📖 Biblia online

Citește Biblia

Biblia audio Planuri audio structurate — ascultă Biblia zilnică

Isaia 36

¹ În al patrusprezecelea an al împăratului Ezechia, Sanherib, împăratul Asiriei, s-a suit împotriva tuturor cetăţilor întărite ale lui Iuda şi le-a luat.

² Şi împăratul Asiriei a trimes din Lachis la Ierusalim, la împăratul Ezechia, pe Rabşache, cu o puternică oştire. Rabşache s-a oprit la canalul de apă al iazului de sus, pe drumul ogorului nălbitorului.

³ Atunci Eliachim, fiul lui Hilchia, căpetenia casei împăratului, s-a dus la el, cu logofătul Şebna, şi cu Ioah, fiul lui Asaf, scriitorul (arhivarul).

⁴ Rabşache le-a zis: ,,Spuneţi lui Ezechia: ,Aşa vorbeşte marele împărat, împăratul Asiriei: ,Ce este încrederea aceasta, pe care te bizui?`

⁵ Eu îţi spun că acestea sânt vorbe în vânt: pentru război trebuie chibzuinţă şi putere. În cine ţi-ai pus dar încrederea, de te-ai răsculat împotriva mea?

⁶ Iată, ai pus-o în Egipt, ai luat ca sprijin această trestie ruptă, care înţeapă şi străpunge mâna ori cui se sprijineşte pe ea! Aşa este Faraon, împăratul Egiptului, pentru toţi ceice se încred în el.

⁷ Dar poate că îmi vei spune: ,Ne încredem în Domnul, Dumnezeul nostru!` Dar nu este El acela ale cărui înălţimi şi altare le-a îndepărtat Ezechia, zicând lui Iuda şi Ierusalimului: ,Să vă închinaţi înaintea acestui altar?`

⁸ Acum fă o învoială cu stăpânul meu, împăratul Asiriei, şi-ţi voi da două mii de cai; să vedem dacă poţi face rost de călăreţi ca să încalece pe ei!

⁹ Cum ai putea să stai tu împotriva unei singure căpetenii, dintre cei mai neânsemnaţi slujitori ai stăpânului meu? Şi totuş tu îţi pui încrederea în Egipt pentru cară şi pentru călăreţi.

¹⁰ Şi apoi, fără voia Domnului m-am suit eu împotriva ţării acesteia s-o nimicesc? Domnul mi-a zis: ,Suie-te împotriva ţării acesteia, şi nimiceşte-o!``

¹¹ Eliachim, Şebna şi Ioah au zis lui Rabşache: ,,Vorbeşte robilor tăi în limba aramaică, fiindcă o înţelegem; nu ne vorbi în limba evreiască, în auzul poporului care este pe zid.``

¹² Rabşache a răspuns: ,,Oare stăpânului tău şi ţie m-a trimes stăpânul meu să spun aceste cuvinte? Nu m-a trimes el să le spun oamenilor acestora, cari şed pe zid ca să-şi mănânce balega şi să-şi bea udul împreună cu voi?``

¹³ Apoi Rabşache a înaintat şi a strigat cu toată puterea lui în limba evreiască: ,,Ascultaţi cuvintele marelui împărat, împăratul Asiriei!

¹⁴ Aşa vorbeşte împăratul: ,Nu vă lăsaţi amăgiţi de Ezechia, căci nu va putea să vă izbăvească.

¹⁵ Nu vă lăsaţi mângâiaţi de Ezechia cu încrederea în Domnul, când vă zice: ,Domnul ne va izbăvi, şi cetatea aceasta nu va fi dată în mânile împăratului Asiriei.`

¹⁶ Nu ascultaţi pe Ezechia. Căci aşa vorbeşte împăratul Asiriei: ,Faceţi pace cu mine, supuneţi-vă mie, şi fiecare din voi va mânca din via lui şi din smochinul lui, şi va bea apă din fântâna lui,

¹⁷ până voi veni, şi vă voi lua într-o ţară ca a voastră, într-o ţară plină de grâu şi de vin, o ţară plină de pâne şi de vii.`

¹⁸ Nu vă lăsaţi amăgiţi de Ezechia, când vă zice: ,Domnul ne va izbăvi.` Oare dumnezeii neamurilor au izbăvit ei fiecare ţara lui din mâna împăratului Asiriei?

¹⁹ Unde sânt dumnezeii Hamatului şi Arpadului? Unde sânt dumnezeii din Sefarvaim? Şi unde sânt dumnezeii Samariei? Au izbăvit ei Samaria din mâna mea?

²⁰ Dintre toţi dumnezeii acestor ţări, cari din ei şi-au izbăvit ţara din mâna mea, pentruca Domnul să izbăvească Ierusalimul din mâna mea?``

²¹ Dar ei au tăcut, şi nu i-au răspuns o vorbă; căci împăratul dăduse porunca aceasta: ,,Să nu-i răspundeţi!``

²² Şi Eliachim, fiul lui Hilchia, căpetenia casei împăratului, Şebna, logofătul, şi Ioah, fiul lui Asaf, scriitorul, au venit astfel la Ezechia, cu hainele sfîşiate, şi i-au spus cuvintele lui Rabşache.

{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":41662,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Hezekiah","title_en":"Hezekiah","content_ro":"<h3>Hezekiah<\/h3>\nHezekiah, who reigned from 728 to 686 BC<\/span> was one of Judah’s best kings. Hezekiah’s father, Ahaz, betrayed the Lord, but Hezekiah promoted true worship of God. Reversing the damage done by Ahaz, he repaired the Temple doors, had the Levites sanctify themselves, and reinstated religious ceremonies. He brought sacrifices, restored the priestly Temple service, and invited people throughout Judah and Israel to celebrate Passover in Jerusalem (2 Chr 29–30). After the celebration, he faithfully destroyed pagan worship sites.<\/p>\nSoon after Hezekiah started ruling, the Assyrians under Shalmaneser V and his successor Sargon II defeated the northern kingdom, deported its inhabitants, and brought in foreign residents (722 BC<\/span>). When Sargon II died in 705 BC<\/span>, his son Sennacherib came to power, triggering widespread rebellion. Hezekiah stopped paying the tribute that his father Ahaz had paid (2 Kgs 18:7; see 16:7). As a result, in 701 BC<\/span> Sennacherib invaded Judah. Hezekiah tried to appease the Assyrian ruler by sending a vast tribute payment, but the attempted return to servitude failed and the Assyrian forces threatened Jerusalem and mocked Hezekiah’s reliance on the Lord (18:17-35). Hezekiah responded with grieving and supplication. The Lord, speaking through Isaiah the prophet, assured Hezekiah that his prayers had been heard and that Sennacherib would not conquer Jerusalem (19:1-34).<\/p>\nAround that same time, Hezekiah became seriously ill (20:1-11). Isaiah told him to prepare for death, but Hezekiah turned to the Lord and prayed for healing. The Lord promised him fifteen more years as well as deliverance from the Assyrians. When he had recovered, Hezekiah unwisely hosted the rebel Babylonian king Merodach-baladan in his palace, showing him the Temple treasures and seeking support from Babylon rather than the Lord. Isaiah predicted that those treasures would be carried off to Babylon (20:12-19).<\/p>\nAfter the Assyrian threat in 701 BC<\/span>, Hezekiah’s remaining years were peaceful and prosperous; he died in 686 BC<\/span> and was succeeded by his son Manasseh.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 18:1–20:21; 2 Chr 28:27–32:33; Isa 36:1–39:8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Hezekiah<\/h3>\nHezekiah, who reigned from 728 to 686 BC<\/span> was one of Judah’s best kings. Hezekiah’s father, Ahaz, betrayed the Lord, but Hezekiah promoted true worship of God. Reversing the damage done by Ahaz, he repaired the Temple doors, had the Levites sanctify themselves, and reinstated religious ceremonies. He brought sacrifices, restored the priestly Temple service, and invited people throughout Judah and Israel to celebrate Passover in Jerusalem (2 Chr 29–30). After the celebration, he faithfully destroyed pagan worship sites.<\/p>\nSoon after Hezekiah started ruling, the Assyrians under Shalmaneser V and his successor Sargon II defeated the northern kingdom, deported its inhabitants, and brought in foreign residents (722 BC<\/span>). When Sargon II died in 705 BC<\/span>, his son Sennacherib came to power, triggering widespread rebellion. Hezekiah stopped paying the tribute that his father Ahaz had paid (2 Kgs 18:7; see 16:7). As a result, in 701 BC<\/span> Sennacherib invaded Judah. Hezekiah tried to appease the Assyrian ruler by sending a vast tribute payment, but the attempted return to servitude failed and the Assyrian forces threatened Jerusalem and mocked Hezekiah’s reliance on the Lord (18:17-35). Hezekiah responded with grieving and supplication. The Lord, speaking through Isaiah the prophet, assured Hezekiah that his prayers had been heard and that Sennacherib would not conquer Jerusalem (19:1-34).<\/p>\nAround that same time, Hezekiah became seriously ill (20:1-11). Isaiah told him to prepare for death, but Hezekiah turned to the Lord and prayed for healing. The Lord promised him fifteen more years as well as deliverance from the Assyrians. When he had recovered, Hezekiah unwisely hosted the rebel Babylonian king Merodach-baladan in his palace, showing him the Temple treasures and seeking support from Babylon rather than the Lord. Isaiah predicted that those treasures would be carried off to Babylon (20:12-19).<\/p>\nAfter the Assyrian threat in 701 BC<\/span>, Hezekiah’s remaining years were peaceful and prosperous; he died in 686 BC<\/span> and was succeeded by his son Manasseh.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 18:1–20:21; 2 Chr 28:27–32:33; Isa 36:1–39:8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Hezekiah Hezekiah, who reigned from 728 to 686 BC was one of Judah’s best kings. Hezekiah’s father, Ahaz, betrayed the Lord, but Hezekiah promoted true worship of God. Reversing the damage done by Ahaz, he repaired the Temple doors, had the Levites sanctify themselves, and reinstated religious ceremonies. He brought sacrifices, restored the priestly Temple service, and invited people throughout Judah and Israel to celebrate Passover in Jerusalem (2 Chr 29–30). After the celebration, he faithf...","summary_en":"Hezekiah Hezekiah, who reigned from 728 to 686 BC was one of Judah’s best kings. Hezekiah’s father, Ahaz, betrayed the Lord, but Hezekiah promoted true worship of God. Reversing the damage done by Ahaz, he repaired the Temple doors, had the Levites sanctify themselves, and reinstated religious ceremonies. He brought sacrifices, restored the priestly Temple service, and invited people throughout Judah and Israel to celebrate Passover in Jerusalem (2 Chr 29–30). After the celebration, he faithf...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":41687,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Assyria","title_en":"Assyria","content_ro":"<h3>Assyria<\/h3>\nAssyria was a symbol of terror and tyranny in the Near East for more than three centuries. In the biblical account, we learn about its power and ruthlessness in its treatment of the people of Israel and Judah. But its fortune rose and fell with the strength of its leaders. Eventually, it was overpowered by those who were stronger.<\/p>\nAshurnasirpal II (885–860 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAshurnasirpal II possessed all the qualities and defects of his successors to the extreme: He had the ambition, energy, courage, vanity, and magnificence of a ruthless and unrelenting empire builder.<\/p>\nShalmaneser III (858–824 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nShalmaneser III is well known for the Battle of Qarqar (853 BC<\/span>), considered the most fully documented event from the ancient world. His invasion of Syria was repelled by a coalition that included King Ahab of Israel and several other states. It was years before Shalmaneser was able to conquer Israel and Syria. King Jehu of Israel is depicted on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III kissing the ground at his feet and offering tribute.<\/p>\nRepentance during the Time of Jonah<\/p>\nSometime during the reign of King Jeroboam II in Israel (793–753 BC<\/span>), the prophet Jonah grudgingly traveled to Nineveh to proclaim judgment (Jon 3–4). Assyria was then in decline, and as Jonah had feared, the king and people of Nineveh listened and repented of their sins. As a result, God granted them a reprieve, which lasted some 150 years.<\/p>\nTiglath-pileser III (744–727 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nTiglath-pileser III usurped the Assyrian throne and began to recover and consolidate control of all Assyria’s territories. He gained the throne of Babylon as well, establishing Assyria firmly as the dominant military and economic power in the Near East. He demonstrated political prudence not usually found in the ruthless Assyrian monarchs. King Menahem of Israel (752–742 BC<\/span>) paid him tribute (2 Kgs 15:19-20), as did Tyre, Byblos, and Damascus. Responding to an appeal from King Ahaz of Judah (735–715 BC<\/span>) to help resist Syria and Israel (2 Kgs 16:5-20), Tiglath-pileser conquered Damascus in 732 BC<\/span>. (His successor, Shalmaneser V, would destroy Samaria in 722 BC<\/span>, punctuating the end of the northern kingdom of Israel.)<\/p>\nSennacherib (705–681 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nSennacherib was occupied throughout his reign in a series of bitter wars. He is especially known in the biblical account for his campaign against Judah and siege of Jerusalem in 701 BC<\/span> during the reign of King Hezekiah and the ministry of the prophet Isaiah (2 Kgs 18:13–19:37; Isa 36–37).<\/p>\nAshurbanipal (668–627 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAshurbanipal captured No-amon (Thebes) in Egypt, thereby realizing the greatest victory in Assyrian history (see Nah 3:3-10). He also established a great library in Nineveh, which was excavated in 1860. Many tablets were found, containing a vast selection of Akkadian material. This library is now one of the principal treasures of the British Museum in London. Very little is known about Ashurbanipal’s reign after 639 BC<\/span>, since his annals do not extend beyond that year. However, allusions in state correspondence, commercial documents, and prayers addressed to the gods suggest that Assyria was becoming increasingly unstable. When Ashurbanipal died in 627 BC<\/span>, his empire declined quickly.<\/p>\nFinal Decline and Destruction<\/p>\nIn 626 BC<\/span>, Nabopolassar became king of Babylon (626–605 BC<\/span>) and formed an alliance with the Medes, making it almost inevitable that Babylon would succeed against Assyria. In 612 BC<\/span> their combined forces launched a final assault against Nineveh, and after three months of siege the mighty city fell (see Nah 1:8). The last of the Assyrian forces were completely destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar (then a general in his father’s army) at the battle of Carchemish in 605 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 15:19–19:37<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Assyria<\/h3>\nAssyria was a symbol of terror and tyranny in the Near East for more than three centuries. In the biblical account, we learn about its power and ruthlessness in its treatment of the people of Israel and Judah. But its fortune rose and fell with the strength of its leaders. Eventually, it was overpowered by those who were stronger.<\/p>\nAshurnasirpal II (885–860 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAshurnasirpal II possessed all the qualities and defects of his successors to the extreme: He had the ambition, energy, courage, vanity, and magnificence of a ruthless and unrelenting empire builder.<\/p>\nShalmaneser III (858–824 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nShalmaneser III is well known for the Battle of Qarqar (853 BC<\/span>), considered the most fully documented event from the ancient world. His invasion of Syria was repelled by a coalition that included King Ahab of Israel and several other states. It was years before Shalmaneser was able to conquer Israel and Syria. King Jehu of Israel is depicted on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III kissing the ground at his feet and offering tribute.<\/p>\nRepentance during the Time of Jonah<\/p>\nSometime during the reign of King Jeroboam II in Israel (793–753 BC<\/span>), the prophet Jonah grudgingly traveled to Nineveh to proclaim judgment (Jon 3–4). Assyria was then in decline, and as Jonah had feared, the king and people of Nineveh listened and repented of their sins. As a result, God granted them a reprieve, which lasted some 150 years.<\/p>\nTiglath-pileser III (744–727 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nTiglath-pileser III usurped the Assyrian throne and began to recover and consolidate control of all Assyria’s territories. He gained the throne of Babylon as well, establishing Assyria firmly as the dominant military and economic power in the Near East. He demonstrated political prudence not usually found in the ruthless Assyrian monarchs. King Menahem of Israel (752–742 BC<\/span>) paid him tribute (2 Kgs 15:19-20), as did Tyre, Byblos, and Damascus. Responding to an appeal from King Ahaz of Judah (735–715 BC<\/span>) to help resist Syria and Israel (2 Kgs 16:5-20), Tiglath-pileser conquered Damascus in 732 BC<\/span>. (His successor, Shalmaneser V, would destroy Samaria in 722 BC<\/span>, punctuating the end of the northern kingdom of Israel.)<\/p>\nSennacherib (705–681 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nSennacherib was occupied throughout his reign in a series of bitter wars. He is especially known in the biblical account for his campaign against Judah and siege of Jerusalem in 701 BC<\/span> during the reign of King Hezekiah and the ministry of the prophet Isaiah (2 Kgs 18:13–19:37; Isa 36–37).<\/p>\nAshurbanipal (668–627 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAshurbanipal captured No-amon (Thebes) in Egypt, thereby realizing the greatest victory in Assyrian history (see Nah 3:3-10). He also established a great library in Nineveh, which was excavated in 1860. Many tablets were found, containing a vast selection of Akkadian material. This library is now one of the principal treasures of the British Museum in London. Very little is known about Ashurbanipal’s reign after 639 BC<\/span>, since his annals do not extend beyond that year. However, allusions in state correspondence, commercial documents, and prayers addressed to the gods suggest that Assyria was becoming increasingly unstable. When Ashurbanipal died in 627 BC<\/span>, his empire declined quickly.<\/p>\nFinal Decline and Destruction<\/p>\nIn 626 BC<\/span>, Nabopolassar became king of Babylon (626–605 BC<\/span>) and formed an alliance with the Medes, making it almost inevitable that Babylon would succeed against Assyria. In 612 BC<\/span> their combined forces launched a final assault against Nineveh, and after three months of siege the mighty city fell (see Nah 1:8). The last of the Assyrian forces were completely destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar (then a general in his father’s army) at the battle of Carchemish in 605 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 15:19–19:37<\/p>","summary_ro":"Assyria Assyria was a symbol of terror and tyranny in the Near East for more than three centuries. In the biblical account, we learn about its power and ruthlessness in its treatment of the people of Israel and Judah. But its fortune rose and fell with the strength of its leaders. Eventually, it was overpowered by those who were stronger. Ashurnasirpal II (885–860 BC) Ashurnasirpal II possessed all the qualities and defects of his successors to the extreme: He had the ambition, energy, courag...","summary_en":"Assyria Assyria was a symbol of terror and tyranny in the Near East for more than three centuries. In the biblical account, we learn about its power and ruthlessness in its treatment of the people of Israel and Judah. But its fortune rose and fell with the strength of its leaders. Eventually, it was overpowered by those who were stronger. Ashurnasirpal II (885–860 BC) Ashurnasirpal II possessed all the qualities and defects of his successors to the extreme: He had the ambition, energy, courag...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69288,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Hezekiah","title_en":"Hezekiah","content_ro":"<h3>Hezekiah<\/h3>\nHezekiah, who reigned from 728 to 686 BC<\/span> was one of Judah’s best kings. Hezekiah’s father, Ahaz, betrayed the Lord, but Hezekiah promoted true worship of God. Reversing the damage done by Ahaz, he repaired the Temple doors, had the Levites sanctify themselves, and reinstated religious ceremonies. He brought sacrifices, restored the priestly Temple service, and invited people throughout Judah and Israel to celebrate Passover in Jerusalem (2 Chr 29–30). After the celebration, he faithfully destroyed pagan worship sites.<\/p>\nSoon after Hezekiah started ruling, the Assyrians under Shalmaneser V and his successor Sargon II defeated the northern kingdom, deported its inhabitants, and brought in foreign residents (722 BC<\/span>). When Sargon II died in 705 BC<\/span>, his son Sennacherib came to power, triggering widespread rebellion. Hezekiah stopped paying the tribute that his father Ahaz had paid (2 Kgs 18:7; see 16:7). As a result, in 701 BC<\/span> Sennacherib invaded Judah. Hezekiah tried to appease the Assyrian ruler by sending a vast tribute payment, but the attempted return to servitude failed and the Assyrian forces threatened Jerusalem and mocked Hezekiah’s reliance on the Lord (18:17-35). Hezekiah responded with grieving and supplication. The Lord, speaking through Isaiah the prophet, assured Hezekiah that his prayers had been heard and that Sennacherib would not conquer Jerusalem (19:1-34).<\/p>\nAround that same time, Hezekiah became seriously ill (20:1-11). Isaiah told him to prepare for death, but Hezekiah turned to the Lord and prayed for healing. The Lord promised him fifteen more years as well as deliverance from the Assyrians. When he had recovered, Hezekiah unwisely hosted the rebel Babylonian king Merodach-baladan in his palace, showing him the Temple treasures and seeking support from Babylon rather than the Lord. Isaiah predicted that those treasures would be carried off to Babylon (20:12-19).<\/p>\nAfter the Assyrian threat in 701 BC<\/span>, Hezekiah’s remaining years were peaceful and prosperous; he died in 686 BC<\/span> and was succeeded by his son Manasseh.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 18:1–20:21; 2 Chr 28:27–32:33; Isa 36:1–39:8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Hezekiah<\/h3>\nHezekiah, who reigned from 728 to 686 BC<\/span> was one of Judah’s best kings. Hezekiah’s father, Ahaz, betrayed the Lord, but Hezekiah promoted true worship of God. Reversing the damage done by Ahaz, he repaired the Temple doors, had the Levites sanctify themselves, and reinstated religious ceremonies. He brought sacrifices, restored the priestly Temple service, and invited people throughout Judah and Israel to celebrate Passover in Jerusalem (2 Chr 29–30). After the celebration, he faithfully destroyed pagan worship sites.<\/p>\nSoon after Hezekiah started ruling, the Assyrians under Shalmaneser V and his successor Sargon II defeated the northern kingdom, deported its inhabitants, and brought in foreign residents (722 BC<\/span>). When Sargon II died in 705 BC<\/span>, his son Sennacherib came to power, triggering widespread rebellion. Hezekiah stopped paying the tribute that his father Ahaz had paid (2 Kgs 18:7; see 16:7). As a result, in 701 BC<\/span> Sennacherib invaded Judah. Hezekiah tried to appease the Assyrian ruler by sending a vast tribute payment, but the attempted return to servitude failed and the Assyrian forces threatened Jerusalem and mocked Hezekiah’s reliance on the Lord (18:17-35). Hezekiah responded with grieving and supplication. The Lord, speaking through Isaiah the prophet, assured Hezekiah that his prayers had been heard and that Sennacherib would not conquer Jerusalem (19:1-34).<\/p>\nAround that same time, Hezekiah became seriously ill (20:1-11). Isaiah told him to prepare for death, but Hezekiah turned to the Lord and prayed for healing. The Lord promised him fifteen more years as well as deliverance from the Assyrians. When he had recovered, Hezekiah unwisely hosted the rebel Babylonian king Merodach-baladan in his palace, showing him the Temple treasures and seeking support from Babylon rather than the Lord. Isaiah predicted that those treasures would be carried off to Babylon (20:12-19).<\/p>\nAfter the Assyrian threat in 701 BC<\/span>, Hezekiah’s remaining years were peaceful and prosperous; he died in 686 BC<\/span> and was succeeded by his son Manasseh.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 18:1–20:21; 2 Chr 28:27–32:33; Isa 36:1–39:8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Hezekiah Hezekiah, who reigned from 728 to 686 BC was one of Judah’s best kings. Hezekiah’s father, Ahaz, betrayed the Lord, but Hezekiah promoted true worship of God. Reversing the damage done by Ahaz, he repaired the Temple doors, had the Levites sanctify themselves, and reinstated religious ceremonies. He brought sacrifices, restored the priestly Temple service, and invited people throughout Judah and Israel to celebrate Passover in Jerusalem (2 Chr 29–30). After the celebration, he faithf...","summary_en":"Hezekiah Hezekiah, who reigned from 728 to 686 BC was one of Judah’s best kings. Hezekiah’s father, Ahaz, betrayed the Lord, but Hezekiah promoted true worship of God. Reversing the damage done by Ahaz, he repaired the Temple doors, had the Levites sanctify themselves, and reinstated religious ceremonies. He brought sacrifices, restored the priestly Temple service, and invited people throughout Judah and Israel to celebrate Passover in Jerusalem (2 Chr 29–30). After the celebration, he faithf...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69313,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Assyria","title_en":"Assyria","content_ro":"<h3>Assyria<\/h3>\nAssyria was a symbol of terror and tyranny in the Near East for more than three centuries. In the biblical account, we learn about its power and ruthlessness in its treatment of the people of Israel and Judah. But its fortune rose and fell with the strength of its leaders. Eventually, it was overpowered by those who were stronger.<\/p>\nAshurnasirpal II (885–860 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAshurnasirpal II possessed all the qualities and defects of his successors to the extreme: He had the ambition, energy, courage, vanity, and magnificence of a ruthless and unrelenting empire builder.<\/p>\nShalmaneser III (858–824 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nShalmaneser III is well known for the Battle of Qarqar (853 BC<\/span>), considered the most fully documented event from the ancient world. His invasion of Syria was repelled by a coalition that included King Ahab of Israel and several other states. It was years before Shalmaneser was able to conquer Israel and Syria. King Jehu of Israel is depicted on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III kissing the ground at his feet and offering tribute.<\/p>\nRepentance during the Time of Jonah<\/p>\nSometime during the reign of King Jeroboam II in Israel (793–753 BC<\/span>), the prophet Jonah grudgingly traveled to Nineveh to proclaim judgment (Jon 3–4). Assyria was then in decline, and as Jonah had feared, the king and people of Nineveh listened and repented of their sins. As a result, God granted them a reprieve, which lasted some 150 years.<\/p>\nTiglath-pileser III (744–727 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nTiglath-pileser III usurped the Assyrian throne and began to recover and consolidate control of all Assyria’s territories. He gained the throne of Babylon as well, establishing Assyria firmly as the dominant military and economic power in the Near East. He demonstrated political prudence not usually found in the ruthless Assyrian monarchs. King Menahem of Israel (752–742 BC<\/span>) paid him tribute (2 Kgs 15:19-20), as did Tyre, Byblos, and Damascus. Responding to an appeal from King Ahaz of Judah (735–715 BC<\/span>) to help resist Syria and Israel (2 Kgs 16:5-20), Tiglath-pileser conquered Damascus in 732 BC<\/span>. (His successor, Shalmaneser V, would destroy Samaria in 722 BC<\/span>, punctuating the end of the northern kingdom of Israel.)<\/p>\nSennacherib (705–681 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nSennacherib was occupied throughout his reign in a series of bitter wars. He is especially known in the biblical account for his campaign against Judah and siege of Jerusalem in 701 BC<\/span> during the reign of King Hezekiah and the ministry of the prophet Isaiah (2 Kgs 18:13–19:37; Isa 36–37).<\/p>\nAshurbanipal (668–627 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAshurbanipal captured No-amon (Thebes) in Egypt, thereby realizing the greatest victory in Assyrian history (see Nah 3:3-10). He also established a great library in Nineveh, which was excavated in 1860. Many tablets were found, containing a vast selection of Akkadian material. This library is now one of the principal treasures of the British Museum in London. Very little is known about Ashurbanipal’s reign after 639 BC<\/span>, since his annals do not extend beyond that year. However, allusions in state correspondence, commercial documents, and prayers addressed to the gods suggest that Assyria was becoming increasingly unstable. When Ashurbanipal died in 627 BC<\/span>, his empire declined quickly.<\/p>\nFinal Decline and Destruction<\/p>\nIn 626 BC<\/span>, Nabopolassar became king of Babylon (626–605 BC<\/span>) and formed an alliance with the Medes, making it almost inevitable that Babylon would succeed against Assyria. In 612 BC<\/span> their combined forces launched a final assault against Nineveh, and after three months of siege the mighty city fell (see Nah 1:8). The last of the Assyrian forces were completely destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar (then a general in his father’s army) at the battle of Carchemish in 605 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 15:19–19:37<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Assyria<\/h3>\nAssyria was a symbol of terror and tyranny in the Near East for more than three centuries. In the biblical account, we learn about its power and ruthlessness in its treatment of the people of Israel and Judah. But its fortune rose and fell with the strength of its leaders. Eventually, it was overpowered by those who were stronger.<\/p>\nAshurnasirpal II (885–860 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAshurnasirpal II possessed all the qualities and defects of his successors to the extreme: He had the ambition, energy, courage, vanity, and magnificence of a ruthless and unrelenting empire builder.<\/p>\nShalmaneser III (858–824 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nShalmaneser III is well known for the Battle of Qarqar (853 BC<\/span>), considered the most fully documented event from the ancient world. His invasion of Syria was repelled by a coalition that included King Ahab of Israel and several other states. It was years before Shalmaneser was able to conquer Israel and Syria. King Jehu of Israel is depicted on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III kissing the ground at his feet and offering tribute.<\/p>\nRepentance during the Time of Jonah<\/p>\nSometime during the reign of King Jeroboam II in Israel (793–753 BC<\/span>), the prophet Jonah grudgingly traveled to Nineveh to proclaim judgment (Jon 3–4). Assyria was then in decline, and as Jonah had feared, the king and people of Nineveh listened and repented of their sins. As a result, God granted them a reprieve, which lasted some 150 years.<\/p>\nTiglath-pileser III (744–727 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nTiglath-pileser III usurped the Assyrian throne and began to recover and consolidate control of all Assyria’s territories. He gained the throne of Babylon as well, establishing Assyria firmly as the dominant military and economic power in the Near East. He demonstrated political prudence not usually found in the ruthless Assyrian monarchs. King Menahem of Israel (752–742 BC<\/span>) paid him tribute (2 Kgs 15:19-20), as did Tyre, Byblos, and Damascus. Responding to an appeal from King Ahaz of Judah (735–715 BC<\/span>) to help resist Syria and Israel (2 Kgs 16:5-20), Tiglath-pileser conquered Damascus in 732 BC<\/span>. (His successor, Shalmaneser V, would destroy Samaria in 722 BC<\/span>, punctuating the end of the northern kingdom of Israel.)<\/p>\nSennacherib (705–681 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nSennacherib was occupied throughout his reign in a series of bitter wars. He is especially known in the biblical account for his campaign against Judah and siege of Jerusalem in 701 BC<\/span> during the reign of King Hezekiah and the ministry of the prophet Isaiah (2 Kgs 18:13–19:37; Isa 36–37).<\/p>\nAshurbanipal (668–627 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAshurbanipal captured No-amon (Thebes) in Egypt, thereby realizing the greatest victory in Assyrian history (see Nah 3:3-10). He also established a great library in Nineveh, which was excavated in 1860. Many tablets were found, containing a vast selection of Akkadian material. This library is now one of the principal treasures of the British Museum in London. Very little is known about Ashurbanipal’s reign after 639 BC<\/span>, since his annals do not extend beyond that year. However, allusions in state correspondence, commercial documents, and prayers addressed to the gods suggest that Assyria was becoming increasingly unstable. When Ashurbanipal died in 627 BC<\/span>, his empire declined quickly.<\/p>\nFinal Decline and Destruction<\/p>\nIn 626 BC<\/span>, Nabopolassar became king of Babylon (626–605 BC<\/span>) and formed an alliance with the Medes, making it almost inevitable that Babylon would succeed against Assyria. In 612 BC<\/span> their combined forces launched a final assault against Nineveh, and after three months of siege the mighty city fell (see Nah 1:8). The last of the Assyrian forces were completely destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar (then a general in his father’s army) at the battle of Carchemish in 605 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 15:19–19:37<\/p>","summary_ro":"Assyria Assyria was a symbol of terror and tyranny in the Near East for more than three centuries. In the biblical account, we learn about its power and ruthlessness in its treatment of the people of Israel and Judah. But its fortune rose and fell with the strength of its leaders. Eventually, it was overpowered by those who were stronger. Ashurnasirpal II (885–860 BC) Ashurnasirpal II possessed all the qualities and defects of his successors to the extreme: He had the ambition, energy, courag...","summary_en":"Assyria Assyria was a symbol of terror and tyranny in the Near East for more than three centuries. In the biblical account, we learn about its power and ruthlessness in its treatment of the people of Israel and Judah. But its fortune rose and fell with the strength of its leaders. Eventually, it was overpowered by those who were stronger. Ashurnasirpal II (885–860 BC) Ashurnasirpal II possessed all the qualities and defects of his successors to the extreme: He had the ambition, energy, courag...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":96914,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Hezekiah","title_en":"Hezekiah","content_ro":"<h3>Hezekiah<\/h3>\nHezekiah, who reigned from 728 to 686 BC<\/span> was one of Judah’s best kings. Hezekiah’s father, Ahaz, betrayed the Lord, but Hezekiah promoted true worship of God. Reversing the damage done by Ahaz, he repaired the Temple doors, had the Levites sanctify themselves, and reinstated religious ceremonies. He brought sacrifices, restored the priestly Temple service, and invited people throughout Judah and Israel to celebrate Passover in Jerusalem (2 Chr 29–30). After the celebration, he faithfully destroyed pagan worship sites.<\/p>\nSoon after Hezekiah started ruling, the Assyrians under Shalmaneser V and his successor Sargon II defeated the northern kingdom, deported its inhabitants, and brought in foreign residents (722 BC<\/span>). When Sargon II died in 705 BC<\/span>, his son Sennacherib came to power, triggering widespread rebellion. Hezekiah stopped paying the tribute that his father Ahaz had paid (2 Kgs 18:7; see 16:7). As a result, in 701 BC<\/span> Sennacherib invaded Judah. Hezekiah tried to appease the Assyrian ruler by sending a vast tribute payment, but the attempted return to servitude failed and the Assyrian forces threatened Jerusalem and mocked Hezekiah’s reliance on the Lord (18:17-35). Hezekiah responded with grieving and supplication. The Lord, speaking through Isaiah the prophet, assured Hezekiah that his prayers had been heard and that Sennacherib would not conquer Jerusalem (19:1-34).<\/p>\nAround that same time, Hezekiah became seriously ill (20:1-11). Isaiah told him to prepare for death, but Hezekiah turned to the Lord and prayed for healing. The Lord promised him fifteen more years as well as deliverance from the Assyrians. When he had recovered, Hezekiah unwisely hosted the rebel Babylonian king Merodach-baladan in his palace, showing him the Temple treasures and seeking support from Babylon rather than the Lord. Isaiah predicted that those treasures would be carried off to Babylon (20:12-19).<\/p>\nAfter the Assyrian threat in 701 BC<\/span>, Hezekiah’s remaining years were peaceful and prosperous; he died in 686 BC<\/span> and was succeeded by his son Manasseh.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 18:1–20:21; 2 Chr 28:27–32:33; Isa 36:1–39:8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Hezekiah<\/h3>\nHezekiah, who reigned from 728 to 686 BC<\/span> was one of Judah’s best kings. Hezekiah’s father, Ahaz, betrayed the Lord, but Hezekiah promoted true worship of God. Reversing the damage done by Ahaz, he repaired the Temple doors, had the Levites sanctify themselves, and reinstated religious ceremonies. He brought sacrifices, restored the priestly Temple service, and invited people throughout Judah and Israel to celebrate Passover in Jerusalem (2 Chr 29–30). After the celebration, he faithfully destroyed pagan worship sites.<\/p>\nSoon after Hezekiah started ruling, the Assyrians under Shalmaneser V and his successor Sargon II defeated the northern kingdom, deported its inhabitants, and brought in foreign residents (722 BC<\/span>). When Sargon II died in 705 BC<\/span>, his son Sennacherib came to power, triggering widespread rebellion. Hezekiah stopped paying the tribute that his father Ahaz had paid (2 Kgs 18:7; see 16:7). As a result, in 701 BC<\/span> Sennacherib invaded Judah. Hezekiah tried to appease the Assyrian ruler by sending a vast tribute payment, but the attempted return to servitude failed and the Assyrian forces threatened Jerusalem and mocked Hezekiah’s reliance on the Lord (18:17-35). Hezekiah responded with grieving and supplication. The Lord, speaking through Isaiah the prophet, assured Hezekiah that his prayers had been heard and that Sennacherib would not conquer Jerusalem (19:1-34).<\/p>\nAround that same time, Hezekiah became seriously ill (20:1-11). Isaiah told him to prepare for death, but Hezekiah turned to the Lord and prayed for healing. The Lord promised him fifteen more years as well as deliverance from the Assyrians. When he had recovered, Hezekiah unwisely hosted the rebel Babylonian king Merodach-baladan in his palace, showing him the Temple treasures and seeking support from Babylon rather than the Lord. Isaiah predicted that those treasures would be carried off to Babylon (20:12-19).<\/p>\nAfter the Assyrian threat in 701 BC<\/span>, Hezekiah’s remaining years were peaceful and prosperous; he died in 686 BC<\/span> and was succeeded by his son Manasseh.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 18:1–20:21; 2 Chr 28:27–32:33; Isa 36:1–39:8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Hezekiah Hezekiah, who reigned from 728 to 686 BC was one of Judah’s best kings. Hezekiah’s father, Ahaz, betrayed the Lord, but Hezekiah promoted true worship of God. Reversing the damage done by Ahaz, he repaired the Temple doors, had the Levites sanctify themselves, and reinstated religious ceremonies. He brought sacrifices, restored the priestly Temple service, and invited people throughout Judah and Israel to celebrate Passover in Jerusalem (2 Chr 29–30). After the celebration, he faithf...","summary_en":"Hezekiah Hezekiah, who reigned from 728 to 686 BC was one of Judah’s best kings. Hezekiah’s father, Ahaz, betrayed the Lord, but Hezekiah promoted true worship of God. Reversing the damage done by Ahaz, he repaired the Temple doors, had the Levites sanctify themselves, and reinstated religious ceremonies. He brought sacrifices, restored the priestly Temple service, and invited people throughout Judah and Israel to celebrate Passover in Jerusalem (2 Chr 29–30). After the celebration, he faithf...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":96939,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Assyria","title_en":"Assyria","content_ro":"<h3>Assyria<\/h3>\nAssyria was a symbol of terror and tyranny in the Near East for more than three centuries. In the biblical account, we learn about its power and ruthlessness in its treatment of the people of Israel and Judah. But its fortune rose and fell with the strength of its leaders. Eventually, it was overpowered by those who were stronger.<\/p>\nAshurnasirpal II (885–860 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAshurnasirpal II possessed all the qualities and defects of his successors to the extreme: He had the ambition, energy, courage, vanity, and magnificence of a ruthless and unrelenting empire builder.<\/p>\nShalmaneser III (858–824 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nShalmaneser III is well known for the Battle of Qarqar (853 BC<\/span>), considered the most fully documented event from the ancient world. His invasion of Syria was repelled by a coalition that included King Ahab of Israel and several other states. It was years before Shalmaneser was able to conquer Israel and Syria. King Jehu of Israel is depicted on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III kissing the ground at his feet and offering tribute.<\/p>\nRepentance during the Time of Jonah<\/p>\nSometime during the reign of King Jeroboam II in Israel (793–753 BC<\/span>), the prophet Jonah grudgingly traveled to Nineveh to proclaim judgment (Jon 3–4). Assyria was then in decline, and as Jonah had feared, the king and people of Nineveh listened and repented of their sins. As a result, God granted them a reprieve, which lasted some 150 years.<\/p>\nTiglath-pileser III (744–727 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nTiglath-pileser III usurped the Assyrian throne and began to recover and consolidate control of all Assyria’s territories. He gained the throne of Babylon as well, establishing Assyria firmly as the dominant military and economic power in the Near East. He demonstrated political prudence not usually found in the ruthless Assyrian monarchs. King Menahem of Israel (752–742 BC<\/span>) paid him tribute (2 Kgs 15:19-20), as did Tyre, Byblos, and Damascus. Responding to an appeal from King Ahaz of Judah (735–715 BC<\/span>) to help resist Syria and Israel (2 Kgs 16:5-20), Tiglath-pileser conquered Damascus in 732 BC<\/span>. (His successor, Shalmaneser V, would destroy Samaria in 722 BC<\/span>, punctuating the end of the northern kingdom of Israel.)<\/p>\nSennacherib (705–681 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nSennacherib was occupied throughout his reign in a series of bitter wars. He is especially known in the biblical account for his campaign against Judah and siege of Jerusalem in 701 BC<\/span> during the reign of King Hezekiah and the ministry of the prophet Isaiah (2 Kgs 18:13–19:37; Isa 36–37).<\/p>\nAshurbanipal (668–627 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAshurbanipal captured No-amon (Thebes) in Egypt, thereby realizing the greatest victory in Assyrian history (see Nah 3:3-10). He also established a great library in Nineveh, which was excavated in 1860. Many tablets were found, containing a vast selection of Akkadian material. This library is now one of the principal treasures of the British Museum in London. Very little is known about Ashurbanipal’s reign after 639 BC<\/span>, since his annals do not extend beyond that year. However, allusions in state correspondence, commercial documents, and prayers addressed to the gods suggest that Assyria was becoming increasingly unstable. When Ashurbanipal died in 627 BC<\/span>, his empire declined quickly.<\/p>\nFinal Decline and Destruction<\/p>\nIn 626 BC<\/span>, Nabopolassar became king of Babylon (626–605 BC<\/span>) and formed an alliance with the Medes, making it almost inevitable that Babylon would succeed against Assyria. In 612 BC<\/span> their combined forces launched a final assault against Nineveh, and after three months of siege the mighty city fell (see Nah 1:8). The last of the Assyrian forces were completely destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar (then a general in his father’s army) at the battle of Carchemish in 605 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 15:19–19:37<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Assyria<\/h3>\nAssyria was a symbol of terror and tyranny in the Near East for more than three centuries. In the biblical account, we learn about its power and ruthlessness in its treatment of the people of Israel and Judah. But its fortune rose and fell with the strength of its leaders. Eventually, it was overpowered by those who were stronger.<\/p>\nAshurnasirpal II (885–860 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAshurnasirpal II possessed all the qualities and defects of his successors to the extreme: He had the ambition, energy, courage, vanity, and magnificence of a ruthless and unrelenting empire builder.<\/p>\nShalmaneser III (858–824 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nShalmaneser III is well known for the Battle of Qarqar (853 BC<\/span>), considered the most fully documented event from the ancient world. His invasion of Syria was repelled by a coalition that included King Ahab of Israel and several other states. It was years before Shalmaneser was able to conquer Israel and Syria. King Jehu of Israel is depicted on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III kissing the ground at his feet and offering tribute.<\/p>\nRepentance during the Time of Jonah<\/p>\nSometime during the reign of King Jeroboam II in Israel (793–753 BC<\/span>), the prophet Jonah grudgingly traveled to Nineveh to proclaim judgment (Jon 3–4). Assyria was then in decline, and as Jonah had feared, the king and people of Nineveh listened and repented of their sins. As a result, God granted them a reprieve, which lasted some 150 years.<\/p>\nTiglath-pileser III (744–727 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nTiglath-pileser III usurped the Assyrian throne and began to recover and consolidate control of all Assyria’s territories. He gained the throne of Babylon as well, establishing Assyria firmly as the dominant military and economic power in the Near East. He demonstrated political prudence not usually found in the ruthless Assyrian monarchs. King Menahem of Israel (752–742 BC<\/span>) paid him tribute (2 Kgs 15:19-20), as did Tyre, Byblos, and Damascus. Responding to an appeal from King Ahaz of Judah (735–715 BC<\/span>) to help resist Syria and Israel (2 Kgs 16:5-20), Tiglath-pileser conquered Damascus in 732 BC<\/span>. (His successor, Shalmaneser V, would destroy Samaria in 722 BC<\/span>, punctuating the end of the northern kingdom of Israel.)<\/p>\nSennacherib (705–681 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nSennacherib was occupied throughout his reign in a series of bitter wars. He is especially known in the biblical account for his campaign against Judah and siege of Jerusalem in 701 BC<\/span> during the reign of King Hezekiah and the ministry of the prophet Isaiah (2 Kgs 18:13–19:37; Isa 36–37).<\/p>\nAshurbanipal (668–627 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAshurbanipal captured No-amon (Thebes) in Egypt, thereby realizing the greatest victory in Assyrian history (see Nah 3:3-10). He also established a great library in Nineveh, which was excavated in 1860. Many tablets were found, containing a vast selection of Akkadian material. This library is now one of the principal treasures of the British Museum in London. Very little is known about Ashurbanipal’s reign after 639 BC<\/span>, since his annals do not extend beyond that year. However, allusions in state correspondence, commercial documents, and prayers addressed to the gods suggest that Assyria was becoming increasingly unstable. When Ashurbanipal died in 627 BC<\/span>, his empire declined quickly.<\/p>\nFinal Decline and Destruction<\/p>\nIn 626 BC<\/span>, Nabopolassar became king of Babylon (626–605 BC<\/span>) and formed an alliance with the Medes, making it almost inevitable that Babylon would succeed against Assyria. In 612 BC<\/span> their combined forces launched a final assault against Nineveh, and after three months of siege the mighty city fell (see Nah 1:8). The last of the Assyrian forces were completely destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar (then a general in his father’s army) at the battle of Carchemish in 605 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 15:19–19:37<\/p>","summary_ro":"Assyria Assyria was a symbol of terror and tyranny in the Near East for more than three centuries. In the biblical account, we learn about its power and ruthlessness in its treatment of the people of Israel and Judah. But its fortune rose and fell with the strength of its leaders. Eventually, it was overpowered by those who were stronger. Ashurnasirpal II (885–860 BC) Ashurnasirpal II possessed all the qualities and defects of his successors to the extreme: He had the ambition, energy, courag...","summary_en":"Assyria Assyria was a symbol of terror and tyranny in the Near East for more than three centuries. In the biblical account, we learn about its power and ruthlessness in its treatment of the people of Israel and Judah. But its fortune rose and fell with the strength of its leaders. Eventually, it was overpowered by those who were stronger. Ashurnasirpal II (885–860 BC) Ashurnasirpal II possessed all the qualities and defects of his successors to the extreme: He had the ambition, energy, courag...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124540,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Hezekiah","title_en":"Hezekiah","content_ro":"<h3>Hezekiah<\/h3>\nHezekiah, who reigned from 728 to 686 BC<\/span> was one of Judah’s best kings. Hezekiah’s father, Ahaz, betrayed the Lord, but Hezekiah promoted true worship of God. Reversing the damage done by Ahaz, he repaired the Temple doors, had the Levites sanctify themselves, and reinstated religious ceremonies. He brought sacrifices, restored the priestly Temple service, and invited people throughout Judah and Israel to celebrate Passover in Jerusalem (2 Chr 29–30). After the celebration, he faithfully destroyed pagan worship sites.<\/p>\nSoon after Hezekiah started ruling, the Assyrians under Shalmaneser V and his successor Sargon II defeated the northern kingdom, deported its inhabitants, and brought in foreign residents (722 BC<\/span>). When Sargon II died in 705 BC<\/span>, his son Sennacherib came to power, triggering widespread rebellion. Hezekiah stopped paying the tribute that his father Ahaz had paid (2 Kgs 18:7; see 16:7). As a result, in 701 BC<\/span> Sennacherib invaded Judah. Hezekiah tried to appease the Assyrian ruler by sending a vast tribute payment, but the attempted return to servitude failed and the Assyrian forces threatened Jerusalem and mocked Hezekiah’s reliance on the Lord (18:17-35). Hezekiah responded with grieving and supplication. The Lord, speaking through Isaiah the prophet, assured Hezekiah that his prayers had been heard and that Sennacherib would not conquer Jerusalem (19:1-34).<\/p>\nAround that same time, Hezekiah became seriously ill (20:1-11). Isaiah told him to prepare for death, but Hezekiah turned to the Lord and prayed for healing. The Lord promised him fifteen more years as well as deliverance from the Assyrians. When he had recovered, Hezekiah unwisely hosted the rebel Babylonian king Merodach-baladan in his palace, showing him the Temple treasures and seeking support from Babylon rather than the Lord. Isaiah predicted that those treasures would be carried off to Babylon (20:12-19).<\/p>\nAfter the Assyrian threat in 701 BC<\/span>, Hezekiah’s remaining years were peaceful and prosperous; he died in 686 BC<\/span> and was succeeded by his son Manasseh.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 18:1–20:21; 2 Chr 28:27–32:33; Isa 36:1–39:8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Hezekiah<\/h3>\nHezekiah, who reigned from 728 to 686 BC<\/span> was one of Judah’s best kings. Hezekiah’s father, Ahaz, betrayed the Lord, but Hezekiah promoted true worship of God. Reversing the damage done by Ahaz, he repaired the Temple doors, had the Levites sanctify themselves, and reinstated religious ceremonies. He brought sacrifices, restored the priestly Temple service, and invited people throughout Judah and Israel to celebrate Passover in Jerusalem (2 Chr 29–30). After the celebration, he faithfully destroyed pagan worship sites.<\/p>\nSoon after Hezekiah started ruling, the Assyrians under Shalmaneser V and his successor Sargon II defeated the northern kingdom, deported its inhabitants, and brought in foreign residents (722 BC<\/span>). When Sargon II died in 705 BC<\/span>, his son Sennacherib came to power, triggering widespread rebellion. Hezekiah stopped paying the tribute that his father Ahaz had paid (2 Kgs 18:7; see 16:7). As a result, in 701 BC<\/span> Sennacherib invaded Judah. Hezekiah tried to appease the Assyrian ruler by sending a vast tribute payment, but the attempted return to servitude failed and the Assyrian forces threatened Jerusalem and mocked Hezekiah’s reliance on the Lord (18:17-35). Hezekiah responded with grieving and supplication. The Lord, speaking through Isaiah the prophet, assured Hezekiah that his prayers had been heard and that Sennacherib would not conquer Jerusalem (19:1-34).<\/p>\nAround that same time, Hezekiah became seriously ill (20:1-11). Isaiah told him to prepare for death, but Hezekiah turned to the Lord and prayed for healing. The Lord promised him fifteen more years as well as deliverance from the Assyrians. When he had recovered, Hezekiah unwisely hosted the rebel Babylonian king Merodach-baladan in his palace, showing him the Temple treasures and seeking support from Babylon rather than the Lord. Isaiah predicted that those treasures would be carried off to Babylon (20:12-19).<\/p>\nAfter the Assyrian threat in 701 BC<\/span>, Hezekiah’s remaining years were peaceful and prosperous; he died in 686 BC<\/span> and was succeeded by his son Manasseh.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 18:1–20:21; 2 Chr 28:27–32:33; Isa 36:1–39:8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Hezekiah Hezekiah, who reigned from 728 to 686 BC was one of Judah’s best kings. Hezekiah’s father, Ahaz, betrayed the Lord, but Hezekiah promoted true worship of God. Reversing the damage done by Ahaz, he repaired the Temple doors, had the Levites sanctify themselves, and reinstated religious ceremonies. He brought sacrifices, restored the priestly Temple service, and invited people throughout Judah and Israel to celebrate Passover in Jerusalem (2 Chr 29–30). After the celebration, he faithf...","summary_en":"Hezekiah Hezekiah, who reigned from 728 to 686 BC was one of Judah’s best kings. Hezekiah’s father, Ahaz, betrayed the Lord, but Hezekiah promoted true worship of God. Reversing the damage done by Ahaz, he repaired the Temple doors, had the Levites sanctify themselves, and reinstated religious ceremonies. He brought sacrifices, restored the priestly Temple service, and invited people throughout Judah and Israel to celebrate Passover in Jerusalem (2 Chr 29–30). After the celebration, he faithf...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124565,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Assyria","title_en":"Assyria","content_ro":"<h3>Assyria<\/h3>\nAssyria was a symbol of terror and tyranny in the Near East for more than three centuries. In the biblical account, we learn about its power and ruthlessness in its treatment of the people of Israel and Judah. But its fortune rose and fell with the strength of its leaders. Eventually, it was overpowered by those who were stronger.<\/p>\nAshurnasirpal II (885–860 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAshurnasirpal II possessed all the qualities and defects of his successors to the extreme: He had the ambition, energy, courage, vanity, and magnificence of a ruthless and unrelenting empire builder.<\/p>\nShalmaneser III (858–824 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nShalmaneser III is well known for the Battle of Qarqar (853 BC<\/span>), considered the most fully documented event from the ancient world. His invasion of Syria was repelled by a coalition that included King Ahab of Israel and several other states. It was years before Shalmaneser was able to conquer Israel and Syria. King Jehu of Israel is depicted on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III kissing the ground at his feet and offering tribute.<\/p>\nRepentance during the Time of Jonah<\/p>\nSometime during the reign of King Jeroboam II in Israel (793–753 BC<\/span>), the prophet Jonah grudgingly traveled to Nineveh to proclaim judgment (Jon 3–4). Assyria was then in decline, and as Jonah had feared, the king and people of Nineveh listened and repented of their sins. As a result, God granted them a reprieve, which lasted some 150 years.<\/p>\nTiglath-pileser III (744–727 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nTiglath-pileser III usurped the Assyrian throne and began to recover and consolidate control of all Assyria’s territories. He gained the throne of Babylon as well, establishing Assyria firmly as the dominant military and economic power in the Near East. He demonstrated political prudence not usually found in the ruthless Assyrian monarchs. King Menahem of Israel (752–742 BC<\/span>) paid him tribute (2 Kgs 15:19-20), as did Tyre, Byblos, and Damascus. Responding to an appeal from King Ahaz of Judah (735–715 BC<\/span>) to help resist Syria and Israel (2 Kgs 16:5-20), Tiglath-pileser conquered Damascus in 732 BC<\/span>. (His successor, Shalmaneser V, would destroy Samaria in 722 BC<\/span>, punctuating the end of the northern kingdom of Israel.)<\/p>\nSennacherib (705–681 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nSennacherib was occupied throughout his reign in a series of bitter wars. He is especially known in the biblical account for his campaign against Judah and siege of Jerusalem in 701 BC<\/span> during the reign of King Hezekiah and the ministry of the prophet Isaiah (2 Kgs 18:13–19:37; Isa 36–37).<\/p>\nAshurbanipal (668–627 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAshurbanipal captured No-amon (Thebes) in Egypt, thereby realizing the greatest victory in Assyrian history (see Nah 3:3-10). He also established a great library in Nineveh, which was excavated in 1860. Many tablets were found, containing a vast selection of Akkadian material. This library is now one of the principal treasures of the British Museum in London. Very little is known about Ashurbanipal’s reign after 639 BC<\/span>, since his annals do not extend beyond that year. However, allusions in state correspondence, commercial documents, and prayers addressed to the gods suggest that Assyria was becoming increasingly unstable. When Ashurbanipal died in 627 BC<\/span>, his empire declined quickly.<\/p>\nFinal Decline and Destruction<\/p>\nIn 626 BC<\/span>, Nabopolassar became king of Babylon (626–605 BC<\/span>) and formed an alliance with the Medes, making it almost inevitable that Babylon would succeed against Assyria. In 612 BC<\/span> their combined forces launched a final assault against Nineveh, and after three months of siege the mighty city fell (see Nah 1:8). The last of the Assyrian forces were completely destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar (then a general in his father’s army) at the battle of Carchemish in 605 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 15:19–19:37<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Assyria<\/h3>\nAssyria was a symbol of terror and tyranny in the Near East for more than three centuries. In the biblical account, we learn about its power and ruthlessness in its treatment of the people of Israel and Judah. But its fortune rose and fell with the strength of its leaders. Eventually, it was overpowered by those who were stronger.<\/p>\nAshurnasirpal II (885–860 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAshurnasirpal II possessed all the qualities and defects of his successors to the extreme: He had the ambition, energy, courage, vanity, and magnificence of a ruthless and unrelenting empire builder.<\/p>\nShalmaneser III (858–824 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nShalmaneser III is well known for the Battle of Qarqar (853 BC<\/span>), considered the most fully documented event from the ancient world. His invasion of Syria was repelled by a coalition that included King Ahab of Israel and several other states. It was years before Shalmaneser was able to conquer Israel and Syria. King Jehu of Israel is depicted on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III kissing the ground at his feet and offering tribute.<\/p>\nRepentance during the Time of Jonah<\/p>\nSometime during the reign of King Jeroboam II in Israel (793–753 BC<\/span>), the prophet Jonah grudgingly traveled to Nineveh to proclaim judgment (Jon 3–4). Assyria was then in decline, and as Jonah had feared, the king and people of Nineveh listened and repented of their sins. As a result, God granted them a reprieve, which lasted some 150 years.<\/p>\nTiglath-pileser III (744–727 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nTiglath-pileser III usurped the Assyrian throne and began to recover and consolidate control of all Assyria’s territories. He gained the throne of Babylon as well, establishing Assyria firmly as the dominant military and economic power in the Near East. He demonstrated political prudence not usually found in the ruthless Assyrian monarchs. King Menahem of Israel (752–742 BC<\/span>) paid him tribute (2 Kgs 15:19-20), as did Tyre, Byblos, and Damascus. Responding to an appeal from King Ahaz of Judah (735–715 BC<\/span>) to help resist Syria and Israel (2 Kgs 16:5-20), Tiglath-pileser conquered Damascus in 732 BC<\/span>. (His successor, Shalmaneser V, would destroy Samaria in 722 BC<\/span>, punctuating the end of the northern kingdom of Israel.)<\/p>\nSennacherib (705–681 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nSennacherib was occupied throughout his reign in a series of bitter wars. He is especially known in the biblical account for his campaign against Judah and siege of Jerusalem in 701 BC<\/span> during the reign of King Hezekiah and the ministry of the prophet Isaiah (2 Kgs 18:13–19:37; Isa 36–37).<\/p>\nAshurbanipal (668–627 BC<\/span>)<\/p>\nAshurbanipal captured No-amon (Thebes) in Egypt, thereby realizing the greatest victory in Assyrian history (see Nah 3:3-10). He also established a great library in Nineveh, which was excavated in 1860. Many tablets were found, containing a vast selection of Akkadian material. This library is now one of the principal treasures of the British Museum in London. Very little is known about Ashurbanipal’s reign after 639 BC<\/span>, since his annals do not extend beyond that year. However, allusions in state correspondence, commercial documents, and prayers addressed to the gods suggest that Assyria was becoming increasingly unstable. When Ashurbanipal died in 627 BC<\/span>, his empire declined quickly.<\/p>\nFinal Decline and Destruction<\/p>\nIn 626 BC<\/span>, Nabopolassar became king of Babylon (626–605 BC<\/span>) and formed an alliance with the Medes, making it almost inevitable that Babylon would succeed against Assyria. In 612 BC<\/span> their combined forces launched a final assault against Nineveh, and after three months of siege the mighty city fell (see Nah 1:8). The last of the Assyrian forces were completely destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar (then a general in his father’s army) at the battle of Carchemish in 605 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 15:19–19:37<\/p>","summary_ro":"Assyria Assyria was a symbol of terror and tyranny in the Near East for more than three centuries. In the biblical account, we learn about its power and ruthlessness in its treatment of the people of Israel and Judah. But its fortune rose and fell with the strength of its leaders. Eventually, it was overpowered by those who were stronger. Ashurnasirpal II (885–860 BC) Ashurnasirpal II possessed all the qualities and defects of his successors to the extreme: He had the ambition, energy, courag...","summary_en":"Assyria Assyria was a symbol of terror and tyranny in the Near East for more than three centuries. In the biblical account, we learn about its power and ruthlessness in its treatment of the people of Israel and Judah. But its fortune rose and fell with the strength of its leaders. Eventually, it was overpowered by those who were stronger. Ashurnasirpal II (885–860 BC) Ashurnasirpal II possessed all the qualities and defects of his successors to the extreme: He had the ambition, energy, courag...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":3093,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Assyrians Assyria","title_en":"Assyrians Assyria","content_ro":"<h3>ASSYRIA, ASSYRIANS<\/h3>\nAncient empire considered the symbol of terror and tyranny in the Near East for more than three centuries. Assyria received its name from the tiny city-state Asshur, on the western bank of the Tigris River in northern Mesopotamia (modern Iraq). The city was the seat of worship of the sun god Asshur (also spelled Ashur). The Hebrew name occurs frequently in the Bible and is translated Assyria (Gn 2:14), Assur (Ezr 4:2; Ps 83:8), or left as Asshur (Gn 10:11, kjv<\/span>). The form of the name comes originally from the Akkadian language.<\/p>\nOriginally, Assyria was a small district in northern Mesopotamia, lying in a rough triangle between the Tigris River and the Upper Zab, a tributary of the Tigris. Eventually Assyria gained control of northern Syria, securing an outlet to the Mediterranean Sea, and took possession of the fertile Mesopotamian plain, extending Assyrian domain over all of Babylonia to the Persian Gulf.<\/p>\nHistory<\/p>\n<h5>Before the Eighth Century BC<\/span><\/h5>\nBy the end of the third millennium BC<\/span>, the Sumerians were trading with Assyria and influencing its people culturally. Periodically Sumerian kings would claim political control over Assyria. Sargon of Agade (c. 2350 BC<\/span>) brought Assyria within the sphere of his political and commercial activities, and when the Amorites overthrew the third dynasty of Ur and established their own states, one of them incorporated Assyria into its territory. During the period of Hammurabi, one of the last great kings of the first Babylonian dynasty (c. 2360–1600 BC<\/span>), the Assyrians supplied building materials and other goods for the Babylonian kingdom.<\/p>\nTrade between Asshur and the Assyrian colony of Kanish in Anatolia began at a very early time in Assyrian history. Goods were transported by caravans of up to 200 donkeys at a time. The wealth pouring in from such a trade put Assyria in a very strong position economically.<\/p>\nThe early phase of Assyrian commercial development was followed by a long period of decline, culminating in the 15th century BC<\/span>. At that time Assyria was reduced to a state of vassalage by a non-Semitic people, the Hurrians (biblical Horites) of the state of Mitanni. In the 14th century another non-Semitic people, the Hittites, overthrew the power of Mitanni. Assyria was gradually able to rise again and assume the role of a great power in the ancient Near East, largely through the policies of a shrewd prince, Asshur-uballit. His reign marked the beginning of a long process by which Assyria ultimately rose to supremacy.<\/p>\nEnlil-nirari (1329–1320 BC<\/span>), son and successor of Asshur-uballit, attacked Babylon and defeated Kurigalzu II, the Kassite king of Babylon (1345–1324 BC<\/span>). Adad-nirari I (1307–1275 BC<\/span>) extended Assyria’s influence by winning victories over the Kassites in Babylonia. He also added territory to the northwest.<\/p>\nThe period of consolidation and expansion in the first Assyrian Empire culminated in the capture of Babylon by Tukulti-ninurta I (1244–1208 BC<\/span>), which for the first time placed Babylon under Assyrian rule. After that climax, however, Assyrian power declined.<\/p>\nThe three centuries from about 1200 to 900 BC<\/span> were marked by movements of different peoples such as the Greeks, Philistines, Arameans, and Hebrews. Under pressure of people migrating from Europe, the Hittite Empire, which formerly had given political stability to Asia Minor and protected the trade routes, crumbled rapidly. By 1200 BC<\/span> it fell to attacks by the Sea Peoples from the Greek mainland.<\/p>\nDuring the tenth century BC<\/span>, Assyria began to make a slow recovery. In the reign of Adad-nirari II (911–891 BC<\/span>), Assyria again launched upon a period of conspicuous economic and military expansion. For the next 60 years Assyrian kings followed a consistent policy of consolidating the work of Adad-nirari II. Ashurnasirpal II (885–860 BC<\/span>) is considered the first great monarch of that new era in Assyrian history. He possessed all the qualities and defects of his successors to the extreme. He had the ambition, energy, courage, vanity, and magnificence of a ruthless, indefatigable empire builder. Ashurnasirpal’s first activities were directed to the mountain area to the east, where he extended Assyria’s control among the mountain people. In the west he subdued the Arameans with characteristic cruelty and did likewise in Asia Minor.<\/p>\nShalmaneser III is well known to historians of the biblical world for the battle of Qarqar (853 BC<\/span>), considered the most fully documented event from the ancient world. He launched an invasion of Syria that was met by a coalition led by Ben-hadad of Damascus and supported by King Ahab of Israel and several other states. Since Shalmaneser was unable to rout the 60,000 troops opposing him, it was many years before the Assyrians were able to conquer Damascus and Samaria. King Jehu of Israel (841–814 BC<\/span>), who later chose to pay tribute rather than fight, is represented, perhaps by an envoy, on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III, excavated at Shalmaneser’s capital city, Calah (now called Nimrud). Jehu is depicted as kissing the ground at the Assyrian monarch’s feet and offering a tribute of silver, gold, and lead vessels.<\/p>\nToward the end of his reign Shalmaneser had to put down a rebellion by some of the principal Assyrian cities. He was succeeded by his heir, Shamshi-adad V (823–811 BC<\/span>). Shamshi-adad’s son Adad-nirari III (810–782 BC<\/span>) built a new palace at Calah and attacked King Hazael of Damascus (Syria) in 804 BC<\/span>. Assyrian pressure on the Syrians undoubtedly was a relief to Israel, which had been oppressed by Hazael (2 Kgs 13:22-25).<\/p>\n<h5>From the Eighth Century to the Battle of Carchemish (605 BC<\/span>)<\/h5>\nBeginning about 800 BC<\/span> the influence of Urartu (Ararat) began to expand, especially in north Syria, at the expense of Assyria. The next half century saw a drastic decline in Assyria’s fortunes. In 746 BC<\/span>, during a revolt in the city of Calah, the entire royal family was murdered.<\/p>\nThe final phase of Assyrian power was instituted by the usurper Tiglath-pileser III (745–727 BC<\/span>), known also by his adopted Babylonian throne-name Pul (2 Kgs 15:19; 1 Chr 5:26). His reign began the process by which Assyria recovered and consolidated control of all its territories and established itself firmly as the dominant military and economic power in the Near East. Tiglath-pileser first secured control of the mountain passes in the north in order to eliminate the threat of invasion from that direction. Next he subjected Syria and Palestine in the west and took control of the road to Egypt and the Mediterranean Sea. Finally, through diplomacy, he gained the throne of Babylonia also. Under the name of Pul he governed Babylonia, creating the remarkable situation of two crowns united in one ruler bearing two different names. His political prudence was not usually found in the ruthless Assyrian monarchs.<\/p>\nFrom the year 743 BC<\/span> Tiglath-pileser III waged a number of campaigns in Syria and Palestine. King Menahem of Israel (752–742 BC<\/span>) paid him tribute (2 Kgs 15:19-20), as did Tyre, Byblos, and Damascus. In 738 he subjugated the north central state of Hamath. Responding to an appeal from King Ahaz of Judah (735–715 BC<\/span>) to help resist the pressures of a proposed anti-Assyrian coalition, Tiglath-pileser conquered Damascus in 732 and Samaria, capital of the northern kingdom of Israel, a decade later. On both occasions deportations of people to Assyria took place. The fall of Samaria in 722 BC<\/span> marked the end of the kingdom of Israel.<\/p>\nSargon II (722–705 BC<\/span>) claimed to be the Assyrian ruler who captured Samaria, but the biblical record attributed the capture to Shalmaneser (2 Kgs 17:2-6). To the policy of deportation, Sargon and his successors added that of colonization. To replace the peoples carried into captivity, these Assyrian kings brought tribes from Babylonia, Elam, Syria, and Arabia and settled them in Samaria and surrounding territory. The new arrivals intermingled with the indigenous people remaining in the land after the deportation and became the Samaritans.<\/p>\nAfter 10 years of warfare against his enemies to the west in Syria and Asia Minor, and to the north in Urartu, Sargon concentrated his efforts on Babylonia. He chased Merodach-baladan II (721–710 BC<\/span>; cf. 2 Kgs 20:12-19; Is 39:1) to Elam and made himself king of Babylon in 709. He started building a new capital city for himself, Dur-Sharrukin (Khorsabad) near Nineveh but was killed in battle before it was finished.<\/p>\nSargon was succeeded by his son Sennacherib (705–681 BC<\/span>), who was occupied throughout his reign in a series of bitter wars. He is especially known in biblical studies for his campaign against Judah and siege of Jerusalem during the reign of King Hezekiah (715–686 BC<\/span>) and the ministry of the prophet Isaiah (2 Kgs 18:13–19:37; Is 36–37). It was during that crisis that the celebrated Siloam Tunnel was constructed to bring water into the beleaguered capital from the spring of Gihon, outside the city wall, to the pool of Siloam (2 Kgs 20:20).<\/p>\nSennacherib was murdered in 681 BC<\/span> and was succeeded by Esarhaddon, who tried unsuccessfully to establish Assyrian control over Egypt. Esarhaddon was succeeded by Ashurbanipal (669–626? BC<\/span>), who managed to capture No-amon (Thebes), thereby realizing the greatest victory in Assyrian history (cf. Na 3:3-10). Ashurbanipal established a great library in Nineveh, which was excavated in 1860. Many tablets made of the finest clay and ranging in size from 1 to 15 inches (2.5 to 38 centimeters) were found, containing a vast selection of Akkadian material. Some of the tablets contain historical records; others, astronomical reports, mathematical calculations, and private or public letters. A considerable part of the collection deals with astrology and medicine. Many of the tablets contain prayers, incantations, psalms, and religious texts in general. A copy of the Babylonian account of creation was also found. This library is now one of the principal treasures of the British Museum in London.<\/p>\nVery little is known about Ashurbanipal’s reign after 639 BC<\/span> since his annals do not extend beyond that year. However, some information on events of his last 13 years can be gleaned from allusions in state correspondence, commercial documents, and prayers addressed to the gods. Evidently the situation in Assyria was becoming increasingly serious, and when Ashurbanipal died in 626 his empire declined quickly.<\/p>\nThe Medes had entered the Assyrian annals during the reign of Esarhaddon, when they still consisted of a large number of associated but separate tribes. Later those tribes began to be welded into a single kingdom. Herodotus states that Phraortes, their king, attacked Assyria but lost his life on the battlefield and was succeeded by his son Cyaxeres.<\/p>\nThe year 626 BC<\/span> marked several important events in the ancient world. Nabopolassar, a Chaldean prince, became king of Babylon (626–605 BC<\/span>) toward the end of that year. An alliance between the Medes and Nabopolassar was concluded, and from that time on, the success of Nabopolassar against Assyria was almost inevitable. By the year 617 BC<\/span> he had cleared Babylonia of all Assyrian garrisons. He then marched up the Euphrates to the Aramean districts that had been part of the Assyrian Empire for two and a half centuries. The plan was for Nabopolassar to attack Nineveh from the west and the Medes to attack it at the same time from the east; however, the combined forces of the Assyrians and Egyptians, now allies, compelled Nabopolassar to withdraw to Babylon.<\/p>\nIn 614 BC<\/span> the Medes carried out a massive attack on Assyria. Although Nineveh was too strong to yield to the attack, the Medes captured some of the neighboring cities, including Asshur, the ancient capital. At that point Nabopolassar arrived with the Babylonian forces. He met Cyaxeres at Asshur, and they established mutual friendship and peace. Their alliance was later confirmed by the marriage of Nebuchadnezzar, Nabopolassar’s son, to Amytis, daughter of Cyaxeres. In 612 BC<\/span> their combined forces launched a final assault against Nineveh, and after three months of siege the mighty city fell (Na 1:8).<\/p>\nDespite the loss of their capital, a weakened Assyrian kingdom survived for three more years. The Assyrian troops who could escape from Nineveh fled westward to Haran, where an Assyrian prince, Asshur-uballit, was made king and sought Egypt’s help to restore the kingship of Assyria. Necho II (609–593 BC<\/span>), known in the Bible as Neco, responded and set off with his Egyptian troops to Haran to fight against the Babylonians, who by now had annihilated Assyria. King Josiah of Judah (640–609 BC<\/span>), who evidently considered himself a vassal of Assyria’s heir, Neo-Babylonia, marched to oppose the Egyptian advance and was mortally wounded by an arrow on the battlefield of Megiddo (2 Kgs 23:29-30; 2 Chr 35:20-24).<\/p>\nWhen Nabopolassar and his allies attacked Haran in 610 BC<\/span>, Asshur-uballit did not attempt to defend it but fled southwest to await Necho and his troops. The joint forces of the Egyptians and the Assyrians returned to mount an assault upon Haran with some initial success. But Nabopolassar’s army compelled the Assyrian-Egyptian forces to abandon the siege and withdraw to Carchemish (present-day Jarablus). There, under the leadership of Nebuchadnezzar, the Babylonians made a direct attack on the powerful army. The resultant carnage on both sides was graphically depicted by the prophet Jeremiah (46:1-12). Nebuchadnezzar emerged victorious in the battle of Carchemish (605 BC<\/span>). However, because of the death of his father, he did not pursue his victory but returned to Babylon to assume the throne.<\/p>\nThere is a tradition in the Assyrian Christian church that after the collapse of the Assyrian Empire under the onslaught of the Medes and Neo-Babylonians, a remnant of the Assyrian people—chiefly princes, noblemen, and warriors—took refuge in the mountains of Kurdistan. There they built a number of armed fortresses. Alexander the Great (336–323 BC<\/span>), his successors, and the Roman legions made no attempt to conquer these tribes. Trajan (AD<\/span> 98–117) marched at the head of the Roman armies through Armenia, touching the northern region of Kurdistan, on his way to Persia. It is asserted that the wise men, or magi, who visited the newly born king in Bethlehem, the baby Jesus, came from Edessa. According to this tradition, the magi, on returning from Bethlehem, proclaimed the amazing things they had heard and seen on their visit to the king. A Christian church was founded among the Assyrians that has survived throughout the centuries.<\/p>\nThe region that was Assyria, including all of Mesopotamia, is within present-day Iraq, an Arabic-speaking country predominantly Muslim in religion.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Israel, History of; Kings, Books of First and Second; Mesopotamia.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ASSYRIA, ASSYRIANS<\/h3>\nAncient empire considered the symbol of terror and tyranny in the Near East for more than three centuries. Assyria received its name from the tiny city-state Asshur, on the western bank of the Tigris River in northern Mesopotamia (modern Iraq). The city was the seat of worship of the sun god Asshur (also spelled Ashur). The Hebrew name occurs frequently in the Bible and is translated Assyria (Gn 2:14), Assur (Ezr 4:2; Ps 83:8), or left as Asshur (Gn 10:11, kjv<\/span>). The form of the name comes originally from the Akkadian language.<\/p>\nOriginally, Assyria was a small district in northern Mesopotamia, lying in a rough triangle between the Tigris River and the Upper Zab, a tributary of the Tigris. Eventually Assyria gained control of northern Syria, securing an outlet to the Mediterranean Sea, and took possession of the fertile Mesopotamian plain, extending Assyrian domain over all of Babylonia to the Persian Gulf.<\/p>\nHistory<\/p>\n<h5>Before the Eighth Century BC<\/span><\/h5>\nBy the end of the third millennium BC<\/span>, the Sumerians were trading with Assyria and influencing its people culturally. Periodically Sumerian kings would claim political control over Assyria. Sargon of Agade (c. 2350 BC<\/span>) brought Assyria within the sphere of his political and commercial activities, and when the Amorites overthrew the third dynasty of Ur and established their own states, one of them incorporated Assyria into its territory. During the period of Hammurabi, one of the last great kings of the first Babylonian dynasty (c. 2360–1600 BC<\/span>), the Assyrians supplied building materials and other goods for the Babylonian kingdom.<\/p>\nTrade between Asshur and the Assyrian colony of Kanish in Anatolia began at a very early time in Assyrian history. Goods were transported by caravans of up to 200 donkeys at a time. The wealth pouring in from such a trade put Assyria in a very strong position economically.<\/p>\nThe early phase of Assyrian commercial development was followed by a long period of decline, culminating in the 15th century BC<\/span>. At that time Assyria was reduced to a state of vassalage by a non-Semitic people, the Hurrians (biblical Horites) of the state of Mitanni. In the 14th century another non-Semitic people, the Hittites, overthrew the power of Mitanni. Assyria was gradually able to rise again and assume the role of a great power in the ancient Near East, largely through the policies of a shrewd prince, Asshur-uballit. His reign marked the beginning of a long process by which Assyria ultimately rose to supremacy.<\/p>\nEnlil-nirari (1329–1320 BC<\/span>), son and successor of Asshur-uballit, attacked Babylon and defeated Kurigalzu II, the Kassite king of Babylon (1345–1324 BC<\/span>). Adad-nirari I (1307–1275 BC<\/span>) extended Assyria’s influence by winning victories over the Kassites in Babylonia. He also added territory to the northwest.<\/p>\nThe period of consolidation and expansion in the first Assyrian Empire culminated in the capture of Babylon by Tukulti-ninurta I (1244–1208 BC<\/span>), which for the first time placed Babylon under Assyrian rule. After that climax, however, Assyrian power declined.<\/p>\nThe three centuries from about 1200 to 900 BC<\/span> were marked by movements of different peoples such as the Greeks, Philistines, Arameans, and Hebrews. Under pressure of people migrating from Europe, the Hittite Empire, which formerly had given political stability to Asia Minor and protected the trade routes, crumbled rapidly. By 1200 BC<\/span> it fell to attacks by the Sea Peoples from the Greek mainland.<\/p>\nDuring the tenth century BC<\/span>, Assyria began to make a slow recovery. In the reign of Adad-nirari II (911–891 BC<\/span>), Assyria again launched upon a period of conspicuous economic and military expansion. For the next 60 years Assyrian kings followed a consistent policy of consolidating the work of Adad-nirari II. Ashurnasirpal II (885–860 BC<\/span>) is considered the first great monarch of that new era in Assyrian history. He possessed all the qualities and defects of his successors to the extreme. He had the ambition, energy, courage, vanity, and magnificence of a ruthless, indefatigable empire builder. Ashurnasirpal’s first activities were directed to the mountain area to the east, where he extended Assyria’s control among the mountain people. In the west he subdued the Arameans with characteristic cruelty and did likewise in Asia Minor.<\/p>\nShalmaneser III is well known to historians of the biblical world for the battle of Qarqar (853 BC<\/span>), considered the most fully documented event from the ancient world. He launched an invasion of Syria that was met by a coalition led by Ben-hadad of Damascus and supported by King Ahab of Israel and several other states. Since Shalmaneser was unable to rout the 60,000 troops opposing him, it was many years before the Assyrians were able to conquer Damascus and Samaria. King Jehu of Israel (841–814 BC<\/span>), who later chose to pay tribute rather than fight, is represented, perhaps by an envoy, on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III, excavated at Shalmaneser’s capital city, Calah (now called Nimrud). Jehu is depicted as kissing the ground at the Assyrian monarch’s feet and offering a tribute of silver, gold, and lead vessels.<\/p>\nToward the end of his reign Shalmaneser had to put down a rebellion by some of the principal Assyrian cities. He was succeeded by his heir, Shamshi-adad V (823–811 BC<\/span>). Shamshi-adad’s son Adad-nirari III (810–782 BC<\/span>) built a new palace at Calah and attacked King Hazael of Damascus (Syria) in 804 BC<\/span>. Assyrian pressure on the Syrians undoubtedly was a relief to Israel, which had been oppressed by Hazael (2 Kgs 13:22-25).<\/p>\n<h5>From the Eighth Century to the Battle of Carchemish (605 BC<\/span>)<\/h5>\nBeginning about 800 BC<\/span> the influence of Urartu (Ararat) began to expand, especially in north Syria, at the expense of Assyria. The next half century saw a drastic decline in Assyria’s fortunes. In 746 BC<\/span>, during a revolt in the city of Calah, the entire royal family was murdered.<\/p>\nThe final phase of Assyrian power was instituted by the usurper Tiglath-pileser III (745–727 BC<\/span>), known also by his adopted Babylonian throne-name Pul (2 Kgs 15:19; 1 Chr 5:26). His reign began the process by which Assyria recovered and consolidated control of all its territories and established itself firmly as the dominant military and economic power in the Near East. Tiglath-pileser first secured control of the mountain passes in the north in order to eliminate the threat of invasion from that direction. Next he subjected Syria and Palestine in the west and took control of the road to Egypt and the Mediterranean Sea. Finally, through diplomacy, he gained the throne of Babylonia also. Under the name of Pul he governed Babylonia, creating the remarkable situation of two crowns united in one ruler bearing two different names. His political prudence was not usually found in the ruthless Assyrian monarchs.<\/p>\nFrom the year 743 BC<\/span> Tiglath-pileser III waged a number of campaigns in Syria and Palestine. King Menahem of Israel (752–742 BC<\/span>) paid him tribute (2 Kgs 15:19-20), as did Tyre, Byblos, and Damascus. In 738 he subjugated the north central state of Hamath. Responding to an appeal from King Ahaz of Judah (735–715 BC<\/span>) to help resist the pressures of a proposed anti-Assyrian coalition, Tiglath-pileser conquered Damascus in 732 and Samaria, capital of the northern kingdom of Israel, a decade later. On both occasions deportations of people to Assyria took place. The fall of Samaria in 722 BC<\/span> marked the end of the kingdom of Israel.<\/p>\nSargon II (722–705 BC<\/span>) claimed to be the Assyrian ruler who captured Samaria, but the biblical record attributed the capture to Shalmaneser (2 Kgs 17:2-6). To the policy of deportation, Sargon and his successors added that of colonization. To replace the peoples carried into captivity, these Assyrian kings brought tribes from Babylonia, Elam, Syria, and Arabia and settled them in Samaria and surrounding territory. The new arrivals intermingled with the indigenous people remaining in the land after the deportation and became the Samaritans.<\/p>\nAfter 10 years of warfare against his enemies to the west in Syria and Asia Minor, and to the north in Urartu, Sargon concentrated his efforts on Babylonia. He chased Merodach-baladan II (721–710 BC<\/span>; cf. 2 Kgs 20:12-19; Is 39:1) to Elam and made himself king of Babylon in 709. He started building a new capital city for himself, Dur-Sharrukin (Khorsabad) near Nineveh but was killed in battle before it was finished.<\/p>\nSargon was succeeded by his son Sennacherib (705–681 BC<\/span>), who was occupied throughout his reign in a series of bitter wars. He is especially known in biblical studies for his campaign against Judah and siege of Jerusalem during the reign of King Hezekiah (715–686 BC<\/span>) and the ministry of the prophet Isaiah (2 Kgs 18:13–19:37; Is 36–37). It was during that crisis that the celebrated Siloam Tunnel was constructed to bring water into the beleaguered capital from the spring of Gihon, outside the city wall, to the pool of Siloam (2 Kgs 20:20).<\/p>\nSennacherib was murdered in 681 BC<\/span> and was succeeded by Esarhaddon, who tried unsuccessfully to establish Assyrian control over Egypt. Esarhaddon was succeeded by Ashurbanipal (669–626? BC<\/span>), who managed to capture No-amon (Thebes), thereby realizing the greatest victory in Assyrian history (cf. Na 3:3-10). Ashurbanipal established a great library in Nineveh, which was excavated in 1860. Many tablets made of the finest clay and ranging in size from 1 to 15 inches (2.5 to 38 centimeters) were found, containing a vast selection of Akkadian material. Some of the tablets contain historical records; others, astronomical reports, mathematical calculations, and private or public letters. A considerable part of the collection deals with astrology and medicine. Many of the tablets contain prayers, incantations, psalms, and religious texts in general. A copy of the Babylonian account of creation was also found. This library is now one of the principal treasures of the British Museum in London.<\/p>\nVery little is known about Ashurbanipal’s reign after 639 BC<\/span> since his annals do not extend beyond that year. However, some information on events of his last 13 years can be gleaned from allusions in state correspondence, commercial documents, and prayers addressed to the gods. Evidently the situation in Assyria was becoming increasingly serious, and when Ashurbanipal died in 626 his empire declined quickly.<\/p>\nThe Medes had entered the Assyrian annals during the reign of Esarhaddon, when they still consisted of a large number of associated but separate tribes. Later those tribes began to be welded into a single kingdom. Herodotus states that Phraortes, their king, attacked Assyria but lost his life on the battlefield and was succeeded by his son Cyaxeres.<\/p>\nThe year 626 BC<\/span> marked several important events in the ancient world. Nabopolassar, a Chaldean prince, became king of Babylon (626–605 BC<\/span>) toward the end of that year. An alliance between the Medes and Nabopolassar was concluded, and from that time on, the success of Nabopolassar against Assyria was almost inevitable. By the year 617 BC<\/span> he had cleared Babylonia of all Assyrian garrisons. He then marched up the Euphrates to the Aramean districts that had been part of the Assyrian Empire for two and a half centuries. The plan was for Nabopolassar to attack Nineveh from the west and the Medes to attack it at the same time from the east; however, the combined forces of the Assyrians and Egyptians, now allies, compelled Nabopolassar to withdraw to Babylon.<\/p>\nIn 614 BC<\/span> the Medes carried out a massive attack on Assyria. Although Nineveh was too strong to yield to the attack, the Medes captured some of the neighboring cities, including Asshur, the ancient capital. At that point Nabopolassar arrived with the Babylonian forces. He met Cyaxeres at Asshur, and they established mutual friendship and peace. Their alliance was later confirmed by the marriage of Nebuchadnezzar, Nabopolassar’s son, to Amytis, daughter of Cyaxeres. In 612 BC<\/span> their combined forces launched a final assault against Nineveh, and after three months of siege the mighty city fell (Na 1:8).<\/p>\nDespite the loss of their capital, a weakened Assyrian kingdom survived for three more years. The Assyrian troops who could escape from Nineveh fled westward to Haran, where an Assyrian prince, Asshur-uballit, was made king and sought Egypt’s help to restore the kingship of Assyria. Necho II (609–593 BC<\/span>), known in the Bible as Neco, responded and set off with his Egyptian troops to Haran to fight against the Babylonians, who by now had annihilated Assyria. King Josiah of Judah (640–609 BC<\/span>), who evidently considered himself a vassal of Assyria’s heir, Neo-Babylonia, marched to oppose the Egyptian advance and was mortally wounded by an arrow on the battlefield of Megiddo (2 Kgs 23:29-30; 2 Chr 35:20-24).<\/p>\nWhen Nabopolassar and his allies attacked Haran in 610 BC<\/span>, Asshur-uballit did not attempt to defend it but fled southwest to await Necho and his troops. The joint forces of the Egyptians and the Assyrians returned to mount an assault upon Haran with some initial success. But Nabopolassar’s army compelled the Assyrian-Egyptian forces to abandon the siege and withdraw to Carchemish (present-day Jarablus). There, under the leadership of Nebuchadnezzar, the Babylonians made a direct attack on the powerful army. The resultant carnage on both sides was graphically depicted by the prophet Jeremiah (46:1-12). Nebuchadnezzar emerged victorious in the battle of Carchemish (605 BC<\/span>). However, because of the death of his father, he did not pursue his victory but returned to Babylon to assume the throne.<\/p>\nThere is a tradition in the Assyrian Christian church that after the collapse of the Assyrian Empire under the onslaught of the Medes and Neo-Babylonians, a remnant of the Assyrian people—chiefly princes, noblemen, and warriors—took refuge in the mountains of Kurdistan. There they built a number of armed fortresses. Alexander the Great (336–323 BC<\/span>), his successors, and the Roman legions made no attempt to conquer these tribes. Trajan (AD<\/span> 98–117) marched at the head of the Roman armies through Armenia, touching the northern region of Kurdistan, on his way to Persia. It is asserted that the wise men, or magi, who visited the newly born king in Bethlehem, the baby Jesus, came from Edessa. According to this tradition, the magi, on returning from Bethlehem, proclaimed the amazing things they had heard and seen on their visit to the king. A Christian church was founded among the Assyrians that has survived throughout the centuries.<\/p>\nThe region that was Assyria, including all of Mesopotamia, is within present-day Iraq, an Arabic-speaking country predominantly Muslim in religion.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Israel, History of; Kings, Books of First and Second; Mesopotamia.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ASSYRIA, ASSYRIANS Ancient empire considered the symbol of terror and tyranny in the Near East for more than three centuries. Assyria received its name from the tiny city-state Asshur, on the western bank of the Tigris River in northern Mesopotamia (modern Iraq). The city was the seat of worship of the sun god Asshur (also spelled Ashur). The Hebrew name occurs frequently in the Bible and is translated Assyria (Gn 2:14), Assur (Ezr 4:2; Ps 83:8), or left as Asshur (Gn 10:11, kjv). The form of...","summary_en":"ASSYRIA, ASSYRIANS Ancient empire considered the symbol of terror and tyranny in the Near East for more than three centuries. Assyria received its name from the tiny city-state Asshur, on the western bank of the Tigris River in northern Mesopotamia (modern Iraq). The city was the seat of worship of the sun god Asshur (also spelled Ashur). The Hebrew name occurs frequently in the Bible and is translated Assyria (Gn 2:14), Assur (Ezr 4:2; Ps 83:8), or left as Asshur (Gn 10:11, kjv). The form of...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":6452,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Bible* (Old Testament), Chronology","title_en":"of the Bible* (Old Testament), Chronology","content_ro":"<h3>CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (Old Testament)<\/h3>\nBranch of biblical studies that attempts to assign dates and sequences to OT events. Chronology is a science. It deals with evidence, theories, assumptions, and the balance of probabilities. Often it boils down to a matter of choosing among theories that are equally unable to solve all the problems raised by other points of view. OT chronology is an accredited branch of biblical studies primarily because it is essential for understanding the proper historical background of the biblical texts. In general, the chronology of the OT is understood well enough to vindicate the basic accuracy and sequential order of Scripture.<\/p>\nBoth biblical and nonbiblical materials are utilized by students of OT chronology. Biblical data include (1) genealogies showing personal and tribal affiliations among various peoples; (2) specific numbers given by biblical authors to indicate a person’s longevity, a king’s reign, or the duration of a specific event; (3) synchronizing statements that date an event in a specific year of a king’s reign or relate it to a natural phenomenon assumed to be common knowledge at the time of writing (e.g., Am 1:1; Zec 14:5).<\/p>\nFrom the abundance of such chronological passages in the OT, one might conclude that establishment of OT dates and sequences would be a simple procedure. Each of the three kinds of biblical materials, however, exhibits special problems that must be solved first.<\/p>\nNonbiblical materials that shed light on OT chronology are quite numerous, and more are discovered year by year. They include (1) official records of important affairs such as military campaigns from countries like Egypt or Babylonia; (2) official inscriptions that are dedicatory or commemorate a great victory; (3) annals listing major accomplishments of a ruler year by year; (4) ostraca (inscribed pieces of pottery) containing letters, tax transactions and economic records, military dispatches between field leaders and command headquarters, or other information. Ostraca may be dated archaeologically and are often used to supplement the biblical record.<\/p>\nThe chronologist tries to examine the pertinent biblical and nonbiblical information, notes areas of correlation among all the data, and finally establishes a working system into which the most facts can be fitted. New evidence uncovered at any time may necessitate shifts in the present working system. Although the basic structure of biblical chronology seems reasonably firm, many details will no doubt be subject to change as new evidence is discovered.<\/p>\nAs a general rule, the earlier the period, the less certain one can be of one’s dating. In the second millennium BC<\/span>, for example, many dates can be assigned within a range of about 100 years. By the time of David and Solomon (c. 1000 BC<\/span>), the margin of error over which scholars debate is a decade or less. The range narrows as one comes toward the present, so that, with the exception of one or two problem eras, dates accurate to within one or two years are possible by roughly the middle of the ninth century BC<\/span>. Such limitations must be kept in mind in any examination of the major periods of OT history.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Prepatriarchal Period<\/p>\n• From Abraham to Moses<\/p>\n• Conquest and Consolidation<\/p>\n• The Monarchy<\/p>\n• Judah after the Fall of Israel<\/p>\n• Beyond 587 BC<\/span><\/p>\nPrepatriarchal Period<\/p>\n<h5>Biblical Evidence<\/h5>\nIn the first 11 chapters of Genesis are found accounts of the Creation (chs 1–2), the fall (ch 3), Cain and Abel (ch 4), the Flood (chs 6–9), and the Tower of Babel (ch 11). Those events are set within a certain chronological framework.<\/p>\nAccording to Genesis 5, a period of 10 generations elapsed between the Creation and the Flood. Although the individuals listed enjoyed a total life span of a hefty 847 years plus, the total time elapsing between Adam and the Flood was only 1,656 years.<\/p>\nAccording to Genesis 11, another 10 generations elapsed from the time of the Flood until the time of Abraham (at least in the Septuagint, the third-century BC<\/span> Greek translation of the OT; the Hebrew Masoretic text has 9). In that period the average age attained by individuals in the list is 346 years (using a figure of 460 for Arphaxad’s son Cainan, who is included in v 13 of the LXX; cf. Lk 3:36); the total elapsed time from the Flood to Abraham is only 520 years. Taken literally, that would mean that all of Abraham’s ancestors as far back as Noah’s son Shem were still alive at Abraham’s birth, and that a total of only 2,176 years elapsed from the time of Creation to Abraham.<\/p>\n<h5>Interpretation of the Biblical Data<\/h5>\nA literalistic or slavishly mathematical interpretation of the figures, as has appeared in the margin of many kjv<\/span> Bibles, requires a number of assumptions: that no names are omitted from the genealogies, that all the numbers given are consecutive, and especially that numbers used in an ancient biblical source carry the same meaning as that associated with them in the modern Western mind. Each assumption needs serious examination in the light of other established facts.<\/p>\nA cursory reading of other biblical genealogies, for example, reveals that not all the names of a given family were always included. Even Matthew recorded a total of 28 generations (two sets of 14 each) between David and Jesus, and comparison with OT genealogies reveals that Matthew omitted several names. Luke listed a total of 42 generations for the same interval. Omissions are also obvious when one compares the genealogical lists given in 1 Chronicles 1–8 with those recorded earlier in Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Joshua, 1 and 2 Samuel, and 1 and 2 Kings.<\/p>\nFurther, ancient peoples thought of numbers in a schematic or stylized way. Use of numbers among the ancient Near Eastern nations differed sharply from current Western practice. Examples of that practice are known from both biblical and nonbiblical sources. For example, a list of eight Sumerian kings who ruled in the city of Shurruppak before the “great flood” of the Jemdet Nar era (c. 3000 BC<\/span>) assigns each man an average reign of more than 30,000 years. Berossus, a Babylonian priest of Marduk living in the third century BC<\/span>, added two names to the eight found in that earlier list of kings and assigned an average of 43,200 years to each king. Such extraordinarily high numbers provide a perspective for considering the numbers of Genesis.<\/p>\nTherefore, although one can assume that the numbers assigned to the ages of the patriarchs preceding Abraham in Genesis had real meaning for those responsible for their preservation, they should not be employed in a purely literal sense to compute the length of the various generations mentioned in the text. Further, the numbers given in the Septuagint and in the Samaritan Pentateuch, another early version of the Pentateuch, diverge in many details from those of the Hebrew Masoretic Text. That means, among other things, that the Genesis numbers caused problems for even the earliest scholars of Scripture.<\/p>\n<h5>Nonbiblical Evidence<\/h5>\nArchaeology provides no evidence that may be used to date either the Creation or any other account preserved in Genesis 1–11. The Flood is an example that illustrates some of the difficulties. Many claims have been made by persons from a wide variety of backgrounds (scientists, explorers, theologians, and others) to the effect that archaeology has proven the Genesis Flood narrative to be true. Yet no city so far excavated in Palestine and Syria (including some of the oldest towns in the world) shows archaeological evidence of the Flood.<\/p>\nAlthough several cities in Mesopotamia do exhibit evidence of a flood, three factors make it difficult to link that evidence with Genesis 6–9. Each of the flood levels so far discovered dates from a different period. Further, since nearby sites show no evidence of flooding, all of the Mesopotamian flood evidence points to relatively small local floods. Finally, the evidence indicates no great cultural discontinuities of the sort that would result from destruction of an entire population. Thus, it seems that the ancient Mesopotamian floods discovered through archaeological research are of the same kind as the floods that still occur in the Euphrates River valley.<\/p>\nClearly, certain questions one might ask of the Genesis narratives simply cannot be answered. Many who regard the Bible as the Word of God have concluded that the dating of events found in Genesis 1–11 must be less important than the theological truths of salvation, faith, and obedience that these accounts present.<\/p>\n\nFrom Abraham to Moses<\/p>\n<h5>The Patriarchal Age<\/h5>\nThe date of Abraham is still a lively topic among biblical scholars who agree that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were indeed historical persons. Opinions range from an early-date view that estimates that the patriarchal age extended from 2086 to 1871 BC<\/span>, to a late-date view placing Abraham at around 1400 BC<\/span>. Since each position claims to fit the biblical data, a closer look at the two points of view is in order.<\/p>\nMany OT passages seem to support the view that puts Abraham at a comparatively early date. First Kings 6:1 computes 480 years back from the founding of the temple in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign (961 BC<\/span>, according to the early-date view) to the exodus from Egypt, which would then be dated 1441 BC<\/span>. Counting 430 years as the period of the Israelite sojourn in Egypt (see Gn 15:13; Ex 12:40) takes the date back to 1871 BC<\/span>. To that date are added the 215 years demanded by the total of (1) Abraham’s age upon entering Canaan (75 years according to Gn 12:4); (2) 25 additional years before the birth of Isaac (Gn 21:5); (3) 60 more years to the birth of Jacob (Gn 25:26); and (4) the appearance of Jacob before the pharaoh at age 130 (Gn 47:9). Those 215 years added to the previous total give a date of 2086 BC<\/span> for the entrance of Abraham into Canaan and a date of 2161 BC<\/span> for his birth.<\/p>\nSuch a calculation does not use all of the chronological evidence presented in the OT; consequently, the date for Abraham is open to challenge. For example, the 480 years between the exodus and Solomon’s fourth regnal year represent a period of time into which the wilderness wanderings, the career of Joshua and his immediate successors, the period of the judges, Samuel, Saul, and David must all be placed. Although the OT does not specifically say how long were the careers of Joshua, Samuel, or Saul, even a modest reckoning pushes the total years required by all the biblical data together to approximately 600.<\/p>\nIn addition, the length of time to be assigned to the Egyptian sojourn is problematic. The Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint both view the number 430 (in Ex 12:40) as applicable not only to the years in Egypt but to the years of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in Canaan as well. Evidently Paul followed the Septuagint tradition when he dated the giving of the law 430 years later than the time of God’s promise to Abraham (see Gal 3:15-18). That means the Septuagint figure cannot be dismissed lightly.<\/p>\nThe late dating of Abraham (c. 1400 BC<\/span>) is based on two propositions: (1) The picture of patriarchal society portrayed in Genesis most closely parallels that reflected in the cuneiform tablets recovered from Nuzi, a town in northeastern Mesopotamia about 175 miles (282 kilometers) north of Baghdad. (2) Because those tablets must be dated in the 15th and 14th centuries BC<\/span>, the parallel patriarchal age must have fallen within the same general time period.<\/p>\nThose who hold the late-date view are aware that their date for Abraham cannot be equated with the set of numbers on which the early-date view depends. They point to other data, also from the OT. Joseph, who was already a highly placed Egyptian official when Jacob moved to Egypt, lived to be 110 years old (Gn 50:26). Moses was a great-grandson of Levi, Joseph’s older brother. Since Joseph lived to see his own greatgrandchildren born (who would probably be younger than Moses since their great-grandfather was younger than his), the late-date view concludes that Joseph could have been alive when Moses was born. The four-generation genealogy of Moses (Levi-Kohath-Amram-Moses, in Ex 6:16-20; Nm 3:17-19; 26:58-59; 1 Chr 6:1-3) was evidently thought to be complete according to Genesis 15:16, which predicted that Abraham’s descendants would be freed from Egyptian bondage “in the fourth generation.”<\/p>\nHowever, a date of around 1400 BC<\/span> for Abraham cannot be aligned with certain other biblical data, including the long Egyptian sojourn demanded by Genesis 15:13 and Exodus 12:40 and a 40-year (or “one-generation”) wilderness existence. Some normally moderate scholars are forced to reduce the wilderness time to two years in order to maintain their late date for Abraham.<\/p>\nIn short, the late-date theory is consistent with part of the biblical evidence (the genealogies of Moses), but the early-date theory conforms to another part (the actual year figures listed in scattered verses from Genesis and Exodus). The late-date theory holds that the genealogies represent more reliable information in Semitic societies generally, whereas the early-date theory computes years given in the biblical account literally throughout its scheme.<\/p>\nBecause of problems attached to both positions, a large group of scholars take a middle ground in dating the patriarchal age. Archaeologically, they say, Abraham and his life and times fit perfectly within the early second millennium, but imperfectly within any later period. By placing Abraham roughly between 1800 and 1600 BC<\/span>, they provide enough latitude for a merging of all the available evidence, biblical and nonbiblical, into a workable chronological scheme. Archaeology provides four major bits of evidence for an early second-millennium patriarchal era.<\/p>\n1. Though the Nuzi tablets furnish a clear parallel to patriarchal social life, other tablets from other towns and an earlier era reflect many of the same customs common to Nuzi and Genesis. Since the Nuzians were Hurrians who came to northeastern Mesopotamia from elsewhere (perhaps Armenia), their social customs originated no doubt much earlier than the time of their tablets now in our possession. Accordingly, the 15th-century BC<\/span> date of the Nuzi tablets does not preclude an earlier date for Abraham.<\/p>\n<li>2. The names of several of Abraham’s ancestors listed in Genesis 11 can now be identified with towns in the northern area of Mesopotamia around Haran, the city from which Abraham migrated to Canaan (Gn 11:31–12:3). Significantly, Haran flourished in the 19th and 18th centuries BC<\/span>.<\/li>\n<li>3. Shortly after 2000 BC<\/span> Semitic nomads from the desert invaded the civilized communities of the Fertile Crescent. Those invaders, called Amorites in the OT, established themselves in several cities in northern Syria and Mesopotamia. One of the Amorite cities was Babylon, ruled by Hammurabi sometime around the beginning of the 18th century BC<\/span>. Although the King Amraphel of Genesis 14:1 is not linguistically identifiable with the Babylonian king Hammurabi, as earlier scholars believed, the picture of the times following the Amorite invasion still accords well with the Genesis narratives generally.<\/li>\n<li>4. Mari, another Amorite town, is now well known because of more than 20,000 tablets recovered from its royal palace and archives. Geographically, Mari is located in the general area of Haran. Chronologically, the tablets recovered come from the 18th century BC<\/span>. One 18th-century king of Mari, Zimri Lim, carried on extensive correspondence with Hammurabi of Babylon. The tablets from Mari also furnish valuable information about tribal and ethnic groups and their movements in the general region. Of basic importance for dating the Genesis materials are certain documents from Mari that include personal names very similar to Abraham (Abi-ram), Jacob, Laban, and several other West Semitic names.<\/li>\nArchaeological evidence neither proves nor disproves the actual existence of Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob. That is admitted on all sides. What archaeology has done is to provide a framework of probabilities within which the biblical patriarchal narratives appear more and more to be at home.<\/p>\n<h5>Date of the Exodus<\/h5>\nThe problem of dating the patriarchal age is closely related to the problem of assigning a date to the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt. Since the evidence does not permit a precise date for Abraham, a precise date for the entry of Joseph or Jacob into Egypt is likewise unobtainable. Further, the biblical evidence does not yield an exact figure for the length of the Israelite sojourn in Egypt.<\/p>\nFor many years biblical scholars viewed 1 Kings 6:1 as a foundation upon which to build an unshakable date for the exodus. Because Solomon’s fourth year could be unquestionably fixed to within at least a 10-year span (967–958 BC<\/span>), the exodus too could be dated with the same precision simply by adding 480 years. But other biblical data raise serious questions about that simple procedure. When the Bible deals with all the events between the time of the exodus and the founding of Solomon’s temple, that is, from Numbers to 1 Kings 5:18, the precise numbers given total not 480 but closer to 600 years.<\/p>\nBecause the evidence is insufficient to allow a precise date for the exodus, scholarly opinion remains divided between two possibilities. A 15th-century exodus is supported by several pieces of evidence. The chronology in 1 Kings 6:1 appears to be independently corroborated by a passage in Judges 11:26. It claims that Israel had occupied the area around Heshbon for 300 years preceding Jephthah’s own day. If Jephthah is dated at roughly 1100 BC<\/span>, one is obviously led back to an exodus in the middle of the 15th century. Also, three successive generations of pharaohs who ruled in the 16th and 15th centuries produced no male offspring, making it more likely that Moses would have become the foster son of a royal princess during that time; all of the 19th-dynasty kings (1306–1200 BC<\/span>) had legitimate male heirs.<\/p>\nIn addition, a 15th-century date makes possible a connection between the Habiru invasion of Canaan (1400–1350 BC<\/span>)—described in the Amarna letters found at Tell el-Amarna, Egypt—and the invasion of Canaan by the Hebrews described in the OT book of Joshua. Related to that is a reference to “Israel” in the Merneptah Stele, a stone pillar inscribed with the deeds of the Egyptian king, Merneptah, of about 1220 BC<\/span>. It implies that the people referred to, met by Merneptah in the course of a Canaanite military campaign, had been in existence for some time. Finally, an excavator of Jericho, John Garstang, placed the destruction of that city at around 1400 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nOther evidence, however, strongly implies not a 15th- but a 13th-century date for the exodus. Many scholars assign a date between 1290 and 1275 BC<\/span> on the basis of that evidence. First, the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1 discussed above may be interpreted as schematically representing 12 generations, as indicated by 1 Chronicles 6:3-8. Thus if 12 generations averaged 25 years instead of 40 years, the reduction of 480 schematized years to 300 actual years would point to an exodus date of around 1266 BC<\/span>. Second, archaeological evidence exists that dates destruction at the assumed sites of several cities conquered by Joshua (Lachish, Debir, Bethel, and Hazor) to the late 13th century. Third, there is no biblical mention of Egyptian military campaigns (such as Merneptah’s 1220 BC<\/span> incursion); Israelites living in Canaan before the time of the militarily active pharaohs Seti I (1319–1301 BC<\/span>) and Ramses II (1301–1234 BC<\/span>) would certainly have been affected by such activity. Fourth, Exodus 1:11 mentions the city of Rameses, the capital built by Ramses II, according to his own inscriptions. A fifth line of argument comes from archaeological conclusions that Transjordan and the Negev Desert were not occupied by sedentary people between 1900 and 1300 BC<\/span>, whereas the Bible states clearly that the Israelites encountered stiff opposition from groups in that same region. Thus, it is argued, the Israelites must have entered that region after 1300 BC<\/span>. Sixth, connecting the Habiru with the Israelites of the Conquest lacks weight because many texts besides the Amarna tablets attest to the existence of Habiru groups virtually all over the ancient Near East. “Habiru” seems to be a much broader term, possibly meaning “trespasser,” and is probably unrelated etymologically or semantically to “Hebrew.” Seventh, and finally, Garstang’s work at Jericho has now been revised by archaeologist Kathleen Kenyon, who showed that the fallen walls that Garstang had dated about 1400 BC<\/span> in reality were destroyed in 1800 BC<\/span> or earlier.<\/p>\nSo far, it has been impossible to decide with precision between the two centuries proposed for the exodus. The majority opinion among OT scholars generally, including a growing number of moderate or conservative scholars, is in favor of the 13th-century option. On the other hand, many other conservative scholars continue to favor the 15th-century date. Dogmatism is unwarranted since problems remain unresolved with either option.<\/p>\nIn accordance with the majority opinion, however, a date of about 1290 BC<\/span> for the exodus will be used in dealing with subsequent problems.<\/p>\nConquest and Consolidation<\/p>\nThe chronological task for the period of conquest and consolidation is to fit all the events narrated by the OT, chiefly in Joshua and Judges, between the exodus (c. 1290 BC<\/span>) and the times of David (c. 1000 BC<\/span>) and Solomon (d. 930 BC<\/span>). In other words, one must fit roughly 550 years of biblical events between Moses and David into a 290-year span.<\/p>\nAlthough assigning an early date for the exodus (c. 1447 BC<\/span>) would make the task somewhat easier, the mere addition of about 157 years does not by itself solve all the problems. Neither date allows enough time for all the OT events from Joshua to David to take place singly and consecutively. Accordingly, advocates of both dates assume that some of the judges ruled simultaneously rather than consecutively. The difference is one of degree only.<\/p>\nThe book of Joshua furnishes most of the OT evidence regarding the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites. Unfortunately, the book of Joshua has no chronological notes that specify the amount of time elapsing during Joshua’s career. Further, there are no biblical references to major contemporary events in other parts of the ancient world, the dates of which could be used to fix the chronology. Rather, in what is obviously a telescoped account, the book of Joshua records the fall of Jericho and Ai, followed closely by a southern and then a northern campaign. After those victories, covering much of the total territory of Canaan, various parcels of land were distributed to the tribal groups of Israel; the tribes were expected to complete the task of destroying whatever Canaanite inhabitants remained in their particular region. One seeks in vain, however, for any statements indicating how long those events took.<\/p>\nIn the book of Judges a slightly different circumstance prevails. There the OT furnishes a rather complete list of figures to indicate the duration of periods of foreign oppression, judgeships, and ensuing peace. The total number of years described for that period is 410, but that total does not include any time for the many “minor” judges. It seems obvious, therefore, that most if not all of the judges were simply local chieftains whose activity was simultaneous with that of other judges, at least for part of their reign. Unfortunately, the book of Judges provides no cross-reference system to indicate which judges were contemporaries of which others. Perhaps the best one can do is to assume general guidelines for the chronology of that period between Moses and David.<\/p>\nTwo significant facts should be kept in mind. First, archaeological information seems to demand a Conquest date beginning about 1250 BC<\/span> rather than 200 years earlier. Assuming concurrent careers for the judges allows one to compress the literal OT figures into the general scheme demanded by other evidence.<\/p>\nSecond, the ancient scribes evidently related the chronology of the period to a 40-year or generation-based schema, a practice that lasted until the time of the divided kingdom, when a regular dynastic chronology was introduced. In the face of so many careers being assigned exactly 40 years, the fact remains that the literal totals of such numbers cannot be harmonized with either the biblical or the archaeological evidence for the period. Accordingly, most scholars doubt that the number 40 was ever intended to be an exact mathematical calculation. That view permits enough leeway for cautious fitting of biblical and other evidence into a general timetable.<\/p>\nThe Monarchy<\/p>\n<h5>Types of Evidence<\/h5>\nFor the period of the Israelite monarchy, chronological evidence is abundant.<\/p>\nThe OT itself strives to provide all the information necessary for the chronology of the period, including (1) a complete list of all the kings in Israel and in Judah both before and after the division of the kingdom; (2) the age of each king (except Saul) at his accession; (3) synchronisms of the northern kingdom of Israel and the southern kingdom of Judah showing in what year of his contemporary in the other kingdom each king came to the throne; and (4) precise calculations of the length of each king’s reign. In addition some important events are dated by reference to another event; others are coordinated with concurrent events in secular history.<\/p>\nOutside the OT an abundance of material provides evidence for a chronology of the period. By far the most important single source is a collection of Assyrian limmu<\/em> lists. In Assyria a record of each king’s reign was kept on a particular kind of annal. Each year of reign was named after an individual of high rank in the court; the first year was named after the king himself, the second after the next highest-ranking official (though that name appears to have been selected by lot originally), and so on, down until the death of the king. The word limmu<\/em> was used to introduce the name of the official after whom the current year was to be named, hence the designation “limmu<\/em> lists.”<\/p>\nAssyrian limmu<\/em> lists are tied precisely to the solar year, making the documents highly reliable. Further, in addition to many events in Assyrian history, notable natural phenomena were dated on the basis of the limmu<\/em> in which they occurred. For example, a solar eclipse dated by the Assyrian scribes in the limmu<\/em> year of Bur-Sagale has been computed astronomically as June 15, 763 BC<\/span>. Beginning with the year 763, then, and working both backward and forward, a complete list of Assyrian limmu<\/em> officials has been obtained for the period between 891 and 648 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nWith the accuracy of the Assyrian limmu<\/em> lists corroborated by a number of sources, they can be used with confidence in reconstructing the chronology of the corresponding period of biblical history. That is especially true where a biblical writer related an Israelite or a Judahite event to a particular year in the reign of an Assyrian king whose limmu<\/em> list indicates the precise years of his reign.<\/p>\nThere are also records from Chaldean (Babylonian) king lists and from later Greek historians. Ptolemy, in the second century AD<\/span>, for example, gave dates for Babylonian kings from 747 BC<\/span> and continued with dates for Persian, Greek, and Roman rulers down to AD<\/span> 161. Finally, useful information is found in inscriptions from monuments, stelae, and other artifacts from Assyria and elsewhere.<\/p>\n<h5>Monarchical Chronology<\/h5>\nThe limmu<\/em> list of the Assyrian king Shalmaneser III provides a basis for the first comparison of dates among Assyria, Israel, and Judah. In the limmu<\/em> of Daian-Assur, Shalmaneser’s sixth year on the throne, Ahab of Israel was listed as one of the kings who fought against the Assyrians in the battle of Qarqar. Thus the date for that battle may be placed confidently in 853 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nAssyrian records also indicate that Shalmaneser III came into contact with an Israelite king 12 years later, in 841 BC<\/span>. That king was Jehu. Thus two fixed points are available for correlating the biblical information. Following the death of Ahab, which is not dated exactly by reference to the Assyrian records, two of his sons came to power. The first, Ahaziah, reigned two years (1 Kgs 22:51); the second, Joram (also called Jehoram), reigned a total of 12 years (2 Kgs 3:1). Recognizing a nonaccession-year reckoning by the Israelites in that era, the apparent total of 14 years may be reduced to an actual total of 12. Thus it seems evident that Ahab not only fought Shalmaneser III in 853 BC<\/span> but also died in that year. Ahab was then followed by his two sons for a total of 12 years before the accession of Jehu in time to account for his contact with Shalmaneser II in 841 BC<\/span>. Further, because Jehu murdered both the king of Israel (Jehoram) and the king of Judah (Ahaziah) at the same time (2 Kgs 9:24-27), a fixed synchronism is provided between the two kingdoms for the year 841 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe first nine kings of Israel ruled an apparent total of 98 years or an actual total (taking into account Israel’s nonaccession-year policy) of 90 years. Zimri, who ruled only seven days (1 Kgs 16:15-18), counts as one of the nine but does not insert an extra year in either the actual or apparent totals. The accession of Jeroboam I thus occurred in 930 BC<\/span> (adding 90 years to 841 BC<\/span>), and Rehoboam of Judah began to rule in that same year as well. Allowing Solomon the 40-year reign indicated in 1 Kings 11:42 points to the year 970 BC<\/span> for his accession. The death of David would also be pinpointed in that period, although allowance must be made for the possibility of a short co-regency of David and Solomon before David’s death. The reign of Saul then falls approximately in the late 11th century BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nIn Judah the period between the death of Solomon in 930 BC<\/span> and the murder of Ahaziah by Jehu in 841 BC<\/span> was occupied by the kingships of six men whose time on the throne totals 95 biblical years. Computation of that era in Judah is not as simple as for the Israelite kings for several reasons. Problems include a change from accession- to nonaccession-year reckoning sometime around 850 BC<\/span>, at least two co-regencies (Jehoshaphat with Asa and then Jehoram with Jehoshaphat), and the calendar differences between the two kingdoms. It is clear that the 95 apparent years must be reduced, on the basis of the differences in computation and calendar, to 90 actual years in order to bring the Judahite figures into line with the established Assyrian and Israelite synchronisms.<\/p>\nAfter the year 841, the next biblical event to be certified by nonbiblical materials is the fall of Samaria in 722 BC<\/span>. That date is furnished by the annals of Sargon II of Assyria (722–705 BC<\/span>), successor to Shalmaneser V (727–722 BC<\/span>). Although that date comes just 120 years after the fixed point of 841 BC<\/span> in Israelite history, the chronological materials for that period are quite difficult to interpret accurately. In the past, scholars resorted to assumptions of extensive co-regencies, to presumed confusion on the part of certain scribes over methods to be followed in computations, or to other theories in attempting to understand the period. In spite of the many difficulties, however, all the biblical and Assyrian dates for the period of the divided monarchy have been harmonized—with the exception of four figures related to the closing years of the Israelite kingdom, all connected in some way with the problematic reign of Hoshea.<\/p>\nJudah after the Fall of Israel<\/p>\nFollowing the fall of Samaria in 722 BC<\/span>, OT chronology is concerned only with the southern kingdom of Judah until its destruction some 135 years later. Two events in the biblical record important for establishing a chronology for that period are the siege of Jerusalem by Sennacherib of Assyria in the late eighth century and the eventual fall of Jerusalem to the Babylonians in the early sixth century.<\/p>\n<h5>Sennacherib’s Invasion of Judah<\/h5>\nThe Assyrian invasion (704–681 BC<\/span>) is recorded in 2 Kings 18:13-16, where verse 13 dates the event to the 14th year of King Hezekiah. Sennacherib’s own inscriptions include a lengthier version of the affair. From them the date of 701 BC<\/span> is established, placing the accession of Hezekiah in 715 BC<\/span>. That much is simple, but problems still arise. For example, 2 Kings 19:9 reports that Sennacherib was in contact with an Ethiopian king, Tirhakah (c. 690–664 BC<\/span>), during the course of his campaign, which included a siege of Jerusalem. Obviously, contact with a ruler who came to power in 690 BC<\/span> at the earliest could not refer to events in 701 BC<\/span>. It is possible, however, that Sennacherib actually made two invasions of Judah, the first in 701 and the second sometime later. The date of that supposed second invasion is not assured, although 2 Kings 19:35-37 may imply that Sennacherib was murdered only shortly after his withdrawal from Jerusalem. Since Sennacherib was succeeded by his son Esarhaddon in the year 681, the presumed second invasion of Judah would have occurred somewhere in the last half of the same decade.<\/p>\nA number of scholars oppose the assumption of a second invasion of Jerusalem by Sennacherib. They suggest the possibility that Tirhakah, though king only from 690 BC<\/span>, may have led troops against Sennacherib as early as 701, before acceding to the throne. The reference to King Tirhakah in 2 Kings 19:9 would then be understood as use of his eventual title in an effort to identify him to a later generation of readers.<\/p>\nHowever the question of the number of invasions is decided, it is certain that Sennacherib invaded Judah in 701 BC<\/span>, the 14th regnal year of Hezekiah. Such a synchronism establishes Hezekiah’s accession year as 715 BC<\/span>, but that date raises another problem. The fall of Samaria, now established at 722, is dated by 2 Kings 18:10 in the sixth year of Hezekiah’s reign. The most likely solution is that Hezekiah began a co-regency with his father, Ahaz, six years before Samaria fell. The possibility for confusion arises from the fact that one verse (2 Kgs 18:13; repeated in Is 36:1) synchronizes Sennacherib’s 701 BC<\/span> invasion with the 14th year of Hezekiah’s independent reign; another verse (2 Kgs 18:10) correlates the fall of Samaria with the beginning of Hezekiah’s co-regency. Thus from about 728 to 715 BC<\/span> Hezekiah was co-regent with Ahaz. From 715 to 697 he reigned alone. From 696 to 686 his son Manasseh was co-ruler with him.<\/p>\nAccording to the chronological information given by a number of verses in 2 Kings, a total of 128 years and six months elapsed between the time of Hezekiah’s accession in 715 and the capture of King Jehoiachin in 597, a date to be discussed below. Thus another problem is to explain the more than 10-year excess apparently demanded by the biblical totals. The best solution appears to lie in the assumption that Manasseh first came to power in 697 as co-regent with his father, Hezekiah. Manasseh died in 642, following what 2 Kings 21:1 states was a 55-year reign. Hezekiah, who came to the throne in 715, is said to have reigned 29 years (2 Kgs 18:2), which would mean that he was king until 686, roughly 11 years after the time when Manasseh must have come to the throne in order to have completed a 55-year reign by 642.<\/p>\n<h5>Fall of Jerusalem<\/h5>\nContemporary Babylonian records are available to shed valuable light on the last few years of Judah’s existence. For the years 626–623, 618–595, and 556 BC<\/span> the Babylonian Chronicle, a formal record of Babylonian affairs of state, has been recovered. From information contained in that chronicle and other cuneiform documents of the period, three dates in Judah’s history may be fixed firmly. The first is the death of Josiah in 609; the second is the battle of Carchemish in 605; the third is the end of the reign of Jehoiachin, which is dated by the Babylonian Chronicle to the second month of Adar in the ninth year of Nebuchadnezzar, or March 16, 597.<\/p>\nAfter Jehoiachin’s capture, Zedekiah became puppet king of Judah for 11 years (2 Kgs 24:18). On the tenth day of the tenth month during Zedekiah’s ninth regnal year (2 Kgs 25:1), the final siege of Jerusalem was begun by the Babylonian army. That day was January 15, 588. On the ninth day of the fourth month during the 11th regnal year of Zedekiah, after a siege of almost 18 months, the wall of Jerusalem was broken through (2 Kgs 25:3-4). The temple was burned on day seven of the following (fifth) month.<\/p>\nBeyond 586 BC<\/span><\/p>\nFollowing the tragedy of 586 BC<\/span>, several further developments are given chronological notice in the OT. Jeremiah 52:30 records a third deportation of Jews to Babylonia in the 23d year of King Nebuchadnezzar (582 or 581 BC<\/span>). Both 2 Kings 25:27 and Jeremiah 52:31 give evidence of the release of King Jehoiachin from prison; the Babylonian Chronicle dates that event at 27 Adar, or March 21, 561 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nIn 539 BC<\/span> the Babylonians themselves were destined to learn the meaning of defeat. In that year a Persian ruler, Cyrus the Great, launched a successful campaign against Babylon and its king, Nabonidus. Inheriting control over the exiled Jews and many other groups of people conquered earlier by Babylonia, Cyrus moved quickly to initiate a policy of tolerance toward his new subjects. In the first year of his rule Cyrus issued an edict making it possible for Jews to return to their former land (Ezr 1:1). On the first day of the following year, 1 Tishri (Ezr 3:6), an altar was set up in Jerusalem. In Iyyar of the following year (April\/May 536) work was begun on the temple itself (Ezr 3:8).<\/p>\nAfter a period of frustrating work stoppages of varying lengths, the preaching of Haggai and Zechariah spurred on the Jews to complete the temple. Work resumed in 520 (Ezr 4:24; Hg 1:1, 15) and was finally completed on 3 Adar, or March 12, 515 (Ezr 6:15). The final stages of OT chronology pertain to the careers of Ezra and Nehemiah. The traditional view of their era places Ezra in the seventh year of Artaxerxes I (458 BC<\/span>) and Nehemiah in the 20th (445 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> “Date” under each OT book; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Diaspora of the Jews; Exodus, The; Israel, History of; Patriarchs, Period of the; Postexilic Period; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (Old Testament)<\/h3>\nBranch of biblical studies that attempts to assign dates and sequences to OT events. Chronology is a science. It deals with evidence, theories, assumptions, and the balance of probabilities. Often it boils down to a matter of choosing among theories that are equally unable to solve all the problems raised by other points of view. OT chronology is an accredited branch of biblical studies primarily because it is essential for understanding the proper historical background of the biblical texts. In general, the chronology of the OT is understood well enough to vindicate the basic accuracy and sequential order of Scripture.<\/p>\nBoth biblical and nonbiblical materials are utilized by students of OT chronology. Biblical data include (1) genealogies showing personal and tribal affiliations among various peoples; (2) specific numbers given by biblical authors to indicate a person’s longevity, a king’s reign, or the duration of a specific event; (3) synchronizing statements that date an event in a specific year of a king’s reign or relate it to a natural phenomenon assumed to be common knowledge at the time of writing (e.g., Am 1:1; Zec 14:5).<\/p>\nFrom the abundance of such chronological passages in the OT, one might conclude that establishment of OT dates and sequences would be a simple procedure. Each of the three kinds of biblical materials, however, exhibits special problems that must be solved first.<\/p>\nNonbiblical materials that shed light on OT chronology are quite numerous, and more are discovered year by year. They include (1) official records of important affairs such as military campaigns from countries like Egypt or Babylonia; (2) official inscriptions that are dedicatory or commemorate a great victory; (3) annals listing major accomplishments of a ruler year by year; (4) ostraca (inscribed pieces of pottery) containing letters, tax transactions and economic records, military dispatches between field leaders and command headquarters, or other information. Ostraca may be dated archaeologically and are often used to supplement the biblical record.<\/p>\nThe chronologist tries to examine the pertinent biblical and nonbiblical information, notes areas of correlation among all the data, and finally establishes a working system into which the most facts can be fitted. New evidence uncovered at any time may necessitate shifts in the present working system. Although the basic structure of biblical chronology seems reasonably firm, many details will no doubt be subject to change as new evidence is discovered.<\/p>\nAs a general rule, the earlier the period, the less certain one can be of one’s dating. In the second millennium BC<\/span>, for example, many dates can be assigned within a range of about 100 years. By the time of David and Solomon (c. 1000 BC<\/span>), the margin of error over which scholars debate is a decade or less. The range narrows as one comes toward the present, so that, with the exception of one or two problem eras, dates accurate to within one or two years are possible by roughly the middle of the ninth century BC<\/span>. Such limitations must be kept in mind in any examination of the major periods of OT history.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Prepatriarchal Period<\/p>\n• From Abraham to Moses<\/p>\n• Conquest and Consolidation<\/p>\n• The Monarchy<\/p>\n• Judah after the Fall of Israel<\/p>\n• Beyond 587 BC<\/span><\/p>\nPrepatriarchal Period<\/p>\n<h5>Biblical Evidence<\/h5>\nIn the first 11 chapters of Genesis are found accounts of the Creation (chs 1–2), the fall (ch 3), Cain and Abel (ch 4), the Flood (chs 6–9), and the Tower of Babel (ch 11). Those events are set within a certain chronological framework.<\/p>\nAccording to Genesis 5, a period of 10 generations elapsed between the Creation and the Flood. Although the individuals listed enjoyed a total life span of a hefty 847 years plus, the total time elapsing between Adam and the Flood was only 1,656 years.<\/p>\nAccording to Genesis 11, another 10 generations elapsed from the time of the Flood until the time of Abraham (at least in the Septuagint, the third-century BC<\/span> Greek translation of the OT; the Hebrew Masoretic text has 9). In that period the average age attained by individuals in the list is 346 years (using a figure of 460 for Arphaxad’s son Cainan, who is included in v 13 of the LXX; cf. Lk 3:36); the total elapsed time from the Flood to Abraham is only 520 years. Taken literally, that would mean that all of Abraham’s ancestors as far back as Noah’s son Shem were still alive at Abraham’s birth, and that a total of only 2,176 years elapsed from the time of Creation to Abraham.<\/p>\n<h5>Interpretation of the Biblical Data<\/h5>\nA literalistic or slavishly mathematical interpretation of the figures, as has appeared in the margin of many kjv<\/span> Bibles, requires a number of assumptions: that no names are omitted from the genealogies, that all the numbers given are consecutive, and especially that numbers used in an ancient biblical source carry the same meaning as that associated with them in the modern Western mind. Each assumption needs serious examination in the light of other established facts.<\/p>\nA cursory reading of other biblical genealogies, for example, reveals that not all the names of a given family were always included. Even Matthew recorded a total of 28 generations (two sets of 14 each) between David and Jesus, and comparison with OT genealogies reveals that Matthew omitted several names. Luke listed a total of 42 generations for the same interval. Omissions are also obvious when one compares the genealogical lists given in 1 Chronicles 1–8 with those recorded earlier in Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Joshua, 1 and 2 Samuel, and 1 and 2 Kings.<\/p>\nFurther, ancient peoples thought of numbers in a schematic or stylized way. Use of numbers among the ancient Near Eastern nations differed sharply from current Western practice. Examples of that practice are known from both biblical and nonbiblical sources. For example, a list of eight Sumerian kings who ruled in the city of Shurruppak before the “great flood” of the Jemdet Nar era (c. 3000 BC<\/span>) assigns each man an average reign of more than 30,000 years. Berossus, a Babylonian priest of Marduk living in the third century BC<\/span>, added two names to the eight found in that earlier list of kings and assigned an average of 43,200 years to each king. Such extraordinarily high numbers provide a perspective for considering the numbers of Genesis.<\/p>\nTherefore, although one can assume that the numbers assigned to the ages of the patriarchs preceding Abraham in Genesis had real meaning for those responsible for their preservation, they should not be employed in a purely literal sense to compute the length of the various generations mentioned in the text. Further, the numbers given in the Septuagint and in the Samaritan Pentateuch, another early version of the Pentateuch, diverge in many details from those of the Hebrew Masoretic Text. That means, among other things, that the Genesis numbers caused problems for even the earliest scholars of Scripture.<\/p>\n<h5>Nonbiblical Evidence<\/h5>\nArchaeology provides no evidence that may be used to date either the Creation or any other account preserved in Genesis 1–11. The Flood is an example that illustrates some of the difficulties. Many claims have been made by persons from a wide variety of backgrounds (scientists, explorers, theologians, and others) to the effect that archaeology has proven the Genesis Flood narrative to be true. Yet no city so far excavated in Palestine and Syria (including some of the oldest towns in the world) shows archaeological evidence of the Flood.<\/p>\nAlthough several cities in Mesopotamia do exhibit evidence of a flood, three factors make it difficult to link that evidence with Genesis 6–9. Each of the flood levels so far discovered dates from a different period. Further, since nearby sites show no evidence of flooding, all of the Mesopotamian flood evidence points to relatively small local floods. Finally, the evidence indicates no great cultural discontinuities of the sort that would result from destruction of an entire population. Thus, it seems that the ancient Mesopotamian floods discovered through archaeological research are of the same kind as the floods that still occur in the Euphrates River valley.<\/p>\nClearly, certain questions one might ask of the Genesis narratives simply cannot be answered. Many who regard the Bible as the Word of God have concluded that the dating of events found in Genesis 1–11 must be less important than the theological truths of salvation, faith, and obedience that these accounts present.<\/p>\n\nFrom Abraham to Moses<\/p>\n<h5>The Patriarchal Age<\/h5>\nThe date of Abraham is still a lively topic among biblical scholars who agree that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were indeed historical persons. Opinions range from an early-date view that estimates that the patriarchal age extended from 2086 to 1871 BC<\/span>, to a late-date view placing Abraham at around 1400 BC<\/span>. Since each position claims to fit the biblical data, a closer look at the two points of view is in order.<\/p>\nMany OT passages seem to support the view that puts Abraham at a comparatively early date. First Kings 6:1 computes 480 years back from the founding of the temple in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign (961 BC<\/span>, according to the early-date view) to the exodus from Egypt, which would then be dated 1441 BC<\/span>. Counting 430 years as the period of the Israelite sojourn in Egypt (see Gn 15:13; Ex 12:40) takes the date back to 1871 BC<\/span>. To that date are added the 215 years demanded by the total of (1) Abraham’s age upon entering Canaan (75 years according to Gn 12:4); (2) 25 additional years before the birth of Isaac (Gn 21:5); (3) 60 more years to the birth of Jacob (Gn 25:26); and (4) the appearance of Jacob before the pharaoh at age 130 (Gn 47:9). Those 215 years added to the previous total give a date of 2086 BC<\/span> for the entrance of Abraham into Canaan and a date of 2161 BC<\/span> for his birth.<\/p>\nSuch a calculation does not use all of the chronological evidence presented in the OT; consequently, the date for Abraham is open to challenge. For example, the 480 years between the exodus and Solomon’s fourth regnal year represent a period of time into which the wilderness wanderings, the career of Joshua and his immediate successors, the period of the judges, Samuel, Saul, and David must all be placed. Although the OT does not specifically say how long were the careers of Joshua, Samuel, or Saul, even a modest reckoning pushes the total years required by all the biblical data together to approximately 600.<\/p>\nIn addition, the length of time to be assigned to the Egyptian sojourn is problematic. The Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint both view the number 430 (in Ex 12:40) as applicable not only to the years in Egypt but to the years of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in Canaan as well. Evidently Paul followed the Septuagint tradition when he dated the giving of the law 430 years later than the time of God’s promise to Abraham (see Gal 3:15-18). That means the Septuagint figure cannot be dismissed lightly.<\/p>\nThe late dating of Abraham (c. 1400 BC<\/span>) is based on two propositions: (1) The picture of patriarchal society portrayed in Genesis most closely parallels that reflected in the cuneiform tablets recovered from Nuzi, a town in northeastern Mesopotamia about 175 miles (282 kilometers) north of Baghdad. (2) Because those tablets must be dated in the 15th and 14th centuries BC<\/span>, the parallel patriarchal age must have fallen within the same general time period.<\/p>\nThose who hold the late-date view are aware that their date for Abraham cannot be equated with the set of numbers on which the early-date view depends. They point to other data, also from the OT. Joseph, who was already a highly placed Egyptian official when Jacob moved to Egypt, lived to be 110 years old (Gn 50:26). Moses was a great-grandson of Levi, Joseph’s older brother. Since Joseph lived to see his own greatgrandchildren born (who would probably be younger than Moses since their great-grandfather was younger than his), the late-date view concludes that Joseph could have been alive when Moses was born. The four-generation genealogy of Moses (Levi-Kohath-Amram-Moses, in Ex 6:16-20; Nm 3:17-19; 26:58-59; 1 Chr 6:1-3) was evidently thought to be complete according to Genesis 15:16, which predicted that Abraham’s descendants would be freed from Egyptian bondage “in the fourth generation.”<\/p>\nHowever, a date of around 1400 BC<\/span> for Abraham cannot be aligned with certain other biblical data, including the long Egyptian sojourn demanded by Genesis 15:13 and Exodus 12:40 and a 40-year (or “one-generation”) wilderness existence. Some normally moderate scholars are forced to reduce the wilderness time to two years in order to maintain their late date for Abraham.<\/p>\nIn short, the late-date theory is consistent with part of the biblical evidence (the genealogies of Moses), but the early-date theory conforms to another part (the actual year figures listed in scattered verses from Genesis and Exodus). The late-date theory holds that the genealogies represent more reliable information in Semitic societies generally, whereas the early-date theory computes years given in the biblical account literally throughout its scheme.<\/p>\nBecause of problems attached to both positions, a large group of scholars take a middle ground in dating the patriarchal age. Archaeologically, they say, Abraham and his life and times fit perfectly within the early second millennium, but imperfectly within any later period. By placing Abraham roughly between 1800 and 1600 BC<\/span>, they provide enough latitude for a merging of all the available evidence, biblical and nonbiblical, into a workable chronological scheme. Archaeology provides four major bits of evidence for an early second-millennium patriarchal era.<\/p>\n1. Though the Nuzi tablets furnish a clear parallel to patriarchal social life, other tablets from other towns and an earlier era reflect many of the same customs common to Nuzi and Genesis. Since the Nuzians were Hurrians who came to northeastern Mesopotamia from elsewhere (perhaps Armenia), their social customs originated no doubt much earlier than the time of their tablets now in our possession. Accordingly, the 15th-century BC<\/span> date of the Nuzi tablets does not preclude an earlier date for Abraham.<\/p>\n<li>2. The names of several of Abraham’s ancestors listed in Genesis 11 can now be identified with towns in the northern area of Mesopotamia around Haran, the city from which Abraham migrated to Canaan (Gn 11:31–12:3). Significantly, Haran flourished in the 19th and 18th centuries BC<\/span>.<\/li>\n<li>3. Shortly after 2000 BC<\/span> Semitic nomads from the desert invaded the civilized communities of the Fertile Crescent. Those invaders, called Amorites in the OT, established themselves in several cities in northern Syria and Mesopotamia. One of the Amorite cities was Babylon, ruled by Hammurabi sometime around the beginning of the 18th century BC<\/span>. Although the King Amraphel of Genesis 14:1 is not linguistically identifiable with the Babylonian king Hammurabi, as earlier scholars believed, the picture of the times following the Amorite invasion still accords well with the Genesis narratives generally.<\/li>\n<li>4. Mari, another Amorite town, is now well known because of more than 20,000 tablets recovered from its royal palace and archives. Geographically, Mari is located in the general area of Haran. Chronologically, the tablets recovered come from the 18th century BC<\/span>. One 18th-century king of Mari, Zimri Lim, carried on extensive correspondence with Hammurabi of Babylon. The tablets from Mari also furnish valuable information about tribal and ethnic groups and their movements in the general region. Of basic importance for dating the Genesis materials are certain documents from Mari that include personal names very similar to Abraham (Abi-ram), Jacob, Laban, and several other West Semitic names.<\/li>\nArchaeological evidence neither proves nor disproves the actual existence of Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob. That is admitted on all sides. What archaeology has done is to provide a framework of probabilities within which the biblical patriarchal narratives appear more and more to be at home.<\/p>\n<h5>Date of the Exodus<\/h5>\nThe problem of dating the patriarchal age is closely related to the problem of assigning a date to the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt. Since the evidence does not permit a precise date for Abraham, a precise date for the entry of Joseph or Jacob into Egypt is likewise unobtainable. Further, the biblical evidence does not yield an exact figure for the length of the Israelite sojourn in Egypt.<\/p>\nFor many years biblical scholars viewed 1 Kings 6:1 as a foundation upon which to build an unshakable date for the exodus. Because Solomon’s fourth year could be unquestionably fixed to within at least a 10-year span (967–958 BC<\/span>), the exodus too could be dated with the same precision simply by adding 480 years. But other biblical data raise serious questions about that simple procedure. When the Bible deals with all the events between the time of the exodus and the founding of Solomon’s temple, that is, from Numbers to 1 Kings 5:18, the precise numbers given total not 480 but closer to 600 years.<\/p>\nBecause the evidence is insufficient to allow a precise date for the exodus, scholarly opinion remains divided between two possibilities. A 15th-century exodus is supported by several pieces of evidence. The chronology in 1 Kings 6:1 appears to be independently corroborated by a passage in Judges 11:26. It claims that Israel had occupied the area around Heshbon for 300 years preceding Jephthah’s own day. If Jephthah is dated at roughly 1100 BC<\/span>, one is obviously led back to an exodus in the middle of the 15th century. Also, three successive generations of pharaohs who ruled in the 16th and 15th centuries produced no male offspring, making it more likely that Moses would have become the foster son of a royal princess during that time; all of the 19th-dynasty kings (1306–1200 BC<\/span>) had legitimate male heirs.<\/p>\nIn addition, a 15th-century date makes possible a connection between the Habiru invasion of Canaan (1400–1350 BC<\/span>)—described in the Amarna letters found at Tell el-Amarna, Egypt—and the invasion of Canaan by the Hebrews described in the OT book of Joshua. Related to that is a reference to “Israel” in the Merneptah Stele, a stone pillar inscribed with the deeds of the Egyptian king, Merneptah, of about 1220 BC<\/span>. It implies that the people referred to, met by Merneptah in the course of a Canaanite military campaign, had been in existence for some time. Finally, an excavator of Jericho, John Garstang, placed the destruction of that city at around 1400 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nOther evidence, however, strongly implies not a 15th- but a 13th-century date for the exodus. Many scholars assign a date between 1290 and 1275 BC<\/span> on the basis of that evidence. First, the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1 discussed above may be interpreted as schematically representing 12 generations, as indicated by 1 Chronicles 6:3-8. Thus if 12 generations averaged 25 years instead of 40 years, the reduction of 480 schematized years to 300 actual years would point to an exodus date of around 1266 BC<\/span>. Second, archaeological evidence exists that dates destruction at the assumed sites of several cities conquered by Joshua (Lachish, Debir, Bethel, and Hazor) to the late 13th century. Third, there is no biblical mention of Egyptian military campaigns (such as Merneptah’s 1220 BC<\/span> incursion); Israelites living in Canaan before the time of the militarily active pharaohs Seti I (1319–1301 BC<\/span>) and Ramses II (1301–1234 BC<\/span>) would certainly have been affected by such activity. Fourth, Exodus 1:11 mentions the city of Rameses, the capital built by Ramses II, according to his own inscriptions. A fifth line of argument comes from archaeological conclusions that Transjordan and the Negev Desert were not occupied by sedentary people between 1900 and 1300 BC<\/span>, whereas the Bible states clearly that the Israelites encountered stiff opposition from groups in that same region. Thus, it is argued, the Israelites must have entered that region after 1300 BC<\/span>. Sixth, connecting the Habiru with the Israelites of the Conquest lacks weight because many texts besides the Amarna tablets attest to the existence of Habiru groups virtually all over the ancient Near East. “Habiru” seems to be a much broader term, possibly meaning “trespasser,” and is probably unrelated etymologically or semantically to “Hebrew.” Seventh, and finally, Garstang’s work at Jericho has now been revised by archaeologist Kathleen Kenyon, who showed that the fallen walls that Garstang had dated about 1400 BC<\/span> in reality were destroyed in 1800 BC<\/span> or earlier.<\/p>\nSo far, it has been impossible to decide with precision between the two centuries proposed for the exodus. The majority opinion among OT scholars generally, including a growing number of moderate or conservative scholars, is in favor of the 13th-century option. On the other hand, many other conservative scholars continue to favor the 15th-century date. Dogmatism is unwarranted since problems remain unresolved with either option.<\/p>\nIn accordance with the majority opinion, however, a date of about 1290 BC<\/span> for the exodus will be used in dealing with subsequent problems.<\/p>\nConquest and Consolidation<\/p>\nThe chronological task for the period of conquest and consolidation is to fit all the events narrated by the OT, chiefly in Joshua and Judges, between the exodus (c. 1290 BC<\/span>) and the times of David (c. 1000 BC<\/span>) and Solomon (d. 930 BC<\/span>). In other words, one must fit roughly 550 years of biblical events between Moses and David into a 290-year span.<\/p>\nAlthough assigning an early date for the exodus (c. 1447 BC<\/span>) would make the task somewhat easier, the mere addition of about 157 years does not by itself solve all the problems. Neither date allows enough time for all the OT events from Joshua to David to take place singly and consecutively. Accordingly, advocates of both dates assume that some of the judges ruled simultaneously rather than consecutively. The difference is one of degree only.<\/p>\nThe book of Joshua furnishes most of the OT evidence regarding the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites. Unfortunately, the book of Joshua has no chronological notes that specify the amount of time elapsing during Joshua’s career. Further, there are no biblical references to major contemporary events in other parts of the ancient world, the dates of which could be used to fix the chronology. Rather, in what is obviously a telescoped account, the book of Joshua records the fall of Jericho and Ai, followed closely by a southern and then a northern campaign. After those victories, covering much of the total territory of Canaan, various parcels of land were distributed to the tribal groups of Israel; the tribes were expected to complete the task of destroying whatever Canaanite inhabitants remained in their particular region. One seeks in vain, however, for any statements indicating how long those events took.<\/p>\nIn the book of Judges a slightly different circumstance prevails. There the OT furnishes a rather complete list of figures to indicate the duration of periods of foreign oppression, judgeships, and ensuing peace. The total number of years described for that period is 410, but that total does not include any time for the many “minor” judges. It seems obvious, therefore, that most if not all of the judges were simply local chieftains whose activity was simultaneous with that of other judges, at least for part of their reign. Unfortunately, the book of Judges provides no cross-reference system to indicate which judges were contemporaries of which others. Perhaps the best one can do is to assume general guidelines for the chronology of that period between Moses and David.<\/p>\nTwo significant facts should be kept in mind. First, archaeological information seems to demand a Conquest date beginning about 1250 BC<\/span> rather than 200 years earlier. Assuming concurrent careers for the judges allows one to compress the literal OT figures into the general scheme demanded by other evidence.<\/p>\nSecond, the ancient scribes evidently related the chronology of the period to a 40-year or generation-based schema, a practice that lasted until the time of the divided kingdom, when a regular dynastic chronology was introduced. In the face of so many careers being assigned exactly 40 years, the fact remains that the literal totals of such numbers cannot be harmonized with either the biblical or the archaeological evidence for the period. Accordingly, most scholars doubt that the number 40 was ever intended to be an exact mathematical calculation. That view permits enough leeway for cautious fitting of biblical and other evidence into a general timetable.<\/p>\nThe Monarchy<\/p>\n<h5>Types of Evidence<\/h5>\nFor the period of the Israelite monarchy, chronological evidence is abundant.<\/p>\nThe OT itself strives to provide all the information necessary for the chronology of the period, including (1) a complete list of all the kings in Israel and in Judah both before and after the division of the kingdom; (2) the age of each king (except Saul) at his accession; (3) synchronisms of the northern kingdom of Israel and the southern kingdom of Judah showing in what year of his contemporary in the other kingdom each king came to the throne; and (4) precise calculations of the length of each king’s reign. In addition some important events are dated by reference to another event; others are coordinated with concurrent events in secular history.<\/p>\nOutside the OT an abundance of material provides evidence for a chronology of the period. By far the most important single source is a collection of Assyrian limmu<\/em> lists. In Assyria a record of each king’s reign was kept on a particular kind of annal. Each year of reign was named after an individual of high rank in the court; the first year was named after the king himself, the second after the next highest-ranking official (though that name appears to have been selected by lot originally), and so on, down until the death of the king. The word limmu<\/em> was used to introduce the name of the official after whom the current year was to be named, hence the designation “limmu<\/em> lists.”<\/p>\nAssyrian limmu<\/em> lists are tied precisely to the solar year, making the documents highly reliable. Further, in addition to many events in Assyrian history, notable natural phenomena were dated on the basis of the limmu<\/em> in which they occurred. For example, a solar eclipse dated by the Assyrian scribes in the limmu<\/em> year of Bur-Sagale has been computed astronomically as June 15, 763 BC<\/span>. Beginning with the year 763, then, and working both backward and forward, a complete list of Assyrian limmu<\/em> officials has been obtained for the period between 891 and 648 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nWith the accuracy of the Assyrian limmu<\/em> lists corroborated by a number of sources, they can be used with confidence in reconstructing the chronology of the corresponding period of biblical history. That is especially true where a biblical writer related an Israelite or a Judahite event to a particular year in the reign of an Assyrian king whose limmu<\/em> list indicates the precise years of his reign.<\/p>\nThere are also records from Chaldean (Babylonian) king lists and from later Greek historians. Ptolemy, in the second century AD<\/span>, for example, gave dates for Babylonian kings from 747 BC<\/span> and continued with dates for Persian, Greek, and Roman rulers down to AD<\/span> 161. Finally, useful information is found in inscriptions from monuments, stelae, and other artifacts from Assyria and elsewhere.<\/p>\n<h5>Monarchical Chronology<\/h5>\nThe limmu<\/em> list of the Assyrian king Shalmaneser III provides a basis for the first comparison of dates among Assyria, Israel, and Judah. In the limmu<\/em> of Daian-Assur, Shalmaneser’s sixth year on the throne, Ahab of Israel was listed as one of the kings who fought against the Assyrians in the battle of Qarqar. Thus the date for that battle may be placed confidently in 853 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nAssyrian records also indicate that Shalmaneser III came into contact with an Israelite king 12 years later, in 841 BC<\/span>. That king was Jehu. Thus two fixed points are available for correlating the biblical information. Following the death of Ahab, which is not dated exactly by reference to the Assyrian records, two of his sons came to power. The first, Ahaziah, reigned two years (1 Kgs 22:51); the second, Joram (also called Jehoram), reigned a total of 12 years (2 Kgs 3:1). Recognizing a nonaccession-year reckoning by the Israelites in that era, the apparent total of 14 years may be reduced to an actual total of 12. Thus it seems evident that Ahab not only fought Shalmaneser III in 853 BC<\/span> but also died in that year. Ahab was then followed by his two sons for a total of 12 years before the accession of Jehu in time to account for his contact with Shalmaneser II in 841 BC<\/span>. Further, because Jehu murdered both the king of Israel (Jehoram) and the king of Judah (Ahaziah) at the same time (2 Kgs 9:24-27), a fixed synchronism is provided between the two kingdoms for the year 841 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe first nine kings of Israel ruled an apparent total of 98 years or an actual total (taking into account Israel’s nonaccession-year policy) of 90 years. Zimri, who ruled only seven days (1 Kgs 16:15-18), counts as one of the nine but does not insert an extra year in either the actual or apparent totals. The accession of Jeroboam I thus occurred in 930 BC<\/span> (adding 90 years to 841 BC<\/span>), and Rehoboam of Judah began to rule in that same year as well. Allowing Solomon the 40-year reign indicated in 1 Kings 11:42 points to the year 970 BC<\/span> for his accession. The death of David would also be pinpointed in that period, although allowance must be made for the possibility of a short co-regency of David and Solomon before David’s death. The reign of Saul then falls approximately in the late 11th century BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nIn Judah the period between the death of Solomon in 930 BC<\/span> and the murder of Ahaziah by Jehu in 841 BC<\/span> was occupied by the kingships of six men whose time on the throne totals 95 biblical years. Computation of that era in Judah is not as simple as for the Israelite kings for several reasons. Problems include a change from accession- to nonaccession-year reckoning sometime around 850 BC<\/span>, at least two co-regencies (Jehoshaphat with Asa and then Jehoram with Jehoshaphat), and the calendar differences between the two kingdoms. It is clear that the 95 apparent years must be reduced, on the basis of the differences in computation and calendar, to 90 actual years in order to bring the Judahite figures into line with the established Assyrian and Israelite synchronisms.<\/p>\nAfter the year 841, the next biblical event to be certified by nonbiblical materials is the fall of Samaria in 722 BC<\/span>. That date is furnished by the annals of Sargon II of Assyria (722–705 BC<\/span>), successor to Shalmaneser V (727–722 BC<\/span>). Although that date comes just 120 years after the fixed point of 841 BC<\/span> in Israelite history, the chronological materials for that period are quite difficult to interpret accurately. In the past, scholars resorted to assumptions of extensive co-regencies, to presumed confusion on the part of certain scribes over methods to be followed in computations, or to other theories in attempting to understand the period. In spite of the many difficulties, however, all the biblical and Assyrian dates for the period of the divided monarchy have been harmonized—with the exception of four figures related to the closing years of the Israelite kingdom, all connected in some way with the problematic reign of Hoshea.<\/p>\nJudah after the Fall of Israel<\/p>\nFollowing the fall of Samaria in 722 BC<\/span>, OT chronology is concerned only with the southern kingdom of Judah until its destruction some 135 years later. Two events in the biblical record important for establishing a chronology for that period are the siege of Jerusalem by Sennacherib of Assyria in the late eighth century and the eventual fall of Jerusalem to the Babylonians in the early sixth century.<\/p>\n<h5>Sennacherib’s Invasion of Judah<\/h5>\nThe Assyrian invasion (704–681 BC<\/span>) is recorded in 2 Kings 18:13-16, where verse 13 dates the event to the 14th year of King Hezekiah. Sennacherib’s own inscriptions include a lengthier version of the affair. From them the date of 701 BC<\/span> is established, placing the accession of Hezekiah in 715 BC<\/span>. That much is simple, but problems still arise. For example, 2 Kings 19:9 reports that Sennacherib was in contact with an Ethiopian king, Tirhakah (c. 690–664 BC<\/span>), during the course of his campaign, which included a siege of Jerusalem. Obviously, contact with a ruler who came to power in 690 BC<\/span> at the earliest could not refer to events in 701 BC<\/span>. It is possible, however, that Sennacherib actually made two invasions of Judah, the first in 701 and the second sometime later. The date of that supposed second invasion is not assured, although 2 Kings 19:35-37 may imply that Sennacherib was murdered only shortly after his withdrawal from Jerusalem. Since Sennacherib was succeeded by his son Esarhaddon in the year 681, the presumed second invasion of Judah would have occurred somewhere in the last half of the same decade.<\/p>\nA number of scholars oppose the assumption of a second invasion of Jerusalem by Sennacherib. They suggest the possibility that Tirhakah, though king only from 690 BC<\/span>, may have led troops against Sennacherib as early as 701, before acceding to the throne. The reference to King Tirhakah in 2 Kings 19:9 would then be understood as use of his eventual title in an effort to identify him to a later generation of readers.<\/p>\nHowever the question of the number of invasions is decided, it is certain that Sennacherib invaded Judah in 701 BC<\/span>, the 14th regnal year of Hezekiah. Such a synchronism establishes Hezekiah’s accession year as 715 BC<\/span>, but that date raises another problem. The fall of Samaria, now established at 722, is dated by 2 Kings 18:10 in the sixth year of Hezekiah’s reign. The most likely solution is that Hezekiah began a co-regency with his father, Ahaz, six years before Samaria fell. The possibility for confusion arises from the fact that one verse (2 Kgs 18:13; repeated in Is 36:1) synchronizes Sennacherib’s 701 BC<\/span> invasion with the 14th year of Hezekiah’s independent reign; another verse (2 Kgs 18:10) correlates the fall of Samaria with the beginning of Hezekiah’s co-regency. Thus from about 728 to 715 BC<\/span> Hezekiah was co-regent with Ahaz. From 715 to 697 he reigned alone. From 696 to 686 his son Manasseh was co-ruler with him.<\/p>\nAccording to the chronological information given by a number of verses in 2 Kings, a total of 128 years and six months elapsed between the time of Hezekiah’s accession in 715 and the capture of King Jehoiachin in 597, a date to be discussed below. Thus another problem is to explain the more than 10-year excess apparently demanded by the biblical totals. The best solution appears to lie in the assumption that Manasseh first came to power in 697 as co-regent with his father, Hezekiah. Manasseh died in 642, following what 2 Kings 21:1 states was a 55-year reign. Hezekiah, who came to the throne in 715, is said to have reigned 29 years (2 Kgs 18:2), which would mean that he was king until 686, roughly 11 years after the time when Manasseh must have come to the throne in order to have completed a 55-year reign by 642.<\/p>\n<h5>Fall of Jerusalem<\/h5>\nContemporary Babylonian records are available to shed valuable light on the last few years of Judah’s existence. For the years 626–623, 618–595, and 556 BC<\/span> the Babylonian Chronicle, a formal record of Babylonian affairs of state, has been recovered. From information contained in that chronicle and other cuneiform documents of the period, three dates in Judah’s history may be fixed firmly. The first is the death of Josiah in 609; the second is the battle of Carchemish in 605; the third is the end of the reign of Jehoiachin, which is dated by the Babylonian Chronicle to the second month of Adar in the ninth year of Nebuchadnezzar, or March 16, 597.<\/p>\nAfter Jehoiachin’s capture, Zedekiah became puppet king of Judah for 11 years (2 Kgs 24:18). On the tenth day of the tenth month during Zedekiah’s ninth regnal year (2 Kgs 25:1), the final siege of Jerusalem was begun by the Babylonian army. That day was January 15, 588. On the ninth day of the fourth month during the 11th regnal year of Zedekiah, after a siege of almost 18 months, the wall of Jerusalem was broken through (2 Kgs 25:3-4). The temple was burned on day seven of the following (fifth) month.<\/p>\nBeyond 586 BC<\/span><\/p>\nFollowing the tragedy of 586 BC<\/span>, several further developments are given chronological notice in the OT. Jeremiah 52:30 records a third deportation of Jews to Babylonia in the 23d year of King Nebuchadnezzar (582 or 581 BC<\/span>). Both 2 Kings 25:27 and Jeremiah 52:31 give evidence of the release of King Jehoiachin from prison; the Babylonian Chronicle dates that event at 27 Adar, or March 21, 561 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nIn 539 BC<\/span> the Babylonians themselves were destined to learn the meaning of defeat. In that year a Persian ruler, Cyrus the Great, launched a successful campaign against Babylon and its king, Nabonidus. Inheriting control over the exiled Jews and many other groups of people conquered earlier by Babylonia, Cyrus moved quickly to initiate a policy of tolerance toward his new subjects. In the first year of his rule Cyrus issued an edict making it possible for Jews to return to their former land (Ezr 1:1). On the first day of the following year, 1 Tishri (Ezr 3:6), an altar was set up in Jerusalem. In Iyyar of the following year (April\/May 536) work was begun on the temple itself (Ezr 3:8).<\/p>\nAfter a period of frustrating work stoppages of varying lengths, the preaching of Haggai and Zechariah spurred on the Jews to complete the temple. Work resumed in 520 (Ezr 4:24; Hg 1:1, 15) and was finally completed on 3 Adar, or March 12, 515 (Ezr 6:15). The final stages of OT chronology pertain to the careers of Ezra and Nehemiah. The traditional view of their era places Ezra in the seventh year of Artaxerxes I (458 BC<\/span>) and Nehemiah in the 20th (445 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> “Date” under each OT book; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Diaspora of the Jews; Exodus, The; Israel, History of; Patriarchs, Period of the; Postexilic Period; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (Old Testament) Branch of biblical studies that attempts to assign dates and sequences to OT events. Chronology is a science. It deals with evidence, theories, assumptions, and the balance of probabilities. Often it boils down to a matter of choosing among theories that are equally unable to solve all the problems raised by other points of view. OT chronology is an accredited branch of biblical studies primarily because it is essential for understanding the proper his...","summary_en":"CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (Old Testament) Branch of biblical studies that attempts to assign dates and sequences to OT events. Chronology is a science. It deals with evidence, theories, assumptions, and the balance of probabilities. Often it boils down to a matter of choosing among theories that are equally unable to solve all the problems raised by other points of view. OT chronology is an accredited branch of biblical studies primarily because it is essential for understanding the proper his...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":16327,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Hezekiah","title_en":"Hezekiah","content_ro":"<h3>HEZEKIAH<\/h3>\n<li>1. King of Judah from 715–686 BC<\/span>. The account of Hezekiah’s reign is in 2 Kings 18:1–20:21, 2 Chronicles 29:1–32:33, and Isaiah 36:1–39:8.<\/li>\nChronology<\/p>\nHezekiah succeeded to Judah’s throne at 25 and ruled for 29 years (2 Kgs 18:2; 2 Chr 29:1). His mother was Abi (2 Kgs 18:2; 2 Chr 29:1; “Abijah,” a longer form), a daughter of Zechariah. The chronology of Hezekiah’s reign is difficult to establish with certainty. The Bible says the Assyrian siege of Samaria, capital of the northern kingdom of Israel, began in the fourth year of his reign and that Samaria fell in the sixth year (2 Kgs 18:9-10), which would make his reign begin about 728 BC<\/span> and end about 699 BC<\/span>. Assyrian king Sennacherib besieged the fortified Judean cities during Hezekiah’s 14th year (2 Kgs 18:13), which would have been 714 BC<\/span>. Assyrian records, however, indicate that Sennacherib came to the Assyrian throne in 705 BC<\/span> and that his Judean campaign took place in 701 BC<\/span>. The most generally accepted solution to the discrepancy is that Hezekiah came to the throne in 715 BC<\/span>, probably after a co-regency with his father, Ahaz, that began in 728 BC<\/span>. That solution harmonizes with the statement that Sennacherib’s siege took place in the 14th year of Hezekiah’s reign, or 701 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nHezekiah’s Religious Reforms<\/p>\nHezekiah came to the throne at a critical juncture in Judah’s history. Sargon II had taken Samaria in 722 BC<\/span>, and Judah was militarily weakened from wars and raids by surrounding nations during the reign of Ahaz. Perhaps motivated by warnings to the northern kingdom delivered by the prophets Amos and Hosea that punishment would come if Israel did not turn back to God, Hezekiah began his religious reforms soon after becoming king.<\/p>\nIn the first month of his reign, Hezekiah opened the temple doors and repaired them. He brought the Levites together and ordered them to sanctify themselves and the temple and to reinstate the religious ceremonies that had long been neglected. Hezekiah brought sacrifices, and the priestly temple service was restored (2 Chr 29).<\/p>\nHezekiah then sent invitations throughout Judah and Israel for the Passover celebration in Jerusalem (held a month later than the prescribed time because the priests and people could not be ready earlier). It was hoped that religious unification would be a prelude to political reunification of the northern kingdom of Israel and the southern kingdom of Judah. However, most of the northern tribes mocked the Judean messengers who brought the invitations, and only a few persons from the tribes of Asher, Manasseh, and Zebulun went to Jerusalem for the celebration (2 Chr 30).<\/p>\nAfter the Passover observance, the worshipers set about destroying the high places and altars. They broke the pillars and cut down the Asherim throughout Judah and Benjamin, and also went into Ephraim and Manasseh (2 Chr 31:1). Hezekiah even smashed the bronze serpent that Moses had made (Nm 21:6-9), for it had become an object of worship and was identified with a serpent deity, Nehushtan (2 Kgs 18:4). Because of his sweeping reforms, later generations said of Hezekiah, “There was never another king like him in the land of Judah, either before or after his time” (2 Kgs 18:5, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe Assyrian Threat<\/p>\nHezekiah knew that Assyria’s growing international dominance was a serious threat to his kingdom, but following his father’s policy of submission, Hezekiah did not attempt any resistance at first.<\/p>\nThe inscriptions of the Assyrian king Sargon II record his victorious campaign in 711 BC<\/span> against a revolt by Aziru, king of Ashdod, who requested help from Egypt and Judah. Perhaps a prophecy received by Isaiah warned Hezekiah not to interfere with the Ashdod siege (Is 20), and so no punitive action was taken against Judah by Assyria. Sargon died in 705, and his son Sennacherib came to the throne. This triggered widespread rebellion throughout the Assyrian provinces. Hezekiah withheld tribute from the new Assyrian ruler and, taking advantage of the confused situation, made raids against the Philistines (2 Kgs 18:8). After subduing rebellious elements in the East, Sennacherib began his campaign against the “land of Hatti” (the Assyrian name for the western countries) in 701 BC<\/span>. In preparation Hezekiah repaired Jerusalem’s city wall, raised towers on it, built another wall outside it, and strengthened the Millo in the City of David. He also stockpiled abundant quantities of weapons and shields (2 Chr 32:5). Knowing the necessity of an adequate water supply for a city under siege, Hezekiah had a 1,777-foot (542-meter) tunnel cut through solid rock from the spring of Gihon to the Siloam Pool to bring water into the city and to prevent the Assyrians from gaining access to the spring water outside the city (2 Kgs 20:20; 2 Chr 32:3-4). The Siloam inscription, carved inside the tunnel itself, records the completion of that remarkable conduit and is one of the oldest preserved examples of the Hebrew language.<\/p>\nSennacherib invaded Palestine and, after an extensive campaign, put down the rebellion there. That campaign is well documented in Assyrian records, including a description of his siege on Jerusalem in 701, and this documentation is supplemented by the biblical account (2 Kgs 18:13–19:37; 2 Chr 32:1-22; Is 36–37). Sidon, the cities of Phoenicia, and the immediate neighbors of Judah (including Byblos, Arnon, Moab, Edom, and Ashdod) submitted to the Assyrians. Resistant Philistine cities were also taken. Sennacherib laid siege against Ekron, whose king, Padi (a loyal subject of Sennacherib), had been taken prisoner by his own subjects and turned over in chains to Hezekiah. A large Egyptian and Ethiopian army failed to relieve the Ekronites, who were defeated by the Assyrians in the vicinity of Eltekah. Ekron was captured, and Padi was recalled to his throne by Sennacherib.<\/p>\nSennacherib then turned his attention to the fortified cities of Judah and took them one by one (2 Kgs 18:13). Assyrian records claim that he captured 46 walled cities and countless villages, including Lachish and Debir (southwest of Jerusalem), 200,150 people, homes, cattle, and flocks without number. While Lachish was still under siege, Hezekiah saw that it was hopeless to resist and sent word to Sennacherib offering to surrender and pay whatever tribute he would impose. The Assyrian ruler demanded an enormous tribute of 300 talents of silver (800 talents according to Assyrian records, either an exaggerated figure or computed by a different standard) and 30 talents of gold. In order to pay that tribute, Hezekiah took all the silver in the temple and the royal treasuries, and stripped the gold from the temple doors and doorposts (2 Kgs 18:14-16). This treasure was sent to Sennacherib along with other gifts that, according to the Assyrian account, included some of Hezekiah’s own daughters as concubines.<\/p>\nThe account in 2 Kings 18:17–19:37 raises the question of whether there was another invasion of Judah at a later date, or whether this passage gives additional details about the invasion of 701. Although Hezekiah had already submitted and paid tribute, these verses describe further Assyrian demands. Those who believe it was a single invasion suggest that this is an account of the Assyrian deputation sent by Sennacherib to demand Jerusalem’s surrender while Lachish was still under siege. The deputation included the Tartan, Rabsaris, and Rabshakeh (titles of court officials rather than personal names). They warned the citizens that their God was no more able to save them than the gods of other cities defeated by the Assyrians. In distress Hezekiah sent word to the prophet Isaiah, who assured the king that Sennacherib would hear a rumor and return to his own land and there die by the sword (2 Kgs 19:1-7). Shortly afterward Sennacherib received word of Babylon’s revolt in his eastern provinces, so he departed at once without taking Jerusalem. Assyrian records do not claim that Jerusalem was taken but only say that Hezekiah was “shut up in Jerusalem like a bird in a cage.” Judah’s surrounding neighbors celebrated their deliverance and brought gifts of gratitude to Hezekiah (2 Chr 32:23).<\/p>\nLater, the Assyrian king heard that Tirhakah, king of Ethiopia, was advancing against him, so he sent another threatening message to Hezekiah, probably to warn him against making an alliance with Tirhakah. Hezekiah took the matter before the Lord and received word from Isaiah that the Assyrian king would return the same way he came and that Jerusalem would be untouched. Soon afterward, in a miraculous intervention by God, 185,000 Assyrian troops were killed, and the Assyrian monarch abandoned his plans to conquer Hezekiah. That embarrassing calamity understandably is not mentioned by the Assyrian records. In 681 Sennacherib was killed by two of his sons as Isaiah had predicted (2 Kgs 19:7, 37).<\/p>\nSometime prior to 701, Hezekiah became seriously ill, and Isaiah told him to prepare for death. The king earnestly prayed for an extension of life, and God promised him 15 more years as well as deliverance from the Assyrians. Hezekiah asked Isaiah for a sign that he would be healed, and a shadow cast by the sun moved backward 10 steps contrary to its normal direction (2 Kgs 20:1-11).<\/p>\nSometime after his recovery Hezekiah received a delegation with presents from Merodach-baladan of Babylon, ostensibly to congratulate Hezekiah on his return to health. The real object of the visit was probably to enlist Hezekiah as an ally in a conspiracy being formed against Assyria. The king showed the Babylonian envoys all the gold, silver, and other valuables he possessed. This act brought a warning from Isaiah that the day would come when all those treasures would be carried away to Babylon (2 Kgs 20:12-19).<\/p>\nHezekiah lived the remainder of his life in peace and prosperity. It may have been during this time that he encouraged literary efforts in Judah, which included copying some of Solomon’s proverbs (Prv 25–29). Upon his death in 686, he was succeeded by his son Manasseh, who probably had become co-regent 10 years earlier.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Israel, History of; King.<\/p>\n<li>2. KJV form of Hizkiah, Neariah’s son, in 1 Chronicles 3:23. See<\/em> Hizkiah #1.<\/li>\n<li>3. Head of a family of exiles (the sons of Ater), 98 of whose descendants returned from the Babylonian exile with Zerubbabel (Ezr 2:16; Neh 7:21; 10:17).<\/li>\n<li>4. Ancestor of the prophet Zephaniah, possibly King Hezekiah himself (Zep 1:1).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>HEZEKIAH<\/h3>\n<li>1. King of Judah from 715–686 BC<\/span>. The account of Hezekiah’s reign is in 2 Kings 18:1–20:21, 2 Chronicles 29:1–32:33, and Isaiah 36:1–39:8.<\/li>\nChronology<\/p>\nHezekiah succeeded to Judah’s throne at 25 and ruled for 29 years (2 Kgs 18:2; 2 Chr 29:1). His mother was Abi (2 Kgs 18:2; 2 Chr 29:1; “Abijah,” a longer form), a daughter of Zechariah. The chronology of Hezekiah’s reign is difficult to establish with certainty. The Bible says the Assyrian siege of Samaria, capital of the northern kingdom of Israel, began in the fourth year of his reign and that Samaria fell in the sixth year (2 Kgs 18:9-10), which would make his reign begin about 728 BC<\/span> and end about 699 BC<\/span>. Assyrian king Sennacherib besieged the fortified Judean cities during Hezekiah’s 14th year (2 Kgs 18:13), which would have been 714 BC<\/span>. Assyrian records, however, indicate that Sennacherib came to the Assyrian throne in 705 BC<\/span> and that his Judean campaign took place in 701 BC<\/span>. The most generally accepted solution to the discrepancy is that Hezekiah came to the throne in 715 BC<\/span>, probably after a co-regency with his father, Ahaz, that began in 728 BC<\/span>. That solution harmonizes with the statement that Sennacherib’s siege took place in the 14th year of Hezekiah’s reign, or 701 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nHezekiah’s Religious Reforms<\/p>\nHezekiah came to the throne at a critical juncture in Judah’s history. Sargon II had taken Samaria in 722 BC<\/span>, and Judah was militarily weakened from wars and raids by surrounding nations during the reign of Ahaz. Perhaps motivated by warnings to the northern kingdom delivered by the prophets Amos and Hosea that punishment would come if Israel did not turn back to God, Hezekiah began his religious reforms soon after becoming king.<\/p>\nIn the first month of his reign, Hezekiah opened the temple doors and repaired them. He brought the Levites together and ordered them to sanctify themselves and the temple and to reinstate the religious ceremonies that had long been neglected. Hezekiah brought sacrifices, and the priestly temple service was restored (2 Chr 29).<\/p>\nHezekiah then sent invitations throughout Judah and Israel for the Passover celebration in Jerusalem (held a month later than the prescribed time because the priests and people could not be ready earlier). It was hoped that religious unification would be a prelude to political reunification of the northern kingdom of Israel and the southern kingdom of Judah. However, most of the northern tribes mocked the Judean messengers who brought the invitations, and only a few persons from the tribes of Asher, Manasseh, and Zebulun went to Jerusalem for the celebration (2 Chr 30).<\/p>\nAfter the Passover observance, the worshipers set about destroying the high places and altars. They broke the pillars and cut down the Asherim throughout Judah and Benjamin, and also went into Ephraim and Manasseh (2 Chr 31:1). Hezekiah even smashed the bronze serpent that Moses had made (Nm 21:6-9), for it had become an object of worship and was identified with a serpent deity, Nehushtan (2 Kgs 18:4). Because of his sweeping reforms, later generations said of Hezekiah, “There was never another king like him in the land of Judah, either before or after his time” (2 Kgs 18:5, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe Assyrian Threat<\/p>\nHezekiah knew that Assyria’s growing international dominance was a serious threat to his kingdom, but following his father’s policy of submission, Hezekiah did not attempt any resistance at first.<\/p>\nThe inscriptions of the Assyrian king Sargon II record his victorious campaign in 711 BC<\/span> against a revolt by Aziru, king of Ashdod, who requested help from Egypt and Judah. Perhaps a prophecy received by Isaiah warned Hezekiah not to interfere with the Ashdod siege (Is 20), and so no punitive action was taken against Judah by Assyria. Sargon died in 705, and his son Sennacherib came to the throne. This triggered widespread rebellion throughout the Assyrian provinces. Hezekiah withheld tribute from the new Assyrian ruler and, taking advantage of the confused situation, made raids against the Philistines (2 Kgs 18:8). After subduing rebellious elements in the East, Sennacherib began his campaign against the “land of Hatti” (the Assyrian name for the western countries) in 701 BC<\/span>. In preparation Hezekiah repaired Jerusalem’s city wall, raised towers on it, built another wall outside it, and strengthened the Millo in the City of David. He also stockpiled abundant quantities of weapons and shields (2 Chr 32:5). Knowing the necessity of an adequate water supply for a city under siege, Hezekiah had a 1,777-foot (542-meter) tunnel cut through solid rock from the spring of Gihon to the Siloam Pool to bring water into the city and to prevent the Assyrians from gaining access to the spring water outside the city (2 Kgs 20:20; 2 Chr 32:3-4). The Siloam inscription, carved inside the tunnel itself, records the completion of that remarkable conduit and is one of the oldest preserved examples of the Hebrew language.<\/p>\nSennacherib invaded Palestine and, after an extensive campaign, put down the rebellion there. That campaign is well documented in Assyrian records, including a description of his siege on Jerusalem in 701, and this documentation is supplemented by the biblical account (2 Kgs 18:13–19:37; 2 Chr 32:1-22; Is 36–37). Sidon, the cities of Phoenicia, and the immediate neighbors of Judah (including Byblos, Arnon, Moab, Edom, and Ashdod) submitted to the Assyrians. Resistant Philistine cities were also taken. Sennacherib laid siege against Ekron, whose king, Padi (a loyal subject of Sennacherib), had been taken prisoner by his own subjects and turned over in chains to Hezekiah. A large Egyptian and Ethiopian army failed to relieve the Ekronites, who were defeated by the Assyrians in the vicinity of Eltekah. Ekron was captured, and Padi was recalled to his throne by Sennacherib.<\/p>\nSennacherib then turned his attention to the fortified cities of Judah and took them one by one (2 Kgs 18:13). Assyrian records claim that he captured 46 walled cities and countless villages, including Lachish and Debir (southwest of Jerusalem), 200,150 people, homes, cattle, and flocks without number. While Lachish was still under siege, Hezekiah saw that it was hopeless to resist and sent word to Sennacherib offering to surrender and pay whatever tribute he would impose. The Assyrian ruler demanded an enormous tribute of 300 talents of silver (800 talents according to Assyrian records, either an exaggerated figure or computed by a different standard) and 30 talents of gold. In order to pay that tribute, Hezekiah took all the silver in the temple and the royal treasuries, and stripped the gold from the temple doors and doorposts (2 Kgs 18:14-16). This treasure was sent to Sennacherib along with other gifts that, according to the Assyrian account, included some of Hezekiah’s own daughters as concubines.<\/p>\nThe account in 2 Kings 18:17–19:37 raises the question of whether there was another invasion of Judah at a later date, or whether this passage gives additional details about the invasion of 701. Although Hezekiah had already submitted and paid tribute, these verses describe further Assyrian demands. Those who believe it was a single invasion suggest that this is an account of the Assyrian deputation sent by Sennacherib to demand Jerusalem’s surrender while Lachish was still under siege. The deputation included the Tartan, Rabsaris, and Rabshakeh (titles of court officials rather than personal names). They warned the citizens that their God was no more able to save them than the gods of other cities defeated by the Assyrians. In distress Hezekiah sent word to the prophet Isaiah, who assured the king that Sennacherib would hear a rumor and return to his own land and there die by the sword (2 Kgs 19:1-7). Shortly afterward Sennacherib received word of Babylon’s revolt in his eastern provinces, so he departed at once without taking Jerusalem. Assyrian records do not claim that Jerusalem was taken but only say that Hezekiah was “shut up in Jerusalem like a bird in a cage.” Judah’s surrounding neighbors celebrated their deliverance and brought gifts of gratitude to Hezekiah (2 Chr 32:23).<\/p>\nLater, the Assyrian king heard that Tirhakah, king of Ethiopia, was advancing against him, so he sent another threatening message to Hezekiah, probably to warn him against making an alliance with Tirhakah. Hezekiah took the matter before the Lord and received word from Isaiah that the Assyrian king would return the same way he came and that Jerusalem would be untouched. Soon afterward, in a miraculous intervention by God, 185,000 Assyrian troops were killed, and the Assyrian monarch abandoned his plans to conquer Hezekiah. That embarrassing calamity understandably is not mentioned by the Assyrian records. In 681 Sennacherib was killed by two of his sons as Isaiah had predicted (2 Kgs 19:7, 37).<\/p>\nSometime prior to 701, Hezekiah became seriously ill, and Isaiah told him to prepare for death. The king earnestly prayed for an extension of life, and God promised him 15 more years as well as deliverance from the Assyrians. Hezekiah asked Isaiah for a sign that he would be healed, and a shadow cast by the sun moved backward 10 steps contrary to its normal direction (2 Kgs 20:1-11).<\/p>\nSometime after his recovery Hezekiah received a delegation with presents from Merodach-baladan of Babylon, ostensibly to congratulate Hezekiah on his return to health. The real object of the visit was probably to enlist Hezekiah as an ally in a conspiracy being formed against Assyria. The king showed the Babylonian envoys all the gold, silver, and other valuables he possessed. This act brought a warning from Isaiah that the day would come when all those treasures would be carried away to Babylon (2 Kgs 20:12-19).<\/p>\nHezekiah lived the remainder of his life in peace and prosperity. It may have been during this time that he encouraged literary efforts in Judah, which included copying some of Solomon’s proverbs (Prv 25–29). Upon his death in 686, he was succeeded by his son Manasseh, who probably had become co-regent 10 years earlier.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Israel, History of; King.<\/p>\n<li>2. KJV form of Hizkiah, Neariah’s son, in 1 Chronicles 3:23. See<\/em> Hizkiah #1.<\/li>\n<li>3. Head of a family of exiles (the sons of Ater), 98 of whose descendants returned from the Babylonian exile with Zerubbabel (Ezr 2:16; Neh 7:21; 10:17).<\/li>\n<li>4. Ancestor of the prophet Zephaniah, possibly King Hezekiah himself (Zep 1:1).<\/li>","summary_ro":"HEZEKIAH 1. King of Judah from 715–686 BC. The account of Hezekiah’s reign is in 2 Kings 18:1–20:21, 2 Chronicles 29:1–32:33, and Isaiah 36:1–39:8. Chronology Hezekiah succeeded to Judah’s throne at 25 and ruled for 29 years (2 Kgs 18:2; 2 Chr 29:1). His mother was Abi (2 Kgs 18:2; 2 Chr 29:1; “Abijah,” a longer form), a daughter of Zechariah. The chronology of Hezekiah’s reign is difficult to establish with certainty. The Bible says the Assyrian siege of Samaria, capital of the northern king...","summary_en":"HEZEKIAH 1. King of Judah from 715–686 BC. The account of Hezekiah’s reign is in 2 Kings 18:1–20:21, 2 Chronicles 29:1–32:33, and Isaiah 36:1–39:8. Chronology Hezekiah succeeded to Judah’s throne at 25 and ruled for 29 years (2 Kgs 18:2; 2 Chr 29:1). His mother was Abi (2 Kgs 18:2; 2 Chr 29:1; “Abijah,” a longer form), a daughter of Zechariah. The chronology of Hezekiah’s reign is difficult to establish with certainty. The Bible says the Assyrian siege of Samaria, capital of the northern king...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17582,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Inscriptions","title_en":"Inscriptions","content_ro":"<h3>INSCRIPTIONS<\/h3>\nTerm used to refer to writing in the ancient world that was done on a material of a permanent nature, such as stone or clay, rather than on ordinary and impermanent substances, such as papyri or parchment.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Introduction<\/p>\n• Inscriptions on Monuments<\/p>\n• Historical Records<\/p>\n• Official Announcements<\/p>\n• Dedications<\/p>\n• Correspondence<\/p>\n• Mosaic Floor Decorations<\/p>\nIntroduction<\/p>\nThere are occasional references to inscriptions in the Bible; for example, the Ten Commandments were inscribed on stone (Ex 31:18) and given to Moses, and later written by Joshua on stone and set up at Mt Ebal near Shechem (Jos 8:32). In the excavations at Shechem, G. E. Wright found a large stone prepared to receive an inscription that he dated to the time of Joshua on stratigraphic grounds. It may still be seen at the site. A message from the hand of God to the Babylonian king Belshazzar was inscribed on the walls of his palace (Dn 5:5, 24). Paul observed an altar with the inscription “To an unknown god” in the marketplace of Athens (Acts 17:23). The book of Revelation speaks of the names of the 12 tribes of the sons of Israel being inscribed on the gates of the heavenly city (Rv 21:12).<\/p>\nInscriptions in the ancient world can be found in almost any language and from any period of history: Egyptian, Babylonian, Persian, Greek, Latin, Hebrew, Aramaic, Nabatean, Moabite, and so on. It was once popular to argue that Moses could not have written the Pentateuch because writing had not been invented that early. Inscriptions found at the turquoise mines of Serabit el-Khadim dating to the 15th century BC<\/span> have disproven this allegation. In addition, it might be noted that clay tablets found at Ras Shamra by Claude Schaeffer and dated to about 1400 BC<\/span> demonstrate a considerable period of literary activity, as do the tablets at Ebla from approximately 1,000 years earlier.<\/p>\nInscriptions may be found in almost any position or place, but the most common locations are in the floors of synagogues, church buildings, and mosques; the pavements of forums; the walls of public buildings; dedicatory stones and statues; stelae and monumental plaques; tombs and sarcophagi; and Roman milestones. An exhaustive list is impossible, but a few representative samples will illustrate the various kinds of extant inscriptional material.<\/p>\nInscriptions on Monuments<\/p>\nThe Egyptian pharaoh Merneptah commemorated his victory over the Sea Peoples in the 13th century BC<\/span> by inscribing a black granite stele with a record of his victory. It contains the earliest known reference to Israel outside the land of Palestine: “Israel lies desolate.”<\/p>\nThe Israelite king Omri (1 Kgs 16:16-30) is referred to in a text carved in the Moabite language on a stone dating near the end of the reign of the Moabite king Mesha, about 830 BC<\/span>. It was found at Diban (OT Dibon) in 1868 and contains a record of the successful rebellion of the king against Israelite oppression.<\/p>\nAnother monumental inscription was found in Persia carved into the steep slope of Mt Behistun. It is a trilingual (Old Persian, Elamite, Akkadian) record of the exploits of Darius I, providing the key to unlocking the mystery of the cuneiform script in which several of these ancient languages were written.<\/p>\nThe Assyrian king Shalmaneser III left a record of his first six campaigns of conquest inscribed on a monolith found in 1861 at Kurkh on the Tigris. The stone is carved front and back in cuneiform that is written over a bas-relief of the king. This same king left a black stone obelisk, six and a half feet (2 meters) high, depicting his triumphs over several other kings, among whom is Jehu, king of Israel, depicted in the second panel from the top, prostrating himself before the Assyrian monarch. This is the earliest picture available of an Israelite and the only known representation of an Israelite king by a contemporary. The inscription above the picture reads, “The tribute of Jehu, son [descendant] of Omri . . .” It dates to the mid-ninth century BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nHistorical Records<\/p>\nFrequently in the region of Mesopotamia, ancient kings recorded important events or proclamations in stone or clay. A notable example is the clay prism containing the final edition of Sennacherib’s Annals dated to 691 BC<\/span>. It is hexagonal, 15 inches (38.1 centimeters) high and 6 inches (15.2 centimeters) wide, and written on all sides in cuneiform script. The inscription speaks of “Hezekiah the Jew (king of Judah), who did not submit to my yoke. . . . Like a caged bird, I shut him up in Jerusalem, his royal city” (cf. 2 Kgs 18; Is 36–39).<\/p>\nEven though no annals comparable to those produced by the Assyrian kings have survived among the Babylonians, we do have some chronicles written on clay tablets covering the years from 626 BC<\/span> to the fall of Babylon to Cyrus in 539. One of these, the Babylonian Chronicle, provides an exact date of March 16, 597 BC<\/span>, for the fall of Jerusalem to the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar (cf. 2 Kgs 24:10-17).<\/p>\nBabylon itself fell to Cyrus the Mede, king of Persia, in 539. The event is not only referred to in the Bible (Ezr 1:1-3) but is also described on a clay barrel-shaped cylinder nine inches (22.9 centimeters) in length, written in cuneiform script, during the reign of Cyrus. It refers to his policy that allowed captive nations to rebuild their cities and temples. This provides an explanation of his encouragement and financial help to the Jews in returning to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple of Solomon that Nebuchadnezzar had destroyed (Ezr 1:2-4).<\/p>\nEgyptian pharaohs were fond of publishing records of their exploits in hieroglyphic script on the walls of temples and tombs. These were usually incised into the stone and then painted. One of the most interesting is Shishak’s description of his invasion of the land of Israel incised on the southern wall of a court of the temple of Amon at Karnak. The inclusion of Megiddo, as well as other cities in Israel, among the more than 75 cities whose names can still be read adds historical interest to the biblical account of Shishak’s invasion and conquest of Jerusalem and “Judah’s fortified cities” (1 Kgs 14:25-26; 2 Chr 12:2-10). Archaeological finds confirm a destruction and burning of the city at this time.<\/p>\nOfficial Announcements<\/p>\nWhen an ancient monarch or public official wanted to publish an announcement with some degree of permanency, it would be carved in stone or set in mosaic. An inscription on a marble slab dating to the reign of Claudius (AD<\/span> 41–54) was found in 1878, originating in the city of Nazareth. It contains a warning against grave robbing or any other desecration of cemeteries. The penalty for such violation was declared to be death. The inscription may reflect some of the troubles Claudius had in Rome over the person of Christ (Suetonius, Claudius<\/em> 25) which led to the expulsion of Jews from the capital city (Acts 18). At issue must have been the resurrection of Christ as proclaimed in Rome.<\/p>\nAnnouncements were placed even in temples. Josephus referred to a small wall surrounding the Jewish temple in Jerusalem that contained slabs of stone at regular intervals giving warning in Greek and Latin to Gentiles entering the temple (War<\/em> 5.193-34; 6.125-26; Antiquities<\/em> 15.417). Two fragmentary examples have been found. One discovered by Clermont-Ganneau in 1871 reads: “No foreigner is to enter within the balustrade and embankment around the sanctuary. Whoever is caught will have himself to blame for his death which follows.” The Romans allowed the Jews to put anyone to death, even a Roman, who went beyond this barrier (War<\/em> 6.126).<\/p>\nAn important inscription commissioned by the emperor Claudius, was found at the beginning of the 20th century in Delphi, Greece. It was written in Greek and mentions Gallio as proconsul with a date that can be established as AD<\/span> 51–52 for his term of office. This Gallio is the proconsul before whom Paul was brought by the Jews of Corinth (Acts 18:12-17). It is therefore extremely important for establishing the date of Paul’s 18-month stay in Corinth, and an important pivotal date for Pauline chronology in general. The inscription is an imperial announcement to the citizens of Delphi regarding the need for increasing the population of the city with eminent people.<\/p>\nThe name Pontius Pilate has appeared in a Latin inscription carved into a stone found in the Roman theater at Caesarea Maritima on the coast of Israel. It refers to him, in partially mutilated words, as prefect and contains the name Tiberium, which designates a structure built in honor of the emperor Tiberius.<\/p>\nDedications<\/p>\nInscriptions were commonly placed on walls or floors of buildings or attached to some other structure dedicating the completed edifice. An inscription was cut into the wall of a long tunnel built by the Jewish king Hezekiah in Jerusalem when the tunnel was finished (2 Kgs 20:20). It is in Hebrew and is now in the Istanbul museum. One of the oldest inscriptions we have in that language, it describes the construction of the Siloam tunnel.<\/p>\nIn the city of Corinth in Greece there is a dedicatory inscription cut into the pavement of a plaza on the north side of the large theater. The abbreviated Latin inscription reads: Erastus pro aedilitate sua pecunia stravit<\/em> (“Erastus, in return for his aedileship, laid the pavement at his own expense”). The bronze has long since been removed from the letters deeply cut into the gray Acrocorinthian limestone. This is probably the same “Erastus, the city treasurer” mentioned by Paul in Romans 16:23. A similar inscription from the Corinthian agora of Paul’s day reads: “Gnaeus Babbius Philinus, aedile and pontifex, had this monument erected at his own expense, and he approved it in his official capacity as duovir.”<\/p>\nA monumental dedicatory inscription in Greek was found in Jerusalem during excavations in 1913–14, which once stood on the wall of a first-century AD<\/span> synagogue on Mt Ophel. It refers to a Theodotus, the son of a ruler of the synagogue named Vettenos, who built the synagogue. Since the name Vettenos is Roman, it may be that Theodotus was a Jewish slave who had been freed and given the Roman name of his master. If so, this inscription may have hung on the “synagogue of the Freedmen” in Jerusalem (Acts 6:9).<\/p>\nThe British Museum contains a portion of a broken arch that stood over an entrance into the Greek city of Thessalonica from the first century AD<\/span> until 1867, when it was torn down to provide stone for the repair of the vast city wall. The inscription begins: “In the time of the politarchs . . .” This is a rare word referring to Roman officials and is used in the book of Acts (Acts 17:6) in reference to city authorities of Thessalonica. This word is found nowhere else in Greek literature.<\/p>\nCorrespondence<\/p>\nIn the second millennium before Christ, it was common practice to write correspondence on small clay tablets. More than half a million have been found in Mari, Nuzi, Nineveh, Ebla, and elsewhere. Interesting examples of such correspondence may be found in a great number of clay tablets found at Tell el-Amarna in Upper Egypt. They were written in the Babylonian language using the cuneiform script during the time when Akhenaton was captivated with his reformation of Egyptian art and religion at his new capital Tell el-Amarna (Akhetaten), and Palestine and Syria were left to the mercy of marauders called Habiru in the documents. Many of these are written from cities in Canaan under attack and ask for help from the pharaoh, whose vassals they are at this time (late 14th century BC<\/span>). Some think that these Habiru were the ancient Hebrews who invaded the land under the direction of Joshua.<\/p>\nSometimes correspondence was written in ink on broken pieces of ceramic pottery (potsherds) called ostraca. In 1935, 18 of these were found in the excavations at Lachish in southern Israel. They are written in Hebrew and provide examples of the kind of script used by the Judeans in the time of Jeremiah. The language is essentially identical with the Hebrew of the OT. The letters were sent by Hosha’yahu, an officer in charge of a nearby town, to Ya’osh, the military governor of Lachish, during the invasion of Judea by the Babylonians, which ended in the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 586 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nEleven such potsherds were found in Masada, on the western shore of the Dead Sea, in excavations conducted by Yigael Yadin from 1963 to 1965. Masada was destroyed by the Roman army under the command of Flavius Silva in AD<\/span> 73. Nine hundred and sixty men, women, and children committed suicide rather than surrender to the Romans. Ten men were chosen to cut the throats of those who remained. They drew lots for the heartbreaking task, according to Josephus (War<\/em> 7.395), and Professor Yadin thinks the ostraca he found were the ones used in the drawing. One of them contained the name of Ben Yair, who was probably Eleazer ben Yair, the commander of the fortress.<\/p>\nMosaic Floor Decorations<\/p>\nIn the Roman and Byzantine periods it was popular to decorate the floors of basilicas, baths, synagogues, churches, and other public buildings with elaborate tesselation containing inscriptions and artwork. Excavation in 1972 disclosed a building in Caesarea Maritima with mosaic inscriptions in six floors throughout the structure. Two of them are the Greek text of Romans 13:3 set in a circular border. Another is a blessing on the one who enters and exits the room: “May the Lord bless your entry and your exit.” Two of them invoke the aid of Christ for people associated with the function and construction of the building. These were a part of a building that was destroyed in the seventh century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe floors of the synagogues at Tiberias-hamath, Beth Shan, Beth Alpha, Eshtemoa, Susiya, Hamath-gader, En-gedi, and others in Israel have inscriptions in Greek and Aramaic that usually refer to benefactors of the synagogue. A synagogue floor has been found in Naro, Tunisia, which contains a Latin inscription. In the Tiberias synagogue, Hebrew was used only for defining the astrological symbols that appear in the zodiac. Aramaic was used primarily for Halakah (religious rule or law), and Greek was principally used in honoring donors.<\/p>\nOne of the best-known mosaic floor inscriptions in churches was in Madaba, Jordan, where the oldest known map of Israel and Jordan was set into the floor in the sixth century AD<\/span>. The place-names of cities, geographical features, and passages of Scripture are given in Greek. Church floors typically contain dated or undated dedications, blessings, and Scripture quotations that appear in Aramaic, Coptic, Syriac, Latin, and Greek. Symbolism often accompanies the inscriptions, but in AD<\/span> 427 an edict was issued forbidding the use of crosses and other religious symbols on pavements so that they might not be stepped on. It is not clear how widespread this prohibition was.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Archaeology and the Bible; Pottery.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>INSCRIPTIONS<\/h3>\nTerm used to refer to writing in the ancient world that was done on a material of a permanent nature, such as stone or clay, rather than on ordinary and impermanent substances, such as papyri or parchment.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Introduction<\/p>\n• Inscriptions on Monuments<\/p>\n• Historical Records<\/p>\n• Official Announcements<\/p>\n• Dedications<\/p>\n• Correspondence<\/p>\n• Mosaic Floor Decorations<\/p>\nIntroduction<\/p>\nThere are occasional references to inscriptions in the Bible; for example, the Ten Commandments were inscribed on stone (Ex 31:18) and given to Moses, and later written by Joshua on stone and set up at Mt Ebal near Shechem (Jos 8:32). In the excavations at Shechem, G. E. Wright found a large stone prepared to receive an inscription that he dated to the time of Joshua on stratigraphic grounds. It may still be seen at the site. A message from the hand of God to the Babylonian king Belshazzar was inscribed on the walls of his palace (Dn 5:5, 24). Paul observed an altar with the inscription “To an unknown god” in the marketplace of Athens (Acts 17:23). The book of Revelation speaks of the names of the 12 tribes of the sons of Israel being inscribed on the gates of the heavenly city (Rv 21:12).<\/p>\nInscriptions in the ancient world can be found in almost any language and from any period of history: Egyptian, Babylonian, Persian, Greek, Latin, Hebrew, Aramaic, Nabatean, Moabite, and so on. It was once popular to argue that Moses could not have written the Pentateuch because writing had not been invented that early. Inscriptions found at the turquoise mines of Serabit el-Khadim dating to the 15th century BC<\/span> have disproven this allegation. In addition, it might be noted that clay tablets found at Ras Shamra by Claude Schaeffer and dated to about 1400 BC<\/span> demonstrate a considerable period of literary activity, as do the tablets at Ebla from approximately 1,000 years earlier.<\/p>\nInscriptions may be found in almost any position or place, but the most common locations are in the floors of synagogues, church buildings, and mosques; the pavements of forums; the walls of public buildings; dedicatory stones and statues; stelae and monumental plaques; tombs and sarcophagi; and Roman milestones. An exhaustive list is impossible, but a few representative samples will illustrate the various kinds of extant inscriptional material.<\/p>\nInscriptions on Monuments<\/p>\nThe Egyptian pharaoh Merneptah commemorated his victory over the Sea Peoples in the 13th century BC<\/span> by inscribing a black granite stele with a record of his victory. It contains the earliest known reference to Israel outside the land of Palestine: “Israel lies desolate.”<\/p>\nThe Israelite king Omri (1 Kgs 16:16-30) is referred to in a text carved in the Moabite language on a stone dating near the end of the reign of the Moabite king Mesha, about 830 BC<\/span>. It was found at Diban (OT Dibon) in 1868 and contains a record of the successful rebellion of the king against Israelite oppression.<\/p>\nAnother monumental inscription was found in Persia carved into the steep slope of Mt Behistun. It is a trilingual (Old Persian, Elamite, Akkadian) record of the exploits of Darius I, providing the key to unlocking the mystery of the cuneiform script in which several of these ancient languages were written.<\/p>\nThe Assyrian king Shalmaneser III left a record of his first six campaigns of conquest inscribed on a monolith found in 1861 at Kurkh on the Tigris. The stone is carved front and back in cuneiform that is written over a bas-relief of the king. This same king left a black stone obelisk, six and a half feet (2 meters) high, depicting his triumphs over several other kings, among whom is Jehu, king of Israel, depicted in the second panel from the top, prostrating himself before the Assyrian monarch. This is the earliest picture available of an Israelite and the only known representation of an Israelite king by a contemporary. The inscription above the picture reads, “The tribute of Jehu, son [descendant] of Omri . . .” It dates to the mid-ninth century BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nHistorical Records<\/p>\nFrequently in the region of Mesopotamia, ancient kings recorded important events or proclamations in stone or clay. A notable example is the clay prism containing the final edition of Sennacherib’s Annals dated to 691 BC<\/span>. It is hexagonal, 15 inches (38.1 centimeters) high and 6 inches (15.2 centimeters) wide, and written on all sides in cuneiform script. The inscription speaks of “Hezekiah the Jew (king of Judah), who did not submit to my yoke. . . . Like a caged bird, I shut him up in Jerusalem, his royal city” (cf. 2 Kgs 18; Is 36–39).<\/p>\nEven though no annals comparable to those produced by the Assyrian kings have survived among the Babylonians, we do have some chronicles written on clay tablets covering the years from 626 BC<\/span> to the fall of Babylon to Cyrus in 539. One of these, the Babylonian Chronicle, provides an exact date of March 16, 597 BC<\/span>, for the fall of Jerusalem to the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar (cf. 2 Kgs 24:10-17).<\/p>\nBabylon itself fell to Cyrus the Mede, king of Persia, in 539. The event is not only referred to in the Bible (Ezr 1:1-3) but is also described on a clay barrel-shaped cylinder nine inches (22.9 centimeters) in length, written in cuneiform script, during the reign of Cyrus. It refers to his policy that allowed captive nations to rebuild their cities and temples. This provides an explanation of his encouragement and financial help to the Jews in returning to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple of Solomon that Nebuchadnezzar had destroyed (Ezr 1:2-4).<\/p>\nEgyptian pharaohs were fond of publishing records of their exploits in hieroglyphic script on the walls of temples and tombs. These were usually incised into the stone and then painted. One of the most interesting is Shishak’s description of his invasion of the land of Israel incised on the southern wall of a court of the temple of Amon at Karnak. The inclusion of Megiddo, as well as other cities in Israel, among the more than 75 cities whose names can still be read adds historical interest to the biblical account of Shishak’s invasion and conquest of Jerusalem and “Judah’s fortified cities” (1 Kgs 14:25-26; 2 Chr 12:2-10). Archaeological finds confirm a destruction and burning of the city at this time.<\/p>\nOfficial Announcements<\/p>\nWhen an ancient monarch or public official wanted to publish an announcement with some degree of permanency, it would be carved in stone or set in mosaic. An inscription on a marble slab dating to the reign of Claudius (AD<\/span> 41–54) was found in 1878, originating in the city of Nazareth. It contains a warning against grave robbing or any other desecration of cemeteries. The penalty for such violation was declared to be death. The inscription may reflect some of the troubles Claudius had in Rome over the person of Christ (Suetonius, Claudius<\/em> 25) which led to the expulsion of Jews from the capital city (Acts 18). At issue must have been the resurrection of Christ as proclaimed in Rome.<\/p>\nAnnouncements were placed even in temples. Josephus referred to a small wall surrounding the Jewish temple in Jerusalem that contained slabs of stone at regular intervals giving warning in Greek and Latin to Gentiles entering the temple (War<\/em> 5.193-34; 6.125-26; Antiquities<\/em> 15.417). Two fragmentary examples have been found. One discovered by Clermont-Ganneau in 1871 reads: “No foreigner is to enter within the balustrade and embankment around the sanctuary. Whoever is caught will have himself to blame for his death which follows.” The Romans allowed the Jews to put anyone to death, even a Roman, who went beyond this barrier (War<\/em> 6.126).<\/p>\nAn important inscription commissioned by the emperor Claudius, was found at the beginning of the 20th century in Delphi, Greece. It was written in Greek and mentions Gallio as proconsul with a date that can be established as AD<\/span> 51–52 for his term of office. This Gallio is the proconsul before whom Paul was brought by the Jews of Corinth (Acts 18:12-17). It is therefore extremely important for establishing the date of Paul’s 18-month stay in Corinth, and an important pivotal date for Pauline chronology in general. The inscription is an imperial announcement to the citizens of Delphi regarding the need for increasing the population of the city with eminent people.<\/p>\nThe name Pontius Pilate has appeared in a Latin inscription carved into a stone found in the Roman theater at Caesarea Maritima on the coast of Israel. It refers to him, in partially mutilated words, as prefect and contains the name Tiberium, which designates a structure built in honor of the emperor Tiberius.<\/p>\nDedications<\/p>\nInscriptions were commonly placed on walls or floors of buildings or attached to some other structure dedicating the completed edifice. An inscription was cut into the wall of a long tunnel built by the Jewish king Hezekiah in Jerusalem when the tunnel was finished (2 Kgs 20:20). It is in Hebrew and is now in the Istanbul museum. One of the oldest inscriptions we have in that language, it describes the construction of the Siloam tunnel.<\/p>\nIn the city of Corinth in Greece there is a dedicatory inscription cut into the pavement of a plaza on the north side of the large theater. The abbreviated Latin inscription reads: Erastus pro aedilitate sua pecunia stravit<\/em> (“Erastus, in return for his aedileship, laid the pavement at his own expense”). The bronze has long since been removed from the letters deeply cut into the gray Acrocorinthian limestone. This is probably the same “Erastus, the city treasurer” mentioned by Paul in Romans 16:23. A similar inscription from the Corinthian agora of Paul’s day reads: “Gnaeus Babbius Philinus, aedile and pontifex, had this monument erected at his own expense, and he approved it in his official capacity as duovir.”<\/p>\nA monumental dedicatory inscription in Greek was found in Jerusalem during excavations in 1913–14, which once stood on the wall of a first-century AD<\/span> synagogue on Mt Ophel. It refers to a Theodotus, the son of a ruler of the synagogue named Vettenos, who built the synagogue. Since the name Vettenos is Roman, it may be that Theodotus was a Jewish slave who had been freed and given the Roman name of his master. If so, this inscription may have hung on the “synagogue of the Freedmen” in Jerusalem (Acts 6:9).<\/p>\nThe British Museum contains a portion of a broken arch that stood over an entrance into the Greek city of Thessalonica from the first century AD<\/span> until 1867, when it was torn down to provide stone for the repair of the vast city wall. The inscription begins: “In the time of the politarchs . . .” This is a rare word referring to Roman officials and is used in the book of Acts (Acts 17:6) in reference to city authorities of Thessalonica. This word is found nowhere else in Greek literature.<\/p>\nCorrespondence<\/p>\nIn the second millennium before Christ, it was common practice to write correspondence on small clay tablets. More than half a million have been found in Mari, Nuzi, Nineveh, Ebla, and elsewhere. Interesting examples of such correspondence may be found in a great number of clay tablets found at Tell el-Amarna in Upper Egypt. They were written in the Babylonian language using the cuneiform script during the time when Akhenaton was captivated with his reformation of Egyptian art and religion at his new capital Tell el-Amarna (Akhetaten), and Palestine and Syria were left to the mercy of marauders called Habiru in the documents. Many of these are written from cities in Canaan under attack and ask for help from the pharaoh, whose vassals they are at this time (late 14th century BC<\/span>). Some think that these Habiru were the ancient Hebrews who invaded the land under the direction of Joshua.<\/p>\nSometimes correspondence was written in ink on broken pieces of ceramic pottery (potsherds) called ostraca. In 1935, 18 of these were found in the excavations at Lachish in southern Israel. They are written in Hebrew and provide examples of the kind of script used by the Judeans in the time of Jeremiah. The language is essentially identical with the Hebrew of the OT. The letters were sent by Hosha’yahu, an officer in charge of a nearby town, to Ya’osh, the military governor of Lachish, during the invasion of Judea by the Babylonians, which ended in the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 586 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nEleven such potsherds were found in Masada, on the western shore of the Dead Sea, in excavations conducted by Yigael Yadin from 1963 to 1965. Masada was destroyed by the Roman army under the command of Flavius Silva in AD<\/span> 73. Nine hundred and sixty men, women, and children committed suicide rather than surrender to the Romans. Ten men were chosen to cut the throats of those who remained. They drew lots for the heartbreaking task, according to Josephus (War<\/em> 7.395), and Professor Yadin thinks the ostraca he found were the ones used in the drawing. One of them contained the name of Ben Yair, who was probably Eleazer ben Yair, the commander of the fortress.<\/p>\nMosaic Floor Decorations<\/p>\nIn the Roman and Byzantine periods it was popular to decorate the floors of basilicas, baths, synagogues, churches, and other public buildings with elaborate tesselation containing inscriptions and artwork. Excavation in 1972 disclosed a building in Caesarea Maritima with mosaic inscriptions in six floors throughout the structure. Two of them are the Greek text of Romans 13:3 set in a circular border. Another is a blessing on the one who enters and exits the room: “May the Lord bless your entry and your exit.” Two of them invoke the aid of Christ for people associated with the function and construction of the building. These were a part of a building that was destroyed in the seventh century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe floors of the synagogues at Tiberias-hamath, Beth Shan, Beth Alpha, Eshtemoa, Susiya, Hamath-gader, En-gedi, and others in Israel have inscriptions in Greek and Aramaic that usually refer to benefactors of the synagogue. A synagogue floor has been found in Naro, Tunisia, which contains a Latin inscription. In the Tiberias synagogue, Hebrew was used only for defining the astrological symbols that appear in the zodiac. Aramaic was used primarily for Halakah (religious rule or law), and Greek was principally used in honoring donors.<\/p>\nOne of the best-known mosaic floor inscriptions in churches was in Madaba, Jordan, where the oldest known map of Israel and Jordan was set into the floor in the sixth century AD<\/span>. The place-names of cities, geographical features, and passages of Scripture are given in Greek. Church floors typically contain dated or undated dedications, blessings, and Scripture quotations that appear in Aramaic, Coptic, Syriac, Latin, and Greek. Symbolism often accompanies the inscriptions, but in AD<\/span> 427 an edict was issued forbidding the use of crosses and other religious symbols on pavements so that they might not be stepped on. It is not clear how widespread this prohibition was.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Archaeology and the Bible; Pottery.<\/p>","summary_ro":"INSCRIPTIONS Term used to refer to writing in the ancient world that was done on a material of a permanent nature, such as stone or clay, rather than on ordinary and impermanent substances, such as papyri or parchment. Preview • Introduction • Inscriptions on Monuments • Historical Records • Official Announcements • Dedications • Correspondence • Mosaic Floor Decorations Introduction There are occasional references to inscriptions in the Bible; for example, the Ten Commandments were inscribed...","summary_en":"INSCRIPTIONS Term used to refer to writing in the ancient world that was done on a material of a permanent nature, such as stone or clay, rather than on ordinary and impermanent substances, such as papyri or parchment. Preview • Introduction • Inscriptions on Monuments • Historical Records • Official Announcements • Dedications • Correspondence • Mosaic Floor Decorations Introduction There are occasional references to inscriptions in the Bible; for example, the Ten Commandments were inscribed...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17747,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Isaiah","title_en":"Book of Isaiah","content_ro":"<h3>ISAIAH, Book of<\/h3>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Literary Unity<\/p>\n• Theological Teaching<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nThe prophet Isaiah, whose name means “the Lord saves,” lived and ministered in Jerusalem. Because of his repeated contact with the kings of Judah, some scholars believed that Isaiah was related to the royal family, but this is not certain. According to chapters 7 and 8, Isaiah was married and had at least two sons, Shear-jashub and Maher-shalal-hash-baz, whose symbolic names illustrated God’s dealings with the nation as a whole. The “disciples” mentioned in 8:16 probably assisted Isaiah in his ministry and may have helped him record the book that bears his name.<\/p>\nWhen Isaiah saw the Lord in the famous temple vision described in chapter 6, he was willing to go wherever God sent him, even though he would face strong opposition (6:9-10). King Ahaz proved to be particularly resistant to Isaiah’s advice (7:4-17), and the people in general ridiculed his preaching (5:10-12; 28:9-10). During the reign of the godly Hezekiah, however, Isaiah’s ministry was much appreciated, and the king consulted him eagerly during times of crisis (37:1-7, 21-35).<\/p>\nIsaiah is usually regarded as the greatest of the writing prophets. Some of the chapters in his book display an unparalleled literary beauty and make use of poetic devices and a rich variety of symbols. Chapters 40–66 contain many powerful passages that underscore the grandeur of the book. It is ironic, then, that many scholars attribute these chapters to a “second” or “third” Isaiah, unknown authors who wrote much later than Isaiah in connection with the Babylonian exile. Yet elsewhere in the OT, the names of all who wrote the prophetic books are preserved, and it would be most unusual for the Jews not to know who wrote such magnificent prophecy as chapters 40–66.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nSince many of the events recorded in chapters 1–39 took place during the ministry of Isaiah, most of these chapters were probably written by about 700 BC<\/span> or shortly thereafter. The destruction of the Assyrian army in 701 BC<\/span> represents the climax of the first half of the book, fulfilling the prophecy of 10:16, 24-34 and 30:31-33. In 37:38 Isaiah refers to the death of King Sennacherib, which did not occur until 681 BC<\/span>. This means that some of the earlier chapters, along with 40–66, were probably written later, during Isaiah’s retirement years. A gap of several decades could help account for the change in subject matter that is found in the last half of the book. In these chapters Isaiah projects into the future as he addresses the Jews who would be in exile in Babylon about 550 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nIsaiah’s public ministry occurred primarily from 740–700 BC<\/span>, a period marked by the rapid expansion of the nation of Assyria. Under King Tiglath-pileser III (745–727 BC<\/span>), the Assyrians moved to the west and south, and by 738 BC<\/span> the Assyrian monarch was demanding tribute from Damascus and Israel. About 734 BC<\/span> Rezin of Damascus (Syria) and Pekah of Israel organized a coalition to rebel against Assyria, and they tried to enlist the support of King Ahaz of Judah. But Ahaz refused to join, and when the kings of Damascus and Israel invaded Judah (see 7:1), Ahaz appealed directly to Tiglath-pileser for help (cf. 2 Kgs 16:7-9). With little hesitation the Assyrians returned to capture Damascus and to turn the northern kingdom of Israel into an Assyrian province.<\/p>\nThe puppet king Hoshea ruled over Israel from 732–723 BC but was imprisoned when he joined a revolt against Shalmaneser V, the new Assyrian king. Shalmaneser besieged the capital city of Samaria, which finally fell in 722 BC<\/span>, spelling the end of the northern kingdom. Sargon succeeded Shalmaneser in 722 and had to quell a number of revolts. In 711 BC<\/span> Sargon captured the Philistine city of Ashdod in a campaign that became the occasion of Isaiah’s prophecy of chapter 20.<\/p>\n\nEven more important was the widespread rebellion that broke out with the accession of Sennacherib in 705 BC<\/span>. King Hezekiah of Judah withheld his normal tribute payment, and by 701 BC<\/span> Sennacherib had invaded Palestine to punish the rebels. The details of this campaign are given in Isaiah 36–37 and tell how city after city was captured by the Assyrians before the invaders stood at the gates of Jerusalem and demanded total surrender. With almost no hope of survival, Hezekiah nevertheless was encouraged by Isaiah to trust God, and in one night the angel of the Lord struck down 185,000 Assyrian soldiers, virtually wiping out Sennacherib’s army (Is 37:36-37).<\/p>\nIn an effort to befriend the enemies of Assyria, Hezekiah showed his treasures to envoys of the king of Babylon (39:1-4). Isaiah warned that someday the Babylonian armies would conquer Jerusalem and carry off those very treasures, along with the residents of the city (vv 5-7). Not only did Isaiah predict the Babylonian captivity of 586–539 BC<\/span> (cf. 6:11-12), but he also foretold that Israel would be released from Babylon (48:20). The Chaldean kingdom led by Nebuchadnezzar would be God’s instrument of judgment upon Judah, but they too would suffer defeat. One of Isaiah’s most remarkable prophecies was the naming of Cyrus, king of Persia, the ruler who would conquer the Babylonians in 539 BC<\/span> and release Israel from exile (cf. 44:28). Along with the Medes (cf. 13:17), Cyrus won several important victories before sending his troops against Babylon. Isaiah hailed him as one anointed by the Lord to bring deliverance for Israel (45:1-5).<\/p>\nLiterary Unity<\/p>\nLargely because of the references to the later kingdoms of Babylon and Persia, the unity of Isaiah has been called into question. Chapters 40–66 move abruptly into the exilic period of 550 BC<\/span>, almost 150 years after Isaiah lived. Moreover, the Servant of the Lord plays a prominent role in these chapters and the messianic king fades into the background. Brilliant poetic passages are found in chapters 40, 53, 55, and 60, demonstrating remarkable depth and power.<\/p>\nAlthough these factors are sometimes cited as a sign of disunity, there are actually strong indications for unity in the book. For example, the historical interlude (chs 36–39) forms a hinge or bridge that links chapters 1–35 and 40–66. Chapters 36–37 complete the Assyrian section, and chapters 38–39 introduce the Babylonian material. Most of the linking chapters are written in prose, while the others (in some translations) are largely poetry. From the standpoint of verbal or stylistic unity, one can point to Isaiah’s favorite title for God, “the Holy One of Israel.” This title appears 12 times in chapters 1–39, and 14 times in chapters 40–66, but only seven times in the rest of the OT. A study of the famous Servant Songs of 52:13–53:12 reveals several ties with earlier passages, especially in chapters 1–6. The servant who is smitten and wounded (53:4-5) receives the same punishment as the beaten and injured nation of 1:5-6 (also cf. 52:13 with 2:12 and 6:1).<\/p>\nTheological Teaching<\/p>\nIsaiah is to the OT as the book of Romans is to the NT—a book filled with rich theological truth. Like Romans, Isaiah unveils the sinfulness of God’s rebellious people and his gracious provision of salvation. Because God is the Holy One of Israel (1:4; 6:3), he cannot ignore sin but must punish those who are guilty. Both Israel (5:30; 42:25) and the other nations (2:11, 17, 20) experience a time of judgment known as the Day of the Lord. In anger God raises his hand against his people (cf. 5:25), but ultimately his wrath is poured out upon Babylon and the nations (cf. 13:3-5; 34:2).<\/p>\nWith the fall of Assyria and Babylon, the Day of the Lord becomes a day of joyous victory (10:27; 61:2). According to Isaiah 63:4, it is the year of the Lord’s redemption. Earlier, Israel had been redeemed from slavery in Egypt; now the return from the Babylonian captivity brings equal joy (52:9; 61:1). The ultimate redemption is to be accomplished through the death of Christ, and Isaiah 53 describes our Lord’s suffering and death in graphic terms. His ministry as the Suffering Servant is also introduced in 49:4 and 50:6-7; meanwhile, 49:6 states that the servant will be “a light for the Gentiles.” Looking ahead to the Second Coming, Isaiah predicts a messianic age of peace and righteousness. Nations will “beat their swords into plowshares” (2:4) and the “Prince of Peace” will rule forever (9:6-7).<\/p>\nThroughout the book God is pictured as the all-powerful Creator (48:13)—the sovereign One seated on a throne, high and exalted; the King, the Lord Almighty (6:1, 5). He controls the armies of the earth (13:4) and removes rulers as he wills (40:23-24). Before him, nations “are but a drop in the bucket” (40:15, nlt<\/span>), and compared with him all idols are worthless and without power (41:29; 44:6). This is the God who shows his fury to his foes and his love to his servants (66:14).<\/p>\n\nContent<\/p>\n<h5>Messages of Judgment and Hope (1–12)<\/h5>\nIn the opening chapter Isaiah characterizes Israel (including Judah) as “a sinful nation” that has rebelled against God. Although the people regularly bring offerings to him, their worship is hypocritical, an attempt to mask their oppression of the poor and helpless. The Lord encourages the nation to repent of their sin or face the fires of judgment. After this introduction, Isaiah turns to describe the peace of the messianic age in 2:1-4. The day will come when all nations will obey God’s word and live at peace. “The mountain of the Lord<\/span>”—Jerusalem—will be raised up “and all the nations shall flow to it” (2:2-3, rsv<\/span>). In the meantime, however, both Israel and the nations have exalted themselves against the Lord, and he will judge them in an awesome display of power. For Israel, God’s judgment will bring great upheaval, including the loss of its leaders. Defiant and ruthless, the rulers will face either death or deportation. Chapter 3 ends by denouncing the pride and vanity of the women of Zion; they, too, will suffer disgrace. After Jerusalem is cleansed of its sin, the remnant will enjoy the rule of “the branch of the Lord<\/span>,” who will protect and shield his people (4:2-6).<\/p>\nIn 5:1-7 Isaiah presents a short song about Israel as God’s vineyard. The Lord did everything possible to ensure a yield of good grapes, but the vineyard produced nothing but bad fruit and had to be destroyed. Isaiah then pronounces six woes against Israel, and announces that the Assyrian army will invade the land. Against the backdrop of Israel’s sin, Isaiah (ch 6) gives an account of the vision through which he was called as a prophet. Overwhelmed by the holiness of God and by his own sinfulness, Isaiah thought he was ruined, but when he was assured that his sins were forgiven, he responded positively to God’s call in spite of the stubbornness of the nation to which he was sent.<\/p>\nOne of the most stubborn individuals in all the nation was King Ahaz of Judah, and chapter 7 describes Isaiah’s encounter with this godless ruler. When Ahaz was threatened by Damascus and the northern kingdom, he refused to believe Isaiah’s promise that God would protect him. This was the occasion on which Isaiah gave Ahaz the sign of Immanuel (7:14). The “virgin” refers ultimately to Mary and “Immanuel” to Christ (Mt 1:23), but in the near fulfillment the child could be Isaiah’s own son Maher-shalal-hash-baz (Is 8:3). (See<\/em> four interpretations of this passage in Virgin Birth of Jesus.) This name (meaning “swift to plunder and quick to spoil,” v 1, nlt<\/span> mg) would be a sign that soon Judah’s enemies would fall; “Immanuel” signified that God would be with Judah (v 10, nlt<\/span> mg). However, if Ahaz appealed for help to the king of Assyria, Isaiah warned him, Assyria’s powerful armies would one day invade Judah also (cf. 7:17-25; 8:6-8). The destruction brought by Assyria would plunge Judah into a time of famine and distress (8:21-22).<\/p>\nNevertheless, the gloom and darkness associated with the Assyrian invasion would not last indefinitely, and 9:1-5 speaks of a time of peace and joy. Verses 6-7 introduce a child who would become a righteous King and would rule forever. This “Prince of Peace” is the Messiah, the “Mighty God” whose kingdom is described in 2:2-4.<\/p>\nFor the immediate future, however, both Israel and Judah will suffer the agony of war as punishment for their sins. God is angry with his people because they are proud and arrogant, and their leaders disregard the pleas of the poor and needy. Civil war and foreign invasion will crush the hapless nation (9:8–10:4). But once Israel has been judged, God will turn his hand against Assyria, the instrument he has used to judge other nations. Because of her string of victories, Assyria is filled with pride and is eager for more triumph. Yet even at the moment when Jerusalem is about to succumb, God will cut down the Assyrian army like a cedar in Lebanon and spare his people (10:26-34).<\/p>\nAfter Assyria’s defeat, Isaiah describes the restoration of Israel and the powerful rule of the Messiah (ch 11). Both Jews and Gentiles will be attracted to Jerusalem to enjoy an era of peace and justice. Like David, the Messiah will have the Spirit of God resting upon him as he judges the wicked and protects the needy. To conclude these opening messages, Isaiah offers two short songs of praise that celebrate God’s past deliverance and his promise of future blessing (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>Oracles against the Nations (13–23)<\/h5>\nAlthough Babylon is not the major power of the day, Isaiah begins his announcements of judgment with two chapters about the destruction of Assyria’s neighbor to the south. Babylon will eventually conquer Jerusalem (between 605 and 586 BC<\/span>), but the Medes (13:17) along with the Elamites will capture Babylon (539 BC<\/span>). In spite of the glory to be achieved by future kings of Babylon, God will bring their pomp down to the grave (14:9-10). The chapter ends with short prophecies against Assyria and the Philistines.<\/p>\nOne of Israel’s oldest enemies was the nation of Moab, situated east of the Dead Sea. Even though it was a small country, Isaiah devotes two chapters to these descendants of Lot. Chapter 15 describes the extensive mourning that will overwhelm their cities. After a brief interlude urging the Moabites to submit to Israel and to her God (16:1-5), Isaiah notes that pride will lead to Moab’s downfall. Sounds of weeping fill the land as the vines and fields wither and are trampled.<\/p>\nIn chapter 17 the fourth oracle is directed against Damascus and Ephraim (the northern kingdom of Israel), probably reflecting their alliance against Judah about 734 BC<\/span>. Both nations will face ruin, and Ephraim is condemned for abandoning the Lord, her “Savior” and “Rock” (17:10).<\/p>\nIn chapters 18 and 19 Isaiah turns to the south and addresses Ethiopia and Egypt, countries that had strong links from 715–633 BC<\/span>, when an Ethiopian named Shabako became pharaoh in Egypt. But Egypt is plagued with disunity and suffers greatly at the hands of Assyrian kings. In spite of the supposed wisdom of her leaders, Egypt faces economic and political ruin (19:5-15). Yet the time is coming when the Egyptians will be restored and will worship the God of Israel. Along with Assyria and Israel, Egypt will become a blessing (19:24). Some interpreters think this is a prophecy of the salvation of Gentiles during the church age, but others relate this day to the peace of the millennial age (cf. 2:2-4; 11:6-9). For the immediate future, however, Isaiah announces that Assyria will take many Egyptians and Ethiopians into captivity (ch 20).<\/p>\nA second oracle about Babylon (cf. 13:1–14:23) is contained in chapter 21, and Isaiah is staggered as he considers the impact of Babylon’s fall (21:3-4). When Babylon collapses, the world will know that her gods were powerless (21:9; cf. Rv 14:8; 18:2).<\/p>\nAlthough it seems out of place among these oracles against the nations, chapter 22 condemns the city of Jerusalem. Like the nations, Jerusalem is full of revelry (22:2) but will soon experience the terrors of a siege. Since the people no longer rely on the Lord (v 11), he will hand them over to the enemy. Jerusalem’s unfaithfulness is exemplified by Shebna, a high official guilty of pride and materialism whose position will be taken by the godly Eliakim (vv 15-23).<\/p>\nThe last oracle (ch 23) is directed against the city of Tyre, which resisted capture until Alexander the Great conquered the island fortress in 332 BC<\/span>. When Tyre fell, the economy of the entire Mediterranean world was shaken, for her ships had carried the goods of the nations far and wide.<\/p>\n<h5>Final Judgment and Blessing (24–27)<\/h5>\nThis section functions as a grand finale to chapters 13–23 in that it anticipates God’s judgment upon the nations and the inauguration of the kingdom of God. A defiled earth must bear its punishment (24:5-6) and even the forces of Satan face judgment (vv 21-22).<\/p>\nIn chapter 25 Isaiah rejoices over God’s great triumph and looks ahead to a day when death will be swallowed up and tears will be wiped from all faces (25:8). Israel’s longtime enemies, symbolized by Moab, will be laid low (vv 10-12), but Jerusalem will be a stronghold for the righteous (26:1-3). In 26:7-19 the nation prays that these promises will become a reality. Verses 20-21 indicate that the Lord will indeed respond, pouring out his wrath upon a sin-cursed earth and upon Satan himself (27:1). When that takes place, Israel will be a fruitful vineyard, a blessing to the whole world (27:2-6; contrast 5:1-7). First, however, Israel will have to endure war and exile, and then the remnant will return to Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<h5>A Series of Woes (28–33)<\/h5>\nReturning to his own historical period, Isaiah pronounces a series of woes upon both the northern and southern kingdoms, as well as one upon Assyria (ch 33). Chapter 28 begins with a description of the fading power of Samaria, the capital of the northern kingdom. Verses 7-10 portray the leaders of Judah in the same light; they have disregarded Isaiah’s message and are out of touch with God. Judgment is on the way, and their false preparation (vv 15, 18) will be of no avail. God will fight against Israel (vv 21-22), and even Jerusalem will be put under siege until God in his mercy intervenes (29:1-8). Because of their hypocritical worship, the people deserve to be punished, but in the future Israel will again acknowledge the Lord and be made physically and spiritually whole (29:17-24).<\/p>\nChapters 30 and 31 denounce Judah’s proposed alliance with Egypt in the effort to thwart Assyria. God wants his people to trust him, not their unreliable neighbors to the south. The Lord promises to protect Jerusalem (30:18; 31:5) and defeat the invading Assyrian army (30:31-33; 31:8-9). None can stand before his mighty sword.<\/p>\nContinuing on this positive note, Isaiah goes on to emphasize the righteous rule of the messianic king in chapters 32 and 33. Zion will enjoy peace and security at last (32:2, 17-18; 33:6), a great change from Isaiah’s own time. In eighth-century BC<\/span> Judah the women might feel secure (32:9), but the Assyrian troops will devastate the crops and precipitate widespread mourning. However, the lamenting will soon end, as the prophet pronounces woe upon Assyria in 33:1. After Isaiah prays for the destruction of Assyria (33:2-9), God promises to take action (vv 10-12). Gone will be the enemy soldiers and officials, for the Lord will save his people and bring them justice and security.<\/p>\n<h5>More Judgment and Blessing (34–35)<\/h5>\nThis section forms a climax to chapters 28–33. Once more, cataclysmic judgment precedes a time of blessing and restoration. In chapter 34 Isaiah depicts a judgment of cosmic dimensions as he moves to a consideration of the last days. Heaven and earth endure the wrath of God that is poured out upon the nations, and verse 4 provides the basis for John’s description of the great tribulation in Revelation 6:13-14. Edom (like Moab; see Is 25:10-12) represents a world judged by the sword of the Lord in his day of vengeance.<\/p>\nChapter 35, on the other hand, speaks of joy and restoration in a passage that pulsates with life. A blooming desert corresponds to the physical and spiritual age when God will come to redeem his people. Both the return of the Israelites from the Babylonian captivity and the second coming of Christ fit this glorious scene.<\/p>\n<h5>Historical Interlude (36–39)<\/h5>\nThese chapters form the hinge that connects the two halves of the book. Chapters 36 and 37 contain the fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecies about Assyria’s collapse, and chapters 38 and 39 introduce the Babylonian captivity that forms the backdrop for chapters 40–66. In 701 BC<\/span> King Sennacherib of Assyria demands the unconditional surrender of Jerusalem. He sends his field commander to address the people and try to gain their submission. With persuasive words, the commander tries to convince the city that surrender is the best policy. Amazingly the people do not panic, and King Hezekiah asks Isaiah to pray for the beleaguered city. The prophet does so and announces that the proud Assyrians will not triumph. Instead, they suffer a terrible disaster as the angel of the Lord strikes down 185,000 men.<\/p>\nChapters 38 and 39 relate another crisis in Hezekiah’s life when he becomes desperately ill. Miraculously, God heals him, and Hezekiah praises the Lord for his gracious intervention. When the king of Babylon sends envoys to congratulate Hezekiah on his recovery, Hezekiah foolishly shows these messengers his royal treasures. Isaiah solemnly announces that someday the armies of Babylon will capture Jerusalem, plunder the land, and take away these treasures.<\/p>\n<h5>The Return from Babylon (40–48)<\/h5>\nThe Babylonian captivity eventually comes, but Isaiah promises that it will end. God, the incomparably powerful Creator, is far greater than any king, nation, or god, and he will bring his people back to Jerusalem. To accomplish this return from exile, God raises up Cyrus, the king of Persia (41:2, 25). The Lord does not forget his people, and he encourages them to take heart and to rejoice.<\/p>\nIn chapter 42 we are introduced to a person even more significant than Cyrus the Persian. Verses 1-7 (the first of four Servant Songs) describe the servant of the Lord, who will bring justice to the nations and will be “a light for the Gentiles” (42:6). This is the Messiah, and the redemption he will accomplish on Calvary (cf. ch 53) is greater than the release from Babylon. In light of the good news associated with the servant, Isaiah praises the Lord for punishing the wicked and rescuing his wayward people. Chapter 43 declares that nothing will stand in the way of Israel’s return, and the Lord will remember their sins no more. In fact, he will pour out his Spirit on their descendants (44:3).<\/p>\nA God so great is far more powerful than any idol. In 44:6-20 Isaiah makes use of satire to show the worthlessness of man-made images. God alone has the power to create and to restore, and he will bring Cyrus on the scene to effect the release of the exiles and to begin the rebuilding of Jerusalem. Chapters 46 and 47 contrast the God of Israel and the idols of Babylon. When God raises up Cyrus, Babylon’s idols will be unable to save their nation, and the queen of kingdoms (47:5) will collapse along with her sorcerers and astrologers. The final chapter in this section (ch 48) restates God’s purpose of gaining release of the Israelites from Babylon through his chosen ally, Cyrus of Persia.<\/p>\n<h5>Salvation through the Servant of the Lord (49–57)<\/h5>\nChapters 49–53 contain the final three Servant Songs (cf. also 42:1-7), culminating in the death of the servant for the sins of the world (52:13–53:12). In the second Servant Song (49:1-7), Isaiah describes the call and ministry of the servant, noting that he will face strong opposition as he accomplishes salvation for Israel and the nations. The rest of chapter 49 deals primarily with the way God will bring Israel back from exile. Soon the land will be filled with a mighty throng (vv 19-21), and the Gentiles will acknowledge Israel and her God (vv 22-23).<\/p>\nAlthough Israel has fully deserved the exile because of her sins (50:1-3), the suffering endured by the servant (vv 4-11; the third Servant Song) is wholly undeserved. The beating and mocking of verse 6 are prophetic of Christ’s experience (cf. Mt 27:26, 30; Mk 15:19). In verses 10-11 of Isaiah 50 the whole nation is challenged to trust in the Lord, as the servant did. There is, in fact, a believing remnant who obey the Lord (51:1-8), and the Lord promises that he will restore them to their homeland. Israel has drunk the cup of God’s wrath (vv 17, 22), but the good news of release from exile causes even the ruins of Jerusalem to burst into songs of joy (52:7-10).<\/p>\nYet the best news of all is salvation from sin; the final Servant Song (52:13–53:12) tells how Christ wins freedom for those held in bondage to sin. In this brief passage we learn how Christ suffers rejection (53:3) and even disfigurement (52:14). Led like a lamb to the slaughter (53:7), he carries our sins in his body as he dies in ignominy. The people think he is suffering for his own sins (v 4), but he is “pierced” and “crushed for our iniquities” (v 5). The first and last paragraphs of this section (52:13-15; 53:10-12) state that through his suffering the servant is highly exalted. What seems like a terrible defeat is actually victory over death and Satan and brings salvation for many.<\/p>\nAs a direct result of the servant’s death, great joy comes to all people. In chapter 54 this joy is reflected in Jerusalem’s new status as the Lord’s wife. Her descendants will be numerous and eager to learn from the Lord. For the first time the plural “servants of the Lord<\/span>” appears (54:17), apparently including all believers, whether Jew or Gentile (cf. 65:8-9, 13-15). Joy and prosperity also characterize chapter 55, an invitation to a great spiritual banquet. All people are urged to turn to the Lord who keeps his promises to Israel. In 56:1-8, foreigners are invited to come to God’s “holy mountain” in Jerusalem, for the temple will be a house of prayer for all the nations (56:7; cf. Mt 21:13).<\/p>\nBelieving Gentiles are contrasted sharply with unbelieving Jews, and in 56:9–57:13 Isaiah returns again to the theme of judgment. Israel suffers because her leaders are wicked and because the people are guilty of idolatry. Spiritual healing is available, but unless individuals repent, they cannot be part of the remnant who will return from exile and enjoy peace in the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<h5>Ultimate Blessing and Final Judgment (58–66)<\/h5>\nThe last nine chapters of Isaiah emphasize redemption and glory, but the reality of judgment is also very much in evidence. In fact, chapters 58 and 59 bemoan the sins of Israel. The people are hypocritical in their worship; they are selfish and fail to keep the Sabbath. Lying, oppression, and murder separate the people from God. When Isaiah openly confesses these sins (59:12-13), the Lord suddenly takes action on behalf of his people. Like a mighty warrior, he rescues the believing remnant from Babylon and brings them back to Jerusalem.<\/p>\nIn chapter 60 the glory and wealth of Jerusalem reach new heights. Both the city and the sanctuary are adorned with splendor, matching the prosperity of Solomon’s reign. Just as the nations treated Solomon with honor, so earth’s leaders will assist and strengthen the returning exiles. While it is true that the Persian government did help the Jews repeatedly, the conditions described here will have their ultimate fulfillment during the Millennium and in connection with the new Jerusalem (cf. Rv 21:23; 22:5). The ancient ruins will be rebuilt (Is 61:4), and the Lord will fulfill the covenant made with Abraham and David (Is 61:8; cf. Gn 12:1-3; Is 55:3). Jerusalem will be the city of the holy people, the redeemed of the Lord (Is 62:12), and the Lord will take delight in her (v 4).<\/p>\nIn order to accomplish salvation for his people, God will have to judge the ungodly first. The great trampling of the winepress (63:2-3) graphically portrays the judgment process and is linked with the Day of the Lord (cf. 13:3; 34:2). Since God has promised to intervene on behalf of his people, Isaiah prays for the realization of that promise (63:7–64:12). He recalls God’s faithfulness in the past and pleads that he will again have mercy upon his suffering people.<\/p>\nThe answer to Isaiah’s prayer is found in chapter 65. God does promise to give the Holy Land back to his servants, to those who worship him and obey him. But for that segment of the nation that continues in its obstinacy, God promises anguish and destruction. The ultimate joy of God’s servants is contained in a description of new heavens and a new earth (65:17-25). Peace, long life, and prosperity will be among the blessings enjoyed in an era that seems to combine features of the Millennium and the eternal state (cf. ch 60).<\/p>\nIn a fitting summary, chapter 66 ties together the themes of salvation and judgment. God will comfort Jerusalem and abundantly bless her, but sinners are the objects of his wrath. Those who honor him will endure forever, but those who rebel will suffer everlasting rejection.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Isaiah (Person); Israel, History of; Messiah; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess; Servant of the Lord; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ISAIAH, Book of<\/h3>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Literary Unity<\/p>\n• Theological Teaching<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nThe prophet Isaiah, whose name means “the Lord saves,” lived and ministered in Jerusalem. Because of his repeated contact with the kings of Judah, some scholars believed that Isaiah was related to the royal family, but this is not certain. According to chapters 7 and 8, Isaiah was married and had at least two sons, Shear-jashub and Maher-shalal-hash-baz, whose symbolic names illustrated God’s dealings with the nation as a whole. The “disciples” mentioned in 8:16 probably assisted Isaiah in his ministry and may have helped him record the book that bears his name.<\/p>\nWhen Isaiah saw the Lord in the famous temple vision described in chapter 6, he was willing to go wherever God sent him, even though he would face strong opposition (6:9-10). King Ahaz proved to be particularly resistant to Isaiah’s advice (7:4-17), and the people in general ridiculed his preaching (5:10-12; 28:9-10). During the reign of the godly Hezekiah, however, Isaiah’s ministry was much appreciated, and the king consulted him eagerly during times of crisis (37:1-7, 21-35).<\/p>\nIsaiah is usually regarded as the greatest of the writing prophets. Some of the chapters in his book display an unparalleled literary beauty and make use of poetic devices and a rich variety of symbols. Chapters 40–66 contain many powerful passages that underscore the grandeur of the book. It is ironic, then, that many scholars attribute these chapters to a “second” or “third” Isaiah, unknown authors who wrote much later than Isaiah in connection with the Babylonian exile. Yet elsewhere in the OT, the names of all who wrote the prophetic books are preserved, and it would be most unusual for the Jews not to know who wrote such magnificent prophecy as chapters 40–66.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nSince many of the events recorded in chapters 1–39 took place during the ministry of Isaiah, most of these chapters were probably written by about 700 BC<\/span> or shortly thereafter. The destruction of the Assyrian army in 701 BC<\/span> represents the climax of the first half of the book, fulfilling the prophecy of 10:16, 24-34 and 30:31-33. In 37:38 Isaiah refers to the death of King Sennacherib, which did not occur until 681 BC<\/span>. This means that some of the earlier chapters, along with 40–66, were probably written later, during Isaiah’s retirement years. A gap of several decades could help account for the change in subject matter that is found in the last half of the book. In these chapters Isaiah projects into the future as he addresses the Jews who would be in exile in Babylon about 550 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nIsaiah’s public ministry occurred primarily from 740–700 BC<\/span>, a period marked by the rapid expansion of the nation of Assyria. Under King Tiglath-pileser III (745–727 BC<\/span>), the Assyrians moved to the west and south, and by 738 BC<\/span> the Assyrian monarch was demanding tribute from Damascus and Israel. About 734 BC<\/span> Rezin of Damascus (Syria) and Pekah of Israel organized a coalition to rebel against Assyria, and they tried to enlist the support of King Ahaz of Judah. But Ahaz refused to join, and when the kings of Damascus and Israel invaded Judah (see 7:1), Ahaz appealed directly to Tiglath-pileser for help (cf. 2 Kgs 16:7-9). With little hesitation the Assyrians returned to capture Damascus and to turn the northern kingdom of Israel into an Assyrian province.<\/p>\nThe puppet king Hoshea ruled over Israel from 732–723 BC but was imprisoned when he joined a revolt against Shalmaneser V, the new Assyrian king. Shalmaneser besieged the capital city of Samaria, which finally fell in 722 BC<\/span>, spelling the end of the northern kingdom. Sargon succeeded Shalmaneser in 722 and had to quell a number of revolts. In 711 BC<\/span> Sargon captured the Philistine city of Ashdod in a campaign that became the occasion of Isaiah’s prophecy of chapter 20.<\/p>\n\nEven more important was the widespread rebellion that broke out with the accession of Sennacherib in 705 BC<\/span>. King Hezekiah of Judah withheld his normal tribute payment, and by 701 BC<\/span> Sennacherib had invaded Palestine to punish the rebels. The details of this campaign are given in Isaiah 36–37 and tell how city after city was captured by the Assyrians before the invaders stood at the gates of Jerusalem and demanded total surrender. With almost no hope of survival, Hezekiah nevertheless was encouraged by Isaiah to trust God, and in one night the angel of the Lord struck down 185,000 Assyrian soldiers, virtually wiping out Sennacherib’s army (Is 37:36-37).<\/p>\nIn an effort to befriend the enemies of Assyria, Hezekiah showed his treasures to envoys of the king of Babylon (39:1-4). Isaiah warned that someday the Babylonian armies would conquer Jerusalem and carry off those very treasures, along with the residents of the city (vv 5-7). Not only did Isaiah predict the Babylonian captivity of 586–539 BC<\/span> (cf. 6:11-12), but he also foretold that Israel would be released from Babylon (48:20). The Chaldean kingdom led by Nebuchadnezzar would be God’s instrument of judgment upon Judah, but they too would suffer defeat. One of Isaiah’s most remarkable prophecies was the naming of Cyrus, king of Persia, the ruler who would conquer the Babylonians in 539 BC<\/span> and release Israel from exile (cf. 44:28). Along with the Medes (cf. 13:17), Cyrus won several important victories before sending his troops against Babylon. Isaiah hailed him as one anointed by the Lord to bring deliverance for Israel (45:1-5).<\/p>\nLiterary Unity<\/p>\nLargely because of the references to the later kingdoms of Babylon and Persia, the unity of Isaiah has been called into question. Chapters 40–66 move abruptly into the exilic period of 550 BC<\/span>, almost 150 years after Isaiah lived. Moreover, the Servant of the Lord plays a prominent role in these chapters and the messianic king fades into the background. Brilliant poetic passages are found in chapters 40, 53, 55, and 60, demonstrating remarkable depth and power.<\/p>\nAlthough these factors are sometimes cited as a sign of disunity, there are actually strong indications for unity in the book. For example, the historical interlude (chs 36–39) forms a hinge or bridge that links chapters 1–35 and 40–66. Chapters 36–37 complete the Assyrian section, and chapters 38–39 introduce the Babylonian material. Most of the linking chapters are written in prose, while the others (in some translations) are largely poetry. From the standpoint of verbal or stylistic unity, one can point to Isaiah’s favorite title for God, “the Holy One of Israel.” This title appears 12 times in chapters 1–39, and 14 times in chapters 40–66, but only seven times in the rest of the OT. A study of the famous Servant Songs of 52:13–53:12 reveals several ties with earlier passages, especially in chapters 1–6. The servant who is smitten and wounded (53:4-5) receives the same punishment as the beaten and injured nation of 1:5-6 (also cf. 52:13 with 2:12 and 6:1).<\/p>\nTheological Teaching<\/p>\nIsaiah is to the OT as the book of Romans is to the NT—a book filled with rich theological truth. Like Romans, Isaiah unveils the sinfulness of God’s rebellious people and his gracious provision of salvation. Because God is the Holy One of Israel (1:4; 6:3), he cannot ignore sin but must punish those who are guilty. Both Israel (5:30; 42:25) and the other nations (2:11, 17, 20) experience a time of judgment known as the Day of the Lord. In anger God raises his hand against his people (cf. 5:25), but ultimately his wrath is poured out upon Babylon and the nations (cf. 13:3-5; 34:2).<\/p>\nWith the fall of Assyria and Babylon, the Day of the Lord becomes a day of joyous victory (10:27; 61:2). According to Isaiah 63:4, it is the year of the Lord’s redemption. Earlier, Israel had been redeemed from slavery in Egypt; now the return from the Babylonian captivity brings equal joy (52:9; 61:1). The ultimate redemption is to be accomplished through the death of Christ, and Isaiah 53 describes our Lord’s suffering and death in graphic terms. His ministry as the Suffering Servant is also introduced in 49:4 and 50:6-7; meanwhile, 49:6 states that the servant will be “a light for the Gentiles.” Looking ahead to the Second Coming, Isaiah predicts a messianic age of peace and righteousness. Nations will “beat their swords into plowshares” (2:4) and the “Prince of Peace” will rule forever (9:6-7).<\/p>\nThroughout the book God is pictured as the all-powerful Creator (48:13)—the sovereign One seated on a throne, high and exalted; the King, the Lord Almighty (6:1, 5). He controls the armies of the earth (13:4) and removes rulers as he wills (40:23-24). Before him, nations “are but a drop in the bucket” (40:15, nlt<\/span>), and compared with him all idols are worthless and without power (41:29; 44:6). This is the God who shows his fury to his foes and his love to his servants (66:14).<\/p>\n\nContent<\/p>\n<h5>Messages of Judgment and Hope (1–12)<\/h5>\nIn the opening chapter Isaiah characterizes Israel (including Judah) as “a sinful nation” that has rebelled against God. Although the people regularly bring offerings to him, their worship is hypocritical, an attempt to mask their oppression of the poor and helpless. The Lord encourages the nation to repent of their sin or face the fires of judgment. After this introduction, Isaiah turns to describe the peace of the messianic age in 2:1-4. The day will come when all nations will obey God’s word and live at peace. “The mountain of the Lord<\/span>”—Jerusalem—will be raised up “and all the nations shall flow to it” (2:2-3, rsv<\/span>). In the meantime, however, both Israel and the nations have exalted themselves against the Lord, and he will judge them in an awesome display of power. For Israel, God’s judgment will bring great upheaval, including the loss of its leaders. Defiant and ruthless, the rulers will face either death or deportation. Chapter 3 ends by denouncing the pride and vanity of the women of Zion; they, too, will suffer disgrace. After Jerusalem is cleansed of its sin, the remnant will enjoy the rule of “the branch of the Lord<\/span>,” who will protect and shield his people (4:2-6).<\/p>\nIn 5:1-7 Isaiah presents a short song about Israel as God’s vineyard. The Lord did everything possible to ensure a yield of good grapes, but the vineyard produced nothing but bad fruit and had to be destroyed. Isaiah then pronounces six woes against Israel, and announces that the Assyrian army will invade the land. Against the backdrop of Israel’s sin, Isaiah (ch 6) gives an account of the vision through which he was called as a prophet. Overwhelmed by the holiness of God and by his own sinfulness, Isaiah thought he was ruined, but when he was assured that his sins were forgiven, he responded positively to God’s call in spite of the stubbornness of the nation to which he was sent.<\/p>\nOne of the most stubborn individuals in all the nation was King Ahaz of Judah, and chapter 7 describes Isaiah’s encounter with this godless ruler. When Ahaz was threatened by Damascus and the northern kingdom, he refused to believe Isaiah’s promise that God would protect him. This was the occasion on which Isaiah gave Ahaz the sign of Immanuel (7:14). The “virgin” refers ultimately to Mary and “Immanuel” to Christ (Mt 1:23), but in the near fulfillment the child could be Isaiah’s own son Maher-shalal-hash-baz (Is 8:3). (See<\/em> four interpretations of this passage in Virgin Birth of Jesus.) This name (meaning “swift to plunder and quick to spoil,” v 1, nlt<\/span> mg) would be a sign that soon Judah’s enemies would fall; “Immanuel” signified that God would be with Judah (v 10, nlt<\/span> mg). However, if Ahaz appealed for help to the king of Assyria, Isaiah warned him, Assyria’s powerful armies would one day invade Judah also (cf. 7:17-25; 8:6-8). The destruction brought by Assyria would plunge Judah into a time of famine and distress (8:21-22).<\/p>\nNevertheless, the gloom and darkness associated with the Assyrian invasion would not last indefinitely, and 9:1-5 speaks of a time of peace and joy. Verses 6-7 introduce a child who would become a righteous King and would rule forever. This “Prince of Peace” is the Messiah, the “Mighty God” whose kingdom is described in 2:2-4.<\/p>\nFor the immediate future, however, both Israel and Judah will suffer the agony of war as punishment for their sins. God is angry with his people because they are proud and arrogant, and their leaders disregard the pleas of the poor and needy. Civil war and foreign invasion will crush the hapless nation (9:8–10:4). But once Israel has been judged, God will turn his hand against Assyria, the instrument he has used to judge other nations. Because of her string of victories, Assyria is filled with pride and is eager for more triumph. Yet even at the moment when Jerusalem is about to succumb, God will cut down the Assyrian army like a cedar in Lebanon and spare his people (10:26-34).<\/p>\nAfter Assyria’s defeat, Isaiah describes the restoration of Israel and the powerful rule of the Messiah (ch 11). Both Jews and Gentiles will be attracted to Jerusalem to enjoy an era of peace and justice. Like David, the Messiah will have the Spirit of God resting upon him as he judges the wicked and protects the needy. To conclude these opening messages, Isaiah offers two short songs of praise that celebrate God’s past deliverance and his promise of future blessing (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>Oracles against the Nations (13–23)<\/h5>\nAlthough Babylon is not the major power of the day, Isaiah begins his announcements of judgment with two chapters about the destruction of Assyria’s neighbor to the south. Babylon will eventually conquer Jerusalem (between 605 and 586 BC<\/span>), but the Medes (13:17) along with the Elamites will capture Babylon (539 BC<\/span>). In spite of the glory to be achieved by future kings of Babylon, God will bring their pomp down to the grave (14:9-10). The chapter ends with short prophecies against Assyria and the Philistines.<\/p>\nOne of Israel’s oldest enemies was the nation of Moab, situated east of the Dead Sea. Even though it was a small country, Isaiah devotes two chapters to these descendants of Lot. Chapter 15 describes the extensive mourning that will overwhelm their cities. After a brief interlude urging the Moabites to submit to Israel and to her God (16:1-5), Isaiah notes that pride will lead to Moab’s downfall. Sounds of weeping fill the land as the vines and fields wither and are trampled.<\/p>\nIn chapter 17 the fourth oracle is directed against Damascus and Ephraim (the northern kingdom of Israel), probably reflecting their alliance against Judah about 734 BC<\/span>. Both nations will face ruin, and Ephraim is condemned for abandoning the Lord, her “Savior” and “Rock” (17:10).<\/p>\nIn chapters 18 and 19 Isaiah turns to the south and addresses Ethiopia and Egypt, countries that had strong links from 715–633 BC<\/span>, when an Ethiopian named Shabako became pharaoh in Egypt. But Egypt is plagued with disunity and suffers greatly at the hands of Assyrian kings. In spite of the supposed wisdom of her leaders, Egypt faces economic and political ruin (19:5-15). Yet the time is coming when the Egyptians will be restored and will worship the God of Israel. Along with Assyria and Israel, Egypt will become a blessing (19:24). Some interpreters think this is a prophecy of the salvation of Gentiles during the church age, but others relate this day to the peace of the millennial age (cf. 2:2-4; 11:6-9). For the immediate future, however, Isaiah announces that Assyria will take many Egyptians and Ethiopians into captivity (ch 20).<\/p>\nA second oracle about Babylon (cf. 13:1–14:23) is contained in chapter 21, and Isaiah is staggered as he considers the impact of Babylon’s fall (21:3-4). When Babylon collapses, the world will know that her gods were powerless (21:9; cf. Rv 14:8; 18:2).<\/p>\nAlthough it seems out of place among these oracles against the nations, chapter 22 condemns the city of Jerusalem. Like the nations, Jerusalem is full of revelry (22:2) but will soon experience the terrors of a siege. Since the people no longer rely on the Lord (v 11), he will hand them over to the enemy. Jerusalem’s unfaithfulness is exemplified by Shebna, a high official guilty of pride and materialism whose position will be taken by the godly Eliakim (vv 15-23).<\/p>\nThe last oracle (ch 23) is directed against the city of Tyre, which resisted capture until Alexander the Great conquered the island fortress in 332 BC<\/span>. When Tyre fell, the economy of the entire Mediterranean world was shaken, for her ships had carried the goods of the nations far and wide.<\/p>\n<h5>Final Judgment and Blessing (24–27)<\/h5>\nThis section functions as a grand finale to chapters 13–23 in that it anticipates God’s judgment upon the nations and the inauguration of the kingdom of God. A defiled earth must bear its punishment (24:5-6) and even the forces of Satan face judgment (vv 21-22).<\/p>\nIn chapter 25 Isaiah rejoices over God’s great triumph and looks ahead to a day when death will be swallowed up and tears will be wiped from all faces (25:8). Israel’s longtime enemies, symbolized by Moab, will be laid low (vv 10-12), but Jerusalem will be a stronghold for the righteous (26:1-3). In 26:7-19 the nation prays that these promises will become a reality. Verses 20-21 indicate that the Lord will indeed respond, pouring out his wrath upon a sin-cursed earth and upon Satan himself (27:1). When that takes place, Israel will be a fruitful vineyard, a blessing to the whole world (27:2-6; contrast 5:1-7). First, however, Israel will have to endure war and exile, and then the remnant will return to Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<h5>A Series of Woes (28–33)<\/h5>\nReturning to his own historical period, Isaiah pronounces a series of woes upon both the northern and southern kingdoms, as well as one upon Assyria (ch 33). Chapter 28 begins with a description of the fading power of Samaria, the capital of the northern kingdom. Verses 7-10 portray the leaders of Judah in the same light; they have disregarded Isaiah’s message and are out of touch with God. Judgment is on the way, and their false preparation (vv 15, 18) will be of no avail. God will fight against Israel (vv 21-22), and even Jerusalem will be put under siege until God in his mercy intervenes (29:1-8). Because of their hypocritical worship, the people deserve to be punished, but in the future Israel will again acknowledge the Lord and be made physically and spiritually whole (29:17-24).<\/p>\nChapters 30 and 31 denounce Judah’s proposed alliance with Egypt in the effort to thwart Assyria. God wants his people to trust him, not their unreliable neighbors to the south. The Lord promises to protect Jerusalem (30:18; 31:5) and defeat the invading Assyrian army (30:31-33; 31:8-9). None can stand before his mighty sword.<\/p>\nContinuing on this positive note, Isaiah goes on to emphasize the righteous rule of the messianic king in chapters 32 and 33. Zion will enjoy peace and security at last (32:2, 17-18; 33:6), a great change from Isaiah’s own time. In eighth-century BC<\/span> Judah the women might feel secure (32:9), but the Assyrian troops will devastate the crops and precipitate widespread mourning. However, the lamenting will soon end, as the prophet pronounces woe upon Assyria in 33:1. After Isaiah prays for the destruction of Assyria (33:2-9), God promises to take action (vv 10-12). Gone will be the enemy soldiers and officials, for the Lord will save his people and bring them justice and security.<\/p>\n<h5>More Judgment and Blessing (34–35)<\/h5>\nThis section forms a climax to chapters 28–33. Once more, cataclysmic judgment precedes a time of blessing and restoration. In chapter 34 Isaiah depicts a judgment of cosmic dimensions as he moves to a consideration of the last days. Heaven and earth endure the wrath of God that is poured out upon the nations, and verse 4 provides the basis for John’s description of the great tribulation in Revelation 6:13-14. Edom (like Moab; see Is 25:10-12) represents a world judged by the sword of the Lord in his day of vengeance.<\/p>\nChapter 35, on the other hand, speaks of joy and restoration in a passage that pulsates with life. A blooming desert corresponds to the physical and spiritual age when God will come to redeem his people. Both the return of the Israelites from the Babylonian captivity and the second coming of Christ fit this glorious scene.<\/p>\n<h5>Historical Interlude (36–39)<\/h5>\nThese chapters form the hinge that connects the two halves of the book. Chapters 36 and 37 contain the fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecies about Assyria’s collapse, and chapters 38 and 39 introduce the Babylonian captivity that forms the backdrop for chapters 40–66. In 701 BC<\/span> King Sennacherib of Assyria demands the unconditional surrender of Jerusalem. He sends his field commander to address the people and try to gain their submission. With persuasive words, the commander tries to convince the city that surrender is the best policy. Amazingly the people do not panic, and King Hezekiah asks Isaiah to pray for the beleaguered city. The prophet does so and announces that the proud Assyrians will not triumph. Instead, they suffer a terrible disaster as the angel of the Lord strikes down 185,000 men.<\/p>\nChapters 38 and 39 relate another crisis in Hezekiah’s life when he becomes desperately ill. Miraculously, God heals him, and Hezekiah praises the Lord for his gracious intervention. When the king of Babylon sends envoys to congratulate Hezekiah on his recovery, Hezekiah foolishly shows these messengers his royal treasures. Isaiah solemnly announces that someday the armies of Babylon will capture Jerusalem, plunder the land, and take away these treasures.<\/p>\n<h5>The Return from Babylon (40–48)<\/h5>\nThe Babylonian captivity eventually comes, but Isaiah promises that it will end. God, the incomparably powerful Creator, is far greater than any king, nation, or god, and he will bring his people back to Jerusalem. To accomplish this return from exile, God raises up Cyrus, the king of Persia (41:2, 25). The Lord does not forget his people, and he encourages them to take heart and to rejoice.<\/p>\nIn chapter 42 we are introduced to a person even more significant than Cyrus the Persian. Verses 1-7 (the first of four Servant Songs) describe the servant of the Lord, who will bring justice to the nations and will be “a light for the Gentiles” (42:6). This is the Messiah, and the redemption he will accomplish on Calvary (cf. ch 53) is greater than the release from Babylon. In light of the good news associated with the servant, Isaiah praises the Lord for punishing the wicked and rescuing his wayward people. Chapter 43 declares that nothing will stand in the way of Israel’s return, and the Lord will remember their sins no more. In fact, he will pour out his Spirit on their descendants (44:3).<\/p>\nA God so great is far more powerful than any idol. In 44:6-20 Isaiah makes use of satire to show the worthlessness of man-made images. God alone has the power to create and to restore, and he will bring Cyrus on the scene to effect the release of the exiles and to begin the rebuilding of Jerusalem. Chapters 46 and 47 contrast the God of Israel and the idols of Babylon. When God raises up Cyrus, Babylon’s idols will be unable to save their nation, and the queen of kingdoms (47:5) will collapse along with her sorcerers and astrologers. The final chapter in this section (ch 48) restates God’s purpose of gaining release of the Israelites from Babylon through his chosen ally, Cyrus of Persia.<\/p>\n<h5>Salvation through the Servant of the Lord (49–57)<\/h5>\nChapters 49–53 contain the final three Servant Songs (cf. also 42:1-7), culminating in the death of the servant for the sins of the world (52:13–53:12). In the second Servant Song (49:1-7), Isaiah describes the call and ministry of the servant, noting that he will face strong opposition as he accomplishes salvation for Israel and the nations. The rest of chapter 49 deals primarily with the way God will bring Israel back from exile. Soon the land will be filled with a mighty throng (vv 19-21), and the Gentiles will acknowledge Israel and her God (vv 22-23).<\/p>\nAlthough Israel has fully deserved the exile because of her sins (50:1-3), the suffering endured by the servant (vv 4-11; the third Servant Song) is wholly undeserved. The beating and mocking of verse 6 are prophetic of Christ’s experience (cf. Mt 27:26, 30; Mk 15:19). In verses 10-11 of Isaiah 50 the whole nation is challenged to trust in the Lord, as the servant did. There is, in fact, a believing remnant who obey the Lord (51:1-8), and the Lord promises that he will restore them to their homeland. Israel has drunk the cup of God’s wrath (vv 17, 22), but the good news of release from exile causes even the ruins of Jerusalem to burst into songs of joy (52:7-10).<\/p>\nYet the best news of all is salvation from sin; the final Servant Song (52:13–53:12) tells how Christ wins freedom for those held in bondage to sin. In this brief passage we learn how Christ suffers rejection (53:3) and even disfigurement (52:14). Led like a lamb to the slaughter (53:7), he carries our sins in his body as he dies in ignominy. The people think he is suffering for his own sins (v 4), but he is “pierced” and “crushed for our iniquities” (v 5). The first and last paragraphs of this section (52:13-15; 53:10-12) state that through his suffering the servant is highly exalted. What seems like a terrible defeat is actually victory over death and Satan and brings salvation for many.<\/p>\nAs a direct result of the servant’s death, great joy comes to all people. In chapter 54 this joy is reflected in Jerusalem’s new status as the Lord’s wife. Her descendants will be numerous and eager to learn from the Lord. For the first time the plural “servants of the Lord<\/span>” appears (54:17), apparently including all believers, whether Jew or Gentile (cf. 65:8-9, 13-15). Joy and prosperity also characterize chapter 55, an invitation to a great spiritual banquet. All people are urged to turn to the Lord who keeps his promises to Israel. In 56:1-8, foreigners are invited to come to God’s “holy mountain” in Jerusalem, for the temple will be a house of prayer for all the nations (56:7; cf. Mt 21:13).<\/p>\nBelieving Gentiles are contrasted sharply with unbelieving Jews, and in 56:9–57:13 Isaiah returns again to the theme of judgment. Israel suffers because her leaders are wicked and because the people are guilty of idolatry. Spiritual healing is available, but unless individuals repent, they cannot be part of the remnant who will return from exile and enjoy peace in the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<h5>Ultimate Blessing and Final Judgment (58–66)<\/h5>\nThe last nine chapters of Isaiah emphasize redemption and glory, but the reality of judgment is also very much in evidence. In fact, chapters 58 and 59 bemoan the sins of Israel. The people are hypocritical in their worship; they are selfish and fail to keep the Sabbath. Lying, oppression, and murder separate the people from God. When Isaiah openly confesses these sins (59:12-13), the Lord suddenly takes action on behalf of his people. Like a mighty warrior, he rescues the believing remnant from Babylon and brings them back to Jerusalem.<\/p>\nIn chapter 60 the glory and wealth of Jerusalem reach new heights. Both the city and the sanctuary are adorned with splendor, matching the prosperity of Solomon’s reign. Just as the nations treated Solomon with honor, so earth’s leaders will assist and strengthen the returning exiles. While it is true that the Persian government did help the Jews repeatedly, the conditions described here will have their ultimate fulfillment during the Millennium and in connection with the new Jerusalem (cf. Rv 21:23; 22:5). The ancient ruins will be rebuilt (Is 61:4), and the Lord will fulfill the covenant made with Abraham and David (Is 61:8; cf. Gn 12:1-3; Is 55:3). Jerusalem will be the city of the holy people, the redeemed of the Lord (Is 62:12), and the Lord will take delight in her (v 4).<\/p>\nIn order to accomplish salvation for his people, God will have to judge the ungodly first. The great trampling of the winepress (63:2-3) graphically portrays the judgment process and is linked with the Day of the Lord (cf. 13:3; 34:2). Since God has promised to intervene on behalf of his people, Isaiah prays for the realization of that promise (63:7–64:12). He recalls God’s faithfulness in the past and pleads that he will again have mercy upon his suffering people.<\/p>\nThe answer to Isaiah’s prayer is found in chapter 65. God does promise to give the Holy Land back to his servants, to those who worship him and obey him. But for that segment of the nation that continues in its obstinacy, God promises anguish and destruction. The ultimate joy of God’s servants is contained in a description of new heavens and a new earth (65:17-25). Peace, long life, and prosperity will be among the blessings enjoyed in an era that seems to combine features of the Millennium and the eternal state (cf. ch 60).<\/p>\nIn a fitting summary, chapter 66 ties together the themes of salvation and judgment. God will comfort Jerusalem and abundantly bless her, but sinners are the objects of his wrath. Those who honor him will endure forever, but those who rebel will suffer everlasting rejection.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Isaiah (Person); Israel, History of; Messiah; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess; Servant of the Lord; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ISAIAH, Book of Preview • Author • Date • Background • Literary Unity • Theological Teaching • Content Author The prophet Isaiah, whose name means “the Lord saves,” lived and ministered in Jerusalem. Because of his repeated contact with the kings of Judah, some scholars believed that Isaiah was related to the royal family, but this is not certain. According to chapters 7 and 8, Isaiah was married and had at least two sons, Shear-jashub and Maher-shalal-hash-baz, whose symbolic names illustrat...","summary_en":"ISAIAH, Book of Preview • Author • Date • Background • Literary Unity • Theological Teaching • Content Author The prophet Isaiah, whose name means “the Lord saves,” lived and ministered in Jerusalem. Because of his repeated contact with the kings of Judah, some scholars believed that Isaiah was related to the royal family, but this is not certain. According to chapters 7 and 8, Isaiah was married and had at least two sons, Shear-jashub and Maher-shalal-hash-baz, whose symbolic names illustrat...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":18027,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"History of Israel","title_en":"History of Israel","content_ro":"<h3>ISRAEL, History of<\/h3>\nAn account of God’s sovereign purpose in calling a people out of paganism and establishing them as witnesses for the true faith among the nations, of God’s sovereign power in protecting them from extinction, of his sovereign justice in dealing with their departure from his ways of holiness, of God’s sovereign grace in forgiving their sins and restoring them to fellowship with himself by providing through them a Savior for the entire world.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Patriarchal Age<\/p>\n• Sojourn in Egypt<\/p>\n• The Exodus<\/p>\n• Wilderness Wanderings<\/p>\n• The Conquest<\/p>\n• The Judges<\/p>\n• The United Monarchy<\/p>\n• The Divided Kingdom<\/p>\n• The Restoration<\/p>\n• The Intertestamental Period<\/p>\n• The Roman Period<\/p>\nPatriarchal Age<\/p>\nThe story of Israel begins with Abraham, whom God called first at Ur, and perhaps later at Haran (Acts 7:2-4), to leave Mesopotamia and go into a land to which God would direct the way. In calling Abraham, God made with him a covenant (Gn 12:1-3) that promised him a land, special divine favor (“I will bless those who bless you, and the one who curses you I will curse,” nasb<\/span>), and the privilege of being a channel of blessing to the entire world (“In you all the families of the earth shall be blessed,” nasb<\/span>). In Genesis 12:4-8 God confirmed this unconditional covenant, promising Abraham this new land forever, along with innumerable descendants. Subsequently, in Genesis 15:1-21, God again confirmed the covenant but added the significant prediction that the guarantee of holding Canaan in perpetuity did not mean occupation of the land in every generation. God also spelled out the limits of the Promised Land (from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates, some 500 to 600 miles or 804 to 965 kilometers in extent). A final confirmation of the covenant to Abraham appears in Genesis 17:6-8. It guaranteed the land of Canaan to Abraham’s posterity and added that kings (an anticipation of the Davidic dynasty) would arise in his line. The covenant was confirmed to Abraham’s son Isaac (Gn 26:3-5) and his grandson Jacob (ch 28).<\/p>\nThis period is known as the patriarchal age in Hebrew history. The patriarchs were Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. They were called patriarchs because they were fathers, not only to their immediate families, but also to the extended family of Hebrews, over which they exercised a fatherly control. They served as political, legal, and spiritual heads of their migratory community, looking after their interests and leading them in worship. Periodically they built altars on which they offered sacrifices. That the patriarchal community was very large can be seen from Genesis 14:14, which says that Abraham had 318 armed men in his camp. If one assumes that most of the men were married and had one or more children each, the total extended family may have numbered in excess of 1,000.<\/p>\nAdditional developments in the life of Abraham and Jacob were particularly important for world history. Abraham, frustrated at not having an heir, accepted Sarah’s suggestion to obtain an heir by the slave girl Hagar. (This was also the custom of the land.) The son born was named Ishmael, progenitor of the Arabs. Thus Abraham is revered by Arabs and Muslims as well as by Jews and Christians. He is the father of the Jews through his son Isaac, child of promise. He holds a special place in Christianity as an example of Christ, through whom all Christians obtain their salvation.<\/p>\nJacob, a scheming scoundrel in his earlier years, wound up in exile in northern Mesopotamia for 20 years in the home of his uncle Laban. There he married Leah and Rachel and fathered the sons who became the progenitors of the 12 tribes of Israel. On his return to Palestine he met God along the banks of the Jabbok River (Gn 32), and God changed his name to Israel (“a prince of God,” kjv<\/span> mg).<\/p>\nThe patriarchal period in Canaan lasted for 215 years. One estimate places Abraham’s entry into Canaan at about 2085 BC<\/span>, when he was 75 years of age. Jacob and his sons migrated to Egypt to escape a severe famine in Canaan in about 1870 BC<\/span>. During much of the patriarchal period, Palestine experienced a decline in population and was occupied largely by nomadic or seminomadic tribes. It was relatively easy for the Hebrews to enter such a situation. After 1900 Palestine began to enjoy more settled conditions. Shortly thereafter, the Hebrews made the trek into Egypt.<\/p>\nSojourn in Egypt<\/p>\nIf Jacob and his sons entered Egypt about 1870 BC<\/span>, it was the period of the Middle Kingdom. And by that time other migrants from Asia were coming in increasing numbers. The Hebrews settled in Goshen, in the eastern delta region, under the protecting care of Joseph, who held a position at the Egyptian court roughly equivalent to that of prime minister. As more and more Asiatic Hyksos came into Egypt, they began to take over the country—northern Egypt at least. During this same time the Hebrews became increasingly numerous. Some who hold to a different chronology believe the Hebrews were welcomed into Egypt during the days of Hyksos domination (after 1750 BC<\/span>). At any rate, by about 1580 BC<\/span> native Egyptian princes regained control of the country and expelled many of the Asiatics.<\/p>\nIn process of time there arose a king over Egypt who “knew not Joseph” (Ex 1:8, kjv<\/span>). Very possibly this meant that a native Egyptian dynasty had arisen in Egypt and they were apprehensive over the fact that the growing numbers and wealth of the Hebrews might jeopardize their own supremacy. But Egyptian measures to subjugate the Hebrews and reduce their birthrate had a reverse effect (Ex 1:12). Finally, the Egyptians ordered the killing of all male Hebrew infants at birth. Among those who disobeyed were the parents of Moses, who set him afloat in a waterproof basket made of reeds. Found by a daughter of Pharaoh, he was brought up in the Egyptian court, was given a first-class education, and became a high official of the realm.<\/p>\nAt the age of 40, Moses identified himself with his own people. He killed an Egyptian in defense of a fellow Hebrew, and immediately fled to the land of Midian in the northeastern part of the Sinai Peninsula. He married and lived there for 40 years, becoming thoroughly familiar with the geography and the ways of the wilderness through which he would later lead the Hebrews. The Egyptians continued to oppress the Hebrew people severely until they cried urgently to God for deliverance. In response, God confronted Moses in the famous burning bush experience and called on him to return to Egypt and lead the people back into the land of Canaan (Ex 3–4). He was to have the help of his brother, Aaron.<\/p>\nThe Exodus<\/p>\nUnderstandably the pharaoh of Egypt was reluctant to permit the Hebrews to leave permanently. The value of this great labor force was incalculable. But finally, after suffering a series of ten plagues, lasting perhaps a year, the Egyptians were persuaded to let the Hebrews go (Ex 7–12).<\/p>\nThe plagues had a theological as well as a practical purpose. They discredited the gods of Egypt and exalted the most high God of heaven (Ex 12:12). The plagues clearly discredited specific gods of Egypt (e.g., the Nile was worshiped as Hapi, plague one; the frog, worshiped as Heqt, plague two; the bull, worshiped as Ptah, plague five; the sun, worshiped as Amon-Re\/Aton, plague nine). Taken together, they struck a direct blow at the Egyptian pantheon.<\/p>\nJust before the last plague, which was the night in which the death angel invaded the homes of the Egyptians, the Israelites made the Passover sacrifice according to divine instructions. This involved killing a lamb for each household (unless the household was too small; in that event, households could combine). Anyone who was careless about applying the blood to the doorpost or who rejected this divine provision came under the judgment of God. After the death of the firstborn throughout the land, the Egyptians begged the Hebrews to leave. Their company numbered 600,000 men over 20 years of age, plus women and children, for a total of over 2,500,000. In addition they took their flocks and herds and personal belongings.<\/p>\nThe date they left Egypt is a matter of continuing debate. Traditionally a date of about 1446 BC<\/span> is given for the exodus (cf. 1 Kgs 6:1, which places the exodus 480 years before construction of the temple started in 966 BC<\/span>) and 1406 BC<\/span> for the Conquest under Joshua, and there do not seem to be any compelling arguments for rejecting that position. But a great many scholars prefer 1275 BC<\/span> for a variety of reasons.<\/p>\nThe early date of the exodus would place the later years of the wilderness wanderings and the subsequent conquest of Palestine during the reigns of Amenhotep III and IV (1412–1366), a time when the pharaohs allowed Egyptian control of Palestine to disintegrate. When the Egyptians did reassert their power, about 1300, they restricted their movements largely to the coastal area, and thus did not come in contact with the Hebrews who were living in the hill country of Judea, Samaria, and Galilee.<\/p>\nWilderness Wanderings<\/p>\nThe wilderness wanderings were an important interlude in the history of Israel. During those years, significant and basic institutions came into existence at God’s command. At Sinai, Moses delivered to Israel the law, the pattern of the tabernacle (which later became the model for the temple) and orders for its operation, as well as detailed instructions for the priesthood and sacrificial system of worship.<\/p>\nThe period of the wanderings was truly a remarkable time. The presence of God was evidenced by a pillar of cloud that hovered over the people by day and a pillar of fire by night. God provided food in the form of manna, periodically provided water by miraculous means, and made sure that clothes did not wear out. In spite of all that, the people murmured and complained continually.<\/p>\nAt Sinai, God gave the law (Ex 19:2–24:18), and the people promptly made a commitment to keep it (24:3). Then God gave the pattern for the tabernacle and its furniture (chs 25–27, 30–31, 35–40) and established the priesthood (chs 28–29). While Moses was on the mountain receiving God’s revelation, the people grew restless and clamored for gods they could see. Even Aaron was carried away with the idolatrous wave and supervised the casting of a golden calf and building of an altar before it. The fact that they turned to Egyptian cattle worship so readily indicates that paganism must have made deep inroads among them while in captivity (chs 32–34). Moses’ intercessory response to God’s announcement that he would destroy Israel because of her idolatry led to a divine determination to execute judgment on only the worst offenders (32:9-14).<\/p>\nSubsequently, God revealed the legal and priestly order (Lv 1:1–27:34). Among the divinely appointed institutions described or alluded to in Leviticus are several special days or feasts, including the Sabbath, Passover, Feast of Unleavened Bread, Firstfruits, Pentecost or Feast of Weeks, Feast of Trumpets, Day of Atonement, Feast of Tabernacles, the Year of Sabbath, and the Year of Jubilee.<\/p>\nAfter camping at Sinai for about a year, the Israelites got their orders to go forward (Nm 10:11-12). Miriam (Moses’ sister) and Aaron criticized Moses’ leadership and suffered divine punishment as a consequence (ch 12). When the people arrived at Kadesh-barnea, the gate to southern Palestine, they were frightened by the report of most of the spies who had been reconnoitering in Canaan and decided that they should not advance into Canaan. They called for a new leader to bring them back to Egypt. God declared that the entire generation would wander in the wilderness until the adults had died. Only Joshua and Caleb (the two spies in favor of invading immediately) would enter the Promised Land (14:26-30). Near the end of the period of wandering, Moses also lost the privilege of entering the land by an act of disobedience.<\/p>\nThe Conquest<\/p>\nThe latter part of the book of Numbers describes how Moses led the Israelites to victory over the peoples living east of the Jordan River. Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh requested permission to settle there and reluctantly were allowed to do so on the condition that they would join the rest of the Israelites in conquering Canaan before settling down. Prior to victories in Transjordan, a new census of adult males was taken in order to determine the military capabilities of Israel and to provide a basis for equitable division of the land they were about to enter. The number of males above 20 years of age was 601,730 (Nm 26:51). The book of Deuteronomy consists primarily of a series of speeches delivered by Moses in a covenant renewal ceremony on the plains of Moab just before his death and the appointment of Joshua as leader.<\/p>\nJoshua lost no time in moving forward. Spies sent across the Jordan to Jericho to reconnoiter reported a situation quite different from what the Hebrews had experienced at Kadesh-barnea a generation earlier. Now the people of Canaan were terrified because they had heard of the numerical strength and victories of the Hebrews. Apparently the day after the spies returned, Joshua moved the people to the edge of the Jordan and prepared to cross over. The waters parted for them here as the Red Sea had parted earlier.<\/p>\nThe narrative of conquest that appears in the book of Joshua is not a detailed battle account. It describes a thrust into the middle of Palestine around Jericho and Ai, a southerly drive to defeat the Amorite league, and a northern campaign against Hazor and other towns. The history of Joshua is extremely telescoped, for Joshua’s major military action must have required about six years. Joshua’s friend Caleb was 79 when the Conquest began and 85 after the last great battle with Jabin, king of Hazor (Jos 14:7-10).<\/p>\nWhen the war was over, major strongholds (e.g., Jerusalem) still remained in enemy hands, but the land west of the Jordan was allocated to the nine and a half Hebrew tribes. The task of reducing enemy towns was left to the individual tribes in whose land they were located. The Joshua account was not so much a narrative of Israelite battle prowess as of God’s faithfulness and intervention on behalf of his people. For example, at Jericho they did not attack but merely followed divine orders and watched the defenses collapse; at Gibeon hailstones killed more Amorites than Israelite soldiers did (Jos 10:7-11).<\/p>\nThe Judges<\/p>\nJoshua died some 30 years after he had led the Hebrews into Canaan, and he was followed by a series of divinely appointed leaders who ruled sometimes over the whole of Israel as a loose confederacy and sometimes over one or more tribes. They were judges, civil functionaries, and military leaders all at the same time.<\/p>\nThe book of Judges pictures a series of recurring cycles: apostasy from God, punishment in the form of oppression by neighboring tribes, cries to God for relief, release from bondage under the leadership of a judge, and a period of rest from oppression.<\/p>\nEstablishment of the chronology of the judges is one of the thorniest problems of Scripture. Adding up all years of oppression and rest mentioned in the book gives a total of 410. The book of Acts gives a total of 450 years from the days of Joshua to Samuel (Acts 13:19). The difference in Acts may be accounted for by the addition of 40 years of Eli’s ministry (1 Sm 4:18). Allowing 410 years for the period of the judges, about 30 for the Conquest to the judges, and 40 for the wilderness wanderings, means 480 years from 1050 BC<\/span>, the date for Saul’s kingship, and would give a date of about 1530 for the exodus. This is about 100 years more than even the early date for the exodus. The most probable explanation is that there is some overlap in oppressions and judgeships. For instance, the activities of Jephthah were centered on the eastern frontier, those of Samson in the Philistine plain to the southwest, and those of Deborah and Barak in the north.<\/p>\nThe United Monarchy<\/p>\nBecause of the weakness of Israel resulting from political disunity and the ineptness and corruption of both Eli’s and Samuel’s sons, the people of Israel called for a king to rule over them. This demand was in reality a rejection of the divine plan of theocracy—the rule of God. God granted the Hebrews’ wish but warned them of the disadvantages of monarchy (1 Sm 8:9-21). The concept of kingship was not new to Israel. It had been hinted at in Genesis 49:10 and Numbers 24:17, and Moses had made some very clear statements about it in Deuteronomy 17:14-20.<\/p>\nThe first stage of Hebrew monarchy is commonly called the united monarchy because all Israel was ruled by a single king. This period lasted for 120 years—encompassing the 40-year reigns of Saul (Acts 13:21), David (2 Sm 5:5), and Solomon (1 Kgs 11:42).<\/p>\nThe people asked for a king, and God granted them one, but not one like those of the surrounding nations. The Hebrew king was to be a man who followed God’s dictates in his public and private life, who did not intrude into the affairs of the priesthood, and who did not fall into idolatry, but exerted all his influence to keep the people faithful to God. If he failed in any of these respects, he ran the risk of being deposed by God, of having his line brought to an end, or even of having the people fall into captivity to a foreign power. All this must be kept in mind when evaluating the reigns of Saul, David, Solomon, and the kings of the divided monarchy.<\/p>\nSaul began well. He won a great victory over the Ammonites at Jabesh-gilead and showed considerable wisdom in administrative matters. But after about two years he intruded into the priest’s office to offer sacrifice, bringing the divine prediction that his kingdom would be taken from him (1 Sm 13:8-14). He would go on to enjoy great military victory and ability as a ruler until about the middle of his reign.<\/p>\nAfter Saul’s disobedience to God’s command to totally destroy the Amalekites, the Lord repudiated Saul and instructed Samuel to anoint David privately as future king of Israel. David’s rise to prominence was spurred by his victory over Goliath and the accompanying defeat of the Philistines. Saul later made David commander of the army, and the young man soon earned a reputation greater than that of the king himself. Saul, who had become increasingly mentally disturbed after his relationship with God was broken, began to make attempts on David’s life, and for the last years of Saul’s reign David lived as a fugitive. Meanwhile, the Philistines got completely out of control and finally killed Saul and most of his sons in the great battle of Mt Gilboa, which gave the Philistines control over much of Palestine west of the Jordan (1 Sm 31:1-7).<\/p>\nSoon David became king in Judah with his capital in Hebron. A son of Saul, Ishbosheth, established himself at Mahanaim, east of the Jordan. For seven years the two tiny kingdoms existed side by side (2 Sm 2:2-11). But after the Israelite king and his army commander were assassinated, David became ruler of a united Hebrew kingdom.<\/p>\nNot long after the beginning of his reign (1010–970 BC<\/span>) David completely defeated and subjugated the Philistines. Soon thereafter he captured Jerusalem, making it the capital of the united kingdom. During succeeding years, David built up an empire (2 Sm 8:10; 1 Chr 18–19), conquering Moab, Edom, Damascus, Zobah, and Ammon, so he controlled territory from the Gulf of Aqaba (a branch of the Red Sea) and the Sinai in the south almost to the Euphrates in the north. Moreover, he established good relations, if not an alliance, with Tyre. The establishment of David’s empire was possible because of a power vacuum in the Middle East. The Egyptians, Mycenaeans, Hittites, and Assyrians were either decadent or removed from the stage of history. The Phoenicians, a peaceful commercial people, were also free to expand their trade, and they were happy to sell cedar to David for his palace and the temple.<\/p>\nWithout doubt, David was Israel’s greatest king. Jerusalem came to be known as the city of David. When the king wanted to build the temple as God’s house, God replied that his son should do it instead. But God would in a very real sense build David’s house; he made a covenant with David, promising him that his house (dynasty, kingdom, throne) would be established forever (2 Sm 7). Christ, the infinite One who came from the line of David, alone was capable of fulfilling this divine promise (see Lk 1:31-33; Acts 2:29-36; 13:32-39; 15:14-17).<\/p>\nLike other Oriental monarchs, David fell into the practice of keeping a harem. Scripture names 8 wives and 21 children and refers to other wives and concubines. Such a situation opened the door to family rivalries and questions about succession to the throne. Two sons, Absalom and Adonijah, made a try for the throne, but both efforts were squelched. Solomon, son of David’s favorite wife, Bathsheba, became the next king.<\/p>\nSolomon (970–930 BC<\/span>) was a man of peace and a builder of palaces, cities, fortifications, and the temple. He fortified cities all over his realm and outfitted cities for his chariot corps and cavalry units. With the help of the Phoenicians, he built a seaport and kept a fleet at Ezion-geber, near modern Eilat on the Gulf of Aqaba. He greatly enlarged Jerusalem by enclosing the temple area to the north of David’s city and the southwestern hill now known as Zion. His best-known project was the temple, which took seven years to build. Twice the size of the tabernacle, it was built on the same basic plan; it measured 90 feet (27.4 meters) long and 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide and had magnificent appointments. But he also constructed a palace complex that took 13 years to complete. This included an armory, a throne room, the king’s private residence, and a house for the daughter of pharaoh.<\/p>\nApparently much influenced by the spiritual testimony of David and desiring God’s blessing on his rule, Solomon made a great sacrifice to God at Gibeon near the beginning of his reign. God met him there and offered to grant whatever he might request. Solomon asked for understanding and wisdom to govern God’s people (1 Kgs 3:9). His God-given wisdom is apparent in many administrative decisions and official policies and building plans.<\/p>\nUnfortunately, Solomon did not show such wisdom in maintaining a harem of 700 wives and 300 concubines or in excessive expenditures that left the state in serious financial straits. He even erected places of worship for his foreign wives, thus subsidizing their idolatries and incurring the wrath of God. In fact, foreign wives and their idolatry proved to be his downfall; before Solomon died, God informed him that for this reason he would divide the kingdom at his death and give most of it to someone other than Solomon’s son. But for David’s sake, God would keep Judah and Jerusalem in the hands of the Davidic line (1 Kgs 11:9-13).<\/p>\nThe Divided Kingdom<\/p>\nAfter the death of Solomon, the Near East was destined to become a very different place. Israel was no longer in a power vacuum. The Assyrian Empire rose in Mesopotamia, to be followed by the Neo-Babylonian and the Medo-Persian Empires in turn. Egypt was temporarily powerful in the south, but it would later come under control of Assyria and Medo-Persia. These empires exerted great pressure on Israel and dominated one or both of the two Hebrew kingdoms.<\/p>\n\nWhen Solomon died, his son Rehoboam took the throne and was forced to deal with a rising tide of resentment over the high taxes and economic stagnation of Solomon’s last years. When Rehoboam refused to give relief, all the northern tribes broke away and formed the northern kingdom, Israel, under the leadership of Jeroboam. The southern kingdom, Judah, was left with only the territory of Judah and Benjamin. A total of 20 kings ruled in each of the separate kingdoms. While the north had several dynasties and the reigns of kings were generally short, in the south the dynasty of David continued to rule and the reigns were longer.<\/p>\n<h5>The Northern Kingdom<\/h5>\nThe northern kingdom lasted from the division in 930 BC<\/span> until its conquest by Assyria in 722. Jeroboam, fearing that he would lose the loyalty of the people if they continued to go to Jerusalem to worship, set up a new religion of his own. Instituting calf worship, he built shrines at Dan in the north and Bethel in the south. This idolatry drew the condemnation of God and fulfilled the prediction that Jeroboam’s line would be wiped out. All his successors are said to have followed in his idolatrous steps. Israel found itself at war during much of its history—with Judah, Syria, or Assyria. Jeroboam established his capital first at Shechem and later at Tirzah.<\/p>\nFour other kings of the north require special comment: Omri, Ahab, Jehu, and Jeroboam II. Omri (885–874 BC<\/span>) must have been an impressive ruler. Generations later, Assyrians still spoke of Israel as the land of Omri. After he had established himself on the throne, he located the permanent capital of the kingdom at Samaria and began the palace complex there. Early in his reign he was successful in conquering Moab, and later he reestablished the good relations with Tyre that existed in the days of David and Solomon. Apparently he established a full alliance and cemented it with the marriage of his son Ahab to Jezebel, a princess of Tyre.<\/p>\nAhab (874–853 BC<\/span>) was one of the most significant of Israel’s kings. He and his wife, Jezebel, promoted the vile idolatry of Baal worship with its religious prostitution, arousing the powerful opposition of the prophet Elijah. Ahab was a formidable military man, defeating the Syrians in major campaigns and participating in a coalition that fought the Assyrians to a virtual standstill. He also built extensively at Samaria, Hazor, Megiddo, and other towns, as excavations show.<\/p>\nJehu (841–814 BC<\/span>) was God’s agent for punishing the house of Omri and destroying Baal worship in Israel. He did eradicate Baal worship and liquidated literally scores of relatives and court officials of Ahab. But he was so ruthless that he killed off the people who knew how to run the government; subsequently, it did not work well. Jehu also was forced to become a vassal to Assyria.<\/p>\nJeroboam II ruled during most of the first half of the eighth century (793–753 BC<\/span>) and brought the kingdom to its greatest extent and prosperity. He, with his contemporary Uzziah in the south, ruled most of the land David had once controlled. This was possible because the Assyrians were in a period of decline during most of the first half of the century.<\/p>\nProphets who were active during the history of the northern kingdom include the nonwriting prophets Elijah and Elisha and the writing prophets Jonah, Amos, and Hosea.<\/p>\n<h5>The Southern Kingdom<\/h5>\nThe history of the southern kingdom of Judah was quite different from that of the northern kingdom. The temple was there and so were large numbers of Levites, many of whom came south after the division of the kingdom to protest the idolatry of the north. In addition to this spiritual strength, there was greater political stability and unity, promoted by the fact that only two tribes—Judah and Benjamin—shared power, and all the kings were of the Davidic dynasty. Moreover, eight of the kings were good monarchs. There were also periodic religious revivals. God granted the southern kingdom about 100 more years of existence than the north. But Judah, too, fell into idolatry and went into captivity for her sins.<\/p>\nRehoboam, the first king in the south, is especially remembered because he refused to listen to wise counsel about fiscal matters and perpetrated the division of the kingdom. He is also remembered for his religious policies. After a good beginning, he allowed apostasy to get out of control and brought the judgment of God in the form of an invasion in his fifth year (926 BC<\/span>) by Shishak I of Egypt, resulting in extensive plunder and payment of tribute. Thereafter, he launched an extensive program to fortify the realm. Shishak’s invasion did have the effect of producing a partial and temporary spiritual reform, but the general trend of Rehoboam’s reign was downward.<\/p>\nConditions during the reign of his son, Abijam, were worse, but Asa (910–869 BC<\/span>) initiated a religious reform that was effective for most of his reign. When threatened by the northern kingdom during his latter years, however, Asa turned to Syria for help instead of to God, and he seems to have defied the prophets of God to his dying day.<\/p>\nAsa’s son Jehoshaphat (872–848 BC<\/span>) was apparently influenced by his father’s early religious devotion, and his reign was characterized by faithfulness, winning the favor of God. However, he seems to have made a full alliance with Ahab of Israel, which resulted in the marriage of his son Jehoram to Ahab’s daughter Athaliah. This alliance involved Jehoshaphat in almost ruinous joint ventures with Ahab, and later with two of his sons when they became kings of Israel. It also opened the door for the introduction of Baal worship into Judah when Jehoram came to the throne in the southern kingdom. For his sin Jehoram (853–841 BC<\/span>) suffered internal revolt, invasion, and death from a horrible disease.<\/p>\nAfter his death, his last remaining son, Ahaziah, ruled less than a year, following the wicked ways of his father. When Ahaziah died in battle, the queen mother, Athaliah, decided to seize the throne for herself and to secure her power by killing off all those in line to the throne. But she missed Ahaziah’s infant son Joash, who was kept hidden in the temple for six years.<\/p>\nWhen Joash was seven, Jehoiada the high priest arranged his coronation and also the execution of the murderous and idolatrous Athaliah. During his early years when Joash was influenced by good counsel, he did well. But after the middle of his reign (835–796 BC<\/span>), he began to listen to the princes who wanted to restore idolatry, and conditions deteriorated. Military reversals brought on economic decline and ultimately the king’s assassination.<\/p>\nHis son Amaziah (796–767 BC<\/span>) started well with victory over Edom and faithfulness to God. But he, too, fell into idolatry and was totally defeated by the northern kingdom, being held prisoner there. At that point his son Uzziah took over (c. 792 BC<\/span>) and began a long and generally successful reign. During the several decades that followed, Assyria was in decline, and Uzziah and his contemporary in the north, Jeroboam II, were able to expand Hebrew holdings so that between them they controlled most of the territory Solomon had ruled.<\/p>\nUzziah (792–740 BC<\/span>) was able to restore the power of Judah rather quickly after his father’s defeat by Israel. Then he subjugated the Philistines in the southwest and the Ammonites across the Jordan; he strengthened his hold on the Edomites. All during his reign economic conditions improved. But at the height of his power Uzziah foolishly violated the high priest’s prerogatives and offered sacrifice in the temple. For this he was smitten with leprosy; his son Jotham was co-regent during the years 750–740 BC<\/span>, going on to rule alone for about five more years. Meanwhile, Assyrian power became resurgent.<\/p>\nBy and large, Jotham merely carried on the policies of Uzziah. But the administration of his son Ahaz (735–715 BC<\/span>) was very much affected by the Assyrian threat. Israel and Syria wanted him to join in war against Assyria, but he refused, being pro-Assyrian in sympathy. When Israel and Syria invaded Judah, King Ahaz sent tribute to Assyria and became her vassal in return for protection. This rash course of action was vainly opposed by Isaiah, who was prophet at court (c. 740–700 BC<\/span>). Contemporaneously, the prophet Micah ministered to the common people of Judah. The pro-Assyrian policy of Ahaz was accompanied by a renewed sympathy for idolatry, and this brought the judgment of God in the form of invasion by Edomites and Philistines and trouble with Assyria. In fact, during this period, Assyria had annexed the northern kingdom (722 BC<\/span>) and removed many of her people into captivity.<\/p>\nThe next king of Judah, Hezekiah (715–686 BC<\/span>), was greatly sobered by the fall of Israel because of her sins, and he determined to launch a reform in his realm. He was anti-Assyrian too, but he did not dare to discontinue tribute payments and strike for independence until after Sennacherib came to the throne in Nineveh in 705 BC<\/span>. At first Sennacherib was too preoccupied to attend to Judah, but finally in 701 he invaded. Despite tremendous initial success, he was stopped by a divinely sent plague (Is 36–39). Isaiah stood by the king to reassure and sustain him during this emergency.<\/p>\nHezekiah’s son Manasseh (697–642 BC<\/span>) ruled longer than any other king of Israel or Judah. Unfortunately, he turned his back on his father’s example and caused the people to fall into gross idolatry (2 Kgs 21:9). Carried away captive by the Assyrians late in his reign, he repented of his evil and God restored him to his throne; thereafter, he led some reforms. But the land was too steeped in iniquity to be rescued. His son Amon (642–640 BC<\/span>) reverted to the idolatry he knew in his youth.<\/p>\nThe situation was different with Josiah (640–609 BC<\/span>), however. Throughout his reign he dedicated himself to reform. He sought to root out idolatry and to restore the temple and its worship. In 622 BC<\/span> the Book of the Law was found during repair of the temple, and its demands—which had been forgotten—made a great impression on king and people alike. It is certain that Jeremiah and Zephaniah ministered during Josiah’s reign, as did Nahum and Habakkuk (in all probability).<\/p>\nInternational conditions were now changing rapidly. Assyria was declining, and Nineveh fell to Babylon and the Medes in 612 BC<\/span>. Three years later Pharaoh Neco of Egypt marched north to aid his Assyrian ally. When Josiah tried to stop him, he was killed in battle.<\/p>\nFrom this point everything was downhill for Judah. None of the rest of the kings was devout, and political power and economic health rapidly declined. The people put one of Josiah’s sons, Jehoahaz, on the throne. He lasted three months. Pharaoh Neco replaced him with Jehoiakim (609–598 BC<\/span>), another son of Josiah. In 605 Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon defeated Neco, invaded Judah, and took tribute and hostages from Jehoiakim, including Daniel and his friends (Dn 1:1). Jehoiakim revolted in 600 BC<\/span>, but Nebuchadnezzar did not come to deal with him personally until 597 BC<\/span>. He died before the Babylonians arrived, and his son Jehoiachin came to the throne in 598 BC<\/span> to rule for only three months before the Babylonians carried him away into exile. Ezekiel was among the many captives taken on that occasion.<\/p>\nThe Babylonians then put Zedekiah, youngest son of Josiah, on the throne in 597 BC<\/span>. When he rebelled, Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to Jerusalem and took the city (587 BC<\/span>), destroying it and the temple and carrying off large numbers of people. The judgment of God had finally fallen on the Jews for their idolatrous ways.<\/p>\nThe Restoration<\/p>\nIn judgment God remembered mercy. This is evident in individual lives, when faithful ones like Daniel, Esther, or Nehemiah rose to a position of importance in political life, or as numerous other persons became prosperous in the foreign environment. It is evident on the community level as God moved to protect Hebrew enclaves scattered abroad and to restore an organized society in Palestine.<\/p>\nAmong the exiles, Judaism as a way of life separated from its own political system or cultic center and began to emerge. Jews finally turned their backs on idolatry. And without a temple, priesthood, king, or land, they turned to the divine Scriptures as their rallying point and the foundation of their community. During this period they developed the synagogue as a place for fellowship, prayer, and study.<\/p>\nGod’s restoration of an organized community to Palestine involved particularly the fortunes of his “anointed” Cyrus (Is 44:28; 45:1). Cyrus was a Persian prince who in 559 BC<\/span> revolted against the dominant dynasty controlling the Median Empire. After consolidating his hold on the throne, he proceeded to conquer Asia Minor and the Chaldean or Neo-Babylonian Empire. As a humane man and a wise administrator, he permitted the captive peoples to return to their homes and rebuild their communities. Cyrus’s decree to the Jews appears in Ezra 1 and dates probably to 538 BC<\/span>. A total of almost 50,000 went back to Judah as a result of this edict (Ezr 2:64-65).<\/p>\nUnder the stresses and strains of reestablishment, the people built their houses but got no further than laying the foundation of a new temple. Finally, the prophets Haggai and Zechariah stirred the people to build the house of God (Ezr 5:1). They began in the second year of Darius I, the Great (520 BC<\/span>; Hg 1:1; Zec 1:1), and completed the work in his sixth year (515 BC<\/span>; Ezr 6:15).<\/p>\nDuring the reign of Darius’s son Xerxes (486–465 BC<\/span>), a plot was hatched to exterminate all the Jews in the Persian Empire, which at that time controlled the lands where Jews lived. Fortunately, Xerxes (Ahasuerus in the book of Esther), in his third year (483 BC<\/span>; Est 1:3), went searching for a new queen and chose Esther, who managed to preserve her people.<\/p>\nXerxes’ son Artaxerxes I (465–424 BC<\/span>) also figured significantly in Jewish history. In his seventh year (458 BC<\/span>; Ezr 7:7), under the leadership of Ezra, a second contingent of Jews returned to Jerusalem. And in Artaxerxes’ 20th year (445 BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1), Nehemiah went to Jerusalem to supervise the rebuilding of the walls of the city. Malachi probably wrote his prophecy to the Jews in Jerusalem during the latter part of Artaxerxes’ reign.<\/p>\nAfter the fall of Samaria and the captivity of Judah, the Hebrews remaining in the land intermarried with various pagan groups in the area. Their offspring became the Samaritans, a religious and racial admixture. These people had moved into the vacuum left by the destruction of Judah, and naturally they looked with disfavor on an intrusion of Babylonian Jews into an area they had come to call their own. They did all they could to frustrate the efforts of Nehemiah to rebuild the walls. It took all the courage, tact, energy, and persuasiveness Ezra and Nehemiah could muster to prevent the returning Jews from intermarrying with racially mixed people of the land. Such intermarriage would have meant the ultimate absorption and destruction of the Jewish people.<\/p>\nA Samaritan temple was later built on Mt Gerizim (probably during the fifth century BC<\/span>), and it became the center of the Samaritan worship. The hostility between Samaritans and Jews continued on into the NT period (Jn 4) and exists to the present.<\/p>\nThe Intertestamental Period<\/p>\nAlexander the Great conquered the Persian Empire with lightning speed. When the people of Jerusalem threw open their gates in 332 BC<\/span> and capitulated without a fight, Alexander treated them well. After his death in 323 BC<\/span>, Palestine passed back and forth among his successors until Ptolemy I of Egypt managed to establish control in 301 BC<\/span>. Thereafter the area remained in Egyptian hands until 198 BC<\/span>. The Ptolemies were tolerant and granted the Jews considerable autonomy, allowing them to develop their unique culture undisturbed as long as they paid their taxes and remained submissive. Many Jews settled in Alexandria and gradually forgot their Hebrew in the Hellenistic environment. As a result, a translation of the OT into Greek (the Septuagint) was produced there. While the Ptolemies did not force Hellenism on the Jews of either Alexandria or Palestine, many were influenced by Hellenistic ideas.<\/p>\nWhen Ptolemy V came to the throne as a minor in 203 BC<\/span>, Antiochus III of Syria took advantage of the weakened Egypt and conquered Palestine (198 BC<\/span>). Apparently the Jews hoped to gain something from the change and welcomed the Syrians. But their hope was ill-founded. Antiochus III suffered disastrous defeat at the hands of Rome at Magnesia in 190 BC<\/span>. Syria not only lost much territory but also was forced to pay a huge indemnity. Thereafter, the Jews suffered under great financial burdens, along with other peoples of the empire. The next Syrian king, Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164 BC<\/span>), decided to launch an effort to achieve greater internal strength and unity within the empire by forcing, among other things, a greater acceptance of Greek culture and the cult of the divine ruler. Naturally this idolatrous requirement weighed heavily on the monotheistic Jews and incited revolution.<\/p>\nBut this does not completely explain the Maccabean revolt against Syria. In 168 BC<\/span> armed conflict broke out between Jewish factions in Jerusalem. Antiochus IV chose to interpret this as open rebellion and sent an army against the city. His forces demolished part of the city wall and many houses. After this Antiochus decided to suppress Judaism completely, and he dedicated the temple to Zeus and sacrificed swine on the altar. Circumcision, Sabbath observance, and other religious festivals were no longer permitted, and public worship of heathen gods became compulsory.<\/p>\nSome Jews capitulated to Antiochus’s orders or only resisted passively, but a few decided to resist openly. Chief among them were Mattathias and his five sons. After the early death of Mattathias, his son Judas Maccabeus led his forces to victory over the Syrians, regaining the right to restore Jewish worship. The rededication of the temple on December 25, 164 BC<\/span>, inaugurated the Festival of Hanukkah (1 Macc 4:36-59). Subsequently, Jonathan and Simon (other sons of Mattathias) continued the struggle until independence was gained in 142 BC<\/span>; this was possible in large part because they saw how to take advantage of the increasing weakness of Syrian rulers and the competition for the royal office.<\/p>\nSimon ruled the Jewish state until his assassination in 134 BC<\/span>, when his son John Hyrcanus (134–104 BC<\/span>) took over. John Hyrcanus fought successfully in the east, north, and south, gaining land in Transjordan, capturing Shechem and the Samaritan temple on Mt Gerizim, and subjugating the Idumeans in the south, forcing them to adopt Judaism. His son Aristobulus ruled for only about a year (104–103 BC<\/span>), but he added a portion of Galilee to the kingdom. When he died, his widow married his brother Alexander Janneus (103–76 BC<\/span>). Janneus carried on almost incessant military action during his reign, and by the time of his death had almost recovered the kingdom of Solomon.<\/p>\nWhen Janneus died, Alexandra, widow of two kings, took the throne (76–67 BC<\/span>) and her eldest son, Hyrcanus II, became high priest. Her reign was peaceful and prosperous, but when she died, her sons fell to squabbling. Their appeals to Pompey, who was campaigning in the eastern Mediterranean area, were responsible for Roman interference in the region and conquest of Palestine in 63 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe Roman Period<\/p>\nAfter the Romans took over Palestine, Hyrcanus II was confirmed as high priest and was also appointed as ethnarch or political ruler (63–40 BC<\/span>). But Antipater, father of Herod the Great, was the real power behind the throne, and during many of those years Hyrcanus was virtually unable to function because of the confusion of the Roman civil wars. Antipater was loyal to Rome and saw that Roman policies were carried out; he won Julius Caesar’s favor toward Jews of both Palestine and in the Dispersion.<\/p>\nWith the support of Mark Antony, Herod managed to get himself appointed king of Judea by the Roman senate in 40 BC<\/span>. But a Parthian invasion of Syria and Jewish hatred for the Romans made it possible for Antigonus II, last king of the Maccabean family, to rule for three years (40–37 BC<\/span>). Finally, Herod ascended his throne in 37 and ruled until 4 BC<\/span>. As an allied king, Herod proved to be an excellent ruler from the Roman point of view and earned the title of “Great.” He brought some order to regions east of the Jordan and made possible organization of the Roman province of Arabia. He also furthered the cultural plans of Augustus for development of a Greco-Roman civilization throughout the whole empire.<\/p>\nHerod admired Greek culture and contributed to building projects in Rhodes, Antioch, Damascus, Athens, and elsewhere outside Palestine. Within Palestine he rebuilt Samaria and named it Sebaste in honor of Augustus (Sebastos<\/span> is Greek for “Augustus”) and also constructed the great port of Caesarea. Probably about as large as Manhattan Island, it became the capital of Roman Palestine. Among his many other building projects, remodeling the temple in Jerusalem was the most famous. Begun in 20 BC<\/span>, it was not completed until just a few years before its destruction in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nThe material splendor of Herod’s reign did not win the affection or support of the Jews, however. Nor did he achieve peace and harmony in his family, among whom there were periodic eruptions of treason, unfaithfulness, and murder. He worried about any threat to his rule and cracked down hard to destroy such threats, as is evident from his slaughter of the infants in Bethlehem after the birth of Christ.<\/p>\nUltimately, Herod controlled Idumea, Judea, Samaria, Galilee, Perea, and the area northeast of the Sea of Galilee. By his last will, his son Archelaus was to rule Idumea, Judea, and Samaria; Antipas, Galilee and Perea; and Philip, the region northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Archelaus was deposed in AD<\/span> 6, and his territory became a Roman province (AD<\/span> 6–41) to be ruled by direct appointees of Rome. The best-known of these was Pontius Pilate (AD<\/span> 26–36), who ordered the crucifixion of Jesus. Antipas was more successful and built a new capital at Tiberias, but he ran afoul of the emperor’s good pleasure in AD<\/span> 39 and was deposed. Philip was the most effective of the three and ruled until his death in AD<\/span> 34. Philip’s lands were later given to Herod Agrippa I in AD<\/span> 37; the holdings of Antipas were then added in AD<\/span> 39; and in 41 Agrippa also received Samaria, Judea, and Idumea.<\/p>\nHerod Agrippa I (AD<\/span> 37–44) was the heir of the Maccabees (through his grandmother Mariamne, first wife of Herod the Great), and for this reason had the support of patriotic Jews and of the Pharisees for his observance of divine ordinances. But when he built a new north wall for Jerusalem and dabbled in foreign affairs, he aroused the suspicions of the Romans; when he died in AD<\/span> 44, they turned the kingdom into a Roman province.<\/p>\nAs is clear from the Gospels, several sects had arisen in Palestine by Roman times and were active during the first century. The Zealots opposed Roman rule and advocated armed rebellion. Herodians supported the Herodian family and Roman power. The Pharisees were fanatically devoted to the law and were supernaturalists in theological orientation. They were somewhat content to support Rome if given religious freedom, and they dominated the synagogues of the land. The Sadducees were antisupernaturalists, tended to collaborate with the ruling regime, and were dominant in the temple. Generally speaking, the literature of the intertestamental period and the popular mentality of the time tended to view the Messiah as a political deliverer who would free his people from foreign domination and set up a new independent kingdom.<\/p>\nRoman prefects ruled Palestine from AD<\/span> 44–66. They had a knack for offending the religious scruples of the Jews and alienating them in other ways. With Felix (AD<\/span> 52–60) there began a constant tension between Jews and Romans that led to the first Jewish revolt (AD<\/span> 66–70). While Paul was imprisoned in Caesarea (Acts 23:23–24:27) about AD<\/span> 58–60, riots broke out there between Jews and Gentiles. Festus (AD<\/span> 60–62; Acts 25) was an able administrator, but the situation was almost out of hand. After he died in office, there was virtual anarchy until his successor, Albinus, arrived (AD<\/span> 62–64). Totally incompetent and dishonest, Albinus was recalled in 64 and replaced by Florus (AD<\/span> 64–66). Florus was even worse, resorting to open robbery and bribery until there was no safety or justice in the land. Finally, the Jews could take no more.<\/p>\nThe spark that ignited the fires of rebellion was an anti-Semitic act by the Hellenistic population of Caesarea in AD<\/span> 66. Soon riots spread to numerous cities, and Roman garrisons were massacred in several places. But the Jews were not united, and in Jerusalem armed bands of Jews fought with each other for mastery. Vespasian was chosen to command the Roman army of some 60,000 to deal with the insurrection. He had subjugated most of Palestine by the time he was elevated to the imperial chair in AD<\/span> 69 (after the death of Nero), and he left his son Titus in charge of completing the operations. In August of AD<\/span> 70 the walls of Jerusalem were breached, many of the people butchered, and the city and the temple leveled. Masada held out until AD<\/span> 73. Palestine had been flattened by Roman might. Loss of life and property had been incalculable and indescribable.<\/p>\nOn two more occasions the Jews were destined to fight disastrously against the Romans. Under Trajan’s rule a rebellion of Jews broke out in Cyrenaica in AD<\/span> 115 and spread rapidly to Cyprus, Egypt, Palestine, and Mesopotamia. In the beginning it was an outgrowth of agitation between the Jews and their Hellenistic neighbors, but it developed into a challenge to Roman authority. This was particularly true after the successes of Parthia on Rome’s eastern frontier when there seemed to be some hope of success in throwing off the Roman yoke. Wherever Jews got the upper hand, they perpetrated massacres, and the non-Semitic population retaliated in kind. Trajan ruthlessly suppressed the rebels and restored order everywhere except Egypt; his successor, Hadrian, was left to accomplish that.<\/p>\nBut Hadrian faced a new rebellion of his own, brought on by his law forbidding circumcision (which he considered to be inhumane) and his decision in AD<\/span> 130 to rebuild Jerusalem as Aelia Capitolina and erect a temple to Jupiter on the site of the temple of Yahweh. The latter would not only profane the temple site but also would preclude any rebuilding of the Jewish temple.<\/p>\nLeader of this second Jewish revolt was Simeon, prince of Israel, called Bar-Kochba (“Son of the Star”). Both sides fought with such great ferocity for over three years (AD<\/span> 132–135) that the population of Judea was almost exterminated. Jerusalem was rebuilt as a Roman colony, and Jews were forbidden to enter on pain of death. Even as late as the fourth century they were permitted to enter only once a year, on the anniversary of the destruction of the temple by Nebuchadnezzar. After the Bar-Kochba revolt, Judaism retreated increasingly within the citadel of the written and oral law, thus separating itself from the Gentiles.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Abraham; Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Conquest and Allotment of the Land; David; Diaspora of the Jews; Exodus, The; First Jewish Revolt; Jew; Judaism; Moses; Patriarchs, Period of the; Saul #2; Solomon; Postexilic Period; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ISRAEL, History of<\/h3>\nAn account of God’s sovereign purpose in calling a people out of paganism and establishing them as witnesses for the true faith among the nations, of God’s sovereign power in protecting them from extinction, of his sovereign justice in dealing with their departure from his ways of holiness, of God’s sovereign grace in forgiving their sins and restoring them to fellowship with himself by providing through them a Savior for the entire world.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Patriarchal Age<\/p>\n• Sojourn in Egypt<\/p>\n• The Exodus<\/p>\n• Wilderness Wanderings<\/p>\n• The Conquest<\/p>\n• The Judges<\/p>\n• The United Monarchy<\/p>\n• The Divided Kingdom<\/p>\n• The Restoration<\/p>\n• The Intertestamental Period<\/p>\n• The Roman Period<\/p>\nPatriarchal Age<\/p>\nThe story of Israel begins with Abraham, whom God called first at Ur, and perhaps later at Haran (Acts 7:2-4), to leave Mesopotamia and go into a land to which God would direct the way. In calling Abraham, God made with him a covenant (Gn 12:1-3) that promised him a land, special divine favor (“I will bless those who bless you, and the one who curses you I will curse,” nasb<\/span>), and the privilege of being a channel of blessing to the entire world (“In you all the families of the earth shall be blessed,” nasb<\/span>). In Genesis 12:4-8 God confirmed this unconditional covenant, promising Abraham this new land forever, along with innumerable descendants. Subsequently, in Genesis 15:1-21, God again confirmed the covenant but added the significant prediction that the guarantee of holding Canaan in perpetuity did not mean occupation of the land in every generation. God also spelled out the limits of the Promised Land (from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates, some 500 to 600 miles or 804 to 965 kilometers in extent). A final confirmation of the covenant to Abraham appears in Genesis 17:6-8. It guaranteed the land of Canaan to Abraham’s posterity and added that kings (an anticipation of the Davidic dynasty) would arise in his line. The covenant was confirmed to Abraham’s son Isaac (Gn 26:3-5) and his grandson Jacob (ch 28).<\/p>\nThis period is known as the patriarchal age in Hebrew history. The patriarchs were Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. They were called patriarchs because they were fathers, not only to their immediate families, but also to the extended family of Hebrews, over which they exercised a fatherly control. They served as political, legal, and spiritual heads of their migratory community, looking after their interests and leading them in worship. Periodically they built altars on which they offered sacrifices. That the patriarchal community was very large can be seen from Genesis 14:14, which says that Abraham had 318 armed men in his camp. If one assumes that most of the men were married and had one or more children each, the total extended family may have numbered in excess of 1,000.<\/p>\nAdditional developments in the life of Abraham and Jacob were particularly important for world history. Abraham, frustrated at not having an heir, accepted Sarah’s suggestion to obtain an heir by the slave girl Hagar. (This was also the custom of the land.) The son born was named Ishmael, progenitor of the Arabs. Thus Abraham is revered by Arabs and Muslims as well as by Jews and Christians. He is the father of the Jews through his son Isaac, child of promise. He holds a special place in Christianity as an example of Christ, through whom all Christians obtain their salvation.<\/p>\nJacob, a scheming scoundrel in his earlier years, wound up in exile in northern Mesopotamia for 20 years in the home of his uncle Laban. There he married Leah and Rachel and fathered the sons who became the progenitors of the 12 tribes of Israel. On his return to Palestine he met God along the banks of the Jabbok River (Gn 32), and God changed his name to Israel (“a prince of God,” kjv<\/span> mg).<\/p>\nThe patriarchal period in Canaan lasted for 215 years. One estimate places Abraham’s entry into Canaan at about 2085 BC<\/span>, when he was 75 years of age. Jacob and his sons migrated to Egypt to escape a severe famine in Canaan in about 1870 BC<\/span>. During much of the patriarchal period, Palestine experienced a decline in population and was occupied largely by nomadic or seminomadic tribes. It was relatively easy for the Hebrews to enter such a situation. After 1900 Palestine began to enjoy more settled conditions. Shortly thereafter, the Hebrews made the trek into Egypt.<\/p>\nSojourn in Egypt<\/p>\nIf Jacob and his sons entered Egypt about 1870 BC<\/span>, it was the period of the Middle Kingdom. And by that time other migrants from Asia were coming in increasing numbers. The Hebrews settled in Goshen, in the eastern delta region, under the protecting care of Joseph, who held a position at the Egyptian court roughly equivalent to that of prime minister. As more and more Asiatic Hyksos came into Egypt, they began to take over the country—northern Egypt at least. During this same time the Hebrews became increasingly numerous. Some who hold to a different chronology believe the Hebrews were welcomed into Egypt during the days of Hyksos domination (after 1750 BC<\/span>). At any rate, by about 1580 BC<\/span> native Egyptian princes regained control of the country and expelled many of the Asiatics.<\/p>\nIn process of time there arose a king over Egypt who “knew not Joseph” (Ex 1:8, kjv<\/span>). Very possibly this meant that a native Egyptian dynasty had arisen in Egypt and they were apprehensive over the fact that the growing numbers and wealth of the Hebrews might jeopardize their own supremacy. But Egyptian measures to subjugate the Hebrews and reduce their birthrate had a reverse effect (Ex 1:12). Finally, the Egyptians ordered the killing of all male Hebrew infants at birth. Among those who disobeyed were the parents of Moses, who set him afloat in a waterproof basket made of reeds. Found by a daughter of Pharaoh, he was brought up in the Egyptian court, was given a first-class education, and became a high official of the realm.<\/p>\nAt the age of 40, Moses identified himself with his own people. He killed an Egyptian in defense of a fellow Hebrew, and immediately fled to the land of Midian in the northeastern part of the Sinai Peninsula. He married and lived there for 40 years, becoming thoroughly familiar with the geography and the ways of the wilderness through which he would later lead the Hebrews. The Egyptians continued to oppress the Hebrew people severely until they cried urgently to God for deliverance. In response, God confronted Moses in the famous burning bush experience and called on him to return to Egypt and lead the people back into the land of Canaan (Ex 3–4). He was to have the help of his brother, Aaron.<\/p>\nThe Exodus<\/p>\nUnderstandably the pharaoh of Egypt was reluctant to permit the Hebrews to leave permanently. The value of this great labor force was incalculable. But finally, after suffering a series of ten plagues, lasting perhaps a year, the Egyptians were persuaded to let the Hebrews go (Ex 7–12).<\/p>\nThe plagues had a theological as well as a practical purpose. They discredited the gods of Egypt and exalted the most high God of heaven (Ex 12:12). The plagues clearly discredited specific gods of Egypt (e.g., the Nile was worshiped as Hapi, plague one; the frog, worshiped as Heqt, plague two; the bull, worshiped as Ptah, plague five; the sun, worshiped as Amon-Re\/Aton, plague nine). Taken together, they struck a direct blow at the Egyptian pantheon.<\/p>\nJust before the last plague, which was the night in which the death angel invaded the homes of the Egyptians, the Israelites made the Passover sacrifice according to divine instructions. This involved killing a lamb for each household (unless the household was too small; in that event, households could combine). Anyone who was careless about applying the blood to the doorpost or who rejected this divine provision came under the judgment of God. After the death of the firstborn throughout the land, the Egyptians begged the Hebrews to leave. Their company numbered 600,000 men over 20 years of age, plus women and children, for a total of over 2,500,000. In addition they took their flocks and herds and personal belongings.<\/p>\nThe date they left Egypt is a matter of continuing debate. Traditionally a date of about 1446 BC<\/span> is given for the exodus (cf. 1 Kgs 6:1, which places the exodus 480 years before construction of the temple started in 966 BC<\/span>) and 1406 BC<\/span> for the Conquest under Joshua, and there do not seem to be any compelling arguments for rejecting that position. But a great many scholars prefer 1275 BC<\/span> for a variety of reasons.<\/p>\nThe early date of the exodus would place the later years of the wilderness wanderings and the subsequent conquest of Palestine during the reigns of Amenhotep III and IV (1412–1366), a time when the pharaohs allowed Egyptian control of Palestine to disintegrate. When the Egyptians did reassert their power, about 1300, they restricted their movements largely to the coastal area, and thus did not come in contact with the Hebrews who were living in the hill country of Judea, Samaria, and Galilee.<\/p>\nWilderness Wanderings<\/p>\nThe wilderness wanderings were an important interlude in the history of Israel. During those years, significant and basic institutions came into existence at God’s command. At Sinai, Moses delivered to Israel the law, the pattern of the tabernacle (which later became the model for the temple) and orders for its operation, as well as detailed instructions for the priesthood and sacrificial system of worship.<\/p>\nThe period of the wanderings was truly a remarkable time. The presence of God was evidenced by a pillar of cloud that hovered over the people by day and a pillar of fire by night. God provided food in the form of manna, periodically provided water by miraculous means, and made sure that clothes did not wear out. In spite of all that, the people murmured and complained continually.<\/p>\nAt Sinai, God gave the law (Ex 19:2–24:18), and the people promptly made a commitment to keep it (24:3). Then God gave the pattern for the tabernacle and its furniture (chs 25–27, 30–31, 35–40) and established the priesthood (chs 28–29). While Moses was on the mountain receiving God’s revelation, the people grew restless and clamored for gods they could see. Even Aaron was carried away with the idolatrous wave and supervised the casting of a golden calf and building of an altar before it. The fact that they turned to Egyptian cattle worship so readily indicates that paganism must have made deep inroads among them while in captivity (chs 32–34). Moses’ intercessory response to God’s announcement that he would destroy Israel because of her idolatry led to a divine determination to execute judgment on only the worst offenders (32:9-14).<\/p>\nSubsequently, God revealed the legal and priestly order (Lv 1:1–27:34). Among the divinely appointed institutions described or alluded to in Leviticus are several special days or feasts, including the Sabbath, Passover, Feast of Unleavened Bread, Firstfruits, Pentecost or Feast of Weeks, Feast of Trumpets, Day of Atonement, Feast of Tabernacles, the Year of Sabbath, and the Year of Jubilee.<\/p>\nAfter camping at Sinai for about a year, the Israelites got their orders to go forward (Nm 10:11-12). Miriam (Moses’ sister) and Aaron criticized Moses’ leadership and suffered divine punishment as a consequence (ch 12). When the people arrived at Kadesh-barnea, the gate to southern Palestine, they were frightened by the report of most of the spies who had been reconnoitering in Canaan and decided that they should not advance into Canaan. They called for a new leader to bring them back to Egypt. God declared that the entire generation would wander in the wilderness until the adults had died. Only Joshua and Caleb (the two spies in favor of invading immediately) would enter the Promised Land (14:26-30). Near the end of the period of wandering, Moses also lost the privilege of entering the land by an act of disobedience.<\/p>\nThe Conquest<\/p>\nThe latter part of the book of Numbers describes how Moses led the Israelites to victory over the peoples living east of the Jordan River. Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh requested permission to settle there and reluctantly were allowed to do so on the condition that they would join the rest of the Israelites in conquering Canaan before settling down. Prior to victories in Transjordan, a new census of adult males was taken in order to determine the military capabilities of Israel and to provide a basis for equitable division of the land they were about to enter. The number of males above 20 years of age was 601,730 (Nm 26:51). The book of Deuteronomy consists primarily of a series of speeches delivered by Moses in a covenant renewal ceremony on the plains of Moab just before his death and the appointment of Joshua as leader.<\/p>\nJoshua lost no time in moving forward. Spies sent across the Jordan to Jericho to reconnoiter reported a situation quite different from what the Hebrews had experienced at Kadesh-barnea a generation earlier. Now the people of Canaan were terrified because they had heard of the numerical strength and victories of the Hebrews. Apparently the day after the spies returned, Joshua moved the people to the edge of the Jordan and prepared to cross over. The waters parted for them here as the Red Sea had parted earlier.<\/p>\nThe narrative of conquest that appears in the book of Joshua is not a detailed battle account. It describes a thrust into the middle of Palestine around Jericho and Ai, a southerly drive to defeat the Amorite league, and a northern campaign against Hazor and other towns. The history of Joshua is extremely telescoped, for Joshua’s major military action must have required about six years. Joshua’s friend Caleb was 79 when the Conquest began and 85 after the last great battle with Jabin, king of Hazor (Jos 14:7-10).<\/p>\nWhen the war was over, major strongholds (e.g., Jerusalem) still remained in enemy hands, but the land west of the Jordan was allocated to the nine and a half Hebrew tribes. The task of reducing enemy towns was left to the individual tribes in whose land they were located. The Joshua account was not so much a narrative of Israelite battle prowess as of God’s faithfulness and intervention on behalf of his people. For example, at Jericho they did not attack but merely followed divine orders and watched the defenses collapse; at Gibeon hailstones killed more Amorites than Israelite soldiers did (Jos 10:7-11).<\/p>\nThe Judges<\/p>\nJoshua died some 30 years after he had led the Hebrews into Canaan, and he was followed by a series of divinely appointed leaders who ruled sometimes over the whole of Israel as a loose confederacy and sometimes over one or more tribes. They were judges, civil functionaries, and military leaders all at the same time.<\/p>\nThe book of Judges pictures a series of recurring cycles: apostasy from God, punishment in the form of oppression by neighboring tribes, cries to God for relief, release from bondage under the leadership of a judge, and a period of rest from oppression.<\/p>\nEstablishment of the chronology of the judges is one of the thorniest problems of Scripture. Adding up all years of oppression and rest mentioned in the book gives a total of 410. The book of Acts gives a total of 450 years from the days of Joshua to Samuel (Acts 13:19). The difference in Acts may be accounted for by the addition of 40 years of Eli’s ministry (1 Sm 4:18). Allowing 410 years for the period of the judges, about 30 for the Conquest to the judges, and 40 for the wilderness wanderings, means 480 years from 1050 BC<\/span>, the date for Saul’s kingship, and would give a date of about 1530 for the exodus. This is about 100 years more than even the early date for the exodus. The most probable explanation is that there is some overlap in oppressions and judgeships. For instance, the activities of Jephthah were centered on the eastern frontier, those of Samson in the Philistine plain to the southwest, and those of Deborah and Barak in the north.<\/p>\nThe United Monarchy<\/p>\nBecause of the weakness of Israel resulting from political disunity and the ineptness and corruption of both Eli’s and Samuel’s sons, the people of Israel called for a king to rule over them. This demand was in reality a rejection of the divine plan of theocracy—the rule of God. God granted the Hebrews’ wish but warned them of the disadvantages of monarchy (1 Sm 8:9-21). The concept of kingship was not new to Israel. It had been hinted at in Genesis 49:10 and Numbers 24:17, and Moses had made some very clear statements about it in Deuteronomy 17:14-20.<\/p>\nThe first stage of Hebrew monarchy is commonly called the united monarchy because all Israel was ruled by a single king. This period lasted for 120 years—encompassing the 40-year reigns of Saul (Acts 13:21), David (2 Sm 5:5), and Solomon (1 Kgs 11:42).<\/p>\nThe people asked for a king, and God granted them one, but not one like those of the surrounding nations. The Hebrew king was to be a man who followed God’s dictates in his public and private life, who did not intrude into the affairs of the priesthood, and who did not fall into idolatry, but exerted all his influence to keep the people faithful to God. If he failed in any of these respects, he ran the risk of being deposed by God, of having his line brought to an end, or even of having the people fall into captivity to a foreign power. All this must be kept in mind when evaluating the reigns of Saul, David, Solomon, and the kings of the divided monarchy.<\/p>\nSaul began well. He won a great victory over the Ammonites at Jabesh-gilead and showed considerable wisdom in administrative matters. But after about two years he intruded into the priest’s office to offer sacrifice, bringing the divine prediction that his kingdom would be taken from him (1 Sm 13:8-14). He would go on to enjoy great military victory and ability as a ruler until about the middle of his reign.<\/p>\nAfter Saul’s disobedience to God’s command to totally destroy the Amalekites, the Lord repudiated Saul and instructed Samuel to anoint David privately as future king of Israel. David’s rise to prominence was spurred by his victory over Goliath and the accompanying defeat of the Philistines. Saul later made David commander of the army, and the young man soon earned a reputation greater than that of the king himself. Saul, who had become increasingly mentally disturbed after his relationship with God was broken, began to make attempts on David’s life, and for the last years of Saul’s reign David lived as a fugitive. Meanwhile, the Philistines got completely out of control and finally killed Saul and most of his sons in the great battle of Mt Gilboa, which gave the Philistines control over much of Palestine west of the Jordan (1 Sm 31:1-7).<\/p>\nSoon David became king in Judah with his capital in Hebron. A son of Saul, Ishbosheth, established himself at Mahanaim, east of the Jordan. For seven years the two tiny kingdoms existed side by side (2 Sm 2:2-11). But after the Israelite king and his army commander were assassinated, David became ruler of a united Hebrew kingdom.<\/p>\nNot long after the beginning of his reign (1010–970 BC<\/span>) David completely defeated and subjugated the Philistines. Soon thereafter he captured Jerusalem, making it the capital of the united kingdom. During succeeding years, David built up an empire (2 Sm 8:10; 1 Chr 18–19), conquering Moab, Edom, Damascus, Zobah, and Ammon, so he controlled territory from the Gulf of Aqaba (a branch of the Red Sea) and the Sinai in the south almost to the Euphrates in the north. Moreover, he established good relations, if not an alliance, with Tyre. The establishment of David’s empire was possible because of a power vacuum in the Middle East. The Egyptians, Mycenaeans, Hittites, and Assyrians were either decadent or removed from the stage of history. The Phoenicians, a peaceful commercial people, were also free to expand their trade, and they were happy to sell cedar to David for his palace and the temple.<\/p>\nWithout doubt, David was Israel’s greatest king. Jerusalem came to be known as the city of David. When the king wanted to build the temple as God’s house, God replied that his son should do it instead. But God would in a very real sense build David’s house; he made a covenant with David, promising him that his house (dynasty, kingdom, throne) would be established forever (2 Sm 7). Christ, the infinite One who came from the line of David, alone was capable of fulfilling this divine promise (see Lk 1:31-33; Acts 2:29-36; 13:32-39; 15:14-17).<\/p>\nLike other Oriental monarchs, David fell into the practice of keeping a harem. Scripture names 8 wives and 21 children and refers to other wives and concubines. Such a situation opened the door to family rivalries and questions about succession to the throne. Two sons, Absalom and Adonijah, made a try for the throne, but both efforts were squelched. Solomon, son of David’s favorite wife, Bathsheba, became the next king.<\/p>\nSolomon (970–930 BC<\/span>) was a man of peace and a builder of palaces, cities, fortifications, and the temple. He fortified cities all over his realm and outfitted cities for his chariot corps and cavalry units. With the help of the Phoenicians, he built a seaport and kept a fleet at Ezion-geber, near modern Eilat on the Gulf of Aqaba. He greatly enlarged Jerusalem by enclosing the temple area to the north of David’s city and the southwestern hill now known as Zion. His best-known project was the temple, which took seven years to build. Twice the size of the tabernacle, it was built on the same basic plan; it measured 90 feet (27.4 meters) long and 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide and had magnificent appointments. But he also constructed a palace complex that took 13 years to complete. This included an armory, a throne room, the king’s private residence, and a house for the daughter of pharaoh.<\/p>\nApparently much influenced by the spiritual testimony of David and desiring God’s blessing on his rule, Solomon made a great sacrifice to God at Gibeon near the beginning of his reign. God met him there and offered to grant whatever he might request. Solomon asked for understanding and wisdom to govern God’s people (1 Kgs 3:9). His God-given wisdom is apparent in many administrative decisions and official policies and building plans.<\/p>\nUnfortunately, Solomon did not show such wisdom in maintaining a harem of 700 wives and 300 concubines or in excessive expenditures that left the state in serious financial straits. He even erected places of worship for his foreign wives, thus subsidizing their idolatries and incurring the wrath of God. In fact, foreign wives and their idolatry proved to be his downfall; before Solomon died, God informed him that for this reason he would divide the kingdom at his death and give most of it to someone other than Solomon’s son. But for David’s sake, God would keep Judah and Jerusalem in the hands of the Davidic line (1 Kgs 11:9-13).<\/p>\nThe Divided Kingdom<\/p>\nAfter the death of Solomon, the Near East was destined to become a very different place. Israel was no longer in a power vacuum. The Assyrian Empire rose in Mesopotamia, to be followed by the Neo-Babylonian and the Medo-Persian Empires in turn. Egypt was temporarily powerful in the south, but it would later come under control of Assyria and Medo-Persia. These empires exerted great pressure on Israel and dominated one or both of the two Hebrew kingdoms.<\/p>\n\nWhen Solomon died, his son Rehoboam took the throne and was forced to deal with a rising tide of resentment over the high taxes and economic stagnation of Solomon’s last years. When Rehoboam refused to give relief, all the northern tribes broke away and formed the northern kingdom, Israel, under the leadership of Jeroboam. The southern kingdom, Judah, was left with only the territory of Judah and Benjamin. A total of 20 kings ruled in each of the separate kingdoms. While the north had several dynasties and the reigns of kings were generally short, in the south the dynasty of David continued to rule and the reigns were longer.<\/p>\n<h5>The Northern Kingdom<\/h5>\nThe northern kingdom lasted from the division in 930 BC<\/span> until its conquest by Assyria in 722. Jeroboam, fearing that he would lose the loyalty of the people if they continued to go to Jerusalem to worship, set up a new religion of his own. Instituting calf worship, he built shrines at Dan in the north and Bethel in the south. This idolatry drew the condemnation of God and fulfilled the prediction that Jeroboam’s line would be wiped out. All his successors are said to have followed in his idolatrous steps. Israel found itself at war during much of its history—with Judah, Syria, or Assyria. Jeroboam established his capital first at Shechem and later at Tirzah.<\/p>\nFour other kings of the north require special comment: Omri, Ahab, Jehu, and Jeroboam II. Omri (885–874 BC<\/span>) must have been an impressive ruler. Generations later, Assyrians still spoke of Israel as the land of Omri. After he had established himself on the throne, he located the permanent capital of the kingdom at Samaria and began the palace complex there. Early in his reign he was successful in conquering Moab, and later he reestablished the good relations with Tyre that existed in the days of David and Solomon. Apparently he established a full alliance and cemented it with the marriage of his son Ahab to Jezebel, a princess of Tyre.<\/p>\nAhab (874–853 BC<\/span>) was one of the most significant of Israel’s kings. He and his wife, Jezebel, promoted the vile idolatry of Baal worship with its religious prostitution, arousing the powerful opposition of the prophet Elijah. Ahab was a formidable military man, defeating the Syrians in major campaigns and participating in a coalition that fought the Assyrians to a virtual standstill. He also built extensively at Samaria, Hazor, Megiddo, and other towns, as excavations show.<\/p>\nJehu (841–814 BC<\/span>) was God’s agent for punishing the house of Omri and destroying Baal worship in Israel. He did eradicate Baal worship and liquidated literally scores of relatives and court officials of Ahab. But he was so ruthless that he killed off the people who knew how to run the government; subsequently, it did not work well. Jehu also was forced to become a vassal to Assyria.<\/p>\nJeroboam II ruled during most of the first half of the eighth century (793–753 BC<\/span>) and brought the kingdom to its greatest extent and prosperity. He, with his contemporary Uzziah in the south, ruled most of the land David had once controlled. This was possible because the Assyrians were in a period of decline during most of the first half of the century.<\/p>\nProphets who were active during the history of the northern kingdom include the nonwriting prophets Elijah and Elisha and the writing prophets Jonah, Amos, and Hosea.<\/p>\n<h5>The Southern Kingdom<\/h5>\nThe history of the southern kingdom of Judah was quite different from that of the northern kingdom. The temple was there and so were large numbers of Levites, many of whom came south after the division of the kingdom to protest the idolatry of the north. In addition to this spiritual strength, there was greater political stability and unity, promoted by the fact that only two tribes—Judah and Benjamin—shared power, and all the kings were of the Davidic dynasty. Moreover, eight of the kings were good monarchs. There were also periodic religious revivals. God granted the southern kingdom about 100 more years of existence than the north. But Judah, too, fell into idolatry and went into captivity for her sins.<\/p>\nRehoboam, the first king in the south, is especially remembered because he refused to listen to wise counsel about fiscal matters and perpetrated the division of the kingdom. He is also remembered for his religious policies. After a good beginning, he allowed apostasy to get out of control and brought the judgment of God in the form of an invasion in his fifth year (926 BC<\/span>) by Shishak I of Egypt, resulting in extensive plunder and payment of tribute. Thereafter, he launched an extensive program to fortify the realm. Shishak’s invasion did have the effect of producing a partial and temporary spiritual reform, but the general trend of Rehoboam’s reign was downward.<\/p>\nConditions during the reign of his son, Abijam, were worse, but Asa (910–869 BC<\/span>) initiated a religious reform that was effective for most of his reign. When threatened by the northern kingdom during his latter years, however, Asa turned to Syria for help instead of to God, and he seems to have defied the prophets of God to his dying day.<\/p>\nAsa’s son Jehoshaphat (872–848 BC<\/span>) was apparently influenced by his father’s early religious devotion, and his reign was characterized by faithfulness, winning the favor of God. However, he seems to have made a full alliance with Ahab of Israel, which resulted in the marriage of his son Jehoram to Ahab’s daughter Athaliah. This alliance involved Jehoshaphat in almost ruinous joint ventures with Ahab, and later with two of his sons when they became kings of Israel. It also opened the door for the introduction of Baal worship into Judah when Jehoram came to the throne in the southern kingdom. For his sin Jehoram (853–841 BC<\/span>) suffered internal revolt, invasion, and death from a horrible disease.<\/p>\nAfter his death, his last remaining son, Ahaziah, ruled less than a year, following the wicked ways of his father. When Ahaziah died in battle, the queen mother, Athaliah, decided to seize the throne for herself and to secure her power by killing off all those in line to the throne. But she missed Ahaziah’s infant son Joash, who was kept hidden in the temple for six years.<\/p>\nWhen Joash was seven, Jehoiada the high priest arranged his coronation and also the execution of the murderous and idolatrous Athaliah. During his early years when Joash was influenced by good counsel, he did well. But after the middle of his reign (835–796 BC<\/span>), he began to listen to the princes who wanted to restore idolatry, and conditions deteriorated. Military reversals brought on economic decline and ultimately the king’s assassination.<\/p>\nHis son Amaziah (796–767 BC<\/span>) started well with victory over Edom and faithfulness to God. But he, too, fell into idolatry and was totally defeated by the northern kingdom, being held prisoner there. At that point his son Uzziah took over (c. 792 BC<\/span>) and began a long and generally successful reign. During the several decades that followed, Assyria was in decline, and Uzziah and his contemporary in the north, Jeroboam II, were able to expand Hebrew holdings so that between them they controlled most of the territory Solomon had ruled.<\/p>\nUzziah (792–740 BC<\/span>) was able to restore the power of Judah rather quickly after his father’s defeat by Israel. Then he subjugated the Philistines in the southwest and the Ammonites across the Jordan; he strengthened his hold on the Edomites. All during his reign economic conditions improved. But at the height of his power Uzziah foolishly violated the high priest’s prerogatives and offered sacrifice in the temple. For this he was smitten with leprosy; his son Jotham was co-regent during the years 750–740 BC<\/span>, going on to rule alone for about five more years. Meanwhile, Assyrian power became resurgent.<\/p>\nBy and large, Jotham merely carried on the policies of Uzziah. But the administration of his son Ahaz (735–715 BC<\/span>) was very much affected by the Assyrian threat. Israel and Syria wanted him to join in war against Assyria, but he refused, being pro-Assyrian in sympathy. When Israel and Syria invaded Judah, King Ahaz sent tribute to Assyria and became her vassal in return for protection. This rash course of action was vainly opposed by Isaiah, who was prophet at court (c. 740–700 BC<\/span>). Contemporaneously, the prophet Micah ministered to the common people of Judah. The pro-Assyrian policy of Ahaz was accompanied by a renewed sympathy for idolatry, and this brought the judgment of God in the form of invasion by Edomites and Philistines and trouble with Assyria. In fact, during this period, Assyria had annexed the northern kingdom (722 BC<\/span>) and removed many of her people into captivity.<\/p>\nThe next king of Judah, Hezekiah (715–686 BC<\/span>), was greatly sobered by the fall of Israel because of her sins, and he determined to launch a reform in his realm. He was anti-Assyrian too, but he did not dare to discontinue tribute payments and strike for independence until after Sennacherib came to the throne in Nineveh in 705 BC<\/span>. At first Sennacherib was too preoccupied to attend to Judah, but finally in 701 he invaded. Despite tremendous initial success, he was stopped by a divinely sent plague (Is 36–39). Isaiah stood by the king to reassure and sustain him during this emergency.<\/p>\nHezekiah’s son Manasseh (697–642 BC<\/span>) ruled longer than any other king of Israel or Judah. Unfortunately, he turned his back on his father’s example and caused the people to fall into gross idolatry (2 Kgs 21:9). Carried away captive by the Assyrians late in his reign, he repented of his evil and God restored him to his throne; thereafter, he led some reforms. But the land was too steeped in iniquity to be rescued. His son Amon (642–640 BC<\/span>) reverted to the idolatry he knew in his youth.<\/p>\nThe situation was different with Josiah (640–609 BC<\/span>), however. Throughout his reign he dedicated himself to reform. He sought to root out idolatry and to restore the temple and its worship. In 622 BC<\/span> the Book of the Law was found during repair of the temple, and its demands—which had been forgotten—made a great impression on king and people alike. It is certain that Jeremiah and Zephaniah ministered during Josiah’s reign, as did Nahum and Habakkuk (in all probability).<\/p>\nInternational conditions were now changing rapidly. Assyria was declining, and Nineveh fell to Babylon and the Medes in 612 BC<\/span>. Three years later Pharaoh Neco of Egypt marched north to aid his Assyrian ally. When Josiah tried to stop him, he was killed in battle.<\/p>\nFrom this point everything was downhill for Judah. None of the rest of the kings was devout, and political power and economic health rapidly declined. The people put one of Josiah’s sons, Jehoahaz, on the throne. He lasted three months. Pharaoh Neco replaced him with Jehoiakim (609–598 BC<\/span>), another son of Josiah. In 605 Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon defeated Neco, invaded Judah, and took tribute and hostages from Jehoiakim, including Daniel and his friends (Dn 1:1). Jehoiakim revolted in 600 BC<\/span>, but Nebuchadnezzar did not come to deal with him personally until 597 BC<\/span>. He died before the Babylonians arrived, and his son Jehoiachin came to the throne in 598 BC<\/span> to rule for only three months before the Babylonians carried him away into exile. Ezekiel was among the many captives taken on that occasion.<\/p>\nThe Babylonians then put Zedekiah, youngest son of Josiah, on the throne in 597 BC<\/span>. When he rebelled, Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to Jerusalem and took the city (587 BC<\/span>), destroying it and the temple and carrying off large numbers of people. The judgment of God had finally fallen on the Jews for their idolatrous ways.<\/p>\nThe Restoration<\/p>\nIn judgment God remembered mercy. This is evident in individual lives, when faithful ones like Daniel, Esther, or Nehemiah rose to a position of importance in political life, or as numerous other persons became prosperous in the foreign environment. It is evident on the community level as God moved to protect Hebrew enclaves scattered abroad and to restore an organized society in Palestine.<\/p>\nAmong the exiles, Judaism as a way of life separated from its own political system or cultic center and began to emerge. Jews finally turned their backs on idolatry. And without a temple, priesthood, king, or land, they turned to the divine Scriptures as their rallying point and the foundation of their community. During this period they developed the synagogue as a place for fellowship, prayer, and study.<\/p>\nGod’s restoration of an organized community to Palestine involved particularly the fortunes of his “anointed” Cyrus (Is 44:28; 45:1). Cyrus was a Persian prince who in 559 BC<\/span> revolted against the dominant dynasty controlling the Median Empire. After consolidating his hold on the throne, he proceeded to conquer Asia Minor and the Chaldean or Neo-Babylonian Empire. As a humane man and a wise administrator, he permitted the captive peoples to return to their homes and rebuild their communities. Cyrus’s decree to the Jews appears in Ezra 1 and dates probably to 538 BC<\/span>. A total of almost 50,000 went back to Judah as a result of this edict (Ezr 2:64-65).<\/p>\nUnder the stresses and strains of reestablishment, the people built their houses but got no further than laying the foundation of a new temple. Finally, the prophets Haggai and Zechariah stirred the people to build the house of God (Ezr 5:1). They began in the second year of Darius I, the Great (520 BC<\/span>; Hg 1:1; Zec 1:1), and completed the work in his sixth year (515 BC<\/span>; Ezr 6:15).<\/p>\nDuring the reign of Darius’s son Xerxes (486–465 BC<\/span>), a plot was hatched to exterminate all the Jews in the Persian Empire, which at that time controlled the lands where Jews lived. Fortunately, Xerxes (Ahasuerus in the book of Esther), in his third year (483 BC<\/span>; Est 1:3), went searching for a new queen and chose Esther, who managed to preserve her people.<\/p>\nXerxes’ son Artaxerxes I (465–424 BC<\/span>) also figured significantly in Jewish history. In his seventh year (458 BC<\/span>; Ezr 7:7), under the leadership of Ezra, a second contingent of Jews returned to Jerusalem. And in Artaxerxes’ 20th year (445 BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1), Nehemiah went to Jerusalem to supervise the rebuilding of the walls of the city. Malachi probably wrote his prophecy to the Jews in Jerusalem during the latter part of Artaxerxes’ reign.<\/p>\nAfter the fall of Samaria and the captivity of Judah, the Hebrews remaining in the land intermarried with various pagan groups in the area. Their offspring became the Samaritans, a religious and racial admixture. These people had moved into the vacuum left by the destruction of Judah, and naturally they looked with disfavor on an intrusion of Babylonian Jews into an area they had come to call their own. They did all they could to frustrate the efforts of Nehemiah to rebuild the walls. It took all the courage, tact, energy, and persuasiveness Ezra and Nehemiah could muster to prevent the returning Jews from intermarrying with racially mixed people of the land. Such intermarriage would have meant the ultimate absorption and destruction of the Jewish people.<\/p>\nA Samaritan temple was later built on Mt Gerizim (probably during the fifth century BC<\/span>), and it became the center of the Samaritan worship. The hostility between Samaritans and Jews continued on into the NT period (Jn 4) and exists to the present.<\/p>\nThe Intertestamental Period<\/p>\nAlexander the Great conquered the Persian Empire with lightning speed. When the people of Jerusalem threw open their gates in 332 BC<\/span> and capitulated without a fight, Alexander treated them well. After his death in 323 BC<\/span>, Palestine passed back and forth among his successors until Ptolemy I of Egypt managed to establish control in 301 BC<\/span>. Thereafter the area remained in Egyptian hands until 198 BC<\/span>. The Ptolemies were tolerant and granted the Jews considerable autonomy, allowing them to develop their unique culture undisturbed as long as they paid their taxes and remained submissive. Many Jews settled in Alexandria and gradually forgot their Hebrew in the Hellenistic environment. As a result, a translation of the OT into Greek (the Septuagint) was produced there. While the Ptolemies did not force Hellenism on the Jews of either Alexandria or Palestine, many were influenced by Hellenistic ideas.<\/p>\nWhen Ptolemy V came to the throne as a minor in 203 BC<\/span>, Antiochus III of Syria took advantage of the weakened Egypt and conquered Palestine (198 BC<\/span>). Apparently the Jews hoped to gain something from the change and welcomed the Syrians. But their hope was ill-founded. Antiochus III suffered disastrous defeat at the hands of Rome at Magnesia in 190 BC<\/span>. Syria not only lost much territory but also was forced to pay a huge indemnity. Thereafter, the Jews suffered under great financial burdens, along with other peoples of the empire. The next Syrian king, Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164 BC<\/span>), decided to launch an effort to achieve greater internal strength and unity within the empire by forcing, among other things, a greater acceptance of Greek culture and the cult of the divine ruler. Naturally this idolatrous requirement weighed heavily on the monotheistic Jews and incited revolution.<\/p>\nBut this does not completely explain the Maccabean revolt against Syria. In 168 BC<\/span> armed conflict broke out between Jewish factions in Jerusalem. Antiochus IV chose to interpret this as open rebellion and sent an army against the city. His forces demolished part of the city wall and many houses. After this Antiochus decided to suppress Judaism completely, and he dedicated the temple to Zeus and sacrificed swine on the altar. Circumcision, Sabbath observance, and other religious festivals were no longer permitted, and public worship of heathen gods became compulsory.<\/p>\nSome Jews capitulated to Antiochus’s orders or only resisted passively, but a few decided to resist openly. Chief among them were Mattathias and his five sons. After the early death of Mattathias, his son Judas Maccabeus led his forces to victory over the Syrians, regaining the right to restore Jewish worship. The rededication of the temple on December 25, 164 BC<\/span>, inaugurated the Festival of Hanukkah (1 Macc 4:36-59). Subsequently, Jonathan and Simon (other sons of Mattathias) continued the struggle until independence was gained in 142 BC<\/span>; this was possible in large part because they saw how to take advantage of the increasing weakness of Syrian rulers and the competition for the royal office.<\/p>\nSimon ruled the Jewish state until his assassination in 134 BC<\/span>, when his son John Hyrcanus (134–104 BC<\/span>) took over. John Hyrcanus fought successfully in the east, north, and south, gaining land in Transjordan, capturing Shechem and the Samaritan temple on Mt Gerizim, and subjugating the Idumeans in the south, forcing them to adopt Judaism. His son Aristobulus ruled for only about a year (104–103 BC<\/span>), but he added a portion of Galilee to the kingdom. When he died, his widow married his brother Alexander Janneus (103–76 BC<\/span>). Janneus carried on almost incessant military action during his reign, and by the time of his death had almost recovered the kingdom of Solomon.<\/p>\nWhen Janneus died, Alexandra, widow of two kings, took the throne (76–67 BC<\/span>) and her eldest son, Hyrcanus II, became high priest. Her reign was peaceful and prosperous, but when she died, her sons fell to squabbling. Their appeals to Pompey, who was campaigning in the eastern Mediterranean area, were responsible for Roman interference in the region and conquest of Palestine in 63 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe Roman Period<\/p>\nAfter the Romans took over Palestine, Hyrcanus II was confirmed as high priest and was also appointed as ethnarch or political ruler (63–40 BC<\/span>). But Antipater, father of Herod the Great, was the real power behind the throne, and during many of those years Hyrcanus was virtually unable to function because of the confusion of the Roman civil wars. Antipater was loyal to Rome and saw that Roman policies were carried out; he won Julius Caesar’s favor toward Jews of both Palestine and in the Dispersion.<\/p>\nWith the support of Mark Antony, Herod managed to get himself appointed king of Judea by the Roman senate in 40 BC<\/span>. But a Parthian invasion of Syria and Jewish hatred for the Romans made it possible for Antigonus II, last king of the Maccabean family, to rule for three years (40–37 BC<\/span>). Finally, Herod ascended his throne in 37 and ruled until 4 BC<\/span>. As an allied king, Herod proved to be an excellent ruler from the Roman point of view and earned the title of “Great.” He brought some order to regions east of the Jordan and made possible organization of the Roman province of Arabia. He also furthered the cultural plans of Augustus for development of a Greco-Roman civilization throughout the whole empire.<\/p>\nHerod admired Greek culture and contributed to building projects in Rhodes, Antioch, Damascus, Athens, and elsewhere outside Palestine. Within Palestine he rebuilt Samaria and named it Sebaste in honor of Augustus (Sebastos<\/span> is Greek for “Augustus”) and also constructed the great port of Caesarea. Probably about as large as Manhattan Island, it became the capital of Roman Palestine. Among his many other building projects, remodeling the temple in Jerusalem was the most famous. Begun in 20 BC<\/span>, it was not completed until just a few years before its destruction in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nThe material splendor of Herod’s reign did not win the affection or support of the Jews, however. Nor did he achieve peace and harmony in his family, among whom there were periodic eruptions of treason, unfaithfulness, and murder. He worried about any threat to his rule and cracked down hard to destroy such threats, as is evident from his slaughter of the infants in Bethlehem after the birth of Christ.<\/p>\nUltimately, Herod controlled Idumea, Judea, Samaria, Galilee, Perea, and the area northeast of the Sea of Galilee. By his last will, his son Archelaus was to rule Idumea, Judea, and Samaria; Antipas, Galilee and Perea; and Philip, the region northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Archelaus was deposed in AD<\/span> 6, and his territory became a Roman province (AD<\/span> 6–41) to be ruled by direct appointees of Rome. The best-known of these was Pontius Pilate (AD<\/span> 26–36), who ordered the crucifixion of Jesus. Antipas was more successful and built a new capital at Tiberias, but he ran afoul of the emperor’s good pleasure in AD<\/span> 39 and was deposed. Philip was the most effective of the three and ruled until his death in AD<\/span> 34. Philip’s lands were later given to Herod Agrippa I in AD<\/span> 37; the holdings of Antipas were then added in AD<\/span> 39; and in 41 Agrippa also received Samaria, Judea, and Idumea.<\/p>\nHerod Agrippa I (AD<\/span> 37–44) was the heir of the Maccabees (through his grandmother Mariamne, first wife of Herod the Great), and for this reason had the support of patriotic Jews and of the Pharisees for his observance of divine ordinances. But when he built a new north wall for Jerusalem and dabbled in foreign affairs, he aroused the suspicions of the Romans; when he died in AD<\/span> 44, they turned the kingdom into a Roman province.<\/p>\nAs is clear from the Gospels, several sects had arisen in Palestine by Roman times and were active during the first century. The Zealots opposed Roman rule and advocated armed rebellion. Herodians supported the Herodian family and Roman power. The Pharisees were fanatically devoted to the law and were supernaturalists in theological orientation. They were somewhat content to support Rome if given religious freedom, and they dominated the synagogues of the land. The Sadducees were antisupernaturalists, tended to collaborate with the ruling regime, and were dominant in the temple. Generally speaking, the literature of the intertestamental period and the popular mentality of the time tended to view the Messiah as a political deliverer who would free his people from foreign domination and set up a new independent kingdom.<\/p>\nRoman prefects ruled Palestine from AD<\/span> 44–66. They had a knack for offending the religious scruples of the Jews and alienating them in other ways. With Felix (AD<\/span> 52–60) there began a constant tension between Jews and Romans that led to the first Jewish revolt (AD<\/span> 66–70). While Paul was imprisoned in Caesarea (Acts 23:23–24:27) about AD<\/span> 58–60, riots broke out there between Jews and Gentiles. Festus (AD<\/span> 60–62; Acts 25) was an able administrator, but the situation was almost out of hand. After he died in office, there was virtual anarchy until his successor, Albinus, arrived (AD<\/span> 62–64). Totally incompetent and dishonest, Albinus was recalled in 64 and replaced by Florus (AD<\/span> 64–66). Florus was even worse, resorting to open robbery and bribery until there was no safety or justice in the land. Finally, the Jews could take no more.<\/p>\nThe spark that ignited the fires of rebellion was an anti-Semitic act by the Hellenistic population of Caesarea in AD<\/span> 66. Soon riots spread to numerous cities, and Roman garrisons were massacred in several places. But the Jews were not united, and in Jerusalem armed bands of Jews fought with each other for mastery. Vespasian was chosen to command the Roman army of some 60,000 to deal with the insurrection. He had subjugated most of Palestine by the time he was elevated to the imperial chair in AD<\/span> 69 (after the death of Nero), and he left his son Titus in charge of completing the operations. In August of AD<\/span> 70 the walls of Jerusalem were breached, many of the people butchered, and the city and the temple leveled. Masada held out until AD<\/span> 73. Palestine had been flattened by Roman might. Loss of life and property had been incalculable and indescribable.<\/p>\nOn two more occasions the Jews were destined to fight disastrously against the Romans. Under Trajan’s rule a rebellion of Jews broke out in Cyrenaica in AD<\/span> 115 and spread rapidly to Cyprus, Egypt, Palestine, and Mesopotamia. In the beginning it was an outgrowth of agitation between the Jews and their Hellenistic neighbors, but it developed into a challenge to Roman authority. This was particularly true after the successes of Parthia on Rome’s eastern frontier when there seemed to be some hope of success in throwing off the Roman yoke. Wherever Jews got the upper hand, they perpetrated massacres, and the non-Semitic population retaliated in kind. Trajan ruthlessly suppressed the rebels and restored order everywhere except Egypt; his successor, Hadrian, was left to accomplish that.<\/p>\nBut Hadrian faced a new rebellion of his own, brought on by his law forbidding circumcision (which he considered to be inhumane) and his decision in AD<\/span> 130 to rebuild Jerusalem as Aelia Capitolina and erect a temple to Jupiter on the site of the temple of Yahweh. The latter would not only profane the temple site but also would preclude any rebuilding of the Jewish temple.<\/p>\nLeader of this second Jewish revolt was Simeon, prince of Israel, called Bar-Kochba (“Son of the Star”). Both sides fought with such great ferocity for over three years (AD<\/span> 132–135) that the population of Judea was almost exterminated. Jerusalem was rebuilt as a Roman colony, and Jews were forbidden to enter on pain of death. Even as late as the fourth century they were permitted to enter only once a year, on the anniversary of the destruction of the temple by Nebuchadnezzar. After the Bar-Kochba revolt, Judaism retreated increasingly within the citadel of the written and oral law, thus separating itself from the Gentiles.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Abraham; Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Conquest and Allotment of the Land; David; Diaspora of the Jews; Exodus, The; First Jewish Revolt; Jew; Judaism; Moses; Patriarchs, Period of the; Saul #2; Solomon; Postexilic Period; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ISRAEL, History of An account of God’s sovereign purpose in calling a people out of paganism and establishing them as witnesses for the true faith among the nations, of God’s sovereign power in protecting them from extinction, of his sovereign justice in dealing with their departure from his ways of holiness, of God’s sovereign grace in forgiving their sins and restoring them to fellowship with himself by providing through them a Savior for the entire world. Preview • Patriarchal Age • Sojour...","summary_en":"ISRAEL, History of An account of God’s sovereign purpose in calling a people out of paganism and establishing them as witnesses for the true faith among the nations, of God’s sovereign power in protecting them from extinction, of his sovereign justice in dealing with their departure from his ways of holiness, of God’s sovereign grace in forgiving their sins and restoring them to fellowship with himself by providing through them a Savior for the entire world. Preview • Patriarchal Age • Sojour...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21950,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Books of First and Second Kings","title_en":"Books of First and Second Kings","content_ro":"<h3>KINGS, Books of First and Second<\/h3>\nBooks continuing the history of the covenant people as recorded in Joshua, Judges, and the books of Samuel. The record in Kings begins with the events at the end of David’s reign (1 Kgs 1–2). It continues through the reign of Solomon (chs 3–11); the histories of the divided kingdoms (1 Kgs 12—2 Kgs 17); and the history of the surviving kingdom in the south, through its fall in 586 BC<\/span> and the subsequent kindness shown Jehoiachin by Evil-merodach, king of Babylon, around 561 BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 18–25).<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Authorship and Date<\/p>\n• Sources<\/p>\n• Theology and Purpose<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthorship and Date<\/p>\nKings was originally regarded as one book in the Hebrew canon; the division into two books of approximately equal length appeared first in the Septuagint and finally entered the Hebrew Bible in the 15th century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe book itself is anonymous, and information about its author can only be deduced by examining the concerns and perspectives of the work. The Babylonian Talmud (Baba Bathra<\/em> 15a) attributes Kings to Jeremiah. Although this identification could have arisen from the tendency of later Jewish tradition to assign biblical books to prophetic authors, the theory of origin in prophetic circles fits the evidence quite well. Substantial portions are given to the lives of the prophets; 16 of 47 chapters are devoted to the lives of Elijah and Elisha (1 Kgs 17—2 Kgs 10), and there is considerable interest in other prophetic figures such as Ahijah (1 Kgs 11:29-39; 14:1-16), an unnamed man of God (13:1-10), and Micaiah (22:13-28). Possible dependence on Isaiah (2 Kgs 18–20; cf. Is 36–39) and Jeremiah (2 Kgs 24–25; cf. Jer 52) also suggest prophetic origin. The author-compiler also shows intense concern with the efficacy of the prophetic word, frequently calling attention to the fulfillment of words spoken earlier by the prophets.<\/p>\nOne might initially think that such a history would be unlikely for a prophet, but the evidence is to the contrary. The prophets were the guardians of the covenant relationship and are known to have produced accounts used as sources by other biblical historians. The following are among such sources: the acts of Samuel the seer, the acts of Nathan the prophet, the acts of Gad the seer (1 Chr 29:29); the acts of Nathan the prophet, the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, the visions of Iddo the seer (2 Chr 9:29); the chronicles of Shemaiah the prophet and of Iddo the seer (12:15); the annotations of the prophet Iddo (13:22); and the acts of Uzziah by Isaiah the prophet (26:22). Add to this the fact that Kings is positioned in the Hebrew canon in the Former Prophets (Joshua to 2 Kings), and a consistent picture of prophetic origin emerges.<\/p>\nThe date of the final part of the book must be after the last events recorded. Evil-merodach’s kindness toward Jehoiachin (c. 561 BC<\/span>) is the terminus of the book and therefore fixes the earliest date. Since the work shows no knowledge of the restoration period, a date before 539 BC<\/span> is probable. The author’s selection of his data to answer the burning theological questions of the exilic community also suggests a date between 561 and 539 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nSources<\/p>\nThe compiler of Kings specifically names three of the sources that he used in his work, and biblical scholars have suggested the presence of a number of other sources that may have been cited. Of course, the sources not mentioned specifically by the compiler are only the speculations of those who have studied his work and can have only varying degrees of probability. The sources both specified and alleged are as follows.<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Acts of Solomon<\/h5>\nAs 1 Kings 11:41 says, “The rest of the events in Solomon’s reign, including his wisdom, are recorded in The Book of the Acts of Solomon”<\/em> (nlt<\/span>). Presumably additional materials of a biographical nature were included, specifically accounts similar to the judgment between the two mothers (3:16-28) or the visit of the queen of Sheba (10:1-10). There has been debate as to whether these materials were official court records or nonofficial documents. Some scholars have attempted to isolate further materials within this section by identifying descriptions of the buildings as from temple archives (chs 6–7) and lists of administrators as from administrative documents (chs 4–5), but this must remain speculative.<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the History of the Kings of Israel<\/h5>\nThis source is mentioned 17 times in Kings, usually in the closing formulas at the end of the account of the reign of a northern king. Some idea of the nature of these chronicles can be derived from looking at the type of information to which the compiler refers his readers (see 1 Kgs 14:19; 16:27; 22:39; 2 Kgs 13:12; 14:28). These passages suggest that this source was the official annals covering the reigns of the kings.<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the History of the Kings of Judah<\/h5>\nThis source is mentioned in 15 passages, and as with the kings of Israel, is found in the concluding formulas to the accounts of the reigns. This source was to be consulted for additional details on individuals’ reigns (for example, see 1 Kgs 15:23; 22:45; 2 Kgs 20:20; 21:17). These sources for the histories of the two kingdoms were probably similar to the annals known from the surrounding cultures, particularly from the reigns of Assyrian kings. They were likely official court histories kept in Samaria and Jerusalem.<\/p>\nIn addition to these explicitly mentioned sources, scholars have suggested the compiler drew on other sources that he does not name.<\/p>\n<h5>Davidic Court History<\/h5>\nSecond Samuel 9–20 is often identified as a unit of material in the composition of the books of Samuel; it is variously called “the court history” or “the succession narrative.” Because of similar vocabulary and outlook, 1 Kings 1–2 are often associated with this material from Samuel. The statement of 1 Kings 2:46, “so the kingdom was now firmly in Solomon’s grip,” is taken to be the end of this record.<\/p>\n<h5>Sources for the House of Ahab<\/h5>\nThe reigns of individual kings are ordinarily given only brief notices; for example, the father of Ahab, Omri, is given eight verses, even though when judged by political and economic significance, he was among the greatest of the northern kings (1 Kgs 16:21-28). However, beginning with the reign of Ahab, the record becomes quite expansive, and extensive coverage is given the dynasty of Ahab through the coup by Jehu (1 Kgs 16—2 Kgs 12). The use of the stereotyped formulas for the reigns is suspended in this material, and the existence of other literature used by the compiler is probable. This material is commonly subdivided into further sources for the lives of Elijah and Elisha and the reign of Ahab.<\/p>\nThe Elijah section covers material in the following chapters: 1 Kings 17–19, including the feeding by the ravens, the incidents with the widow of Zarephath, the drought, the fire on Carmel, and the revelation of God at Sinai; 1 Kings 21, the affair of Naboth’s vineyard; and 2 Kings 1, the death of Ahaziah’s messengers. The reign of Ahab, which gets so much attention in Kings, is primarily a backdrop for the accounts concerning Elijah.<\/p>\nThe Elisha material found in 2 Kings 2–13 may have had an independent literary development from that of the Elijah accounts. It includes the following: chapter 2 (Elisha’s succession to the prophetic office, the purification of a spring, the death of mocking children); chapter 3 (on the campaign against Moab); chapter 4 (the widow’s oil, the Shunammite woman); chapter 5 (Naaman’s leprosy); chapter 6 (the Aramean attempt to capture Elisha); chapter 7 (the famine in Samaria); chapter 8 (the Shunammite’s property, the coup of Hazael); chapter 9 (the anointing of Jehu); and chapter 13 (the death of Elisha). No other portion of the OT takes the sheer delight in the miraculous that is seen in the Elisha narratives.<\/p>\nIn 1 Kings 16 to 2 Kings 13 there are additional incidents not directly related to the biographies of Elijah and Elisha; accounts such as the military campaigns of 1 Kings 20:1-34 and further details of Jehu’s coup (2 Kgs 9:11–10:36) are often attributed to a third source containing accounts of the dynasty of Ahab and his successors. In all three of these possible sources the orientation is toward affairs in the northern kingdom.<\/p>\n<h5>Isaiah Source<\/h5>\nThe account of the reign of Hezekiah contains a section (2 Kgs 18:13–20:19) that is nearly a verbatim citation of material also found in Isaiah (Is 36:1–39:8). The section records the invasion of Sennacherib, the mission of the Rabshakeh, Hezekiah’s prayer, Isaiah’s prophecy, Hezekiah’s illness, the regression of the sun, and the envoys from Merodach-baladan. The material must be regarded as based on the book of Isaiah or some other source used in both Isaiah and Kings.<\/p>\n<h5>A Prophetic Source<\/h5>\nBecause Kings shows great interest in the prophets and their ministries, various scholars have suggested that yet another source was used by the compiler; this would be an independent literary unit containing accounts of the prophets. This source would have contained the records for the material on Ahijah (1 Kgs 11:29-39; 14:1-16), unnamed prophets (ch 12; 20:35-43), Micaiah (22:13-28), and other references.<\/p>\nApart from the sources explicitly mentioned and inferences about their character, the remainder of the sources suggested have only varying degrees of probability. Considerable scholarly effort has gone into identifying and characterizing such sources, but it remains speculative. When considering the sources the compiler may have used, one important caution must be kept in mind. Even if such sources did exist, one cannot have confidence in a reconstruction of the compositional history. Which sources had already been integrated into a larger composition before they were used by the compiler of Kings? We cannot be certain that the life situation out of which these other sources grew has been correctly identified, nor can we know that even the compiler himself was aware of the past history of his sources. Biblical scholarship has expended considerable energy in trying to delineate the past history of the book of Kings, but it has often been at the neglect of the unity of perspective that is the product of the final compiler(s) in whose hands the book received its canonical form.<\/p>\nWhat is important to understanding the book is not the perspective of its various sources (of which the compiler himself may have been unaware), but the perspective of the book as a whole on the history of the kingdoms. It is the outline that the compiler has imposed on the sources that establishes the teaching of the book; his sources are used in accord with his own purposes, a fact that makes the purposes for which the sources had been prepared largely irrelevant to the teaching of the book in its present form. Exploring possible sources, worthwhile in itself, must not eclipse the message of the book as a whole. This is not to imply that the books of Kings are simply a compilation of unaltered sources. The writer(s) undoubtedly exercised a measure of selectivity and literary skill in composing the historical narrative.<\/p>\nOne compositional technique of the compiler is quite prominent in the histories of the divided kingdoms: this is the use of formulaic introductions and conclusions to the various reigns. The formulas for both kingdoms are quite similar, differing only in minor details. For the kings of Judah, the full introductory formula is as follows: (1) year of accession synchronized with the regnal year of the northern king; (2) age of the king at his accession; (3) length of his reign; (4) name of his mother; (5) judgment on the character of the reign. The account of a Judean king’s reign is concluded as follows: (1) a reference to the chronicles of the kings of Judah for further information; (2) a statement regarding the death of the king, including the place of burial; (3) successor: “And his son reigned in his stead” (rsv<\/span>). The full formula for a Judean king can be seen, for example, in the reign of Rehoboam (1 Kgs 14:21-22, 29-31).<\/p>\nThe formulas differ slightly for the kings of Israel; the introduction is as follows: (1) year of succession synchronized with the regnal year of the southern king; (2) length of his reign; (3) location of the royal residence; (4) condemnation for idolatry; (5) name of the king’s father. The account of an Israelite king’s reign ends as follows: (1) a reference to the chronicles of the kings of Israel for further information; (2) a statement regarding his death; (3) a statement of the succession of his son, unless a usurper follows. The full formula for an Israelite king can be seen, for example, in the reign of Baasha (1 Kgs 15:33-34; 16:5-6).<\/p>\nThere is some variation in the use of these patterns, but on the whole, they are consistently followed and provide the basic framework for the history of the divided kingdom. The synchronisms of the reigns provide data for constructing the chronology of the period. The variations in the formulas may reflect the characteristics of the sources the compiler was using or may reflect his own interests. The name of the mother of a Judean king is recorded, but not of an Israelite king, perhaps reflecting concern with a more exact and fuller record of the Davidic succession. The royal residence is presumed to be Jerusalem for the southern kings (though it may be mentioned) but is recorded for the northern kings since it moved several times, from Shechem to Penuel to Tirzah to Samaria. The mention of the king’s father for a northern ruler also reflects the frequent change in dynasties there, as opposed to the dynastic stability of Judah, which is reinforced by mentioning the burial of almost all its kings in the city of David.<\/p>\nTheology and Purpose<\/p>\nThe books of Kings record the history of the covenant people from the end of the reign of David (961 BC<\/span>) through the fall of the southern kingdom (586 BC<\/span>). Yet it is not history written in accord with modern expectations for history textbooks. Rather than concentrating on economic, political, and military themes as they shaped the history of the period, the compiler of Kings is motivated by theological concerns.<\/p>\nEvaluation of the theology and purpose of the books of Kings is made easier by the fact that there is a parallel history for much of Kings found in the books of Chronicles. By comparing the two accounts, especially where the later Chronicler adds or deletes material found in Kings, the interests of both histories are thrown into clearer relief.<\/p>\nThe books of Kings were composed during the exile, likely between 560 and 539 BC<\/span>. Jerusalem had been turned into rubble, and there was no longer a throne of David. Those two pillars of the popular theology—the inviolability of the temple and the throne of David (Jer 7:4; 13:13-14; 22:1-9; see 1 Kgs 8:16, 29)—had tumbled. If Israel’s faith was to survive, the burning questions that had to be answered were “How did it all happen? Can’t God keep his promises to David and to Zion? Have the promises failed?” The writer of Kings aims to deal with the bewilderment of the chosen people in response to the disasters of 722 BC<\/span> (fall of Samaria) and 586 BC<\/span> (fall of Jerusalem). Kings, like the book of Job, is a theodicy, a justification of the ways of God to men.<\/p>\nIn order to answer the question “How did it happen?” the compiler adopts the procedure of recounting the history of the covenant people in light of standards propounded in the Law. For this reason Kings could be called Pentateuchal history, or even more pointedly, Deuteronomic history, for standards propounded only in the book of Deuteronomy in the Pentateuch are used by the compiler to measure the kingdoms. Among the prominent themes selected from Deuteronomy and applied to the kingdoms are the centralization of worship, the institution of the monarchy, the efficacy of the prophetic word, and the outworking of the covenant curses on disobedience.<\/p>\n<h5>Centralization of Worship<\/h5>\nThe primary concern of the writer is the purity of the worship of the Lord. His major criterion for measuring this purity is the attitude of the kings toward centralization of worship in the Jerusalem temple as opposed to the worship of the Lord elsewhere and the continuation of Canaanite cults mingled with Yahwism at the high places. Centralization of worship at the central shrine is called for in Deuteronomy 12. Perhaps “centralization of worship” is a misnomer, for worship was always centered around the tabernacle in the periods prior to the temple; the change that is envisaged in Deuteronomy is not the centralizing of worship but rather the fact that the shrine would no longer be mobile but stationary. For the kings of the northern kingdom, this criterion becomes virtually a stereotyped formula that “he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord and walked in the way of Jeroboam son of Nebat, who sinned and made all Israel sin along with him” (see 1 Kgs 14:16; 15:30; 16:31; 2 Kgs 3:3; 10:31; 13:2, 11; 14:24; 15:9, 18, 24, 28; 17:22). The compiler of Kings sees the rival altars with the golden calves at Dan and Bethel as the great sin of which the northern kings never repented (1 Kgs 12:25–13:34). Rejecting the primacy of Jerusalem, these altars became the rod with which to measure the northern kings. All the kings of Israel are condemned by this standard (except for Shallum, who reigned but a month, and Hoshea, the last of the northern kings)—even Zimri, the murderer of Elah, who ruled only one week before committing suicide in the flames of his own palace (16:9-20). For the kings of Judah, a different standard is used: what their attitude was to the high places where heterodox worship was allowed to flourish in the environs of Jerusalem. Only Hezekiah and Josiah receive the compiler’s unqualified endorsement for following the ways of David (2 Kgs 18:3; 22:2). Six others are commended for their zeal in suppressing idolatry, though they did not remove the high places (Asa, 1 Kgs 15:9-15; Jehoshaphat, 22:43; Jehoash, 2 Kgs 12:2-3; Amaziah, 14:3-4; Azariah, 15:3-4; Jotham, 15:34-35). The remainder of the Judean kings are condemned for their participation in the high places and their desecration of the temple itself. This one theme is the preeminent motif in the book.<\/p>\n<h5>History of the Monarchy<\/h5>\nA second prominent interest for the compiler was to trace the history of the monarchy. Deuteronomy 17:14-20 provides for the day when Israel would ask for a king and charges that king with the basic religious responsibility for the people. This provision for a king, again a feature found only in Deuteronomy, becomes the basis for the compiler’s intense interest in the history of the monarchy, and particularly the religious fidelity of the kings. David becomes the model of the ideal king, the one by whom the others are measured, the one whose sons “continue long in his kingdom in the midst of Israel” (17:20; see also 1 Kgs 15:11; 2 Kgs 18:3; 22:2 for following in the ways of David, and 1 Kgs 14:8; 15:3-5; 2 Kgs 14:3; 16:2 for the reverse). The compiler wanted to show that God had been faithful to David even though David’s sons were not faithful. While both kingdoms had about the same number of kings, the northern kingdom is marked by repeated dynastic changes and regicide through its 200 years, while the dynasty of David is maintained as a lamp in the south through 350 years (1 Kgs 11:13, 32, 36; 15:4-5; 2 Kgs 8:19; 19:34; 20:6). It is the disaster that had befallen the house of David, and the consequent doubts about the promises of God, that prompted the compiler to write.<\/p>\n<h5>Efficacy of the Prophetic Word<\/h5>\nAnother reason why Kings can be called Deuteronomic history is its concern with the efficacy of the prophetic word. There are three passages in the Pentateuch that deal with the institution of the prophetic order: Numbers 12:1-8; Deuteronomy 13:1-5; and Deuteronomy 18:14-22. It is only in Deuteronomy 18 that the test of a true prophet is given: that what he has spoken comes about, that his words are fulfilled. Notice the number of instances where the writer calls attention to the fulfillment of the words of the prophets: 2 Samuel 7:13 in 1 Kings 8:20; 1 Kings 11:29-36 in 12:15; 1 Kings 13:1-3 in 2 Kings 23:16-18; 1 Kings 14:6-12 in 14:17-18 and 15:29; 1 Kings 16:1-4 in 16:7, 11-12; Joshua 6:26 in 1 Kings 16:34; 1 Kings 22:17 in 22:35-38; 1 Kings 21:21-29 in 2 Kings 9:7-10, 30-37 and 10:10-11, 30; 2 Kings 1:6 in 1:17; 2 Kings 21:10-15 in 24:2; 2 Kings 22:15-20 in 23:30. The writer is concerned to show that the words of the prophets were efficacious, powerful words. His concern with the prophetic order is also seen in the material devoted to Elijah and Elisha and to other prophetic figures.<\/p>\n<h5>Fulfillment of the Curses<\/h5>\nAnother aspect of the compiler’s interest in Deuteronomy is seen in his concern to trace the fulfillment of the covenant curses on disobedience. God’s covenant with Israel would issue in curses or blessings depending on the obedience of the people; the compiler of Kings sees the curses inflicted on the two kingdoms because of their failure to meet the demands of the covenant. He takes care to show that most of the curses of Deuteronomy 28:15-68 had some historical realization in the life of the people. Moses had warned that disobedience would “bring a nation against you from afar, from the end of the earth, as the eagle swoops down” (Dt 28:49, nasb<\/span>), and the Assyrians came to Samaria and the Babylonians to Jerusalem (28:52). The siege of Samaria lasted from 724 to 722 BC<\/span>, and the siege of Jerusalem from 588 to 586 BC<\/span>. The dire conditions of the siege would drive the people to devouring their own children; women would feed on their afterbirths. It happened to Israel in the siege of Ben-hadad (2 Kgs 6:24-30). Just as the Lord had delighted to prosper and multiply his people, so he would not refrain from destroying them and scattering them among the peoples of the earth (Dt 28:63-67).<\/p>\nIn these and other ways the writer of Kings set out to write the history of Israel and Judah to solve a theological dilemma. How was one to reconcile the exile with God’s promises to the nation and David? His answer is twofold: (1) the problem was not with God but with the people’s disobedience—God remains just; (2) the end of the state does not equal the end of the people or the house of David. Here the ending of the book is instructive: Evil-merodach releases Jehoiachin from prison, elevates him above the other kings, and provides his rations (2 Kgs 25:27-30). Even during the exile, though cut down to almost nothing, the house of David still enjoys the favor and blessing of God. God has not abandoned his promises; the people should keep hope.<\/p>\nOther themes in Kings also show the theological motivations underlying the compiler’s selection and arrangement of the data, particularly his use of Deuteronomy as a framework for examining the history of the people. Compare the laws governing the observance of Passover in Exodus 12:1-20 and Deuteronomy 16:1-8: whereas the Passover is centered in the family in Exodus, it is celebrated at the sanctuary in Deuteronomy. The writer of Kings is careful to show that the Passover during the reign of Josiah was celebrated in accordance with the requirements of Deuteronomy (2 Kgs 23:21-23). A passage in Deuteronomy is explicitly cited with reference to Amaziah’s keeping the law (Dt 24:16 in 2 Kgs 14:6).<\/p>\n<h5>Contrast with Chronicles<\/h5>\nThe interests of Kings are further highlighted when compared with the parallel accounts in Chronicles. While the writer of Kings worked in the aftermath of the destruction of Jerusalem and had to answer the “how?” and “why?” questions, the Chronicler is part of the restoration community. Here the burning theological questions were not “how?” and “why?” but rather “What continuity do we have with David? Is God still interested in us?” The need is not to account for the exile but rather to relate the postexilic and the preexilic. The building of the second temple and the ordering of worship there show up in increased detail in Chronicles in any matter pertaining to the former temple. Chronicles is a history of Judah and of the Davidic line, reflecting the fact that it alone survives after the exile. Interesting, too, are the things omitted from the account by the Chronicler. Since he is not building a case for an indictment, as was done in Samuel and Kings, he is free to omit references to David’s sin with Bathsheba (2 Sm 11) or to Solomon’s difficulties in gaining the throne (1 Kgs 1–2). Since in his day the northern kingdom had not survived, the Chronicler did not go into detail about the sins of Jeroboam (chs 13–14). Chronicles is interested more in the affairs of the temple and does not show the marked interest in prophetic matters found in Kings, so that the lives of Elijah and Elisha are omitted (1 Kgs 16—2 Kgs 10). Nor does the Chronicler recite the sins that led to the demise of the northern kingdom (2 Kgs 17:1–18:12). In all these examples one can see the interplay of the historical moment and theological concerns of the people and the compilers. Each compiler has selected and arranged the data in accordance with the concerns and needs of the community in which he was a member; comparing the two accounts throws the interests of each into sharp relief.<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\n\nThe books of Kings fall into three parts: (1) the reign of Solomon (1 Kgs 1–11); (2) the history of the divided kingdom (1 Kgs 12–2 Kgs 17); (3) the history of the surviving kingdom in Judah (2 Kgs 18–25).<\/p>\n<h5>The Reign of Solomon (1 Kgs 1–11)<\/h5>\nThe record begins with an account of the court intrigue surrounding Solomon’s accession to the throne, set against the backdrop of the abortive coup by Adonijah (ch 1). The dying David charges Solomon to obey the commandments of God (2:1-4) and also to take vengeance on his enemies (vv 5-9). After David’s death Solomon orders the deaths of Adonijah, Joab, and Shimei, and the banishment of Abiathar, the priest who had supported Adonijah in his bid for the throne (vv 13-46). Enemies eliminated, the kingdom was firmly established by Solomon (v 46).<\/p>\nThe remainder of Solomon’s reign is divided into two parts: Solomon the good, who follows in the ways of his father, David (chs 3–10); and Solomon the bad, whose heart is led astray (ch 11). While sacrificing at Gibeon, Solomon asks God to give him the gift of wisdom to rule—wisdom promptly demonstrated in the quarrel of two prostitutes about a child (ch 3). An account is given of the administrative organization of the kingdom and the incomparable wisdom of Solomon (ch 4). The compiler of Kings gives extensive coverage to the preparations (ch 5), building (chs 6–7), and dedication (ch 8) of the temple. God appeared to Solomon a second time, reminding him to keep his commandments as David had done (9:1-9). Details are given of the king’s building and commercial activities (vv 10-27). The account of the visit by the queen of Sheba is followed with elaboration of Solomon’s splendor (ch 10). But Solomon did not keep God’s commands; seduced to pagan worship by his foreign wives, he was not fully devoted to the Lord as David had been (11:4), and God determined to take away the northern tribes from the rule of his son (vv 11-13). As punishment from the hand of God, Solomon faced rebellion among conquered peoples (vv 14-25) and within Israel in the person of Jeroboam (vv 26-40).<\/p>\n<h5>History of the Divided Kingdom (1 Kgs 12—2 Kgs 17)<\/h5>\n\nThe united monarchy dissolved after the death of Solomon. The northern kingdom (Israel) would exist for about two centuries, would be ruled by 20 kings from nine different dynasties, and would show a history of internal weakness riddled with regicide and usurpation. In contrast, the southern kingdom would last for three and a half centuries and would be ruled by 19 kings of Davidic descent (apart from a short period under the dynastic interloper Athaliah).<\/p>\nThere had been a long history of independent action and even warfare between the northern and southern tribes prior to David and Solomon, so it is no surprise that the division would take place along the lines that it did. The immediate cause, however, was the unwise severity with which Rehoboam replied to the representatives of the northern tribes while negotiating for the kingship. Jeroboam, the popular hero of the earlier insurrection against Solomon, became king in the north. He immediately erected the rival sanctuaries at Dan and Bethel (1 Kgs 12); these rival altars became the measure by which the kings of Israel were condemned for following in the sins of Jeroboam.<\/p>\nFor two generations there would be warfare between Israel and Judah over the border areas in Benjamin claimed by both sides. Fifty years of sporadic fighting on their mutual frontier, interlaced with invasions from the Arameans in the north or the Egyptians in the south, would consume the reigns of Jeroboam, Nadab, Baasha, Elah, and Zimri in Israel and of Rehoboam, Abijam, and Asa in Judah (1 Kgs 13:1–16:20).<\/p>\nThe accession of Omri in Israel introduced a ruling house that would last for a total of four generations and end the dynastic instability of the northern kingdom. Though Kings gives Omri a scant eight verses (1 Kgs 16:21-28), he was among the greatest of the northern kings, forging alliances with the Phoenicians and Judah; for over a century, the Assyrians would call Israel “the house of Omri.”<\/p>\nThe reigns of Omri’s successors, Ahab, Ahaziah, and Jehoram, are treated at disproportionate length, taking almost a third of the total book, 16 of 47 chapters (1 Kgs 17—2 Kgs 10). This is due to the fact that the compiler of Kings incorporated extensive coverage of the lives of Elijah and Elisha, weaving a contrast between good and evil by paralleling the dynasty of Omri with these prophets. Ahab and Jezebel were used as foils for the account of Elijah, so that Ahab became a paradigm of the evil king (e.g., 2 Kgs 21:3).<\/p>\nBecause of this preoccupation with the dynasty of Omri and the lives of Elijah and Elisha, the equivalent period in Judah is not given as extensive coverage. During this period, the northern kingdom appears to have exercised some hegemony over Judah, as attested by the marriage of an Omride (Athaliah, 2 Kgs 8:18, 26) to Jehoram of Judah and the subservient role of Jehoshaphat to Ahab at the battle of Ramoth-gilead (1 Kgs 22). Judah’s fortunes declined in this period when Edom revolted against Jehoram (2 Kgs 8:20-22), costing Judah control over the port at Ezion-geber and consequent economic losses.<\/p>\nIn 842 BC<\/span> Jehu, after being anointed king by a prophet (2 Kgs 9:1-13), led a coup ending the house of Omri and also killing Ahaziah of Judah (vv 14-29). Jehu’s purge also brought the death of Jezebel, Ahab’s family, members of the family of Ahaziah, and the ministers of Baal (9:30–10:36). The consequences were severe politically: the murder of the Phoenician princess Jezebel and the king of Judah cost Israel its allies to the north and south.<\/p>\nJehu’s dynasty had the longest succession of any in Israel, including Jehoahaz, Jehoash, Jeroboam II, and Zechariah, a period spanning 90 years. Jehu’s murder of Ahaziah of Judah set the stage for the one threat to the continuity of the Davidic dynasty. Queen Athaliah, herself an Omride, seized the throne and attempted a purge of Davidic pretenders. She ruled for six years, until the faithful priest Jehoiada staged a countercoup to place the child Joash on the throne of David (ch 11).<\/p>\nIsrael endured a half century of weakness as a result of Jehu’s coup, during which the Arameans had a free hand, reducing the forces of Jehu’s son Jehoahaz to a small army and bodyguard (2 Kgs 13:1-7).<\/p>\nThe reemergence of Assyria early in the ninth century BC<\/span> gave relief to Israel and Judah. Assyrian armies conquered the Arameans; with that threat removed, Israel and Judah enjoyed a dramatic resurgence. Jehoash of Israel, grandson of Jehu, reconquered cities lost to the Arameans (2 Kgs 13:25); Elisha died during his reign (v 20). In the south Amaziah reconquered the Edomites (14:7). Amaziah and Jehoash renewed the warfare between the kingdoms, with the north again victorious (vv 8-14).<\/p>\nUnder Jeroboam II, Israel enjoyed a period of prosperity when the borders of the kingdom reached the same extent as they had under Solomon (2 Kgs 14:23-28). Uzziah (Azariah), his contemporary in Judah, also fortified Jerusalem and undertook a program of offensive operations extending Judah’s sway to the south (14:21-22; 15:1-7).<\/p>\nYet this resurgence was but a brilliant sunset in the history of the two kingdoms. After the death of Jeroboam II, the history is one of successive disasters, culminating in the fall of Israel and the subjugation of Judah to the might of Assyria. The next 30 years in Israel would see four dynasties, three represented by only one king, and repeated regicides as the northern kingdom hastened to its demise. A period of civil war and anarchy would see five kings in just over ten years (2 Kgs 15). Heavy tribute was paid to Tiglath-pileser III in both the north and south (15:19-20; 16:7-10). Israel and the Arameans forged a coalition to throw back the Assyrians and sought to press Ahaz of Judah into the fight; Ahaz appealed to Tiglath-pileser III for help. The coalition was destroyed, and Israel and Judah became vassals. Hoshea defected as soon as he felt safe, looking to Egypt for help, but it was suicide for the northern kingdom. Shalmaneser V retaliated, and the political history of the state of Israel came to an end (17:1-23). The area was resettled with other displaced populations (vv 24-41).<\/p>\nIsrael had faced the Arameans and survived, only to fall to Assyria. And now, similarly, Judah would outlast Assyria, only to fall to Babylon.<\/p>\n<h5>History of the Surviving Kingdom of Judah (2 Kgs 18–25)<\/h5>\nAhaz’s appeal for Assyrian aid cost him his liberty, and Judah became a vassal of the Assyrian Empire. Illegitimate worship flourished under his rule (2 Kgs 16:1-19). Ahaz was succeeded by the first of the outstanding reform kings of Judah: Hezekiah. Much of the account of his reign is given to his rebellion against Sennacherib of Assyria: the rebellion, the Assyrian envoys and threats, Isaiah’s assurances of deliverance, and the destruction of the Assyrian armies (18:9–19:37). Hezekiah’s illness was averted after a sign and oracle from Isaiah (20:1-11). As part of what appears to be negotiations toward an anti-Assyrian alliance, Hezekiah also entertained envoys from Babylon, a decision that the prophet announced would be costly (vv 12-21).<\/p>\nHezekiah was followed by Manasseh, who ruled longer than any other king of Judah (a total of 55 years). His reign was marked by great apostasy—apostasy so severe that the compiler of Kings regarded his reign as sufficient reason for the exile that was unavoidable (2 Kgs 21:1-18; cf. 23:26; 24:3-4; Jer 15:1-4). Manasseh was followed by his son Amon, a carbon copy of his father, who ruled only two years before he was deposed by the people (2 Kings 21:19-26).<\/p>\nThe second great reform king of Judah, Josiah, followed. In his reign the Book of the Law was found while the temple was being refurbished; he led the people in a renewal of the covenant and suppressed illegitimate worship (2 Kgs 22:1–23:14). The Assyrian Empire was in rapid decline, so Josiah extended his borders to the north, destroying the altar at Bethel and the high places throughout Samaria (23:15-20). A great Passover celebration was convened in Jerusalem, and further measures were taken to rectify worship (vv 21-25). Josiah tried to block Pharaoh Neco’s foray to assist Assyria, and he lost his life at Megiddo (vv 26-30).<\/p>\nJosiah was the only king of Judah to have three of his sons succeed him. At his death the people put Jehoahaz on the throne, but Neco removed him three months later and took him to Egypt in chains (2 Kgs 23:31-33), replacing him with another son of Josiah, Eliakim, whose name was changed to Jehoiakim (vv 34-37). During his reign, Nebuchadnezzar conquered Judah, and Jehoiakim became his vassal. Late in his life Jehoiakim rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar. Jehoiakim died, leaving his son Jehoiachin to face retaliation from Babylon (24:1-10). Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem; when the city fell, Jehoiachin, the queen mother, the army, and the leaders of the land were carried away captive. Nebuchadnezzar put Mattaniah (uncle of Jehoiachin and third son of Josiah) on the throne, changing his name to Zedekiah (vv 11-17). Nine years later Zedekiah, too, would rebel against Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar besieged the city for two years and, when it fell, utterly destroyed it. Zedekiah’s sons were killed before his eyes, and then his own eyes were put out, and he was taken to Babylon (24:18–25:21). Nebuchadnezzar appointed Gedaliah to rule as governor from nearby Mizpah; he was assassinated, and the conspirators fled to Egypt (25:22-26).<\/p>\nThe book concludes by showing that God had not forgotten his promise to David, mentioning that in captivity Jehoiachin enjoyed favor from the hand of Evil-merodach, successor of Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kgs 25:27-30).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Chronicles, Books of First and Second.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KINGS, Books of First and Second<\/h3>\nBooks continuing the history of the covenant people as recorded in Joshua, Judges, and the books of Samuel. The record in Kings begins with the events at the end of David’s reign (1 Kgs 1–2). It continues through the reign of Solomon (chs 3–11); the histories of the divided kingdoms (1 Kgs 12—2 Kgs 17); and the history of the surviving kingdom in the south, through its fall in 586 BC<\/span> and the subsequent kindness shown Jehoiachin by Evil-merodach, king of Babylon, around 561 BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 18–25).<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Authorship and Date<\/p>\n• Sources<\/p>\n• Theology and Purpose<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthorship and Date<\/p>\nKings was originally regarded as one book in the Hebrew canon; the division into two books of approximately equal length appeared first in the Septuagint and finally entered the Hebrew Bible in the 15th century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe book itself is anonymous, and information about its author can only be deduced by examining the concerns and perspectives of the work. The Babylonian Talmud (Baba Bathra<\/em> 15a) attributes Kings to Jeremiah. Although this identification could have arisen from the tendency of later Jewish tradition to assign biblical books to prophetic authors, the theory of origin in prophetic circles fits the evidence quite well. Substantial portions are given to the lives of the prophets; 16 of 47 chapters are devoted to the lives of Elijah and Elisha (1 Kgs 17—2 Kgs 10), and there is considerable interest in other prophetic figures such as Ahijah (1 Kgs 11:29-39; 14:1-16), an unnamed man of God (13:1-10), and Micaiah (22:13-28). Possible dependence on Isaiah (2 Kgs 18–20; cf. Is 36–39) and Jeremiah (2 Kgs 24–25; cf. Jer 52) also suggest prophetic origin. The author-compiler also shows intense concern with the efficacy of the prophetic word, frequently calling attention to the fulfillment of words spoken earlier by the prophets.<\/p>\nOne might initially think that such a history would be unlikely for a prophet, but the evidence is to the contrary. The prophets were the guardians of the covenant relationship and are known to have produced accounts used as sources by other biblical historians. The following are among such sources: the acts of Samuel the seer, the acts of Nathan the prophet, the acts of Gad the seer (1 Chr 29:29); the acts of Nathan the prophet, the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, the visions of Iddo the seer (2 Chr 9:29); the chronicles of Shemaiah the prophet and of Iddo the seer (12:15); the annotations of the prophet Iddo (13:22); and the acts of Uzziah by Isaiah the prophet (26:22). Add to this the fact that Kings is positioned in the Hebrew canon in the Former Prophets (Joshua to 2 Kings), and a consistent picture of prophetic origin emerges.<\/p>\nThe date of the final part of the book must be after the last events recorded. Evil-merodach’s kindness toward Jehoiachin (c. 561 BC<\/span>) is the terminus of the book and therefore fixes the earliest date. Since the work shows no knowledge of the restoration period, a date before 539 BC<\/span> is probable. The author’s selection of his data to answer the burning theological questions of the exilic community also suggests a date between 561 and 539 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nSources<\/p>\nThe compiler of Kings specifically names three of the sources that he used in his work, and biblical scholars have suggested the presence of a number of other sources that may have been cited. Of course, the sources not mentioned specifically by the compiler are only the speculations of those who have studied his work and can have only varying degrees of probability. The sources both specified and alleged are as follows.<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Acts of Solomon<\/h5>\nAs 1 Kings 11:41 says, “The rest of the events in Solomon’s reign, including his wisdom, are recorded in The Book of the Acts of Solomon”<\/em> (nlt<\/span>). Presumably additional materials of a biographical nature were included, specifically accounts similar to the judgment between the two mothers (3:16-28) or the visit of the queen of Sheba (10:1-10). There has been debate as to whether these materials were official court records or nonofficial documents. Some scholars have attempted to isolate further materials within this section by identifying descriptions of the buildings as from temple archives (chs 6–7) and lists of administrators as from administrative documents (chs 4–5), but this must remain speculative.<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the History of the Kings of Israel<\/h5>\nThis source is mentioned 17 times in Kings, usually in the closing formulas at the end of the account of the reign of a northern king. Some idea of the nature of these chronicles can be derived from looking at the type of information to which the compiler refers his readers (see 1 Kgs 14:19; 16:27; 22:39; 2 Kgs 13:12; 14:28). These passages suggest that this source was the official annals covering the reigns of the kings.<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the History of the Kings of Judah<\/h5>\nThis source is mentioned in 15 passages, and as with the kings of Israel, is found in the concluding formulas to the accounts of the reigns. This source was to be consulted for additional details on individuals’ reigns (for example, see 1 Kgs 15:23; 22:45; 2 Kgs 20:20; 21:17). These sources for the histories of the two kingdoms were probably similar to the annals known from the surrounding cultures, particularly from the reigns of Assyrian kings. They were likely official court histories kept in Samaria and Jerusalem.<\/p>\nIn addition to these explicitly mentioned sources, scholars have suggested the compiler drew on other sources that he does not name.<\/p>\n<h5>Davidic Court History<\/h5>\nSecond Samuel 9–20 is often identified as a unit of material in the composition of the books of Samuel; it is variously called “the court history” or “the succession narrative.” Because of similar vocabulary and outlook, 1 Kings 1–2 are often associated with this material from Samuel. The statement of 1 Kings 2:46, “so the kingdom was now firmly in Solomon’s grip,” is taken to be the end of this record.<\/p>\n<h5>Sources for the House of Ahab<\/h5>\nThe reigns of individual kings are ordinarily given only brief notices; for example, the father of Ahab, Omri, is given eight verses, even though when judged by political and economic significance, he was among the greatest of the northern kings (1 Kgs 16:21-28). However, beginning with the reign of Ahab, the record becomes quite expansive, and extensive coverage is given the dynasty of Ahab through the coup by Jehu (1 Kgs 16—2 Kgs 12). The use of the stereotyped formulas for the reigns is suspended in this material, and the existence of other literature used by the compiler is probable. This material is commonly subdivided into further sources for the lives of Elijah and Elisha and the reign of Ahab.<\/p>\nThe Elijah section covers material in the following chapters: 1 Kings 17–19, including the feeding by the ravens, the incidents with the widow of Zarephath, the drought, the fire on Carmel, and the revelation of God at Sinai; 1 Kings 21, the affair of Naboth’s vineyard; and 2 Kings 1, the death of Ahaziah’s messengers. The reign of Ahab, which gets so much attention in Kings, is primarily a backdrop for the accounts concerning Elijah.<\/p>\nThe Elisha material found in 2 Kings 2–13 may have had an independent literary development from that of the Elijah accounts. It includes the following: chapter 2 (Elisha’s succession to the prophetic office, the purification of a spring, the death of mocking children); chapter 3 (on the campaign against Moab); chapter 4 (the widow’s oil, the Shunammite woman); chapter 5 (Naaman’s leprosy); chapter 6 (the Aramean attempt to capture Elisha); chapter 7 (the famine in Samaria); chapter 8 (the Shunammite’s property, the coup of Hazael); chapter 9 (the anointing of Jehu); and chapter 13 (the death of Elisha). No other portion of the OT takes the sheer delight in the miraculous that is seen in the Elisha narratives.<\/p>\nIn 1 Kings 16 to 2 Kings 13 there are additional incidents not directly related to the biographies of Elijah and Elisha; accounts such as the military campaigns of 1 Kings 20:1-34 and further details of Jehu’s coup (2 Kgs 9:11–10:36) are often attributed to a third source containing accounts of the dynasty of Ahab and his successors. In all three of these possible sources the orientation is toward affairs in the northern kingdom.<\/p>\n<h5>Isaiah Source<\/h5>\nThe account of the reign of Hezekiah contains a section (2 Kgs 18:13–20:19) that is nearly a verbatim citation of material also found in Isaiah (Is 36:1–39:8). The section records the invasion of Sennacherib, the mission of the Rabshakeh, Hezekiah’s prayer, Isaiah’s prophecy, Hezekiah’s illness, the regression of the sun, and the envoys from Merodach-baladan. The material must be regarded as based on the book of Isaiah or some other source used in both Isaiah and Kings.<\/p>\n<h5>A Prophetic Source<\/h5>\nBecause Kings shows great interest in the prophets and their ministries, various scholars have suggested that yet another source was used by the compiler; this would be an independent literary unit containing accounts of the prophets. This source would have contained the records for the material on Ahijah (1 Kgs 11:29-39; 14:1-16), unnamed prophets (ch 12; 20:35-43), Micaiah (22:13-28), and other references.<\/p>\nApart from the sources explicitly mentioned and inferences about their character, the remainder of the sources suggested have only varying degrees of probability. Considerable scholarly effort has gone into identifying and characterizing such sources, but it remains speculative. When considering the sources the compiler may have used, one important caution must be kept in mind. Even if such sources did exist, one cannot have confidence in a reconstruction of the compositional history. Which sources had already been integrated into a larger composition before they were used by the compiler of Kings? We cannot be certain that the life situation out of which these other sources grew has been correctly identified, nor can we know that even the compiler himself was aware of the past history of his sources. Biblical scholarship has expended considerable energy in trying to delineate the past history of the book of Kings, but it has often been at the neglect of the unity of perspective that is the product of the final compiler(s) in whose hands the book received its canonical form.<\/p>\nWhat is important to understanding the book is not the perspective of its various sources (of which the compiler himself may have been unaware), but the perspective of the book as a whole on the history of the kingdoms. It is the outline that the compiler has imposed on the sources that establishes the teaching of the book; his sources are used in accord with his own purposes, a fact that makes the purposes for which the sources had been prepared largely irrelevant to the teaching of the book in its present form. Exploring possible sources, worthwhile in itself, must not eclipse the message of the book as a whole. This is not to imply that the books of Kings are simply a compilation of unaltered sources. The writer(s) undoubtedly exercised a measure of selectivity and literary skill in composing the historical narrative.<\/p>\nOne compositional technique of the compiler is quite prominent in the histories of the divided kingdoms: this is the use of formulaic introductions and conclusions to the various reigns. The formulas for both kingdoms are quite similar, differing only in minor details. For the kings of Judah, the full introductory formula is as follows: (1) year of accession synchronized with the regnal year of the northern king; (2) age of the king at his accession; (3) length of his reign; (4) name of his mother; (5) judgment on the character of the reign. The account of a Judean king’s reign is concluded as follows: (1) a reference to the chronicles of the kings of Judah for further information; (2) a statement regarding the death of the king, including the place of burial; (3) successor: “And his son reigned in his stead” (rsv<\/span>). The full formula for a Judean king can be seen, for example, in the reign of Rehoboam (1 Kgs 14:21-22, 29-31).<\/p>\nThe formulas differ slightly for the kings of Israel; the introduction is as follows: (1) year of succession synchronized with the regnal year of the southern king; (2) length of his reign; (3) location of the royal residence; (4) condemnation for idolatry; (5) name of the king’s father. The account of an Israelite king’s reign ends as follows: (1) a reference to the chronicles of the kings of Israel for further information; (2) a statement regarding his death; (3) a statement of the succession of his son, unless a usurper follows. The full formula for an Israelite king can be seen, for example, in the reign of Baasha (1 Kgs 15:33-34; 16:5-6).<\/p>\nThere is some variation in the use of these patterns, but on the whole, they are consistently followed and provide the basic framework for the history of the divided kingdom. The synchronisms of the reigns provide data for constructing the chronology of the period. The variations in the formulas may reflect the characteristics of the sources the compiler was using or may reflect his own interests. The name of the mother of a Judean king is recorded, but not of an Israelite king, perhaps reflecting concern with a more exact and fuller record of the Davidic succession. The royal residence is presumed to be Jerusalem for the southern kings (though it may be mentioned) but is recorded for the northern kings since it moved several times, from Shechem to Penuel to Tirzah to Samaria. The mention of the king’s father for a northern ruler also reflects the frequent change in dynasties there, as opposed to the dynastic stability of Judah, which is reinforced by mentioning the burial of almost all its kings in the city of David.<\/p>\nTheology and Purpose<\/p>\nThe books of Kings record the history of the covenant people from the end of the reign of David (961 BC<\/span>) through the fall of the southern kingdom (586 BC<\/span>). Yet it is not history written in accord with modern expectations for history textbooks. Rather than concentrating on economic, political, and military themes as they shaped the history of the period, the compiler of Kings is motivated by theological concerns.<\/p>\nEvaluation of the theology and purpose of the books of Kings is made easier by the fact that there is a parallel history for much of Kings found in the books of Chronicles. By comparing the two accounts, especially where the later Chronicler adds or deletes material found in Kings, the interests of both histories are thrown into clearer relief.<\/p>\nThe books of Kings were composed during the exile, likely between 560 and 539 BC<\/span>. Jerusalem had been turned into rubble, and there was no longer a throne of David. Those two pillars of the popular theology—the inviolability of the temple and the throne of David (Jer 7:4; 13:13-14; 22:1-9; see 1 Kgs 8:16, 29)—had tumbled. If Israel’s faith was to survive, the burning questions that had to be answered were “How did it all happen? Can’t God keep his promises to David and to Zion? Have the promises failed?” The writer of Kings aims to deal with the bewilderment of the chosen people in response to the disasters of 722 BC<\/span> (fall of Samaria) and 586 BC<\/span> (fall of Jerusalem). Kings, like the book of Job, is a theodicy, a justification of the ways of God to men.<\/p>\nIn order to answer the question “How did it happen?” the compiler adopts the procedure of recounting the history of the covenant people in light of standards propounded in the Law. For this reason Kings could be called Pentateuchal history, or even more pointedly, Deuteronomic history, for standards propounded only in the book of Deuteronomy in the Pentateuch are used by the compiler to measure the kingdoms. Among the prominent themes selected from Deuteronomy and applied to the kingdoms are the centralization of worship, the institution of the monarchy, the efficacy of the prophetic word, and the outworking of the covenant curses on disobedience.<\/p>\n<h5>Centralization of Worship<\/h5>\nThe primary concern of the writer is the purity of the worship of the Lord. His major criterion for measuring this purity is the attitude of the kings toward centralization of worship in the Jerusalem temple as opposed to the worship of the Lord elsewhere and the continuation of Canaanite cults mingled with Yahwism at the high places. Centralization of worship at the central shrine is called for in Deuteronomy 12. Perhaps “centralization of worship” is a misnomer, for worship was always centered around the tabernacle in the periods prior to the temple; the change that is envisaged in Deuteronomy is not the centralizing of worship but rather the fact that the shrine would no longer be mobile but stationary. For the kings of the northern kingdom, this criterion becomes virtually a stereotyped formula that “he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord and walked in the way of Jeroboam son of Nebat, who sinned and made all Israel sin along with him” (see 1 Kgs 14:16; 15:30; 16:31; 2 Kgs 3:3; 10:31; 13:2, 11; 14:24; 15:9, 18, 24, 28; 17:22). The compiler of Kings sees the rival altars with the golden calves at Dan and Bethel as the great sin of which the northern kings never repented (1 Kgs 12:25–13:34). Rejecting the primacy of Jerusalem, these altars became the rod with which to measure the northern kings. All the kings of Israel are condemned by this standard (except for Shallum, who reigned but a month, and Hoshea, the last of the northern kings)—even Zimri, the murderer of Elah, who ruled only one week before committing suicide in the flames of his own palace (16:9-20). For the kings of Judah, a different standard is used: what their attitude was to the high places where heterodox worship was allowed to flourish in the environs of Jerusalem. Only Hezekiah and Josiah receive the compiler’s unqualified endorsement for following the ways of David (2 Kgs 18:3; 22:2). Six others are commended for their zeal in suppressing idolatry, though they did not remove the high places (Asa, 1 Kgs 15:9-15; Jehoshaphat, 22:43; Jehoash, 2 Kgs 12:2-3; Amaziah, 14:3-4; Azariah, 15:3-4; Jotham, 15:34-35). The remainder of the Judean kings are condemned for their participation in the high places and their desecration of the temple itself. This one theme is the preeminent motif in the book.<\/p>\n<h5>History of the Monarchy<\/h5>\nA second prominent interest for the compiler was to trace the history of the monarchy. Deuteronomy 17:14-20 provides for the day when Israel would ask for a king and charges that king with the basic religious responsibility for the people. This provision for a king, again a feature found only in Deuteronomy, becomes the basis for the compiler’s intense interest in the history of the monarchy, and particularly the religious fidelity of the kings. David becomes the model of the ideal king, the one by whom the others are measured, the one whose sons “continue long in his kingdom in the midst of Israel” (17:20; see also 1 Kgs 15:11; 2 Kgs 18:3; 22:2 for following in the ways of David, and 1 Kgs 14:8; 15:3-5; 2 Kgs 14:3; 16:2 for the reverse). The compiler wanted to show that God had been faithful to David even though David’s sons were not faithful. While both kingdoms had about the same number of kings, the northern kingdom is marked by repeated dynastic changes and regicide through its 200 years, while the dynasty of David is maintained as a lamp in the south through 350 years (1 Kgs 11:13, 32, 36; 15:4-5; 2 Kgs 8:19; 19:34; 20:6). It is the disaster that had befallen the house of David, and the consequent doubts about the promises of God, that prompted the compiler to write.<\/p>\n<h5>Efficacy of the Prophetic Word<\/h5>\nAnother reason why Kings can be called Deuteronomic history is its concern with the efficacy of the prophetic word. There are three passages in the Pentateuch that deal with the institution of the prophetic order: Numbers 12:1-8; Deuteronomy 13:1-5; and Deuteronomy 18:14-22. It is only in Deuteronomy 18 that the test of a true prophet is given: that what he has spoken comes about, that his words are fulfilled. Notice the number of instances where the writer calls attention to the fulfillment of the words of the prophets: 2 Samuel 7:13 in 1 Kings 8:20; 1 Kings 11:29-36 in 12:15; 1 Kings 13:1-3 in 2 Kings 23:16-18; 1 Kings 14:6-12 in 14:17-18 and 15:29; 1 Kings 16:1-4 in 16:7, 11-12; Joshua 6:26 in 1 Kings 16:34; 1 Kings 22:17 in 22:35-38; 1 Kings 21:21-29 in 2 Kings 9:7-10, 30-37 and 10:10-11, 30; 2 Kings 1:6 in 1:17; 2 Kings 21:10-15 in 24:2; 2 Kings 22:15-20 in 23:30. The writer is concerned to show that the words of the prophets were efficacious, powerful words. His concern with the prophetic order is also seen in the material devoted to Elijah and Elisha and to other prophetic figures.<\/p>\n<h5>Fulfillment of the Curses<\/h5>\nAnother aspect of the compiler’s interest in Deuteronomy is seen in his concern to trace the fulfillment of the covenant curses on disobedience. God’s covenant with Israel would issue in curses or blessings depending on the obedience of the people; the compiler of Kings sees the curses inflicted on the two kingdoms because of their failure to meet the demands of the covenant. He takes care to show that most of the curses of Deuteronomy 28:15-68 had some historical realization in the life of the people. Moses had warned that disobedience would “bring a nation against you from afar, from the end of the earth, as the eagle swoops down” (Dt 28:49, nasb<\/span>), and the Assyrians came to Samaria and the Babylonians to Jerusalem (28:52). The siege of Samaria lasted from 724 to 722 BC<\/span>, and the siege of Jerusalem from 588 to 586 BC<\/span>. The dire conditions of the siege would drive the people to devouring their own children; women would feed on their afterbirths. It happened to Israel in the siege of Ben-hadad (2 Kgs 6:24-30). Just as the Lord had delighted to prosper and multiply his people, so he would not refrain from destroying them and scattering them among the peoples of the earth (Dt 28:63-67).<\/p>\nIn these and other ways the writer of Kings set out to write the history of Israel and Judah to solve a theological dilemma. How was one to reconcile the exile with God’s promises to the nation and David? His answer is twofold: (1) the problem was not with God but with the people’s disobedience—God remains just; (2) the end of the state does not equal the end of the people or the house of David. Here the ending of the book is instructive: Evil-merodach releases Jehoiachin from prison, elevates him above the other kings, and provides his rations (2 Kgs 25:27-30). Even during the exile, though cut down to almost nothing, the house of David still enjoys the favor and blessing of God. God has not abandoned his promises; the people should keep hope.<\/p>\nOther themes in Kings also show the theological motivations underlying the compiler’s selection and arrangement of the data, particularly his use of Deuteronomy as a framework for examining the history of the people. Compare the laws governing the observance of Passover in Exodus 12:1-20 and Deuteronomy 16:1-8: whereas the Passover is centered in the family in Exodus, it is celebrated at the sanctuary in Deuteronomy. The writer of Kings is careful to show that the Passover during the reign of Josiah was celebrated in accordance with the requirements of Deuteronomy (2 Kgs 23:21-23). A passage in Deuteronomy is explicitly cited with reference to Amaziah’s keeping the law (Dt 24:16 in 2 Kgs 14:6).<\/p>\n<h5>Contrast with Chronicles<\/h5>\nThe interests of Kings are further highlighted when compared with the parallel accounts in Chronicles. While the writer of Kings worked in the aftermath of the destruction of Jerusalem and had to answer the “how?” and “why?” questions, the Chronicler is part of the restoration community. Here the burning theological questions were not “how?” and “why?” but rather “What continuity do we have with David? Is God still interested in us?” The need is not to account for the exile but rather to relate the postexilic and the preexilic. The building of the second temple and the ordering of worship there show up in increased detail in Chronicles in any matter pertaining to the former temple. Chronicles is a history of Judah and of the Davidic line, reflecting the fact that it alone survives after the exile. Interesting, too, are the things omitted from the account by the Chronicler. Since he is not building a case for an indictment, as was done in Samuel and Kings, he is free to omit references to David’s sin with Bathsheba (2 Sm 11) or to Solomon’s difficulties in gaining the throne (1 Kgs 1–2). Since in his day the northern kingdom had not survived, the Chronicler did not go into detail about the sins of Jeroboam (chs 13–14). Chronicles is interested more in the affairs of the temple and does not show the marked interest in prophetic matters found in Kings, so that the lives of Elijah and Elisha are omitted (1 Kgs 16—2 Kgs 10). Nor does the Chronicler recite the sins that led to the demise of the northern kingdom (2 Kgs 17:1–18:12). In all these examples one can see the interplay of the historical moment and theological concerns of the people and the compilers. Each compiler has selected and arranged the data in accordance with the concerns and needs of the community in which he was a member; comparing the two accounts throws the interests of each into sharp relief.<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\n\nThe books of Kings fall into three parts: (1) the reign of Solomon (1 Kgs 1–11); (2) the history of the divided kingdom (1 Kgs 12–2 Kgs 17); (3) the history of the surviving kingdom in Judah (2 Kgs 18–25).<\/p>\n<h5>The Reign of Solomon (1 Kgs 1–11)<\/h5>\nThe record begins with an account of the court intrigue surrounding Solomon’s accession to the throne, set against the backdrop of the abortive coup by Adonijah (ch 1). The dying David charges Solomon to obey the commandments of God (2:1-4) and also to take vengeance on his enemies (vv 5-9). After David’s death Solomon orders the deaths of Adonijah, Joab, and Shimei, and the banishment of Abiathar, the priest who had supported Adonijah in his bid for the throne (vv 13-46). Enemies eliminated, the kingdom was firmly established by Solomon (v 46).<\/p>\nThe remainder of Solomon’s reign is divided into two parts: Solomon the good, who follows in the ways of his father, David (chs 3–10); and Solomon the bad, whose heart is led astray (ch 11). While sacrificing at Gibeon, Solomon asks God to give him the gift of wisdom to rule—wisdom promptly demonstrated in the quarrel of two prostitutes about a child (ch 3). An account is given of the administrative organization of the kingdom and the incomparable wisdom of Solomon (ch 4). The compiler of Kings gives extensive coverage to the preparations (ch 5), building (chs 6–7), and dedication (ch 8) of the temple. God appeared to Solomon a second time, reminding him to keep his commandments as David had done (9:1-9). Details are given of the king’s building and commercial activities (vv 10-27). The account of the visit by the queen of Sheba is followed with elaboration of Solomon’s splendor (ch 10). But Solomon did not keep God’s commands; seduced to pagan worship by his foreign wives, he was not fully devoted to the Lord as David had been (11:4), and God determined to take away the northern tribes from the rule of his son (vv 11-13). As punishment from the hand of God, Solomon faced rebellion among conquered peoples (vv 14-25) and within Israel in the person of Jeroboam (vv 26-40).<\/p>\n<h5>History of the Divided Kingdom (1 Kgs 12—2 Kgs 17)<\/h5>\n\nThe united monarchy dissolved after the death of Solomon. The northern kingdom (Israel) would exist for about two centuries, would be ruled by 20 kings from nine different dynasties, and would show a history of internal weakness riddled with regicide and usurpation. In contrast, the southern kingdom would last for three and a half centuries and would be ruled by 19 kings of Davidic descent (apart from a short period under the dynastic interloper Athaliah).<\/p>\nThere had been a long history of independent action and even warfare between the northern and southern tribes prior to David and Solomon, so it is no surprise that the division would take place along the lines that it did. The immediate cause, however, was the unwise severity with which Rehoboam replied to the representatives of the northern tribes while negotiating for the kingship. Jeroboam, the popular hero of the earlier insurrection against Solomon, became king in the north. He immediately erected the rival sanctuaries at Dan and Bethel (1 Kgs 12); these rival altars became the measure by which the kings of Israel were condemned for following in the sins of Jeroboam.<\/p>\nFor two generations there would be warfare between Israel and Judah over the border areas in Benjamin claimed by both sides. Fifty years of sporadic fighting on their mutual frontier, interlaced with invasions from the Arameans in the north or the Egyptians in the south, would consume the reigns of Jeroboam, Nadab, Baasha, Elah, and Zimri in Israel and of Rehoboam, Abijam, and Asa in Judah (1 Kgs 13:1–16:20).<\/p>\nThe accession of Omri in Israel introduced a ruling house that would last for a total of four generations and end the dynastic instability of the northern kingdom. Though Kings gives Omri a scant eight verses (1 Kgs 16:21-28), he was among the greatest of the northern kings, forging alliances with the Phoenicians and Judah; for over a century, the Assyrians would call Israel “the house of Omri.”<\/p>\nThe reigns of Omri’s successors, Ahab, Ahaziah, and Jehoram, are treated at disproportionate length, taking almost a third of the total book, 16 of 47 chapters (1 Kgs 17—2 Kgs 10). This is due to the fact that the compiler of Kings incorporated extensive coverage of the lives of Elijah and Elisha, weaving a contrast between good and evil by paralleling the dynasty of Omri with these prophets. Ahab and Jezebel were used as foils for the account of Elijah, so that Ahab became a paradigm of the evil king (e.g., 2 Kgs 21:3).<\/p>\nBecause of this preoccupation with the dynasty of Omri and the lives of Elijah and Elisha, the equivalent period in Judah is not given as extensive coverage. During this period, the northern kingdom appears to have exercised some hegemony over Judah, as attested by the marriage of an Omride (Athaliah, 2 Kgs 8:18, 26) to Jehoram of Judah and the subservient role of Jehoshaphat to Ahab at the battle of Ramoth-gilead (1 Kgs 22). Judah’s fortunes declined in this period when Edom revolted against Jehoram (2 Kgs 8:20-22), costing Judah control over the port at Ezion-geber and consequent economic losses.<\/p>\nIn 842 BC<\/span> Jehu, after being anointed king by a prophet (2 Kgs 9:1-13), led a coup ending the house of Omri and also killing Ahaziah of Judah (vv 14-29). Jehu’s purge also brought the death of Jezebel, Ahab’s family, members of the family of Ahaziah, and the ministers of Baal (9:30–10:36). The consequences were severe politically: the murder of the Phoenician princess Jezebel and the king of Judah cost Israel its allies to the north and south.<\/p>\nJehu’s dynasty had the longest succession of any in Israel, including Jehoahaz, Jehoash, Jeroboam II, and Zechariah, a period spanning 90 years. Jehu’s murder of Ahaziah of Judah set the stage for the one threat to the continuity of the Davidic dynasty. Queen Athaliah, herself an Omride, seized the throne and attempted a purge of Davidic pretenders. She ruled for six years, until the faithful priest Jehoiada staged a countercoup to place the child Joash on the throne of David (ch 11).<\/p>\nIsrael endured a half century of weakness as a result of Jehu’s coup, during which the Arameans had a free hand, reducing the forces of Jehu’s son Jehoahaz to a small army and bodyguard (2 Kgs 13:1-7).<\/p>\nThe reemergence of Assyria early in the ninth century BC<\/span> gave relief to Israel and Judah. Assyrian armies conquered the Arameans; with that threat removed, Israel and Judah enjoyed a dramatic resurgence. Jehoash of Israel, grandson of Jehu, reconquered cities lost to the Arameans (2 Kgs 13:25); Elisha died during his reign (v 20). In the south Amaziah reconquered the Edomites (14:7). Amaziah and Jehoash renewed the warfare between the kingdoms, with the north again victorious (vv 8-14).<\/p>\nUnder Jeroboam II, Israel enjoyed a period of prosperity when the borders of the kingdom reached the same extent as they had under Solomon (2 Kgs 14:23-28). Uzziah (Azariah), his contemporary in Judah, also fortified Jerusalem and undertook a program of offensive operations extending Judah’s sway to the south (14:21-22; 15:1-7).<\/p>\nYet this resurgence was but a brilliant sunset in the history of the two kingdoms. After the death of Jeroboam II, the history is one of successive disasters, culminating in the fall of Israel and the subjugation of Judah to the might of Assyria. The next 30 years in Israel would see four dynasties, three represented by only one king, and repeated regicides as the northern kingdom hastened to its demise. A period of civil war and anarchy would see five kings in just over ten years (2 Kgs 15). Heavy tribute was paid to Tiglath-pileser III in both the north and south (15:19-20; 16:7-10). Israel and the Arameans forged a coalition to throw back the Assyrians and sought to press Ahaz of Judah into the fight; Ahaz appealed to Tiglath-pileser III for help. The coalition was destroyed, and Israel and Judah became vassals. Hoshea defected as soon as he felt safe, looking to Egypt for help, but it was suicide for the northern kingdom. Shalmaneser V retaliated, and the political history of the state of Israel came to an end (17:1-23). The area was resettled with other displaced populations (vv 24-41).<\/p>\nIsrael had faced the Arameans and survived, only to fall to Assyria. And now, similarly, Judah would outlast Assyria, only to fall to Babylon.<\/p>\n<h5>History of the Surviving Kingdom of Judah (2 Kgs 18–25)<\/h5>\nAhaz’s appeal for Assyrian aid cost him his liberty, and Judah became a vassal of the Assyrian Empire. Illegitimate worship flourished under his rule (2 Kgs 16:1-19). Ahaz was succeeded by the first of the outstanding reform kings of Judah: Hezekiah. Much of the account of his reign is given to his rebellion against Sennacherib of Assyria: the rebellion, the Assyrian envoys and threats, Isaiah’s assurances of deliverance, and the destruction of the Assyrian armies (18:9–19:37). Hezekiah’s illness was averted after a sign and oracle from Isaiah (20:1-11). As part of what appears to be negotiations toward an anti-Assyrian alliance, Hezekiah also entertained envoys from Babylon, a decision that the prophet announced would be costly (vv 12-21).<\/p>\nHezekiah was followed by Manasseh, who ruled longer than any other king of Judah (a total of 55 years). His reign was marked by great apostasy—apostasy so severe that the compiler of Kings regarded his reign as sufficient reason for the exile that was unavoidable (2 Kgs 21:1-18; cf. 23:26; 24:3-4; Jer 15:1-4). Manasseh was followed by his son Amon, a carbon copy of his father, who ruled only two years before he was deposed by the people (2 Kings 21:19-26).<\/p>\nThe second great reform king of Judah, Josiah, followed. In his reign the Book of the Law was found while the temple was being refurbished; he led the people in a renewal of the covenant and suppressed illegitimate worship (2 Kgs 22:1–23:14). The Assyrian Empire was in rapid decline, so Josiah extended his borders to the north, destroying the altar at Bethel and the high places throughout Samaria (23:15-20). A great Passover celebration was convened in Jerusalem, and further measures were taken to rectify worship (vv 21-25). Josiah tried to block Pharaoh Neco’s foray to assist Assyria, and he lost his life at Megiddo (vv 26-30).<\/p>\nJosiah was the only king of Judah to have three of his sons succeed him. At his death the people put Jehoahaz on the throne, but Neco removed him three months later and took him to Egypt in chains (2 Kgs 23:31-33), replacing him with another son of Josiah, Eliakim, whose name was changed to Jehoiakim (vv 34-37). During his reign, Nebuchadnezzar conquered Judah, and Jehoiakim became his vassal. Late in his life Jehoiakim rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar. Jehoiakim died, leaving his son Jehoiachin to face retaliation from Babylon (24:1-10). Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem; when the city fell, Jehoiachin, the queen mother, the army, and the leaders of the land were carried away captive. Nebuchadnezzar put Mattaniah (uncle of Jehoiachin and third son of Josiah) on the throne, changing his name to Zedekiah (vv 11-17). Nine years later Zedekiah, too, would rebel against Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar besieged the city for two years and, when it fell, utterly destroyed it. Zedekiah’s sons were killed before his eyes, and then his own eyes were put out, and he was taken to Babylon (24:18–25:21). Nebuchadnezzar appointed Gedaliah to rule as governor from nearby Mizpah; he was assassinated, and the conspirators fled to Egypt (25:22-26).<\/p>\nThe book concludes by showing that God had not forgotten his promise to David, mentioning that in captivity Jehoiachin enjoyed favor from the hand of Evil-merodach, successor of Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kgs 25:27-30).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Chronicles, Books of First and Second.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KINGS, Books of First and Second Books continuing the history of the covenant people as recorded in Joshua, Judges, and the books of Samuel. The record in Kings begins with the events at the end of David’s reign (1 Kgs 1–2). It continues through the reign of Solomon (chs 3–11); the histories of the divided kingdoms (1 Kgs 12—2 Kgs 17); and the history of the surviving kingdom in the south, through its fall in 586 BC and the subsequent kindness shown Jehoiachin by Evil-merodach, king of Babylo...","summary_en":"KINGS, Books of First and Second Books continuing the history of the covenant people as recorded in Joshua, Judges, and the books of Samuel. The record in Kings begins with the events at the end of David’s reign (1 Kgs 1–2). It continues through the reign of Solomon (chs 3–11); the histories of the divided kingdoms (1 Kgs 12—2 Kgs 17); and the history of the surviving kingdom in the south, through its fall in 586 BC and the subsequent kindness shown Jehoiachin by Evil-merodach, king of Babylo...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22380,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Lachish","title_en":"Lachish","content_ro":"<h3>LACHISH<\/h3>\nPlace first mentioned in the Bible in connection with Joshua and the Israelite conquest of Palestine. At that time, its king and army were among the coalition of southern Palestinian towns that faced Joshua at Gibeon. After Joshua’s victory, he executed the king of Lachish and later took the town itself (Jos 10:26, 32). Though David probably brought the town to life again, it gained new significance when King Rehoboam of Judah (c. 920 BC<\/span>) made it one of his fortified cities to protect the realm against Egyptian and Philistine attacks (2 Chr 11:9). About a century later, Amaziah, king of Judah, was killed at Lachish, where he had fled to escape from conspirators (2 Kgs 14:19).<\/p>\n\nLachish resisted valiantly when Sennacherib of Assyria invaded in 701 BC<\/span>, but it ultimately fell under furious onslaughts (2 Kgs 18:13-17; Is 36). Reoccupied and rebuilt by the Judeans, it was one of the last outposts of Jerusalem to fall to the Babylonians when Nebuchadnezzar invaded in 588–586 BC<\/span> and brought the southern kingdom to an end (Jer 34:7). In addition to biblical references, the Egyptian Amarna letters and Assyrian records allude to Lachish.<\/p>\nThe location of Lachish was long debated. Originally, it was placed at Umm Lakis, then in 1891 at Tell el-Hesi, and finally in 1929 at Tell ed-Duweir, 30 miles (48.3 kilometers) southwest of Jerusalem and 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) west of Hebron. This last identification has now been confirmed by a variety of indicators.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Lachish Letters.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LACHISH<\/h3>\nPlace first mentioned in the Bible in connection with Joshua and the Israelite conquest of Palestine. At that time, its king and army were among the coalition of southern Palestinian towns that faced Joshua at Gibeon. After Joshua’s victory, he executed the king of Lachish and later took the town itself (Jos 10:26, 32). Though David probably brought the town to life again, it gained new significance when King Rehoboam of Judah (c. 920 BC<\/span>) made it one of his fortified cities to protect the realm against Egyptian and Philistine attacks (2 Chr 11:9). About a century later, Amaziah, king of Judah, was killed at Lachish, where he had fled to escape from conspirators (2 Kgs 14:19).<\/p>\n\nLachish resisted valiantly when Sennacherib of Assyria invaded in 701 BC<\/span>, but it ultimately fell under furious onslaughts (2 Kgs 18:13-17; Is 36). Reoccupied and rebuilt by the Judeans, it was one of the last outposts of Jerusalem to fall to the Babylonians when Nebuchadnezzar invaded in 588–586 BC<\/span> and brought the southern kingdom to an end (Jer 34:7). In addition to biblical references, the Egyptian Amarna letters and Assyrian records allude to Lachish.<\/p>\nThe location of Lachish was long debated. Originally, it was placed at Umm Lakis, then in 1891 at Tell el-Hesi, and finally in 1929 at Tell ed-Duweir, 30 miles (48.3 kilometers) southwest of Jerusalem and 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) west of Hebron. This last identification has now been confirmed by a variety of indicators.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Lachish Letters.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LACHISH Place first mentioned in the Bible in connection with Joshua and the Israelite conquest of Palestine. At that time, its king and army were among the coalition of southern Palestinian towns that faced Joshua at Gibeon. After Joshua’s victory, he executed the king of Lachish and later took the town itself (Jos 10:26, 32). Though David probably brought the town to life again, it gained new significance when King Rehoboam of Judah (c. 920 BC) made it one of his fortified cities to protect...","summary_en":"LACHISH Place first mentioned in the Bible in connection with Joshua and the Israelite conquest of Palestine. At that time, its king and army were among the coalition of southern Palestinian towns that faced Joshua at Gibeon. After Joshua’s victory, he executed the king of Lachish and later took the town itself (Jos 10:26, 32). Though David probably brought the town to life again, it gained new significance when King Rehoboam of Judah (c. 920 BC) made it one of his fortified cities to protect...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":25545,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Micah (Person)","title_en":"Micah (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>MICAH (Person<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Ephraimite judge who had idols made and then hired a Levite to become his priest (Jgs 17–18).<\/li>\n<li>2. Shimei’s descendant from Reuben’s tribe (1 Chr 5:5).<\/li>\n<li>3. Alternate spelling of Mica, Mephibosheth’s son and the great-grandson of King Saul, in 1 Chronicles 8:34-35; 9:40-41. See<\/em> Mica #1.<\/li>\n<li>4. KJV spelling of Mica, Zicri’s son, in 1 Chronicles 9:15. See<\/em> Mica #2.<\/li>\n<li>5. Levite and Uzziel’s son from Kohath’s clan, whose temple responsibilities included care of the furniture and equipment (1 Chr 23:20; 24:24-25).<\/li>\n<li>6. Alternate spelling of Micaiah, Acbor’s father, in 2 Chronicles 34:20. See<\/em> Micaiah #2.<\/li>\n<li>7. Prophet and author of the OT book that bears his name (Mi 1:1). A native of Moresheth, a town about 21 miles (33.8 kilometers) southwest of Jerusalem, Micah prophesied to both northern and southern kingdoms during the reigns of Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah (750–686 BC<\/span>). According to Micah 1:9, he was still prophesying in 701 BC<\/span> when the Assyrian armies under Sennacherib (cf. Is 36–37) besieged Jerusalem. About 100 years later, Micah is used as an example of an early prophet who predicted the destruction of Jerusalem (cf. Jer 26:16-19).<\/li>\nSee also<\/em> Micah, Book of; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MICAH (Person<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Ephraimite judge who had idols made and then hired a Levite to become his priest (Jgs 17–18).<\/li>\n<li>2. Shimei’s descendant from Reuben’s tribe (1 Chr 5:5).<\/li>\n<li>3. Alternate spelling of Mica, Mephibosheth’s son and the great-grandson of King Saul, in 1 Chronicles 8:34-35; 9:40-41. See<\/em> Mica #1.<\/li>\n<li>4. KJV spelling of Mica, Zicri’s son, in 1 Chronicles 9:15. See<\/em> Mica #2.<\/li>\n<li>5. Levite and Uzziel’s son from Kohath’s clan, whose temple responsibilities included care of the furniture and equipment (1 Chr 23:20; 24:24-25).<\/li>\n<li>6. Alternate spelling of Micaiah, Acbor’s father, in 2 Chronicles 34:20. See<\/em> Micaiah #2.<\/li>\n<li>7. Prophet and author of the OT book that bears his name (Mi 1:1). A native of Moresheth, a town about 21 miles (33.8 kilometers) southwest of Jerusalem, Micah prophesied to both northern and southern kingdoms during the reigns of Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah (750–686 BC<\/span>). According to Micah 1:9, he was still prophesying in 701 BC<\/span> when the Assyrian armies under Sennacherib (cf. Is 36–37) besieged Jerusalem. About 100 years later, Micah is used as an example of an early prophet who predicted the destruction of Jerusalem (cf. Jer 26:16-19).<\/li>\nSee also<\/em> Micah, Book of; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MICAH (Person) 1. Ephraimite judge who had idols made and then hired a Levite to become his priest (Jgs 17–18). 2. Shimei’s descendant from Reuben’s tribe (1 Chr 5:5). 3. Alternate spelling of Mica, Mephibosheth’s son and the great-grandson of King Saul, in 1 Chronicles 8:34-35; 9:40-41. See Mica #1. 4. KJV spelling of Mica, Zicri’s son, in 1 Chronicles 9:15. See Mica #2. 5. Levite and Uzziel’s son from Kohath’s clan, whose temple responsibilities included care of the furniture and equipment ...","summary_en":"MICAH (Person) 1. Ephraimite judge who had idols made and then hired a Levite to become his priest (Jgs 17–18). 2. Shimei’s descendant from Reuben’s tribe (1 Chr 5:5). 3. Alternate spelling of Mica, Mephibosheth’s son and the great-grandson of King Saul, in 1 Chronicles 8:34-35; 9:40-41. See Mica #1. 4. KJV spelling of Mica, Zicri’s son, in 1 Chronicles 9:15. See Mica #2. 5. Levite and Uzziel’s son from Kohath’s clan, whose temple responsibilities included care of the furniture and equipment ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":51547,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:1","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:1","content_ro":"36:1–39:8<\/strong> Jerusalem’s rescue from King Sennacherib of Assyria is a focal point of chs 1–39. The Lord promised to rescue his people by remaining present with Jerusalem (see 7:14) and by maintaining a remnant (see study note on 10:20). Even though much of the country was desolate and the population decimated because of their foolish alliance with Assyria (chs 7–8), the Lord preserved his people from total conquest through Hezekiah, a godly king. Hezekiah faced the same test that Ahaz did, a test of trust (note the recurrence of words for trust<\/em> in the Assyrian officer’s challenge in ch 36). But Hezekiah has learned the lessons taught in chs 13–35 and, at least initially, he passed the test. This narrative is duplicated in 2 Kgs 18:13–20:19.<\/p>","content_en":"36:1–39:8<\/strong> Jerusalem’s rescue from King Sennacherib of Assyria is a focal point of chs 1–39. The Lord promised to rescue his people by remaining present with Jerusalem (see 7:14) and by maintaining a remnant (see study note on 10:20). Even though much of the country was desolate and the population decimated because of their foolish alliance with Assyria (chs 7–8), the Lord preserved his people from total conquest through Hezekiah, a godly king. Hezekiah faced the same test that Ahaz did, a test of trust (note the recurrence of words for trust<\/em> in the Assyrian officer’s challenge in ch 36). But Hezekiah has learned the lessons taught in chs 13–35 and, at least initially, he passed the test. This narrative is duplicated in 2 Kgs 18:13–20:19.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:1–39:8 Jerusalem’s rescue from King Sennacherib of Assyria is a focal point of chs 1–39. The Lord promised to rescue his people by remaining present with Jerusalem (see 7:14) and by maintaining a remnant (see study note on 10:20). Even though much of the country was desolate and the population decimated because of their foolish alliance with Assyria (chs 7–8), the Lord preserved his people from total conquest through Hezekiah, a godly king. Hezekiah faced the same test that Ahaz did, a tes...","summary_en":"36:1–39:8 Jerusalem’s rescue from King Sennacherib of Assyria is a focal point of chs 1–39. The Lord promised to rescue his people by remaining present with Jerusalem (see 7:14) and by maintaining a remnant (see study note on 10:20). Even though much of the country was desolate and the population decimated because of their foolish alliance with Assyria (chs 7–8), the Lord preserved his people from total conquest through Hezekiah, a godly king. Hezekiah faced the same test that Ahaz did, a tes...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":51548,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:1","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:1","content_ro":"36:1<\/strong> King Sennacherib of Assyria<\/em> ruled from 705–681 BC<\/span>. Hezekiah, like many other kings under Assyrian vassalage, had reasserted his independence when Sennacherib came to the throne in troubled circumstances. By 701 BC<\/span>, the Assyrian king was ready to punish Hezekiah. Sennacherib recorded having conquered<\/em> forty-six fortified cities and many villages, and having taken 200,146 captives. Hezekiah responded by attempting to appease Sennacherib (see 2 Kgs 18:14-16), but it was too late.<\/p>","content_en":"36:1<\/strong> King Sennacherib of Assyria<\/em> ruled from 705–681 BC<\/span>. Hezekiah, like many other kings under Assyrian vassalage, had reasserted his independence when Sennacherib came to the throne in troubled circumstances. By 701 BC<\/span>, the Assyrian king was ready to punish Hezekiah. Sennacherib recorded having conquered<\/em> forty-six fortified cities and many villages, and having taken 200,146 captives. Hezekiah responded by attempting to appease Sennacherib (see 2 Kgs 18:14-16), but it was too late.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:1 King Sennacherib of Assyria ruled from 705–681 BC. Hezekiah, like many other kings under Assyrian vassalage, had reasserted his independence when Sennacherib came to the throne in troubled circumstances. By 701 BC, the Assyrian king was ready to punish Hezekiah. Sennacherib recorded having conquered forty-six fortified cities and many villages, and having taken 200,146 captives. Hezekiah responded by attempting to appease Sennacherib (see 2 Kgs 18:14-16), but it was too late.","summary_en":"36:1 King Sennacherib of Assyria ruled from 705–681 BC. Hezekiah, like many other kings under Assyrian vassalage, had reasserted his independence when Sennacherib came to the throne in troubled circumstances. By 701 BC, the Assyrian king was ready to punish Hezekiah. Sennacherib recorded having conquered forty-six fortified cities and many villages, and having taken 200,146 captives. Hezekiah responded by attempting to appease Sennacherib (see 2 Kgs 18:14-16), but it was too late.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":79173,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:1","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:1","content_ro":"36:1–39:8<\/strong> Jerusalem’s rescue from King Sennacherib of Assyria is a focal point of chs 1–39. The Lord promised to rescue his people by remaining present with Jerusalem (see 7:14) and by maintaining a remnant (see study note on 10:20). Even though much of the country was desolate and the population decimated because of their foolish alliance with Assyria (chs 7–8), the Lord preserved his people from total conquest through Hezekiah, a godly king. Hezekiah faced the same test that Ahaz did, a test of trust (note the recurrence of words for trust<\/em> in the Assyrian officer’s challenge in ch 36). But Hezekiah has learned the lessons taught in chs 13–35 and, at least initially, he passed the test. This narrative is duplicated in 2 Kgs 18:13–20:19.<\/p>","content_en":"36:1–39:8<\/strong> Jerusalem’s rescue from King Sennacherib of Assyria is a focal point of chs 1–39. The Lord promised to rescue his people by remaining present with Jerusalem (see 7:14) and by maintaining a remnant (see study note on 10:20). Even though much of the country was desolate and the population decimated because of their foolish alliance with Assyria (chs 7–8), the Lord preserved his people from total conquest through Hezekiah, a godly king. Hezekiah faced the same test that Ahaz did, a test of trust (note the recurrence of words for trust<\/em> in the Assyrian officer’s challenge in ch 36). But Hezekiah has learned the lessons taught in chs 13–35 and, at least initially, he passed the test. This narrative is duplicated in 2 Kgs 18:13–20:19.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:1–39:8 Jerusalem’s rescue from King Sennacherib of Assyria is a focal point of chs 1–39. The Lord promised to rescue his people by remaining present with Jerusalem (see 7:14) and by maintaining a remnant (see study note on 10:20). Even though much of the country was desolate and the population decimated because of their foolish alliance with Assyria (chs 7–8), the Lord preserved his people from total conquest through Hezekiah, a godly king. Hezekiah faced the same test that Ahaz did, a tes...","summary_en":"36:1–39:8 Jerusalem’s rescue from King Sennacherib of Assyria is a focal point of chs 1–39. The Lord promised to rescue his people by remaining present with Jerusalem (see 7:14) and by maintaining a remnant (see study note on 10:20). Even though much of the country was desolate and the population decimated because of their foolish alliance with Assyria (chs 7–8), the Lord preserved his people from total conquest through Hezekiah, a godly king. Hezekiah faced the same test that Ahaz did, a tes...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":79174,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:1","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:1","content_ro":"36:1<\/strong> King Sennacherib of Assyria<\/em> ruled from 705–681 BC<\/span>. Hezekiah, like many other kings under Assyrian vassalage, had reasserted his independence when Sennacherib came to the throne in troubled circumstances. By 701 BC<\/span>, the Assyrian king was ready to punish Hezekiah. Sennacherib recorded having conquered<\/em> forty-six fortified cities and many villages, and having taken 200,146 captives. Hezekiah responded by attempting to appease Sennacherib (see 2 Kgs 18:14-16), but it was too late.<\/p>","content_en":"36:1<\/strong> King Sennacherib of Assyria<\/em> ruled from 705–681 BC<\/span>. Hezekiah, like many other kings under Assyrian vassalage, had reasserted his independence when Sennacherib came to the throne in troubled circumstances. By 701 BC<\/span>, the Assyrian king was ready to punish Hezekiah. Sennacherib recorded having conquered<\/em> forty-six fortified cities and many villages, and having taken 200,146 captives. Hezekiah responded by attempting to appease Sennacherib (see 2 Kgs 18:14-16), but it was too late.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:1 King Sennacherib of Assyria ruled from 705–681 BC. Hezekiah, like many other kings under Assyrian vassalage, had reasserted his independence when Sennacherib came to the throne in troubled circumstances. By 701 BC, the Assyrian king was ready to punish Hezekiah. Sennacherib recorded having conquered forty-six fortified cities and many villages, and having taken 200,146 captives. Hezekiah responded by attempting to appease Sennacherib (see 2 Kgs 18:14-16), but it was too late.","summary_en":"36:1 King Sennacherib of Assyria ruled from 705–681 BC. Hezekiah, like many other kings under Assyrian vassalage, had reasserted his independence when Sennacherib came to the throne in troubled circumstances. By 701 BC, the Assyrian king was ready to punish Hezekiah. Sennacherib recorded having conquered forty-six fortified cities and many villages, and having taken 200,146 captives. Hezekiah responded by attempting to appease Sennacherib (see 2 Kgs 18:14-16), but it was too late.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106799,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:1","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:1","content_ro":"36:1–39:8<\/strong> Jerusalem’s rescue from King Sennacherib of Assyria is a focal point of chs 1–39. The Lord promised to rescue his people by remaining present with Jerusalem (see 7:14) and by maintaining a remnant (see study note on 10:20). Even though much of the country was desolate and the population decimated because of their foolish alliance with Assyria (chs 7–8), the Lord preserved his people from total conquest through Hezekiah, a godly king. Hezekiah faced the same test that Ahaz did, a test of trust (note the recurrence of words for trust<\/em> in the Assyrian officer’s challenge in ch 36). But Hezekiah has learned the lessons taught in chs 13–35 and, at least initially, he passed the test. This narrative is duplicated in 2 Kgs 18:13–20:19.<\/p>","content_en":"36:1–39:8<\/strong> Jerusalem’s rescue from King Sennacherib of Assyria is a focal point of chs 1–39. The Lord promised to rescue his people by remaining present with Jerusalem (see 7:14) and by maintaining a remnant (see study note on 10:20). Even though much of the country was desolate and the population decimated because of their foolish alliance with Assyria (chs 7–8), the Lord preserved his people from total conquest through Hezekiah, a godly king. Hezekiah faced the same test that Ahaz did, a test of trust (note the recurrence of words for trust<\/em> in the Assyrian officer’s challenge in ch 36). But Hezekiah has learned the lessons taught in chs 13–35 and, at least initially, he passed the test. This narrative is duplicated in 2 Kgs 18:13–20:19.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:1–39:8 Jerusalem’s rescue from King Sennacherib of Assyria is a focal point of chs 1–39. The Lord promised to rescue his people by remaining present with Jerusalem (see 7:14) and by maintaining a remnant (see study note on 10:20). Even though much of the country was desolate and the population decimated because of their foolish alliance with Assyria (chs 7–8), the Lord preserved his people from total conquest through Hezekiah, a godly king. Hezekiah faced the same test that Ahaz did, a tes...","summary_en":"36:1–39:8 Jerusalem’s rescue from King Sennacherib of Assyria is a focal point of chs 1–39. The Lord promised to rescue his people by remaining present with Jerusalem (see 7:14) and by maintaining a remnant (see study note on 10:20). Even though much of the country was desolate and the population decimated because of their foolish alliance with Assyria (chs 7–8), the Lord preserved his people from total conquest through Hezekiah, a godly king. Hezekiah faced the same test that Ahaz did, a tes...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106800,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:1","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:1","content_ro":"36:1<\/strong> King Sennacherib of Assyria<\/em> ruled from 705–681 BC<\/span>. Hezekiah, like many other kings under Assyrian vassalage, had reasserted his independence when Sennacherib came to the throne in troubled circumstances. By 701 BC<\/span>, the Assyrian king was ready to punish Hezekiah. Sennacherib recorded having conquered<\/em> forty-six fortified cities and many villages, and having taken 200,146 captives. Hezekiah responded by attempting to appease Sennacherib (see 2 Kgs 18:14-16), but it was too late.<\/p>","content_en":"36:1<\/strong> King Sennacherib of Assyria<\/em> ruled from 705–681 BC<\/span>. Hezekiah, like many other kings under Assyrian vassalage, had reasserted his independence when Sennacherib came to the throne in troubled circumstances. By 701 BC<\/span>, the Assyrian king was ready to punish Hezekiah. Sennacherib recorded having conquered<\/em> forty-six fortified cities and many villages, and having taken 200,146 captives. Hezekiah responded by attempting to appease Sennacherib (see 2 Kgs 18:14-16), but it was too late.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:1 King Sennacherib of Assyria ruled from 705–681 BC. Hezekiah, like many other kings under Assyrian vassalage, had reasserted his independence when Sennacherib came to the throne in troubled circumstances. By 701 BC, the Assyrian king was ready to punish Hezekiah. Sennacherib recorded having conquered forty-six fortified cities and many villages, and having taken 200,146 captives. Hezekiah responded by attempting to appease Sennacherib (see 2 Kgs 18:14-16), but it was too late.","summary_en":"36:1 King Sennacherib of Assyria ruled from 705–681 BC. Hezekiah, like many other kings under Assyrian vassalage, had reasserted his independence when Sennacherib came to the throne in troubled circumstances. By 701 BC, the Assyrian king was ready to punish Hezekiah. Sennacherib recorded having conquered forty-six fortified cities and many villages, and having taken 200,146 captives. Hezekiah responded by attempting to appease Sennacherib (see 2 Kgs 18:14-16), but it was too late.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":134425,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:1","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:1","content_ro":"36:1–39:8<\/strong> Jerusalem’s rescue from King Sennacherib of Assyria is a focal point of chs 1–39. The Lord promised to rescue his people by remaining present with Jerusalem (see 7:14) and by maintaining a remnant (see study note on 10:20). Even though much of the country was desolate and the population decimated because of their foolish alliance with Assyria (chs 7–8), the Lord preserved his people from total conquest through Hezekiah, a godly king. Hezekiah faced the same test that Ahaz did, a test of trust (note the recurrence of words for trust<\/em> in the Assyrian officer’s challenge in ch 36). But Hezekiah has learned the lessons taught in chs 13–35 and, at least initially, he passed the test. This narrative is duplicated in 2 Kgs 18:13–20:19.<\/p>","content_en":"36:1–39:8<\/strong> Jerusalem’s rescue from King Sennacherib of Assyria is a focal point of chs 1–39. The Lord promised to rescue his people by remaining present with Jerusalem (see 7:14) and by maintaining a remnant (see study note on 10:20). Even though much of the country was desolate and the population decimated because of their foolish alliance with Assyria (chs 7–8), the Lord preserved his people from total conquest through Hezekiah, a godly king. Hezekiah faced the same test that Ahaz did, a test of trust (note the recurrence of words for trust<\/em> in the Assyrian officer’s challenge in ch 36). But Hezekiah has learned the lessons taught in chs 13–35 and, at least initially, he passed the test. This narrative is duplicated in 2 Kgs 18:13–20:19.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:1–39:8 Jerusalem’s rescue from King Sennacherib of Assyria is a focal point of chs 1–39. The Lord promised to rescue his people by remaining present with Jerusalem (see 7:14) and by maintaining a remnant (see study note on 10:20). Even though much of the country was desolate and the population decimated because of their foolish alliance with Assyria (chs 7–8), the Lord preserved his people from total conquest through Hezekiah, a godly king. Hezekiah faced the same test that Ahaz did, a tes...","summary_en":"36:1–39:8 Jerusalem’s rescue from King Sennacherib of Assyria is a focal point of chs 1–39. The Lord promised to rescue his people by remaining present with Jerusalem (see 7:14) and by maintaining a remnant (see study note on 10:20). Even though much of the country was desolate and the population decimated because of their foolish alliance with Assyria (chs 7–8), the Lord preserved his people from total conquest through Hezekiah, a godly king. Hezekiah faced the same test that Ahaz did, a tes...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":134426,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:1","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:1","content_ro":"36:1<\/strong> King Sennacherib of Assyria<\/em> ruled from 705–681 BC<\/span>. Hezekiah, like many other kings under Assyrian vassalage, had reasserted his independence when Sennacherib came to the throne in troubled circumstances. By 701 BC<\/span>, the Assyrian king was ready to punish Hezekiah. Sennacherib recorded having conquered<\/em> forty-six fortified cities and many villages, and having taken 200,146 captives. Hezekiah responded by attempting to appease Sennacherib (see 2 Kgs 18:14-16), but it was too late.<\/p>","content_en":"36:1<\/strong> King Sennacherib of Assyria<\/em> ruled from 705–681 BC<\/span>. Hezekiah, like many other kings under Assyrian vassalage, had reasserted his independence when Sennacherib came to the throne in troubled circumstances. By 701 BC<\/span>, the Assyrian king was ready to punish Hezekiah. Sennacherib recorded having conquered<\/em> forty-six fortified cities and many villages, and having taken 200,146 captives. Hezekiah responded by attempting to appease Sennacherib (see 2 Kgs 18:14-16), but it was too late.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:1 King Sennacherib of Assyria ruled from 705–681 BC. Hezekiah, like many other kings under Assyrian vassalage, had reasserted his independence when Sennacherib came to the throne in troubled circumstances. By 701 BC, the Assyrian king was ready to punish Hezekiah. Sennacherib recorded having conquered forty-six fortified cities and many villages, and having taken 200,146 captives. Hezekiah responded by attempting to appease Sennacherib (see 2 Kgs 18:14-16), but it was too late.","summary_en":"36:1 King Sennacherib of Assyria ruled from 705–681 BC. Hezekiah, like many other kings under Assyrian vassalage, had reasserted his independence when Sennacherib came to the throne in troubled circumstances. By 701 BC, the Assyrian king was ready to punish Hezekiah. Sennacherib recorded having conquered forty-six fortified cities and many villages, and having taken 200,146 captives. Hezekiah responded by attempting to appease Sennacherib (see 2 Kgs 18:14-16), but it was too late.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":63794,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Trusting God in Isaiah","title_en":"Trusting God in Isaiah","content_ro":"<h3>Trusting God in Isaiah<\/h3>\nThe prophet Isaiah saw that mere humans prove untrustworthy (Isa 2:22). When in distress, the people of Judah often sought help from other nations (e.g., Egypt or Assyria), but Isaiah pointed out that Judah’s success and security was based upon their trust in God (see 8:9-17). King Hezekiah was mocked by the Assyrian army for trusting in God, yet it was that very trust that led to a great victory for God’s people (36:1–37:37).<\/p>\nThose who trust in the Lord live in awe of him (29:23) and are not afraid (see 35:4), knowing that the Lord will be with them (51:12). They respond in praise because they trust in him (12:1-2; 25:9), and they express their trust through obedience to him (26:8). The faithful might feel the effects of God’s judgment on his enemies as they await the Lord’s salvation. Yet they find new strength day by day (40:31) and see themselves ultimately as citizens of God’s city, Zion (see 26:1-3). Those who trust in the Lord have true and lasting inner peace (26:3, 12; 32:17-18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 2:22; 7:4-9; 8:16-20; 12:1-2; 26:2-3, 12; 32:17-18; 35:4; 40:9-11, 28-31; 51:12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Trusting God in Isaiah<\/h3>\nThe prophet Isaiah saw that mere humans prove untrustworthy (Isa 2:22). When in distress, the people of Judah often sought help from other nations (e.g., Egypt or Assyria), but Isaiah pointed out that Judah’s success and security was based upon their trust in God (see 8:9-17). King Hezekiah was mocked by the Assyrian army for trusting in God, yet it was that very trust that led to a great victory for God’s people (36:1–37:37).<\/p>\nThose who trust in the Lord live in awe of him (29:23) and are not afraid (see 35:4), knowing that the Lord will be with them (51:12). They respond in praise because they trust in him (12:1-2; 25:9), and they express their trust through obedience to him (26:8). The faithful might feel the effects of God’s judgment on his enemies as they await the Lord’s salvation. Yet they find new strength day by day (40:31) and see themselves ultimately as citizens of God’s city, Zion (see 26:1-3). Those who trust in the Lord have true and lasting inner peace (26:3, 12; 32:17-18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 2:22; 7:4-9; 8:16-20; 12:1-2; 26:2-3, 12; 32:17-18; 35:4; 40:9-11, 28-31; 51:12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Trusting God in Isaiah The prophet Isaiah saw that mere humans prove untrustworthy (Isa 2:22). When in distress, the people of Judah often sought help from other nations (e.g., Egypt or Assyria), but Isaiah pointed out that Judah’s success and security was based upon their trust in God (see 8:9-17). King Hezekiah was mocked by the Assyrian army for trusting in God, yet it was that very trust that led to a great victory for God’s people (36:1–37:37). Those who trust in the Lord live in awe of ...","summary_en":"Trusting God in Isaiah The prophet Isaiah saw that mere humans prove untrustworthy (Isa 2:22). When in distress, the people of Judah often sought help from other nations (e.g., Egypt or Assyria), but Isaiah pointed out that Judah’s success and security was based upon their trust in God (see 8:9-17). King Hezekiah was mocked by the Assyrian army for trusting in God, yet it was that very trust that led to a great victory for God’s people (36:1–37:37). Those who trust in the Lord live in awe of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64145,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Invasion","title_en":"Invasion","content_ro":"<h3>Invasion<\/h3>\nIn the ancient world, invasions by foreign powers were relatively common. When they occurred, they brought great hardship; and if the invaders succeeded, what followed was staggering: destruction and suffering as the victorious invaders killed the adult men, raped the women, enslaved the children, plundered all that was valuable, and destroyed everything else. The threat of invasion brought terror.<\/p>\nIn the last decades of the monarchy, the people of Judah and Jerusalem were living in the shadow of Babylon and under constant threat of hostile conquest. Over a century earlier, the Assyrians had destroyed the northern kingdom of Israel, had flooded into Judah, and had besieged Jerusalem. These events were still fresh in the memories of the people of Judah. The prophet Jeremiah warned of another impending invasion and the desolation it would bring.<\/p>\nIn times when invasion threatened, it was tempting to look for anything that could prevent the suffering that was coming. Prophets like Jeremiah encouraged God’s people to turn away from false gods and back to the Lord, to stop looking to powerful allies to rescue them and instead look to the Lord for protection. The prophets sometimes also painted a vivid picture of exactly what would happen when invasion came. Their purpose was not to cause terror or to dishearten God’s people, but to turn them back to the Lord so that they would trust in him to save them and experience his rescue. This is precisely how Hezekiah had responded to the Assyrian invasion a century earlier—he turned to the Lord, and the Lord had indeed rescued him and his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 14:1-16; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; 18:13–19:37; Isa 6:8-13; 36:1–37:38; 65:21-23; Jer 6:22-26; 19:7-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Invasion<\/h3>\nIn the ancient world, invasions by foreign powers were relatively common. When they occurred, they brought great hardship; and if the invaders succeeded, what followed was staggering: destruction and suffering as the victorious invaders killed the adult men, raped the women, enslaved the children, plundered all that was valuable, and destroyed everything else. The threat of invasion brought terror.<\/p>\nIn the last decades of the monarchy, the people of Judah and Jerusalem were living in the shadow of Babylon and under constant threat of hostile conquest. Over a century earlier, the Assyrians had destroyed the northern kingdom of Israel, had flooded into Judah, and had besieged Jerusalem. These events were still fresh in the memories of the people of Judah. The prophet Jeremiah warned of another impending invasion and the desolation it would bring.<\/p>\nIn times when invasion threatened, it was tempting to look for anything that could prevent the suffering that was coming. Prophets like Jeremiah encouraged God’s people to turn away from false gods and back to the Lord, to stop looking to powerful allies to rescue them and instead look to the Lord for protection. The prophets sometimes also painted a vivid picture of exactly what would happen when invasion came. Their purpose was not to cause terror or to dishearten God’s people, but to turn them back to the Lord so that they would trust in him to save them and experience his rescue. This is precisely how Hezekiah had responded to the Assyrian invasion a century earlier—he turned to the Lord, and the Lord had indeed rescued him and his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 14:1-16; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; 18:13–19:37; Isa 6:8-13; 36:1–37:38; 65:21-23; Jer 6:22-26; 19:7-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"Invasion In the ancient world, invasions by foreign powers were relatively common. When they occurred, they brought great hardship; and if the invaders succeeded, what followed was staggering: destruction and suffering as the victorious invaders killed the adult men, raped the women, enslaved the children, plundered all that was valuable, and destroyed everything else. The threat of invasion brought terror. In the last decades of the monarchy, the people of Judah and Jerusalem were living in ...","summary_en":"Invasion In the ancient world, invasions by foreign powers were relatively common. When they occurred, they brought great hardship; and if the invaders succeeded, what followed was staggering: destruction and suffering as the victorious invaders killed the adult men, raped the women, enslaved the children, plundered all that was valuable, and destroyed everything else. The threat of invasion brought terror. In the last decades of the monarchy, the people of Judah and Jerusalem were living in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91420,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Trusting God in Isaiah","title_en":"Trusting God in Isaiah","content_ro":"<h3>Trusting God in Isaiah<\/h3>\nThe prophet Isaiah saw that mere humans prove untrustworthy (Isa 2:22). When in distress, the people of Judah often sought help from other nations (e.g., Egypt or Assyria), but Isaiah pointed out that Judah’s success and security was based upon their trust in God (see 8:9-17). King Hezekiah was mocked by the Assyrian army for trusting in God, yet it was that very trust that led to a great victory for God’s people (36:1–37:37).<\/p>\nThose who trust in the Lord live in awe of him (29:23) and are not afraid (see 35:4), knowing that the Lord will be with them (51:12). They respond in praise because they trust in him (12:1-2; 25:9), and they express their trust through obedience to him (26:8). The faithful might feel the effects of God’s judgment on his enemies as they await the Lord’s salvation. Yet they find new strength day by day (40:31) and see themselves ultimately as citizens of God’s city, Zion (see 26:1-3). Those who trust in the Lord have true and lasting inner peace (26:3, 12; 32:17-18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 2:22; 7:4-9; 8:16-20; 12:1-2; 26:2-3, 12; 32:17-18; 35:4; 40:9-11, 28-31; 51:12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Trusting God in Isaiah<\/h3>\nThe prophet Isaiah saw that mere humans prove untrustworthy (Isa 2:22). When in distress, the people of Judah often sought help from other nations (e.g., Egypt or Assyria), but Isaiah pointed out that Judah’s success and security was based upon their trust in God (see 8:9-17). King Hezekiah was mocked by the Assyrian army for trusting in God, yet it was that very trust that led to a great victory for God’s people (36:1–37:37).<\/p>\nThose who trust in the Lord live in awe of him (29:23) and are not afraid (see 35:4), knowing that the Lord will be with them (51:12). They respond in praise because they trust in him (12:1-2; 25:9), and they express their trust through obedience to him (26:8). The faithful might feel the effects of God’s judgment on his enemies as they await the Lord’s salvation. Yet they find new strength day by day (40:31) and see themselves ultimately as citizens of God’s city, Zion (see 26:1-3). Those who trust in the Lord have true and lasting inner peace (26:3, 12; 32:17-18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 2:22; 7:4-9; 8:16-20; 12:1-2; 26:2-3, 12; 32:17-18; 35:4; 40:9-11, 28-31; 51:12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Trusting God in Isaiah The prophet Isaiah saw that mere humans prove untrustworthy (Isa 2:22). When in distress, the people of Judah often sought help from other nations (e.g., Egypt or Assyria), but Isaiah pointed out that Judah’s success and security was based upon their trust in God (see 8:9-17). King Hezekiah was mocked by the Assyrian army for trusting in God, yet it was that very trust that led to a great victory for God’s people (36:1–37:37). Those who trust in the Lord live in awe of ...","summary_en":"Trusting God in Isaiah The prophet Isaiah saw that mere humans prove untrustworthy (Isa 2:22). When in distress, the people of Judah often sought help from other nations (e.g., Egypt or Assyria), but Isaiah pointed out that Judah’s success and security was based upon their trust in God (see 8:9-17). King Hezekiah was mocked by the Assyrian army for trusting in God, yet it was that very trust that led to a great victory for God’s people (36:1–37:37). Those who trust in the Lord live in awe of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91771,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Invasion","title_en":"Invasion","content_ro":"<h3>Invasion<\/h3>\nIn the ancient world, invasions by foreign powers were relatively common. When they occurred, they brought great hardship; and if the invaders succeeded, what followed was staggering: destruction and suffering as the victorious invaders killed the adult men, raped the women, enslaved the children, plundered all that was valuable, and destroyed everything else. The threat of invasion brought terror.<\/p>\nIn the last decades of the monarchy, the people of Judah and Jerusalem were living in the shadow of Babylon and under constant threat of hostile conquest. Over a century earlier, the Assyrians had destroyed the northern kingdom of Israel, had flooded into Judah, and had besieged Jerusalem. These events were still fresh in the memories of the people of Judah. The prophet Jeremiah warned of another impending invasion and the desolation it would bring.<\/p>\nIn times when invasion threatened, it was tempting to look for anything that could prevent the suffering that was coming. Prophets like Jeremiah encouraged God’s people to turn away from false gods and back to the Lord, to stop looking to powerful allies to rescue them and instead look to the Lord for protection. The prophets sometimes also painted a vivid picture of exactly what would happen when invasion came. Their purpose was not to cause terror or to dishearten God’s people, but to turn them back to the Lord so that they would trust in him to save them and experience his rescue. This is precisely how Hezekiah had responded to the Assyrian invasion a century earlier—he turned to the Lord, and the Lord had indeed rescued him and his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 14:1-16; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; 18:13–19:37; Isa 6:8-13; 36:1–37:38; 65:21-23; Jer 6:22-26; 19:7-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Invasion<\/h3>\nIn the ancient world, invasions by foreign powers were relatively common. When they occurred, they brought great hardship; and if the invaders succeeded, what followed was staggering: destruction and suffering as the victorious invaders killed the adult men, raped the women, enslaved the children, plundered all that was valuable, and destroyed everything else. The threat of invasion brought terror.<\/p>\nIn the last decades of the monarchy, the people of Judah and Jerusalem were living in the shadow of Babylon and under constant threat of hostile conquest. Over a century earlier, the Assyrians had destroyed the northern kingdom of Israel, had flooded into Judah, and had besieged Jerusalem. These events were still fresh in the memories of the people of Judah. The prophet Jeremiah warned of another impending invasion and the desolation it would bring.<\/p>\nIn times when invasion threatened, it was tempting to look for anything that could prevent the suffering that was coming. Prophets like Jeremiah encouraged God’s people to turn away from false gods and back to the Lord, to stop looking to powerful allies to rescue them and instead look to the Lord for protection. The prophets sometimes also painted a vivid picture of exactly what would happen when invasion came. Their purpose was not to cause terror or to dishearten God’s people, but to turn them back to the Lord so that they would trust in him to save them and experience his rescue. This is precisely how Hezekiah had responded to the Assyrian invasion a century earlier—he turned to the Lord, and the Lord had indeed rescued him and his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 14:1-16; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; 18:13–19:37; Isa 6:8-13; 36:1–37:38; 65:21-23; Jer 6:22-26; 19:7-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"Invasion In the ancient world, invasions by foreign powers were relatively common. When they occurred, they brought great hardship; and if the invaders succeeded, what followed was staggering: destruction and suffering as the victorious invaders killed the adult men, raped the women, enslaved the children, plundered all that was valuable, and destroyed everything else. The threat of invasion brought terror. In the last decades of the monarchy, the people of Judah and Jerusalem were living in ...","summary_en":"Invasion In the ancient world, invasions by foreign powers were relatively common. When they occurred, they brought great hardship; and if the invaders succeeded, what followed was staggering: destruction and suffering as the victorious invaders killed the adult men, raped the women, enslaved the children, plundered all that was valuable, and destroyed everything else. The threat of invasion brought terror. In the last decades of the monarchy, the people of Judah and Jerusalem were living in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119046,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Trusting God in Isaiah","title_en":"Trusting God in Isaiah","content_ro":"<h3>Trusting God in Isaiah<\/h3>\nThe prophet Isaiah saw that mere humans prove untrustworthy (Isa 2:22). When in distress, the people of Judah often sought help from other nations (e.g., Egypt or Assyria), but Isaiah pointed out that Judah’s success and security was based upon their trust in God (see 8:9-17). King Hezekiah was mocked by the Assyrian army for trusting in God, yet it was that very trust that led to a great victory for God’s people (36:1–37:37).<\/p>\nThose who trust in the Lord live in awe of him (29:23) and are not afraid (see 35:4), knowing that the Lord will be with them (51:12). They respond in praise because they trust in him (12:1-2; 25:9), and they express their trust through obedience to him (26:8). The faithful might feel the effects of God’s judgment on his enemies as they await the Lord’s salvation. Yet they find new strength day by day (40:31) and see themselves ultimately as citizens of God’s city, Zion (see 26:1-3). Those who trust in the Lord have true and lasting inner peace (26:3, 12; 32:17-18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 2:22; 7:4-9; 8:16-20; 12:1-2; 26:2-3, 12; 32:17-18; 35:4; 40:9-11, 28-31; 51:12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Trusting God in Isaiah<\/h3>\nThe prophet Isaiah saw that mere humans prove untrustworthy (Isa 2:22). When in distress, the people of Judah often sought help from other nations (e.g., Egypt or Assyria), but Isaiah pointed out that Judah’s success and security was based upon their trust in God (see 8:9-17). King Hezekiah was mocked by the Assyrian army for trusting in God, yet it was that very trust that led to a great victory for God’s people (36:1–37:37).<\/p>\nThose who trust in the Lord live in awe of him (29:23) and are not afraid (see 35:4), knowing that the Lord will be with them (51:12). They respond in praise because they trust in him (12:1-2; 25:9), and they express their trust through obedience to him (26:8). The faithful might feel the effects of God’s judgment on his enemies as they await the Lord’s salvation. Yet they find new strength day by day (40:31) and see themselves ultimately as citizens of God’s city, Zion (see 26:1-3). Those who trust in the Lord have true and lasting inner peace (26:3, 12; 32:17-18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 2:22; 7:4-9; 8:16-20; 12:1-2; 26:2-3, 12; 32:17-18; 35:4; 40:9-11, 28-31; 51:12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Trusting God in Isaiah The prophet Isaiah saw that mere humans prove untrustworthy (Isa 2:22). When in distress, the people of Judah often sought help from other nations (e.g., Egypt or Assyria), but Isaiah pointed out that Judah’s success and security was based upon their trust in God (see 8:9-17). King Hezekiah was mocked by the Assyrian army for trusting in God, yet it was that very trust that led to a great victory for God’s people (36:1–37:37). Those who trust in the Lord live in awe of ...","summary_en":"Trusting God in Isaiah The prophet Isaiah saw that mere humans prove untrustworthy (Isa 2:22). When in distress, the people of Judah often sought help from other nations (e.g., Egypt or Assyria), but Isaiah pointed out that Judah’s success and security was based upon their trust in God (see 8:9-17). King Hezekiah was mocked by the Assyrian army for trusting in God, yet it was that very trust that led to a great victory for God’s people (36:1–37:37). Those who trust in the Lord live in awe of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119397,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Invasion","title_en":"Invasion","content_ro":"<h3>Invasion<\/h3>\nIn the ancient world, invasions by foreign powers were relatively common. When they occurred, they brought great hardship; and if the invaders succeeded, what followed was staggering: destruction and suffering as the victorious invaders killed the adult men, raped the women, enslaved the children, plundered all that was valuable, and destroyed everything else. The threat of invasion brought terror.<\/p>\nIn the last decades of the monarchy, the people of Judah and Jerusalem were living in the shadow of Babylon and under constant threat of hostile conquest. Over a century earlier, the Assyrians had destroyed the northern kingdom of Israel, had flooded into Judah, and had besieged Jerusalem. These events were still fresh in the memories of the people of Judah. The prophet Jeremiah warned of another impending invasion and the desolation it would bring.<\/p>\nIn times when invasion threatened, it was tempting to look for anything that could prevent the suffering that was coming. Prophets like Jeremiah encouraged God’s people to turn away from false gods and back to the Lord, to stop looking to powerful allies to rescue them and instead look to the Lord for protection. The prophets sometimes also painted a vivid picture of exactly what would happen when invasion came. Their purpose was not to cause terror or to dishearten God’s people, but to turn them back to the Lord so that they would trust in him to save them and experience his rescue. This is precisely how Hezekiah had responded to the Assyrian invasion a century earlier—he turned to the Lord, and the Lord had indeed rescued him and his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 14:1-16; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; 18:13–19:37; Isa 6:8-13; 36:1–37:38; 65:21-23; Jer 6:22-26; 19:7-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Invasion<\/h3>\nIn the ancient world, invasions by foreign powers were relatively common. When they occurred, they brought great hardship; and if the invaders succeeded, what followed was staggering: destruction and suffering as the victorious invaders killed the adult men, raped the women, enslaved the children, plundered all that was valuable, and destroyed everything else. The threat of invasion brought terror.<\/p>\nIn the last decades of the monarchy, the people of Judah and Jerusalem were living in the shadow of Babylon and under constant threat of hostile conquest. Over a century earlier, the Assyrians had destroyed the northern kingdom of Israel, had flooded into Judah, and had besieged Jerusalem. These events were still fresh in the memories of the people of Judah. The prophet Jeremiah warned of another impending invasion and the desolation it would bring.<\/p>\nIn times when invasion threatened, it was tempting to look for anything that could prevent the suffering that was coming. Prophets like Jeremiah encouraged God’s people to turn away from false gods and back to the Lord, to stop looking to powerful allies to rescue them and instead look to the Lord for protection. The prophets sometimes also painted a vivid picture of exactly what would happen when invasion came. Their purpose was not to cause terror or to dishearten God’s people, but to turn them back to the Lord so that they would trust in him to save them and experience his rescue. This is precisely how Hezekiah had responded to the Assyrian invasion a century earlier—he turned to the Lord, and the Lord had indeed rescued him and his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 14:1-16; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; 18:13–19:37; Isa 6:8-13; 36:1–37:38; 65:21-23; Jer 6:22-26; 19:7-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"Invasion In the ancient world, invasions by foreign powers were relatively common. When they occurred, they brought great hardship; and if the invaders succeeded, what followed was staggering: destruction and suffering as the victorious invaders killed the adult men, raped the women, enslaved the children, plundered all that was valuable, and destroyed everything else. The threat of invasion brought terror. In the last decades of the monarchy, the people of Judah and Jerusalem were living in ...","summary_en":"Invasion In the ancient world, invasions by foreign powers were relatively common. When they occurred, they brought great hardship; and if the invaders succeeded, what followed was staggering: destruction and suffering as the victorious invaders killed the adult men, raped the women, enslaved the children, plundered all that was valuable, and destroyed everything else. The threat of invasion brought terror. In the last decades of the monarchy, the people of Judah and Jerusalem were living in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146672,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Trusting God in Isaiah","title_en":"Trusting God in Isaiah","content_ro":"<h3>Trusting God in Isaiah<\/h3>\nThe prophet Isaiah saw that mere humans prove untrustworthy (Isa 2:22). When in distress, the people of Judah often sought help from other nations (e.g., Egypt or Assyria), but Isaiah pointed out that Judah’s success and security was based upon their trust in God (see 8:9-17). King Hezekiah was mocked by the Assyrian army for trusting in God, yet it was that very trust that led to a great victory for God’s people (36:1–37:37).<\/p>\nThose who trust in the Lord live in awe of him (29:23) and are not afraid (see 35:4), knowing that the Lord will be with them (51:12). They respond in praise because they trust in him (12:1-2; 25:9), and they express their trust through obedience to him (26:8). The faithful might feel the effects of God’s judgment on his enemies as they await the Lord’s salvation. Yet they find new strength day by day (40:31) and see themselves ultimately as citizens of God’s city, Zion (see 26:1-3). Those who trust in the Lord have true and lasting inner peace (26:3, 12; 32:17-18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 2:22; 7:4-9; 8:16-20; 12:1-2; 26:2-3, 12; 32:17-18; 35:4; 40:9-11, 28-31; 51:12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Trusting God in Isaiah<\/h3>\nThe prophet Isaiah saw that mere humans prove untrustworthy (Isa 2:22). When in distress, the people of Judah often sought help from other nations (e.g., Egypt or Assyria), but Isaiah pointed out that Judah’s success and security was based upon their trust in God (see 8:9-17). King Hezekiah was mocked by the Assyrian army for trusting in God, yet it was that very trust that led to a great victory for God’s people (36:1–37:37).<\/p>\nThose who trust in the Lord live in awe of him (29:23) and are not afraid (see 35:4), knowing that the Lord will be with them (51:12). They respond in praise because they trust in him (12:1-2; 25:9), and they express their trust through obedience to him (26:8). The faithful might feel the effects of God’s judgment on his enemies as they await the Lord’s salvation. Yet they find new strength day by day (40:31) and see themselves ultimately as citizens of God’s city, Zion (see 26:1-3). Those who trust in the Lord have true and lasting inner peace (26:3, 12; 32:17-18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 2:22; 7:4-9; 8:16-20; 12:1-2; 26:2-3, 12; 32:17-18; 35:4; 40:9-11, 28-31; 51:12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Trusting God in Isaiah The prophet Isaiah saw that mere humans prove untrustworthy (Isa 2:22). When in distress, the people of Judah often sought help from other nations (e.g., Egypt or Assyria), but Isaiah pointed out that Judah’s success and security was based upon their trust in God (see 8:9-17). King Hezekiah was mocked by the Assyrian army for trusting in God, yet it was that very trust that led to a great victory for God’s people (36:1–37:37). Those who trust in the Lord live in awe of ...","summary_en":"Trusting God in Isaiah The prophet Isaiah saw that mere humans prove untrustworthy (Isa 2:22). When in distress, the people of Judah often sought help from other nations (e.g., Egypt or Assyria), but Isaiah pointed out that Judah’s success and security was based upon their trust in God (see 8:9-17). King Hezekiah was mocked by the Assyrian army for trusting in God, yet it was that very trust that led to a great victory for God’s people (36:1–37:37). Those who trust in the Lord live in awe of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147023,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Invasion","title_en":"Invasion","content_ro":"<h3>Invasion<\/h3>\nIn the ancient world, invasions by foreign powers were relatively common. When they occurred, they brought great hardship; and if the invaders succeeded, what followed was staggering: destruction and suffering as the victorious invaders killed the adult men, raped the women, enslaved the children, plundered all that was valuable, and destroyed everything else. The threat of invasion brought terror.<\/p>\nIn the last decades of the monarchy, the people of Judah and Jerusalem were living in the shadow of Babylon and under constant threat of hostile conquest. Over a century earlier, the Assyrians had destroyed the northern kingdom of Israel, had flooded into Judah, and had besieged Jerusalem. These events were still fresh in the memories of the people of Judah. The prophet Jeremiah warned of another impending invasion and the desolation it would bring.<\/p>\nIn times when invasion threatened, it was tempting to look for anything that could prevent the suffering that was coming. Prophets like Jeremiah encouraged God’s people to turn away from false gods and back to the Lord, to stop looking to powerful allies to rescue them and instead look to the Lord for protection. The prophets sometimes also painted a vivid picture of exactly what would happen when invasion came. Their purpose was not to cause terror or to dishearten God’s people, but to turn them back to the Lord so that they would trust in him to save them and experience his rescue. This is precisely how Hezekiah had responded to the Assyrian invasion a century earlier—he turned to the Lord, and the Lord had indeed rescued him and his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 14:1-16; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; 18:13–19:37; Isa 6:8-13; 36:1–37:38; 65:21-23; Jer 6:22-26; 19:7-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Invasion<\/h3>\nIn the ancient world, invasions by foreign powers were relatively common. When they occurred, they brought great hardship; and if the invaders succeeded, what followed was staggering: destruction and suffering as the victorious invaders killed the adult men, raped the women, enslaved the children, plundered all that was valuable, and destroyed everything else. The threat of invasion brought terror.<\/p>\nIn the last decades of the monarchy, the people of Judah and Jerusalem were living in the shadow of Babylon and under constant threat of hostile conquest. Over a century earlier, the Assyrians had destroyed the northern kingdom of Israel, had flooded into Judah, and had besieged Jerusalem. These events were still fresh in the memories of the people of Judah. The prophet Jeremiah warned of another impending invasion and the desolation it would bring.<\/p>\nIn times when invasion threatened, it was tempting to look for anything that could prevent the suffering that was coming. Prophets like Jeremiah encouraged God’s people to turn away from false gods and back to the Lord, to stop looking to powerful allies to rescue them and instead look to the Lord for protection. The prophets sometimes also painted a vivid picture of exactly what would happen when invasion came. Their purpose was not to cause terror or to dishearten God’s people, but to turn them back to the Lord so that they would trust in him to save them and experience his rescue. This is precisely how Hezekiah had responded to the Assyrian invasion a century earlier—he turned to the Lord, and the Lord had indeed rescued him and his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 14:1-16; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; 18:13–19:37; Isa 6:8-13; 36:1–37:38; 65:21-23; Jer 6:22-26; 19:7-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"Invasion In the ancient world, invasions by foreign powers were relatively common. When they occurred, they brought great hardship; and if the invaders succeeded, what followed was staggering: destruction and suffering as the victorious invaders killed the adult men, raped the women, enslaved the children, plundered all that was valuable, and destroyed everything else. The threat of invasion brought terror. In the last decades of the monarchy, the people of Judah and Jerusalem were living in ...","summary_en":"Invasion In the ancient world, invasions by foreign powers were relatively common. When they occurred, they brought great hardship; and if the invaders succeeded, what followed was staggering: destruction and suffering as the victorious invaders killed the adult men, raped the women, enslaved the children, plundered all that was valuable, and destroyed everything else. The threat of invasion brought terror. In the last decades of the monarchy, the people of Judah and Jerusalem were living in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":7382,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Conduit*","title_en":"Conduit*","content_ro":"<h3>CONDUIT*<\/h3>\nWater tunnel or channel. In the OT the Hebrew word can mean rivulets in the ground made by rain (Jb 38:25, “channel”; Ez 31:4, “stream”) or a simple trench such as Elijah dug around the altar in his encounter with the prophets of Baal, a Canaanite fertility god (1 Kgs 18:31-38).<\/p>\nA water tunnel was constructed during King Hezekiah’s reign to bring water from the Gihon Spring, once located outside the walls of Jerusalem, to inside the city proper (“pool,” 2 Kgs 18:17; 20:20; Neh 2:14; Is 7:3; 22:9-11; 36:2). The mouth of the spring was sealed and its water diverted into the city through the conduit to keep Israel’s enemies from using the spring during a siege of the city. That tunnel expanded a tunnel begun by earlier inhabitants of the city, the Jebusites. David and his men may have entered Jerusalem through that first tunnel to overthrow the Jebusites (2 Sm 5:8).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Architecture; Siloam, Pool of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CONDUIT*<\/h3>\nWater tunnel or channel. In the OT the Hebrew word can mean rivulets in the ground made by rain (Jb 38:25, “channel”; Ez 31:4, “stream”) or a simple trench such as Elijah dug around the altar in his encounter with the prophets of Baal, a Canaanite fertility god (1 Kgs 18:31-38).<\/p>\nA water tunnel was constructed during King Hezekiah’s reign to bring water from the Gihon Spring, once located outside the walls of Jerusalem, to inside the city proper (“pool,” 2 Kgs 18:17; 20:20; Neh 2:14; Is 7:3; 22:9-11; 36:2). The mouth of the spring was sealed and its water diverted into the city through the conduit to keep Israel’s enemies from using the spring during a siege of the city. That tunnel expanded a tunnel begun by earlier inhabitants of the city, the Jebusites. David and his men may have entered Jerusalem through that first tunnel to overthrow the Jebusites (2 Sm 5:8).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Architecture; Siloam, Pool of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CONDUIT* Water tunnel or channel. In the OT the Hebrew word can mean rivulets in the ground made by rain (Jb 38:25, “channel”; Ez 31:4, “stream”) or a simple trench such as Elijah dug around the altar in his encounter with the prophets of Baal, a Canaanite fertility god (1 Kgs 18:31-38). A water tunnel was constructed during King Hezekiah’s reign to bring water from the Gihon Spring, once located outside the walls of Jerusalem, to inside the city proper (“pool,” 2 Kgs 18:17; 20:20; Neh 2:14; ...","summary_en":"CONDUIT* Water tunnel or channel. In the OT the Hebrew word can mean rivulets in the ground made by rain (Jb 38:25, “channel”; Ez 31:4, “stream”) or a simple trench such as Elijah dug around the altar in his encounter with the prophets of Baal, a Canaanite fertility god (1 Kgs 18:31-38). A water tunnel was constructed during King Hezekiah’s reign to bring water from the Gihon Spring, once located outside the walls of Jerusalem, to inside the city proper (“pool,” 2 Kgs 18:17; 20:20; Neh 2:14; ...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":8303,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Cup-Bearer","title_en":"Cup-Bearer","content_ro":"<h3>CUP-BEARER<\/h3>\nOfficial whose primary duty was to taste the wine served to the king as a precaution against poisoning. Cup-bearers frequented the courts of kings and high officials in antiquity (1 Kgs 10:5). These men were close to those in authority and sometimes exercised considerable influence. Generally several of them served the king with the “chief cup-bearer” (butler) at their head (Gn 40:1-23). Solomon’s court included cup-bearers (2 Chr 9:4), and Nehemiah was the king’s cup-bearer (Neh 1:11–2:1); Rabshakeh may have been a cup-bearer (2 Kgs 18:13-19; Is 36:2).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CUP-BEARER<\/h3>\nOfficial whose primary duty was to taste the wine served to the king as a precaution against poisoning. Cup-bearers frequented the courts of kings and high officials in antiquity (1 Kgs 10:5). These men were close to those in authority and sometimes exercised considerable influence. Generally several of them served the king with the “chief cup-bearer” (butler) at their head (Gn 40:1-23). Solomon’s court included cup-bearers (2 Chr 9:4), and Nehemiah was the king’s cup-bearer (Neh 1:11–2:1); Rabshakeh may have been a cup-bearer (2 Kgs 18:13-19; Is 36:2).<\/p>","summary_ro":"CUP-BEARER Official whose primary duty was to taste the wine served to the king as a precaution against poisoning. Cup-bearers frequented the courts of kings and high officials in antiquity (1 Kgs 10:5). These men were close to those in authority and sometimes exercised considerable influence. Generally several of them served the king with the “chief cup-bearer” (butler) at their head (Gn 40:1-23). Solomon’s court included cup-bearers (2 Chr 9:4), and Nehemiah was the king’s cup-bearer (Neh 1...","summary_en":"CUP-BEARER Official whose primary duty was to taste the wine served to the king as a precaution against poisoning. Cup-bearers frequented the courts of kings and high officials in antiquity (1 Kgs 10:5). These men were close to those in authority and sometimes exercised considerable influence. Generally several of them served the king with the “chief cup-bearer” (butler) at their head (Gn 40:1-23). Solomon’s court included cup-bearers (2 Chr 9:4), and Nehemiah was the king’s cup-bearer (Neh 1...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":12844,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Fuller*","title_en":"Fuller*","content_ro":"<h3>FULLER*<\/h3>\nOne who cleans, shrinks, thickens, or dyes cloth or newly shorn wool. It was the fuller’s job to prepare fibers used for weaving by cleansing them of oil and other impurities. The cleansing materials the fuller used were white clay, urine, and ashes of special plants. The fuller’s plant lay outside the town because of offensive odors and because space was needed for spreading the fibers to dry, as was the case of the Fuller’s Field outside Jerusalem in Isaiah’s day (2 Kgs 18:17; Is 7:3; 36:2).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FULLER*<\/h3>\nOne who cleans, shrinks, thickens, or dyes cloth or newly shorn wool. It was the fuller’s job to prepare fibers used for weaving by cleansing them of oil and other impurities. The cleansing materials the fuller used were white clay, urine, and ashes of special plants. The fuller’s plant lay outside the town because of offensive odors and because space was needed for spreading the fibers to dry, as was the case of the Fuller’s Field outside Jerusalem in Isaiah’s day (2 Kgs 18:17; Is 7:3; 36:2).<\/p>","summary_ro":"FULLER* One who cleans, shrinks, thickens, or dyes cloth or newly shorn wool. It was the fuller’s job to prepare fibers used for weaving by cleansing them of oil and other impurities. The cleansing materials the fuller used were white clay, urine, and ashes of special plants. The fuller’s plant lay outside the town because of offensive odors and because space was needed for spreading the fibers to dry, as was the case of the Fuller’s Field outside Jerusalem in Isaiah’s day (2 Kgs 18:17; Is 7:...","summary_en":"FULLER* One who cleans, shrinks, thickens, or dyes cloth or newly shorn wool. It was the fuller’s job to prepare fibers used for weaving by cleansing them of oil and other impurities. The cleansing materials the fuller used were white clay, urine, and ashes of special plants. The fuller’s plant lay outside the town because of offensive odors and because space was needed for spreading the fibers to dry, as was the case of the Fuller’s Field outside Jerusalem in Isaiah’s day (2 Kgs 18:17; Is 7:...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":12847,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Fuller’s Field*","title_en":"Fuller’s Field*","content_ro":"<h3>FULLER’S FIELD*<\/h3>\nPlace outside Jerusalem that was linked to a spring or pool by a causeway or aqueduct (2 Kgs 18:17; Is 7:3; 36:2). It has been generally identified with an area near En-rogel (“spring of the fuller”). The spring was south of Jerusalem in the Kidron Valley. It was originally the tribal boundary between Judah and Benjamin (Jos 15:7; 18:16). When Absalom rebelled and King David fled from Jerusalem, two of David’s men stayed at En-rogel to gather information about the rebellion (2 Sm 17:17).<\/p>\nEn-rogel has been identified with the modern Bir Attub, or “Job’s Well,” on the left bank of Wadi en-Nar. The well sinks deep into the rock, reaches an underground stream, and gushes forth following rainfalls.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jerusalem.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FULLER’S FIELD*<\/h3>\nPlace outside Jerusalem that was linked to a spring or pool by a causeway or aqueduct (2 Kgs 18:17; Is 7:3; 36:2). It has been generally identified with an area near En-rogel (“spring of the fuller”). The spring was south of Jerusalem in the Kidron Valley. It was originally the tribal boundary between Judah and Benjamin (Jos 15:7; 18:16). When Absalom rebelled and King David fled from Jerusalem, two of David’s men stayed at En-rogel to gather information about the rebellion (2 Sm 17:17).<\/p>\nEn-rogel has been identified with the modern Bir Attub, or “Job’s Well,” on the left bank of Wadi en-Nar. The well sinks deep into the rock, reaches an underground stream, and gushes forth following rainfalls.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jerusalem.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FULLER’S FIELD* Place outside Jerusalem that was linked to a spring or pool by a causeway or aqueduct (2 Kgs 18:17; Is 7:3; 36:2). It has been generally identified with an area near En-rogel (“spring of the fuller”). The spring was south of Jerusalem in the Kidron Valley. It was originally the tribal boundary between Judah and Benjamin (Jos 15:7; 18:16). When Absalom rebelled and King David fled from Jerusalem, two of David’s men stayed at En-rogel to gather information about the rebellion (2...","summary_en":"FULLER’S FIELD* Place outside Jerusalem that was linked to a spring or pool by a causeway or aqueduct (2 Kgs 18:17; Is 7:3; 36:2). It has been generally identified with an area near En-rogel (“spring of the fuller”). The spring was south of Jerusalem in the Kidron Valley. It was originally the tribal boundary between Judah and Benjamin (Jos 15:7; 18:16). When Absalom rebelled and King David fled from Jerusalem, two of David’s men stayed at En-rogel to gather information about the rebellion (2...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32290,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Rabshakeh*","title_en":"Rabshakeh*","content_ro":"<h3>RABSHAKEH*<\/h3>\nHigh Assyrian official, originally a cupbearer or chamberlain, but later a powerful palace official. The rabshakeh was the emissary of Sennacherib, who insultingly demanded that Hezekiah and Jerusalem abandon their reliance on both Egypt and God and surrender to Assyria. Hezekiah refused; the rabshakeh returned to find his king at war against Libnah (2 Kgs 18:17-37; 19:4, 8; Is 36:2-22; 37:4, 8).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RABSHAKEH*<\/h3>\nHigh Assyrian official, originally a cupbearer or chamberlain, but later a powerful palace official. The rabshakeh was the emissary of Sennacherib, who insultingly demanded that Hezekiah and Jerusalem abandon their reliance on both Egypt and God and surrender to Assyria. Hezekiah refused; the rabshakeh returned to find his king at war against Libnah (2 Kgs 18:17-37; 19:4, 8; Is 36:2-22; 37:4, 8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"RABSHAKEH* High Assyrian official, originally a cupbearer or chamberlain, but later a powerful palace official. The rabshakeh was the emissary of Sennacherib, who insultingly demanded that Hezekiah and Jerusalem abandon their reliance on both Egypt and God and surrender to Assyria. Hezekiah refused; the rabshakeh returned to find his king at war against Libnah (2 Kgs 18:17-37; 19:4, 8; Is 36:2-22; 37:4, 8).","summary_en":"RABSHAKEH* High Assyrian official, originally a cupbearer or chamberlain, but later a powerful palace official. The rabshakeh was the emissary of Sennacherib, who insultingly demanded that Hezekiah and Jerusalem abandon their reliance on both Egypt and God and surrender to Assyria. Hezekiah refused; the rabshakeh returned to find his king at war against Libnah (2 Kgs 18:17-37; 19:4, 8; Is 36:2-22; 37:4, 8).","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":51549,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:2","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:2","content_ro":"36:2<\/strong> Lachish<\/em> was a city overlooking the low-lying hills to the west of Jerusalem. It had to be taken before the final attack on Jerusalem could be launched. • the aqueduct that feeds water into the upper pool:<\/em> This was a pool on the north side of Jerusalem, not the Gihon Spring in the Kidron valley. • Isaiah had met Ahaz on this same road leading to the field where cloth is washed<\/em> some thirty-three years earlier (see Isa 7:3). At that time he had challenged Ahaz to trust God. However, Ahaz trusted Assyria instead, and this desperate situation was a result. Now the challenge to trust God came from mocking, foreign lips (see 28:11-13).<\/p>","content_en":"36:2<\/strong> Lachish<\/em> was a city overlooking the low-lying hills to the west of Jerusalem. It had to be taken before the final attack on Jerusalem could be launched. • the aqueduct that feeds water into the upper pool:<\/em> This was a pool on the north side of Jerusalem, not the Gihon Spring in the Kidron valley. • Isaiah had met Ahaz on this same road leading to the field where cloth is washed<\/em> some thirty-three years earlier (see Isa 7:3). At that time he had challenged Ahaz to trust God. However, Ahaz trusted Assyria instead, and this desperate situation was a result. Now the challenge to trust God came from mocking, foreign lips (see 28:11-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:2 Lachish was a city overlooking the low-lying hills to the west of Jerusalem. It had to be taken before the final attack on Jerusalem could be launched. • the aqueduct that feeds water into the upper pool: This was a pool on the north side of Jerusalem, not the Gihon Spring in the Kidron valley. • Isaiah had met Ahaz on this same road leading to the field where cloth is washed some thirty-three years earlier (see Isa 7:3). At that time he had challenged Ahaz to trust God. However, Ahaz tr...","summary_en":"36:2 Lachish was a city overlooking the low-lying hills to the west of Jerusalem. It had to be taken before the final attack on Jerusalem could be launched. • the aqueduct that feeds water into the upper pool: This was a pool on the north side of Jerusalem, not the Gihon Spring in the Kidron valley. • Isaiah had met Ahaz on this same road leading to the field where cloth is washed some thirty-three years earlier (see Isa 7:3). At that time he had challenged Ahaz to trust God. However, Ahaz tr...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":79175,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:2","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:2","content_ro":"36:2<\/strong> Lachish<\/em> was a city overlooking the low-lying hills to the west of Jerusalem. It had to be taken before the final attack on Jerusalem could be launched. • the aqueduct that feeds water into the upper pool:<\/em> This was a pool on the north side of Jerusalem, not the Gihon Spring in the Kidron valley. • Isaiah had met Ahaz on this same road leading to the field where cloth is washed<\/em> some thirty-three years earlier (see Isa 7:3). At that time he had challenged Ahaz to trust God. However, Ahaz trusted Assyria instead, and this desperate situation was a result. Now the challenge to trust God came from mocking, foreign lips (see 28:11-13).<\/p>","content_en":"36:2<\/strong> Lachish<\/em> was a city overlooking the low-lying hills to the west of Jerusalem. It had to be taken before the final attack on Jerusalem could be launched. • the aqueduct that feeds water into the upper pool:<\/em> This was a pool on the north side of Jerusalem, not the Gihon Spring in the Kidron valley. • Isaiah had met Ahaz on this same road leading to the field where cloth is washed<\/em> some thirty-three years earlier (see Isa 7:3). At that time he had challenged Ahaz to trust God. However, Ahaz trusted Assyria instead, and this desperate situation was a result. Now the challenge to trust God came from mocking, foreign lips (see 28:11-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:2 Lachish was a city overlooking the low-lying hills to the west of Jerusalem. It had to be taken before the final attack on Jerusalem could be launched. • the aqueduct that feeds water into the upper pool: This was a pool on the north side of Jerusalem, not the Gihon Spring in the Kidron valley. • Isaiah had met Ahaz on this same road leading to the field where cloth is washed some thirty-three years earlier (see Isa 7:3). At that time he had challenged Ahaz to trust God. However, Ahaz tr...","summary_en":"36:2 Lachish was a city overlooking the low-lying hills to the west of Jerusalem. It had to be taken before the final attack on Jerusalem could be launched. • the aqueduct that feeds water into the upper pool: This was a pool on the north side of Jerusalem, not the Gihon Spring in the Kidron valley. • Isaiah had met Ahaz on this same road leading to the field where cloth is washed some thirty-three years earlier (see Isa 7:3). At that time he had challenged Ahaz to trust God. However, Ahaz tr...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106801,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:2","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:2","content_ro":"36:2<\/strong> Lachish<\/em> was a city overlooking the low-lying hills to the west of Jerusalem. It had to be taken before the final attack on Jerusalem could be launched. • the aqueduct that feeds water into the upper pool:<\/em> This was a pool on the north side of Jerusalem, not the Gihon Spring in the Kidron valley. • Isaiah had met Ahaz on this same road leading to the field where cloth is washed<\/em> some thirty-three years earlier (see Isa 7:3). At that time he had challenged Ahaz to trust God. However, Ahaz trusted Assyria instead, and this desperate situation was a result. Now the challenge to trust God came from mocking, foreign lips (see 28:11-13).<\/p>","content_en":"36:2<\/strong> Lachish<\/em> was a city overlooking the low-lying hills to the west of Jerusalem. It had to be taken before the final attack on Jerusalem could be launched. • the aqueduct that feeds water into the upper pool:<\/em> This was a pool on the north side of Jerusalem, not the Gihon Spring in the Kidron valley. • Isaiah had met Ahaz on this same road leading to the field where cloth is washed<\/em> some thirty-three years earlier (see Isa 7:3). At that time he had challenged Ahaz to trust God. However, Ahaz trusted Assyria instead, and this desperate situation was a result. Now the challenge to trust God came from mocking, foreign lips (see 28:11-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:2 Lachish was a city overlooking the low-lying hills to the west of Jerusalem. It had to be taken before the final attack on Jerusalem could be launched. • the aqueduct that feeds water into the upper pool: This was a pool on the north side of Jerusalem, not the Gihon Spring in the Kidron valley. • Isaiah had met Ahaz on this same road leading to the field where cloth is washed some thirty-three years earlier (see Isa 7:3). At that time he had challenged Ahaz to trust God. However, Ahaz tr...","summary_en":"36:2 Lachish was a city overlooking the low-lying hills to the west of Jerusalem. It had to be taken before the final attack on Jerusalem could be launched. • the aqueduct that feeds water into the upper pool: This was a pool on the north side of Jerusalem, not the Gihon Spring in the Kidron valley. • Isaiah had met Ahaz on this same road leading to the field where cloth is washed some thirty-three years earlier (see Isa 7:3). At that time he had challenged Ahaz to trust God. However, Ahaz tr...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":134427,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:2","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:2","content_ro":"36:2<\/strong> Lachish<\/em> was a city overlooking the low-lying hills to the west of Jerusalem. It had to be taken before the final attack on Jerusalem could be launched. • the aqueduct that feeds water into the upper pool:<\/em> This was a pool on the north side of Jerusalem, not the Gihon Spring in the Kidron valley. • Isaiah had met Ahaz on this same road leading to the field where cloth is washed<\/em> some thirty-three years earlier (see Isa 7:3). At that time he had challenged Ahaz to trust God. However, Ahaz trusted Assyria instead, and this desperate situation was a result. Now the challenge to trust God came from mocking, foreign lips (see 28:11-13).<\/p>","content_en":"36:2<\/strong> Lachish<\/em> was a city overlooking the low-lying hills to the west of Jerusalem. It had to be taken before the final attack on Jerusalem could be launched. • the aqueduct that feeds water into the upper pool:<\/em> This was a pool on the north side of Jerusalem, not the Gihon Spring in the Kidron valley. • Isaiah had met Ahaz on this same road leading to the field where cloth is washed<\/em> some thirty-three years earlier (see Isa 7:3). At that time he had challenged Ahaz to trust God. However, Ahaz trusted Assyria instead, and this desperate situation was a result. Now the challenge to trust God came from mocking, foreign lips (see 28:11-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:2 Lachish was a city overlooking the low-lying hills to the west of Jerusalem. It had to be taken before the final attack on Jerusalem could be launched. • the aqueduct that feeds water into the upper pool: This was a pool on the north side of Jerusalem, not the Gihon Spring in the Kidron valley. • Isaiah had met Ahaz on this same road leading to the field where cloth is washed some thirty-three years earlier (see Isa 7:3). At that time he had challenged Ahaz to trust God. However, Ahaz tr...","summary_en":"36:2 Lachish was a city overlooking the low-lying hills to the west of Jerusalem. It had to be taken before the final attack on Jerusalem could be launched. • the aqueduct that feeds water into the upper pool: This was a pool on the north side of Jerusalem, not the Gihon Spring in the Kidron valley. • Isaiah had met Ahaz on this same road leading to the field where cloth is washed some thirty-three years earlier (see Isa 7:3). At that time he had challenged Ahaz to trust God. However, Ahaz tr...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":16417,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Hilkiah","title_en":"Hilkiah","content_ro":"<h3>HILKIAH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Father of Eliakim, an overseer in King Hezekiah’s household (2 Kgs 18:18, 26; Is 22:20; 36:3, 22).<\/li>\n<li>2. High priest and Shallum’s son in the reign of King Josiah who, during the repair of the temple, found the Book of the Law (2 Kgs 22:3-14; 1 Chr 6:13; 9:11; 2 Chr 34:14-22). According to Ezra 7:1 (cf. 1 Esd 8:1), he was also an ancestor of Ezra. He is an important figure in the events surrounding Josiah’s religious reform, not only because he found the Book of the Law, but also because he led the king’s messengers to consult Huldah the prophetess regarding God’s Word (2 Kgs 22:14) and later presided over the purification of the temple (23:4).<\/li>\n<li>3. Merarite Levite, the son of Amzi and Amaziah’s father (1 Chr 6:45).<\/li>\n<li>4. Merarite Levite and Hosah’s son, who was appointed as a gatekeeper in the temple by David (1 Chr 26:11).<\/li>\n<li>5. Companion of Ezra at the public reading of the law (Neh 8:4). Scholars disagree as to whether he was a layman or a priest.<\/li>\n<li>6. Priest among the returned exiles (Neh 12:7).<\/li>\n<li>7. Anathoth priest who was the father of Jeremiah (Jer 1:1).<\/li>\n<li>8. Father of Gemariah whom King Zedekiah sent to Babylon with a letter of assurance from Jeremiah (Jer 29:3).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>HILKIAH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Father of Eliakim, an overseer in King Hezekiah’s household (2 Kgs 18:18, 26; Is 22:20; 36:3, 22).<\/li>\n<li>2. High priest and Shallum’s son in the reign of King Josiah who, during the repair of the temple, found the Book of the Law (2 Kgs 22:3-14; 1 Chr 6:13; 9:11; 2 Chr 34:14-22). According to Ezra 7:1 (cf. 1 Esd 8:1), he was also an ancestor of Ezra. He is an important figure in the events surrounding Josiah’s religious reform, not only because he found the Book of the Law, but also because he led the king’s messengers to consult Huldah the prophetess regarding God’s Word (2 Kgs 22:14) and later presided over the purification of the temple (23:4).<\/li>\n<li>3. Merarite Levite, the son of Amzi and Amaziah’s father (1 Chr 6:45).<\/li>\n<li>4. Merarite Levite and Hosah’s son, who was appointed as a gatekeeper in the temple by David (1 Chr 26:11).<\/li>\n<li>5. Companion of Ezra at the public reading of the law (Neh 8:4). Scholars disagree as to whether he was a layman or a priest.<\/li>\n<li>6. Priest among the returned exiles (Neh 12:7).<\/li>\n<li>7. Anathoth priest who was the father of Jeremiah (Jer 1:1).<\/li>\n<li>8. Father of Gemariah whom King Zedekiah sent to Babylon with a letter of assurance from Jeremiah (Jer 29:3).<\/li>","summary_ro":"HILKIAH 1. Father of Eliakim, an overseer in King Hezekiah’s household (2 Kgs 18:18, 26; Is 22:20; 36:3, 22). 2. High priest and Shallum’s son in the reign of King Josiah who, during the repair of the temple, found the Book of the Law (2 Kgs 22:3-14; 1 Chr 6:13; 9:11; 2 Chr 34:14-22). According to Ezra 7:1 (cf. 1 Esd 8:1), he was also an ancestor of Ezra. He is an important figure in the events surrounding Josiah’s religious reform, not only because he found the Book of the Law, but also beca...","summary_en":"HILKIAH 1. Father of Eliakim, an overseer in King Hezekiah’s household (2 Kgs 18:18, 26; Is 22:20; 36:3, 22). 2. High priest and Shallum’s son in the reign of King Josiah who, during the repair of the temple, found the Book of the Law (2 Kgs 22:3-14; 1 Chr 6:13; 9:11; 2 Chr 34:14-22). According to Ezra 7:1 (cf. 1 Esd 8:1), he was also an ancestor of Ezra. He is an important figure in the events surrounding Josiah’s religious reform, not only because he found the Book of the Law, but also beca...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19915,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Joah","title_en":"Joah","content_ro":"<h3>JOAH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Asaph’s son and a court official under King Hezekiah (2 Kgs 18:18, 26; Is 36:3, 11, 22). He was one of the officers sent by Hezekiah to deal with the Assyrians during the siege of Jerusalem.<\/li>\n<li>2. Zimmah’s son from Levi’s tribe (1 Chr 6:21).<\/li>\n<li>3. Levite, Obed-edom’s son and a gatekeeper of the sanctuary in David’s time (1 Chr 26:4).<\/li>\n<li>4. Joahaz’s son and a recorder under King Josiah; he was one of the deputies overseeing the temple repairs (2 Chr 34:8).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>JOAH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Asaph’s son and a court official under King Hezekiah (2 Kgs 18:18, 26; Is 36:3, 11, 22). He was one of the officers sent by Hezekiah to deal with the Assyrians during the siege of Jerusalem.<\/li>\n<li>2. Zimmah’s son from Levi’s tribe (1 Chr 6:21).<\/li>\n<li>3. Levite, Obed-edom’s son and a gatekeeper of the sanctuary in David’s time (1 Chr 26:4).<\/li>\n<li>4. Joahaz’s son and a recorder under King Josiah; he was one of the deputies overseeing the temple repairs (2 Chr 34:8).<\/li>","summary_ro":"JOAH 1. Asaph’s son and a court official under King Hezekiah (2 Kgs 18:18, 26; Is 36:3, 11, 22). He was one of the officers sent by Hezekiah to deal with the Assyrians during the siege of Jerusalem. 2. Zimmah’s son from Levi’s tribe (1 Chr 6:21). 3. Levite, Obed-edom’s son and a gatekeeper of the sanctuary in David’s time (1 Chr 26:4). 4. Joahaz’s son and a recorder under King Josiah; he was one of the deputies overseeing the temple repairs (2 Chr 34:8).","summary_en":"JOAH 1. Asaph’s son and a court official under King Hezekiah (2 Kgs 18:18, 26; Is 36:3, 11, 22). He was one of the officers sent by Hezekiah to deal with the Assyrians during the siege of Jerusalem. 2. Zimmah’s son from Levi’s tribe (1 Chr 6:21). 3. Levite, Obed-edom’s son and a gatekeeper of the sanctuary in David’s time (1 Chr 26:4). 4. Joahaz’s son and a recorder under King Josiah; he was one of the deputies overseeing the temple repairs (2 Chr 34:8).","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34097,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Scribe","title_en":"Scribe","content_ro":"<h3>SCRIBE<\/h3>\nReference in early OT times to those employed for their ability to transcribe information. After the exile, scribes were a class of scholars who taught, copied, and interpreted the Jewish law for the people. They appear in the Gospels primarily as opponents of Jesus.<\/p>\nScribes in Preexilic Times<\/p>\nThe ability to read and write was not widespread in ancient Israel, and professional secretaries were needed in the various aspects of public life. This appears to be the earliest biblical notion of the term “scribe” and has no particular religious connotation. Scribes were employed to keep accounts or transcribe legal information (Jer 32:12), military data (2 Chr 26:11), other public documents (Jgs 8:14; Is 50:1), or personal correspondence (Jer 36:18). These secretaries were essential to royal administrations, and there is frequent mention of a chief scribe who functioned as a court recorder (1 Kgs 4:3; 2 Chr 24:11), adviser (2 Sm 8:16-17; 2 Kgs 18:18; 22:12; 1 Chr 27:32; Is 36:3), and financial overseer (2 Kgs 22:3-4). Secretaries or scribes were associated with the priesthood as well, serving as recorders for temple affairs (1 Chr 24:6; 2 Chr 34:13-15).<\/p>\nScribes in Postexilic Times<\/p>\nWith the restoration of Judaism under Ezra and Nehemiah, the term “scribe” begins to be associated more narrowly with those who gathered together, studied, and interpreted the Torah (Jewish law). They became, in essence, a separate profession of teachers (although unpaid), able to preserve accurately the law of Moses and interpret it to meet conditions in postexilic times. In this initial period, Ezra himself appears as the ideal “scribe who studied and taught the commands and laws of the Lord<\/span> to Israel” (Ezr 7:11, nlt<\/span>). In Ecclesiasticus, the scribe is portrayed as one who, because of his diligent study of the Law, the Prophets, and Writings (Ecclus 38:24ff; 39:1), is able to penetrate the hidden meanings of texts (39:2-3) and thus is able to serve as judge and counsel for the affairs of the people and state (38:33; 39:4-8). Because of his invaluable place in a society governed by the Torah, the scribe is worthy of praise and veneration throughout succeeding generations (39:9). By the second century BC<\/span>, the scribes were a fairly distinct class in Jewish society. They appear as such during the Maccabean wars, acting as a negotiating body with the rival Syrians (1 Macc 7:12). It is also significant that, from this time forward, the history of the scribe in Jewish life is closely linked with the rise of the Pharisees. Although there were apparently some scribes affiliated with the rival Sadducean party, the party of the Pharisees, with its absolute devotion to the law (including the oral law), became the primary religiopolitical affiliation for the scribes (see the close connection in the NT: Mt 5:20; 12:38; 15:1; Mk 7:5; Lk 6:7).<\/p>\nTraining and Status<\/p>\nThe training of scribes initially occurred within priestly family-based guilds that guaranteed the regulation and perpetuation of this position (1 Chr 2:55). Later, scribal training in the law became open to members of all classes, with the eventual result, by Jesus’ time, of scribes from nonpriestly families being far more numerous and influential. Training in the law began at an early age under the personal supervision of a teacher (rabbi), who gave instructions in all matters pertaining to the law and its interpretation for present needs. Because the written law of Moses could not possibly speak directly to conditions in postexilic times, the oral interpretation and application of the written law to meet such current needs was a significant contribution by the scribes. Such oral law promulgated by them was regarded as equal to the written law and equally binding for those desiring to please God (see Mk 7:6-13). This important function, lying at the heart of Jewish life, accounts for the participation of the scribes in the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrin, in order to make legal decisions in keeping with the law, obviously needed the presence of those most knowledgeable about the minutest details of the Torah and the principles governing its application to new circumstances. The scribes, consequently, were the only members outside the aristocratic high priests and elders to be represented in this Jewish supreme court (Mt 26:57; Mk 14:43, 53; Lk 22:66; Acts 23:9). Being the authoritative instructors of the law both within the temple (Lk 2:46) and within the various synagogues of Judea and Galilee (5:17), as well as prominent members of the Sanhedrin, the scribes were greatly respected within the Jewish community. They wore special robes (Mk 12:38) with memorial fringes at the bottom and phylacteries, or “prayer boxes,” hanging from the arms (Mt 23:5). Such attire made their presence obvious and occasioned the rising or bowing of the common people when they passed (Mk 12:38). They were addressed with respect as “rabbi” or “master” (Mt 23:7) and were given the place of honor at worship as well as at social affairs (Mt 23:2; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46). Indeed, the high regard the Jews held for their scribes is testified by the fact that such teachers of the law were buried alongside the tombs of the patriarchs and prophets.<\/p>\nThe Scribes in Jesus’ Day<\/p>\nThe scribes appear predominantly in the ministry of Jesus as those concerned with the circumspectness of legal observance. Luke refers to the scribes as “lawyers,” thereby describing their chief function as interpreters of the Jewish law in a way that communicated to his gentile audience. It is often found, therefore, that the scribes were critical members of Jesus’ audience, accusing him of violating the law on numerous occasions: in forgiving sins (Mt 9:1-3; Lk 5:17-26), in breaking their notion of Sabbath observance through work (Lk 6:1-2) and healing (vv 6-11), in not following their accepted ceremonial washings (Mk 7:2-5), and in ignoring their practice of fasting (Lk 5:33-39). Not surprisingly, they especially disapproved of Jesus’ practice of mingling with the unclean and outcasts of Jewish society (Mk 2:16-17; Lk 15:1-2). In a similar light, they are not unfrequently found presenting questions concerning the law for the purpose of tricking Jesus (Mk 7:5; 12:28, 35; Lk 11:53; Jn 8:3-4). In a similar fashion, they demanded that Jesus make his identity clear (Mt 12:38) and reveal the source of his authority to perform miracles (Mk 3:22; Lk 20:1-4). Although there is evidence that a minority of the scribes accepted Jesus (Mt 8:19; 13:52; Mk 12:32; Jn 3:1-2), their primary attitude toward Jesus was one of hostility. As previously suggested, this was partly due to Jesus’ differing expression of fidelity to the Mosaic law and his openness toward the outcasts. It was also partly due to the rising popularity of Jesus among the people, which posed a threat to their own authority (Mt 7:29) and to the safety of the city (Mt 21:15; Mk 11:18). Certainly, another major contributing factor of their opposition to Jesus was his exposure of their hypocrisy and corruption. In his rebukes of the scribes and the Pharisees, Jesus openly accused them of catering to public approval (Mt 23:5-7; Mk 12:38-39; Lk 11:43). While appearing to be outwardly correct and holy, they were inwardly corrupt (Mt 23:25-28; Lk 11:39-41). Jesus also attacked the principle of oral law taught by the scribes, which they demanded that the people follow. Jesus charged that the oral law was a “heavy burden” that the scribes themselves did not even bother to follow (Mt 23:2-4, 13-22; Lk 11:46). While emphasizing the minor points of the law, the scribes were also guilty of ignoring the weightier concerns of justice, mercy, and faith (Mt 23:23-24; Mk 12:40; Lk 11:42). Contrary to being the descendants of the prophets, as the scribes held themselves to be, the scribes (Jesus claimed) would have killed the prophets if they had lived in their day (Mt 23:29-36; Lk 20:9-19).<\/p>\nIt is not surprising to find, therefore, the scribes anxious to get rid of Jesus (Mk 14:1; Lk 11:53). His more flexible interpretation of the law posed a clear threat to their position and authority within the community. The scribes joined forces with their normal opponents (the high priesthood) to engineer Jesus’ arrest (Mk 14:43). When Jesus appeared before them and the rest of the Sanhedrin, they worked with the other leaders to construct a case against him worthy of death (Mt 26:57-66). When taking Jesus before Herod, they stood by and shouted their accusations with the others (Lk 23:10). Finally, they participated with other members of the Sanhedrin in mocking Jesus on the cross, demanding that Jesus save himself by coming down from the cross (Mt 27:41-43). Prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD<\/span> 70, the scribes continued with the other elements of the Sanhedrin to oppose the early Christian church, and they brought about Stephen’s martyrdom (Acts 6:12-14).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Judaism; Pharisees; Writer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SCRIBE<\/h3>\nReference in early OT times to those employed for their ability to transcribe information. After the exile, scribes were a class of scholars who taught, copied, and interpreted the Jewish law for the people. They appear in the Gospels primarily as opponents of Jesus.<\/p>\nScribes in Preexilic Times<\/p>\nThe ability to read and write was not widespread in ancient Israel, and professional secretaries were needed in the various aspects of public life. This appears to be the earliest biblical notion of the term “scribe” and has no particular religious connotation. Scribes were employed to keep accounts or transcribe legal information (Jer 32:12), military data (2 Chr 26:11), other public documents (Jgs 8:14; Is 50:1), or personal correspondence (Jer 36:18). These secretaries were essential to royal administrations, and there is frequent mention of a chief scribe who functioned as a court recorder (1 Kgs 4:3; 2 Chr 24:11), adviser (2 Sm 8:16-17; 2 Kgs 18:18; 22:12; 1 Chr 27:32; Is 36:3), and financial overseer (2 Kgs 22:3-4). Secretaries or scribes were associated with the priesthood as well, serving as recorders for temple affairs (1 Chr 24:6; 2 Chr 34:13-15).<\/p>\nScribes in Postexilic Times<\/p>\nWith the restoration of Judaism under Ezra and Nehemiah, the term “scribe” begins to be associated more narrowly with those who gathered together, studied, and interpreted the Torah (Jewish law). They became, in essence, a separate profession of teachers (although unpaid), able to preserve accurately the law of Moses and interpret it to meet conditions in postexilic times. In this initial period, Ezra himself appears as the ideal “scribe who studied and taught the commands and laws of the Lord<\/span> to Israel” (Ezr 7:11, nlt<\/span>). In Ecclesiasticus, the scribe is portrayed as one who, because of his diligent study of the Law, the Prophets, and Writings (Ecclus 38:24ff; 39:1), is able to penetrate the hidden meanings of texts (39:2-3) and thus is able to serve as judge and counsel for the affairs of the people and state (38:33; 39:4-8). Because of his invaluable place in a society governed by the Torah, the scribe is worthy of praise and veneration throughout succeeding generations (39:9). By the second century BC<\/span>, the scribes were a fairly distinct class in Jewish society. They appear as such during the Maccabean wars, acting as a negotiating body with the rival Syrians (1 Macc 7:12). It is also significant that, from this time forward, the history of the scribe in Jewish life is closely linked with the rise of the Pharisees. Although there were apparently some scribes affiliated with the rival Sadducean party, the party of the Pharisees, with its absolute devotion to the law (including the oral law), became the primary religiopolitical affiliation for the scribes (see the close connection in the NT: Mt 5:20; 12:38; 15:1; Mk 7:5; Lk 6:7).<\/p>\nTraining and Status<\/p>\nThe training of scribes initially occurred within priestly family-based guilds that guaranteed the regulation and perpetuation of this position (1 Chr 2:55). Later, scribal training in the law became open to members of all classes, with the eventual result, by Jesus’ time, of scribes from nonpriestly families being far more numerous and influential. Training in the law began at an early age under the personal supervision of a teacher (rabbi), who gave instructions in all matters pertaining to the law and its interpretation for present needs. Because the written law of Moses could not possibly speak directly to conditions in postexilic times, the oral interpretation and application of the written law to meet such current needs was a significant contribution by the scribes. Such oral law promulgated by them was regarded as equal to the written law and equally binding for those desiring to please God (see Mk 7:6-13). This important function, lying at the heart of Jewish life, accounts for the participation of the scribes in the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrin, in order to make legal decisions in keeping with the law, obviously needed the presence of those most knowledgeable about the minutest details of the Torah and the principles governing its application to new circumstances. The scribes, consequently, were the only members outside the aristocratic high priests and elders to be represented in this Jewish supreme court (Mt 26:57; Mk 14:43, 53; Lk 22:66; Acts 23:9). Being the authoritative instructors of the law both within the temple (Lk 2:46) and within the various synagogues of Judea and Galilee (5:17), as well as prominent members of the Sanhedrin, the scribes were greatly respected within the Jewish community. They wore special robes (Mk 12:38) with memorial fringes at the bottom and phylacteries, or “prayer boxes,” hanging from the arms (Mt 23:5). Such attire made their presence obvious and occasioned the rising or bowing of the common people when they passed (Mk 12:38). They were addressed with respect as “rabbi” or “master” (Mt 23:7) and were given the place of honor at worship as well as at social affairs (Mt 23:2; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46). Indeed, the high regard the Jews held for their scribes is testified by the fact that such teachers of the law were buried alongside the tombs of the patriarchs and prophets.<\/p>\nThe Scribes in Jesus’ Day<\/p>\nThe scribes appear predominantly in the ministry of Jesus as those concerned with the circumspectness of legal observance. Luke refers to the scribes as “lawyers,” thereby describing their chief function as interpreters of the Jewish law in a way that communicated to his gentile audience. It is often found, therefore, that the scribes were critical members of Jesus’ audience, accusing him of violating the law on numerous occasions: in forgiving sins (Mt 9:1-3; Lk 5:17-26), in breaking their notion of Sabbath observance through work (Lk 6:1-2) and healing (vv 6-11), in not following their accepted ceremonial washings (Mk 7:2-5), and in ignoring their practice of fasting (Lk 5:33-39). Not surprisingly, they especially disapproved of Jesus’ practice of mingling with the unclean and outcasts of Jewish society (Mk 2:16-17; Lk 15:1-2). In a similar light, they are not unfrequently found presenting questions concerning the law for the purpose of tricking Jesus (Mk 7:5; 12:28, 35; Lk 11:53; Jn 8:3-4). In a similar fashion, they demanded that Jesus make his identity clear (Mt 12:38) and reveal the source of his authority to perform miracles (Mk 3:22; Lk 20:1-4). Although there is evidence that a minority of the scribes accepted Jesus (Mt 8:19; 13:52; Mk 12:32; Jn 3:1-2), their primary attitude toward Jesus was one of hostility. As previously suggested, this was partly due to Jesus’ differing expression of fidelity to the Mosaic law and his openness toward the outcasts. It was also partly due to the rising popularity of Jesus among the people, which posed a threat to their own authority (Mt 7:29) and to the safety of the city (Mt 21:15; Mk 11:18). Certainly, another major contributing factor of their opposition to Jesus was his exposure of their hypocrisy and corruption. In his rebukes of the scribes and the Pharisees, Jesus openly accused them of catering to public approval (Mt 23:5-7; Mk 12:38-39; Lk 11:43). While appearing to be outwardly correct and holy, they were inwardly corrupt (Mt 23:25-28; Lk 11:39-41). Jesus also attacked the principle of oral law taught by the scribes, which they demanded that the people follow. Jesus charged that the oral law was a “heavy burden” that the scribes themselves did not even bother to follow (Mt 23:2-4, 13-22; Lk 11:46). While emphasizing the minor points of the law, the scribes were also guilty of ignoring the weightier concerns of justice, mercy, and faith (Mt 23:23-24; Mk 12:40; Lk 11:42). Contrary to being the descendants of the prophets, as the scribes held themselves to be, the scribes (Jesus claimed) would have killed the prophets if they had lived in their day (Mt 23:29-36; Lk 20:9-19).<\/p>\nIt is not surprising to find, therefore, the scribes anxious to get rid of Jesus (Mk 14:1; Lk 11:53). His more flexible interpretation of the law posed a clear threat to their position and authority within the community. The scribes joined forces with their normal opponents (the high priesthood) to engineer Jesus’ arrest (Mk 14:43). When Jesus appeared before them and the rest of the Sanhedrin, they worked with the other leaders to construct a case against him worthy of death (Mt 26:57-66). When taking Jesus before Herod, they stood by and shouted their accusations with the others (Lk 23:10). Finally, they participated with other members of the Sanhedrin in mocking Jesus on the cross, demanding that Jesus save himself by coming down from the cross (Mt 27:41-43). Prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD<\/span> 70, the scribes continued with the other elements of the Sanhedrin to oppose the early Christian church, and they brought about Stephen’s martyrdom (Acts 6:12-14).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Judaism; Pharisees; Writer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SCRIBE Reference in early OT times to those employed for their ability to transcribe information. After the exile, scribes were a class of scholars who taught, copied, and interpreted the Jewish law for the people. They appear in the Gospels primarily as opponents of Jesus. Scribes in Preexilic Times The ability to read and write was not widespread in ancient Israel, and professional secretaries were needed in the various aspects of public life. This appears to be the earliest biblical notion...","summary_en":"SCRIBE Reference in early OT times to those employed for their ability to transcribe information. After the exile, scribes were a class of scholars who taught, copied, and interpreted the Jewish law for the people. They appear in the Gospels primarily as opponents of Jesus. Scribes in Preexilic Times The ability to read and write was not widespread in ancient Israel, and professional secretaries were needed in the various aspects of public life. This appears to be the earliest biblical notion...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":51550,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:3","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:3","content_ro":"36:3<\/strong> Eliakim<\/em> eventually advanced in rank, while Shebna<\/em> was demoted (see 22:15-24).<\/p>","content_en":"36:3<\/strong> Eliakim<\/em> eventually advanced in rank, while Shebna<\/em> was demoted (see 22:15-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:3 Eliakim eventually advanced in rank, while Shebna was demoted (see 22:15-24).","summary_en":"36:3 Eliakim eventually advanced in rank, while Shebna was demoted (see 22:15-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":79176,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:3","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:3","content_ro":"36:3<\/strong> Eliakim<\/em> eventually advanced in rank, while Shebna<\/em> was demoted (see 22:15-24).<\/p>","content_en":"36:3<\/strong> Eliakim<\/em> eventually advanced in rank, while Shebna<\/em> was demoted (see 22:15-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:3 Eliakim eventually advanced in rank, while Shebna was demoted (see 22:15-24).","summary_en":"36:3 Eliakim eventually advanced in rank, while Shebna was demoted (see 22:15-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106802,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:3","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:3","content_ro":"36:3<\/strong> Eliakim<\/em> eventually advanced in rank, while Shebna<\/em> was demoted (see 22:15-24).<\/p>","content_en":"36:3<\/strong> Eliakim<\/em> eventually advanced in rank, while Shebna<\/em> was demoted (see 22:15-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:3 Eliakim eventually advanced in rank, while Shebna was demoted (see 22:15-24).","summary_en":"36:3 Eliakim eventually advanced in rank, while Shebna was demoted (see 22:15-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":134428,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:3","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:3","content_ro":"36:3<\/strong> Eliakim<\/em> eventually advanced in rank, while Shebna<\/em> was demoted (see 22:15-24).<\/p>","content_en":"36:3<\/strong> Eliakim<\/em> eventually advanced in rank, while Shebna<\/em> was demoted (see 22:15-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:3 Eliakim eventually advanced in rank, while Shebna was demoted (see 22:15-24).","summary_en":"36:3 Eliakim eventually advanced in rank, while Shebna was demoted (see 22:15-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":51551,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:4","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:4","content_ro":"36:4-22<\/strong> The Assyrian chief of staff attempted to use intimidation to negotiate a settlement without bloodshed. In his first speech (36:4-10), he rightly argued against Egypt’s ability to rescue but wrongly charged Hezekiah with misplaced trust in the Lord. Strikingly, the Assyrian did not see the contest as being between the gods of Assyria and the Lord but rather between Sennacherib—the great king<\/em>—and the Lord.<\/p>","content_en":"36:4-22<\/strong> The Assyrian chief of staff attempted to use intimidation to negotiate a settlement without bloodshed. In his first speech (36:4-10), he rightly argued against Egypt’s ability to rescue but wrongly charged Hezekiah with misplaced trust in the Lord. Strikingly, the Assyrian did not see the contest as being between the gods of Assyria and the Lord but rather between Sennacherib—the great king<\/em>—and the Lord.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:4-22 The Assyrian chief of staff attempted to use intimidation to negotiate a settlement without bloodshed. In his first speech (36:4-10), he rightly argued against Egypt’s ability to rescue but wrongly charged Hezekiah with misplaced trust in the Lord. Strikingly, the Assyrian did not see the contest as being between the gods of Assyria and the Lord but rather between Sennacherib—the great king—and the Lord.","summary_en":"36:4-22 The Assyrian chief of staff attempted to use intimidation to negotiate a settlement without bloodshed. In his first speech (36:4-10), he rightly argued against Egypt’s ability to rescue but wrongly charged Hezekiah with misplaced trust in the Lord. Strikingly, the Assyrian did not see the contest as being between the gods of Assyria and the Lord but rather between Sennacherib—the great king—and the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":51552,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:4","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:4","content_ro":"36:4<\/strong> Great king<\/em> is a title similar to emperor.<\/em><\/p>","content_en":"36:4<\/strong> Great king<\/em> is a title similar to emperor.<\/em><\/p>","summary_ro":"36:4 Great king is a title similar to emperor.","summary_en":"36:4 Great king is a title similar to emperor.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":79177,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:4","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:4","content_ro":"36:4-22<\/strong> The Assyrian chief of staff attempted to use intimidation to negotiate a settlement without bloodshed. In his first speech (36:4-10), he rightly argued against Egypt’s ability to rescue but wrongly charged Hezekiah with misplaced trust in the Lord. Strikingly, the Assyrian did not see the contest as being between the gods of Assyria and the Lord but rather between Sennacherib—the great king<\/em>—and the Lord.<\/p>","content_en":"36:4-22<\/strong> The Assyrian chief of staff attempted to use intimidation to negotiate a settlement without bloodshed. In his first speech (36:4-10), he rightly argued against Egypt’s ability to rescue but wrongly charged Hezekiah with misplaced trust in the Lord. Strikingly, the Assyrian did not see the contest as being between the gods of Assyria and the Lord but rather between Sennacherib—the great king<\/em>—and the Lord.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:4-22 The Assyrian chief of staff attempted to use intimidation to negotiate a settlement without bloodshed. In his first speech (36:4-10), he rightly argued against Egypt’s ability to rescue but wrongly charged Hezekiah with misplaced trust in the Lord. Strikingly, the Assyrian did not see the contest as being between the gods of Assyria and the Lord but rather between Sennacherib—the great king—and the Lord.","summary_en":"36:4-22 The Assyrian chief of staff attempted to use intimidation to negotiate a settlement without bloodshed. In his first speech (36:4-10), he rightly argued against Egypt’s ability to rescue but wrongly charged Hezekiah with misplaced trust in the Lord. Strikingly, the Assyrian did not see the contest as being between the gods of Assyria and the Lord but rather between Sennacherib—the great king—and the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":79178,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:4","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:4","content_ro":"36:4<\/strong> Great king<\/em> is a title similar to emperor.<\/em><\/p>","content_en":"36:4<\/strong> Great king<\/em> is a title similar to emperor.<\/em><\/p>","summary_ro":"36:4 Great king is a title similar to emperor.","summary_en":"36:4 Great king is a title similar to emperor.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106803,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:4","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:4","content_ro":"36:4-22<\/strong> The Assyrian chief of staff attempted to use intimidation to negotiate a settlement without bloodshed. In his first speech (36:4-10), he rightly argued against Egypt’s ability to rescue but wrongly charged Hezekiah with misplaced trust in the Lord. Strikingly, the Assyrian did not see the contest as being between the gods of Assyria and the Lord but rather between Sennacherib—the great king<\/em>—and the Lord.<\/p>","content_en":"36:4-22<\/strong> The Assyrian chief of staff attempted to use intimidation to negotiate a settlement without bloodshed. In his first speech (36:4-10), he rightly argued against Egypt’s ability to rescue but wrongly charged Hezekiah with misplaced trust in the Lord. Strikingly, the Assyrian did not see the contest as being between the gods of Assyria and the Lord but rather between Sennacherib—the great king<\/em>—and the Lord.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:4-22 The Assyrian chief of staff attempted to use intimidation to negotiate a settlement without bloodshed. In his first speech (36:4-10), he rightly argued against Egypt’s ability to rescue but wrongly charged Hezekiah with misplaced trust in the Lord. Strikingly, the Assyrian did not see the contest as being between the gods of Assyria and the Lord but rather between Sennacherib—the great king—and the Lord.","summary_en":"36:4-22 The Assyrian chief of staff attempted to use intimidation to negotiate a settlement without bloodshed. In his first speech (36:4-10), he rightly argued against Egypt’s ability to rescue but wrongly charged Hezekiah with misplaced trust in the Lord. Strikingly, the Assyrian did not see the contest as being between the gods of Assyria and the Lord but rather between Sennacherib—the great king—and the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106804,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:4","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:4","content_ro":"36:4<\/strong> Great king<\/em> is a title similar to emperor.<\/em><\/p>","content_en":"36:4<\/strong> Great king<\/em> is a title similar to emperor.<\/em><\/p>","summary_ro":"36:4 Great king is a title similar to emperor.","summary_en":"36:4 Great king is a title similar to emperor.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":134429,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:4","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:4","content_ro":"36:4-22<\/strong> The Assyrian chief of staff attempted to use intimidation to negotiate a settlement without bloodshed. In his first speech (36:4-10), he rightly argued against Egypt’s ability to rescue but wrongly charged Hezekiah with misplaced trust in the Lord. Strikingly, the Assyrian did not see the contest as being between the gods of Assyria and the Lord but rather between Sennacherib—the great king<\/em>—and the Lord.<\/p>","content_en":"36:4-22<\/strong> The Assyrian chief of staff attempted to use intimidation to negotiate a settlement without bloodshed. In his first speech (36:4-10), he rightly argued against Egypt’s ability to rescue but wrongly charged Hezekiah with misplaced trust in the Lord. Strikingly, the Assyrian did not see the contest as being between the gods of Assyria and the Lord but rather between Sennacherib—the great king<\/em>—and the Lord.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:4-22 The Assyrian chief of staff attempted to use intimidation to negotiate a settlement without bloodshed. In his first speech (36:4-10), he rightly argued against Egypt’s ability to rescue but wrongly charged Hezekiah with misplaced trust in the Lord. Strikingly, the Assyrian did not see the contest as being between the gods of Assyria and the Lord but rather between Sennacherib—the great king—and the Lord.","summary_en":"36:4-22 The Assyrian chief of staff attempted to use intimidation to negotiate a settlement without bloodshed. In his first speech (36:4-10), he rightly argued against Egypt’s ability to rescue but wrongly charged Hezekiah with misplaced trust in the Lord. Strikingly, the Assyrian did not see the contest as being between the gods of Assyria and the Lord but rather between Sennacherib—the great king—and the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":134430,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:4","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:4","content_ro":"36:4<\/strong> Great king<\/em> is a title similar to emperor.<\/em><\/p>","content_en":"36:4<\/strong> Great king<\/em> is a title similar to emperor.<\/em><\/p>","summary_ro":"36:4 Great king is a title similar to emperor.","summary_en":"36:4 Great king is a title similar to emperor.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":51553,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:5","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:5","content_ro":"36:5<\/strong> Who are you counting on:<\/em> Judah had asked Egypt to help them (see 30:1-5).<\/p>","content_en":"36:5<\/strong> Who are you counting on:<\/em> Judah had asked Egypt to help them (see 30:1-5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:5 Who are you counting on: Judah had asked Egypt to help them (see 30:1-5).","summary_en":"36:5 Who are you counting on: Judah had asked Egypt to help them (see 30:1-5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":79179,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:5","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:5","content_ro":"36:5<\/strong> Who are you counting on:<\/em> Judah had asked Egypt to help them (see 30:1-5).<\/p>","content_en":"36:5<\/strong> Who are you counting on:<\/em> Judah had asked Egypt to help them (see 30:1-5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:5 Who are you counting on: Judah had asked Egypt to help them (see 30:1-5).","summary_en":"36:5 Who are you counting on: Judah had asked Egypt to help them (see 30:1-5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106805,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:5","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:5","content_ro":"36:5<\/strong> Who are you counting on:<\/em> Judah had asked Egypt to help them (see 30:1-5).<\/p>","content_en":"36:5<\/strong> Who are you counting on:<\/em> Judah had asked Egypt to help them (see 30:1-5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:5 Who are you counting on: Judah had asked Egypt to help them (see 30:1-5).","summary_en":"36:5 Who are you counting on: Judah had asked Egypt to help them (see 30:1-5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":134431,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:5","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:5","content_ro":"36:5<\/strong> Who are you counting on:<\/em> Judah had asked Egypt to help them (see 30:1-5).<\/p>","content_en":"36:5<\/strong> Who are you counting on:<\/em> Judah had asked Egypt to help them (see 30:1-5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:5 Who are you counting on: Judah had asked Egypt to help them (see 30:1-5).","summary_en":"36:5 Who are you counting on: Judah had asked Egypt to help them (see 30:1-5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":39136,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Zedekiah","title_en":"Zedekiah","content_ro":"<h3>ZEDEKIAH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Judah’s last king and a key political figure in the fateful final decade of the southern kingdom. His reign (597–586 BC<\/span>) spanned Nebuchadnezzar’s two attacks on Jerusalem, in 597 and 586. The first attack was in reprisal for the rebellion of Josiah’s son, Jehoiakim (609–598 BC<\/span>), against Nebuchadnezzar; however, by the time his forces captured Jerusalem, Jehoiakim was dead and had been succeeded by his 18-year-old son Jehoiachin. Nebuchadnezzar deposed the young king and deported him to Babylon, along with the elite of the nation: government officials, army officers, and craftsmen. As Jehoiachin’s replacement, Nebuchadnezzar appointed his uncle Mattaniah, a younger brother of Jehoiakim and of the earlier, short-lived King Jehoahaz (609 BC<\/span>). Mattaniah was thus the third son of Josiah to occupy the throne of Judah. The Babylonian king named him Zedekiah, which means “the Lord is my righteousness.”<\/li>\nZedekiah found himself in a difficult position as Judah’s king. Many evidently still regarded Jehoiachin as the real king (cf. Jer 28:1-4). Certainly the Judeans deported to Babylonia dated events by reference to Jehoiachin (2 Kgs 25:27; Ez 1:2). Though the Babylonians exacted from Zedekiah an oath of loyalty (2 Chr 36:13; Ez 17:13-18), evidence suggests that they too viewed Zedekiah’s predecessor as the legitimate king and Zedekiah as regent. They may have been holding him in reserve for possible restoration to power, should events require it.<\/p>\nJudah was filled with a false optimism that could hardly have helped the new king. It was confidently expected that the deportation of the leading citizens would be only temporary; prophets were guaranteeing that Babylon’s power would be broken within two years (Jer 28:2-4). They were opposed by a few prophets led by Jeremiah, whose message found little support.<\/p>\nPressure both from within the nation and from without was put on Zedekiah to change his political allegiance. In the fourth year of his reign (593 BC<\/span>), the neighboring states of Ammon, Moab, Tyre, and Sidon formed a coalition to fight for independence from Babylon. Envoys were sent to Zedekiah (Jer 27:1-3). However, Jeremiah advised the king not to get involved. In the same year, according to Jeremiah 51:59, Zedekiah visited Babylon. He may have been summoned to affirm his loyalty and to explain his role in the political situation. The planned rebellion did not occur, perhaps because aid from Egypt failed to materialize.<\/p>\nWithin the Judean court a strong pro-Egyptian party existed. This party saw Egypt as an ally for breaking away from their eastern master, just like the advisers of King Hezekiah a century before (cf. Is 31:1-3; 36:6). Zedekiah, finding it difficult to resist this political pressure, eventually transferred his allegiance to Egypt.<\/p>\nHophra (589–570 BC<\/span>), Psammetichus’s heir to the Egyptian throne, organized a joint rebellion in the west against Babylon. According to Ezekiel 21:18-32 and 25:12-17, Judah and Ammon supported him, while Edom and Philistia shrewdly abstained. Zedekiah was rebuked by the prophet Ezekiel (Ez 17:13-18) for breaking his oath to Nebuchadnezzar (cf. 2 Chr 36:13) and rebelling against him by sending envoys to Egypt to negotiate for military support.<\/p>\nIn the face of this western uprising engineered by his Egyptian rival, Nebuchadnezzar was forced to march westward. Setting up headquarters at Riblah in northern Syria, he decided to make Jerusalem his prime target (Ez 21:18-23). The ensuing siege of Jerusalem was temporarily lifted due to an Egyptian attack but afterward was resumed until the city fell. Zedekiah, fleeing eastward with his troops, was caught near Jericho and taken north to Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah. There he was put on trial for breaking his promises of vassalage. By way of punishment, his sons were killed before his eyes. This tragic sight was the last he ever saw, since his eyes were then put out. He was taken in chains to Babylon, where he eventually died in prison (2 Kgs 25:5-7; Jer 39:7; 52:8-11; cf. Ez 12:13).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Israel, History of.<\/p>\n<li>2. Kenaanah’s son and one of the prophets who spoke falsely to kings Ahab of Israel and Jehoshaphat of Judah, telling them that the Lord would give Ahab victory over the Syrians at Ramoth-gilead (1 Kgs 22:11). After hearing Micaiah’s contrary prediction that Ahab would in fact be killed in the battle, Zedekiah, in anger, struck Micaiah (v 24).<\/li>\n<li>3. Jeconiah’s son and a descendant of David through Solomon’s line (1 Chr 3:16).<\/li>\n<li>4. Leading priest who affirmed Nehemiah’s covenant during the postexilic era (Neh 10:1).<\/li>\n<li>5. Maaseiah’s son, who, according to Jeremiah, King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon would kill by roasting in fire for his adultery and lying words (Jer 29:21-23).<\/li>\n<li>6. Hananiah’s son and a prince in Judah during King Jehoiakim’s reign (Jer 36:12).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>ZEDEKIAH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Judah’s last king and a key political figure in the fateful final decade of the southern kingdom. His reign (597–586 BC<\/span>) spanned Nebuchadnezzar’s two attacks on Jerusalem, in 597 and 586. The first attack was in reprisal for the rebellion of Josiah’s son, Jehoiakim (609–598 BC<\/span>), against Nebuchadnezzar; however, by the time his forces captured Jerusalem, Jehoiakim was dead and had been succeeded by his 18-year-old son Jehoiachin. Nebuchadnezzar deposed the young king and deported him to Babylon, along with the elite of the nation: government officials, army officers, and craftsmen. As Jehoiachin’s replacement, Nebuchadnezzar appointed his uncle Mattaniah, a younger brother of Jehoiakim and of the earlier, short-lived King Jehoahaz (609 BC<\/span>). Mattaniah was thus the third son of Josiah to occupy the throne of Judah. The Babylonian king named him Zedekiah, which means “the Lord is my righteousness.”<\/li>\nZedekiah found himself in a difficult position as Judah’s king. Many evidently still regarded Jehoiachin as the real king (cf. Jer 28:1-4). Certainly the Judeans deported to Babylonia dated events by reference to Jehoiachin (2 Kgs 25:27; Ez 1:2). Though the Babylonians exacted from Zedekiah an oath of loyalty (2 Chr 36:13; Ez 17:13-18), evidence suggests that they too viewed Zedekiah’s predecessor as the legitimate king and Zedekiah as regent. They may have been holding him in reserve for possible restoration to power, should events require it.<\/p>\nJudah was filled with a false optimism that could hardly have helped the new king. It was confidently expected that the deportation of the leading citizens would be only temporary; prophets were guaranteeing that Babylon’s power would be broken within two years (Jer 28:2-4). They were opposed by a few prophets led by Jeremiah, whose message found little support.<\/p>\nPressure both from within the nation and from without was put on Zedekiah to change his political allegiance. In the fourth year of his reign (593 BC<\/span>), the neighboring states of Ammon, Moab, Tyre, and Sidon formed a coalition to fight for independence from Babylon. Envoys were sent to Zedekiah (Jer 27:1-3). However, Jeremiah advised the king not to get involved. In the same year, according to Jeremiah 51:59, Zedekiah visited Babylon. He may have been summoned to affirm his loyalty and to explain his role in the political situation. The planned rebellion did not occur, perhaps because aid from Egypt failed to materialize.<\/p>\nWithin the Judean court a strong pro-Egyptian party existed. This party saw Egypt as an ally for breaking away from their eastern master, just like the advisers of King Hezekiah a century before (cf. Is 31:1-3; 36:6). Zedekiah, finding it difficult to resist this political pressure, eventually transferred his allegiance to Egypt.<\/p>\nHophra (589–570 BC<\/span>), Psammetichus’s heir to the Egyptian throne, organized a joint rebellion in the west against Babylon. According to Ezekiel 21:18-32 and 25:12-17, Judah and Ammon supported him, while Edom and Philistia shrewdly abstained. Zedekiah was rebuked by the prophet Ezekiel (Ez 17:13-18) for breaking his oath to Nebuchadnezzar (cf. 2 Chr 36:13) and rebelling against him by sending envoys to Egypt to negotiate for military support.<\/p>\nIn the face of this western uprising engineered by his Egyptian rival, Nebuchadnezzar was forced to march westward. Setting up headquarters at Riblah in northern Syria, he decided to make Jerusalem his prime target (Ez 21:18-23). The ensuing siege of Jerusalem was temporarily lifted due to an Egyptian attack but afterward was resumed until the city fell. Zedekiah, fleeing eastward with his troops, was caught near Jericho and taken north to Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah. There he was put on trial for breaking his promises of vassalage. By way of punishment, his sons were killed before his eyes. This tragic sight was the last he ever saw, since his eyes were then put out. He was taken in chains to Babylon, where he eventually died in prison (2 Kgs 25:5-7; Jer 39:7; 52:8-11; cf. Ez 12:13).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Israel, History of.<\/p>\n<li>2. Kenaanah’s son and one of the prophets who spoke falsely to kings Ahab of Israel and Jehoshaphat of Judah, telling them that the Lord would give Ahab victory over the Syrians at Ramoth-gilead (1 Kgs 22:11). After hearing Micaiah’s contrary prediction that Ahab would in fact be killed in the battle, Zedekiah, in anger, struck Micaiah (v 24).<\/li>\n<li>3. Jeconiah’s son and a descendant of David through Solomon’s line (1 Chr 3:16).<\/li>\n<li>4. Leading priest who affirmed Nehemiah’s covenant during the postexilic era (Neh 10:1).<\/li>\n<li>5. Maaseiah’s son, who, according to Jeremiah, King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon would kill by roasting in fire for his adultery and lying words (Jer 29:21-23).<\/li>\n<li>6. Hananiah’s son and a prince in Judah during King Jehoiakim’s reign (Jer 36:12).<\/li>","summary_ro":"ZEDEKIAH 1. Judah’s last king and a key political figure in the fateful final decade of the southern kingdom. His reign (597–586 BC) spanned Nebuchadnezzar’s two attacks on Jerusalem, in 597 and 586. The first attack was in reprisal for the rebellion of Josiah’s son, Jehoiakim (609–598 BC), against Nebuchadnezzar; however, by the time his forces captured Jerusalem, Jehoiakim was dead and had been succeeded by his 18-year-old son Jehoiachin. Nebuchadnezzar deposed the young king and deported h...","summary_en":"ZEDEKIAH 1. Judah’s last king and a key political figure in the fateful final decade of the southern kingdom. His reign (597–586 BC) spanned Nebuchadnezzar’s two attacks on Jerusalem, in 597 and 586. The first attack was in reprisal for the rebellion of Josiah’s son, Jehoiakim (609–598 BC), against Nebuchadnezzar; however, by the time his forces captured Jerusalem, Jehoiakim was dead and had been succeeded by his 18-year-old son Jehoiachin. Nebuchadnezzar deposed the young king and deported h...","source":"Articles\/Z.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":51554,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:6","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:6","content_ro":"36:6<\/strong> Egypt . . . is completely unreliable:<\/em> Isaiah argued the same case, pointing to the Lord as the only reliable source of help (31:1-3, 7; 39:7). • A kind of reed<\/em> that breaks easily grows near the Nile (see Ezek 29:6-7).<\/p>","content_en":"36:6<\/strong> Egypt . . . is completely unreliable:<\/em> Isaiah argued the same case, pointing to the Lord as the only reliable source of help (31:1-3, 7; 39:7). • A kind of reed<\/em> that breaks easily grows near the Nile (see Ezek 29:6-7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:6 Egypt . . . is completely unreliable: Isaiah argued the same case, pointing to the Lord as the only reliable source of help (31:1-3, 7; 39:7). • A kind of reed that breaks easily grows near the Nile (see Ezek 29:6-7).","summary_en":"36:6 Egypt . . . is completely unreliable: Isaiah argued the same case, pointing to the Lord as the only reliable source of help (31:1-3, 7; 39:7). • A kind of reed that breaks easily grows near the Nile (see Ezek 29:6-7).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":79180,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:6","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:6","content_ro":"36:6<\/strong> Egypt . . . is completely unreliable:<\/em> Isaiah argued the same case, pointing to the Lord as the only reliable source of help (31:1-3, 7; 39:7). • A kind of reed<\/em> that breaks easily grows near the Nile (see Ezek 29:6-7).<\/p>","content_en":"36:6<\/strong> Egypt . . . is completely unreliable:<\/em> Isaiah argued the same case, pointing to the Lord as the only reliable source of help (31:1-3, 7; 39:7). • A kind of reed<\/em> that breaks easily grows near the Nile (see Ezek 29:6-7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:6 Egypt . . . is completely unreliable: Isaiah argued the same case, pointing to the Lord as the only reliable source of help (31:1-3, 7; 39:7). • A kind of reed that breaks easily grows near the Nile (see Ezek 29:6-7).","summary_en":"36:6 Egypt . . . is completely unreliable: Isaiah argued the same case, pointing to the Lord as the only reliable source of help (31:1-3, 7; 39:7). • A kind of reed that breaks easily grows near the Nile (see Ezek 29:6-7).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106806,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:6","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:6","content_ro":"36:6<\/strong> Egypt . . . is completely unreliable:<\/em> Isaiah argued the same case, pointing to the Lord as the only reliable source of help (31:1-3, 7; 39:7). • A kind of reed<\/em> that breaks easily grows near the Nile (see Ezek 29:6-7).<\/p>","content_en":"36:6<\/strong> Egypt . . . is completely unreliable:<\/em> Isaiah argued the same case, pointing to the Lord as the only reliable source of help (31:1-3, 7; 39:7). • A kind of reed<\/em> that breaks easily grows near the Nile (see Ezek 29:6-7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:6 Egypt . . . is completely unreliable: Isaiah argued the same case, pointing to the Lord as the only reliable source of help (31:1-3, 7; 39:7). • A kind of reed that breaks easily grows near the Nile (see Ezek 29:6-7).","summary_en":"36:6 Egypt . . . is completely unreliable: Isaiah argued the same case, pointing to the Lord as the only reliable source of help (31:1-3, 7; 39:7). • A kind of reed that breaks easily grows near the Nile (see Ezek 29:6-7).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":134432,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:6","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:6","content_ro":"36:6<\/strong> Egypt . . . is completely unreliable:<\/em> Isaiah argued the same case, pointing to the Lord as the only reliable source of help (31:1-3, 7; 39:7). • A kind of reed<\/em> that breaks easily grows near the Nile (see Ezek 29:6-7).<\/p>","content_en":"36:6<\/strong> Egypt . . . is completely unreliable:<\/em> Isaiah argued the same case, pointing to the Lord as the only reliable source of help (31:1-3, 7; 39:7). • A kind of reed<\/em> that breaks easily grows near the Nile (see Ezek 29:6-7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:6 Egypt . . . is completely unreliable: Isaiah argued the same case, pointing to the Lord as the only reliable source of help (31:1-3, 7; 39:7). • A kind of reed that breaks easily grows near the Nile (see Ezek 29:6-7).","summary_en":"36:6 Egypt . . . is completely unreliable: Isaiah argued the same case, pointing to the Lord as the only reliable source of help (31:1-3, 7; 39:7). • A kind of reed that breaks easily grows near the Nile (see Ezek 29:6-7).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":51555,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:7","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:7","content_ro":"36:7<\/strong> We are trusting in the<\/em> Lord<\/span> our God:<\/em> Ironically, the Assyrian chief of staff knew about and played on Isaiah’s message (26:4; 36:15; 37:10). • Hezekiah showed his zeal for the Lord by tearing down<\/em> the pagan shrines and altars<\/em> (2 Kgs 18:4), but the Assyrians mistakenly thought Hezekiah had angered God in the process.<\/p>","content_en":"36:7<\/strong> We are trusting in the<\/em> Lord<\/span> our God:<\/em> Ironically, the Assyrian chief of staff knew about and played on Isaiah’s message (26:4; 36:15; 37:10). • Hezekiah showed his zeal for the Lord by tearing down<\/em> the pagan shrines and altars<\/em> (2 Kgs 18:4), but the Assyrians mistakenly thought Hezekiah had angered God in the process.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:7 We are trusting in the Lord our God: Ironically, the Assyrian chief of staff knew about and played on Isaiah’s message (26:4; 36:15; 37:10). • Hezekiah showed his zeal for the Lord by tearing down the pagan shrines and altars (2 Kgs 18:4), but the Assyrians mistakenly thought Hezekiah had angered God in the process.","summary_en":"36:7 We are trusting in the Lord our God: Ironically, the Assyrian chief of staff knew about and played on Isaiah’s message (26:4; 36:15; 37:10). • Hezekiah showed his zeal for the Lord by tearing down the pagan shrines and altars (2 Kgs 18:4), but the Assyrians mistakenly thought Hezekiah had angered God in the process.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":79181,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:7","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:7","content_ro":"36:7<\/strong> We are trusting in the<\/em> Lord<\/span> our God:<\/em> Ironically, the Assyrian chief of staff knew about and played on Isaiah’s message (26:4; 36:15; 37:10). • Hezekiah showed his zeal for the Lord by tearing down<\/em> the pagan shrines and altars<\/em> (2 Kgs 18:4), but the Assyrians mistakenly thought Hezekiah had angered God in the process.<\/p>","content_en":"36:7<\/strong> We are trusting in the<\/em> Lord<\/span> our God:<\/em> Ironically, the Assyrian chief of staff knew about and played on Isaiah’s message (26:4; 36:15; 37:10). • Hezekiah showed his zeal for the Lord by tearing down<\/em> the pagan shrines and altars<\/em> (2 Kgs 18:4), but the Assyrians mistakenly thought Hezekiah had angered God in the process.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:7 We are trusting in the Lord our God: Ironically, the Assyrian chief of staff knew about and played on Isaiah’s message (26:4; 36:15; 37:10). • Hezekiah showed his zeal for the Lord by tearing down the pagan shrines and altars (2 Kgs 18:4), but the Assyrians mistakenly thought Hezekiah had angered God in the process.","summary_en":"36:7 We are trusting in the Lord our God: Ironically, the Assyrian chief of staff knew about and played on Isaiah’s message (26:4; 36:15; 37:10). • Hezekiah showed his zeal for the Lord by tearing down the pagan shrines and altars (2 Kgs 18:4), but the Assyrians mistakenly thought Hezekiah had angered God in the process.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106807,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:7","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:7","content_ro":"36:7<\/strong> We are trusting in the<\/em> Lord<\/span> our God:<\/em> Ironically, the Assyrian chief of staff knew about and played on Isaiah’s message (26:4; 36:15; 37:10). • Hezekiah showed his zeal for the Lord by tearing down<\/em> the pagan shrines and altars<\/em> (2 Kgs 18:4), but the Assyrians mistakenly thought Hezekiah had angered God in the process.<\/p>","content_en":"36:7<\/strong> We are trusting in the<\/em> Lord<\/span> our God:<\/em> Ironically, the Assyrian chief of staff knew about and played on Isaiah’s message (26:4; 36:15; 37:10). • Hezekiah showed his zeal for the Lord by tearing down<\/em> the pagan shrines and altars<\/em> (2 Kgs 18:4), but the Assyrians mistakenly thought Hezekiah had angered God in the process.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:7 We are trusting in the Lord our God: Ironically, the Assyrian chief of staff knew about and played on Isaiah’s message (26:4; 36:15; 37:10). • Hezekiah showed his zeal for the Lord by tearing down the pagan shrines and altars (2 Kgs 18:4), but the Assyrians mistakenly thought Hezekiah had angered God in the process.","summary_en":"36:7 We are trusting in the Lord our God: Ironically, the Assyrian chief of staff knew about and played on Isaiah’s message (26:4; 36:15; 37:10). • Hezekiah showed his zeal for the Lord by tearing down the pagan shrines and altars (2 Kgs 18:4), but the Assyrians mistakenly thought Hezekiah had angered God in the process.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":134433,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:7","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:7","content_ro":"36:7<\/strong> We are trusting in the<\/em> Lord<\/span> our God:<\/em> Ironically, the Assyrian chief of staff knew about and played on Isaiah’s message (26:4; 36:15; 37:10). • Hezekiah showed his zeal for the Lord by tearing down<\/em> the pagan shrines and altars<\/em> (2 Kgs 18:4), but the Assyrians mistakenly thought Hezekiah had angered God in the process.<\/p>","content_en":"36:7<\/strong> We are trusting in the<\/em> Lord<\/span> our God:<\/em> Ironically, the Assyrian chief of staff knew about and played on Isaiah’s message (26:4; 36:15; 37:10). • Hezekiah showed his zeal for the Lord by tearing down<\/em> the pagan shrines and altars<\/em> (2 Kgs 18:4), but the Assyrians mistakenly thought Hezekiah had angered God in the process.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:7 We are trusting in the Lord our God: Ironically, the Assyrian chief of staff knew about and played on Isaiah’s message (26:4; 36:15; 37:10). • Hezekiah showed his zeal for the Lord by tearing down the pagan shrines and altars (2 Kgs 18:4), but the Assyrians mistakenly thought Hezekiah had angered God in the process.","summary_en":"36:7 We are trusting in the Lord our God: Ironically, the Assyrian chief of staff knew about and played on Isaiah’s message (26:4; 36:15; 37:10). • Hezekiah showed his zeal for the Lord by tearing down the pagan shrines and altars (2 Kgs 18:4), but the Assyrians mistakenly thought Hezekiah had angered God in the process.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":51556,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:8","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:8","content_ro":"36:8<\/strong> At this time, cavalry mounted on horses<\/em> was the newest military technology. The Assyrian chief of staff was mocking the Judeans because he knew that Judah had no trained men<\/em> who knew how to ride<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"36:8<\/strong> At this time, cavalry mounted on horses<\/em> was the newest military technology. The Assyrian chief of staff was mocking the Judeans because he knew that Judah had no trained men<\/em> who knew how to ride<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:8 At this time, cavalry mounted on horses was the newest military technology. The Assyrian chief of staff was mocking the Judeans because he knew that Judah had no trained men who knew how to ride.","summary_en":"36:8 At this time, cavalry mounted on horses was the newest military technology. The Assyrian chief of staff was mocking the Judeans because he knew that Judah had no trained men who knew how to ride.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":79182,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:8","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:8","content_ro":"36:8<\/strong> At this time, cavalry mounted on horses<\/em> was the newest military technology. The Assyrian chief of staff was mocking the Judeans because he knew that Judah had no trained men<\/em> who knew how to ride<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"36:8<\/strong> At this time, cavalry mounted on horses<\/em> was the newest military technology. The Assyrian chief of staff was mocking the Judeans because he knew that Judah had no trained men<\/em> who knew how to ride<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:8 At this time, cavalry mounted on horses was the newest military technology. The Assyrian chief of staff was mocking the Judeans because he knew that Judah had no trained men who knew how to ride.","summary_en":"36:8 At this time, cavalry mounted on horses was the newest military technology. The Assyrian chief of staff was mocking the Judeans because he knew that Judah had no trained men who knew how to ride.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106808,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:8","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:8","content_ro":"36:8<\/strong> At this time, cavalry mounted on horses<\/em> was the newest military technology. The Assyrian chief of staff was mocking the Judeans because he knew that Judah had no trained men<\/em> who knew how to ride<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"36:8<\/strong> At this time, cavalry mounted on horses<\/em> was the newest military technology. The Assyrian chief of staff was mocking the Judeans because he knew that Judah had no trained men<\/em> who knew how to ride<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:8 At this time, cavalry mounted on horses was the newest military technology. The Assyrian chief of staff was mocking the Judeans because he knew that Judah had no trained men who knew how to ride.","summary_en":"36:8 At this time, cavalry mounted on horses was the newest military technology. The Assyrian chief of staff was mocking the Judeans because he knew that Judah had no trained men who knew how to ride.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":134434,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:8","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:8","content_ro":"36:8<\/strong> At this time, cavalry mounted on horses<\/em> was the newest military technology. The Assyrian chief of staff was mocking the Judeans because he knew that Judah had no trained men<\/em> who knew how to ride<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"36:8<\/strong> At this time, cavalry mounted on horses<\/em> was the newest military technology. The Assyrian chief of staff was mocking the Judeans because he knew that Judah had no trained men<\/em> who knew how to ride<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:8 At this time, cavalry mounted on horses was the newest military technology. The Assyrian chief of staff was mocking the Judeans because he knew that Judah had no trained men who knew how to ride.","summary_en":"36:8 At this time, cavalry mounted on horses was the newest military technology. The Assyrian chief of staff was mocking the Judeans because he knew that Judah had no trained men who knew how to ride.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":51557,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:10","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:10","content_ro":"36:10<\/strong> The<\/em> Lord<\/span> himself told us:<\/em> It was common for a king to claim the approval of a deity in destroying other kingdoms. This claim was consistent with Isaiah’s prophecy in 10:5-6.<\/p>","content_en":"36:10<\/strong> The<\/em> Lord<\/span> himself told us:<\/em> It was common for a king to claim the approval of a deity in destroying other kingdoms. This claim was consistent with Isaiah’s prophecy in 10:5-6.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:10 The Lord himself told us: It was common for a king to claim the approval of a deity in destroying other kingdoms. This claim was consistent with Isaiah’s prophecy in 10:5-6.","summary_en":"36:10 The Lord himself told us: It was common for a king to claim the approval of a deity in destroying other kingdoms. This claim was consistent with Isaiah’s prophecy in 10:5-6.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":79183,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:10","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:10","content_ro":"36:10<\/strong> The<\/em> Lord<\/span> himself told us:<\/em> It was common for a king to claim the approval of a deity in destroying other kingdoms. This claim was consistent with Isaiah’s prophecy in 10:5-6.<\/p>","content_en":"36:10<\/strong> The<\/em> Lord<\/span> himself told us:<\/em> It was common for a king to claim the approval of a deity in destroying other kingdoms. This claim was consistent with Isaiah’s prophecy in 10:5-6.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:10 The Lord himself told us: It was common for a king to claim the approval of a deity in destroying other kingdoms. This claim was consistent with Isaiah’s prophecy in 10:5-6.","summary_en":"36:10 The Lord himself told us: It was common for a king to claim the approval of a deity in destroying other kingdoms. This claim was consistent with Isaiah’s prophecy in 10:5-6.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106809,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:10","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:10","content_ro":"36:10<\/strong> The<\/em> Lord<\/span> himself told us:<\/em> It was common for a king to claim the approval of a deity in destroying other kingdoms. This claim was consistent with Isaiah’s prophecy in 10:5-6.<\/p>","content_en":"36:10<\/strong> The<\/em> Lord<\/span> himself told us:<\/em> It was common for a king to claim the approval of a deity in destroying other kingdoms. This claim was consistent with Isaiah’s prophecy in 10:5-6.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:10 The Lord himself told us: It was common for a king to claim the approval of a deity in destroying other kingdoms. This claim was consistent with Isaiah’s prophecy in 10:5-6.","summary_en":"36:10 The Lord himself told us: It was common for a king to claim the approval of a deity in destroying other kingdoms. This claim was consistent with Isaiah’s prophecy in 10:5-6.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":134435,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:10","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:10","content_ro":"36:10<\/strong> The<\/em> Lord<\/span> himself told us:<\/em> It was common for a king to claim the approval of a deity in destroying other kingdoms. This claim was consistent with Isaiah’s prophecy in 10:5-6.<\/p>","content_en":"36:10<\/strong> The<\/em> Lord<\/span> himself told us:<\/em> It was common for a king to claim the approval of a deity in destroying other kingdoms. This claim was consistent with Isaiah’s prophecy in 10:5-6.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:10 The Lord himself told us: It was common for a king to claim the approval of a deity in destroying other kingdoms. This claim was consistent with Isaiah’s prophecy in 10:5-6.","summary_en":"36:10 The Lord himself told us: It was common for a king to claim the approval of a deity in destroying other kingdoms. This claim was consistent with Isaiah’s prophecy in 10:5-6.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"11":[{"id":51558,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:11","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:11","content_ro":"36:11<\/strong> Aramaic<\/em> was the lingua franca used throughout the Assyrian Empire, understood by the elite but not by the common people of Judah.<\/p>","content_en":"36:11<\/strong> Aramaic<\/em> was the lingua franca used throughout the Assyrian Empire, understood by the elite but not by the common people of Judah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:11 Aramaic was the lingua franca used throughout the Assyrian Empire, understood by the elite but not by the common people of Judah.","summary_en":"36:11 Aramaic was the lingua franca used throughout the Assyrian Empire, understood by the elite but not by the common people of Judah.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":79184,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:11","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:11","content_ro":"36:11<\/strong> Aramaic<\/em> was the lingua franca used throughout the Assyrian Empire, understood by the elite but not by the common people of Judah.<\/p>","content_en":"36:11<\/strong> Aramaic<\/em> was the lingua franca used throughout the Assyrian Empire, understood by the elite but not by the common people of Judah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:11 Aramaic was the lingua franca used throughout the Assyrian Empire, understood by the elite but not by the common people of Judah.","summary_en":"36:11 Aramaic was the lingua franca used throughout the Assyrian Empire, understood by the elite but not by the common people of Judah.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106810,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:11","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:11","content_ro":"36:11<\/strong> Aramaic<\/em> was the lingua franca used throughout the Assyrian Empire, understood by the elite but not by the common people of Judah.<\/p>","content_en":"36:11<\/strong> Aramaic<\/em> was the lingua franca used throughout the Assyrian Empire, understood by the elite but not by the common people of Judah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:11 Aramaic was the lingua franca used throughout the Assyrian Empire, understood by the elite but not by the common people of Judah.","summary_en":"36:11 Aramaic was the lingua franca used throughout the Assyrian Empire, understood by the elite but not by the common people of Judah.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":134436,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:11","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:11","content_ro":"36:11<\/strong> Aramaic<\/em> was the lingua franca used throughout the Assyrian Empire, understood by the elite but not by the common people of Judah.<\/p>","content_en":"36:11<\/strong> Aramaic<\/em> was the lingua franca used throughout the Assyrian Empire, understood by the elite but not by the common people of Judah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:11 Aramaic was the lingua franca used throughout the Assyrian Empire, understood by the elite but not by the common people of Judah.","summary_en":"36:11 Aramaic was the lingua franca used throughout the Assyrian Empire, understood by the elite but not by the common people of Judah.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"13":[{"id":51559,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:13","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:13","content_ro":"36:13-20<\/strong> In the Assyrian chief of staff’s second speech, he claimed that his nation’s gods were more powerful than the God of Judah (cp. 10:9-10). God’s ability to rescue his people was at stake. In the ensuing drama, the Lord shocked the Assyrian with his power (37:36-37).<\/p>","content_en":"36:13-20<\/strong> In the Assyrian chief of staff’s second speech, he claimed that his nation’s gods were more powerful than the God of Judah (cp. 10:9-10). God’s ability to rescue his people was at stake. In the ensuing drama, the Lord shocked the Assyrian with his power (37:36-37).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:13-20 In the Assyrian chief of staff’s second speech, he claimed that his nation’s gods were more powerful than the God of Judah (cp. 10:9-10). God’s ability to rescue his people was at stake. In the ensuing drama, the Lord shocked the Assyrian with his power (37:36-37).","summary_en":"36:13-20 In the Assyrian chief of staff’s second speech, he claimed that his nation’s gods were more powerful than the God of Judah (cp. 10:9-10). God’s ability to rescue his people was at stake. In the ensuing drama, the Lord shocked the Assyrian with his power (37:36-37).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":79185,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:13","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:13","content_ro":"36:13-20<\/strong> In the Assyrian chief of staff’s second speech, he claimed that his nation’s gods were more powerful than the God of Judah (cp. 10:9-10). God’s ability to rescue his people was at stake. In the ensuing drama, the Lord shocked the Assyrian with his power (37:36-37).<\/p>","content_en":"36:13-20<\/strong> In the Assyrian chief of staff’s second speech, he claimed that his nation’s gods were more powerful than the God of Judah (cp. 10:9-10). God’s ability to rescue his people was at stake. In the ensuing drama, the Lord shocked the Assyrian with his power (37:36-37).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:13-20 In the Assyrian chief of staff’s second speech, he claimed that his nation’s gods were more powerful than the God of Judah (cp. 10:9-10). God’s ability to rescue his people was at stake. In the ensuing drama, the Lord shocked the Assyrian with his power (37:36-37).","summary_en":"36:13-20 In the Assyrian chief of staff’s second speech, he claimed that his nation’s gods were more powerful than the God of Judah (cp. 10:9-10). God’s ability to rescue his people was at stake. In the ensuing drama, the Lord shocked the Assyrian with his power (37:36-37).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106811,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:13","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:13","content_ro":"36:13-20<\/strong> In the Assyrian chief of staff’s second speech, he claimed that his nation’s gods were more powerful than the God of Judah (cp. 10:9-10). God’s ability to rescue his people was at stake. In the ensuing drama, the Lord shocked the Assyrian with his power (37:36-37).<\/p>","content_en":"36:13-20<\/strong> In the Assyrian chief of staff’s second speech, he claimed that his nation’s gods were more powerful than the God of Judah (cp. 10:9-10). God’s ability to rescue his people was at stake. In the ensuing drama, the Lord shocked the Assyrian with his power (37:36-37).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:13-20 In the Assyrian chief of staff’s second speech, he claimed that his nation’s gods were more powerful than the God of Judah (cp. 10:9-10). God’s ability to rescue his people was at stake. In the ensuing drama, the Lord shocked the Assyrian with his power (37:36-37).","summary_en":"36:13-20 In the Assyrian chief of staff’s second speech, he claimed that his nation’s gods were more powerful than the God of Judah (cp. 10:9-10). God’s ability to rescue his people was at stake. In the ensuing drama, the Lord shocked the Assyrian with his power (37:36-37).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":134437,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:13","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:13","content_ro":"36:13-20<\/strong> In the Assyrian chief of staff’s second speech, he claimed that his nation’s gods were more powerful than the God of Judah (cp. 10:9-10). God’s ability to rescue his people was at stake. In the ensuing drama, the Lord shocked the Assyrian with his power (37:36-37).<\/p>","content_en":"36:13-20<\/strong> In the Assyrian chief of staff’s second speech, he claimed that his nation’s gods were more powerful than the God of Judah (cp. 10:9-10). God’s ability to rescue his people was at stake. In the ensuing drama, the Lord shocked the Assyrian with his power (37:36-37).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:13-20 In the Assyrian chief of staff’s second speech, he claimed that his nation’s gods were more powerful than the God of Judah (cp. 10:9-10). God’s ability to rescue his people was at stake. In the ensuing drama, the Lord shocked the Assyrian with his power (37:36-37).","summary_en":"36:13-20 In the Assyrian chief of staff’s second speech, he claimed that his nation’s gods were more powerful than the God of Judah (cp. 10:9-10). God’s ability to rescue his people was at stake. In the ensuing drama, the Lord shocked the Assyrian with his power (37:36-37).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"14":[{"id":26889,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Nahum","title_en":"Book of Nahum","content_ro":"<h3>NAHUM, Book of<\/h3>\nSeventh book in the canonical grouping of the 12 Minor Prophets. Its significance and importance lie in the strategic place it holds in delineating the plan and program of God in relationship to both Judah and the nations of the world.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nNahum is identified as an Elkoshite in the superscription to the book (Na 1:1). The term is somewhat doubtful in meaning but probably refers to a city now unknown. If the term does refer to a geographical location, it may be the village of Elcesi in Judah.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nThe book of Nahum deals with the fall of two great cities, Nineveh and Thebes. The fall of Thebes is cited in 3:8-10, and the entire book deals with the destruction of Nineveh, the capital of Assyria, which was yet future. Thebes was destroyed by the Assyrians around 663 BC<\/span>, and Nineveh fell in 612 BC<\/span>. Within this range of history a number of dates for the composition of Nahum have been suggested. Some scholars prefer a date very close to the fall of Nineveh, perhaps during the time when Assyria was being invaded. However, Assyria’s influence extended to Judah at the time of the writing of the book (1:13-15; 2:2), a fact that is hardly consonant with the impending downfall of that nation. Since the influence of Assyria in the western provinces began to decline in the latter half of the seventh century, it is best to place the writing of the book in the middle of the seventh century, subsequent to the destruction of Thebes but before the erosion of Assyrian power in Syro-Palestine.<\/p>\nScholars who deny the validity of biblical prophecy generally date the book in the period subsequent to the fall of Nineveh.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nThe extent of Assyrian dominance in the mid-seventh century was unparalleled. Never before had Assyrian influence extended so far. The destruction of Thebes brought to an end any significant resistance to Assyria by Egypt, their most powerful foe.<\/p>\nThe destruction of Thebes occurred during the reign of Manasseh of Judah (696–642 BC<\/span>), who was, for all intents and purposes, a vassal of the Assyrians. Assyrian influence in Judah led to the intrusion of non-Yahwistic influences, such as the revival of fertility cults and the worship of Assyrian astral deities (2 Kgs 21:1-9).<\/p>\nWithin the structure of Assyria’s enormous expansion there were many weaknesses that would bring about the decline and eventual demise of that empire. For one thing, it had overextended itself. The task of keeping hostile captive countries in line, many of which were at vast distances from the capital, became increasingly difficult.<\/p>\nAssyria began to experience internal difficulties, particularly with the Chaldeans, a group of loosely knit tribes who had been absorbed into the Assyrian Empire. Egypt also began to withhold tribute. Numerous border raids by barbarians caused the empire to gradually weaken.<\/p>\nThe situation worsened as the internal strife began to burgeon into a major crisis. Finally a coalition of Babylonians, Medes, and Scythians brought about the collapse of Assyria when, after a three-month siege, Nineveh fell in 612 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe site of Nineveh was excavated in 1840 by Henry Layard. The excavation revealed that the city was heavily fortified. Evidence still remains of the moats and bulwarks constructed for its defense. The palace of Sennacherib, with its 71 rooms decorated with artistic works, was also uncovered by Layard. Even though the palace lay buried for millennia, it still revealed the splendor of the days of Nineveh’s greatness.<\/p>\nThe prophet Nahum predicted that the city would be burned (Na 2:13). In his description of the city, Layard indicated that a great fire had destroyed Nineveh. This became evident even when only two small portions of the tell had been explored. The massive gates of the city, which Nahum said would be open to its enemies (3:13), were also burned. The massive sculptures that originally stood by the gates were found buried in debris of earth, brick, and stones mixed with charcoal.<\/p>\nAn important archaeological find is a Babylonian chronicle recording events in the reign of the Babylonian king Nabopolassar (625–605 BC<\/span>). This chronicle fixes the date of the fall of Nineveh, placing it in the 14th year of Nabopolassar—that is, 612 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nPurpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\nThe purpose of the book of Nahum is to predict the downfall of the Assyrian Empire as prefigured in its capital city, Nineveh. It sets forth the mighty power of God revealed in the arena of history.<\/p>\nAt first glance the book may seem to be lacking substantial theological teaching. It is, after all, an extended ode celebrating the downfall of a pagan city. However, when one looks at history from the perspective of a prophet, history becomes the context for the revelation of many of God’s attributes.<\/p>\nIn chapter 1 the prophet weaves several significant theological themes into his account of the demise of the city. He sets forth the fact that God loves and cares for his own. In 1:7 he describes the Lord as knowing those who take refuge in him. In 1:13 God promises the end of Assyrian oppression of Judah.<\/p>\nGod’s sovereignty is set forth as well. God is sovereign over the nations that oppose him (1:2). He is sovereign over nature, for the clouds are but the dust of his feet (v 3). God cannot be defied (v 6). He is the sovereign of his people (v 13).<\/p>\nBasic to the theological structure of the book is its affirmation that God is the Lord of history. History is the arena of his activity. God is not merely an abstract concept to the prophet, nor is he a disinterested deity. He brings nations into being and he destroys them. History is not under the control of godless nations or fortuitous events; it is under the control of the Creator.<\/p>\nNahum points out that God does not deal with people only in wrath. His wrath is revealed against those who oppose him. He deals in tenderness and love with those who find him to be their refuge.<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\n<h5>Superscription (1:1)<\/h5>\nLike other prophetic books, Nahum begins with a superscription. It attributes the authorship of the book to the prophet Nahum. The first part of the superscription reads, “An oracle concerning Nineveh,” which indicates the book’s content.<\/p>\n<h5>The Prophet Considers the Wrath and Might of God (1:2-6)<\/h5>\nThe message of the prophet begins with a descriptive account of a number of attributes of God, specifically his anger and sovereign power. The statement that God is a jealous God (1:2) is not to be understood as attributing selfish motives to God. Rather, it expresses God’s intense devotion and loyalty to those who are his own.<\/p>\nBasic to this section is the affirmation that God takes vengeance on his foes. This theological principle is the basis for Nahum’s description of the fall of Nineveh. That Assyria was an enemy of God was made clear in history. The Assyrians were not only an instrument used by God to punish his people, but also they were a pagan people who opposed and harassed the Hebrews at every opportunity. Their conquest and exile of the kingdom of Israel was the ultimate manifestation of their opposition to Yahweh. Perhaps it was this dreadful period in Hebrew history that was uppermost in Nahum’s mind.<\/p>\nAn opening statement in this book says, “The Lord<\/span> is slow to get angry, but his power is great, and he never lets the guilty go unpunished” (1:3, nlt<\/span>). Even toward his enemies God acts in grace; he does not lash out in uncontrolled rage but deals with them to change their ways. The statement “he never lets the guilty go unpunished” is an allusion to the great affirmation of God in Exodus 34:6. It is best translated, “He will not completely clear the guilty,” which affirms that God forgives but often allows the effects of sin to have their course. This is illustrated in the case of David, whose sin with Bathsheba was forgiven, but the child of the union died. The destruction of Nineveh was thus certain to occur, according to the theological principle established by Nahum: God punishes those who oppose him.<\/p>\nThe sovereignty of God over the sphere of nature is established in Nahum 1:3b-6. It, too, is the arena in which his awesome power is revealed.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fall of Nineveh and the Deliverance of Israel (1:7-15)<\/h5>\nThe prophet then turned to the city of Nineveh in direct address. In verse 11 he speaks of one who comes forth from Assyria plotting evil against the Lord—a reminder of the Rabshakeh, the Assyrian emissary cited in Isaiah 36:14-20 as counseling the people to give in to his demands for surrender. The words of doom for Nineveh become words of comfort for Judah, for Nahum says that Assyria will afflict them no longer (Na 1:12).<\/p>\nThe ultimacy of the destruction of the city is set forth in verses 13-15. No longer would Assyria rise to afflict the Jews. This great truth is celebrated in verse 15, where the prophet encourages the people to return to their worship of God, for they will no longer have Assyria as an enemy.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fall of Nineveh (2:1-13)<\/h5>\nThe literary style of Nahum in this section is superb. The fast-moving action, expressed by concise, almost clipped phrasing, lends an atmosphere of excitement and urgency to the description of the collapse of the city. One hears the orders of the defenders in these words: “Sound the alarm! Man the ramparts! Muster your defenses, and keep a sharp watch for the enemy attack to begin!” (2:1, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nNahum seems to describe the rush into the city just moments after the walls had been breached. One sees the flashes of red as shields are brandished (2:3) and hears the crushing sound of the madly dashing chariots (v 4), but the defenders are too late (v 5).<\/p>\nAn important part of Nineveh’s defensive structure were the moats that surrounded the city. These moats, fed by two rivers in the vicinity, are alluded to in 2:6, 8. But these moats can’t keep back the invaders.<\/p>\nThe language again becomes vivid, punctuated with brisk commands: “Stop, stop!” (2:8). And the invaders are heard to say, “Loot the silver! Plunder the gold!” Finally the siege is over, and there is only desolation and ruin (v 10).<\/p>\nThis section closes with a reference to lions (2:11-13). Lions in the OT often stand for the wicked, particularly when the wicked devour the righteous. Assyria was very lionlike in its treatment of the Jews. But God declares that he is against the Assyrians (v 13) and will completely cut them off.<\/p>\nThis section, vivid and colorful in its style, contains a deep theological message that should not be overlooked. It affirms God’s activity in history and assures the believer that the enemies of God will never ultimately conquer the people of God. For God is almighty; he is an avenging God who jealously cares for his own.<\/p>\n<h5>A Lament for Nineveh (3:1-19)<\/h5>\nThe prophet pronounces “woe” on the city in a lengthy ode celebrating Nineveh’s fall. If he seems to get undue satisfaction from Nineveh’s destruction, it is not necessarily because he has a cruel nature. The OT writers viewed the godless nations of the world as the personification of evil. When Nineveh fell, the sphere of history witnessed God’s conquest of evil in that particular realm.<\/p>\nIn 3:1-7 the prophet speaks of the shame that Nineveh will experience as a result of her fall. He describes one of the causes of Assyria’s downfall as her sorceries and harlotries (3:4). This is an evident reference to the idolatrous religion of Assyria. The Assyrian priests were noted for their use of divination and omens. Particularly noteworthy were their attempts to predict the future by observing the motions of the heavenly bodies.<\/p>\nThe prophet pointed to other countries that fell prey to their enemies (3:8-11) and affirmed that Assyria is no better than these. He closed by describing the grandeur and might of Nineveh, but he vividly showed how all of that would pass away. Whether it is fortifications (v 12) or extensive trade (v 16), or soldiers (v 17)—all will crumble.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Israel, History of; Nahum (Person) #1; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NAHUM, Book of<\/h3>\nSeventh book in the canonical grouping of the 12 Minor Prophets. Its significance and importance lie in the strategic place it holds in delineating the plan and program of God in relationship to both Judah and the nations of the world.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nNahum is identified as an Elkoshite in the superscription to the book (Na 1:1). The term is somewhat doubtful in meaning but probably refers to a city now unknown. If the term does refer to a geographical location, it may be the village of Elcesi in Judah.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nThe book of Nahum deals with the fall of two great cities, Nineveh and Thebes. The fall of Thebes is cited in 3:8-10, and the entire book deals with the destruction of Nineveh, the capital of Assyria, which was yet future. Thebes was destroyed by the Assyrians around 663 BC<\/span>, and Nineveh fell in 612 BC<\/span>. Within this range of history a number of dates for the composition of Nahum have been suggested. Some scholars prefer a date very close to the fall of Nineveh, perhaps during the time when Assyria was being invaded. However, Assyria’s influence extended to Judah at the time of the writing of the book (1:13-15; 2:2), a fact that is hardly consonant with the impending downfall of that nation. Since the influence of Assyria in the western provinces began to decline in the latter half of the seventh century, it is best to place the writing of the book in the middle of the seventh century, subsequent to the destruction of Thebes but before the erosion of Assyrian power in Syro-Palestine.<\/p>\nScholars who deny the validity of biblical prophecy generally date the book in the period subsequent to the fall of Nineveh.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nThe extent of Assyrian dominance in the mid-seventh century was unparalleled. Never before had Assyrian influence extended so far. The destruction of Thebes brought to an end any significant resistance to Assyria by Egypt, their most powerful foe.<\/p>\nThe destruction of Thebes occurred during the reign of Manasseh of Judah (696–642 BC<\/span>), who was, for all intents and purposes, a vassal of the Assyrians. Assyrian influence in Judah led to the intrusion of non-Yahwistic influences, such as the revival of fertility cults and the worship of Assyrian astral deities (2 Kgs 21:1-9).<\/p>\nWithin the structure of Assyria’s enormous expansion there were many weaknesses that would bring about the decline and eventual demise of that empire. For one thing, it had overextended itself. The task of keeping hostile captive countries in line, many of which were at vast distances from the capital, became increasingly difficult.<\/p>\nAssyria began to experience internal difficulties, particularly with the Chaldeans, a group of loosely knit tribes who had been absorbed into the Assyrian Empire. Egypt also began to withhold tribute. Numerous border raids by barbarians caused the empire to gradually weaken.<\/p>\nThe situation worsened as the internal strife began to burgeon into a major crisis. Finally a coalition of Babylonians, Medes, and Scythians brought about the collapse of Assyria when, after a three-month siege, Nineveh fell in 612 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe site of Nineveh was excavated in 1840 by Henry Layard. The excavation revealed that the city was heavily fortified. Evidence still remains of the moats and bulwarks constructed for its defense. The palace of Sennacherib, with its 71 rooms decorated with artistic works, was also uncovered by Layard. Even though the palace lay buried for millennia, it still revealed the splendor of the days of Nineveh’s greatness.<\/p>\nThe prophet Nahum predicted that the city would be burned (Na 2:13). In his description of the city, Layard indicated that a great fire had destroyed Nineveh. This became evident even when only two small portions of the tell had been explored. The massive gates of the city, which Nahum said would be open to its enemies (3:13), were also burned. The massive sculptures that originally stood by the gates were found buried in debris of earth, brick, and stones mixed with charcoal.<\/p>\nAn important archaeological find is a Babylonian chronicle recording events in the reign of the Babylonian king Nabopolassar (625–605 BC<\/span>). This chronicle fixes the date of the fall of Nineveh, placing it in the 14th year of Nabopolassar—that is, 612 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nPurpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\nThe purpose of the book of Nahum is to predict the downfall of the Assyrian Empire as prefigured in its capital city, Nineveh. It sets forth the mighty power of God revealed in the arena of history.<\/p>\nAt first glance the book may seem to be lacking substantial theological teaching. It is, after all, an extended ode celebrating the downfall of a pagan city. However, when one looks at history from the perspective of a prophet, history becomes the context for the revelation of many of God’s attributes.<\/p>\nIn chapter 1 the prophet weaves several significant theological themes into his account of the demise of the city. He sets forth the fact that God loves and cares for his own. In 1:7 he describes the Lord as knowing those who take refuge in him. In 1:13 God promises the end of Assyrian oppression of Judah.<\/p>\nGod’s sovereignty is set forth as well. God is sovereign over the nations that oppose him (1:2). He is sovereign over nature, for the clouds are but the dust of his feet (v 3). God cannot be defied (v 6). He is the sovereign of his people (v 13).<\/p>\nBasic to the theological structure of the book is its affirmation that God is the Lord of history. History is the arena of his activity. God is not merely an abstract concept to the prophet, nor is he a disinterested deity. He brings nations into being and he destroys them. History is not under the control of godless nations or fortuitous events; it is under the control of the Creator.<\/p>\nNahum points out that God does not deal with people only in wrath. His wrath is revealed against those who oppose him. He deals in tenderness and love with those who find him to be their refuge.<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\n<h5>Superscription (1:1)<\/h5>\nLike other prophetic books, Nahum begins with a superscription. It attributes the authorship of the book to the prophet Nahum. The first part of the superscription reads, “An oracle concerning Nineveh,” which indicates the book’s content.<\/p>\n<h5>The Prophet Considers the Wrath and Might of God (1:2-6)<\/h5>\nThe message of the prophet begins with a descriptive account of a number of attributes of God, specifically his anger and sovereign power. The statement that God is a jealous God (1:2) is not to be understood as attributing selfish motives to God. Rather, it expresses God’s intense devotion and loyalty to those who are his own.<\/p>\nBasic to this section is the affirmation that God takes vengeance on his foes. This theological principle is the basis for Nahum’s description of the fall of Nineveh. That Assyria was an enemy of God was made clear in history. The Assyrians were not only an instrument used by God to punish his people, but also they were a pagan people who opposed and harassed the Hebrews at every opportunity. Their conquest and exile of the kingdom of Israel was the ultimate manifestation of their opposition to Yahweh. Perhaps it was this dreadful period in Hebrew history that was uppermost in Nahum’s mind.<\/p>\nAn opening statement in this book says, “The Lord<\/span> is slow to get angry, but his power is great, and he never lets the guilty go unpunished” (1:3, nlt<\/span>). Even toward his enemies God acts in grace; he does not lash out in uncontrolled rage but deals with them to change their ways. The statement “he never lets the guilty go unpunished” is an allusion to the great affirmation of God in Exodus 34:6. It is best translated, “He will not completely clear the guilty,” which affirms that God forgives but often allows the effects of sin to have their course. This is illustrated in the case of David, whose sin with Bathsheba was forgiven, but the child of the union died. The destruction of Nineveh was thus certain to occur, according to the theological principle established by Nahum: God punishes those who oppose him.<\/p>\nThe sovereignty of God over the sphere of nature is established in Nahum 1:3b-6. It, too, is the arena in which his awesome power is revealed.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fall of Nineveh and the Deliverance of Israel (1:7-15)<\/h5>\nThe prophet then turned to the city of Nineveh in direct address. In verse 11 he speaks of one who comes forth from Assyria plotting evil against the Lord—a reminder of the Rabshakeh, the Assyrian emissary cited in Isaiah 36:14-20 as counseling the people to give in to his demands for surrender. The words of doom for Nineveh become words of comfort for Judah, for Nahum says that Assyria will afflict them no longer (Na 1:12).<\/p>\nThe ultimacy of the destruction of the city is set forth in verses 13-15. No longer would Assyria rise to afflict the Jews. This great truth is celebrated in verse 15, where the prophet encourages the people to return to their worship of God, for they will no longer have Assyria as an enemy.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fall of Nineveh (2:1-13)<\/h5>\nThe literary style of Nahum in this section is superb. The fast-moving action, expressed by concise, almost clipped phrasing, lends an atmosphere of excitement and urgency to the description of the collapse of the city. One hears the orders of the defenders in these words: “Sound the alarm! Man the ramparts! Muster your defenses, and keep a sharp watch for the enemy attack to begin!” (2:1, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nNahum seems to describe the rush into the city just moments after the walls had been breached. One sees the flashes of red as shields are brandished (2:3) and hears the crushing sound of the madly dashing chariots (v 4), but the defenders are too late (v 5).<\/p>\nAn important part of Nineveh’s defensive structure were the moats that surrounded the city. These moats, fed by two rivers in the vicinity, are alluded to in 2:6, 8. But these moats can’t keep back the invaders.<\/p>\nThe language again becomes vivid, punctuated with brisk commands: “Stop, stop!” (2:8). And the invaders are heard to say, “Loot the silver! Plunder the gold!” Finally the siege is over, and there is only desolation and ruin (v 10).<\/p>\nThis section closes with a reference to lions (2:11-13). Lions in the OT often stand for the wicked, particularly when the wicked devour the righteous. Assyria was very lionlike in its treatment of the Jews. But God declares that he is against the Assyrians (v 13) and will completely cut them off.<\/p>\nThis section, vivid and colorful in its style, contains a deep theological message that should not be overlooked. It affirms God’s activity in history and assures the believer that the enemies of God will never ultimately conquer the people of God. For God is almighty; he is an avenging God who jealously cares for his own.<\/p>\n<h5>A Lament for Nineveh (3:1-19)<\/h5>\nThe prophet pronounces “woe” on the city in a lengthy ode celebrating Nineveh’s fall. If he seems to get undue satisfaction from Nineveh’s destruction, it is not necessarily because he has a cruel nature. The OT writers viewed the godless nations of the world as the personification of evil. When Nineveh fell, the sphere of history witnessed God’s conquest of evil in that particular realm.<\/p>\nIn 3:1-7 the prophet speaks of the shame that Nineveh will experience as a result of her fall. He describes one of the causes of Assyria’s downfall as her sorceries and harlotries (3:4). This is an evident reference to the idolatrous religion of Assyria. The Assyrian priests were noted for their use of divination and omens. Particularly noteworthy were their attempts to predict the future by observing the motions of the heavenly bodies.<\/p>\nThe prophet pointed to other countries that fell prey to their enemies (3:8-11) and affirmed that Assyria is no better than these. He closed by describing the grandeur and might of Nineveh, but he vividly showed how all of that would pass away. Whether it is fortifications (v 12) or extensive trade (v 16), or soldiers (v 17)—all will crumble.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Israel, History of; Nahum (Person) #1; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NAHUM, Book of Seventh book in the canonical grouping of the 12 Minor Prophets. Its significance and importance lie in the strategic place it holds in delineating the plan and program of God in relationship to both Judah and the nations of the world. Preview • Author • Date • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author Nahum is identified as an Elkoshite in the superscription to the book (Na 1:1). The term is somewhat doubtful in meaning but probably refers to a city now un...","summary_en":"NAHUM, Book of Seventh book in the canonical grouping of the 12 Minor Prophets. Its significance and importance lie in the strategic place it holds in delineating the plan and program of God in relationship to both Judah and the nations of the world. Preview • Author • Date • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author Nahum is identified as an Elkoshite in the superscription to the book (Na 1:1). The term is somewhat doubtful in meaning but probably refers to a city now un...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":51560,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:14","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:14","content_ro":"36:14<\/strong> Don’t let Hezekiah deceive you:<\/em> This public accusation against Hezekiah was intended to undermine the people’s confidence in him.<\/p>","content_en":"36:14<\/strong> Don’t let Hezekiah deceive you:<\/em> This public accusation against Hezekiah was intended to undermine the people’s confidence in him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:14 Don’t let Hezekiah deceive you: This public accusation against Hezekiah was intended to undermine the people’s confidence in him.","summary_en":"36:14 Don’t let Hezekiah deceive you: This public accusation against Hezekiah was intended to undermine the people’s confidence in him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":79186,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:14","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:14","content_ro":"36:14<\/strong> Don’t let Hezekiah deceive you:<\/em> This public accusation against Hezekiah was intended to undermine the people’s confidence in him.<\/p>","content_en":"36:14<\/strong> Don’t let Hezekiah deceive you:<\/em> This public accusation against Hezekiah was intended to undermine the people’s confidence in him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:14 Don’t let Hezekiah deceive you: This public accusation against Hezekiah was intended to undermine the people’s confidence in him.","summary_en":"36:14 Don’t let Hezekiah deceive you: This public accusation against Hezekiah was intended to undermine the people’s confidence in him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106812,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:14","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:14","content_ro":"36:14<\/strong> Don’t let Hezekiah deceive you:<\/em> This public accusation against Hezekiah was intended to undermine the people’s confidence in him.<\/p>","content_en":"36:14<\/strong> Don’t let Hezekiah deceive you:<\/em> This public accusation against Hezekiah was intended to undermine the people’s confidence in him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:14 Don’t let Hezekiah deceive you: This public accusation against Hezekiah was intended to undermine the people’s confidence in him.","summary_en":"36:14 Don’t let Hezekiah deceive you: This public accusation against Hezekiah was intended to undermine the people’s confidence in him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":134438,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:14","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:14","content_ro":"36:14<\/strong> Don’t let Hezekiah deceive you:<\/em> This public accusation against Hezekiah was intended to undermine the people’s confidence in him.<\/p>","content_en":"36:14<\/strong> Don’t let Hezekiah deceive you:<\/em> This public accusation against Hezekiah was intended to undermine the people’s confidence in him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:14 Don’t let Hezekiah deceive you: This public accusation against Hezekiah was intended to undermine the people’s confidence in him.","summary_en":"36:14 Don’t let Hezekiah deceive you: This public accusation against Hezekiah was intended to undermine the people’s confidence in him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":51561,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:15","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:15","content_ro":"36:15<\/strong> Hezekiah demonstrated a strong faith in the<\/em> Lord<\/span>,<\/em> unlike Ahaz (ch 7). Hezekiah’s faith would bring rescue<\/em>,<\/em> whereas Ahaz’s lack of faith brought him trouble (see 7:9).<\/p>","content_en":"36:15<\/strong> Hezekiah demonstrated a strong faith in the<\/em> Lord<\/span>,<\/em> unlike Ahaz (ch 7). Hezekiah’s faith would bring rescue<\/em>,<\/em> whereas Ahaz’s lack of faith brought him trouble (see 7:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:15 Hezekiah demonstrated a strong faith in the Lord, unlike Ahaz (ch 7). Hezekiah’s faith would bring rescue, whereas Ahaz’s lack of faith brought him trouble (see 7:9).","summary_en":"36:15 Hezekiah demonstrated a strong faith in the Lord, unlike Ahaz (ch 7). Hezekiah’s faith would bring rescue, whereas Ahaz’s lack of faith brought him trouble (see 7:9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":79187,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:15","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:15","content_ro":"36:15<\/strong> Hezekiah demonstrated a strong faith in the<\/em> Lord<\/span>,<\/em> unlike Ahaz (ch 7). Hezekiah’s faith would bring rescue<\/em>,<\/em> whereas Ahaz’s lack of faith brought him trouble (see 7:9).<\/p>","content_en":"36:15<\/strong> Hezekiah demonstrated a strong faith in the<\/em> Lord<\/span>,<\/em> unlike Ahaz (ch 7). Hezekiah’s faith would bring rescue<\/em>,<\/em> whereas Ahaz’s lack of faith brought him trouble (see 7:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:15 Hezekiah demonstrated a strong faith in the Lord, unlike Ahaz (ch 7). Hezekiah’s faith would bring rescue, whereas Ahaz’s lack of faith brought him trouble (see 7:9).","summary_en":"36:15 Hezekiah demonstrated a strong faith in the Lord, unlike Ahaz (ch 7). Hezekiah’s faith would bring rescue, whereas Ahaz’s lack of faith brought him trouble (see 7:9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106813,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:15","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:15","content_ro":"36:15<\/strong> Hezekiah demonstrated a strong faith in the<\/em> Lord<\/span>,<\/em> unlike Ahaz (ch 7). Hezekiah’s faith would bring rescue<\/em>,<\/em> whereas Ahaz’s lack of faith brought him trouble (see 7:9).<\/p>","content_en":"36:15<\/strong> Hezekiah demonstrated a strong faith in the<\/em> Lord<\/span>,<\/em> unlike Ahaz (ch 7). Hezekiah’s faith would bring rescue<\/em>,<\/em> whereas Ahaz’s lack of faith brought him trouble (see 7:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:15 Hezekiah demonstrated a strong faith in the Lord, unlike Ahaz (ch 7). Hezekiah’s faith would bring rescue, whereas Ahaz’s lack of faith brought him trouble (see 7:9).","summary_en":"36:15 Hezekiah demonstrated a strong faith in the Lord, unlike Ahaz (ch 7). Hezekiah’s faith would bring rescue, whereas Ahaz’s lack of faith brought him trouble (see 7:9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":134439,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:15","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:15","content_ro":"36:15<\/strong> Hezekiah demonstrated a strong faith in the<\/em> Lord<\/span>,<\/em> unlike Ahaz (ch 7). Hezekiah’s faith would bring rescue<\/em>,<\/em> whereas Ahaz’s lack of faith brought him trouble (see 7:9).<\/p>","content_en":"36:15<\/strong> Hezekiah demonstrated a strong faith in the<\/em> Lord<\/span>,<\/em> unlike Ahaz (ch 7). Hezekiah’s faith would bring rescue<\/em>,<\/em> whereas Ahaz’s lack of faith brought him trouble (see 7:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:15 Hezekiah demonstrated a strong faith in the Lord, unlike Ahaz (ch 7). Hezekiah’s faith would bring rescue, whereas Ahaz’s lack of faith brought him trouble (see 7:9).","summary_en":"36:15 Hezekiah demonstrated a strong faith in the Lord, unlike Ahaz (ch 7). Hezekiah’s faith would bring rescue, whereas Ahaz’s lack of faith brought him trouble (see 7:9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":6726,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Cistern","title_en":"Cistern","content_ro":"<h3>CISTERN<\/h3>\nPlace to store water; a man-made catch basin or reservoir. Stone cisterns plastered with lime came into common use in Palestine in the 13th century BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nLeaky or abandoned cisterns were often used as burial, torture, or prison chambers. For example, the dungeon into which the prophet Jeremiah was lowered was an abandoned muddy cistern (Jer 38:6). Ishmael threw the bodies of 70 murdered men into a large cistern originally constructed by King Asa for a wartime water supply (41:4-9).<\/p>\nCisterns were vitally important in the arid Near East. King Uzziah of Judah is described as hewing out many cisterns in areas where springs or wells were lacking (2 Chr 26:10). An Assyrian general taunting King Hezekiah and his people promised that, if they would submit, everyone would drink the water of his own cistern (Is 36:16; cf. 2 Kgs 18:31). Much earlier, Moses had assured the Israelites that cisterns already hewn out would be among God’s blessing in the Promised Land (Dt 6:11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CISTERN<\/h3>\nPlace to store water; a man-made catch basin or reservoir. Stone cisterns plastered with lime came into common use in Palestine in the 13th century BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nLeaky or abandoned cisterns were often used as burial, torture, or prison chambers. For example, the dungeon into which the prophet Jeremiah was lowered was an abandoned muddy cistern (Jer 38:6). Ishmael threw the bodies of 70 murdered men into a large cistern originally constructed by King Asa for a wartime water supply (41:4-9).<\/p>\nCisterns were vitally important in the arid Near East. King Uzziah of Judah is described as hewing out many cisterns in areas where springs or wells were lacking (2 Chr 26:10). An Assyrian general taunting King Hezekiah and his people promised that, if they would submit, everyone would drink the water of his own cistern (Is 36:16; cf. 2 Kgs 18:31). Much earlier, Moses had assured the Israelites that cisterns already hewn out would be among God’s blessing in the Promised Land (Dt 6:11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"CISTERN Place to store water; a man-made catch basin or reservoir. Stone cisterns plastered with lime came into common use in Palestine in the 13th century BC. Leaky or abandoned cisterns were often used as burial, torture, or prison chambers. For example, the dungeon into which the prophet Jeremiah was lowered was an abandoned muddy cistern (Jer 38:6). Ishmael threw the bodies of 70 murdered men into a large cistern originally constructed by King Asa for a wartime water supply (41:4-9). Cist...","summary_en":"CISTERN Place to store water; a man-made catch basin or reservoir. Stone cisterns plastered with lime came into common use in Palestine in the 13th century BC. Leaky or abandoned cisterns were often used as burial, torture, or prison chambers. For example, the dungeon into which the prophet Jeremiah was lowered was an abandoned muddy cistern (Jer 38:6). Ishmael threw the bodies of 70 murdered men into a large cistern originally constructed by King Asa for a wartime water supply (41:4-9). Cist...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":51562,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:16","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:16","content_ro":"36:16-17<\/strong> The Assyrian was tempting the people of Jerusalem with provisions that the Lord had promised to provide his obedient people (see 1:19; 37:30-35; Deut 8:7-9). It was a tempting offer, but a counterfeit. And it covered up the reality of exile that would have followed (Isa 36:17).<\/p>","content_en":"36:16-17<\/strong> The Assyrian was tempting the people of Jerusalem with provisions that the Lord had promised to provide his obedient people (see 1:19; 37:30-35; Deut 8:7-9). It was a tempting offer, but a counterfeit. And it covered up the reality of exile that would have followed (Isa 36:17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:16-17 The Assyrian was tempting the people of Jerusalem with provisions that the Lord had promised to provide his obedient people (see 1:19; 37:30-35; Deut 8:7-9). It was a tempting offer, but a counterfeit. And it covered up the reality of exile that would have followed (Isa 36:17).","summary_en":"36:16-17 The Assyrian was tempting the people of Jerusalem with provisions that the Lord had promised to provide his obedient people (see 1:19; 37:30-35; Deut 8:7-9). It was a tempting offer, but a counterfeit. And it covered up the reality of exile that would have followed (Isa 36:17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":79188,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:16","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:16","content_ro":"36:16-17<\/strong> The Assyrian was tempting the people of Jerusalem with provisions that the Lord had promised to provide his obedient people (see 1:19; 37:30-35; Deut 8:7-9). It was a tempting offer, but a counterfeit. And it covered up the reality of exile that would have followed (Isa 36:17).<\/p>","content_en":"36:16-17<\/strong> The Assyrian was tempting the people of Jerusalem with provisions that the Lord had promised to provide his obedient people (see 1:19; 37:30-35; Deut 8:7-9). It was a tempting offer, but a counterfeit. And it covered up the reality of exile that would have followed (Isa 36:17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:16-17 The Assyrian was tempting the people of Jerusalem with provisions that the Lord had promised to provide his obedient people (see 1:19; 37:30-35; Deut 8:7-9). It was a tempting offer, but a counterfeit. And it covered up the reality of exile that would have followed (Isa 36:17).","summary_en":"36:16-17 The Assyrian was tempting the people of Jerusalem with provisions that the Lord had promised to provide his obedient people (see 1:19; 37:30-35; Deut 8:7-9). It was a tempting offer, but a counterfeit. And it covered up the reality of exile that would have followed (Isa 36:17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106814,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:16","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:16","content_ro":"36:16-17<\/strong> The Assyrian was tempting the people of Jerusalem with provisions that the Lord had promised to provide his obedient people (see 1:19; 37:30-35; Deut 8:7-9). It was a tempting offer, but a counterfeit. And it covered up the reality of exile that would have followed (Isa 36:17).<\/p>","content_en":"36:16-17<\/strong> The Assyrian was tempting the people of Jerusalem with provisions that the Lord had promised to provide his obedient people (see 1:19; 37:30-35; Deut 8:7-9). It was a tempting offer, but a counterfeit. And it covered up the reality of exile that would have followed (Isa 36:17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:16-17 The Assyrian was tempting the people of Jerusalem with provisions that the Lord had promised to provide his obedient people (see 1:19; 37:30-35; Deut 8:7-9). It was a tempting offer, but a counterfeit. And it covered up the reality of exile that would have followed (Isa 36:17).","summary_en":"36:16-17 The Assyrian was tempting the people of Jerusalem with provisions that the Lord had promised to provide his obedient people (see 1:19; 37:30-35; Deut 8:7-9). It was a tempting offer, but a counterfeit. And it covered up the reality of exile that would have followed (Isa 36:17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":134440,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:16","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:16","content_ro":"36:16-17<\/strong> The Assyrian was tempting the people of Jerusalem with provisions that the Lord had promised to provide his obedient people (see 1:19; 37:30-35; Deut 8:7-9). It was a tempting offer, but a counterfeit. And it covered up the reality of exile that would have followed (Isa 36:17).<\/p>","content_en":"36:16-17<\/strong> The Assyrian was tempting the people of Jerusalem with provisions that the Lord had promised to provide his obedient people (see 1:19; 37:30-35; Deut 8:7-9). It was a tempting offer, but a counterfeit. And it covered up the reality of exile that would have followed (Isa 36:17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:16-17 The Assyrian was tempting the people of Jerusalem with provisions that the Lord had promised to provide his obedient people (see 1:19; 37:30-35; Deut 8:7-9). It was a tempting offer, but a counterfeit. And it covered up the reality of exile that would have followed (Isa 36:17).","summary_en":"36:16-17 The Assyrian was tempting the people of Jerusalem with provisions that the Lord had promised to provide his obedient people (see 1:19; 37:30-35; Deut 8:7-9). It was a tempting offer, but a counterfeit. And it covered up the reality of exile that would have followed (Isa 36:17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":2781,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Arpad","title_en":"Arpad","content_ro":"<h3>ARPAD<\/h3>\nCity in northern Syria. Arpad was overrun twice by the Assyrians: in 740 BC<\/span> by Tiglath-pileser III and in 720 BC<\/span> by Sargon II. The Assyrians used Arpad and Hamath as examples of the inability of any gods, including Israel’s, to protect cities against Assyria’s attacks (2 Kgs 18:34; 19:13; Is 10:9; 36:19; 37:13). Arpad and Hamath are also mentioned in a later prophecy against the Syrian city of Damascus (Jer 49:23). Arpad has been identified as modern Tell Erfad, north of Aleppo.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ARPAD<\/h3>\nCity in northern Syria. Arpad was overrun twice by the Assyrians: in 740 BC<\/span> by Tiglath-pileser III and in 720 BC<\/span> by Sargon II. The Assyrians used Arpad and Hamath as examples of the inability of any gods, including Israel’s, to protect cities against Assyria’s attacks (2 Kgs 18:34; 19:13; Is 10:9; 36:19; 37:13). Arpad and Hamath are also mentioned in a later prophecy against the Syrian city of Damascus (Jer 49:23). Arpad has been identified as modern Tell Erfad, north of Aleppo.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ARPAD City in northern Syria. Arpad was overrun twice by the Assyrians: in 740 BC by Tiglath-pileser III and in 720 BC by Sargon II. The Assyrians used Arpad and Hamath as examples of the inability of any gods, including Israel’s, to protect cities against Assyria’s attacks (2 Kgs 18:34; 19:13; Is 10:9; 36:19; 37:13). Arpad and Hamath are also mentioned in a later prophecy against the Syrian city of Damascus (Jer 49:23). Arpad has been identified as modern Tell Erfad, north of Aleppo.","summary_en":"ARPAD City in northern Syria. Arpad was overrun twice by the Assyrians: in 740 BC by Tiglath-pileser III and in 720 BC by Sargon II. The Assyrians used Arpad and Hamath as examples of the inability of any gods, including Israel’s, to protect cities against Assyria’s attacks (2 Kgs 18:34; 19:13; Is 10:9; 36:19; 37:13). Arpad and Hamath are also mentioned in a later prophecy against the Syrian city of Damascus (Jer 49:23). Arpad has been identified as modern Tell Erfad, north of Aleppo.","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":15132,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Hamath","title_en":"Hamath","content_ro":"<h3>HAMATH<\/h3>\n<li>1. City and district located about 125 miles (201 kilometers) north of Damascus (Syria), on the Orontes River. The early residents apparently were of the Hamitic race from the descendants of Canaan (Gn 10:18), but later inhabitants were Semitic. It was to be the northern boundary of the nation of Israel, described as the “entrance of Hamath” (Nm 34:7-8; Jos 13:5; Hebrew, Lebo Hamath<\/span>), but actually it was such only in the early monarchy and under Jeroboam II (793–753 BC<\/span>). The location is uncertain but was between the Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon Mountains. Some scholars have thought of it as an actual place-name, Lebo-hamath, and have identified it with modern Lebweh on the Orontes. Others have located it elsewhere in Syria.<\/li>\nHamath was established during the Neolithic period and destroyed about 1750 BC<\/span>, perhaps by the Hyksos. It was later rebuilt and conquered by Thutmose III (1502–1448 BC<\/span>), and while Egypt controlled Syria, Hamath prospered. Several Hittite inscriptions have been discovered that disclose that Hamath had become the capital of a small Hittite kingdom prior to 900 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nWhen David fought Hadadezer, king of Zobah, and defeated him, then Toi, king of Hamath, sent his son to congratulate David (2 Sm 8:9-10). Since Solomon built store-cities in the region of Hamath (2 Chr 8:4), it has been suggested that Hamath had become a tributary kingdom to Israel. During the reign of Ahab of Israel, the Assyrian royal inscriptions state that Irhulini, king of Hamath, allied with Damascus, Israel, and the 12 kings of the coast to resist the advances of Shalmaneser III (860–825 BC<\/span>). The league halted Shalmaneser, although he continued to harass Syria, and about 846 BC<\/span> he conquered the Syrian league, when Hamath became subject to Assyria. In 730 BC<\/span> Eni-Ilus, then king of Hamath, paid tribute to Tiglath-pileser III. About 720 BC<\/span> Sargon II colonized Hamath with 4,300 Assyrians and moved many people from different areas of his kingdom, including Hamath, to Samaria (2 Kgs 17:24). Israelites also were apparently colonized in Hamath (Is 11:11). Other OT references to the Assyrian conquest of Hamath include 2 Kings 18:34, 19:13, Isaiah 10:9, 36:19, 37:13, and Amos 6:2. Later the city seems to have been subject to Damascus (Jer 49:23). Some of the prophets predicted that Israel would eventually extend its boundaries once again to Hamath (Ez 47:16-17; 48:1; Zec 9:2).<\/p>\nDuring the Maccabean period, Jonathan Maccabeus and his army met the army of Demetrius at Hamath (1 Macc 12:25). According to Josephus, Antiochus Epiphanes changed its name to Epiphania (Antiquities<\/em> 1.4.2), the name by which it was known to the Greeks and Romans.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Hamath, Entrance of.<\/p>\n<li>2. Hamath-zobah is mentioned in 2 Chronicles 8:3 as a town conquered by Solomon. Some have suggested that it was the same city as the Hamath above, while others suggest that it was a different town in the district of Zobah.<\/li>\nSee also<\/em> Hamath-zobah.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HAMATH<\/h3>\n<li>1. City and district located about 125 miles (201 kilometers) north of Damascus (Syria), on the Orontes River. The early residents apparently were of the Hamitic race from the descendants of Canaan (Gn 10:18), but later inhabitants were Semitic. It was to be the northern boundary of the nation of Israel, described as the “entrance of Hamath” (Nm 34:7-8; Jos 13:5; Hebrew, Lebo Hamath<\/span>), but actually it was such only in the early monarchy and under Jeroboam II (793–753 BC<\/span>). The location is uncertain but was between the Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon Mountains. Some scholars have thought of it as an actual place-name, Lebo-hamath, and have identified it with modern Lebweh on the Orontes. Others have located it elsewhere in Syria.<\/li>\nHamath was established during the Neolithic period and destroyed about 1750 BC<\/span>, perhaps by the Hyksos. It was later rebuilt and conquered by Thutmose III (1502–1448 BC<\/span>), and while Egypt controlled Syria, Hamath prospered. Several Hittite inscriptions have been discovered that disclose that Hamath had become the capital of a small Hittite kingdom prior to 900 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nWhen David fought Hadadezer, king of Zobah, and defeated him, then Toi, king of Hamath, sent his son to congratulate David (2 Sm 8:9-10). Since Solomon built store-cities in the region of Hamath (2 Chr 8:4), it has been suggested that Hamath had become a tributary kingdom to Israel. During the reign of Ahab of Israel, the Assyrian royal inscriptions state that Irhulini, king of Hamath, allied with Damascus, Israel, and the 12 kings of the coast to resist the advances of Shalmaneser III (860–825 BC<\/span>). The league halted Shalmaneser, although he continued to harass Syria, and about 846 BC<\/span> he conquered the Syrian league, when Hamath became subject to Assyria. In 730 BC<\/span> Eni-Ilus, then king of Hamath, paid tribute to Tiglath-pileser III. About 720 BC<\/span> Sargon II colonized Hamath with 4,300 Assyrians and moved many people from different areas of his kingdom, including Hamath, to Samaria (2 Kgs 17:24). Israelites also were apparently colonized in Hamath (Is 11:11). Other OT references to the Assyrian conquest of Hamath include 2 Kings 18:34, 19:13, Isaiah 10:9, 36:19, 37:13, and Amos 6:2. Later the city seems to have been subject to Damascus (Jer 49:23). Some of the prophets predicted that Israel would eventually extend its boundaries once again to Hamath (Ez 47:16-17; 48:1; Zec 9:2).<\/p>\nDuring the Maccabean period, Jonathan Maccabeus and his army met the army of Demetrius at Hamath (1 Macc 12:25). According to Josephus, Antiochus Epiphanes changed its name to Epiphania (Antiquities<\/em> 1.4.2), the name by which it was known to the Greeks and Romans.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Hamath, Entrance of.<\/p>\n<li>2. Hamath-zobah is mentioned in 2 Chronicles 8:3 as a town conquered by Solomon. Some have suggested that it was the same city as the Hamath above, while others suggest that it was a different town in the district of Zobah.<\/li>\nSee also<\/em> Hamath-zobah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HAMATH 1. City and district located about 125 miles (201 kilometers) north of Damascus (Syria), on the Orontes River. The early residents apparently were of the Hamitic race from the descendants of Canaan (Gn 10:18), but later inhabitants were Semitic. It was to be the northern boundary of the nation of Israel, described as the “entrance of Hamath” (Nm 34:7-8; Jos 13:5; Hebrew, Lebo Hamath), but actually it was such only in the early monarchy and under Jeroboam II (793–753 BC). The location i...","summary_en":"HAMATH 1. City and district located about 125 miles (201 kilometers) north of Damascus (Syria), on the Orontes River. The early residents apparently were of the Hamitic race from the descendants of Canaan (Gn 10:18), but later inhabitants were Semitic. It was to be the northern boundary of the nation of Israel, described as the “entrance of Hamath” (Nm 34:7-8; Jos 13:5; Hebrew, Lebo Hamath), but actually it was such only in the early monarchy and under Jeroboam II (793–753 BC). The location i...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34350,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sepharvaim, Sepharvites*","title_en":"Sepharvaim, Sepharvites*","content_ro":"<h3>SEPHARVAIM, SEPHARVITES*<\/h3>\nOne of five cities and its inhabitants who were transported to Samaria after the fall of Israel to Sargon II, king of Assyria, in 722 BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 17:24). The Sepharvites were remembered for their abominable practice of offering their children as burnt sacrifices to their gods Adrammelech and Anammelech. In a taunting message to King Hezekiah of Judah (715–686 BC<\/span>), King Sennacherib of Assyria (705–681 BC<\/span>) warned that as the gods and kings of Sepharvaim were not able to prevent her fall to the Assyrians, so too it would be with Jerusalem and Hezekiah’s God (2 Kgs 18:34; Is 36:19; 37:13). The location of Sepharvaim is uncertain. It is probably identifiable with the Syrian city of Sibraim near Damascus (Ez 47:16).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SEPHARVAIM, SEPHARVITES*<\/h3>\nOne of five cities and its inhabitants who were transported to Samaria after the fall of Israel to Sargon II, king of Assyria, in 722 BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 17:24). The Sepharvites were remembered for their abominable practice of offering their children as burnt sacrifices to their gods Adrammelech and Anammelech. In a taunting message to King Hezekiah of Judah (715–686 BC<\/span>), King Sennacherib of Assyria (705–681 BC<\/span>) warned that as the gods and kings of Sepharvaim were not able to prevent her fall to the Assyrians, so too it would be with Jerusalem and Hezekiah’s God (2 Kgs 18:34; Is 36:19; 37:13). The location of Sepharvaim is uncertain. It is probably identifiable with the Syrian city of Sibraim near Damascus (Ez 47:16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SEPHARVAIM, SEPHARVITES* One of five cities and its inhabitants who were transported to Samaria after the fall of Israel to Sargon II, king of Assyria, in 722 BC (2 Kgs 17:24). The Sepharvites were remembered for their abominable practice of offering their children as burnt sacrifices to their gods Adrammelech and Anammelech. In a taunting message to King Hezekiah of Judah (715–686 BC), King Sennacherib of Assyria (705–681 BC) warned that as the gods and kings of Sepharvaim were not able to p...","summary_en":"SEPHARVAIM, SEPHARVITES* One of five cities and its inhabitants who were transported to Samaria after the fall of Israel to Sargon II, king of Assyria, in 722 BC (2 Kgs 17:24). The Sepharvites were remembered for their abominable practice of offering their children as burnt sacrifices to their gods Adrammelech and Anammelech. In a taunting message to King Hezekiah of Judah (715–686 BC), King Sennacherib of Assyria (705–681 BC) warned that as the gods and kings of Sepharvaim were not able to p...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":51563,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:19","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:19","content_ro":"36:19<\/strong> The populations of Hamath and<\/em> Arpad<\/em> had been relocated to Samaria, where the new local deities were the gods of Sepharvaim<\/em> (2 Kgs 17:24). The logic of the argument made sense to an Assyrian. If the Assyrian gods defeated all the gods of the other nations and the God of the Israelite nation of Samaria, would they not also defeat the God of Judah?<\/p>","content_en":"36:19<\/strong> The populations of Hamath and<\/em> Arpad<\/em> had been relocated to Samaria, where the new local deities were the gods of Sepharvaim<\/em> (2 Kgs 17:24). The logic of the argument made sense to an Assyrian. If the Assyrian gods defeated all the gods of the other nations and the God of the Israelite nation of Samaria, would they not also defeat the God of Judah?<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:19 The populations of Hamath and Arpad had been relocated to Samaria, where the new local deities were the gods of Sepharvaim (2 Kgs 17:24). The logic of the argument made sense to an Assyrian. If the Assyrian gods defeated all the gods of the other nations and the God of the Israelite nation of Samaria, would they not also defeat the God of Judah?","summary_en":"36:19 The populations of Hamath and Arpad had been relocated to Samaria, where the new local deities were the gods of Sepharvaim (2 Kgs 17:24). The logic of the argument made sense to an Assyrian. If the Assyrian gods defeated all the gods of the other nations and the God of the Israelite nation of Samaria, would they not also defeat the God of Judah?","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":79189,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:19","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:19","content_ro":"36:19<\/strong> The populations of Hamath and<\/em> Arpad<\/em> had been relocated to Samaria, where the new local deities were the gods of Sepharvaim<\/em> (2 Kgs 17:24). The logic of the argument made sense to an Assyrian. If the Assyrian gods defeated all the gods of the other nations and the God of the Israelite nation of Samaria, would they not also defeat the God of Judah?<\/p>","content_en":"36:19<\/strong> The populations of Hamath and<\/em> Arpad<\/em> had been relocated to Samaria, where the new local deities were the gods of Sepharvaim<\/em> (2 Kgs 17:24). The logic of the argument made sense to an Assyrian. If the Assyrian gods defeated all the gods of the other nations and the God of the Israelite nation of Samaria, would they not also defeat the God of Judah?<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:19 The populations of Hamath and Arpad had been relocated to Samaria, where the new local deities were the gods of Sepharvaim (2 Kgs 17:24). The logic of the argument made sense to an Assyrian. If the Assyrian gods defeated all the gods of the other nations and the God of the Israelite nation of Samaria, would they not also defeat the God of Judah?","summary_en":"36:19 The populations of Hamath and Arpad had been relocated to Samaria, where the new local deities were the gods of Sepharvaim (2 Kgs 17:24). The logic of the argument made sense to an Assyrian. If the Assyrian gods defeated all the gods of the other nations and the God of the Israelite nation of Samaria, would they not also defeat the God of Judah?","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106815,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:19","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:19","content_ro":"36:19<\/strong> The populations of Hamath and<\/em> Arpad<\/em> had been relocated to Samaria, where the new local deities were the gods of Sepharvaim<\/em> (2 Kgs 17:24). The logic of the argument made sense to an Assyrian. If the Assyrian gods defeated all the gods of the other nations and the God of the Israelite nation of Samaria, would they not also defeat the God of Judah?<\/p>","content_en":"36:19<\/strong> The populations of Hamath and<\/em> Arpad<\/em> had been relocated to Samaria, where the new local deities were the gods of Sepharvaim<\/em> (2 Kgs 17:24). The logic of the argument made sense to an Assyrian. If the Assyrian gods defeated all the gods of the other nations and the God of the Israelite nation of Samaria, would they not also defeat the God of Judah?<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:19 The populations of Hamath and Arpad had been relocated to Samaria, where the new local deities were the gods of Sepharvaim (2 Kgs 17:24). The logic of the argument made sense to an Assyrian. If the Assyrian gods defeated all the gods of the other nations and the God of the Israelite nation of Samaria, would they not also defeat the God of Judah?","summary_en":"36:19 The populations of Hamath and Arpad had been relocated to Samaria, where the new local deities were the gods of Sepharvaim (2 Kgs 17:24). The logic of the argument made sense to an Assyrian. If the Assyrian gods defeated all the gods of the other nations and the God of the Israelite nation of Samaria, would they not also defeat the God of Judah?","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":134441,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Isaia 36:19","title_en":"Study Note: Isaia 36:19","content_ro":"36:19<\/strong> The populations of Hamath and<\/em> Arpad<\/em> had been relocated to Samaria, where the new local deities were the gods of Sepharvaim<\/em> (2 Kgs 17:24). The logic of the argument made sense to an Assyrian. If the Assyrian gods defeated all the gods of the other nations and the God of the Israelite nation of Samaria, would they not also defeat the God of Judah?<\/p>","content_en":"36:19<\/strong> The populations of Hamath and<\/em> Arpad<\/em> had been relocated to Samaria, where the new local deities were the gods of Sepharvaim<\/em> (2 Kgs 17:24). The logic of the argument made sense to an Assyrian. If the Assyrian gods defeated all the gods of the other nations and the God of the Israelite nation of Samaria, would they not also defeat the God of Judah?<\/p>","summary_ro":"36:19 The populations of Hamath and Arpad had been relocated to Samaria, where the new local deities were the gods of Sepharvaim (2 Kgs 17:24). The logic of the argument made sense to an Assyrian. If the Assyrian gods defeated all the gods of the other nations and the God of the Israelite nation of Samaria, would they not also defeat the God of Judah?","summary_en":"36:19 The populations of Hamath and Arpad had been relocated to Samaria, where the new local deities were the gods of Sepharvaim (2 Kgs 17:24). The logic of the argument made sense to an Assyrian. If the Assyrian gods defeated all the gods of the other nations and the God of the Israelite nation of Samaria, would they not also defeat the God of Judah?","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"22":[{"id":2851,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Asaph","title_en":"Asaph","content_ro":"<h3>ASAPH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Berechiah’s son, an important tabernacle musician during King David’s reign (1 Chr 6:31-32, 39). Along with Heman, the head singer, and Ethan, Asaph was appointed to sound bronze cymbals during the ceremony when the ark was brought to the new tabernacle (1 Chr 15:1-19). David appointed Asaph to serve “by giving constant praise and thanks to the Lord God of Israel” (1 Chr 16:4-5, tlb<\/span>) and to lead Israel in a special psalm of praise (1 Chr 16:7-36). Along with his relatives he ministered daily before the ark (1 Chr 16:37; 25:6, 9; 1 Esd 1:15; 5:27, 59). He was also described as David’s private prophet (1 Chr 25:1-2). Asaph’s name appears in the superscriptions of Psalms 50 and 73–83 and in the guild he established, “the sons of Asaph” (1 Chr 25:1; 2 Chr 35:15; Ezr 2:41; Neh 7:44; 11:22).<\/li>\n<li>2. Joah’s father. Joah was the recorder (court historian or royal scribe) in King Hezekiah’s administration (2 Kgs 18:18, 27; Is 36:22).<\/li>\n<li>3. Temple guard or gatekeeper, seemingly the same person as Ebiasaph (1 Chr 9:18).<\/li>\n<li>4. Keeper of the king’s forest in Palestine under Artaxerxes I Longimanus (Neh 2:8). Nehemiah asked this Asaph for timber to rebuild the wall, gates, and structures of Jerusalem.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>ASAPH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Berechiah’s son, an important tabernacle musician during King David’s reign (1 Chr 6:31-32, 39). Along with Heman, the head singer, and Ethan, Asaph was appointed to sound bronze cymbals during the ceremony when the ark was brought to the new tabernacle (1 Chr 15:1-19). David appointed Asaph to serve “by giving constant praise and thanks to the Lord God of Israel” (1 Chr 16:4-5, tlb<\/span>) and to lead Israel in a special psalm of praise (1 Chr 16:7-36). Along with his relatives he ministered daily before the ark (1 Chr 16:37; 25:6, 9; 1 Esd 1:15; 5:27, 59). He was also described as David’s private prophet (1 Chr 25:1-2). Asaph’s name appears in the superscriptions of Psalms 50 and 73–83 and in the guild he established, “the sons of Asaph” (1 Chr 25:1; 2 Chr 35:15; Ezr 2:41; Neh 7:44; 11:22).<\/li>\n<li>2. Joah’s father. Joah was the recorder (court historian or royal scribe) in King Hezekiah’s administration (2 Kgs 18:18, 27; Is 36:22).<\/li>\n<li>3. Temple guard or gatekeeper, seemingly the same person as Ebiasaph (1 Chr 9:18).<\/li>\n<li>4. Keeper of the king’s forest in Palestine under Artaxerxes I Longimanus (Neh 2:8). Nehemiah asked this Asaph for timber to rebuild the wall, gates, and structures of Jerusalem.<\/li>","summary_ro":"ASAPH 1. Berechiah’s son, an important tabernacle musician during King David’s reign (1 Chr 6:31-32, 39). Along with Heman, the head singer, and Ethan, Asaph was appointed to sound bronze cymbals during the ceremony when the ark was brought to the new tabernacle (1 Chr 15:1-19). David appointed Asaph to serve “by giving constant praise and thanks to the Lord God of Israel” (1 Chr 16:4-5, tlb) and to lead Israel in a special psalm of praise (1 Chr 16:7-36). Along with his relatives he minister...","summary_en":"ASAPH 1. Berechiah’s son, an important tabernacle musician during King David’s reign (1 Chr 6:31-32, 39). Along with Heman, the head singer, and Ethan, Asaph was appointed to sound bronze cymbals during the ceremony when the ark was brought to the new tabernacle (1 Chr 15:1-19). David appointed Asaph to serve “by giving constant praise and thanks to the Lord God of Israel” (1 Chr 16:4-5, tlb) and to lead Israel in a special psalm of praise (1 Chr 16:7-36). Along with his relatives he minister...","source":"Articles\/A.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"}}

Isaia 36

Citește Biblia

Isaia 36

Niciun rezultat

Redare audio

Bine ai venit! 👋