idea of the Hebrew word for glory is “heaviness” or “solidity.” It connotes “significance” or “worth,” the absolute opposite of “vanity” or “nothingness.” When God’s glory appears, it is not merely a bright light or a glittering cloud, but a visible expression of...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115523,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Glory of God","title_en":"The Glory of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Glory of God<\/h3>\n<p><em>Glory<\/em> has a rather different connotation in the Old Testament than it does in English usage. The English word suggests something thin and passing—the glory of a sunset, the glory of last year’s winning team. The root idea of the Hebrew word for <em>glory<\/em> is “heaviness” or “solidity.” It connotes “significance” or “worth,” the absolute opposite of “vanity” or “nothingness.” When God’s glory appears, it is not merely a bright light or a glittering cloud, but a visible expression of his absolute reality.<\/p>\n<p>God’s glory is the manifestation of his person, his power, and his majesty (see Ezek 1:28; 10:4). God’s glory may be revealed in nature, such as in a thunderstorm (Job 37:2-5; Ps 29:3, 7) or in the plagues sent on the Egyptians (Num 14:21-22). God’s glory can also be a unique manifestation, such as the revelation on Mount Sinai (Deut 5:24). When the Tabernacle and Solomon’s Temple were dedicated, God’s glory filled those structures (Exod 40:34-35; 1 Kgs 8:10-11), indicating his approval of them and that his presence would now reside there. Similarly, the glory of the Lord sent the fire that kindled the first sacrifices of the sanctuary (Lev 9:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>When God reveals his glory to his creation (see, e.g., Exod 24:16-18), it is often called a <em>theophany<\/em>. God gives limited (or veiled) glimpses of his glory because no one can see God and live (Exod 33:18-23; see also Isa 6:5). To “give glory” to God (Josh 7:19; Isa 24:15; Jer 13:16) means to speak or act in a manner that acknowledges who God is.<\/p>\n<p>Christ is the glory and image of God (2 Cor 4:4), and he was glorified in his death and resurrection (John 17:1-5). When Christ appears again at last, he will further manifest God’s glory in his restored Kingdom (Rev 21:11, 23). Paul declares that the presence of Christ in the lives of believers provides assurance that we will share in that glory (Rom 5:2; Col 1:27).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 14:17-18; 16:6-12; 33:17-23; 40:34-38; Lev 9:23-24; 10:1-3; Num 14:21-22; Deut 5:24; Josh 7:19; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 7:1-3; Job 37:2-5; Pss 3:3; 8:4-6; 19:1; 29:3, 7-9; 48:8; Isa 6:3-5; 42:8; 43:7; 66:18-19; Jer 13:16; Ezek 1:28; 10:4; Hos 4:7; John 17:1-5; Rom 5:2; 2 Cor 4:4; Col 1:27; Rev 21:10-11, 23-25<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Glory of God<\/h3>\n<p><em>Glory<\/em> has a rather different connotation in the Old Testament than it does in English usage. The English word suggests something thin and passing—the glory of a sunset, the glory of last year’s winning team. The root idea of the Hebrew word for <em>glory<\/em> is “heaviness” or “solidity.” It connotes “significance” or “worth,” the absolute opposite of “vanity” or “nothingness.” When God’s glory appears, it is not merely a bright light or a glittering cloud, but a visible expression of his absolute reality.<\/p>\n<p>God’s glory is the manifestation of his person, his power, and his majesty (see Ezek 1:28; 10:4). God’s glory may be revealed in nature, such as in a thunderstorm (Job 37:2-5; Ps 29:3, 7) or in the plagues sent on the Egyptians (Num 14:21-22). God’s glory can also be a unique manifestation, such as the revelation on Mount Sinai (Deut 5:24). When the Tabernacle and Solomon’s Temple were dedicated, God’s glory filled those structures (Exod 40:34-35; 1 Kgs 8:10-11), indicating his approval of them and that his presence would now reside there. Similarly, the glory of the Lord sent the fire that kindled the first sacrifices of the sanctuary (Lev 9:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>When God reveals his glory to his creation (see, e.g., Exod 24:16-18), it is often called a <em>theophany<\/em>. God gives limited (or veiled) glimpses of his glory because no one can see God and live (Exod 33:18-23; see also Isa 6:5). To “give glory” to God (Josh 7:19; Isa 24:15; Jer 13:16) means to speak or act in a manner that acknowledges who God is.<\/p>\n<p>Christ is the glory and image of God (2 Cor 4:4), and he was glorified in his death and resurrection (John 17:1-5). When Christ appears again at last, he will further manifest God’s glory in his restored Kingdom (Rev 21:11, 23). Paul declares that the presence of Christ in the lives of believers provides assurance that we will share in that glory (Rom 5:2; Col 1:27).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 14:17-18; 16:6-12; 33:17-23; 40:34-38; Lev 9:23-24; 10:1-3; Num 14:21-22; Deut 5:24; Josh 7:19; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 7:1-3; Job 37:2-5; Pss 3:3; 8:4-6; 19:1; 29:3, 7-9; 48:8; Isa 6:3-5; 42:8; 43:7; 66:18-19; Jer 13:16; Ezek 1:28; 10:4; Hos 4:7; John 17:1-5; Rom 5:2; 2 Cor 4:4; Col 1:27; Rev 21:10-11, 23-25<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Glory of God Glory has a rather different connotation in the Old Testament than it does in English usage. The English word suggests something thin and passing—the glory of a sunset, the glory of last year’s winning team. The root idea of the Hebrew word for glory is “heaviness” or “solidity.” It connotes “significance” or “worth,” the absolute opposite of “vanity” or “nothingness.” When God’s glory appears, it is not merely a bright light or a glittering cloud, but a visible expression of...","summary_en":"The Glory of God Glory has a rather different connotation in the Old Testament than it does in English usage. The English word suggests something thin and passing—the glory of a sunset, the glory of last year’s winning team. The root idea of the Hebrew word for glory is “heaviness” or “solidity.” It connotes “significance” or “worth,” the absolute opposite of “vanity” or “nothingness.” When God’s glory appears, it is not merely a bright light or a glittering cloud, but a visible expression of...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143149,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Glory of God","title_en":"The Glory of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Glory of God<\/h3>\n<p><em>Glory<\/em> has a rather different connotation in the Old Testament than it does in English usage. The English word suggests something thin and passing—the glory of a sunset, the glory of last year’s winning team. The root idea of the Hebrew word for <em>glory<\/em> is “heaviness” or “solidity.” It connotes “significance” or “worth,” the absolute opposite of “vanity” or “nothingness.” When God’s glory appears, it is not merely a bright light or a glittering cloud, but a visible expression of his absolute reality.<\/p>\n<p>God’s glory is the manifestation of his person, his power, and his majesty (see Ezek 1:28; 10:4). God’s glory may be revealed in nature, such as in a thunderstorm (Job 37:2-5; Ps 29:3, 7) or in the plagues sent on the Egyptians (Num 14:21-22). God’s glory can also be a unique manifestation, such as the revelation on Mount Sinai (Deut 5:24). When the Tabernacle and Solomon’s Temple were dedicated, God’s glory filled those structures (Exod 40:34-35; 1 Kgs 8:10-11), indicating his approval of them and that his presence would now reside there. Similarly, the glory of the Lord sent the fire that kindled the first sacrifices of the sanctuary (Lev 9:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>When God reveals his glory to his creation (see, e.g., Exod 24:16-18), it is often called a <em>theophany<\/em>. God gives limited (or veiled) glimpses of his glory because no one can see God and live (Exod 33:18-23; see also Isa 6:5). To “give glory” to God (Josh 7:19; Isa 24:15; Jer 13:16) means to speak or act in a manner that acknowledges who God is.<\/p>\n<p>Christ is the glory and image of God (2 Cor 4:4), and he was glorified in his death and resurrection (John 17:1-5). When Christ appears again at last, he will further manifest God’s glory in his restored Kingdom (Rev 21:11, 23). Paul declares that the presence of Christ in the lives of believers provides assurance that we will share in that glory (Rom 5:2; Col 1:27).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 14:17-18; 16:6-12; 33:17-23; 40:34-38; Lev 9:23-24; 10:1-3; Num 14:21-22; Deut 5:24; Josh 7:19; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 7:1-3; Job 37:2-5; Pss 3:3; 8:4-6; 19:1; 29:3, 7-9; 48:8; Isa 6:3-5; 42:8; 43:7; 66:18-19; Jer 13:16; Ezek 1:28; 10:4; Hos 4:7; John 17:1-5; Rom 5:2; 2 Cor 4:4; Col 1:27; Rev 21:10-11, 23-25<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Glory of God<\/h3>\n<p><em>Glory<\/em> has a rather different connotation in the Old Testament than it does in English usage. The English word suggests something thin and passing—the glory of a sunset, the glory of last year’s winning team. The root idea of the Hebrew word for <em>glory<\/em> is “heaviness” or “solidity.” It connotes “significance” or “worth,” the absolute opposite of “vanity” or “nothingness.” When God’s glory appears, it is not merely a bright light or a glittering cloud, but a visible expression of his absolute reality.<\/p>\n<p>God’s glory is the manifestation of his person, his power, and his majesty (see Ezek 1:28; 10:4). God’s glory may be revealed in nature, such as in a thunderstorm (Job 37:2-5; Ps 29:3, 7) or in the plagues sent on the Egyptians (Num 14:21-22). God’s glory can also be a unique manifestation, such as the revelation on Mount Sinai (Deut 5:24). When the Tabernacle and Solomon’s Temple were dedicated, God’s glory filled those structures (Exod 40:34-35; 1 Kgs 8:10-11), indicating his approval of them and that his presence would now reside there. Similarly, the glory of the Lord sent the fire that kindled the first sacrifices of the sanctuary (Lev 9:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>When God reveals his glory to his creation (see, e.g., Exod 24:16-18), it is often called a <em>theophany<\/em>. God gives limited (or veiled) glimpses of his glory because no one can see God and live (Exod 33:18-23; see also Isa 6:5). To “give glory” to God (Josh 7:19; Isa 24:15; Jer 13:16) means to speak or act in a manner that acknowledges who God is.<\/p>\n<p>Christ is the glory and image of God (2 Cor 4:4), and he was glorified in his death and resurrection (John 17:1-5). When Christ appears again at last, he will further manifest God’s glory in his restored Kingdom (Rev 21:11, 23). Paul declares that the presence of Christ in the lives of believers provides assurance that we will share in that glory (Rom 5:2; Col 1:27).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 14:17-18; 16:6-12; 33:17-23; 40:34-38; Lev 9:23-24; 10:1-3; Num 14:21-22; Deut 5:24; Josh 7:19; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 7:1-3; Job 37:2-5; Pss 3:3; 8:4-6; 19:1; 29:3, 7-9; 48:8; Isa 6:3-5; 42:8; 43:7; 66:18-19; Jer 13:16; Ezek 1:28; 10:4; Hos 4:7; John 17:1-5; Rom 5:2; 2 Cor 4:4; Col 1:27; Rev 21:10-11, 23-25<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Glory of God Glory has a rather different connotation in the Old Testament than it does in English usage. The English word suggests something thin and passing—the glory of a sunset, the glory of last year’s winning team. The root idea of the Hebrew word for glory is “heaviness” or “solidity.” It connotes “significance” or “worth,” the absolute opposite of “vanity” or “nothingness.” When God’s glory appears, it is not merely a bright light or a glittering cloud, but a visible expression of...","summary_en":"The Glory of God Glory has a rather different connotation in the Old Testament than it does in English usage. The English word suggests something thin and passing—the glory of a sunset, the glory of last year’s winning team. The root idea of the Hebrew word for glory is “heaviness” or “solidity.” It connotes “significance” or “worth,” the absolute opposite of “vanity” or “nothingness.” When God’s glory appears, it is not merely a bright light or a glittering cloud, but a visible expression of...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"20":[{"id":327,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Achan, Achar*","title_en":"Achan, Achar*","content_ro":"<h3>ACHAN, ACHAR*<\/h3>\n<p>Member of Judah’s tribe who kept some of the spoils from the Israelite victory at Jericho in violation of Joshua’s order and God’s command (Jos 6:1–7:1). A subsequent Israelite defeat at Ai, a weaker city than Jericho, revealed God’s anger to Joshua. With God’s help, Joshua determined which of the Israelites had been guilty of disobedience. Achan confessed that he had buried a robe and some gold and silver from Jericho in his tent (Jos 7:20-22). The recovered loot was taken to the valley of Achor (meaning “trouble,” “calamity”), where Achan and his family were stoned. In the Hebrew text, 1 Chronicles 2:7 gives Achan’s name as Achar (“disaster”) because he “brought disaster on Israel by taking plunder that had been set apart for the <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ACHAN, ACHAR*<\/h3>\n<p>Member of Judah’s tribe who kept some of the spoils from the Israelite victory at Jericho in violation of Joshua’s order and God’s command (Jos 6:1–7:1). A subsequent Israelite defeat at Ai, a weaker city than Jericho, revealed God’s anger to Joshua. With God’s help, Joshua determined which of the Israelites had been guilty of disobedience. Achan confessed that he had buried a robe and some gold and silver from Jericho in his tent (Jos 7:20-22). The recovered loot was taken to the valley of Achor (meaning “trouble,” “calamity”), where Achan and his family were stoned. In the Hebrew text, 1 Chronicles 2:7 gives Achan’s name as Achar (“disaster”) because he “brought disaster on Israel by taking plunder that had been set apart for the <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"ACHAN, ACHAR* Member of Judah’s tribe who kept some of the spoils from the Israelite victory at Jericho in violation of Joshua’s order and God’s command (Jos 6:1–7:1). A subsequent Israelite defeat at Ai, a weaker city than Jericho, revealed God’s anger to Joshua. With God’s help, Joshua determined which of the Israelites had been guilty of disobedience. Achan confessed that he had buried a robe and some gold and silver from Jericho in his tent (Jos 7:20-22). The recovered loot was taken to t...","summary_en":"ACHAN, ACHAR* Member of Judah’s tribe who kept some of the spoils from the Israelite victory at Jericho in violation of Joshua’s order and God’s command (Jos 6:1–7:1). A subsequent Israelite defeat at Ai, a weaker city than Jericho, revealed God’s anger to Joshua. With God’s help, Joshua determined which of the Israelites had been guilty of disobedience. Achan confessed that he had buried a robe and some gold and silver from Jericho in his tent (Jos 7:20-22). The recovered loot was taken to t...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":8097,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Law and Punishment*, Criminal","title_en":"Law and Punishment*, Criminal","content_ro":"<h3>CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT*<\/h3>\n<p>The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, “crimes” included all punishable offenses, even religious offenses such as idolatry (worshiping a false god) or blasphemy (speaking or behaving with contempt toward God).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>• Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<p>• Punishment<\/p>\n<p>• Conclusion<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NearEasternContext\">Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>In ancient societies as in modern ones, laws were considered necessary to regulate individual behavior for the good of the community, state, or nation. Today laws are thought of as made by people for their own protection. In contrast, all ancient Near Eastern law codes were considered to have come directly from some divine source. Hebrew law, though distinct, followed the general pattern of Near Eastern law codes, as is known from those that have survived—such as the Code of Hammurabi and Assyrian and Hittite laws.<\/p>\n<p>Conclusions about the “origin” of ancient laws should be made cautiously. Although evidence indicates that Hammurabi based his legislation partially on earlier Sumerian codes, he declared that his code had been received from Shamash, god of justice. That declaration must have been intended to convey primarily that his code had the express sanction of Shamash, since at least some people would recognize it as a compilation based largely on earlier laws. Similarly, the clear biblical statements about Moses receiving the law on Mt Sinai (Ex 19–24) do not rule out the possibility that parts of the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments) may have existed in earlier codes. Possibly the Mosaic legislation included some social rules adapted from the period of Israel’s sojourn in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HebrewCriminalLaw\">Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<h5>Laws Governing Offenses against God<\/h5>\n<p>Since Hebrew law was designed for a group of people for whom religion was of paramount importance and whose faith was endangered by the influence of the beliefs of their pagan neighbors, it is not surprising that so much of Hebrew law dealt with crimes committed against God. The prohibition against worshiping idols is stated and repeated in the Torah, or Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible): “You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them” (Ex 20:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Sacrifice of infants, practiced in some pagan religions, was specifically prohibited in Israel. The penalty for that crime, as for the other forms of murder, was stoning to death (Lv 20:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Leviticus, death by stoning was recorded as the appropriate punishment for blaspheming the name of God (Lv 24:11-16). False prophecy was also a criminal offense; that accusation could apply to a person making a prediction in the name of a god other than the Lord, or implying falsely that one’s prophecy resulted from a communication with God. Jeremiah, whose prophecy of Nebuchadnezzar’s victory over the southern kingdom of Judah was for a time considered to be false, was almost lynched by a mob (Jer 26:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The idea of keeping the seventh day holy stemmed from the celebration of God’s work in creating the universe in six days and resting on the seventh. Keeping the Sabbath required cessation of manual work for the entire family, including farm animals (Ex 16:23; 20:8-11). People were also required to meet together on the Sabbath for worship, which at a later period in Hebrew history included the reading of Scripture, prayer, and preaching. Anyone breaking the Sabbath could be sentenced to death, as happened to a man caught gathering firewood on the Sabbath (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Any type of premeditated crime was considered an offense against God, the giver of all law; hence, it was punishable by death (Nm 15:30-31). Hebrew law also insisted on donation of the firstfruits of harvest to the Lord without delay. That requirement was sometimes carried over to include a first child, whose life was dedicated to service in the temple (Ex 22:29-30; Dt 15:19).<\/p>\n<h5>Personal Injury<\/h5>\n<p>Murder, an offense against “God’s image,” was one of many crimes punishable by death in OT times. The book of Exodus stated unequivocally that “anyone who hits a person hard enough to cause death must be put to death” (Ex 21:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). A murderer who killed by using a weapon such as a stone, a piece of wood, or iron could be killed in revenge by a relative of the deceased. If the original death happened accidentally, the community would sometimes help to conceal the killer and encourage him to hide in a nearby city of refuge, where he would be safe as long as he remained within its gates. He had to stay in that sanctuary until the death of the high priest then in office, after which he was free to return to his own city (Nm 35:10-28). The sixth commandment enjoined, “You shall not kill” (Ex 20:13). The Hebrew word referred specifically to murder, not to all forms of killing. Killing an enemy in battle and the execution of a murderer were considered necessary and were not prohibited. More than one witness was required for any conviction, particularly in a murder case (Nm 35:30; Dt 17:6; 19:15).<\/p>\n<p>In the Code of Hammurabi a man responsible for an accidental injury to another was required to pay for the services of the physician. If the victim died, a fine was payable according to the victim’s rank. In a sense the Hebrews went further by requiring payment for any loss of time suffered by the injured person (Ex 21:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Kidnapping was punishable by death in the OT. Exodus states that “Kidnappers must be killed, whether they are caught in possession of their victims or have already sold them as slaves” (Ex 21:16, <span>nlt<\/span>). Joseph’s being sold into slavery by his brothers illustrates this kind of kidnapping.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws concerning Property<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus is quite specific about anyone responsible for damage to the property or crops of another. If a field caught fire and the fire spread, damaging crops in other fields, the person who started the fire, or perhaps the owner of the first field to catch fire, was responsible for the damage (Ex 22:6). Hammurabi’s code cited a similar instance of a man who neglected to keep a dike in repair and was therefore responsible for flood damage to his neighbor’s crops.<\/p>\n<p>Injuries to animals, especially oxen, or injuries to people or property caused by such animals formed an important area of Hebrew law. If an ox that had been previously good-tempered killed a man, the owner would be blameless, although the ox would be put to death—a severe financial penalty for the owner. If an ox with a history of goring killed a man because its owner failed to restrain it adequately, both ox and owner would be put to death. The owner’s life could be ransomed by payment of an agreed-upon sum. If the person an ox gored was a servant, the ox was stoned and the owner paid a fine (Ex 21:28-32). The Code of Hammurabi also recommended no punishment for a first offense by an animal, but if the owner knew that the ox was dangerous and had taken no steps to prevent harm, a fine in silver was payable—a very large fine for an upper-class victim, slightly less if the victim was a slave. However bad the circumstances and however vicious the ox, the Code of Hammurabi stopped at a fine for the offense, never imposing a death penalty on either the animal or the owner.<\/p>\n<p>Negligence causing injury to an animal was also punished in Hebrew law. If an ox or a donkey fell into a pit carelessly left uncovered, the owner of the animal was reimbursed for its loss (Ex 21:33-36).<\/p>\n<p>In ancient cultures women were generally considered chattel (personal property), much like animals or slaves. A daughter was considered to be her father’s property until her marriage, then the property of her husband. Therefore, any offense against a married woman was regarded as an offense against the property of the husband. According to the Code of Hammurabi, a child could be sold into slavery as a servant or bondsman, usually in payment of the father’s debt (cf. Ex 21:2-7; Neh 5:5-8; Is 50:1). Parental authority was so highly regarded in biblical law that a stubborn and rebellious son could be brought before the elders on the grounds of being disobedient and a glutton or a drunkard. He might then be convicted and stoned to death on the spot by the men of the city (Dt 21:18-21). Even that, however, was a protection of the child’s rights; some Near Eastern legislation allowed a parent to order the death of his offspring without reference to the elders or to anyone else. With daughters in particular being held in such low esteem, it is perhaps remarkable that a daughter could inherit property if there were no sons (Nm 27:8).<\/p>\n<p>Adultery, prohibited in the Decalogue, was another crime against a man’s property, specifically his wife. The book of Deuteronomy goes into considerable detail about cases of adultery—the punishment for both persons being death (Dt 22:22). If a man seduced a young woman who was not betrothed, he was required to pay her father the bride price (50 silver shekels); he could not divorce her but had to keep her as his wife for the rest of his life (Ex 22:16; Dt 22:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>In a situation where a wife was accused of adultery but without evidence, a trial was conducted. The husband would bring his wife to a priest and present a small offering (a tenth of a measure of barley meal, with neither oil nor frankincense on it), indicating the low esteem in which he now held his wife. The woman then stood before the Lord holding an earthen jar of “holy water.” Dust from the floor of the tabernacle was mixed with the water, and the cereal offering was placed in her hands. Her hair was loosened by the priest to show not only her grief but also to give an impression of abandonment. She was then required to take an oath. After that, the priest pronounced a curse upon her to the effect that her womb would be fertilized easily, but that she would have many miscarriages. She had to give her consent to that pronouncement. The priest then wrote the curses in a book and symbolically washed them off into the “bitter water.” The woman was required to drink the water while the priest waved the cereal offering from her hands before the Lord and burned some of it on the altar. The priest told her that if she was guilty, the water would make her thigh rot and her abdomen swell. If that happened, she would become an outcast; but if she were proved innocent, she would be free. Whatever the result, no blame for false accusation fell upon the husband (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a slave was struck by his master in such a manner as to cause instant death, the slave’s death had to be avenged. If the slave lingered, possibly for days, he did not need to be avenged, his loss being a sufficient punishment for the owner (Ex 21:20-21). It is unlikely that the Hebrews had much experience with that law, which had no parallels in Hammurabi’s code. If an owner injured his slave by causing the loss of an eye or a tooth, Hebrew law required that the slave be set free (vv 26-27). The Code of Hammurabi gave an example of a man injuring another man’s slave; the owner had to be paid half the slave’s value.<\/p>\n<p>Little emphasis was placed on burglary or larceny in the Hebrew law code. A burglar was presumed to be repentant and ready to make restitution. After return of the stolen property and payment of a small additional fine, a thief could again “approach the Lord” (Lv 6:2-7). By contrast, the Code of Hammurabi prescribed the death penalty for burglary. In Hebrew law, theft of an animal required restitution to be made in the ratio of at least two to one; if a bull or a cow had been stolen or sold, the thief had to restore the property fivefold. The Code of Hammurabi contained a similar statute: “If a man steal ox or sheep, ass or pig, or goat—if it be from a god or a palace, he shall restore thirtyfold; if it be from a freeman, he shall render tenfold. If the thief have nothing wherewith to pay, he shall be put to death.” In Hebrew law goods stolen from a home were simply to be restored without additional penalty. If the thief no longer had the goods and was unable to pay the equivalent value, he might be sold into slavery until restitution was made (Ex 22:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>General Laws<\/h5>\n<p>The Hebrew code as contained in Exodus and Deuteronomy included many general prohibitions. Some concerned business dealings such as the removal of boundary markers (Dt 19:14). The use of false weights and measures was condemned (Lv 19:35; Dt 25:15; Prv 11:1; 20:23; Mi 6:11). Bribery was strictly forbidden (Ex 23:8), yet no punishment was specified for those who broke that law. In the Code of Hammurabi, if a judge changed his decision and was unable to give a satisfactory explanation, particularly if bribery was suspected, the judge had to pay 12 times the amount of the penalty and lost his seat on the bench. In the Hebrew code, perjury was also dealt with, although again no punishment was specified. The Code of Hammurabi stated that for perjury in cases where the punishment was death, persons giving false testimony were to be sentenced to death themselves (cf. Ex 23:1).<\/p>\n<p>A number of Hebrew laws reflected concern for the poor. For example, poor people were not to be subjected to usury if they were in debt, or left cold at night if their coats were taken as a pledge. Widows, orphans, and strangers were also to be treated with mercy and understanding (Ex 22:21-27; 23:9; Dt 23:19; 24:17).<\/p>\n<p>Some Hebrew laws concerned family behavior, such as those previously mentioned who cursed or disobeyed their parents (Ex 21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 27:16; cf. Prv 20:20; 30:17). Family responsibilities were strong; an entire family frequently suffered punishment for the crime of one of its individual members (Jos 7:20-26; 2 Sm 3:29; 21:1-9; 2 Kgs 5:27; Lam 5:7). Over a period of time, as individual responsibility came to be recognized, parents were no longer put to death for the crimes of their children, or vice versa (cf. Jer 31:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Sorcery and witchcraft were forbidden. The book of Exodus stated explicitly, “A sorceress must not be allowed to live” (22:18, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sexual perversions, such as intercourse with animals, were forbidden under penalty of death. Regulations prohibiting marriage with close relatives were given in detail (Lv 20:17-21).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew law no parallel existed for some interesting items in the Code of Hammurabi concerning surgery. That code mentioned veterinary surgery and even operations on the human eye. A Babylonian surgeon had to be wary, for “if a physician makes a deep incision upon a man with his bronze lancet and causes the man’s death or operates on the eye socket of a man with his bronze lancet and destroys the man’s eye, then they shall cut off his hand.” Surgery was virtually unknown among the ancient Israelites except for the ritual practice of circumcision.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Punishment\">Punishment<\/p>\n<p>Near Eastern punishments for murder and personal injury were retaliatory and often of the same nature as the offense. Other methods of punishment tended to vary with individual countries or traditions. Many kinds of punishment were inflicted on people defeated in both a full-scale war or a small insurrection.<\/p>\n<h5>Physical Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Many forms of punishment stopped short of killing but could nevertheless be quite severe.<\/p>\n<p>1. In the OT beating with rods or switches was the traditional form of discipline for children, fools, and slaves (Ex 21:20; Prv 13:24; 26:3). Scourging (also called flogging) was more severe than beating. The whip employed could be made of several strips of leather fastened at one end or of two interwoven leather strips. A whip nicknamed “scorpion” (because of the barbs in its end) was one of the cruelest instruments of punishment mentioned in the OT (1 Kgs 12:11, 14). The severity of punishment could be increased by inserting pieces of metal or bone into the leather.<\/p>\n<p>Before a scourging, the victim would be examined for physical fitness. If death resulted from the blows, no blame was attached to the person administering the punishment. The victim was stripped to the waist and tied to a pillar, his hands bound with leather thongs. The severity of a scourging depended on the crime, although the Mosaic law set an upper limit of 40 lashes (Dt 25:1-3). To guard against a miscount, that number was later lowered by one (2 Cor 11:24). Lashes might be administered both on the chest and the back. Under some law codes, scourging could be used as a private punishment; in that case, if the victim died, another life was forfeit.<\/p>\n<p>In offenses against the law, synagogue authorities administered scourgings (Mt 10:17). A husband might be scourged by the elders of the city for defamation of his wife’s character (Dt 22:18). Scourging was also used as a means of interrogating a prisoner—hence, a Roman captain’s comment that the apostle Paul should be “examined by scourging” (Acts 22:24).<\/p>\n<p>The Romans usually reserved scourging for non-Roman citizens, such as slaves or aliens, as well as for those condemned to death. Normally, criminals were scourged after they had been condemned to death; it is therefore unusual to find the scourging of Jesus taking place before his condemnation. Pilate may have hoped to soften the people’s hearts by Jesus’ suffering so that they would not demand the death penalty (Lk 23:16, 22; Jn 19:1).<\/p>\n<p>Citizens of the Roman Empire could never be beaten or scourged before sentencing (Acts 22:25). Hence, the magistrates were afraid when they heard that Paul, a Roman citizen, had been beaten under those circumstances (16:37-39).<\/p>\n<li>2. The gouging out of the eyes of prisoners and captives was a common practice in the Near East. The Philistines blinded Samson before imprisoning him (Jgs 16:21). The Babylonians did the same to King Zedekiah in 587 <span>BC<\/span> before taking him into captivity (2 Kgs 25:7). The Ammonite king Nahash was prepared to accept peace overtures from the men of the city of Jabesh on condition that all their right eyes be gouged out. Nahash’s purpose was to disgrace them and prevent them from further active participation in warfare (1 Sm 11:1-4).<\/li>\n<li>3. Several forms of mutilation served as punishments in the Near East. The Israelites considered their own bodies sacred and made in God’s image, but that did not prevent them from mutilating their enemies by cutting off their thumbs and large toes.<\/li>\n<p>The Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian law code prescribed mutilation of the eye, nose, ear, breast, tongue, lip, hand, and finger as punishments for specific crimes. In Assyria, punishment was often inflicted by the victim of the crime under supervision of court officials. The Code of Hammurabi also contained safeguards so that criminals were not punished in excess of the law’s sentence.<\/p>\n<li>4. Stocks are mentioned as a form of punishment in the later OT period. The prophets Hanani (2 Chr 16:10) and Jeremiah (Jer 20:2-3) suffered the indignity of being placed in stocks. Both ankles, and sometimes the wrists and head as well, were placed in holes in two large pieces of wood. In Roman times, stocks were converted to a form of torture, with a prisoner’s legs stretched to holes increasingly far apart. In the NT, Paul and Silas had their feet placed in stocks by a Philippian jailer (Acts 16:24). The same Greek word, meaning “confinement,” can refer to fetters chaining a prisoner or to an iron collar like that worn by runaway Roman slaves.<\/li>\n<h5>Capital Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Capital punishment was common in many Near Eastern countries. Several methods were used.<\/p>\n<p>1. Those who offended a king were beheaded with a sword (2 Sm 16:9; 2 Kgs 6:31-32), as were idolaters and murderers (according to the Mishnah, the Jewish commentary on the law). The sword was probably used for private executions as well. Inhabitants of entire cities were sometimes “put to the sword” for their denial of the faith (Ex 32:27; Dt 13:15).<\/p>\n<li>2. Certain sexual offenses were punished with death by burning (Lv 20:14; 21:9). Tamar, Judah’s daughter-in-law, was accused of adultery and ordered to be burned to death outside the city (Gn 38:24). The Lord instructed that anyone whose feet touched the holy ground of Mt Sinai was to be shot with arrows or stoned (Ex 19:13).<\/li>\n<li>3. Hanging may have been a form of execution in biblical times. But many scholars think the word translated “hanging” or “hanging on a tree” actually meant impalement (Nm 25:4; Dt 21:22-23; Jos 8:29; 2 Sm 21:6, 9; Est 9:14). A spiked wooden stake was set in the ground and the victim’s body was forced onto the spike, the tip of which probably protruded from the chest or mouth. Commonly practiced by the Assyrians, that form of execution was reserved for those guilty of the worst crimes and for prisoners of war or deserters. The Persian king Darius is reputed to have impaled 3,000 men when his army entered Babylon. Impalement was the penalty Darius set for changing his edict concerning the rebuilding of the temple (Ezr 6:11-12). It is not certain whether Haman was hung or impaled (see Est 7:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span> and mg notes).<\/li>\n<p>Usually “hanging” was a means of exhibiting a corpse as a warning to local inhabitants (Gn 40:19; Jos 8:29; 10:26; 2 Sm 4:12). Corpses were exhibited for only one day and were buried before nightfall. The hanging corpse was considered a defilement of the land that God had given (Dt 21:22-23). According to the Mishnah, the hands were tied together and the body hanged from the arm of a wooden gallows.<\/p>\n<li>4. Crucifixion was a punishment employed by the Syrian king Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167–166 <span>BC<\/span>; according to Josephus, a first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish historian, Jews who refused to give up their traditional faith were so executed. During the Maccabean period (167–40 <span>BC<\/span>), Alexander Janneus crucified 800 rebellious Pharisees in an attempt to reestablish his authority. Crucifixion was a widespread form of execution: it was used in most places in the Roman Empire, including India, North Africa, and Germany. Between 4 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 70, on some occasions the number of people crucified at one time reached into the thousands.<\/li>\n<p>Three types of crosses seem to have been used: a cross with the crossbar below the head of the upright bar (Latin cross); a T-shaped cross (St Anthony’s cross); and an X-shaped cross (St Andrew’s cross). Matthew records that an inscription, “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews,” was placed over Jesus’ head (Mt 27:37). That indicates that for Jesus’ crucifixion a Latin cross was used, as artists have traditionally depicted it. In crucifixions the victim was most likely affixed to the cross while it was still lying flat on the ground. Then the cross was raised into position and dropped into a hole. The hands were either nailed or bound to the cross; it is uncertain whether the feet were nailed with one or two nails. The weight of the body was supported by a piece of wood at the feet and possibly by another that was like a spike between the legs.<\/p>\n<li>5. Stoning was the most common Hebrew death penalty. The first stones were thrown by the prosecution witnesses, who were then joined by spectators. Stoning was the punishment for certain religious offenses (Lv 24:16; Nm 15:32-36; Dt 13:1-10; 17:2-5), adultery (Dt 22:23-24), child sacrifice (Lv 20:2), divination of spirits (Lv 20:27), and rebellion (Dt 21:18-21). Before his conversion, the apostle Paul witnessed and consented to the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58-59). Paul himself later survived a stoning at Lystra (14:19). In Roman times, a person would occasionally be stoned as he stood on a gallows.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew law was part of the Torah (“instruction”) given by God to make his covenant people holy. At that time the Israelites were a seminomadic band of former slaves. Although there are similarities with the Code of Hammurabi and other laws of settled Near Eastern cultures, there are also many differences. Hebrew law often had a broader view, even in its less sophisticated cultural setting, as though its purpose was more to teach godly behavior than to stabilize society. The simplicity and directness of the Ten Commandments, in particular, continue to influence jurisprudence, even in modern secular society.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s primary message is God’s love for his covenant people, yet it never overlooks the harsh realities of life in a fallen world. Human beings sin and they commit crimes; they suffer estrangement from God because of their sin and are punished for their crimes. Christians are constantly reminded of the realism of God’s love by the cross as the symbol of Christian faith. They see the crucifixion of Jesus Christ as the fulfillment of OT prophecy that the Lord put our iniquity on him (Is 53:5-6). The NT conviction is that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Courts and Trials; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT*<\/h3>\n<p>The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, “crimes” included all punishable offenses, even religious offenses such as idolatry (worshiping a false god) or blasphemy (speaking or behaving with contempt toward God).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>• Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<p>• Punishment<\/p>\n<p>• Conclusion<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NearEasternContext\">Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>In ancient societies as in modern ones, laws were considered necessary to regulate individual behavior for the good of the community, state, or nation. Today laws are thought of as made by people for their own protection. In contrast, all ancient Near Eastern law codes were considered to have come directly from some divine source. Hebrew law, though distinct, followed the general pattern of Near Eastern law codes, as is known from those that have survived—such as the Code of Hammurabi and Assyrian and Hittite laws.<\/p>\n<p>Conclusions about the “origin” of ancient laws should be made cautiously. Although evidence indicates that Hammurabi based his legislation partially on earlier Sumerian codes, he declared that his code had been received from Shamash, god of justice. That declaration must have been intended to convey primarily that his code had the express sanction of Shamash, since at least some people would recognize it as a compilation based largely on earlier laws. Similarly, the clear biblical statements about Moses receiving the law on Mt Sinai (Ex 19–24) do not rule out the possibility that parts of the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments) may have existed in earlier codes. Possibly the Mosaic legislation included some social rules adapted from the period of Israel’s sojourn in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HebrewCriminalLaw\">Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<h5>Laws Governing Offenses against God<\/h5>\n<p>Since Hebrew law was designed for a group of people for whom religion was of paramount importance and whose faith was endangered by the influence of the beliefs of their pagan neighbors, it is not surprising that so much of Hebrew law dealt with crimes committed against God. The prohibition against worshiping idols is stated and repeated in the Torah, or Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible): “You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them” (Ex 20:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Sacrifice of infants, practiced in some pagan religions, was specifically prohibited in Israel. The penalty for that crime, as for the other forms of murder, was stoning to death (Lv 20:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Leviticus, death by stoning was recorded as the appropriate punishment for blaspheming the name of God (Lv 24:11-16). False prophecy was also a criminal offense; that accusation could apply to a person making a prediction in the name of a god other than the Lord, or implying falsely that one’s prophecy resulted from a communication with God. Jeremiah, whose prophecy of Nebuchadnezzar’s victory over the southern kingdom of Judah was for a time considered to be false, was almost lynched by a mob (Jer 26:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The idea of keeping the seventh day holy stemmed from the celebration of God’s work in creating the universe in six days and resting on the seventh. Keeping the Sabbath required cessation of manual work for the entire family, including farm animals (Ex 16:23; 20:8-11). People were also required to meet together on the Sabbath for worship, which at a later period in Hebrew history included the reading of Scripture, prayer, and preaching. Anyone breaking the Sabbath could be sentenced to death, as happened to a man caught gathering firewood on the Sabbath (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Any type of premeditated crime was considered an offense against God, the giver of all law; hence, it was punishable by death (Nm 15:30-31). Hebrew law also insisted on donation of the firstfruits of harvest to the Lord without delay. That requirement was sometimes carried over to include a first child, whose life was dedicated to service in the temple (Ex 22:29-30; Dt 15:19).<\/p>\n<h5>Personal Injury<\/h5>\n<p>Murder, an offense against “God’s image,” was one of many crimes punishable by death in OT times. The book of Exodus stated unequivocally that “anyone who hits a person hard enough to cause death must be put to death” (Ex 21:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). A murderer who killed by using a weapon such as a stone, a piece of wood, or iron could be killed in revenge by a relative of the deceased. If the original death happened accidentally, the community would sometimes help to conceal the killer and encourage him to hide in a nearby city of refuge, where he would be safe as long as he remained within its gates. He had to stay in that sanctuary until the death of the high priest then in office, after which he was free to return to his own city (Nm 35:10-28). The sixth commandment enjoined, “You shall not kill” (Ex 20:13). The Hebrew word referred specifically to murder, not to all forms of killing. Killing an enemy in battle and the execution of a murderer were considered necessary and were not prohibited. More than one witness was required for any conviction, particularly in a murder case (Nm 35:30; Dt 17:6; 19:15).<\/p>\n<p>In the Code of Hammurabi a man responsible for an accidental injury to another was required to pay for the services of the physician. If the victim died, a fine was payable according to the victim’s rank. In a sense the Hebrews went further by requiring payment for any loss of time suffered by the injured person (Ex 21:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Kidnapping was punishable by death in the OT. Exodus states that “Kidnappers must be killed, whether they are caught in possession of their victims or have already sold them as slaves” (Ex 21:16, <span>nlt<\/span>). Joseph’s being sold into slavery by his brothers illustrates this kind of kidnapping.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws concerning Property<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus is quite specific about anyone responsible for damage to the property or crops of another. If a field caught fire and the fire spread, damaging crops in other fields, the person who started the fire, or perhaps the owner of the first field to catch fire, was responsible for the damage (Ex 22:6). Hammurabi’s code cited a similar instance of a man who neglected to keep a dike in repair and was therefore responsible for flood damage to his neighbor’s crops.<\/p>\n<p>Injuries to animals, especially oxen, or injuries to people or property caused by such animals formed an important area of Hebrew law. If an ox that had been previously good-tempered killed a man, the owner would be blameless, although the ox would be put to death—a severe financial penalty for the owner. If an ox with a history of goring killed a man because its owner failed to restrain it adequately, both ox and owner would be put to death. The owner’s life could be ransomed by payment of an agreed-upon sum. If the person an ox gored was a servant, the ox was stoned and the owner paid a fine (Ex 21:28-32). The Code of Hammurabi also recommended no punishment for a first offense by an animal, but if the owner knew that the ox was dangerous and had taken no steps to prevent harm, a fine in silver was payable—a very large fine for an upper-class victim, slightly less if the victim was a slave. However bad the circumstances and however vicious the ox, the Code of Hammurabi stopped at a fine for the offense, never imposing a death penalty on either the animal or the owner.<\/p>\n<p>Negligence causing injury to an animal was also punished in Hebrew law. If an ox or a donkey fell into a pit carelessly left uncovered, the owner of the animal was reimbursed for its loss (Ex 21:33-36).<\/p>\n<p>In ancient cultures women were generally considered chattel (personal property), much like animals or slaves. A daughter was considered to be her father’s property until her marriage, then the property of her husband. Therefore, any offense against a married woman was regarded as an offense against the property of the husband. According to the Code of Hammurabi, a child could be sold into slavery as a servant or bondsman, usually in payment of the father’s debt (cf. Ex 21:2-7; Neh 5:5-8; Is 50:1). Parental authority was so highly regarded in biblical law that a stubborn and rebellious son could be brought before the elders on the grounds of being disobedient and a glutton or a drunkard. He might then be convicted and stoned to death on the spot by the men of the city (Dt 21:18-21). Even that, however, was a protection of the child’s rights; some Near Eastern legislation allowed a parent to order the death of his offspring without reference to the elders or to anyone else. With daughters in particular being held in such low esteem, it is perhaps remarkable that a daughter could inherit property if there were no sons (Nm 27:8).<\/p>\n<p>Adultery, prohibited in the Decalogue, was another crime against a man’s property, specifically his wife. The book of Deuteronomy goes into considerable detail about cases of adultery—the punishment for both persons being death (Dt 22:22). If a man seduced a young woman who was not betrothed, he was required to pay her father the bride price (50 silver shekels); he could not divorce her but had to keep her as his wife for the rest of his life (Ex 22:16; Dt 22:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>In a situation where a wife was accused of adultery but without evidence, a trial was conducted. The husband would bring his wife to a priest and present a small offering (a tenth of a measure of barley meal, with neither oil nor frankincense on it), indicating the low esteem in which he now held his wife. The woman then stood before the Lord holding an earthen jar of “holy water.” Dust from the floor of the tabernacle was mixed with the water, and the cereal offering was placed in her hands. Her hair was loosened by the priest to show not only her grief but also to give an impression of abandonment. She was then required to take an oath. After that, the priest pronounced a curse upon her to the effect that her womb would be fertilized easily, but that she would have many miscarriages. She had to give her consent to that pronouncement. The priest then wrote the curses in a book and symbolically washed them off into the “bitter water.” The woman was required to drink the water while the priest waved the cereal offering from her hands before the Lord and burned some of it on the altar. The priest told her that if she was guilty, the water would make her thigh rot and her abdomen swell. If that happened, she would become an outcast; but if she were proved innocent, she would be free. Whatever the result, no blame for false accusation fell upon the husband (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a slave was struck by his master in such a manner as to cause instant death, the slave’s death had to be avenged. If the slave lingered, possibly for days, he did not need to be avenged, his loss being a sufficient punishment for the owner (Ex 21:20-21). It is unlikely that the Hebrews had much experience with that law, which had no parallels in Hammurabi’s code. If an owner injured his slave by causing the loss of an eye or a tooth, Hebrew law required that the slave be set free (vv 26-27). The Code of Hammurabi gave an example of a man injuring another man’s slave; the owner had to be paid half the slave’s value.<\/p>\n<p>Little emphasis was placed on burglary or larceny in the Hebrew law code. A burglar was presumed to be repentant and ready to make restitution. After return of the stolen property and payment of a small additional fine, a thief could again “approach the Lord” (Lv 6:2-7). By contrast, the Code of Hammurabi prescribed the death penalty for burglary. In Hebrew law, theft of an animal required restitution to be made in the ratio of at least two to one; if a bull or a cow had been stolen or sold, the thief had to restore the property fivefold. The Code of Hammurabi contained a similar statute: “If a man steal ox or sheep, ass or pig, or goat—if it be from a god or a palace, he shall restore thirtyfold; if it be from a freeman, he shall render tenfold. If the thief have nothing wherewith to pay, he shall be put to death.” In Hebrew law goods stolen from a home were simply to be restored without additional penalty. If the thief no longer had the goods and was unable to pay the equivalent value, he might be sold into slavery until restitution was made (Ex 22:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>General Laws<\/h5>\n<p>The Hebrew code as contained in Exodus and Deuteronomy included many general prohibitions. Some concerned business dealings such as the removal of boundary markers (Dt 19:14). The use of false weights and measures was condemned (Lv 19:35; Dt 25:15; Prv 11:1; 20:23; Mi 6:11). Bribery was strictly forbidden (Ex 23:8), yet no punishment was specified for those who broke that law. In the Code of Hammurabi, if a judge changed his decision and was unable to give a satisfactory explanation, particularly if bribery was suspected, the judge had to pay 12 times the amount of the penalty and lost his seat on the bench. In the Hebrew code, perjury was also dealt with, although again no punishment was specified. The Code of Hammurabi stated that for perjury in cases where the punishment was death, persons giving false testimony were to be sentenced to death themselves (cf. Ex 23:1).<\/p>\n<p>A number of Hebrew laws reflected concern for the poor. For example, poor people were not to be subjected to usury if they were in debt, or left cold at night if their coats were taken as a pledge. Widows, orphans, and strangers were also to be treated with mercy and understanding (Ex 22:21-27; 23:9; Dt 23:19; 24:17).<\/p>\n<p>Some Hebrew laws concerned family behavior, such as those previously mentioned who cursed or disobeyed their parents (Ex 21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 27:16; cf. Prv 20:20; 30:17). Family responsibilities were strong; an entire family frequently suffered punishment for the crime of one of its individual members (Jos 7:20-26; 2 Sm 3:29; 21:1-9; 2 Kgs 5:27; Lam 5:7). Over a period of time, as individual responsibility came to be recognized, parents were no longer put to death for the crimes of their children, or vice versa (cf. Jer 31:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Sorcery and witchcraft were forbidden. The book of Exodus stated explicitly, “A sorceress must not be allowed to live” (22:18, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sexual perversions, such as intercourse with animals, were forbidden under penalty of death. Regulations prohibiting marriage with close relatives were given in detail (Lv 20:17-21).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew law no parallel existed for some interesting items in the Code of Hammurabi concerning surgery. That code mentioned veterinary surgery and even operations on the human eye. A Babylonian surgeon had to be wary, for “if a physician makes a deep incision upon a man with his bronze lancet and causes the man’s death or operates on the eye socket of a man with his bronze lancet and destroys the man’s eye, then they shall cut off his hand.” Surgery was virtually unknown among the ancient Israelites except for the ritual practice of circumcision.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Punishment\">Punishment<\/p>\n<p>Near Eastern punishments for murder and personal injury were retaliatory and often of the same nature as the offense. Other methods of punishment tended to vary with individual countries or traditions. Many kinds of punishment were inflicted on people defeated in both a full-scale war or a small insurrection.<\/p>\n<h5>Physical Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Many forms of punishment stopped short of killing but could nevertheless be quite severe.<\/p>\n<p>1. In the OT beating with rods or switches was the traditional form of discipline for children, fools, and slaves (Ex 21:20; Prv 13:24; 26:3). Scourging (also called flogging) was more severe than beating. The whip employed could be made of several strips of leather fastened at one end or of two interwoven leather strips. A whip nicknamed “scorpion” (because of the barbs in its end) was one of the cruelest instruments of punishment mentioned in the OT (1 Kgs 12:11, 14). The severity of punishment could be increased by inserting pieces of metal or bone into the leather.<\/p>\n<p>Before a scourging, the victim would be examined for physical fitness. If death resulted from the blows, no blame was attached to the person administering the punishment. The victim was stripped to the waist and tied to a pillar, his hands bound with leather thongs. The severity of a scourging depended on the crime, although the Mosaic law set an upper limit of 40 lashes (Dt 25:1-3). To guard against a miscount, that number was later lowered by one (2 Cor 11:24). Lashes might be administered both on the chest and the back. Under some law codes, scourging could be used as a private punishment; in that case, if the victim died, another life was forfeit.<\/p>\n<p>In offenses against the law, synagogue authorities administered scourgings (Mt 10:17). A husband might be scourged by the elders of the city for defamation of his wife’s character (Dt 22:18). Scourging was also used as a means of interrogating a prisoner—hence, a Roman captain’s comment that the apostle Paul should be “examined by scourging” (Acts 22:24).<\/p>\n<p>The Romans usually reserved scourging for non-Roman citizens, such as slaves or aliens, as well as for those condemned to death. Normally, criminals were scourged after they had been condemned to death; it is therefore unusual to find the scourging of Jesus taking place before his condemnation. Pilate may have hoped to soften the people’s hearts by Jesus’ suffering so that they would not demand the death penalty (Lk 23:16, 22; Jn 19:1).<\/p>\n<p>Citizens of the Roman Empire could never be beaten or scourged before sentencing (Acts 22:25). Hence, the magistrates were afraid when they heard that Paul, a Roman citizen, had been beaten under those circumstances (16:37-39).<\/p>\n<li>2. The gouging out of the eyes of prisoners and captives was a common practice in the Near East. The Philistines blinded Samson before imprisoning him (Jgs 16:21). The Babylonians did the same to King Zedekiah in 587 <span>BC<\/span> before taking him into captivity (2 Kgs 25:7). The Ammonite king Nahash was prepared to accept peace overtures from the men of the city of Jabesh on condition that all their right eyes be gouged out. Nahash’s purpose was to disgrace them and prevent them from further active participation in warfare (1 Sm 11:1-4).<\/li>\n<li>3. Several forms of mutilation served as punishments in the Near East. The Israelites considered their own bodies sacred and made in God’s image, but that did not prevent them from mutilating their enemies by cutting off their thumbs and large toes.<\/li>\n<p>The Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian law code prescribed mutilation of the eye, nose, ear, breast, tongue, lip, hand, and finger as punishments for specific crimes. In Assyria, punishment was often inflicted by the victim of the crime under supervision of court officials. The Code of Hammurabi also contained safeguards so that criminals were not punished in excess of the law’s sentence.<\/p>\n<li>4. Stocks are mentioned as a form of punishment in the later OT period. The prophets Hanani (2 Chr 16:10) and Jeremiah (Jer 20:2-3) suffered the indignity of being placed in stocks. Both ankles, and sometimes the wrists and head as well, were placed in holes in two large pieces of wood. In Roman times, stocks were converted to a form of torture, with a prisoner’s legs stretched to holes increasingly far apart. In the NT, Paul and Silas had their feet placed in stocks by a Philippian jailer (Acts 16:24). The same Greek word, meaning “confinement,” can refer to fetters chaining a prisoner or to an iron collar like that worn by runaway Roman slaves.<\/li>\n<h5>Capital Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Capital punishment was common in many Near Eastern countries. Several methods were used.<\/p>\n<p>1. Those who offended a king were beheaded with a sword (2 Sm 16:9; 2 Kgs 6:31-32), as were idolaters and murderers (according to the Mishnah, the Jewish commentary on the law). The sword was probably used for private executions as well. Inhabitants of entire cities were sometimes “put to the sword” for their denial of the faith (Ex 32:27; Dt 13:15).<\/p>\n<li>2. Certain sexual offenses were punished with death by burning (Lv 20:14; 21:9). Tamar, Judah’s daughter-in-law, was accused of adultery and ordered to be burned to death outside the city (Gn 38:24). The Lord instructed that anyone whose feet touched the holy ground of Mt Sinai was to be shot with arrows or stoned (Ex 19:13).<\/li>\n<li>3. Hanging may have been a form of execution in biblical times. But many scholars think the word translated “hanging” or “hanging on a tree” actually meant impalement (Nm 25:4; Dt 21:22-23; Jos 8:29; 2 Sm 21:6, 9; Est 9:14). A spiked wooden stake was set in the ground and the victim’s body was forced onto the spike, the tip of which probably protruded from the chest or mouth. Commonly practiced by the Assyrians, that form of execution was reserved for those guilty of the worst crimes and for prisoners of war or deserters. The Persian king Darius is reputed to have impaled 3,000 men when his army entered Babylon. Impalement was the penalty Darius set for changing his edict concerning the rebuilding of the temple (Ezr 6:11-12). It is not certain whether Haman was hung or impaled (see Est 7:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span> and mg notes).<\/li>\n<p>Usually “hanging” was a means of exhibiting a corpse as a warning to local inhabitants (Gn 40:19; Jos 8:29; 10:26; 2 Sm 4:12). Corpses were exhibited for only one day and were buried before nightfall. The hanging corpse was considered a defilement of the land that God had given (Dt 21:22-23). According to the Mishnah, the hands were tied together and the body hanged from the arm of a wooden gallows.<\/p>\n<li>4. Crucifixion was a punishment employed by the Syrian king Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167–166 <span>BC<\/span>; according to Josephus, a first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish historian, Jews who refused to give up their traditional faith were so executed. During the Maccabean period (167–40 <span>BC<\/span>), Alexander Janneus crucified 800 rebellious Pharisees in an attempt to reestablish his authority. Crucifixion was a widespread form of execution: it was used in most places in the Roman Empire, including India, North Africa, and Germany. Between 4 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 70, on some occasions the number of people crucified at one time reached into the thousands.<\/li>\n<p>Three types of crosses seem to have been used: a cross with the crossbar below the head of the upright bar (Latin cross); a T-shaped cross (St Anthony’s cross); and an X-shaped cross (St Andrew’s cross). Matthew records that an inscription, “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews,” was placed over Jesus’ head (Mt 27:37). That indicates that for Jesus’ crucifixion a Latin cross was used, as artists have traditionally depicted it. In crucifixions the victim was most likely affixed to the cross while it was still lying flat on the ground. Then the cross was raised into position and dropped into a hole. The hands were either nailed or bound to the cross; it is uncertain whether the feet were nailed with one or two nails. The weight of the body was supported by a piece of wood at the feet and possibly by another that was like a spike between the legs.<\/p>\n<li>5. Stoning was the most common Hebrew death penalty. The first stones were thrown by the prosecution witnesses, who were then joined by spectators. Stoning was the punishment for certain religious offenses (Lv 24:16; Nm 15:32-36; Dt 13:1-10; 17:2-5), adultery (Dt 22:23-24), child sacrifice (Lv 20:2), divination of spirits (Lv 20:27), and rebellion (Dt 21:18-21). Before his conversion, the apostle Paul witnessed and consented to the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58-59). Paul himself later survived a stoning at Lystra (14:19). In Roman times, a person would occasionally be stoned as he stood on a gallows.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew law was part of the Torah (“instruction”) given by God to make his covenant people holy. At that time the Israelites were a seminomadic band of former slaves. Although there are similarities with the Code of Hammurabi and other laws of settled Near Eastern cultures, there are also many differences. Hebrew law often had a broader view, even in its less sophisticated cultural setting, as though its purpose was more to teach godly behavior than to stabilize society. The simplicity and directness of the Ten Commandments, in particular, continue to influence jurisprudence, even in modern secular society.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s primary message is God’s love for his covenant people, yet it never overlooks the harsh realities of life in a fallen world. Human beings sin and they commit crimes; they suffer estrangement from God because of their sin and are punished for their crimes. Christians are constantly reminded of the realism of God’s love by the cross as the symbol of Christian faith. They see the crucifixion of Jesus Christ as the fulfillment of OT prophecy that the Lord put our iniquity on him (Is 53:5-6). The NT conviction is that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Courts and Trials; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT* The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, ...","summary_en":"CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT* The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, ...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":7972,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Covet, Covetousness*","title_en":"Covet, Covetousness*","content_ro":"<h3>COVET, COVETOUSNESS*<\/h3>\n<p>The desire to have something for oneself that belongs to another—a craving or passionate desire. Three Hebrew words are translated “covet” in the OT (see <span>rsv<\/span>). In one recital of the Ten Commandments (Dt 5:21) the text reads, “You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.” The same Hebrew word occurs in Proverbs 21:26: “All day long the wicked covets.” Another word implies dishonest gain (Hb 2:9). In the Exodus listing of the Ten Commandments, a third word is used for craving a neighbor’s wife (Ex 20:17). The same word is used of Achan’s coveting of the spoils of Ai (Jos 7:21; cf. Mi 2:2). To covet is to desire inordinately, to place the object of desire before love and devotion to God.<\/p>\n<p>That idea is conveyed in the NT by a Greek word literally meaning “inordinate desire to have more.” The apostle Paul listed that kind of covetousness among earthly attitudes of which Christians are to rid themselves. “Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry” (Col 3:5, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Eph 5:3; 1 Cor 6:10).<\/p>\n<p>Covetousness is pictured as a serious sin that leads to a variety of other sins. The love of money is the root of all evils (1 Tm 6:9-10; cf. Prv 15:27). It was the sin of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-3; cf. 1 Sm 15:9, 19; Mt 26:14-15; 2 Pt 2:15; Jude 1:11). Jesus warned: “Take heed, and beware of all covetousness; for a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions” (Lk 12:15, <span>rsv<\/span>). Another Greek word translated “covet” in the <span>kjv<\/span> is better translated “earnestly desire” in a positive sense (1 Cor 14:39).<\/p>\n<p>The translators of the OT who produced the Septuagint used still another Greek word for the three Hebrew words rendered “covet” in English versions. In the NT the verb form of that word is used in both a positive and negative sense. It means “to desire or long for,” whether food (Lk 15:16), the divine mysteries (Mt 13:17; 1 Pt 1:12), some good thing (Phil 1:23; Heb 6:11), or some evil thing (Mt 5:28; 1 Thes 4:5; 1 Jn 2:17). The noun form of the same word generally reflects an attitude of disobedience to the law of God in which desire has given place to an evil impulse that results in sin (Jn 8:44; Rom 1:24; 6:12; 7:7-8; 13:14; Gal 5:16, 26).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COVET, COVETOUSNESS*<\/h3>\n<p>The desire to have something for oneself that belongs to another—a craving or passionate desire. Three Hebrew words are translated “covet” in the OT (see <span>rsv<\/span>). In one recital of the Ten Commandments (Dt 5:21) the text reads, “You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.” The same Hebrew word occurs in Proverbs 21:26: “All day long the wicked covets.” Another word implies dishonest gain (Hb 2:9). In the Exodus listing of the Ten Commandments, a third word is used for craving a neighbor’s wife (Ex 20:17). The same word is used of Achan’s coveting of the spoils of Ai (Jos 7:21; cf. Mi 2:2). To covet is to desire inordinately, to place the object of desire before love and devotion to God.<\/p>\n<p>That idea is conveyed in the NT by a Greek word literally meaning “inordinate desire to have more.” The apostle Paul listed that kind of covetousness among earthly attitudes of which Christians are to rid themselves. “Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry” (Col 3:5, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Eph 5:3; 1 Cor 6:10).<\/p>\n<p>Covetousness is pictured as a serious sin that leads to a variety of other sins. The love of money is the root of all evils (1 Tm 6:9-10; cf. Prv 15:27). It was the sin of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-3; cf. 1 Sm 15:9, 19; Mt 26:14-15; 2 Pt 2:15; Jude 1:11). Jesus warned: “Take heed, and beware of all covetousness; for a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions” (Lk 12:15, <span>rsv<\/span>). Another Greek word translated “covet” in the <span>kjv<\/span> is better translated “earnestly desire” in a positive sense (1 Cor 14:39).<\/p>\n<p>The translators of the OT who produced the Septuagint used still another Greek word for the three Hebrew words rendered “covet” in English versions. In the NT the verb form of that word is used in both a positive and negative sense. It means “to desire or long for,” whether food (Lk 15:16), the divine mysteries (Mt 13:17; 1 Pt 1:12), some good thing (Phil 1:23; Heb 6:11), or some evil thing (Mt 5:28; 1 Thes 4:5; 1 Jn 2:17). The noun form of the same word generally reflects an attitude of disobedience to the law of God in which desire has given place to an evil impulse that results in sin (Jn 8:44; Rom 1:24; 6:12; 7:7-8; 13:14; Gal 5:16, 26).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COVET, COVETOUSNESS* The desire to have something for oneself that belongs to another—a craving or passionate desire. Three Hebrew words are translated “covet” in the OT (see rsv). In one recital of the Ten Commandments (Dt 5:21) the text reads, “You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.” The same Hebrew word occurs in Proverbs 21:26: “All day long the wicked covets.” Another word implies dishonest gain (Hb 2:9). In the Exodus listing of the Ten Commandments, a third word is used for craving ...","summary_en":"COVET, COVETOUSNESS* The desire to have something for oneself that belongs to another—a craving or passionate desire. Three Hebrew words are translated “covet” in the OT (see rsv). In one recital of the Ten Commandments (Dt 5:21) the text reads, “You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.” The same Hebrew word occurs in Proverbs 21:26: “All day long the wicked covets.” Another word implies dishonest gain (Hb 2:9). In the Exodus listing of the Ten Commandments, a third word is used for craving ...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":10780,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Embroidery Embroiderer","title_en":"Embroidery Embroiderer","content_ro":"<h3>EMBROIDERER, EMBROIDERY<\/h3>\n<p>The art of making decorative designs on clothing. This was an art practiced both in the home and as a profession; it was done on a loom or with a needle. Delicate fabrics in the tabernacle and temple (Ex 26:1, 31) and the garments of priests (28:6, 8; 39:2) were beautifully embroidered. The art was practiced in Canaan (Jgs 5:30), Egypt (Ez 27:7), Syria (v 16), Babylonia (Jos 7:21), Assyria, and Persia (Est 1:6).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EMBROIDERER, EMBROIDERY<\/h3>\n<p>The art of making decorative designs on clothing. This was an art practiced both in the home and as a profession; it was done on a loom or with a needle. Delicate fabrics in the tabernacle and temple (Ex 26:1, 31) and the garments of priests (28:6, 8; 39:2) were beautifully embroidered. The art was practiced in Canaan (Jgs 5:30), Egypt (Ez 27:7), Syria (v 16), Babylonia (Jos 7:21), Assyria, and Persia (Est 1:6).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EMBROIDERER, EMBROIDERY The art of making decorative designs on clothing. This was an art practiced both in the home and as a profession; it was done on a loom or with a needle. Delicate fabrics in the tabernacle and temple (Ex 26:1, 31) and the garments of priests (28:6, 8; 39:2) were beautifully embroidered. The art was practiced in Canaan (Jgs 5:30), Egypt (Ez 27:7), Syria (v 16), Babylonia (Jos 7:21), Assyria, and Persia (Est 1:6). See also Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing.","summary_en":"EMBROIDERER, EMBROIDERY The art of making decorative designs on clothing. This was an art practiced both in the home and as a profession; it was done on a loom or with a needle. Delicate fabrics in the tabernacle and temple (Ex 26:1, 31) and the garments of priests (28:6, 8; 39:2) were beautifully embroidered. The art was practiced in Canaan (Jgs 5:30), Egypt (Ez 27:7), Syria (v 16), Babylonia (Jos 7:21), Assyria, and Persia (Est 1:6). See also Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing.","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20748,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Joshua","title_en":"Book of Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":25887,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Minerals* and Metals","title_en":"Minerals* and Metals","content_ro":"<h3>MINERALS* AND METALS<\/h3>\n<p>A “mineral” is a naturally occurring substance, normally an ore that must be mined and treated before the metal can be extracted. A “metal” is a chemical element such as iron or copper, which is free from contamination by other materials. Metals in a pure form generally do not occur in nature, though there are exceptions.<\/p>\n<p>In Palestine, mining and smelting are ancient arts, practiced long before the Israelites arrived. The quarrying of suitable stones, such as flint, for toolmaking goes back to the Stone Age; the quarrying of stone for building is also an ancient craft. In particular, metals, native gold, copper, and meteoric iron were known and used in the Middle East before 4000 <span>BC<\/span>. From 4000 to 3000 <span>BC<\/span>, native silver became known as well as copper and lead ores. The art of smelting was discovered probably almost by accident, resulting in the production of alloys like bronze. Then the reduction of oxidized iron was discovered. From 3000 to 2000 <span>BC<\/span>, important advances were made. Copper sulfides and tin oxides were reduced to metal, and metallic tin and copper became important items of trade.<\/p>\n<p>In the years 2000 to 1000 <span>BC<\/span>, bellows came into use for furnaces, and iron was reduced from its ores and forged. The art of making brass from copper and zinc was discovered about 1500 <span>BC<\/span> but did not become significant till somewhat later. Bronze, known for many centuries, was made sometimes with a high tin content to form speculum for mirrors. By this time the Israelites were settled in the land and the kingdom was established. From 1000 <span>BC<\/span> to the start of the Christian era, the production of metals, especially iron, greatly expanded. A form of steel was made and used for weapons and tools.<\/p>\n<p>By the time of David and Solomon, the Israelites had learned many skills in the preparation and working of metals. Under David, Edom, with its rich copper and iron deposits, was conquered (2 Sm 8:13-14) and there was a lot of activity in the casting of metals in the Jordan Valley (1 Kgs 7:13-14, 45-46). In this activity Solomon had the assistance of Hiram, a Phoenician artisan. Israelite tradition associated the origins of metallurgy with Tubal-cain (Gn 4:22), who is said to have forged all kinds of tools out of bronze and iron. Deuteronomy 8:9 refers to the presence of iron and copper in the land to which Israel was going.<\/p>\n<p>While the Israelites eventually undertook their own metalworking processes, it is evident from 1 Samuel 13:19-22 that on at least one occasion, in the days of Philistine domination, they were obliged to have their agricultural tools made by their enemies. Similarly, the manufacture of cult vessels for Solomon’s temple was supervised by Phoenician artisans (1 Kgs 7:13-50).<\/p>\n<p>Minerals, metals, and precious stones were also important items of trade. Israel was never a land rich in these commodities and was obliged to import a wide variety of them. The visit of the queen of Sheba was partly diplomatic and partly for trade (1 Kgs 10:2, 10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Metals and precious stones featured also among the booty carried off by invaders, notably—but not only—by the Egyptians and Assyrians. These items were in constant demand as they were needed for agriculture and making weapons of war, and for the manufacture of jewelry and items of personal adornment.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Minerals\">Minerals<\/p>\n<p>A mineral is an inorganic substance with a definite chemical composition and structure, sometimes occurring alone or sometimes combined with others. “Ore” refers to any mineral or mineral aggregate containing chemical compounds of metals in sufficient quantity and grade to make the extraction of the metal commercially profitable. The essential element, the metal, occurs in nature as a chemical compound, such as a sulfide, an oxide, a carbonate, or some other compound, though the sulfides and oxides are the most common. Minerals exhibit a variety of properties, such as color, luster, crystal form, cleavage, fracture, hardness, and density, which help in their identification and exercise control on the commercial and industrial uses of the particular mineral.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Metals\">Metals<\/p>\n<p>A metal in its pure form is a chemically pure element with its own fixed physical properties, such as density, tensile strength, crystalline structure, melting point, ductility, conductivity, and the like. Metals form alloys with other metals, but this process destroys their purity. In both the ancient world and the modern world the alloy is extremely important.<\/p>\n<p>In order to obtain a pure metal, the ore in which the metal is contained must be smelted—a process known as metallurgy. In ancient Israel pure metals were widely used—among them were gold, silver, iron, and lead. Yet alloys such as bronze and brass were even more widely used.<\/p>\n<h5>Metallurgy and Metal Extraction<\/h5>\n<p>The method of producing hard wrought iron was discovered by the Hittites of Asia Minor about 1300 <span>BC<\/span>, and was taken up by the Philistines (1 Sm 13:19-20). At first, the iron obtained from simple furnaces was drawn off and hammered to drive out slag (Dt 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:51; Jer 11:4). Later, the addition of carbon produced an early form of steel.<\/p>\n<p>The lead sulfide ore is heated with lime in a flow of air. A slag with rock particles forms. The air is then cut off and the temperature is raised. Finally, the lead flows free.<\/p>\n<p>The OT refers to the mining of silver (Jb 28:1), the refining of the metal (Zec 13:9; Mal 3:3), the melting of scrap metals or jeweler’s remnants (Ez 22:20-22), and of multiple refinings in a crucible (Prv 17:3; 27:21) to produce refined silver (1 Chr 29:4; Ps 12:6; Prv 10:20).<\/p>\n<h5>Specific Metals<\/h5>\n<p>Although several OT passages suggest that the science of metallurgy was known in biblical times, comparatively little archaeological evidence is available. The processing plants were small and were used for the treatment of copper and iron. The archaeological record is far from complete, but the general impression is that metallic ores were comparatively rare in Palestine; imports must have been considerable. However, numerous molds for casting agricultural and military tools have come to light in excavations. Evidently, some refined metal was available locally, but perhaps most of it was imported. The metal was then heated and poured into the appropriate earthenware or pottery mold.<\/p>\n<p>There are many references to metals in the Bible, but especially to gold, silver, iron, and lead. While copper was widely used, it was normally in the form of its alloys, bronze and brass. There are comparatively few references to tin as such, though it was used in manufacturing bronze. Similarly zinc, though used in the manufacture of brass, is not mentioned in the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Gold is referred to hundreds of times in the OT and NT, more frequently than any other metal. It is often mentioned together with silver, and in the majority of cases silver is mentioned first, reflecting a time when gold was less valued.<\/p>\n<p>Gold was used in the manufacture of ornaments for personal use (Gn 24:53; 41:42; Ex 3:22; 11:2; 12:35). Gold was important in worship both in Israel and among the non-Israelites. References to pagan gods occur in several passages (Ex 20:23; 32:2-4; Ps 115:4; Is 2:20; 30:22; 31:7; 40:19; 46:6; Hos 8:4). It seems that the gold was melted down and later engraved so that the replicas could be called both molten images (Ex 32:24) and graven images. The tabernacle and the temple used a great deal of gold. The wooden ark was covered inside and outside with gold (25:11). Other timber pieces were overlaid with gold (25:11; 1 Kgs 6:20-22, 30).<\/p>\n<p>The vessels and utensils used in the tabernacle and temple were made of “pure gold”: the cherubim (Ex 25:18; 37:7), the mercy seat (25:17; 37:6), the candlestick (Ex 25:31; Zec 4:2), various vessels (Ex 25:38; 2 Kgs 24:13), chains to carry the ephod (Ex 28:14), and the bells on the high priest’s robe. The high priest’s crown, ephod, and breastplate were also of gold (39:2-30). The offerings collected for the manufacture of such articles in the wilderness include golden dishes weighing 120 shekels (Nm 7:86). The more lavishly adorned temple apparently used more gold than the tabernacle (1 Kgs 6:20-28; 1 Chr 29:2-7; 2 Chr 3:4–4:22). The number of specific references to gold in the tabernacle and temple is far too great to mention all of them here. The large amount of gold used in the temple was attractive to invaders, who would strip the temple of its gold and carry it off as booty (1 Kgs 14:26; 2 Kgs 16:8; 18:14; 24:13; 25:15; 2 Chr 12:9).<\/p>\n<p>Gold had commercial value. It was imported in Solomon’s day, and up to 666 talents were brought to Israel annually (1 Kgs 10:14). Hiram of Tyre gave Solomon 120 talents of gold (9:14), possibly as a loan. Certainly Solomon used a lot of gold in the temple (10:16-17). Gold was useful, too, for buying off an enemy (2 Kgs 16:8) or simply as tribute (18:14). Evidence of this comes also from the Assyrian annals, where the tribute taken from various lands often included gold.<\/p>\n<p>The possession of gold was not in itself an evil thing, but preoccupation with its accumulation was condemned (Jb 28:15-17; Prv 3:14; 8:10, 19; 16:16). The possession of wisdom and the knowledge of God was of greater value than the possession of much gold (Pss 19:10; 119:72, 127; Prv 20:15). Job rejected trust in gold (Jb 31:24). Gold would not save a man in the day of judgment (Zep 1:18).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT gold was regarded as perishable (Jas 5:3; 1 Pt 1:18) and as an unnecessary burden to carry (Mt 10:9; Acts 3:6). The wearing of a gold ring was certainly no measure of a man’s worth (Jas 2:2); indeed, both Paul and Peter forbade it (1 Tm 2:9; 1 Pt 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>The use of gold in itself was no measure of piety. The elders of Revelation 4:4 wore golden crowns, but the great harlot was “bedecked with gold” (Rv 17:4), as was the harlot city Babylon (18:16). By contrast, there are some positive statements in the NT about the value of gold (3:18). The wise men brought gold to the infant Jesus as a symbol of his kingly character (Mt 2:11), and the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, was a city of gold, clear as glass (Rv 21:18).<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, silver is mentioned in several connections. Being a precious metal, once considered more precious than gold, it was regularly used in commerce for the payments of debts. Small pieces of silver were weighed into a balance against a standard weight. Abraham bought the cave at Machpelah as a burial place for Sarah for 400 shekels of silver and weighed out the “money” according to the weight’s current value with the merchant (Gn 23:15-16). Joseph’s brothers received 20 pieces of silver in payment for Joseph (37:28), and Benjamin was given a money gift by Joseph in pieces of silver (45:22).<\/p>\n<p>There are other examples of payment in silver for commodities or services (Gn 20:16; Ex 21:32; Lv 27:16; Jos 24:32; Jgs 17:10; 2 Sm 24:24; Neh 7:72; Jb 28:15; Is 7:23; 46:6; Am 2:6; 8:6). Silver was a measure of a man’s wealth (Gn 13:2; 24:35; Ex 25:3; Nm 22:18; Dt 7:25; Zep 1:18; Hg 2:8; Zec 6:11). An unusual comment in 1 Kings 10:21 notes that in Solomon’s day “it was not considered as anything,” apparently because it was so plentiful. It was regularly taken as booty (Jos 6:19; 7:21; 1 Kgs 15:18). Sometimes the drinking cup of an important man was made of silver (Gn 44:2). Sometimes, too, a royal crown was made of gold and silver (Zec 6:11). It was important in the manufacture of personal ornaments (Gn 24:53; Ex 3:22; 12:35), and one example is given of ornaments of gold studded with silver (Sg 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>The process of refining silver was used as a metaphor for the trying of people’s hearts (Ps 66:10; Is 48:10), and the tarnishing and deterioration of silver was a picture of the disintegration of one’s character (Is 1:22; Jer 6:30). God’s Word is pictured as “pure” silver refined and purified in a furnace. Despite silver’s great value, wisdom excels it (Job 28:15; Prv 3:14; 8:19; 10:20; 16:16; 22:1; 25:11).<\/p>\n<p>Native copper is mentioned in Deuteronomy 8:9, though the reference may be to one of its ores. More commonly, biblical references are to brass, the alloy of copper and zinc. However, the chemical analysis of copper-based tools and implements during the middle and late Bronze Ages (c. 2000–1200 <span>BC<\/span>) shows that the material was bronze. References to brass in the <span>kjv<\/span> are therefore to bronze.<\/p>\n<p>By NT times, copper in the form of alloys (bronze and brass) was widely used. Bronze coinage was well known and this may be the sense of Matthew 10:9. The widow’s mite was a tiny bronze coin, the lepton. Bronze utensils and vessels were well known (Rv 9:20; 18:12). The reference to “sounding brass” (<span>kjv<\/span>) in 1 Corinthians 13:1 may actually be to brass, which was a bright, shining alloy, and was used in musical instruments. In the vision of John in Revelation (Rv 1:15; 2:18), the Son of Man had feet of fine brass (<span>nlt<\/span> “bronze”).<\/p>\n<p>The Iron Age began in Palestine about 1200 <span>BC<\/span>, that is, in the days of the judges, though native iron had been known in Egypt in the predynastic period. Archaeological evidence suggests that the smelting of iron ore was discovered by the Hittites about 1400 <span>BC<\/span>. The Philistines seem to have introduced iron to Palestine about 1300 <span>BC<\/span>. In the days of Moses an encounter with the Midianites produced much tribute, among which iron is mentioned (Nm 31:22). When Israel captured Jericho, the spoils included iron (Jos 6:24). Manasseh’s half-tribe also took booty including iron (22:8). In the days of the judges the Canaanites were equipped with chariots of iron (Jos 17:16-18; Jgs 1:19; 4:3).<\/p>\n<p>These early references point to the arrival of iron at the start of the Iron Age. The Philistines enjoyed a local monopoly in its use (1 Sm 13:19-21), and their mighty warrior Goliath was armed with an iron spear (17:7). It was not long, however, before Israel learned the use of iron (2 Sm 12:31; 23:7). Evidently, by Solomon’s time, iron was widely used, because builders of the temple were forbidden to use iron tools (1 Kgs 6:7). The false prophet Zedekiah in Ahab’s day used the horns of iron to thrust toward Syria as he spoke of their defeat (22:11).<\/p>\n<p>The prophet Isaiah in the eighth century <span>BC<\/span> referred to iron (Is 10:34), and Jeremiah later spoke of the metal in several places (Jer 1:18; 6:28; 11:4; 15:12; 17:1; 28:13-14). Ezekiel made use of an iron plate in one of his symbolic actions (Ez 4:3), referred to iron in his description of smelting (22:18, 20), and listed it as a commodity for trade (27:12, 19). The prophet Amos spoke of threshing instruments of iron (Am 1:3). Micah used iron as a symbol for military might (Mi 4:13). The book of Daniel makes several references to it (Dn 2:33-35, 40-45; 4:15, 23; 7:7, 19).<\/p>\n<p>By Roman times, iron weapons were the regular implements of war. Gates of iron were used to close prisons (Acts 12:10), and in a symbolic usage powerful rulers were said to rule with a rod of iron (Rv 2:27; 9:9; 12:5; 19:15). The term “iron” was used also in some metaphorical expressions. The smelting of iron was a symbol of testing and suffering (Dt 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:51; Jer 11:4; Ez 22:18), a pillar of iron was symbolic of strength (Jer 1:18), and an iron rod of harsh rule (Ps 2:9; Rv 2:27; 12:5; 19:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Coppersmith; Goldsmith; Ironsmith; Mason, Masonry; Silversmith; Stones, Precious.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MINERALS* AND METALS<\/h3>\n<p>A “mineral” is a naturally occurring substance, normally an ore that must be mined and treated before the metal can be extracted. A “metal” is a chemical element such as iron or copper, which is free from contamination by other materials. Metals in a pure form generally do not occur in nature, though there are exceptions.<\/p>\n<p>In Palestine, mining and smelting are ancient arts, practiced long before the Israelites arrived. The quarrying of suitable stones, such as flint, for toolmaking goes back to the Stone Age; the quarrying of stone for building is also an ancient craft. In particular, metals, native gold, copper, and meteoric iron were known and used in the Middle East before 4000 <span>BC<\/span>. From 4000 to 3000 <span>BC<\/span>, native silver became known as well as copper and lead ores. The art of smelting was discovered probably almost by accident, resulting in the production of alloys like bronze. Then the reduction of oxidized iron was discovered. From 3000 to 2000 <span>BC<\/span>, important advances were made. Copper sulfides and tin oxides were reduced to metal, and metallic tin and copper became important items of trade.<\/p>\n<p>In the years 2000 to 1000 <span>BC<\/span>, bellows came into use for furnaces, and iron was reduced from its ores and forged. The art of making brass from copper and zinc was discovered about 1500 <span>BC<\/span> but did not become significant till somewhat later. Bronze, known for many centuries, was made sometimes with a high tin content to form speculum for mirrors. By this time the Israelites were settled in the land and the kingdom was established. From 1000 <span>BC<\/span> to the start of the Christian era, the production of metals, especially iron, greatly expanded. A form of steel was made and used for weapons and tools.<\/p>\n<p>By the time of David and Solomon, the Israelites had learned many skills in the preparation and working of metals. Under David, Edom, with its rich copper and iron deposits, was conquered (2 Sm 8:13-14) and there was a lot of activity in the casting of metals in the Jordan Valley (1 Kgs 7:13-14, 45-46). In this activity Solomon had the assistance of Hiram, a Phoenician artisan. Israelite tradition associated the origins of metallurgy with Tubal-cain (Gn 4:22), who is said to have forged all kinds of tools out of bronze and iron. Deuteronomy 8:9 refers to the presence of iron and copper in the land to which Israel was going.<\/p>\n<p>While the Israelites eventually undertook their own metalworking processes, it is evident from 1 Samuel 13:19-22 that on at least one occasion, in the days of Philistine domination, they were obliged to have their agricultural tools made by their enemies. Similarly, the manufacture of cult vessels for Solomon’s temple was supervised by Phoenician artisans (1 Kgs 7:13-50).<\/p>\n<p>Minerals, metals, and precious stones were also important items of trade. Israel was never a land rich in these commodities and was obliged to import a wide variety of them. The visit of the queen of Sheba was partly diplomatic and partly for trade (1 Kgs 10:2, 10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Metals and precious stones featured also among the booty carried off by invaders, notably—but not only—by the Egyptians and Assyrians. These items were in constant demand as they were needed for agriculture and making weapons of war, and for the manufacture of jewelry and items of personal adornment.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Minerals\">Minerals<\/p>\n<p>A mineral is an inorganic substance with a definite chemical composition and structure, sometimes occurring alone or sometimes combined with others. “Ore” refers to any mineral or mineral aggregate containing chemical compounds of metals in sufficient quantity and grade to make the extraction of the metal commercially profitable. The essential element, the metal, occurs in nature as a chemical compound, such as a sulfide, an oxide, a carbonate, or some other compound, though the sulfides and oxides are the most common. Minerals exhibit a variety of properties, such as color, luster, crystal form, cleavage, fracture, hardness, and density, which help in their identification and exercise control on the commercial and industrial uses of the particular mineral.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Metals\">Metals<\/p>\n<p>A metal in its pure form is a chemically pure element with its own fixed physical properties, such as density, tensile strength, crystalline structure, melting point, ductility, conductivity, and the like. Metals form alloys with other metals, but this process destroys their purity. In both the ancient world and the modern world the alloy is extremely important.<\/p>\n<p>In order to obtain a pure metal, the ore in which the metal is contained must be smelted—a process known as metallurgy. In ancient Israel pure metals were widely used—among them were gold, silver, iron, and lead. Yet alloys such as bronze and brass were even more widely used.<\/p>\n<h5>Metallurgy and Metal Extraction<\/h5>\n<p>The method of producing hard wrought iron was discovered by the Hittites of Asia Minor about 1300 <span>BC<\/span>, and was taken up by the Philistines (1 Sm 13:19-20). At first, the iron obtained from simple furnaces was drawn off and hammered to drive out slag (Dt 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:51; Jer 11:4). Later, the addition of carbon produced an early form of steel.<\/p>\n<p>The lead sulfide ore is heated with lime in a flow of air. A slag with rock particles forms. The air is then cut off and the temperature is raised. Finally, the lead flows free.<\/p>\n<p>The OT refers to the mining of silver (Jb 28:1), the refining of the metal (Zec 13:9; Mal 3:3), the melting of scrap metals or jeweler’s remnants (Ez 22:20-22), and of multiple refinings in a crucible (Prv 17:3; 27:21) to produce refined silver (1 Chr 29:4; Ps 12:6; Prv 10:20).<\/p>\n<h5>Specific Metals<\/h5>\n<p>Although several OT passages suggest that the science of metallurgy was known in biblical times, comparatively little archaeological evidence is available. The processing plants were small and were used for the treatment of copper and iron. The archaeological record is far from complete, but the general impression is that metallic ores were comparatively rare in Palestine; imports must have been considerable. However, numerous molds for casting agricultural and military tools have come to light in excavations. Evidently, some refined metal was available locally, but perhaps most of it was imported. The metal was then heated and poured into the appropriate earthenware or pottery mold.<\/p>\n<p>There are many references to metals in the Bible, but especially to gold, silver, iron, and lead. While copper was widely used, it was normally in the form of its alloys, bronze and brass. There are comparatively few references to tin as such, though it was used in manufacturing bronze. Similarly zinc, though used in the manufacture of brass, is not mentioned in the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Gold is referred to hundreds of times in the OT and NT, more frequently than any other metal. It is often mentioned together with silver, and in the majority of cases silver is mentioned first, reflecting a time when gold was less valued.<\/p>\n<p>Gold was used in the manufacture of ornaments for personal use (Gn 24:53; 41:42; Ex 3:22; 11:2; 12:35). Gold was important in worship both in Israel and among the non-Israelites. References to pagan gods occur in several passages (Ex 20:23; 32:2-4; Ps 115:4; Is 2:20; 30:22; 31:7; 40:19; 46:6; Hos 8:4). It seems that the gold was melted down and later engraved so that the replicas could be called both molten images (Ex 32:24) and graven images. The tabernacle and the temple used a great deal of gold. The wooden ark was covered inside and outside with gold (25:11). Other timber pieces were overlaid with gold (25:11; 1 Kgs 6:20-22, 30).<\/p>\n<p>The vessels and utensils used in the tabernacle and temple were made of “pure gold”: the cherubim (Ex 25:18; 37:7), the mercy seat (25:17; 37:6), the candlestick (Ex 25:31; Zec 4:2), various vessels (Ex 25:38; 2 Kgs 24:13), chains to carry the ephod (Ex 28:14), and the bells on the high priest’s robe. The high priest’s crown, ephod, and breastplate were also of gold (39:2-30). The offerings collected for the manufacture of such articles in the wilderness include golden dishes weighing 120 shekels (Nm 7:86). The more lavishly adorned temple apparently used more gold than the tabernacle (1 Kgs 6:20-28; 1 Chr 29:2-7; 2 Chr 3:4–4:22). The number of specific references to gold in the tabernacle and temple is far too great to mention all of them here. The large amount of gold used in the temple was attractive to invaders, who would strip the temple of its gold and carry it off as booty (1 Kgs 14:26; 2 Kgs 16:8; 18:14; 24:13; 25:15; 2 Chr 12:9).<\/p>\n<p>Gold had commercial value. It was imported in Solomon’s day, and up to 666 talents were brought to Israel annually (1 Kgs 10:14). Hiram of Tyre gave Solomon 120 talents of gold (9:14), possibly as a loan. Certainly Solomon used a lot of gold in the temple (10:16-17). Gold was useful, too, for buying off an enemy (2 Kgs 16:8) or simply as tribute (18:14). Evidence of this comes also from the Assyrian annals, where the tribute taken from various lands often included gold.<\/p>\n<p>The possession of gold was not in itself an evil thing, but preoccupation with its accumulation was condemned (Jb 28:15-17; Prv 3:14; 8:10, 19; 16:16). The possession of wisdom and the knowledge of God was of greater value than the possession of much gold (Pss 19:10; 119:72, 127; Prv 20:15). Job rejected trust in gold (Jb 31:24). Gold would not save a man in the day of judgment (Zep 1:18).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT gold was regarded as perishable (Jas 5:3; 1 Pt 1:18) and as an unnecessary burden to carry (Mt 10:9; Acts 3:6). The wearing of a gold ring was certainly no measure of a man’s worth (Jas 2:2); indeed, both Paul and Peter forbade it (1 Tm 2:9; 1 Pt 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>The use of gold in itself was no measure of piety. The elders of Revelation 4:4 wore golden crowns, but the great harlot was “bedecked with gold” (Rv 17:4), as was the harlot city Babylon (18:16). By contrast, there are some positive statements in the NT about the value of gold (3:18). The wise men brought gold to the infant Jesus as a symbol of his kingly character (Mt 2:11), and the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, was a city of gold, clear as glass (Rv 21:18).<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, silver is mentioned in several connections. Being a precious metal, once considered more precious than gold, it was regularly used in commerce for the payments of debts. Small pieces of silver were weighed into a balance against a standard weight. Abraham bought the cave at Machpelah as a burial place for Sarah for 400 shekels of silver and weighed out the “money” according to the weight’s current value with the merchant (Gn 23:15-16). Joseph’s brothers received 20 pieces of silver in payment for Joseph (37:28), and Benjamin was given a money gift by Joseph in pieces of silver (45:22).<\/p>\n<p>There are other examples of payment in silver for commodities or services (Gn 20:16; Ex 21:32; Lv 27:16; Jos 24:32; Jgs 17:10; 2 Sm 24:24; Neh 7:72; Jb 28:15; Is 7:23; 46:6; Am 2:6; 8:6). Silver was a measure of a man’s wealth (Gn 13:2; 24:35; Ex 25:3; Nm 22:18; Dt 7:25; Zep 1:18; Hg 2:8; Zec 6:11). An unusual comment in 1 Kings 10:21 notes that in Solomon’s day “it was not considered as anything,” apparently because it was so plentiful. It was regularly taken as booty (Jos 6:19; 7:21; 1 Kgs 15:18). Sometimes the drinking cup of an important man was made of silver (Gn 44:2). Sometimes, too, a royal crown was made of gold and silver (Zec 6:11). It was important in the manufacture of personal ornaments (Gn 24:53; Ex 3:22; 12:35), and one example is given of ornaments of gold studded with silver (Sg 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>The process of refining silver was used as a metaphor for the trying of people’s hearts (Ps 66:10; Is 48:10), and the tarnishing and deterioration of silver was a picture of the disintegration of one’s character (Is 1:22; Jer 6:30). God’s Word is pictured as “pure” silver refined and purified in a furnace. Despite silver’s great value, wisdom excels it (Job 28:15; Prv 3:14; 8:19; 10:20; 16:16; 22:1; 25:11).<\/p>\n<p>Native copper is mentioned in Deuteronomy 8:9, though the reference may be to one of its ores. More commonly, biblical references are to brass, the alloy of copper and zinc. However, the chemical analysis of copper-based tools and implements during the middle and late Bronze Ages (c. 2000–1200 <span>BC<\/span>) shows that the material was bronze. References to brass in the <span>kjv<\/span> are therefore to bronze.<\/p>\n<p>By NT times, copper in the form of alloys (bronze and brass) was widely used. Bronze coinage was well known and this may be the sense of Matthew 10:9. The widow’s mite was a tiny bronze coin, the lepton. Bronze utensils and vessels were well known (Rv 9:20; 18:12). The reference to “sounding brass” (<span>kjv<\/span>) in 1 Corinthians 13:1 may actually be to brass, which was a bright, shining alloy, and was used in musical instruments. In the vision of John in Revelation (Rv 1:15; 2:18), the Son of Man had feet of fine brass (<span>nlt<\/span> “bronze”).<\/p>\n<p>The Iron Age began in Palestine about 1200 <span>BC<\/span>, that is, in the days of the judges, though native iron had been known in Egypt in the predynastic period. Archaeological evidence suggests that the smelting of iron ore was discovered by the Hittites about 1400 <span>BC<\/span>. The Philistines seem to have introduced iron to Palestine about 1300 <span>BC<\/span>. In the days of Moses an encounter with the Midianites produced much tribute, among which iron is mentioned (Nm 31:22). When Israel captured Jericho, the spoils included iron (Jos 6:24). Manasseh’s half-tribe also took booty including iron (22:8). In the days of the judges the Canaanites were equipped with chariots of iron (Jos 17:16-18; Jgs 1:19; 4:3).<\/p>\n<p>These early references point to the arrival of iron at the start of the Iron Age. The Philistines enjoyed a local monopoly in its use (1 Sm 13:19-21), and their mighty warrior Goliath was armed with an iron spear (17:7). It was not long, however, before Israel learned the use of iron (2 Sm 12:31; 23:7). Evidently, by Solomon’s time, iron was widely used, because builders of the temple were forbidden to use iron tools (1 Kgs 6:7). The false prophet Zedekiah in Ahab’s day used the horns of iron to thrust toward Syria as he spoke of their defeat (22:11).<\/p>\n<p>The prophet Isaiah in the eighth century <span>BC<\/span> referred to iron (Is 10:34), and Jeremiah later spoke of the metal in several places (Jer 1:18; 6:28; 11:4; 15:12; 17:1; 28:13-14). Ezekiel made use of an iron plate in one of his symbolic actions (Ez 4:3), referred to iron in his description of smelting (22:18, 20), and listed it as a commodity for trade (27:12, 19). The prophet Amos spoke of threshing instruments of iron (Am 1:3). Micah used iron as a symbol for military might (Mi 4:13). The book of Daniel makes several references to it (Dn 2:33-35, 40-45; 4:15, 23; 7:7, 19).<\/p>\n<p>By Roman times, iron weapons were the regular implements of war. Gates of iron were used to close prisons (Acts 12:10), and in a symbolic usage powerful rulers were said to rule with a rod of iron (Rv 2:27; 9:9; 12:5; 19:15). The term “iron” was used also in some metaphorical expressions. The smelting of iron was a symbol of testing and suffering (Dt 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:51; Jer 11:4; Ez 22:18), a pillar of iron was symbolic of strength (Jer 1:18), and an iron rod of harsh rule (Ps 2:9; Rv 2:27; 12:5; 19:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Coppersmith; Goldsmith; Ironsmith; Mason, Masonry; Silversmith; Stones, Precious.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MINERALS* AND METALS A “mineral” is a naturally occurring substance, normally an ore that must be mined and treated before the metal can be extracted. A “metal” is a chemical element such as iron or copper, which is free from contamination by other materials. Metals in a pure form generally do not occur in nature, though there are exceptions. In Palestine, mining and smelting are ancient arts, practiced long before the Israelites arrived. The quarrying of suitable stones, such as flint, for t...","summary_en":"MINERALS* AND METALS A “mineral” is a naturally occurring substance, normally an ore that must be mined and treated before the metal can be extracted. A “metal” is a chemical element such as iron or copper, which is free from contamination by other materials. Metals in a pure form generally do not occur in nature, though there are exceptions. In Palestine, mining and smelting are ancient arts, practiced long before the Israelites arrived. The quarrying of suitable stones, such as flint, for t...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45411,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:21","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:21<\/strong> The <em>robe<\/em> should have been burned with the rest of Jericho’s goods. It was <em>from Babylon<\/em>, evidence that long-distance trade was a significant part of life in the ancient Near East. • <em>200 silver coins:<\/em> Achan took pieces or lumps of silver that functioned as money; coinage <em>per se<\/em> was not invented until the 600s <span>BC<\/span>. • <em>I wanted them so much<\/em> is translated “covet” in the tenth commandment (Exod 20:17). Achan’s coveting had prompted his theft.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:21<\/strong> The <em>robe<\/em> should have been burned with the rest of Jericho’s goods. It was <em>from Babylon<\/em>, evidence that long-distance trade was a significant part of life in the ancient Near East. • <em>200 silver coins:<\/em> Achan took pieces or lumps of silver that functioned as money; coinage <em>per se<\/em> was not invented until the 600s <span>BC<\/span>. • <em>I wanted them so much<\/em> is translated “covet” in the tenth commandment (Exod 20:17). Achan’s coveting had prompted his theft.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:21 The robe should have been burned with the rest of Jericho’s goods. It was from Babylon, evidence that long-distance trade was a significant part of life in the ancient Near East. • 200 silver coins: Achan took pieces or lumps of silver that functioned as money; coinage per se was not invented until the 600s BC. • I wanted them so much is translated “covet” in the tenth commandment (Exod 20:17). Achan’s coveting had prompted his theft.","summary_en":"7:21 The robe should have been burned with the rest of Jericho’s goods. It was from Babylon, evidence that long-distance trade was a significant part of life in the ancient Near East. • 200 silver coins: Achan took pieces or lumps of silver that functioned as money; coinage per se was not invented until the 600s BC. • I wanted them so much is translated “covet” in the tenth commandment (Exod 20:17). Achan’s coveting had prompted his theft.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73037,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:21","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:21<\/strong> The <em>robe<\/em> should have been burned with the rest of Jericho’s goods. It was <em>from Babylon<\/em>, evidence that long-distance trade was a significant part of life in the ancient Near East. • <em>200 silver coins:<\/em> Achan took pieces or lumps of silver that functioned as money; coinage <em>per se<\/em> was not invented until the 600s <span>BC<\/span>. • <em>I wanted them so much<\/em> is translated “covet” in the tenth commandment (Exod 20:17). Achan’s coveting had prompted his theft.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:21<\/strong> The <em>robe<\/em> should have been burned with the rest of Jericho’s goods. It was <em>from Babylon<\/em>, evidence that long-distance trade was a significant part of life in the ancient Near East. • <em>200 silver coins:<\/em> Achan took pieces or lumps of silver that functioned as money; coinage <em>per se<\/em> was not invented until the 600s <span>BC<\/span>. • <em>I wanted them so much<\/em> is translated “covet” in the tenth commandment (Exod 20:17). Achan’s coveting had prompted his theft.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:21 The robe should have been burned with the rest of Jericho’s goods. It was from Babylon, evidence that long-distance trade was a significant part of life in the ancient Near East. • 200 silver coins: Achan took pieces or lumps of silver that functioned as money; coinage per se was not invented until the 600s BC. • I wanted them so much is translated “covet” in the tenth commandment (Exod 20:17). Achan’s coveting had prompted his theft.","summary_en":"7:21 The robe should have been burned with the rest of Jericho’s goods. It was from Babylon, evidence that long-distance trade was a significant part of life in the ancient Near East. • 200 silver coins: Achan took pieces or lumps of silver that functioned as money; coinage per se was not invented until the 600s BC. • I wanted them so much is translated “covet” in the tenth commandment (Exod 20:17). Achan’s coveting had prompted his theft.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100663,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:21","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:21<\/strong> The <em>robe<\/em> should have been burned with the rest of Jericho’s goods. It was <em>from Babylon<\/em>, evidence that long-distance trade was a significant part of life in the ancient Near East. • <em>200 silver coins:<\/em> Achan took pieces or lumps of silver that functioned as money; coinage <em>per se<\/em> was not invented until the 600s <span>BC<\/span>. • <em>I wanted them so much<\/em> is translated “covet” in the tenth commandment (Exod 20:17). Achan’s coveting had prompted his theft.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:21<\/strong> The <em>robe<\/em> should have been burned with the rest of Jericho’s goods. It was <em>from Babylon<\/em>, evidence that long-distance trade was a significant part of life in the ancient Near East. • <em>200 silver coins:<\/em> Achan took pieces or lumps of silver that functioned as money; coinage <em>per se<\/em> was not invented until the 600s <span>BC<\/span>. • <em>I wanted them so much<\/em> is translated “covet” in the tenth commandment (Exod 20:17). Achan’s coveting had prompted his theft.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:21 The robe should have been burned with the rest of Jericho’s goods. It was from Babylon, evidence that long-distance trade was a significant part of life in the ancient Near East. • 200 silver coins: Achan took pieces or lumps of silver that functioned as money; coinage per se was not invented until the 600s BC. • I wanted them so much is translated “covet” in the tenth commandment (Exod 20:17). Achan’s coveting had prompted his theft.","summary_en":"7:21 The robe should have been burned with the rest of Jericho’s goods. It was from Babylon, evidence that long-distance trade was a significant part of life in the ancient Near East. • 200 silver coins: Achan took pieces or lumps of silver that functioned as money; coinage per se was not invented until the 600s BC. • I wanted them so much is translated “covet” in the tenth commandment (Exod 20:17). Achan’s coveting had prompted his theft.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128289,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:21","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:21<\/strong> The <em>robe<\/em> should have been burned with the rest of Jericho’s goods. It was <em>from Babylon<\/em>, evidence that long-distance trade was a significant part of life in the ancient Near East. • <em>200 silver coins:<\/em> Achan took pieces or lumps of silver that functioned as money; coinage <em>per se<\/em> was not invented until the 600s <span>BC<\/span>. • <em>I wanted them so much<\/em> is translated “covet” in the tenth commandment (Exod 20:17). Achan’s coveting had prompted his theft.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:21<\/strong> The <em>robe<\/em> should have been burned with the rest of Jericho’s goods. It was <em>from Babylon<\/em>, evidence that long-distance trade was a significant part of life in the ancient Near East. • <em>200 silver coins:<\/em> Achan took pieces or lumps of silver that functioned as money; coinage <em>per se<\/em> was not invented until the 600s <span>BC<\/span>. • <em>I wanted them so much<\/em> is translated “covet” in the tenth commandment (Exod 20:17). Achan’s coveting had prompted his theft.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:21 The robe should have been burned with the rest of Jericho’s goods. It was from Babylon, evidence that long-distance trade was a significant part of life in the ancient Near East. • 200 silver coins: Achan took pieces or lumps of silver that functioned as money; coinage per se was not invented until the 600s BC. • I wanted them so much is translated “covet” in the tenth commandment (Exod 20:17). Achan’s coveting had prompted his theft.","summary_en":"7:21 The robe should have been burned with the rest of Jericho’s goods. It was from Babylon, evidence that long-distance trade was a significant part of life in the ancient Near East. • 200 silver coins: Achan took pieces or lumps of silver that functioned as money; coinage per se was not invented until the 600s BC. • I wanted them so much is translated “covet” in the tenth commandment (Exod 20:17). Achan’s coveting had prompted his theft.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"22":[{"id":45412,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:22","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:22<\/strong> Because the matter was urgent, Joshua’s messengers <em>ran to the tent<\/em> to confirm Achan’s confession.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:22<\/strong> Because the matter was urgent, Joshua’s messengers <em>ran to the tent<\/em> to confirm Achan’s confession.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:22 Because the matter was urgent, Joshua’s messengers ran to the tent to confirm Achan’s confession.","summary_en":"7:22 Because the matter was urgent, Joshua’s messengers ran to the tent to confirm Achan’s confession.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73038,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:22","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:22<\/strong> Because the matter was urgent, Joshua’s messengers <em>ran to the tent<\/em> to confirm Achan’s confession.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:22<\/strong> Because the matter was urgent, Joshua’s messengers <em>ran to the tent<\/em> to confirm Achan’s confession.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:22 Because the matter was urgent, Joshua’s messengers ran to the tent to confirm Achan’s confession.","summary_en":"7:22 Because the matter was urgent, Joshua’s messengers ran to the tent to confirm Achan’s confession.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100664,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:22","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:22<\/strong> Because the matter was urgent, Joshua’s messengers <em>ran to the tent<\/em> to confirm Achan’s confession.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:22<\/strong> Because the matter was urgent, Joshua’s messengers <em>ran to the tent<\/em> to confirm Achan’s confession.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:22 Because the matter was urgent, Joshua’s messengers ran to the tent to confirm Achan’s confession.","summary_en":"7:22 Because the matter was urgent, Joshua’s messengers ran to the tent to confirm Achan’s confession.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128290,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:22","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:22<\/strong> Because the matter was urgent, Joshua’s messengers <em>ran to the tent<\/em> to confirm Achan’s confession.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:22<\/strong> Because the matter was urgent, Joshua’s messengers <em>ran to the tent<\/em> to confirm Achan’s confession.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:22 Because the matter was urgent, Joshua’s messengers ran to the tent to confirm Achan’s confession.","summary_en":"7:22 Because the matter was urgent, Joshua’s messengers ran to the tent to confirm Achan’s confession.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"24":[{"id":340,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Achor","title_en":"Achor","content_ro":"<h3>ACHOR<\/h3>\n<p>Valley that received its name when Achan, the troubler of Israel, was stoned and burned there (Jos 7:24-26; cf. 1 Chr 2:7). Achor was on the northern boundary of Judah’s tribal allotment (Jos 15:7). Later, the valley is mentioned in prophecies of Israel’s future blessings. A valley once known as the scene of Israel’s trouble would become “a door of hope” and a place for joyful singing (Hos 2:15); a place of relative desolation would one day become a place for herds to lie down (Is 65:10). The valley of Achor is commonly identified as the Buqei‘ah.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ACHOR<\/h3>\n<p>Valley that received its name when Achan, the troubler of Israel, was stoned and burned there (Jos 7:24-26; cf. 1 Chr 2:7). Achor was on the northern boundary of Judah’s tribal allotment (Jos 15:7). Later, the valley is mentioned in prophecies of Israel’s future blessings. A valley once known as the scene of Israel’s trouble would become “a door of hope” and a place for joyful singing (Hos 2:15); a place of relative desolation would one day become a place for herds to lie down (Is 65:10). The valley of Achor is commonly identified as the Buqei‘ah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ACHOR Valley that received its name when Achan, the troubler of Israel, was stoned and burned there (Jos 7:24-26; cf. 1 Chr 2:7). Achor was on the northern boundary of Judah’s tribal allotment (Jos 15:7). Later, the valley is mentioned in prophecies of Israel’s future blessings. A valley once known as the scene of Israel’s trouble would become “a door of hope” and a place for joyful singing (Hos 2:15); a place of relative desolation would one day become a place for herds to lie down (Is 65:10...","summary_en":"ACHOR Valley that received its name when Achan, the troubler of Israel, was stoned and burned there (Jos 7:24-26; cf. 1 Chr 2:7). Achor was on the northern boundary of Judah’s tribal allotment (Jos 15:7). Later, the valley is mentioned in prophecies of Israel’s future blessings. A valley once known as the scene of Israel’s trouble would become “a door of hope” and a place for joyful singing (Hos 2:15); a place of relative desolation would one day become a place for herds to lie down (Is 65:10...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":530,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Adam (Person)","title_en":"Adam (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>ADAM (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>First man and father of the human race. Adam’s role in biblical history is important not only in OT considerations but also in understanding the meaning of salvation and the person and work of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The creation of Adam and the first woman, Eve, is recited in two accounts in the book of Genesis. The intent of the first account (1:26-31) is to present the first pair in their relationship to God and to the rest of the created order. It teaches that with regard to God the first humans were created male and female in God’s image with his specific mandate to populate and rule over the earth. With regard to the rest of creation the first humans were, on one hand, part of it, being created on the same day as other land animals; on the other hand, they were distinctly above it, being the culmination of the creation process and sole bearers of God’s image.<\/p>\n<p>The intent of the second account is much more specific (2:4–3:24); it seeks to explain the origin of the present human condition of sin and death and to set the stage for the drama of redemption. The story treats in detail aspects of Adam’s creation omitted from the first story. For example, it tells of the formation of Adam from the dust of the ground and of his receiving the breath of life from God (2:7). It recounts the planting of the Garden and the responsibility given to Adam to cultivate it (2:8-15). God’s instruction to Adam that the fruit of every tree in the Garden was his for food, except one, is carefully recorded, as well as the solemn warning that the fruit of the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” was never to be eaten, under the pain of death (2:16-17). Adam’s loneliness after naming the animals and not finding a suitable companion is also described, thus introducing the creation of the first woman (2:18-22). The creation of Eve from Adam’s rib poignantly portrays the essential unity of spirit and purpose of the sexes intended by God.<\/p>\n<p>The story does not end on such a positive note, however. It moves on to record the great deception Satan played upon Eve through the serpent. By clever insinuations and distortion of God’s original commandment (cf. 3:1 with 2:16-17), the serpent tricked Eve into eating the forbidden fruit and sharing it with Adam. Eve seems to have eaten because she was deceived (1 Tm 2:14), Adam out of a willful and conscious rebellion. Ironically, the two beings originally created in God’s image and likeness believed that they could become “like” God by disobeying him (Gn 3:5).<\/p>\n<p>The effects of their disobedience were immediate, though not at all what Adam had expected. For the first time a barrier of shame disrupted the unity of man and woman (3:7). More important, a barrier of real moral guilt was erected between the first couple and God. The story relates that when God came looking for Adam after his rebellion, he was hiding among the trees, already aware of his separation from God (3:8). When God questioned him, Adam threw the blame on Eve and, by implication, back on God: “It was the woman you gave me who brought me the fruit” (3:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). Eve in turn blamed the serpent (3:13).<\/p>\n<p>According to the story in Genesis, God held all three responsible and informed each one of the calamitous consequences of their rebellion (3:14-19). The two great mandates, originally signs of pure blessing, became mixed with curse and pain—the earth could now be populated only through the woman’s birth pangs and could be subdued only by the man’s labor and perspiration (3:16-18). Further, the unity of man and woman would be strained by man’s subjugation of her, or possibly by the beginning of a struggle for dominance between them (3:16b can be taken both ways). Finally, God pronounced the ultimate consequence: as he had originally warned, Adam and Eve were to die. Someday the breath of life would be taken from them, and their bodies would return to the dust from which they were made (3:19). That very day they also experienced a “spiritual” death; they were separated from God, the giver of life, and from the tree of life, the symbol of eternal life (3:22). God sent them out of Eden, and there was no way back. The entrance to paradise was blocked by the cherubim and flaming sword (3:23-24). Only God could restore what they had lost.<\/p>\n<p>The story is not devoid of hope. God was merciful even then. He made them garments of skin to cover their bodies and promised that someday the power of Satan behind the serpent would be crushed by the woman’s “seed” (Gn 3:15; cf. Rom 16:20). Many scholars consider that promise to be the first biblical mention of redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSignificanceofAdam\">The Significance of Adam<\/p>\n<p>Adam’s significance is based upon several assumptions, the first being that he was a historical individual. That assumption was made by many OT writers (Gn 4:25; 5:1-5; 1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7). The NT writers agreed (Lk 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tm 2:13-14; Jude 1:14). Equally essential to Adam’s significance is a second assumption, that he was more than an individual. To begin with, the Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> (more correctly <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’a–dha–m<\/span>) is not merely a proper name. Even in the Genesis story it is not used as a name until Genesis 4:25. The word is one of several Hebrew words meaning “man” and is the generic term for “human race.” In the vast majority of cases it refers either to a male individual (Lv 1:2; Jos 14:15; Neh 9:29; Is 56:2) or to humanity in general (Ex 4:11; Nm 12:3; 16:29; Dt 4:28; 1 Kgs 4:31; Jb 7:20; 14:1). The generic, collective sense of the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> is also behind the phrase “children (or sons) of men” (2 Sm 7:14; Pss 11:4; 12:1; 14:2; 53:2; 90:3; Eccl 1:13; 2:3). That phrase, literally “sons of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span><em>,”<\/em> simply means “men” or “human beings,” and when it is used the entire human race is in view. Indeed, the universalistic human connotation of the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> indicates a concern in the OT going far beyond Israel’s nationalistic hopes and its God—to all the earth’s people and the Lord of all nations (Gn 9:5-7; Dt 5:24; 8:3; 1 Kgs 8:38-39; Pss 8:4; 89:48; 107:8-31; Prv 12:14; Mi 6:8).<\/p>\n<p>It is no accident, then, that the first man was named “Adam” or “Man.” The name intimates that to speak about Adam is somehow also to speak about the entire human race. Such usage can perhaps best be understood through the ancient concept of corporate personality and representation familiar to the Hebrews and other Near Eastern peoples. Modern thinking emphasizes the individual; existence of the social group and all social relationships has been seen as secondary to, and dependent upon, the existence and desire of the individual. The Hebrew understanding was quite different. Though the separate personality of the individual was appreciated (Jer 31:29-30; Ez 18:4), there was a strong tendency to see the social group (family, tribe, nation) as a single organism with a corporate identity of its own. Likewise the group representative was seen as the embodiment or personification of the corporate personality of the group. Within the representative the essential qualities and characteristics of the social group resided in such a way that the actions and decisions of the representative were binding on the entire group. If the group was a family, the father was usually considered the corporate representative; for good or for ill his family, and sometimes his descendants, received the results of his actions (Gn 17:1-8; cf. Gn 20:1-9, 18; Ex 20:5-6; Jos 7:24-25; Rom 11:28; Heb 7:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>As the original man and father of humankind, in whose image all succeeding generations would be born (Gn 5:3), Adam was the corporate representative of humanity. The creation accounts themselves give the impression that the mandates of Genesis 1:26-30 (cf. Gn 9:1, 7; Pss 8:5-7; 104:14) as well as the curses of Genesis 3:16-19 (cf. Ps 90:3; Eccl 12:7; Is 13:8; 21:3) were meant not only for Adam (and Eve) but, through him, for the entire race.<\/p>\n<p>In Romans 5:12-21 the apostle Paul contrasted the death and condemnation brought upon humanity by Adam’s disobedience with the life and justification given to humanity through Christ’s obedience. More explicitly, in 1 Corinthians 15:45-50 (<span>rsv<\/span>), Paul called Christ the “last Adam,” “second man,” and the “man of heaven” in juxtaposition to the “first Adam,” the “first man,” and the “man of dust.”<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, the human race was divided into two groups in the persons of Adam and Christ. Those who remain “incorporated” in Adam are the “old” humanity, bearing the image of the “man of dust” and partaking of his sin and alienation from God and Creation (Rom 5:12-19; 8:20-22). But those who are incorporated into Christ by faith become Christ’s “body” (Rom 12:4-5; 1 Cor 12:12-13, 27; Eph 1:22-23; Col 1:18); they are recreated in Christ’s image (Rom 8:29; 1 Cor 15:49; 2 Cor 3:18); they become one “new man” (Eph 2:15; 4:24; Col 3:9-10, <span>kjv<\/span>); and they partake of the new creation (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). The old barriers raised by Adam are removed by Christ (Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19; Gal 3:27-28; Eph 2:14-16). For Paul, the functional similarity of Adam and Christ as representatives meant that Christ had restored what Adam had lost.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eve; Man, Old and New; New Creation, New Creature.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ADAM (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>First man and father of the human race. Adam’s role in biblical history is important not only in OT considerations but also in understanding the meaning of salvation and the person and work of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The creation of Adam and the first woman, Eve, is recited in two accounts in the book of Genesis. The intent of the first account (1:26-31) is to present the first pair in their relationship to God and to the rest of the created order. It teaches that with regard to God the first humans were created male and female in God’s image with his specific mandate to populate and rule over the earth. With regard to the rest of creation the first humans were, on one hand, part of it, being created on the same day as other land animals; on the other hand, they were distinctly above it, being the culmination of the creation process and sole bearers of God’s image.<\/p>\n<p>The intent of the second account is much more specific (2:4–3:24); it seeks to explain the origin of the present human condition of sin and death and to set the stage for the drama of redemption. The story treats in detail aspects of Adam’s creation omitted from the first story. For example, it tells of the formation of Adam from the dust of the ground and of his receiving the breath of life from God (2:7). It recounts the planting of the Garden and the responsibility given to Adam to cultivate it (2:8-15). God’s instruction to Adam that the fruit of every tree in the Garden was his for food, except one, is carefully recorded, as well as the solemn warning that the fruit of the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” was never to be eaten, under the pain of death (2:16-17). Adam’s loneliness after naming the animals and not finding a suitable companion is also described, thus introducing the creation of the first woman (2:18-22). The creation of Eve from Adam’s rib poignantly portrays the essential unity of spirit and purpose of the sexes intended by God.<\/p>\n<p>The story does not end on such a positive note, however. It moves on to record the great deception Satan played upon Eve through the serpent. By clever insinuations and distortion of God’s original commandment (cf. 3:1 with 2:16-17), the serpent tricked Eve into eating the forbidden fruit and sharing it with Adam. Eve seems to have eaten because she was deceived (1 Tm 2:14), Adam out of a willful and conscious rebellion. Ironically, the two beings originally created in God’s image and likeness believed that they could become “like” God by disobeying him (Gn 3:5).<\/p>\n<p>The effects of their disobedience were immediate, though not at all what Adam had expected. For the first time a barrier of shame disrupted the unity of man and woman (3:7). More important, a barrier of real moral guilt was erected between the first couple and God. The story relates that when God came looking for Adam after his rebellion, he was hiding among the trees, already aware of his separation from God (3:8). When God questioned him, Adam threw the blame on Eve and, by implication, back on God: “It was the woman you gave me who brought me the fruit” (3:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). Eve in turn blamed the serpent (3:13).<\/p>\n<p>According to the story in Genesis, God held all three responsible and informed each one of the calamitous consequences of their rebellion (3:14-19). The two great mandates, originally signs of pure blessing, became mixed with curse and pain—the earth could now be populated only through the woman’s birth pangs and could be subdued only by the man’s labor and perspiration (3:16-18). Further, the unity of man and woman would be strained by man’s subjugation of her, or possibly by the beginning of a struggle for dominance between them (3:16b can be taken both ways). Finally, God pronounced the ultimate consequence: as he had originally warned, Adam and Eve were to die. Someday the breath of life would be taken from them, and their bodies would return to the dust from which they were made (3:19). That very day they also experienced a “spiritual” death; they were separated from God, the giver of life, and from the tree of life, the symbol of eternal life (3:22). God sent them out of Eden, and there was no way back. The entrance to paradise was blocked by the cherubim and flaming sword (3:23-24). Only God could restore what they had lost.<\/p>\n<p>The story is not devoid of hope. God was merciful even then. He made them garments of skin to cover their bodies and promised that someday the power of Satan behind the serpent would be crushed by the woman’s “seed” (Gn 3:15; cf. Rom 16:20). Many scholars consider that promise to be the first biblical mention of redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSignificanceofAdam\">The Significance of Adam<\/p>\n<p>Adam’s significance is based upon several assumptions, the first being that he was a historical individual. That assumption was made by many OT writers (Gn 4:25; 5:1-5; 1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7). The NT writers agreed (Lk 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tm 2:13-14; Jude 1:14). Equally essential to Adam’s significance is a second assumption, that he was more than an individual. To begin with, the Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> (more correctly <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’a–dha–m<\/span>) is not merely a proper name. Even in the Genesis story it is not used as a name until Genesis 4:25. The word is one of several Hebrew words meaning “man” and is the generic term for “human race.” In the vast majority of cases it refers either to a male individual (Lv 1:2; Jos 14:15; Neh 9:29; Is 56:2) or to humanity in general (Ex 4:11; Nm 12:3; 16:29; Dt 4:28; 1 Kgs 4:31; Jb 7:20; 14:1). The generic, collective sense of the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> is also behind the phrase “children (or sons) of men” (2 Sm 7:14; Pss 11:4; 12:1; 14:2; 53:2; 90:3; Eccl 1:13; 2:3). That phrase, literally “sons of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span><em>,”<\/em> simply means “men” or “human beings,” and when it is used the entire human race is in view. Indeed, the universalistic human connotation of the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> indicates a concern in the OT going far beyond Israel’s nationalistic hopes and its God—to all the earth’s people and the Lord of all nations (Gn 9:5-7; Dt 5:24; 8:3; 1 Kgs 8:38-39; Pss 8:4; 89:48; 107:8-31; Prv 12:14; Mi 6:8).<\/p>\n<p>It is no accident, then, that the first man was named “Adam” or “Man.” The name intimates that to speak about Adam is somehow also to speak about the entire human race. Such usage can perhaps best be understood through the ancient concept of corporate personality and representation familiar to the Hebrews and other Near Eastern peoples. Modern thinking emphasizes the individual; existence of the social group and all social relationships has been seen as secondary to, and dependent upon, the existence and desire of the individual. The Hebrew understanding was quite different. Though the separate personality of the individual was appreciated (Jer 31:29-30; Ez 18:4), there was a strong tendency to see the social group (family, tribe, nation) as a single organism with a corporate identity of its own. Likewise the group representative was seen as the embodiment or personification of the corporate personality of the group. Within the representative the essential qualities and characteristics of the social group resided in such a way that the actions and decisions of the representative were binding on the entire group. If the group was a family, the father was usually considered the corporate representative; for good or for ill his family, and sometimes his descendants, received the results of his actions (Gn 17:1-8; cf. Gn 20:1-9, 18; Ex 20:5-6; Jos 7:24-25; Rom 11:28; Heb 7:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>As the original man and father of humankind, in whose image all succeeding generations would be born (Gn 5:3), Adam was the corporate representative of humanity. The creation accounts themselves give the impression that the mandates of Genesis 1:26-30 (cf. Gn 9:1, 7; Pss 8:5-7; 104:14) as well as the curses of Genesis 3:16-19 (cf. Ps 90:3; Eccl 12:7; Is 13:8; 21:3) were meant not only for Adam (and Eve) but, through him, for the entire race.<\/p>\n<p>In Romans 5:12-21 the apostle Paul contrasted the death and condemnation brought upon humanity by Adam’s disobedience with the life and justification given to humanity through Christ’s obedience. More explicitly, in 1 Corinthians 15:45-50 (<span>rsv<\/span>), Paul called Christ the “last Adam,” “second man,” and the “man of heaven” in juxtaposition to the “first Adam,” the “first man,” and the “man of dust.”<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, the human race was divided into two groups in the persons of Adam and Christ. Those who remain “incorporated” in Adam are the “old” humanity, bearing the image of the “man of dust” and partaking of his sin and alienation from God and Creation (Rom 5:12-19; 8:20-22). But those who are incorporated into Christ by faith become Christ’s “body” (Rom 12:4-5; 1 Cor 12:12-13, 27; Eph 1:22-23; Col 1:18); they are recreated in Christ’s image (Rom 8:29; 1 Cor 15:49; 2 Cor 3:18); they become one “new man” (Eph 2:15; 4:24; Col 3:9-10, <span>kjv<\/span>); and they partake of the new creation (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). The old barriers raised by Adam are removed by Christ (Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19; Gal 3:27-28; Eph 2:14-16). For Paul, the functional similarity of Adam and Christ as representatives meant that Christ had restored what Adam had lost.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eve; Man, Old and New; New Creation, New Creature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ADAM (Person) First man and father of the human race. Adam’s role in biblical history is important not only in OT considerations but also in understanding the meaning of salvation and the person and work of Jesus Christ. The creation of Adam and the first woman, Eve, is recited in two accounts in the book of Genesis. The intent of the first account (1:26-31) is to present the first pair in their relationship to God and to the rest of the created order. It teaches that with regard to God the f...","summary_en":"ADAM (Person) First man and father of the human race. Adam’s role in biblical history is important not only in OT considerations but also in understanding the meaning of salvation and the person and work of Jesus Christ. The creation of Adam and the first woman, Eve, is recited in two accounts in the book of Genesis. The intent of the first account (1:26-31) is to present the first pair in their relationship to God and to the rest of the created order. It teaches that with regard to God the f...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45413,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:24","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:24<\/strong> This careful listing of Achan’s relatives and possessions, including the stolen items, has the tone of a legal statement. Achan compromised all that pertained to him through his contact with the stolen items; thus, all had to be included in his judgment.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:24<\/strong> This careful listing of Achan’s relatives and possessions, including the stolen items, has the tone of a legal statement. Achan compromised all that pertained to him through his contact with the stolen items; thus, all had to be included in his judgment.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:24 This careful listing of Achan’s relatives and possessions, including the stolen items, has the tone of a legal statement. Achan compromised all that pertained to him through his contact with the stolen items; thus, all had to be included in his judgment.","summary_en":"7:24 This careful listing of Achan’s relatives and possessions, including the stolen items, has the tone of a legal statement. Achan compromised all that pertained to him through his contact with the stolen items; thus, all had to be included in his judgment.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73039,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:24","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:24<\/strong> This careful listing of Achan’s relatives and possessions, including the stolen items, has the tone of a legal statement. Achan compromised all that pertained to him through his contact with the stolen items; thus, all had to be included in his judgment.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:24<\/strong> This careful listing of Achan’s relatives and possessions, including the stolen items, has the tone of a legal statement. Achan compromised all that pertained to him through his contact with the stolen items; thus, all had to be included in his judgment.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:24 This careful listing of Achan’s relatives and possessions, including the stolen items, has the tone of a legal statement. Achan compromised all that pertained to him through his contact with the stolen items; thus, all had to be included in his judgment.","summary_en":"7:24 This careful listing of Achan’s relatives and possessions, including the stolen items, has the tone of a legal statement. Achan compromised all that pertained to him through his contact with the stolen items; thus, all had to be included in his judgment.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100665,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:24","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:24<\/strong> This careful listing of Achan’s relatives and possessions, including the stolen items, has the tone of a legal statement. Achan compromised all that pertained to him through his contact with the stolen items; thus, all had to be included in his judgment.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:24<\/strong> This careful listing of Achan’s relatives and possessions, including the stolen items, has the tone of a legal statement. Achan compromised all that pertained to him through his contact with the stolen items; thus, all had to be included in his judgment.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:24 This careful listing of Achan’s relatives and possessions, including the stolen items, has the tone of a legal statement. Achan compromised all that pertained to him through his contact with the stolen items; thus, all had to be included in his judgment.","summary_en":"7:24 This careful listing of Achan’s relatives and possessions, including the stolen items, has the tone of a legal statement. Achan compromised all that pertained to him through his contact with the stolen items; thus, all had to be included in his judgment.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128291,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:24","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:24<\/strong> This careful listing of Achan’s relatives and possessions, including the stolen items, has the tone of a legal statement. Achan compromised all that pertained to him through his contact with the stolen items; thus, all had to be included in his judgment.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:24<\/strong> This careful listing of Achan’s relatives and possessions, including the stolen items, has the tone of a legal statement. Achan compromised all that pertained to him through his contact with the stolen items; thus, all had to be included in his judgment.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:24 This careful listing of Achan’s relatives and possessions, including the stolen items, has the tone of a legal statement. Achan compromised all that pertained to him through his contact with the stolen items; thus, all had to be included in his judgment.","summary_en":"7:24 This careful listing of Achan’s relatives and possessions, including the stolen items, has the tone of a legal statement. Achan compromised all that pertained to him through his contact with the stolen items; thus, all had to be included in his judgment.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"25":[{"id":5849,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Customs* Burial, Burial","title_en":"Customs* Burial, Burial","content_ro":"<h3>BURIAL, BURIAL CUSTOMS*<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible makes frequent reference to burial practices. A society’s burial customs are a reflection of its views about death and the afterlife. The ancient Egyptians, for example, thought of life after death as a continuation of physical activities in another realm, as evidenced by their elaborately furnished tombs. The ancient Hebrews emphasized a more spiritual concept of union or fellowship of the departed with generations gone on before.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GravesandTombs\">Graves and Tombs<\/p>\n<p>Among the Hebrews, location of burial plots was generally determined on a family basis. The OT contains many references to an Israelite’s desire to be buried in the family burying place, describing his death as “going to his fathers” (Gn 15:15; 1 Kgs 13:22).<\/p>\n<p>The cave of Machpelah at Hebron was one example of family “cohabitation” of a tomb for a succession of generations. Abraham purchased the site from Ephron the Hittite at the time of Sarah’s death (Gn 23). When Abraham died, Isaac and Ishmael laid his body in the same tomb (25:9), and there Jacob in turn buried his parents, Isaac and Rebekah, as well as Jacob’s wife Leah (49:31). After his death, Jacob’s body was buried with his father’s in accord with his own request (49:29; 50:13). Jacob’s son Joseph made his kinsmen promise that his remains would be preserved so they could be carried back to the homeland when God enabled his people to return from Egypt (50:25). Samuel is spoken of as being buried in his house at Ramah, evidently referring to a family graveyard plot (1 Sm 25:1). Joab was buried in his own house in the wilderness (1 Kgs 2:34). King Manasseh was buried in the garden of his palace (2 Kgs 21:18), and Joshua in his own inheritance at Timnath-serah (Jos 24:30). Kings were careful to perpetuate their memory by special burial sites, often in the City of David (the part of Jerusalem on the southeastern ridge first occupied by that great king). King Josiah designated his burial place in advance, most likely an ancestral tomb (2 Kgs 23:30).<\/p>\n<p>Individual burial sites, such as that of Deborah near Bethel (Gn 35:8) and of Rachel on the road to Ephrath (Gn 35:1, 20), were an exception necessitated by sudden death at some distance from the family tomb.<\/p>\n<p>Bodies were buried in tombs, that is, natural caves or rock-hewn sepulchers, such as that belonging to Joseph of Arimathea where the body of Jesus was laid (Mt 27:59-60). They were also buried in shallow graves covered with rock heaps, serving both to mark them and to prevent desecration of the body by animals.<\/p>\n<p>Some graves were marked by a monument erected in love (Gn 35:20) and honor (2 Kgs 23:17), but stones were sometimes heaped on a dishonorable burial place, as in the case of Achan (Jos 7:26) and Absalom (2 Sm 18:17). Tombs were often adorned or embellished, sometimes whitewashed, in part to warn against ceremonial contamination prohibited by Mosaic law. Jesus spoke of such embellishment in a rebuke of the Pharisees (Mt 23:27).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TreatmentoftheCorpse\">Treatment of the Corpse<\/p>\n<p>The assurance given by God to Jacob that “Joseph’s hand shall close your eyes” (Gn 46:4, <span>rsv<\/span>) probably alludes to the custom of a near relative closing the eyes of one who died with a fixed stare. Close relatives might also literally embrace and kiss the body immediately upon expiration. The body was washed and dressed in the deceased one’s clothing. Pins and other ornaments found in excavated tombs are evidence that the dead were buried fully clothed. Soldiers were buried in full regalia, with shields covering or cradling the armored bodies, their swords under their heads (Ez 32:27).<\/p>\n<p>Embalming was not a usual practice in Israel. Egyptian treatment for Jacob and Joseph was the exception rather than the rule. According to the Greek historian Herodotus, the Egyptians commenced embalming procedures by removing the brain from the cranium through the nasal apertures, piecemeal, using a long curved hook. When this had been done, the cranial cavity was rinsed out with a mixture of resins and spices. The corpse was eviscerated, and the entrails were placed in four canopic jars. The body was soaked in a solution of natron for a period of from 40 to 80 days, depending on the cost of the burial. At the time of interment, the corpse was wrapped in strips of fine linen cloth from head to foot and put in an anthropoid coffin. The canopic jars were placed in the tomb along with the body, symbolizing the reuniting of the personality and its survival after death.<\/p>\n<p>Cremation of the bodies of Saul and his sons (1 Sm 31:12-13) was also an exception to normal practice. The Roman historian Tacitus wrote that in contrast with Roman custom, Jewish piety required the burying rather than burning of dead bodies. Under Mosaic law such burning was reserved as a sentence of judgment (Lv 21:9; Jos 7:25).<\/p>\n<p>After preparation of the body, it was carried on a bier (a simple frame with carrying poles) without being placed in a coffin. The body was laid either in a prepared niche in the wall of a rock-hewn chamber or directly in a shallow grave dug in a burial plot. Neither bier nor any form of casket entered the pit with the corpse. The spices used as a perfume and temporary deterrent to decay cannot properly be considered an attempt at embalming (Mk 16:1).<\/p>\n<p>As we know from the Gospel record of Jesus’ burial, some cave tombs had a seal at the doorway, either a hinged wooden door or a flat stone shaped so it could be rolled into place. Such a stone seal could be reopened only with extreme effort (Mk 15:46; 16:3-4). By NT times the Jews sometimes economized on the use of a family tomb by placing the dry bones of formerly buried relatives in ossuaries. These boxlike receptacles were probably an adaptation of chests used by the Romans for holding ashes after a cremation.<\/p>\n<p>Under Mosaic legislation, ceremonial defilement was contracted either through physical contact with the corpse or by participation in the formalities of mourning. Especially stringent prohibitions applied to the priests of Israel. The high priest himself could have nothing at all to do with mourning. In particular, he “must never defile himself by going near a dead person, even if it is his father or mother. He must not desecrate the sanctuary of his God by leaving it to attend his parents’ funeral, because he has been made holy by the anointing oil of his God” (Lv 21:10-12, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Although the customs and procedures were evidently modified little from OT to NT times, some added details are given in the NT record. For example, it is noted that the corpse was washed (Acts 9:37). The body was then anointed and wrapped in linen cloths with spices enclosed (Mk 16:1; Jn 19:40). Finally, the limbs were tightly bound and the head covered with a separate piece of cloth (Jn 11:44).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Mourning; Funeral Customs.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BURIAL, BURIAL CUSTOMS*<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible makes frequent reference to burial practices. A society’s burial customs are a reflection of its views about death and the afterlife. The ancient Egyptians, for example, thought of life after death as a continuation of physical activities in another realm, as evidenced by their elaborately furnished tombs. The ancient Hebrews emphasized a more spiritual concept of union or fellowship of the departed with generations gone on before.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GravesandTombs\">Graves and Tombs<\/p>\n<p>Among the Hebrews, location of burial plots was generally determined on a family basis. The OT contains many references to an Israelite’s desire to be buried in the family burying place, describing his death as “going to his fathers” (Gn 15:15; 1 Kgs 13:22).<\/p>\n<p>The cave of Machpelah at Hebron was one example of family “cohabitation” of a tomb for a succession of generations. Abraham purchased the site from Ephron the Hittite at the time of Sarah’s death (Gn 23). When Abraham died, Isaac and Ishmael laid his body in the same tomb (25:9), and there Jacob in turn buried his parents, Isaac and Rebekah, as well as Jacob’s wife Leah (49:31). After his death, Jacob’s body was buried with his father’s in accord with his own request (49:29; 50:13). Jacob’s son Joseph made his kinsmen promise that his remains would be preserved so they could be carried back to the homeland when God enabled his people to return from Egypt (50:25). Samuel is spoken of as being buried in his house at Ramah, evidently referring to a family graveyard plot (1 Sm 25:1). Joab was buried in his own house in the wilderness (1 Kgs 2:34). King Manasseh was buried in the garden of his palace (2 Kgs 21:18), and Joshua in his own inheritance at Timnath-serah (Jos 24:30). Kings were careful to perpetuate their memory by special burial sites, often in the City of David (the part of Jerusalem on the southeastern ridge first occupied by that great king). King Josiah designated his burial place in advance, most likely an ancestral tomb (2 Kgs 23:30).<\/p>\n<p>Individual burial sites, such as that of Deborah near Bethel (Gn 35:8) and of Rachel on the road to Ephrath (Gn 35:1, 20), were an exception necessitated by sudden death at some distance from the family tomb.<\/p>\n<p>Bodies were buried in tombs, that is, natural caves or rock-hewn sepulchers, such as that belonging to Joseph of Arimathea where the body of Jesus was laid (Mt 27:59-60). They were also buried in shallow graves covered with rock heaps, serving both to mark them and to prevent desecration of the body by animals.<\/p>\n<p>Some graves were marked by a monument erected in love (Gn 35:20) and honor (2 Kgs 23:17), but stones were sometimes heaped on a dishonorable burial place, as in the case of Achan (Jos 7:26) and Absalom (2 Sm 18:17). Tombs were often adorned or embellished, sometimes whitewashed, in part to warn against ceremonial contamination prohibited by Mosaic law. Jesus spoke of such embellishment in a rebuke of the Pharisees (Mt 23:27).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TreatmentoftheCorpse\">Treatment of the Corpse<\/p>\n<p>The assurance given by God to Jacob that “Joseph’s hand shall close your eyes” (Gn 46:4, <span>rsv<\/span>) probably alludes to the custom of a near relative closing the eyes of one who died with a fixed stare. Close relatives might also literally embrace and kiss the body immediately upon expiration. The body was washed and dressed in the deceased one’s clothing. Pins and other ornaments found in excavated tombs are evidence that the dead were buried fully clothed. Soldiers were buried in full regalia, with shields covering or cradling the armored bodies, their swords under their heads (Ez 32:27).<\/p>\n<p>Embalming was not a usual practice in Israel. Egyptian treatment for Jacob and Joseph was the exception rather than the rule. According to the Greek historian Herodotus, the Egyptians commenced embalming procedures by removing the brain from the cranium through the nasal apertures, piecemeal, using a long curved hook. When this had been done, the cranial cavity was rinsed out with a mixture of resins and spices. The corpse was eviscerated, and the entrails were placed in four canopic jars. The body was soaked in a solution of natron for a period of from 40 to 80 days, depending on the cost of the burial. At the time of interment, the corpse was wrapped in strips of fine linen cloth from head to foot and put in an anthropoid coffin. The canopic jars were placed in the tomb along with the body, symbolizing the reuniting of the personality and its survival after death.<\/p>\n<p>Cremation of the bodies of Saul and his sons (1 Sm 31:12-13) was also an exception to normal practice. The Roman historian Tacitus wrote that in contrast with Roman custom, Jewish piety required the burying rather than burning of dead bodies. Under Mosaic law such burning was reserved as a sentence of judgment (Lv 21:9; Jos 7:25).<\/p>\n<p>After preparation of the body, it was carried on a bier (a simple frame with carrying poles) without being placed in a coffin. The body was laid either in a prepared niche in the wall of a rock-hewn chamber or directly in a shallow grave dug in a burial plot. Neither bier nor any form of casket entered the pit with the corpse. The spices used as a perfume and temporary deterrent to decay cannot properly be considered an attempt at embalming (Mk 16:1).<\/p>\n<p>As we know from the Gospel record of Jesus’ burial, some cave tombs had a seal at the doorway, either a hinged wooden door or a flat stone shaped so it could be rolled into place. Such a stone seal could be reopened only with extreme effort (Mk 15:46; 16:3-4). By NT times the Jews sometimes economized on the use of a family tomb by placing the dry bones of formerly buried relatives in ossuaries. These boxlike receptacles were probably an adaptation of chests used by the Romans for holding ashes after a cremation.<\/p>\n<p>Under Mosaic legislation, ceremonial defilement was contracted either through physical contact with the corpse or by participation in the formalities of mourning. Especially stringent prohibitions applied to the priests of Israel. The high priest himself could have nothing at all to do with mourning. In particular, he “must never defile himself by going near a dead person, even if it is his father or mother. He must not desecrate the sanctuary of his God by leaving it to attend his parents’ funeral, because he has been made holy by the anointing oil of his God” (Lv 21:10-12, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Although the customs and procedures were evidently modified little from OT to NT times, some added details are given in the NT record. For example, it is noted that the corpse was washed (Acts 9:37). The body was then anointed and wrapped in linen cloths with spices enclosed (Mk 16:1; Jn 19:40). Finally, the limbs were tightly bound and the head covered with a separate piece of cloth (Jn 11:44).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Mourning; Funeral Customs.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BURIAL, BURIAL CUSTOMS* The Bible makes frequent reference to burial practices. A society’s burial customs are a reflection of its views about death and the afterlife. The ancient Egyptians, for example, thought of life after death as a continuation of physical activities in another realm, as evidenced by their elaborately furnished tombs. The ancient Hebrews emphasized a more spiritual concept of union or fellowship of the departed with generations gone on before. Graves and Tombs Among the ...","summary_en":"BURIAL, BURIAL CUSTOMS* The Bible makes frequent reference to burial practices. A society’s burial customs are a reflection of its views about death and the afterlife. The ancient Egyptians, for example, thought of life after death as a continuation of physical activities in another realm, as evidenced by their elaborately furnished tombs. The ancient Hebrews emphasized a more spiritual concept of union or fellowship of the departed with generations gone on before. Graves and Tombs Among the ...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20753,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Joshua","title_en":"Book of Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45414,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:25","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:25<\/strong> Stoning was one prescribed means of execution (see, e.g., Exod 19:13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:25<\/strong> Stoning was one prescribed means of execution (see, e.g., Exod 19:13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:25 Stoning was one prescribed means of execution (see, e.g., Exod 19:13).","summary_en":"7:25 Stoning was one prescribed means of execution (see, e.g., Exod 19:13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73040,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:25","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:25<\/strong> Stoning was one prescribed means of execution (see, e.g., Exod 19:13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:25<\/strong> Stoning was one prescribed means of execution (see, e.g., Exod 19:13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:25 Stoning was one prescribed means of execution (see, e.g., Exod 19:13).","summary_en":"7:25 Stoning was one prescribed means of execution (see, e.g., Exod 19:13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100666,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:25","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:25<\/strong> Stoning was one prescribed means of execution (see, e.g., Exod 19:13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:25<\/strong> Stoning was one prescribed means of execution (see, e.g., Exod 19:13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:25 Stoning was one prescribed means of execution (see, e.g., Exod 19:13).","summary_en":"7:25 Stoning was one prescribed means of execution (see, e.g., Exod 19:13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128292,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:25","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:25<\/strong> Stoning was one prescribed means of execution (see, e.g., Exod 19:13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:25<\/strong> Stoning was one prescribed means of execution (see, e.g., Exod 19:13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:25 Stoning was one prescribed means of execution (see, e.g., Exod 19:13).","summary_en":"7:25 Stoning was one prescribed means of execution (see, e.g., Exod 19:13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"26":[{"id":5842,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Customs* Burial, Burial","title_en":"Customs* Burial, Burial","content_ro":"<h3>BURIAL, BURIAL CUSTOMS*<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible makes frequent reference to burial practices. A society’s burial customs are a reflection of its views about death and the afterlife. The ancient Egyptians, for example, thought of life after death as a continuation of physical activities in another realm, as evidenced by their elaborately furnished tombs. The ancient Hebrews emphasized a more spiritual concept of union or fellowship of the departed with generations gone on before.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GravesandTombs\">Graves and Tombs<\/p>\n<p>Among the Hebrews, location of burial plots was generally determined on a family basis. The OT contains many references to an Israelite’s desire to be buried in the family burying place, describing his death as “going to his fathers” (Gn 15:15; 1 Kgs 13:22).<\/p>\n<p>The cave of Machpelah at Hebron was one example of family “cohabitation” of a tomb for a succession of generations. Abraham purchased the site from Ephron the Hittite at the time of Sarah’s death (Gn 23). When Abraham died, Isaac and Ishmael laid his body in the same tomb (25:9), and there Jacob in turn buried his parents, Isaac and Rebekah, as well as Jacob’s wife Leah (49:31). After his death, Jacob’s body was buried with his father’s in accord with his own request (49:29; 50:13). Jacob’s son Joseph made his kinsmen promise that his remains would be preserved so they could be carried back to the homeland when God enabled his people to return from Egypt (50:25). Samuel is spoken of as being buried in his house at Ramah, evidently referring to a family graveyard plot (1 Sm 25:1). Joab was buried in his own house in the wilderness (1 Kgs 2:34). King Manasseh was buried in the garden of his palace (2 Kgs 21:18), and Joshua in his own inheritance at Timnath-serah (Jos 24:30). Kings were careful to perpetuate their memory by special burial sites, often in the City of David (the part of Jerusalem on the southeastern ridge first occupied by that great king). King Josiah designated his burial place in advance, most likely an ancestral tomb (2 Kgs 23:30).<\/p>\n<p>Individual burial sites, such as that of Deborah near Bethel (Gn 35:8) and of Rachel on the road to Ephrath (Gn 35:1, 20), were an exception necessitated by sudden death at some distance from the family tomb.<\/p>\n<p>Bodies were buried in tombs, that is, natural caves or rock-hewn sepulchers, such as that belonging to Joseph of Arimathea where the body of Jesus was laid (Mt 27:59-60). They were also buried in shallow graves covered with rock heaps, serving both to mark them and to prevent desecration of the body by animals.<\/p>\n<p>Some graves were marked by a monument erected in love (Gn 35:20) and honor (2 Kgs 23:17), but stones were sometimes heaped on a dishonorable burial place, as in the case of Achan (Jos 7:26) and Absalom (2 Sm 18:17). Tombs were often adorned or embellished, sometimes whitewashed, in part to warn against ceremonial contamination prohibited by Mosaic law. Jesus spoke of such embellishment in a rebuke of the Pharisees (Mt 23:27).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TreatmentoftheCorpse\">Treatment of the Corpse<\/p>\n<p>The assurance given by God to Jacob that “Joseph’s hand shall close your eyes” (Gn 46:4, <span>rsv<\/span>) probably alludes to the custom of a near relative closing the eyes of one who died with a fixed stare. Close relatives might also literally embrace and kiss the body immediately upon expiration. The body was washed and dressed in the deceased one’s clothing. Pins and other ornaments found in excavated tombs are evidence that the dead were buried fully clothed. Soldiers were buried in full regalia, with shields covering or cradling the armored bodies, their swords under their heads (Ez 32:27).<\/p>\n<p>Embalming was not a usual practice in Israel. Egyptian treatment for Jacob and Joseph was the exception rather than the rule. According to the Greek historian Herodotus, the Egyptians commenced embalming procedures by removing the brain from the cranium through the nasal apertures, piecemeal, using a long curved hook. When this had been done, the cranial cavity was rinsed out with a mixture of resins and spices. The corpse was eviscerated, and the entrails were placed in four canopic jars. The body was soaked in a solution of natron for a period of from 40 to 80 days, depending on the cost of the burial. At the time of interment, the corpse was wrapped in strips of fine linen cloth from head to foot and put in an anthropoid coffin. The canopic jars were placed in the tomb along with the body, symbolizing the reuniting of the personality and its survival after death.<\/p>\n<p>Cremation of the bodies of Saul and his sons (1 Sm 31:12-13) was also an exception to normal practice. The Roman historian Tacitus wrote that in contrast with Roman custom, Jewish piety required the burying rather than burning of dead bodies. Under Mosaic law such burning was reserved as a sentence of judgment (Lv 21:9; Jos 7:25).<\/p>\n<p>After preparation of the body, it was carried on a bier (a simple frame with carrying poles) without being placed in a coffin. The body was laid either in a prepared niche in the wall of a rock-hewn chamber or directly in a shallow grave dug in a burial plot. Neither bier nor any form of casket entered the pit with the corpse. The spices used as a perfume and temporary deterrent to decay cannot properly be considered an attempt at embalming (Mk 16:1).<\/p>\n<p>As we know from the Gospel record of Jesus’ burial, some cave tombs had a seal at the doorway, either a hinged wooden door or a flat stone shaped so it could be rolled into place. Such a stone seal could be reopened only with extreme effort (Mk 15:46; 16:3-4). By NT times the Jews sometimes economized on the use of a family tomb by placing the dry bones of formerly buried relatives in ossuaries. These boxlike receptacles were probably an adaptation of chests used by the Romans for holding ashes after a cremation.<\/p>\n<p>Under Mosaic legislation, ceremonial defilement was contracted either through physical contact with the corpse or by participation in the formalities of mourning. Especially stringent prohibitions applied to the priests of Israel. The high priest himself could have nothing at all to do with mourning. In particular, he “must never defile himself by going near a dead person, even if it is his father or mother. He must not desecrate the sanctuary of his God by leaving it to attend his parents’ funeral, because he has been made holy by the anointing oil of his God” (Lv 21:10-12, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Although the customs and procedures were evidently modified little from OT to NT times, some added details are given in the NT record. For example, it is noted that the corpse was washed (Acts 9:37). The body was then anointed and wrapped in linen cloths with spices enclosed (Mk 16:1; Jn 19:40). Finally, the limbs were tightly bound and the head covered with a separate piece of cloth (Jn 11:44).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Mourning; Funeral Customs.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BURIAL, BURIAL CUSTOMS*<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible makes frequent reference to burial practices. A society’s burial customs are a reflection of its views about death and the afterlife. The ancient Egyptians, for example, thought of life after death as a continuation of physical activities in another realm, as evidenced by their elaborately furnished tombs. The ancient Hebrews emphasized a more spiritual concept of union or fellowship of the departed with generations gone on before.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GravesandTombs\">Graves and Tombs<\/p>\n<p>Among the Hebrews, location of burial plots was generally determined on a family basis. The OT contains many references to an Israelite’s desire to be buried in the family burying place, describing his death as “going to his fathers” (Gn 15:15; 1 Kgs 13:22).<\/p>\n<p>The cave of Machpelah at Hebron was one example of family “cohabitation” of a tomb for a succession of generations. Abraham purchased the site from Ephron the Hittite at the time of Sarah’s death (Gn 23). When Abraham died, Isaac and Ishmael laid his body in the same tomb (25:9), and there Jacob in turn buried his parents, Isaac and Rebekah, as well as Jacob’s wife Leah (49:31). After his death, Jacob’s body was buried with his father’s in accord with his own request (49:29; 50:13). Jacob’s son Joseph made his kinsmen promise that his remains would be preserved so they could be carried back to the homeland when God enabled his people to return from Egypt (50:25). Samuel is spoken of as being buried in his house at Ramah, evidently referring to a family graveyard plot (1 Sm 25:1). Joab was buried in his own house in the wilderness (1 Kgs 2:34). King Manasseh was buried in the garden of his palace (2 Kgs 21:18), and Joshua in his own inheritance at Timnath-serah (Jos 24:30). Kings were careful to perpetuate their memory by special burial sites, often in the City of David (the part of Jerusalem on the southeastern ridge first occupied by that great king). King Josiah designated his burial place in advance, most likely an ancestral tomb (2 Kgs 23:30).<\/p>\n<p>Individual burial sites, such as that of Deborah near Bethel (Gn 35:8) and of Rachel on the road to Ephrath (Gn 35:1, 20), were an exception necessitated by sudden death at some distance from the family tomb.<\/p>\n<p>Bodies were buried in tombs, that is, natural caves or rock-hewn sepulchers, such as that belonging to Joseph of Arimathea where the body of Jesus was laid (Mt 27:59-60). They were also buried in shallow graves covered with rock heaps, serving both to mark them and to prevent desecration of the body by animals.<\/p>\n<p>Some graves were marked by a monument erected in love (Gn 35:20) and honor (2 Kgs 23:17), but stones were sometimes heaped on a dishonorable burial place, as in the case of Achan (Jos 7:26) and Absalom (2 Sm 18:17). Tombs were often adorned or embellished, sometimes whitewashed, in part to warn against ceremonial contamination prohibited by Mosaic law. Jesus spoke of such embellishment in a rebuke of the Pharisees (Mt 23:27).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TreatmentoftheCorpse\">Treatment of the Corpse<\/p>\n<p>The assurance given by God to Jacob that “Joseph’s hand shall close your eyes” (Gn 46:4, <span>rsv<\/span>) probably alludes to the custom of a near relative closing the eyes of one who died with a fixed stare. Close relatives might also literally embrace and kiss the body immediately upon expiration. The body was washed and dressed in the deceased one’s clothing. Pins and other ornaments found in excavated tombs are evidence that the dead were buried fully clothed. Soldiers were buried in full regalia, with shields covering or cradling the armored bodies, their swords under their heads (Ez 32:27).<\/p>\n<p>Embalming was not a usual practice in Israel. Egyptian treatment for Jacob and Joseph was the exception rather than the rule. According to the Greek historian Herodotus, the Egyptians commenced embalming procedures by removing the brain from the cranium through the nasal apertures, piecemeal, using a long curved hook. When this had been done, the cranial cavity was rinsed out with a mixture of resins and spices. The corpse was eviscerated, and the entrails were placed in four canopic jars. The body was soaked in a solution of natron for a period of from 40 to 80 days, depending on the cost of the burial. At the time of interment, the corpse was wrapped in strips of fine linen cloth from head to foot and put in an anthropoid coffin. The canopic jars were placed in the tomb along with the body, symbolizing the reuniting of the personality and its survival after death.<\/p>\n<p>Cremation of the bodies of Saul and his sons (1 Sm 31:12-13) was also an exception to normal practice. The Roman historian Tacitus wrote that in contrast with Roman custom, Jewish piety required the burying rather than burning of dead bodies. Under Mosaic law such burning was reserved as a sentence of judgment (Lv 21:9; Jos 7:25).<\/p>\n<p>After preparation of the body, it was carried on a bier (a simple frame with carrying poles) without being placed in a coffin. The body was laid either in a prepared niche in the wall of a rock-hewn chamber or directly in a shallow grave dug in a burial plot. Neither bier nor any form of casket entered the pit with the corpse. The spices used as a perfume and temporary deterrent to decay cannot properly be considered an attempt at embalming (Mk 16:1).<\/p>\n<p>As we know from the Gospel record of Jesus’ burial, some cave tombs had a seal at the doorway, either a hinged wooden door or a flat stone shaped so it could be rolled into place. Such a stone seal could be reopened only with extreme effort (Mk 15:46; 16:3-4). By NT times the Jews sometimes economized on the use of a family tomb by placing the dry bones of formerly buried relatives in ossuaries. These boxlike receptacles were probably an adaptation of chests used by the Romans for holding ashes after a cremation.<\/p>\n<p>Under Mosaic legislation, ceremonial defilement was contracted either through physical contact with the corpse or by participation in the formalities of mourning. Especially stringent prohibitions applied to the priests of Israel. The high priest himself could have nothing at all to do with mourning. In particular, he “must never defile himself by going near a dead person, even if it is his father or mother. He must not desecrate the sanctuary of his God by leaving it to attend his parents’ funeral, because he has been made holy by the anointing oil of his God” (Lv 21:10-12, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Although the customs and procedures were evidently modified little from OT to NT times, some added details are given in the NT record. For example, it is noted that the corpse was washed (Acts 9:37). The body was then anointed and wrapped in linen cloths with spices enclosed (Mk 16:1; Jn 19:40). Finally, the limbs were tightly bound and the head covered with a separate piece of cloth (Jn 11:44).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Mourning; Funeral Customs.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BURIAL, BURIAL CUSTOMS* The Bible makes frequent reference to burial practices. A society’s burial customs are a reflection of its views about death and the afterlife. The ancient Egyptians, for example, thought of life after death as a continuation of physical activities in another realm, as evidenced by their elaborately furnished tombs. The ancient Hebrews emphasized a more spiritual concept of union or fellowship of the departed with generations gone on before. Graves and Tombs Among the ...","summary_en":"BURIAL, BURIAL CUSTOMS* The Bible makes frequent reference to burial practices. A society’s burial customs are a reflection of its views about death and the afterlife. The ancient Egyptians, for example, thought of life after death as a continuation of physical activities in another realm, as evidenced by their elaborately furnished tombs. The ancient Hebrews emphasized a more spiritual concept of union or fellowship of the departed with generations gone on before. Graves and Tombs Among the ...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45415,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:26","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:26<\/strong> God had not been <em>angry<\/em> without basis. God’s people must be holy. To trifle with things belonging to God signifies rebellion against God, and such sin always brings trouble (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘akor<\/span>) upon God’s people. Achan’s sin brought disaster on Israel, so the severe punishment he received was just.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:26<\/strong> God had not been <em>angry<\/em> without basis. God’s people must be holy. To trifle with things belonging to God signifies rebellion against God, and such sin always brings trouble (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘akor<\/span>) upon God’s people. Achan’s sin brought disaster on Israel, so the severe punishment he received was just.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:26 God had not been angry without basis. God’s people must be holy. To trifle with things belonging to God signifies rebellion against God, and such sin always brings trouble (‘akor) upon God’s people. Achan’s sin brought disaster on Israel, so the severe punishment he received was just.","summary_en":"7:26 God had not been angry without basis. God’s people must be holy. To trifle with things belonging to God signifies rebellion against God, and such sin always brings trouble (‘akor) upon God’s people. Achan’s sin brought disaster on Israel, so the severe punishment he received was just.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73041,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:26","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:26<\/strong> God had not been <em>angry<\/em> without basis. God’s people must be holy. To trifle with things belonging to God signifies rebellion against God, and such sin always brings trouble (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘akor<\/span>) upon God’s people. Achan’s sin brought disaster on Israel, so the severe punishment he received was just.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:26<\/strong> God had not been <em>angry<\/em> without basis. God’s people must be holy. To trifle with things belonging to God signifies rebellion against God, and such sin always brings trouble (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘akor<\/span>) upon God’s people. Achan’s sin brought disaster on Israel, so the severe punishment he received was just.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:26 God had not been angry without basis. God’s people must be holy. To trifle with things belonging to God signifies rebellion against God, and such sin always brings trouble (‘akor) upon God’s people. Achan’s sin brought disaster on Israel, so the severe punishment he received was just.","summary_en":"7:26 God had not been angry without basis. God’s people must be holy. To trifle with things belonging to God signifies rebellion against God, and such sin always brings trouble (‘akor) upon God’s people. Achan’s sin brought disaster on Israel, so the severe punishment he received was just.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100667,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:26","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:26<\/strong> God had not been <em>angry<\/em> without basis. God’s people must be holy. To trifle with things belonging to God signifies rebellion against God, and such sin always brings trouble (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘akor<\/span>) upon God’s people. Achan’s sin brought disaster on Israel, so the severe punishment he received was just.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:26<\/strong> God had not been <em>angry<\/em> without basis. God’s people must be holy. To trifle with things belonging to God signifies rebellion against God, and such sin always brings trouble (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘akor<\/span>) upon God’s people. Achan’s sin brought disaster on Israel, so the severe punishment he received was just.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:26 God had not been angry without basis. God’s people must be holy. To trifle with things belonging to God signifies rebellion against God, and such sin always brings trouble (‘akor) upon God’s people. Achan’s sin brought disaster on Israel, so the severe punishment he received was just.","summary_en":"7:26 God had not been angry without basis. God’s people must be holy. To trifle with things belonging to God signifies rebellion against God, and such sin always brings trouble (‘akor) upon God’s people. Achan’s sin brought disaster on Israel, so the severe punishment he received was just.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128293,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 7:26","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 7:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:26<\/strong> God had not been <em>angry<\/em> without basis. God’s people must be holy. To trifle with things belonging to God signifies rebellion against God, and such sin always brings trouble (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘akor<\/span>) upon God’s people. Achan’s sin brought disaster on Israel, so the severe punishment he received was just.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:26<\/strong> God had not been <em>angry<\/em> without basis. God’s people must be holy. To trifle with things belonging to God signifies rebellion against God, and such sin always brings trouble (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘akor<\/span>) upon God’s people. Achan’s sin brought disaster on Israel, so the severe punishment he received was just.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:26 God had not been angry without basis. God’s people must be holy. To trifle with things belonging to God signifies rebellion against God, and such sin always brings trouble (‘akor) upon God’s people. Achan’s sin brought disaster on Israel, so the severe punishment he received was just.","summary_en":"7:26 God had not been angry without basis. God’s people must be holy. To trifle with things belonging to God signifies rebellion against God, and such sin always brings trouble (‘akor) upon God’s people. Achan’s sin brought disaster on Israel, so the severe punishment he received was just.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}]},"labels":{"article":"Articol","map":"Hartă","chart":"Diagramă","textbox":"Notă explicativă","picture":"Imagine","profile":"Profil","study_note":"Notă de studiu","theme_note":"Temă biblică"},"icons":{"article":"📖","map":"🗺️","chart":"📊","textbox":"💡","picture":"🖼️","profile":"👤","study_note":"📝","theme_note":"🎯"},"typeColors":{"article":"#d4af37","map":"#2d7d46","chart":"#3b82f6","textbox":"#8b5cf6","picture":"#ec4899","profile":"#f59e0b","study_note":"#06b6d4","theme_note":"#ef4444"}}
🔍
Niciun rezultat
Nu am găsit versete care să conțină textul căutat.
Iosua 7
📘 Info carte
Se încarcă...
📖 Resurse
Muzică de relaxareSelectează o piesă
0:00
Redare audio
0 piese
🍪 Folosim cookie-uri
Folosim cookie-uri esențiale pentru funcționarea platformei și cookie-uri de analiză pentru a îmbunătăți experiența ta.
Află mai multe
✝️
Logosasistentul Biserica Online
✝️
Bine ai venit! 👋
Sunt Logos, prietenul tău spiritual. Începe conversația — te ascult cu drag! ✨