1
Din partea oamenilor din popor şi din partea nevestelor lor s-au ridicat mari plângeri împotriva fraţilor lor Iudei.
2
Unii ziceau: ,,Noi, fiii noştri şi fetele noastre, sântem mulţi; să ni se dea grâu ca să mâncăm şi să trăim.``
3
Alţii ziceau: ,,Punem zălog ogoarele, viile şi casele noastre, ca să avem grâu în timpul foametei.``
4
Alţii ziceau: ,,Am împrumutat argint punând zălog ogoarele şi viile noastre pentru birul împăratului.
5
Şi totuş carnea noastră este ca şi carnea fraţilor noştri, copiii noştri sânt ca şi copiii lor; şi iată, supunem la robie pe fiii noştri şi pe fetele noastre, şi multe din fetele noastre au şi fost supuse la robie; sântem fără putere, căci ogoarele şi viile noastre sânt ale altora.``
6
M-am supărat foarte tare când le-am auzit plângerile şi cuvintele acestea.
7
Am hotărât să mustru pe cei mari şi pe dregători, şi le-am zis: ,,Ce! voi împrumutaţi cu camătă fraţilor voştri?`` Şi am strâns în jurul meu o mare mulţime,
8
şi le-am zis: ,,Noi am răscumpărat, după puterea noastră, pe fraţii noştri Iudei, vânduţi neamurilor; şi voi să vindeţi pe fraţii voştri? Şi încă nouă să ne fie vânduţi?`` Ei au tăcut, ne având ce să răspundă.
9
Apoi am zis: ,,Ce faceţi voi nu este bine. N-ar trebui să umblaţi în frica Dumnezeului nostru, ca să nu fiţi de ocara neamurilor vrăjmaşe nouă?
10
Şi eu, şi fraţii mei şi slujitorii mei, le-am împrumutat argint şi grâu. Să le lăsăm dar datoria aceasta!
11
Daţi-le înapoi astăzi ogoarele, viile, măslinii şi casele, şi a suta parte din argintul, din grâul, din mustul şi din untdelemnul, pe care l-aţi cerut dela ei ca dobândă.``
12
Ei au răspuns: ,,Le vom da înapoi, şi nu le vom cere nimic, vom face cum ai zis.`` Atunci am chemat pe preoţi, înaintea cărora i-am pus să jure că îşi vor ţinea cuvântul.
13
Şi mi-am scuturat mantaua, zicând: ,,Aşa să scuture Dumnezeu afară din Casa Lui şi de averile lui pe orice om care nu-şi va ţinea cuvântul, şi aşa să fie scuturat omul acela şi lăsat cu mânile goale!`` Toată adunarea a zis: ,,Amin.`` Şi au lăudat pe Domnul. Şi poporul s-a ţinut de cuvânt.
14
Din ziua când m-a pus împăratul dregător peste ei în ţara lui Iuda, dela al douăzecilea an până la al treizeci şi doilea an al împăratului Artaxerxe, timp de doisprezece ani, nici eu, nici fraţii mei n-am trăit din veniturile cuvenite dregătorului.
15
Înainte de mine, cei dintâi dregători împovărau poporul, şi luau dela el pâne şi vin, afară de cei patruzeci de sicli de argint; chiar şi slujitorii lor apăsau poporul. Eu n-am făcut aşa, din frică de Dumnezeu.
16
Ba, mai mult, am lucrat la dregerea zidului acestuia, n-am cumpărat niciun ogor, şi toţi slujitorii mei erau la lucru.
17
Aveam la masă o sută cincizeci de oameni, Iudei şi dregători, afară de ceice veneau la noi din neamurile deprimprejur.
18
Mi se pregătea în fiecare zi un bou, şase berbeci aleşi, şi păsări, şi la fiecare zece zile se pregătea din belşug tot vinul care era de trebuinţă. Cu toate acestea, n-am cerut veniturile cuvenite dregătorului, pentrucă lucrările apăsau greu asupra poporului acestuia.
19
Adu-Ţi aminte de mine, spre bine, Dumnezeule, pentru tot ce am făcut pentru poporul acesta!
{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":41803,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Nehemiah","title_en":"Nehemiah","content_ro":"<h3>Nehemiah<\/h3>\n<p>Nehemiah was a powerful leader of God’s people living in Judea following the Exile. Nehemiah improved the morale and strength of God’s people in the midst of difficulty.<\/p>\n<p>Before Nehemiah returned to Judea, he was cup-bearer to Persian king Artaxerxes I (465–424 <span>BC<\/span>). The cup-bearer brought the king his wine (tasting it first to make sure it wasn’t poisoned) and was his trusted confidant and adviser. Nehemiah heard reports about Jerusalem’s sad state and, moved with compassion, he asked the king’s permission to return to Judea to help his people. The king responded favorably and made him governor of the province of Judea for twelve years to aid his fellow Jews and rebuild the walls of Jerusalem (Neh 1:1–2:8).<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah had the support of the Persian king, but he faced opposition from the inhabitants of the land. These people of mixed heritage were the ancestors of the New Testament Samaritans. Nehemiah showed great courage and skill as he successfully helped the people of Judea rebuild the walls that protected Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah had a strong personal faith, as seen by his prayers (Neh 1:4-11; 2:4) and his confidence in divine guidance and help (2:8, 18, 20). He also advocated economic justice: He rebuked a few rich Judeans who were exploiting a food shortage by exacting high interest from their poorer relatives, and he provided an example of better conduct (Neh 5).<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah was vitally concerned about the people’s faithfulness, and he individually confronted men who had married pagan women (13:23-29). He had a strong interest in maintaining Temple worship, and he led the Jewish community to pledge support for Temple personnel and to provide offerings (10:32-39). He also reformed Sabbath observance (13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p>Although there were still problems at the end of his tenure in Jerusalem (see Neh 13), Nehemiah was an effective leader who restored a national and religious identity to the Jewish settlers in a period of political and economic weakness.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Neh 1:1–7:73; 8:9-10; 10:1–13:31<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Nehemiah<\/h3>\n<p>Nehemiah was a powerful leader of God’s people living in Judea following the Exile. Nehemiah improved the morale and strength of God’s people in the midst of difficulty.<\/p>\n<p>Before Nehemiah returned to Judea, he was cup-bearer to Persian king Artaxerxes I (465–424 <span>BC<\/span>). The cup-bearer brought the king his wine (tasting it first to make sure it wasn’t poisoned) and was his trusted confidant and adviser. Nehemiah heard reports about Jerusalem’s sad state and, moved with compassion, he asked the king’s permission to return to Judea to help his people. The king responded favorably and made him governor of the province of Judea for twelve years to aid his fellow Jews and rebuild the walls of Jerusalem (Neh 1:1–2:8).<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah had the support of the Persian king, but he faced opposition from the inhabitants of the land. These people of mixed heritage were the ancestors of the New Testament Samaritans. Nehemiah showed great courage and skill as he successfully helped the people of Judea rebuild the walls that protected Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah had a strong personal faith, as seen by his prayers (Neh 1:4-11; 2:4) and his confidence in divine guidance and help (2:8, 18, 20). He also advocated economic justice: He rebuked a few rich Judeans who were exploiting a food shortage by exacting high interest from their poorer relatives, and he provided an example of better conduct (Neh 5).<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah was vitally concerned about the people’s faithfulness, and he individually confronted men who had married pagan women (13:23-29). He had a strong interest in maintaining Temple worship, and he led the Jewish community to pledge support for Temple personnel and to provide offerings (10:32-39). He also reformed Sabbath observance (13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p>Although there were still problems at the end of his tenure in Jerusalem (see Neh 13), Nehemiah was an effective leader who restored a national and religious identity to the Jewish settlers in a period of political and economic weakness.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Neh 1:1–7:73; 8:9-10; 10:1–13:31<\/p>","summary_ro":"Nehemiah Nehemiah was a powerful leader of God’s people living in Judea following the Exile. Nehemiah improved the morale and strength of God’s people in the midst of difficulty. Before Nehemiah returned to Judea, he was cup-bearer to Persian king Artaxerxes I (465–424 BC). The cup-bearer brought the king his wine (tasting it first to make sure it wasn’t poisoned) and was his trusted confidant and adviser. Nehemiah heard reports about Jerusalem’s sad state and, moved with compassion, he asked...","summary_en":"Nehemiah Nehemiah was a powerful leader of God’s people living in Judea following the Exile. Nehemiah improved the morale and strength of God’s people in the midst of difficulty. Before Nehemiah returned to Judea, he was cup-bearer to Persian king Artaxerxes I (465–424 BC). The cup-bearer brought the king his wine (tasting it first to make sure it wasn’t poisoned) and was his trusted confidant and adviser. Nehemiah heard reports about Jerusalem’s sad state and, moved with compassion, he asked...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69429,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Nehemiah","title_en":"Nehemiah","content_ro":"<h3>Nehemiah<\/h3>\n<p>Nehemiah was a powerful leader of God’s people living in Judea following the Exile. Nehemiah improved the morale and strength of God’s people in the midst of difficulty.<\/p>\n<p>Before Nehemiah returned to Judea, he was cup-bearer to Persian king Artaxerxes I (465–424 <span>BC<\/span>). The cup-bearer brought the king his wine (tasting it first to make sure it wasn’t poisoned) and was his trusted confidant and adviser. Nehemiah heard reports about Jerusalem’s sad state and, moved with compassion, he asked the king’s permission to return to Judea to help his people. The king responded favorably and made him governor of the province of Judea for twelve years to aid his fellow Jews and rebuild the walls of Jerusalem (Neh 1:1–2:8).<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah had the support of the Persian king, but he faced opposition from the inhabitants of the land. These people of mixed heritage were the ancestors of the New Testament Samaritans. Nehemiah showed great courage and skill as he successfully helped the people of Judea rebuild the walls that protected Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah had a strong personal faith, as seen by his prayers (Neh 1:4-11; 2:4) and his confidence in divine guidance and help (2:8, 18, 20). He also advocated economic justice: He rebuked a few rich Judeans who were exploiting a food shortage by exacting high interest from their poorer relatives, and he provided an example of better conduct (Neh 5).<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah was vitally concerned about the people’s faithfulness, and he individually confronted men who had married pagan women (13:23-29). He had a strong interest in maintaining Temple worship, and he led the Jewish community to pledge support for Temple personnel and to provide offerings (10:32-39). He also reformed Sabbath observance (13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p>Although there were still problems at the end of his tenure in Jerusalem (see Neh 13), Nehemiah was an effective leader who restored a national and religious identity to the Jewish settlers in a period of political and economic weakness.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Neh 1:1–7:73; 8:9-10; 10:1–13:31<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Nehemiah<\/h3>\n<p>Nehemiah was a powerful leader of God’s people living in Judea following the Exile. Nehemiah improved the morale and strength of God’s people in the midst of difficulty.<\/p>\n<p>Before Nehemiah returned to Judea, he was cup-bearer to Persian king Artaxerxes I (465–424 <span>BC<\/span>). The cup-bearer brought the king his wine (tasting it first to make sure it wasn’t poisoned) and was his trusted confidant and adviser. Nehemiah heard reports about Jerusalem’s sad state and, moved with compassion, he asked the king’s permission to return to Judea to help his people. The king responded favorably and made him governor of the province of Judea for twelve years to aid his fellow Jews and rebuild the walls of Jerusalem (Neh 1:1–2:8).<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah had the support of the Persian king, but he faced opposition from the inhabitants of the land. These people of mixed heritage were the ancestors of the New Testament Samaritans. Nehemiah showed great courage and skill as he successfully helped the people of Judea rebuild the walls that protected Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah had a strong personal faith, as seen by his prayers (Neh 1:4-11; 2:4) and his confidence in divine guidance and help (2:8, 18, 20). He also advocated economic justice: He rebuked a few rich Judeans who were exploiting a food shortage by exacting high interest from their poorer relatives, and he provided an example of better conduct (Neh 5).<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah was vitally concerned about the people’s faithfulness, and he individually confronted men who had married pagan women (13:23-29). He had a strong interest in maintaining Temple worship, and he led the Jewish community to pledge support for Temple personnel and to provide offerings (10:32-39). He also reformed Sabbath observance (13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p>Although there were still problems at the end of his tenure in Jerusalem (see Neh 13), Nehemiah was an effective leader who restored a national and religious identity to the Jewish settlers in a period of political and economic weakness.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Neh 1:1–7:73; 8:9-10; 10:1–13:31<\/p>","summary_ro":"Nehemiah Nehemiah was a powerful leader of God’s people living in Judea following the Exile. Nehemiah improved the morale and strength of God’s people in the midst of difficulty. Before Nehemiah returned to Judea, he was cup-bearer to Persian king Artaxerxes I (465–424 BC). The cup-bearer brought the king his wine (tasting it first to make sure it wasn’t poisoned) and was his trusted confidant and adviser. Nehemiah heard reports about Jerusalem’s sad state and, moved with compassion, he asked...","summary_en":"Nehemiah Nehemiah was a powerful leader of God’s people living in Judea following the Exile. Nehemiah improved the morale and strength of God’s people in the midst of difficulty. Before Nehemiah returned to Judea, he was cup-bearer to Persian king Artaxerxes I (465–424 BC). The cup-bearer brought the king his wine (tasting it first to make sure it wasn’t poisoned) and was his trusted confidant and adviser. Nehemiah heard reports about Jerusalem’s sad state and, moved with compassion, he asked...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97055,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Nehemiah","title_en":"Nehemiah","content_ro":"<h3>Nehemiah<\/h3>\n<p>Nehemiah was a powerful leader of God’s people living in Judea following the Exile. Nehemiah improved the morale and strength of God’s people in the midst of difficulty.<\/p>\n<p>Before Nehemiah returned to Judea, he was cup-bearer to Persian king Artaxerxes I (465–424 <span>BC<\/span>). The cup-bearer brought the king his wine (tasting it first to make sure it wasn’t poisoned) and was his trusted confidant and adviser. Nehemiah heard reports about Jerusalem’s sad state and, moved with compassion, he asked the king’s permission to return to Judea to help his people. The king responded favorably and made him governor of the province of Judea for twelve years to aid his fellow Jews and rebuild the walls of Jerusalem (Neh 1:1–2:8).<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah had the support of the Persian king, but he faced opposition from the inhabitants of the land. These people of mixed heritage were the ancestors of the New Testament Samaritans. Nehemiah showed great courage and skill as he successfully helped the people of Judea rebuild the walls that protected Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah had a strong personal faith, as seen by his prayers (Neh 1:4-11; 2:4) and his confidence in divine guidance and help (2:8, 18, 20). He also advocated economic justice: He rebuked a few rich Judeans who were exploiting a food shortage by exacting high interest from their poorer relatives, and he provided an example of better conduct (Neh 5).<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah was vitally concerned about the people’s faithfulness, and he individually confronted men who had married pagan women (13:23-29). He had a strong interest in maintaining Temple worship, and he led the Jewish community to pledge support for Temple personnel and to provide offerings (10:32-39). He also reformed Sabbath observance (13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p>Although there were still problems at the end of his tenure in Jerusalem (see Neh 13), Nehemiah was an effective leader who restored a national and religious identity to the Jewish settlers in a period of political and economic weakness.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Neh 1:1–7:73; 8:9-10; 10:1–13:31<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Nehemiah<\/h3>\n<p>Nehemiah was a powerful leader of God’s people living in Judea following the Exile. Nehemiah improved the morale and strength of God’s people in the midst of difficulty.<\/p>\n<p>Before Nehemiah returned to Judea, he was cup-bearer to Persian king Artaxerxes I (465–424 <span>BC<\/span>). The cup-bearer brought the king his wine (tasting it first to make sure it wasn’t poisoned) and was his trusted confidant and adviser. Nehemiah heard reports about Jerusalem’s sad state and, moved with compassion, he asked the king’s permission to return to Judea to help his people. The king responded favorably and made him governor of the province of Judea for twelve years to aid his fellow Jews and rebuild the walls of Jerusalem (Neh 1:1–2:8).<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah had the support of the Persian king, but he faced opposition from the inhabitants of the land. These people of mixed heritage were the ancestors of the New Testament Samaritans. Nehemiah showed great courage and skill as he successfully helped the people of Judea rebuild the walls that protected Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah had a strong personal faith, as seen by his prayers (Neh 1:4-11; 2:4) and his confidence in divine guidance and help (2:8, 18, 20). He also advocated economic justice: He rebuked a few rich Judeans who were exploiting a food shortage by exacting high interest from their poorer relatives, and he provided an example of better conduct (Neh 5).<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah was vitally concerned about the people’s faithfulness, and he individually confronted men who had married pagan women (13:23-29). He had a strong interest in maintaining Temple worship, and he led the Jewish community to pledge support for Temple personnel and to provide offerings (10:32-39). He also reformed Sabbath observance (13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p>Although there were still problems at the end of his tenure in Jerusalem (see Neh 13), Nehemiah was an effective leader who restored a national and religious identity to the Jewish settlers in a period of political and economic weakness.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Neh 1:1–7:73; 8:9-10; 10:1–13:31<\/p>","summary_ro":"Nehemiah Nehemiah was a powerful leader of God’s people living in Judea following the Exile. Nehemiah improved the morale and strength of God’s people in the midst of difficulty. Before Nehemiah returned to Judea, he was cup-bearer to Persian king Artaxerxes I (465–424 BC). The cup-bearer brought the king his wine (tasting it first to make sure it wasn’t poisoned) and was his trusted confidant and adviser. Nehemiah heard reports about Jerusalem’s sad state and, moved with compassion, he asked...","summary_en":"Nehemiah Nehemiah was a powerful leader of God’s people living in Judea following the Exile. Nehemiah improved the morale and strength of God’s people in the midst of difficulty. Before Nehemiah returned to Judea, he was cup-bearer to Persian king Artaxerxes I (465–424 BC). The cup-bearer brought the king his wine (tasting it first to make sure it wasn’t poisoned) and was his trusted confidant and adviser. Nehemiah heard reports about Jerusalem’s sad state and, moved with compassion, he asked...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124681,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Nehemiah","title_en":"Nehemiah","content_ro":"<h3>Nehemiah<\/h3>\n<p>Nehemiah was a powerful leader of God’s people living in Judea following the Exile. Nehemiah improved the morale and strength of God’s people in the midst of difficulty.<\/p>\n<p>Before Nehemiah returned to Judea, he was cup-bearer to Persian king Artaxerxes I (465–424 <span>BC<\/span>). The cup-bearer brought the king his wine (tasting it first to make sure it wasn’t poisoned) and was his trusted confidant and adviser. Nehemiah heard reports about Jerusalem’s sad state and, moved with compassion, he asked the king’s permission to return to Judea to help his people. The king responded favorably and made him governor of the province of Judea for twelve years to aid his fellow Jews and rebuild the walls of Jerusalem (Neh 1:1–2:8).<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah had the support of the Persian king, but he faced opposition from the inhabitants of the land. These people of mixed heritage were the ancestors of the New Testament Samaritans. Nehemiah showed great courage and skill as he successfully helped the people of Judea rebuild the walls that protected Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah had a strong personal faith, as seen by his prayers (Neh 1:4-11; 2:4) and his confidence in divine guidance and help (2:8, 18, 20). He also advocated economic justice: He rebuked a few rich Judeans who were exploiting a food shortage by exacting high interest from their poorer relatives, and he provided an example of better conduct (Neh 5).<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah was vitally concerned about the people’s faithfulness, and he individually confronted men who had married pagan women (13:23-29). He had a strong interest in maintaining Temple worship, and he led the Jewish community to pledge support for Temple personnel and to provide offerings (10:32-39). He also reformed Sabbath observance (13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p>Although there were still problems at the end of his tenure in Jerusalem (see Neh 13), Nehemiah was an effective leader who restored a national and religious identity to the Jewish settlers in a period of political and economic weakness.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Neh 1:1–7:73; 8:9-10; 10:1–13:31<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Nehemiah<\/h3>\n<p>Nehemiah was a powerful leader of God’s people living in Judea following the Exile. Nehemiah improved the morale and strength of God’s people in the midst of difficulty.<\/p>\n<p>Before Nehemiah returned to Judea, he was cup-bearer to Persian king Artaxerxes I (465–424 <span>BC<\/span>). The cup-bearer brought the king his wine (tasting it first to make sure it wasn’t poisoned) and was his trusted confidant and adviser. Nehemiah heard reports about Jerusalem’s sad state and, moved with compassion, he asked the king’s permission to return to Judea to help his people. The king responded favorably and made him governor of the province of Judea for twelve years to aid his fellow Jews and rebuild the walls of Jerusalem (Neh 1:1–2:8).<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah had the support of the Persian king, but he faced opposition from the inhabitants of the land. These people of mixed heritage were the ancestors of the New Testament Samaritans. Nehemiah showed great courage and skill as he successfully helped the people of Judea rebuild the walls that protected Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah had a strong personal faith, as seen by his prayers (Neh 1:4-11; 2:4) and his confidence in divine guidance and help (2:8, 18, 20). He also advocated economic justice: He rebuked a few rich Judeans who were exploiting a food shortage by exacting high interest from their poorer relatives, and he provided an example of better conduct (Neh 5).<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah was vitally concerned about the people’s faithfulness, and he individually confronted men who had married pagan women (13:23-29). He had a strong interest in maintaining Temple worship, and he led the Jewish community to pledge support for Temple personnel and to provide offerings (10:32-39). He also reformed Sabbath observance (13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p>Although there were still problems at the end of his tenure in Jerusalem (see Neh 13), Nehemiah was an effective leader who restored a national and religious identity to the Jewish settlers in a period of political and economic weakness.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Neh 1:1–7:73; 8:9-10; 10:1–13:31<\/p>","summary_ro":"Nehemiah Nehemiah was a powerful leader of God’s people living in Judea following the Exile. Nehemiah improved the morale and strength of God’s people in the midst of difficulty. Before Nehemiah returned to Judea, he was cup-bearer to Persian king Artaxerxes I (465–424 BC). The cup-bearer brought the king his wine (tasting it first to make sure it wasn’t poisoned) and was his trusted confidant and adviser. Nehemiah heard reports about Jerusalem’s sad state and, moved with compassion, he asked...","summary_en":"Nehemiah Nehemiah was a powerful leader of God’s people living in Judea following the Exile. Nehemiah improved the morale and strength of God’s people in the midst of difficulty. Before Nehemiah returned to Judea, he was cup-bearer to Persian king Artaxerxes I (465–424 BC). The cup-bearer brought the king his wine (tasting it first to make sure it wasn’t poisoned) and was his trusted confidant and adviser. Nehemiah heard reports about Jerusalem’s sad state and, moved with compassion, he asked...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27210,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Nehemiah (Person)","title_en":"Nehemiah (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>NEHEMIAH (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Name of three men mentioned in the OT after the period of the exile. The name means “the Lord comforts” and was appropriate for this time of hope and fulfillment.<\/p>\n<p>1. Leader mentioned in a list of Jewish exiles who returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel sometime after 538 <span>BC<\/span> (Ezr 2:2; Neh 7:7).<\/p>\n<li>2. Ruler of half the district of Beth-zur who helped rebuild the Jerusalem wall in 444 <span>BC<\/span> (Neh 3:16).<\/li>\n<li>3. Governor of Judah during the restoration. Originally cupbearer to the Persian king Artaxerxes I (464–424 <span>BC<\/span>), Nehemiah pleaded to be sent to Judah to aid his fellow Jews in their difficulties and in particular to rebuild Jerusalem (Neh 1:1–2:8). He was appointed governor of Judah for 12 years.<\/li>\n<p>After inspecting the walls upon his arrival, he realized that their repair was to be his prime task. This repair would guarantee the security of the city and could provide a focal point for the Jewish community scattered throughout Judah. That he was able to marshal support for this project and to complete it attests to his skills in management and administration. He also had a strong personal faith, as his prayers (Neh 1:4-11; 2:4) and conviction of divine guidance and help (2:8, 18, 20) attest. He had to overcome hostility and intimidation from powerful neighboring authorities in Samaria, Ammon, and Arabia (4:1-9; 6:1-14). He also required economic justice (ch 5). A few rich Jews were exploiting a food shortage by exacting high interest from their poorer brothers.<\/p>\n<p>Included in Nehemiah’s concern for Jerusalem was a strong interest in the maintenance of temple worship. He was involved in the production of a document in which the Jewish community pledged themselves to support the temple personnel and to provide offerings (Neh 10:1, 32-39). Clearly, he realized that Judah needed at its heart a religious emphasis as well as political stability. These particular religious reforms are linked with those of his second period as governor (ch 13). Other reforms of that period concerned the observance of the Sabbath (13:15-22) and the problem of marriages to non-Jews (13:23-27). Nehemiah was a forceful leader (v 25) who used his imperial powers to restore to the settlers a national and religious identity in a period of political and economic weakness.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Nehemiah, Book of; Ezra (Person) #1; Ezra, Book of; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NEHEMIAH (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Name of three men mentioned in the OT after the period of the exile. The name means “the Lord comforts” and was appropriate for this time of hope and fulfillment.<\/p>\n<p>1. Leader mentioned in a list of Jewish exiles who returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel sometime after 538 <span>BC<\/span> (Ezr 2:2; Neh 7:7).<\/p>\n<li>2. Ruler of half the district of Beth-zur who helped rebuild the Jerusalem wall in 444 <span>BC<\/span> (Neh 3:16).<\/li>\n<li>3. Governor of Judah during the restoration. Originally cupbearer to the Persian king Artaxerxes I (464–424 <span>BC<\/span>), Nehemiah pleaded to be sent to Judah to aid his fellow Jews in their difficulties and in particular to rebuild Jerusalem (Neh 1:1–2:8). He was appointed governor of Judah for 12 years.<\/li>\n<p>After inspecting the walls upon his arrival, he realized that their repair was to be his prime task. This repair would guarantee the security of the city and could provide a focal point for the Jewish community scattered throughout Judah. That he was able to marshal support for this project and to complete it attests to his skills in management and administration. He also had a strong personal faith, as his prayers (Neh 1:4-11; 2:4) and conviction of divine guidance and help (2:8, 18, 20) attest. He had to overcome hostility and intimidation from powerful neighboring authorities in Samaria, Ammon, and Arabia (4:1-9; 6:1-14). He also required economic justice (ch 5). A few rich Jews were exploiting a food shortage by exacting high interest from their poorer brothers.<\/p>\n<p>Included in Nehemiah’s concern for Jerusalem was a strong interest in the maintenance of temple worship. He was involved in the production of a document in which the Jewish community pledged themselves to support the temple personnel and to provide offerings (Neh 10:1, 32-39). Clearly, he realized that Judah needed at its heart a religious emphasis as well as political stability. These particular religious reforms are linked with those of his second period as governor (ch 13). Other reforms of that period concerned the observance of the Sabbath (13:15-22) and the problem of marriages to non-Jews (13:23-27). Nehemiah was a forceful leader (v 25) who used his imperial powers to restore to the settlers a national and religious identity in a period of political and economic weakness.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Nehemiah, Book of; Ezra (Person) #1; Ezra, Book of; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NEHEMIAH (Person) Name of three men mentioned in the OT after the period of the exile. The name means “the Lord comforts” and was appropriate for this time of hope and fulfillment. 1. Leader mentioned in a list of Jewish exiles who returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel sometime after 538 BC (Ezr 2:2; Neh 7:7). 2. Ruler of half the district of Beth-zur who helped rebuild the Jerusalem wall in 444 BC (Neh 3:16). 3. Governor of Judah during the restoration. Originally cupbearer to the Persian ki...","summary_en":"NEHEMIAH (Person) Name of three men mentioned in the OT after the period of the exile. The name means “the Lord comforts” and was appropriate for this time of hope and fulfillment. 1. Leader mentioned in a list of Jewish exiles who returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel sometime after 538 BC (Ezr 2:2; Neh 7:7). 2. Ruler of half the district of Beth-zur who helped rebuild the Jerusalem wall in 444 BC (Neh 3:16). 3. Governor of Judah during the restoration. Originally cupbearer to the Persian ki...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27217,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Nehemiah","title_en":"Book of Nehemiah","content_ro":"<h3>NEHEMIAH, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>One of the last of the Jewish historical books.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Authenticity<\/p>\n<p>• Chronology<\/p>\n<p>• Significance<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>In 597 <span>BC<\/span> Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon took away the first exiles from Jerusalem. In 586 <span>BC<\/span> the Babylonians returned, pillaged and burned the city and its temple, and took an estimated 60,000 to 80,000 Judeans into exile. The expatriates settled in various districts where they enjoyed a measure of freedom. They engaged in agriculture and commerce and in some instances acquired considerable wealth. The elders continued to function, prophets like Ezekiel ministered among the exiles, and resistance to religious apostasy was kept alive in the popular mind.<\/p>\n<p>With the appearance of the Persian king Cyrus the Great (559–530 <span>BC<\/span>), the Jewish exiles’ prospects altered dramatically. Cyrus was a civilized and enlightened statesman, and within a short time after his conquest of Babylon, he issued an edict (Ezr 1:2-4) that granted the expatriates permission to return to their homeland. Two separate groups of exiles returned to Judah and built a new sanctuary in Jerusalem on the site of Solomon’s temple in 516 <span>BC<\/span>. Then, under King Artaxerxes I (464–424 <span>BC<\/span>), two separate groups returned from Babylon under Ezra (458 <span>BC<\/span>) and Nehemiah (445 <span>BC<\/span>), respectively. From this seedbed there sprang the theocratic people of Judah, the Jews, dedicated to the law of God, isolated from foreign influence, and centered in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah’s personal memoirs form a considerable portion of the book that bears his name. These memoirs reveal a man of nobility and piety, who was compassionate, prudent, and patriotic. He was a man of generosity and fidelity, political acumen, and religious zeal, of total dedication to God, outstanding organizational ability, and dynamic leadership. At the same time Nehemiah possessed a capacity for ruthlessness when confronting the sin and waywardness of his compatriots (Neh 5:1-13) and the intrigues of powerful non-Jewish enemies (13:8, 28). Not surprisingly, then, a dispirited and dejected people awoke from their lethargic and apathetic state and responded to Nehemiah’s stringent approach to their situation (2:4; 13:14, 22, 31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalAuthenticity\">Historical Authenticity<\/p>\n<p>According to Josephus and other early writers, the books of Ezra and Nehemiah formed one book in the early Hebrew Bible entitled the book of Ezra. The earliest Hebrew manuscript in which the two books are divided is dated 1448, and modern Hebrew Bibles refer to them as the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. In manuscripts of the Greek OT (LXX) they also formed one book. Origen, in the beginning of the third century, is the first to attest to a division. There is general acknowledgment of the genuineness of the personal memoirs of Nehemiah, which constitute a major part of the book.<\/p>\n<p>The historical framework of the book is confirmed by papyri that were discovered between 1898 and 1908 in Elephantine, an island in the upper Nile. Here Psammetichus II (593–588 <span>BC<\/span>) established a Jewish colony. The Elephantine papyri are well preserved, written in Aramaic, and are the fifth-century <span>BC<\/span> literary remains of this Jewish colony of the Persian period.<\/p>\n<p>The most important item among the papyri is a copy of a letter sent to the Persian governor of Judah in 407 <span>BC<\/span>. Three years earlier the Jewish temple in Elephantine had been destroyed. This disaster was the occasion of a letter to Jehohanan, the high priest in Jerusalem (see Neh 12:12-13). Now, in their letter to the governor in Judah, they asked permission to rebuild their temple and said that they had sent a similar request to Delaiah and Shelamiah, the sons of Sanballat (Nehemiah’s enemy, 2:10, 19; 4:1). The Elephantine papyri reveal that Sanballat was governor of the province of Samaria and that Tobiah was governor of the province of Ammon in Transjordan (2:10, 19). Here, then, is evidence that there was in Judah a twofold authority, civil and religious, and that the high priest of 408–407 <span>BC<\/span> was Jehohanan (12:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Chronology\">Chronology<\/p>\n<p>The question about whether Ezra or Nehemiah came to Jerusalem first has been hotly debated. There is no doubt that Nehemiah arrived in the city in 445 <span>BC<\/span>. The objections to the view that Ezra came to Jerusalem 13 years earlier, in 458 <span>BC<\/span>, raise questions concerning historical and textual data that are of such complexity as to preclude discussion of them here. However, achieving an understanding of the spiritual values of the book does not depend on a correct interpretation of the details of chronology. Arguments against the traditional chronology are neither altogether decisive, nor do they dispel the inherent complexities.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Significance\">Significance<\/p>\n<p>When the exiles returned to Jerusalem, Judah had neither nationhood nor political status. Only one thing remained to them: their religion. They were the “remnant” of Yahweh’s chosen people, from whom would rise the new and glorious Israel. It was this vision that explains Nehemiah’s insistence that the Jewish people maintain the purity and exclusiveness of their religious faith and practice in order to rejuvenate their national life and rebuild the city walls (6:15), because this symbolized the racial and the religious purity of the people. He also insisted on separation from paganism, prohibition of marriage with non-Jews (13:23-28), and careful observance of the laws of the Sabbath (vv 15-22).<\/p>\n<p>It is, therefore, difficult to exaggerate the significance of the book of Nehemiah. Along with the book of Ezra, it furnishes the only consecutive Hebrew account of that period in Jewish history when the foundations of Judaism—with its inflexible segregation of the Jews and its passionate veneration of the Mosaic law—were laid. Of course, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi also contribute to knowledge of the period, but Nehemiah (with Ezra) provides a progressive narrative of this epoch. The return of the expatriates from Babylon to Jerusalem constitutes a resumption of the saving purposes of God for his ancient people, leading to the advent of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The account of the return from Babylon under Nehemiah emphasizes the religious aspect of the community of repatriates in Jerusalem. But other, secondary factors should be noted: Nehemiah’s preoccupation with Judah’s political security and constitutional status to ensure its independence of Samaria; the rebuilding of the city walls; Nehemiah’s resettlements of population (7:4; 11:1-2); and his appointment to the governorship of the new province. However, there is no reference in the book of Nehemiah (or for that matter in Ezra) to a restoration to nationhood under a scion of the house of David—no mention of a Messiah, no allusion to the universal kingdom of God. Nehemiah manifests absolute loyalty to the Persian overlord who, while showing remarkable openness to Nehemiah’s request (2:4-9), still continues to levy taxes (5:4, 15).<\/p>\n<p>The repatriates retreated behind their city’s new walls and congregated around the second temple, completed in 516 <span>BC<\/span>. “The book of the law of Moses” (8:1), recognized by the Persian overlord as the law of the land of Judah, became central to Jewish devotion and worship. Judaism was the product of the restoration, which became both a protective barrier against, and a wall of separation from, the Gentiles. Religious institutions initiated during the Babylonian exile and transplanted to Jerusalem took deep and firm root: the synagogue where the Law and the Prophets were read and the prayers were offered; the scribes who worked with single-minded devotion; and the Sanhedrin that continued to serve the new theocracy.<\/p>\n<p>The Jewish remnant of the fifth century <span>BC<\/span> parallels the modern Christian church in that both share the challenge of spiritual reconstruction and renewal essential to God’s purposes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>In the winter of 445 <span>BC<\/span>, the Persian court was in Susa, the ancient capital of Elam (1:1). There Nehemiah occupied a position of honor and influence (2:1). From Jerusalem, a company of Judeans arrived, among them Nehemiah’s brother, whose description of conditions in Jerusalem horrified and grieved Nehemiah (1:2-4). Four months later, and after much prayer, he reached Jerusalem with an armed escort (1:5–2:11). After a three-day inspection of the situation, Nehemiah realized that rebuilding the walls would be his primary task (2:12–3:32).<\/p>\n<p>An outburst of new national spirit caused latent opposition to surface. Sanballat, Tobiah, and Geshem were powerful, resourceful, astute antagonists. Through ridicule and rumors, they insinuated that work on the walls was a form of rebellion against the king (2:19; 4:1-3, 7-14; 6:1-9). But Nehemiah countered every subterfuge and stratagem with prayer and with an adamant refusal to deviate from his goal. There was also hostility from traitors within the camp (6:10-19). Despite all opposition, Jerusalem’s walls were reconstructed (v 15) and rededicated amid enthusiastic celebration (12:27-43).<\/p>\n<p>The community’s response to the reading by Ezra, priest and scribe, of the law of Moses and to its interpretation by the Levites (8:1-8), was a complex response of sorrow for sin and rejoicing in God (vv 9-18); of fasting and prayer (9:1-37); of renewing the covenant (9:38–10:29); and of self-commitment to obey God’s commandments, ordinances, and statutes (10:30-39). Chapters 11 and 12 refer to various offices and duties, civil and religious, and the names of the people appointed to them. Then follows the decision to exclude all people of foreign descent from Judaism (13:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>At this juncture Nehemiah traveled to Susa to give an account of his stewardship; a further leave of absence being granted, he returned to Jerusalem to find that serious irregularities were again present. His enemy Tobiah and the priest Eliashib were embroiled (13:4-9); the people failed to provide the Levites with adequate maintenance (vv 10-14); the laws of the Sabbath were being violated (vv 15-22); and Jews were marrying non-Jews (vv 23-32). Due to the increase of intermarriage with foreigners, the offspring could not speak Hebrew (vv 23-25). The danger of assimilation was halted by enforcing a policy of exclusivism.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Nehemiah ends rather abruptly with a description of his vigorous and ruthless handling of these deviations from the newly established principles and precepts of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Ezra, Book of; Ezra (Person) #1; Israel, History of; Judaism; Nehemiah (Person) #3; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NEHEMIAH, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>One of the last of the Jewish historical books.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Authenticity<\/p>\n<p>• Chronology<\/p>\n<p>• Significance<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>In 597 <span>BC<\/span> Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon took away the first exiles from Jerusalem. In 586 <span>BC<\/span> the Babylonians returned, pillaged and burned the city and its temple, and took an estimated 60,000 to 80,000 Judeans into exile. The expatriates settled in various districts where they enjoyed a measure of freedom. They engaged in agriculture and commerce and in some instances acquired considerable wealth. The elders continued to function, prophets like Ezekiel ministered among the exiles, and resistance to religious apostasy was kept alive in the popular mind.<\/p>\n<p>With the appearance of the Persian king Cyrus the Great (559–530 <span>BC<\/span>), the Jewish exiles’ prospects altered dramatically. Cyrus was a civilized and enlightened statesman, and within a short time after his conquest of Babylon, he issued an edict (Ezr 1:2-4) that granted the expatriates permission to return to their homeland. Two separate groups of exiles returned to Judah and built a new sanctuary in Jerusalem on the site of Solomon’s temple in 516 <span>BC<\/span>. Then, under King Artaxerxes I (464–424 <span>BC<\/span>), two separate groups returned from Babylon under Ezra (458 <span>BC<\/span>) and Nehemiah (445 <span>BC<\/span>), respectively. From this seedbed there sprang the theocratic people of Judah, the Jews, dedicated to the law of God, isolated from foreign influence, and centered in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah’s personal memoirs form a considerable portion of the book that bears his name. These memoirs reveal a man of nobility and piety, who was compassionate, prudent, and patriotic. He was a man of generosity and fidelity, political acumen, and religious zeal, of total dedication to God, outstanding organizational ability, and dynamic leadership. At the same time Nehemiah possessed a capacity for ruthlessness when confronting the sin and waywardness of his compatriots (Neh 5:1-13) and the intrigues of powerful non-Jewish enemies (13:8, 28). Not surprisingly, then, a dispirited and dejected people awoke from their lethargic and apathetic state and responded to Nehemiah’s stringent approach to their situation (2:4; 13:14, 22, 31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalAuthenticity\">Historical Authenticity<\/p>\n<p>According to Josephus and other early writers, the books of Ezra and Nehemiah formed one book in the early Hebrew Bible entitled the book of Ezra. The earliest Hebrew manuscript in which the two books are divided is dated 1448, and modern Hebrew Bibles refer to them as the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. In manuscripts of the Greek OT (LXX) they also formed one book. Origen, in the beginning of the third century, is the first to attest to a division. There is general acknowledgment of the genuineness of the personal memoirs of Nehemiah, which constitute a major part of the book.<\/p>\n<p>The historical framework of the book is confirmed by papyri that were discovered between 1898 and 1908 in Elephantine, an island in the upper Nile. Here Psammetichus II (593–588 <span>BC<\/span>) established a Jewish colony. The Elephantine papyri are well preserved, written in Aramaic, and are the fifth-century <span>BC<\/span> literary remains of this Jewish colony of the Persian period.<\/p>\n<p>The most important item among the papyri is a copy of a letter sent to the Persian governor of Judah in 407 <span>BC<\/span>. Three years earlier the Jewish temple in Elephantine had been destroyed. This disaster was the occasion of a letter to Jehohanan, the high priest in Jerusalem (see Neh 12:12-13). Now, in their letter to the governor in Judah, they asked permission to rebuild their temple and said that they had sent a similar request to Delaiah and Shelamiah, the sons of Sanballat (Nehemiah’s enemy, 2:10, 19; 4:1). The Elephantine papyri reveal that Sanballat was governor of the province of Samaria and that Tobiah was governor of the province of Ammon in Transjordan (2:10, 19). Here, then, is evidence that there was in Judah a twofold authority, civil and religious, and that the high priest of 408–407 <span>BC<\/span> was Jehohanan (12:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Chronology\">Chronology<\/p>\n<p>The question about whether Ezra or Nehemiah came to Jerusalem first has been hotly debated. There is no doubt that Nehemiah arrived in the city in 445 <span>BC<\/span>. The objections to the view that Ezra came to Jerusalem 13 years earlier, in 458 <span>BC<\/span>, raise questions concerning historical and textual data that are of such complexity as to preclude discussion of them here. However, achieving an understanding of the spiritual values of the book does not depend on a correct interpretation of the details of chronology. Arguments against the traditional chronology are neither altogether decisive, nor do they dispel the inherent complexities.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Significance\">Significance<\/p>\n<p>When the exiles returned to Jerusalem, Judah had neither nationhood nor political status. Only one thing remained to them: their religion. They were the “remnant” of Yahweh’s chosen people, from whom would rise the new and glorious Israel. It was this vision that explains Nehemiah’s insistence that the Jewish people maintain the purity and exclusiveness of their religious faith and practice in order to rejuvenate their national life and rebuild the city walls (6:15), because this symbolized the racial and the religious purity of the people. He also insisted on separation from paganism, prohibition of marriage with non-Jews (13:23-28), and careful observance of the laws of the Sabbath (vv 15-22).<\/p>\n<p>It is, therefore, difficult to exaggerate the significance of the book of Nehemiah. Along with the book of Ezra, it furnishes the only consecutive Hebrew account of that period in Jewish history when the foundations of Judaism—with its inflexible segregation of the Jews and its passionate veneration of the Mosaic law—were laid. Of course, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi also contribute to knowledge of the period, but Nehemiah (with Ezra) provides a progressive narrative of this epoch. The return of the expatriates from Babylon to Jerusalem constitutes a resumption of the saving purposes of God for his ancient people, leading to the advent of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The account of the return from Babylon under Nehemiah emphasizes the religious aspect of the community of repatriates in Jerusalem. But other, secondary factors should be noted: Nehemiah’s preoccupation with Judah’s political security and constitutional status to ensure its independence of Samaria; the rebuilding of the city walls; Nehemiah’s resettlements of population (7:4; 11:1-2); and his appointment to the governorship of the new province. However, there is no reference in the book of Nehemiah (or for that matter in Ezra) to a restoration to nationhood under a scion of the house of David—no mention of a Messiah, no allusion to the universal kingdom of God. Nehemiah manifests absolute loyalty to the Persian overlord who, while showing remarkable openness to Nehemiah’s request (2:4-9), still continues to levy taxes (5:4, 15).<\/p>\n<p>The repatriates retreated behind their city’s new walls and congregated around the second temple, completed in 516 <span>BC<\/span>. “The book of the law of Moses” (8:1), recognized by the Persian overlord as the law of the land of Judah, became central to Jewish devotion and worship. Judaism was the product of the restoration, which became both a protective barrier against, and a wall of separation from, the Gentiles. Religious institutions initiated during the Babylonian exile and transplanted to Jerusalem took deep and firm root: the synagogue where the Law and the Prophets were read and the prayers were offered; the scribes who worked with single-minded devotion; and the Sanhedrin that continued to serve the new theocracy.<\/p>\n<p>The Jewish remnant of the fifth century <span>BC<\/span> parallels the modern Christian church in that both share the challenge of spiritual reconstruction and renewal essential to God’s purposes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>In the winter of 445 <span>BC<\/span>, the Persian court was in Susa, the ancient capital of Elam (1:1). There Nehemiah occupied a position of honor and influence (2:1). From Jerusalem, a company of Judeans arrived, among them Nehemiah’s brother, whose description of conditions in Jerusalem horrified and grieved Nehemiah (1:2-4). Four months later, and after much prayer, he reached Jerusalem with an armed escort (1:5–2:11). After a three-day inspection of the situation, Nehemiah realized that rebuilding the walls would be his primary task (2:12–3:32).<\/p>\n<p>An outburst of new national spirit caused latent opposition to surface. Sanballat, Tobiah, and Geshem were powerful, resourceful, astute antagonists. Through ridicule and rumors, they insinuated that work on the walls was a form of rebellion against the king (2:19; 4:1-3, 7-14; 6:1-9). But Nehemiah countered every subterfuge and stratagem with prayer and with an adamant refusal to deviate from his goal. There was also hostility from traitors within the camp (6:10-19). Despite all opposition, Jerusalem’s walls were reconstructed (v 15) and rededicated amid enthusiastic celebration (12:27-43).<\/p>\n<p>The community’s response to the reading by Ezra, priest and scribe, of the law of Moses and to its interpretation by the Levites (8:1-8), was a complex response of sorrow for sin and rejoicing in God (vv 9-18); of fasting and prayer (9:1-37); of renewing the covenant (9:38–10:29); and of self-commitment to obey God’s commandments, ordinances, and statutes (10:30-39). Chapters 11 and 12 refer to various offices and duties, civil and religious, and the names of the people appointed to them. Then follows the decision to exclude all people of foreign descent from Judaism (13:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>At this juncture Nehemiah traveled to Susa to give an account of his stewardship; a further leave of absence being granted, he returned to Jerusalem to find that serious irregularities were again present. His enemy Tobiah and the priest Eliashib were embroiled (13:4-9); the people failed to provide the Levites with adequate maintenance (vv 10-14); the laws of the Sabbath were being violated (vv 15-22); and Jews were marrying non-Jews (vv 23-32). Due to the increase of intermarriage with foreigners, the offspring could not speak Hebrew (vv 23-25). The danger of assimilation was halted by enforcing a policy of exclusivism.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Nehemiah ends rather abruptly with a description of his vigorous and ruthless handling of these deviations from the newly established principles and precepts of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Ezra, Book of; Ezra (Person) #1; Israel, History of; Judaism; Nehemiah (Person) #3; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NEHEMIAH, Book of One of the last of the Jewish historical books. Preview • Background • Author • Historical Authenticity • Chronology • Significance • Content Background In 597 BC Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon took away the first exiles from Jerusalem. In 586 BC the Babylonians returned, pillaged and burned the city and its temple, and took an estimated 60,000 to 80,000 Judeans into exile. The expatriates settled in various districts where they enjoyed a measure of freedom. They engaged in agric...","summary_en":"NEHEMIAH, Book of One of the last of the Jewish historical books. Preview • Background • Author • Historical Authenticity • Chronology • Significance • Content Background In 597 BC Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon took away the first exiles from Jerusalem. In 586 BC the Babylonians returned, pillaged and burned the city and its temple, and took an estimated 60,000 to 80,000 Judeans into exile. The expatriates settled in various districts where they enjoyed a measure of freedom. They engaged in agric...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30943,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Period*, Postexilic","title_en":"Period*, Postexilic","content_ro":"<h3>POSTEXILIC PERIOD*<\/h3>\n<p>A period in the Jews’ history after their exile to Babylon. This period extends from 539–c. 331 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Biblical Perspective<\/p>\n<p>• The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire<\/p>\n<p>• The Policy of Persia<\/p>\n<p>• The Return from Exile<\/p>\n<p>• The Return of Ezra<\/p>\n<p>• Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• The Remainder of the Persian Period<\/p>\n<p>• Religious Features of the Postexilic Period<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBiblicalPerspective\">The Biblical Perspective<\/p>\n<p>The books that specifically cover the history of the postexilic or Persian period are Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, and Zechariah. These cover a period of over a century, only a portion of which is dealt with in detail, as the following table shows:<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCollapseoftheBabylonianEmpire\">The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire<\/p>\n<p>This occurred with dramatic suddenness, largely because of internal resistance to the policies of the last Babylonian king, Nabonidus (555–539 <span>BC<\/span>). His neglect of the traditional Babylonian deity, Marduk, in favor of the moon god, Sin, was particularly resented. Nabonidus lived in Taima during the last decade of his reign, refusing to enter Babylon, where his son Belshazzar ruled as virtual king, as noted in Daniel 5. Babylon fell to the Persians in October 538 <span>BC<\/span> and the entire empire passed into their control.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePolicyofPersia\">The Policy of Persia<\/p>\n<p>This is well documented through contemporary inscriptions, notably the record of Cyrus, the first king of the Persian Empire (559–530 <span>BC<\/span>), in the “Cyrus Cylinder.” A new phase in the relationship of conqueror to conquered peoples opened up, which contrasted with the policy of the Assyrian and Babylonian empires of crushing any opposition by massive force. Cyrus and his successors followed a conciliatory line, allowing exiled groups to return home, encouraging local faiths, posing as the champions of the territorial deities, and allowing local autonomy except where Persian interests were affected adversely. The cost of this operation, although considerable, must have been infinitesimal compared with that of keeping rebellious subjects under constant subjection.<\/p>\n<p>The new enlightened policy is reflected in the decree of Cyrus, dated 538 <span>BC<\/span> (Ezr 1:1) and preserved in two versions. The first (vv 1-4) is clearly the official proclamation, while the second (6:3-5) is a more prosaic memorandum dealing with building specifications, a record of Cyrus’s commitment stored in the official archives (vv 1-2). The critical tendency to question the narrative in Ezra 1, especially on the score of the favorable references to the God of Israel and the vast financial support promised, has been nullified by the archaeological evidence, which shows an identical policy elsewhere. The Cyrus Cylinder, for example, notes, “The gods who live within them [i.e., the cities] I returned to their places. . . . All of their inhabitants I collected and restored to their dwelling places.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judah itself there is no evidence for any warfare in this period, which suggests that the Persian takeover of the area was nonviolent. Judah was incorporated into the fifth Persian province, which included the entire area west of the Euphrates River (Ezr 7:21). It was no more than a minor subdistrict, governed through Samaria.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheReturnfromExile\">The Return from Exile<\/p>\n<p>The continuance of a large Jewish community in Babylonia shows that not all the Jews responded to the invitation to return to their homeland, probably because of the prosperity acquired in exile. But 42,360 dedicated Jews (Ezr 2:64) braved the challenge of a four-month 900-mile (1,448-kilometer) journey under Sheshbazzar (1:8), the officially appointed leader, and Zerubbabel his nephew (3:2), who was probably the one to whom the Jews looked as leader. With great enthusiasm the Jews rebuilt the altar of sacrifice and resumed the observance of the traditional feasts (vv 1-6), revealing both a sense of stewardship (2:68-69) and careful attention to the requirements of the Law (3:2-4). Soon after, work on the second temple commenced—the materials and master craftsmen being imported from Tyre and Sidon (Ezr 3:7-9; cf. 1 Kgs 5). When the foundations were laid, the worshipers were doubtless aware that they were fulfilling God’s promise through Jeremiah (Ezr 3:10-11; cf. Jer 33:10-11). But their high hopes were thwarted when there was opposition from neighboring areas (Ezr 4:4-5), selfishness in giving their own accommodations a higher priority than the Lord’s house (Hg 1:2-4, 9), and a series of crop failures that further reduced morale (1:6, 10-11; 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Work on the temple was not resumed until Haggai and Zechariah appeared in 520 <span>BC<\/span>. They encouraged Zerubbabel and Joshua (Jeshua) the high priest, rebuked the people for their apathy and selfishness, and promised God’s presence and blessing upon the temple project (Hg 1:12–2:9). Zechariah’s preaching went beyond the building of the temple, including the rebuilding of Jerusalem itself (Zec 2:1-5) and its world reputation (2:1-5, 11-12; 8:22). The two leaders were addressed in ways that anticipated the Messiah (Hg 2:21-23; Zec 6:10-14). But the Persian king Darius (521–486 <span>BC<\/span>) was not alarmed when the rebuilding operation was reported to him (Ezr 5:1–6:13) and allowed the work to continue. In February 515 <span>BC<\/span> it was dedicated (6:14-16). The Jewish community again had a focal point for its religion, but the political situation remained difficult, with no real security in a still-shattered city.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheReturnofEzra\">The Return of Ezra<\/p>\n<p>The traditional date of Ezra’s return is 458 <span>BC<\/span> (preceding that of Nehemiah in 445 <span>BC<\/span>). This is based on the premise that the King Artaxerxes noted in Ezra 7:7 was Artaxerxes I Longimanus (464–424 <span>BC<\/span>) and not Artaxerxes II Mnemon (404–359 <span>BC<\/span>). However, some scholars, allowing that the king was Artaxerxes I, but believing that Nehemiah preceded Ezra, suggest that a tens unit has dropped out of “seventh” in Ezra 7:7, and that the date of Ezra’s return should be the 27th (438 <span>BC<\/span>) or 37th year (428 <span>BC<\/span>) of Artaxerxes I, making Ezra’s return a few years after Nehemiah’s. While this is plausible, there remains strong support for the traditional view. It accords with the order of the two books in the OT and requires no textual emendation. It also accounts for the section in Ezra 4:7-23, where, in the reign of Artaxerxes, an abortive effort was made by a recently returned group to rebuild the wall of Jerusalem. Nehemiah 1:1-4 suggests that this was regarded as important and its abrupt termination, by a decree of the king, caused Nehemiah great distress. The probability is that Ezra, recently returned, realized that little could be done in the way of major religious reformation until Jerusalem was secure, but in attempting to rebuild the wall he exceeded his mandate and was not able to function adequately until Nehemiah arrived, when the new security of Jerusalem allowed the great Law-reading ceremony of Nehemiah 8:1-12 to take place.<\/p>\n<p>Ezra’s ministry concerned the teaching of the Law of Moses, the Pentateuch, which had long been extant in its final form by this time. Ezra 7 shows that Artaxerxes was following the traditional Persian policy of encouraging good relationships with his subject peoples. Ezra’s appointment (Ezr 7:12) was to a state office; it has frequently been paraphrased as “Secretary of State for Jewish Religious Affairs.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NehemiahsReturnandMinistry\">Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry<\/p>\n<p>Hanani and others (Neh 1:1-3) informed Nehemiah of the complete failure of a recent attempt to rebuild the wall, probably that recorded in Ezra 4:7-23, and sought his mediation before the very king who had authorized the decree that compelled work on the wall to cease. A friend in high places was vital, and Nehemiah, a trusted and influential member of the court (Neh 1:11), was approached for this delicate and dangerous task. Nehemiah 1:4–2:8 shows how well he prepared for and seized his opportunity. His appointment as the governor of Judah (5:14) involved the removal of this area from the control of the governor of Samaria, which accounts for the unrelenting hostility of Sanballat (2:19; 4:1). The evidence of Nehemiah 3 suggests that the extent of Judah at this time was limited, probably not reaching as far north as Bethel or as far south as Hebron. Nehemiah was faced with opposition that included ridicule (2:19; 4:1-3), armed force (4:8, 11), discouragement (v 10), internal economic problems (5:1-18), intrigue (6:1-2), intimidation, and blackmail (vv 5-14). In spite of these obstacles, the wall was completed in the incredibly brief period of 52 days (v 15).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to this monumental achievement, Nehemiah completely reorganized the social and economic life of Jerusalem, dealing with alienated mortgages, excessive interest rates (Neh 5:1-13), mixed marriages (10:30; 13:23-30), Sabbath observance (10:31; 13:15-21), and temple supplies (10:32-40; 13:10-13). Almost certainly, it was this political and economic security that allowed Ezra, who probably arrived 13 years earlier, to proceed with his great religious reformation based on the Law. Nehemiah’s book, usually called the “Nehemiah Memoirs,” was probably presented by him in the temple as a “votive offering” (as indicated by the form of 5:19; 13:14, 22, 31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRemainderofthePersianPeriod\">The Remainder of the Persian Period<\/p>\n<p>Persian control, which probably centered on Lachish, was traditionally mild, except where her interests were directly threatened. There is no evidence of any major discontent in Judah, which enjoyed a considerable degree of autonomy. The Phoenician revolt of 351 <span>BC<\/span>, which took Artaxerxes III (359–338 <span>BC<\/span>) three years to subdue, was the only serious disturbance in the area. While Artaxerxes deported some Jews to Hyrcania, southeast of the Caspian Sea, that was probably a precautionary measure, and Judah does not appear to have been greatly involved in the revolt. The Jerusalem priests were allowed to mint their own coinage and levy a temple tax. Under the wider influence of the Persian Empire, Hebrew gradually fell out of popular usage as a spoken language, being replaced by Aramaic. As the international stature of Greece increased, so the influence of Hellenism began to be felt, even in Judah.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ReligiousFeaturesofthePostexilicPeriod\">Religious Features of the Postexilic Period<\/p>\n<h5>The Decline of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>There were three main reasons for this:<\/p>\n<p>1. The prophetic movement as a whole became discredited after Jerusalem fell in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. The large number of popular cult prophets who had foretold a sudden end to the Babylonian oppression (e.g., Jer 28:1-4) were proved decisively wrong. The suspicion that henceforth became attached to prophecy was increased further in the Persian period, when large numbers of itinerant “prophets” of various religions traveled widely. Zechariah 13:2-6 shows the stern measures advocated against such false prophets and fortune-tellers.<\/p>\n<li>2. There was a markedly different historical situation. The chastened remnant that survived had turned away from the blatant apostasy that characterized the preexilic period, so that the prophetic condemnation was not required with the same urgency. The temple and the Law had acquired a new prominence, and postexilic prophecy generally was concerned either with the rebuilding of the temple (e.g., Haggai and Zechariah) or the purification of its cult (e.g., Malachi). Once this goal had been realized, the role of the prophet was diminished. Another historical factor was the relatively large number of priests who returned from captivity, doubtless encouraged by the prospect of serving in the rebuilt temple. The main need at this time was for the priest, who revealed God’s will on the basis of the Law.<\/li>\n<li>3. There was an increasing stress on the transcendence of God, caused partly by an emphasis upon priestly mediation and partly by a fear of God that resulted from the recent judgment. The apocalyptic movement, with its emphasis on angelic intermediaries between humans and a transcendent God, encouraged this tendency. Correspondingly, the prophetic appeal for a personal, moral walk with God weakened.<\/li>\n<h5>The Rise of the Synagogue<\/h5>\n<p>Some type of local worship, independent of the temple and its sacrifices, must have developed in the Captivity, with the Law increasingly occupying a dominant position. Later on, the prophetic books were read and expounded, but the primary stress was always on the Law. This mode of worship later took root in the homeland, and the synagogue gradually developed into the focal point of the community for social relationships, education, and worship. It facilitated the worldwide continuance and expansion of the Jewish faith, independent of Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Diaspora of the Jews; Ezra, Book of; Haggai, Book of; Israel, History of; Nehemiah, Book of; Zechariah, Book of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>POSTEXILIC PERIOD*<\/h3>\n<p>A period in the Jews’ history after their exile to Babylon. This period extends from 539–c. 331 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Biblical Perspective<\/p>\n<p>• The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire<\/p>\n<p>• The Policy of Persia<\/p>\n<p>• The Return from Exile<\/p>\n<p>• The Return of Ezra<\/p>\n<p>• Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• The Remainder of the Persian Period<\/p>\n<p>• Religious Features of the Postexilic Period<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBiblicalPerspective\">The Biblical Perspective<\/p>\n<p>The books that specifically cover the history of the postexilic or Persian period are Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, and Zechariah. These cover a period of over a century, only a portion of which is dealt with in detail, as the following table shows:<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCollapseoftheBabylonianEmpire\">The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire<\/p>\n<p>This occurred with dramatic suddenness, largely because of internal resistance to the policies of the last Babylonian king, Nabonidus (555–539 <span>BC<\/span>). His neglect of the traditional Babylonian deity, Marduk, in favor of the moon god, Sin, was particularly resented. Nabonidus lived in Taima during the last decade of his reign, refusing to enter Babylon, where his son Belshazzar ruled as virtual king, as noted in Daniel 5. Babylon fell to the Persians in October 538 <span>BC<\/span> and the entire empire passed into their control.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePolicyofPersia\">The Policy of Persia<\/p>\n<p>This is well documented through contemporary inscriptions, notably the record of Cyrus, the first king of the Persian Empire (559–530 <span>BC<\/span>), in the “Cyrus Cylinder.” A new phase in the relationship of conqueror to conquered peoples opened up, which contrasted with the policy of the Assyrian and Babylonian empires of crushing any opposition by massive force. Cyrus and his successors followed a conciliatory line, allowing exiled groups to return home, encouraging local faiths, posing as the champions of the territorial deities, and allowing local autonomy except where Persian interests were affected adversely. The cost of this operation, although considerable, must have been infinitesimal compared with that of keeping rebellious subjects under constant subjection.<\/p>\n<p>The new enlightened policy is reflected in the decree of Cyrus, dated 538 <span>BC<\/span> (Ezr 1:1) and preserved in two versions. The first (vv 1-4) is clearly the official proclamation, while the second (6:3-5) is a more prosaic memorandum dealing with building specifications, a record of Cyrus’s commitment stored in the official archives (vv 1-2). The critical tendency to question the narrative in Ezra 1, especially on the score of the favorable references to the God of Israel and the vast financial support promised, has been nullified by the archaeological evidence, which shows an identical policy elsewhere. The Cyrus Cylinder, for example, notes, “The gods who live within them [i.e., the cities] I returned to their places. . . . All of their inhabitants I collected and restored to their dwelling places.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judah itself there is no evidence for any warfare in this period, which suggests that the Persian takeover of the area was nonviolent. Judah was incorporated into the fifth Persian province, which included the entire area west of the Euphrates River (Ezr 7:21). It was no more than a minor subdistrict, governed through Samaria.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheReturnfromExile\">The Return from Exile<\/p>\n<p>The continuance of a large Jewish community in Babylonia shows that not all the Jews responded to the invitation to return to their homeland, probably because of the prosperity acquired in exile. But 42,360 dedicated Jews (Ezr 2:64) braved the challenge of a four-month 900-mile (1,448-kilometer) journey under Sheshbazzar (1:8), the officially appointed leader, and Zerubbabel his nephew (3:2), who was probably the one to whom the Jews looked as leader. With great enthusiasm the Jews rebuilt the altar of sacrifice and resumed the observance of the traditional feasts (vv 1-6), revealing both a sense of stewardship (2:68-69) and careful attention to the requirements of the Law (3:2-4). Soon after, work on the second temple commenced—the materials and master craftsmen being imported from Tyre and Sidon (Ezr 3:7-9; cf. 1 Kgs 5). When the foundations were laid, the worshipers were doubtless aware that they were fulfilling God’s promise through Jeremiah (Ezr 3:10-11; cf. Jer 33:10-11). But their high hopes were thwarted when there was opposition from neighboring areas (Ezr 4:4-5), selfishness in giving their own accommodations a higher priority than the Lord’s house (Hg 1:2-4, 9), and a series of crop failures that further reduced morale (1:6, 10-11; 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Work on the temple was not resumed until Haggai and Zechariah appeared in 520 <span>BC<\/span>. They encouraged Zerubbabel and Joshua (Jeshua) the high priest, rebuked the people for their apathy and selfishness, and promised God’s presence and blessing upon the temple project (Hg 1:12–2:9). Zechariah’s preaching went beyond the building of the temple, including the rebuilding of Jerusalem itself (Zec 2:1-5) and its world reputation (2:1-5, 11-12; 8:22). The two leaders were addressed in ways that anticipated the Messiah (Hg 2:21-23; Zec 6:10-14). But the Persian king Darius (521–486 <span>BC<\/span>) was not alarmed when the rebuilding operation was reported to him (Ezr 5:1–6:13) and allowed the work to continue. In February 515 <span>BC<\/span> it was dedicated (6:14-16). The Jewish community again had a focal point for its religion, but the political situation remained difficult, with no real security in a still-shattered city.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheReturnofEzra\">The Return of Ezra<\/p>\n<p>The traditional date of Ezra’s return is 458 <span>BC<\/span> (preceding that of Nehemiah in 445 <span>BC<\/span>). This is based on the premise that the King Artaxerxes noted in Ezra 7:7 was Artaxerxes I Longimanus (464–424 <span>BC<\/span>) and not Artaxerxes II Mnemon (404–359 <span>BC<\/span>). However, some scholars, allowing that the king was Artaxerxes I, but believing that Nehemiah preceded Ezra, suggest that a tens unit has dropped out of “seventh” in Ezra 7:7, and that the date of Ezra’s return should be the 27th (438 <span>BC<\/span>) or 37th year (428 <span>BC<\/span>) of Artaxerxes I, making Ezra’s return a few years after Nehemiah’s. While this is plausible, there remains strong support for the traditional view. It accords with the order of the two books in the OT and requires no textual emendation. It also accounts for the section in Ezra 4:7-23, where, in the reign of Artaxerxes, an abortive effort was made by a recently returned group to rebuild the wall of Jerusalem. Nehemiah 1:1-4 suggests that this was regarded as important and its abrupt termination, by a decree of the king, caused Nehemiah great distress. The probability is that Ezra, recently returned, realized that little could be done in the way of major religious reformation until Jerusalem was secure, but in attempting to rebuild the wall he exceeded his mandate and was not able to function adequately until Nehemiah arrived, when the new security of Jerusalem allowed the great Law-reading ceremony of Nehemiah 8:1-12 to take place.<\/p>\n<p>Ezra’s ministry concerned the teaching of the Law of Moses, the Pentateuch, which had long been extant in its final form by this time. Ezra 7 shows that Artaxerxes was following the traditional Persian policy of encouraging good relationships with his subject peoples. Ezra’s appointment (Ezr 7:12) was to a state office; it has frequently been paraphrased as “Secretary of State for Jewish Religious Affairs.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NehemiahsReturnandMinistry\">Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry<\/p>\n<p>Hanani and others (Neh 1:1-3) informed Nehemiah of the complete failure of a recent attempt to rebuild the wall, probably that recorded in Ezra 4:7-23, and sought his mediation before the very king who had authorized the decree that compelled work on the wall to cease. A friend in high places was vital, and Nehemiah, a trusted and influential member of the court (Neh 1:11), was approached for this delicate and dangerous task. Nehemiah 1:4–2:8 shows how well he prepared for and seized his opportunity. His appointment as the governor of Judah (5:14) involved the removal of this area from the control of the governor of Samaria, which accounts for the unrelenting hostility of Sanballat (2:19; 4:1). The evidence of Nehemiah 3 suggests that the extent of Judah at this time was limited, probably not reaching as far north as Bethel or as far south as Hebron. Nehemiah was faced with opposition that included ridicule (2:19; 4:1-3), armed force (4:8, 11), discouragement (v 10), internal economic problems (5:1-18), intrigue (6:1-2), intimidation, and blackmail (vv 5-14). In spite of these obstacles, the wall was completed in the incredibly brief period of 52 days (v 15).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to this monumental achievement, Nehemiah completely reorganized the social and economic life of Jerusalem, dealing with alienated mortgages, excessive interest rates (Neh 5:1-13), mixed marriages (10:30; 13:23-30), Sabbath observance (10:31; 13:15-21), and temple supplies (10:32-40; 13:10-13). Almost certainly, it was this political and economic security that allowed Ezra, who probably arrived 13 years earlier, to proceed with his great religious reformation based on the Law. Nehemiah’s book, usually called the “Nehemiah Memoirs,” was probably presented by him in the temple as a “votive offering” (as indicated by the form of 5:19; 13:14, 22, 31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRemainderofthePersianPeriod\">The Remainder of the Persian Period<\/p>\n<p>Persian control, which probably centered on Lachish, was traditionally mild, except where her interests were directly threatened. There is no evidence of any major discontent in Judah, which enjoyed a considerable degree of autonomy. The Phoenician revolt of 351 <span>BC<\/span>, which took Artaxerxes III (359–338 <span>BC<\/span>) three years to subdue, was the only serious disturbance in the area. While Artaxerxes deported some Jews to Hyrcania, southeast of the Caspian Sea, that was probably a precautionary measure, and Judah does not appear to have been greatly involved in the revolt. The Jerusalem priests were allowed to mint their own coinage and levy a temple tax. Under the wider influence of the Persian Empire, Hebrew gradually fell out of popular usage as a spoken language, being replaced by Aramaic. As the international stature of Greece increased, so the influence of Hellenism began to be felt, even in Judah.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ReligiousFeaturesofthePostexilicPeriod\">Religious Features of the Postexilic Period<\/p>\n<h5>The Decline of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>There were three main reasons for this:<\/p>\n<p>1. The prophetic movement as a whole became discredited after Jerusalem fell in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. The large number of popular cult prophets who had foretold a sudden end to the Babylonian oppression (e.g., Jer 28:1-4) were proved decisively wrong. The suspicion that henceforth became attached to prophecy was increased further in the Persian period, when large numbers of itinerant “prophets” of various religions traveled widely. Zechariah 13:2-6 shows the stern measures advocated against such false prophets and fortune-tellers.<\/p>\n<li>2. There was a markedly different historical situation. The chastened remnant that survived had turned away from the blatant apostasy that characterized the preexilic period, so that the prophetic condemnation was not required with the same urgency. The temple and the Law had acquired a new prominence, and postexilic prophecy generally was concerned either with the rebuilding of the temple (e.g., Haggai and Zechariah) or the purification of its cult (e.g., Malachi). Once this goal had been realized, the role of the prophet was diminished. Another historical factor was the relatively large number of priests who returned from captivity, doubtless encouraged by the prospect of serving in the rebuilt temple. The main need at this time was for the priest, who revealed God’s will on the basis of the Law.<\/li>\n<li>3. There was an increasing stress on the transcendence of God, caused partly by an emphasis upon priestly mediation and partly by a fear of God that resulted from the recent judgment. The apocalyptic movement, with its emphasis on angelic intermediaries between humans and a transcendent God, encouraged this tendency. Correspondingly, the prophetic appeal for a personal, moral walk with God weakened.<\/li>\n<h5>The Rise of the Synagogue<\/h5>\n<p>Some type of local worship, independent of the temple and its sacrifices, must have developed in the Captivity, with the Law increasingly occupying a dominant position. Later on, the prophetic books were read and expounded, but the primary stress was always on the Law. This mode of worship later took root in the homeland, and the synagogue gradually developed into the focal point of the community for social relationships, education, and worship. It facilitated the worldwide continuance and expansion of the Jewish faith, independent of Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Diaspora of the Jews; Ezra, Book of; Haggai, Book of; Israel, History of; Nehemiah, Book of; Zechariah, Book of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"POSTEXILIC PERIOD* A period in the Jews’ history after their exile to Babylon. This period extends from 539–c. 331 BC. Preview • The Biblical Perspective • The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire • The Policy of Persia • The Return from Exile • The Return of Ezra • Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry • The Remainder of the Persian Period • Religious Features of the Postexilic Period The Biblical Perspective The books that specifically cover the history of the postexilic or Persian period are Ezra, N...","summary_en":"POSTEXILIC PERIOD* A period in the Jews’ history after their exile to Babylon. This period extends from 539–c. 331 BC. Preview • The Biblical Perspective • The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire • The Policy of Persia • The Return from Exile • The Return of Ezra • Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry • The Remainder of the Persian Period • Religious Features of the Postexilic Period The Biblical Perspective The books that specifically cover the history of the postexilic or Persian period are Ezra, N...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":48165,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:1-13<\/strong> Although severe financial problems threatened to derail the wall’s completion (5:1-5), Nehemiah worked out a solution (5:6-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:1-13<\/strong> Although severe financial problems threatened to derail the wall’s completion (5:1-5), Nehemiah worked out a solution (5:6-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1-13 Although severe financial problems threatened to derail the wall’s completion (5:1-5), Nehemiah worked out a solution (5:6-13).","summary_en":"5:1-13 Although severe financial problems threatened to derail the wall’s completion (5:1-5), Nehemiah worked out a solution (5:6-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75791,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:1-13<\/strong> Although severe financial problems threatened to derail the wall’s completion (5:1-5), Nehemiah worked out a solution (5:6-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:1-13<\/strong> Although severe financial problems threatened to derail the wall’s completion (5:1-5), Nehemiah worked out a solution (5:6-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1-13 Although severe financial problems threatened to derail the wall’s completion (5:1-5), Nehemiah worked out a solution (5:6-13).","summary_en":"5:1-13 Although severe financial problems threatened to derail the wall’s completion (5:1-5), Nehemiah worked out a solution (5:6-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103417,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:1-13<\/strong> Although severe financial problems threatened to derail the wall’s completion (5:1-5), Nehemiah worked out a solution (5:6-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:1-13<\/strong> Although severe financial problems threatened to derail the wall’s completion (5:1-5), Nehemiah worked out a solution (5:6-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1-13 Although severe financial problems threatened to derail the wall’s completion (5:1-5), Nehemiah worked out a solution (5:6-13).","summary_en":"5:1-13 Although severe financial problems threatened to derail the wall’s completion (5:1-5), Nehemiah worked out a solution (5:6-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":131043,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:1-13<\/strong> Although severe financial problems threatened to derail the wall’s completion (5:1-5), Nehemiah worked out a solution (5:6-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:1-13<\/strong> Although severe financial problems threatened to derail the wall’s completion (5:1-5), Nehemiah worked out a solution (5:6-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1-13 Although severe financial problems threatened to derail the wall’s completion (5:1-5), Nehemiah worked out a solution (5:6-13).","summary_en":"5:1-13 Although severe financial problems threatened to derail the wall’s completion (5:1-5), Nehemiah worked out a solution (5:6-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60136,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Famine","title_en":"Famine","content_ro":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","summary_en":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":62201,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Dealing with Conflict","title_en":"Dealing with Conflict","content_ro":"<h3>Dealing with Conflict<\/h3>\n<p>God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., Exod 17:1-4). The book of Nehemiah provides perhaps the most comprehensive example of how a godly person can respond to conflict.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah faced both external and internal opposition to all that God was directing him to do. External opposition came from foreigners such as Sanballat, Geshem, and Tobiah. They fiercely opposed the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s walls and mocked Nehemiah’s leadership (Neh 2:10, 2:19; 4:1-3). The opposition gradually grew to include other Arabs, Ammonites, and people from Ashdod, who plotted to attack the builders (4:7-9, 11). To meet this opposition, Nehemiah posted guards, prayed for God’s help, developed an emergency warning system, and kept working (4:6-23). Israel’s frustrated enemies made several attempts to disgrace or kill Nehemiah (6:1-14). However, Nehemiah had the wisdom to avoid or frustrate their plots while focusing on the task God had given him.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah also faced internal problems. Wealthy Jews were mistreating the poor by charging high interest (5:1-13). Jews had married foreigners who worshiped other gods (13:23-30). Many were not tithing or keeping the Sabbath holy (10:31-39; 13:10-22). Finally, he had to oppose the priest Eliashib, who had allowed Tobiah to use one of the Temple storerooms (13:4-9). Confronting these problems required a firm commitment to the principles explained in Scripture, boldness in insisting that people follow these divine instructions, and compassion in restoring people to fellowship after the confrontation.<\/p>\n<p>In each of these cases, Nehemiah courageously followed the example of earlier leaders such as Moses, who opposed the worship of the gold calf (Exod 32); Samuel, who opposed those involved with Baal worship (1 Sam 7:3-8); Nathan, who opposed David’s sins (2 Sam 12:1-14); and Jehoshaphat, who trusted in God to defeat a much stronger enemy (2 Chr 20:1-37). Like these earlier men of God, Nehemiah took a stand for what was right instead of letting those for whom he was responsible go their own ways. He refused to be discouraged or intimidated by internal difficulties or external threats against him. He consistently depended on God for wisdom and for blessing on his work.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and Paul both outlined some strategies for dealing with internal conflict (Matt 5:23-26; 18:15-17; 1 Cor 6:1-8; 10:23-33) and external conflict (Matt 5:43-47; Rom 12:14-21). Unfortunately, the actions of believers, no matter how upstanding, will sometimes be met with continued—or even increased—opposition. Nonetheless, we are called to handle opposition in a way similar to Nehemiah—with wisdom, patience, prayer, and resolve.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:5-13; 26:12-35; Exod 32:1-35; 1 Sam 7:3-8; 2 Sam 12:1-31; 19:41-43; 2 Chr 20:1-37; 34:3-7; Neh 2:19-20; 4:1-23; 5:1-13; 6:1-14; 13:4-28; Ps 140:1-2; Prov 13:10; 17:14, 19; 25:8; 26:17, 21; 29:22; Hab 1:3; Acts 23:6-11; 2 Cor 7:5-6; Eph 6:10-18; Phil 2:3; 1 Tim 6:4; 2 Tim 2:14, 23-26; Titus 2:15; Jas 3:13-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Dealing with Conflict<\/h3>\n<p>God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., Exod 17:1-4). The book of Nehemiah provides perhaps the most comprehensive example of how a godly person can respond to conflict.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah faced both external and internal opposition to all that God was directing him to do. External opposition came from foreigners such as Sanballat, Geshem, and Tobiah. They fiercely opposed the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s walls and mocked Nehemiah’s leadership (Neh 2:10, 2:19; 4:1-3). The opposition gradually grew to include other Arabs, Ammonites, and people from Ashdod, who plotted to attack the builders (4:7-9, 11). To meet this opposition, Nehemiah posted guards, prayed for God’s help, developed an emergency warning system, and kept working (4:6-23). Israel’s frustrated enemies made several attempts to disgrace or kill Nehemiah (6:1-14). However, Nehemiah had the wisdom to avoid or frustrate their plots while focusing on the task God had given him.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah also faced internal problems. Wealthy Jews were mistreating the poor by charging high interest (5:1-13). Jews had married foreigners who worshiped other gods (13:23-30). Many were not tithing or keeping the Sabbath holy (10:31-39; 13:10-22). Finally, he had to oppose the priest Eliashib, who had allowed Tobiah to use one of the Temple storerooms (13:4-9). Confronting these problems required a firm commitment to the principles explained in Scripture, boldness in insisting that people follow these divine instructions, and compassion in restoring people to fellowship after the confrontation.<\/p>\n<p>In each of these cases, Nehemiah courageously followed the example of earlier leaders such as Moses, who opposed the worship of the gold calf (Exod 32); Samuel, who opposed those involved with Baal worship (1 Sam 7:3-8); Nathan, who opposed David’s sins (2 Sam 12:1-14); and Jehoshaphat, who trusted in God to defeat a much stronger enemy (2 Chr 20:1-37). Like these earlier men of God, Nehemiah took a stand for what was right instead of letting those for whom he was responsible go their own ways. He refused to be discouraged or intimidated by internal difficulties or external threats against him. He consistently depended on God for wisdom and for blessing on his work.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and Paul both outlined some strategies for dealing with internal conflict (Matt 5:23-26; 18:15-17; 1 Cor 6:1-8; 10:23-33) and external conflict (Matt 5:43-47; Rom 12:14-21). Unfortunately, the actions of believers, no matter how upstanding, will sometimes be met with continued—or even increased—opposition. Nonetheless, we are called to handle opposition in a way similar to Nehemiah—with wisdom, patience, prayer, and resolve.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:5-13; 26:12-35; Exod 32:1-35; 1 Sam 7:3-8; 2 Sam 12:1-31; 19:41-43; 2 Chr 20:1-37; 34:3-7; Neh 2:19-20; 4:1-23; 5:1-13; 6:1-14; 13:4-28; Ps 140:1-2; Prov 13:10; 17:14, 19; 25:8; 26:17, 21; 29:22; Hab 1:3; Acts 23:6-11; 2 Cor 7:5-6; Eph 6:10-18; Phil 2:3; 1 Tim 6:4; 2 Tim 2:14, 23-26; Titus 2:15; Jas 3:13-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Dealing with Conflict God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., E...","summary_en":"Dealing with Conflict God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., E...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64737,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"What Is Good","title_en":"What Is Good","content_ro":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","summary_en":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87762,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Famine","title_en":"Famine","content_ro":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","summary_en":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89827,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Dealing with Conflict","title_en":"Dealing with Conflict","content_ro":"<h3>Dealing with Conflict<\/h3>\n<p>God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., Exod 17:1-4). The book of Nehemiah provides perhaps the most comprehensive example of how a godly person can respond to conflict.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah faced both external and internal opposition to all that God was directing him to do. External opposition came from foreigners such as Sanballat, Geshem, and Tobiah. They fiercely opposed the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s walls and mocked Nehemiah’s leadership (Neh 2:10, 2:19; 4:1-3). The opposition gradually grew to include other Arabs, Ammonites, and people from Ashdod, who plotted to attack the builders (4:7-9, 11). To meet this opposition, Nehemiah posted guards, prayed for God’s help, developed an emergency warning system, and kept working (4:6-23). Israel’s frustrated enemies made several attempts to disgrace or kill Nehemiah (6:1-14). However, Nehemiah had the wisdom to avoid or frustrate their plots while focusing on the task God had given him.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah also faced internal problems. Wealthy Jews were mistreating the poor by charging high interest (5:1-13). Jews had married foreigners who worshiped other gods (13:23-30). Many were not tithing or keeping the Sabbath holy (10:31-39; 13:10-22). Finally, he had to oppose the priest Eliashib, who had allowed Tobiah to use one of the Temple storerooms (13:4-9). Confronting these problems required a firm commitment to the principles explained in Scripture, boldness in insisting that people follow these divine instructions, and compassion in restoring people to fellowship after the confrontation.<\/p>\n<p>In each of these cases, Nehemiah courageously followed the example of earlier leaders such as Moses, who opposed the worship of the gold calf (Exod 32); Samuel, who opposed those involved with Baal worship (1 Sam 7:3-8); Nathan, who opposed David’s sins (2 Sam 12:1-14); and Jehoshaphat, who trusted in God to defeat a much stronger enemy (2 Chr 20:1-37). Like these earlier men of God, Nehemiah took a stand for what was right instead of letting those for whom he was responsible go their own ways. He refused to be discouraged or intimidated by internal difficulties or external threats against him. He consistently depended on God for wisdom and for blessing on his work.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and Paul both outlined some strategies for dealing with internal conflict (Matt 5:23-26; 18:15-17; 1 Cor 6:1-8; 10:23-33) and external conflict (Matt 5:43-47; Rom 12:14-21). Unfortunately, the actions of believers, no matter how upstanding, will sometimes be met with continued—or even increased—opposition. Nonetheless, we are called to handle opposition in a way similar to Nehemiah—with wisdom, patience, prayer, and resolve.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:5-13; 26:12-35; Exod 32:1-35; 1 Sam 7:3-8; 2 Sam 12:1-31; 19:41-43; 2 Chr 20:1-37; 34:3-7; Neh 2:19-20; 4:1-23; 5:1-13; 6:1-14; 13:4-28; Ps 140:1-2; Prov 13:10; 17:14, 19; 25:8; 26:17, 21; 29:22; Hab 1:3; Acts 23:6-11; 2 Cor 7:5-6; Eph 6:10-18; Phil 2:3; 1 Tim 6:4; 2 Tim 2:14, 23-26; Titus 2:15; Jas 3:13-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Dealing with Conflict<\/h3>\n<p>God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., Exod 17:1-4). The book of Nehemiah provides perhaps the most comprehensive example of how a godly person can respond to conflict.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah faced both external and internal opposition to all that God was directing him to do. External opposition came from foreigners such as Sanballat, Geshem, and Tobiah. They fiercely opposed the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s walls and mocked Nehemiah’s leadership (Neh 2:10, 2:19; 4:1-3). The opposition gradually grew to include other Arabs, Ammonites, and people from Ashdod, who plotted to attack the builders (4:7-9, 11). To meet this opposition, Nehemiah posted guards, prayed for God’s help, developed an emergency warning system, and kept working (4:6-23). Israel’s frustrated enemies made several attempts to disgrace or kill Nehemiah (6:1-14). However, Nehemiah had the wisdom to avoid or frustrate their plots while focusing on the task God had given him.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah also faced internal problems. Wealthy Jews were mistreating the poor by charging high interest (5:1-13). Jews had married foreigners who worshiped other gods (13:23-30). Many were not tithing or keeping the Sabbath holy (10:31-39; 13:10-22). Finally, he had to oppose the priest Eliashib, who had allowed Tobiah to use one of the Temple storerooms (13:4-9). Confronting these problems required a firm commitment to the principles explained in Scripture, boldness in insisting that people follow these divine instructions, and compassion in restoring people to fellowship after the confrontation.<\/p>\n<p>In each of these cases, Nehemiah courageously followed the example of earlier leaders such as Moses, who opposed the worship of the gold calf (Exod 32); Samuel, who opposed those involved with Baal worship (1 Sam 7:3-8); Nathan, who opposed David’s sins (2 Sam 12:1-14); and Jehoshaphat, who trusted in God to defeat a much stronger enemy (2 Chr 20:1-37). Like these earlier men of God, Nehemiah took a stand for what was right instead of letting those for whom he was responsible go their own ways. He refused to be discouraged or intimidated by internal difficulties or external threats against him. He consistently depended on God for wisdom and for blessing on his work.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and Paul both outlined some strategies for dealing with internal conflict (Matt 5:23-26; 18:15-17; 1 Cor 6:1-8; 10:23-33) and external conflict (Matt 5:43-47; Rom 12:14-21). Unfortunately, the actions of believers, no matter how upstanding, will sometimes be met with continued—or even increased—opposition. Nonetheless, we are called to handle opposition in a way similar to Nehemiah—with wisdom, patience, prayer, and resolve.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:5-13; 26:12-35; Exod 32:1-35; 1 Sam 7:3-8; 2 Sam 12:1-31; 19:41-43; 2 Chr 20:1-37; 34:3-7; Neh 2:19-20; 4:1-23; 5:1-13; 6:1-14; 13:4-28; Ps 140:1-2; Prov 13:10; 17:14, 19; 25:8; 26:17, 21; 29:22; Hab 1:3; Acts 23:6-11; 2 Cor 7:5-6; Eph 6:10-18; Phil 2:3; 1 Tim 6:4; 2 Tim 2:14, 23-26; Titus 2:15; Jas 3:13-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Dealing with Conflict God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., E...","summary_en":"Dealing with Conflict God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., E...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92363,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"What Is Good","title_en":"What Is Good","content_ro":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","summary_en":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115388,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Famine","title_en":"Famine","content_ro":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","summary_en":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":117453,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Dealing with Conflict","title_en":"Dealing with Conflict","content_ro":"<h3>Dealing with Conflict<\/h3>\n<p>God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., Exod 17:1-4). The book of Nehemiah provides perhaps the most comprehensive example of how a godly person can respond to conflict.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah faced both external and internal opposition to all that God was directing him to do. External opposition came from foreigners such as Sanballat, Geshem, and Tobiah. They fiercely opposed the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s walls and mocked Nehemiah’s leadership (Neh 2:10, 2:19; 4:1-3). The opposition gradually grew to include other Arabs, Ammonites, and people from Ashdod, who plotted to attack the builders (4:7-9, 11). To meet this opposition, Nehemiah posted guards, prayed for God’s help, developed an emergency warning system, and kept working (4:6-23). Israel’s frustrated enemies made several attempts to disgrace or kill Nehemiah (6:1-14). However, Nehemiah had the wisdom to avoid or frustrate their plots while focusing on the task God had given him.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah also faced internal problems. Wealthy Jews were mistreating the poor by charging high interest (5:1-13). Jews had married foreigners who worshiped other gods (13:23-30). Many were not tithing or keeping the Sabbath holy (10:31-39; 13:10-22). Finally, he had to oppose the priest Eliashib, who had allowed Tobiah to use one of the Temple storerooms (13:4-9). Confronting these problems required a firm commitment to the principles explained in Scripture, boldness in insisting that people follow these divine instructions, and compassion in restoring people to fellowship after the confrontation.<\/p>\n<p>In each of these cases, Nehemiah courageously followed the example of earlier leaders such as Moses, who opposed the worship of the gold calf (Exod 32); Samuel, who opposed those involved with Baal worship (1 Sam 7:3-8); Nathan, who opposed David’s sins (2 Sam 12:1-14); and Jehoshaphat, who trusted in God to defeat a much stronger enemy (2 Chr 20:1-37). Like these earlier men of God, Nehemiah took a stand for what was right instead of letting those for whom he was responsible go their own ways. He refused to be discouraged or intimidated by internal difficulties or external threats against him. He consistently depended on God for wisdom and for blessing on his work.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and Paul both outlined some strategies for dealing with internal conflict (Matt 5:23-26; 18:15-17; 1 Cor 6:1-8; 10:23-33) and external conflict (Matt 5:43-47; Rom 12:14-21). Unfortunately, the actions of believers, no matter how upstanding, will sometimes be met with continued—or even increased—opposition. Nonetheless, we are called to handle opposition in a way similar to Nehemiah—with wisdom, patience, prayer, and resolve.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:5-13; 26:12-35; Exod 32:1-35; 1 Sam 7:3-8; 2 Sam 12:1-31; 19:41-43; 2 Chr 20:1-37; 34:3-7; Neh 2:19-20; 4:1-23; 5:1-13; 6:1-14; 13:4-28; Ps 140:1-2; Prov 13:10; 17:14, 19; 25:8; 26:17, 21; 29:22; Hab 1:3; Acts 23:6-11; 2 Cor 7:5-6; Eph 6:10-18; Phil 2:3; 1 Tim 6:4; 2 Tim 2:14, 23-26; Titus 2:15; Jas 3:13-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Dealing with Conflict<\/h3>\n<p>God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., Exod 17:1-4). The book of Nehemiah provides perhaps the most comprehensive example of how a godly person can respond to conflict.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah faced both external and internal opposition to all that God was directing him to do. External opposition came from foreigners such as Sanballat, Geshem, and Tobiah. They fiercely opposed the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s walls and mocked Nehemiah’s leadership (Neh 2:10, 2:19; 4:1-3). The opposition gradually grew to include other Arabs, Ammonites, and people from Ashdod, who plotted to attack the builders (4:7-9, 11). To meet this opposition, Nehemiah posted guards, prayed for God’s help, developed an emergency warning system, and kept working (4:6-23). Israel’s frustrated enemies made several attempts to disgrace or kill Nehemiah (6:1-14). However, Nehemiah had the wisdom to avoid or frustrate their plots while focusing on the task God had given him.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah also faced internal problems. Wealthy Jews were mistreating the poor by charging high interest (5:1-13). Jews had married foreigners who worshiped other gods (13:23-30). Many were not tithing or keeping the Sabbath holy (10:31-39; 13:10-22). Finally, he had to oppose the priest Eliashib, who had allowed Tobiah to use one of the Temple storerooms (13:4-9). Confronting these problems required a firm commitment to the principles explained in Scripture, boldness in insisting that people follow these divine instructions, and compassion in restoring people to fellowship after the confrontation.<\/p>\n<p>In each of these cases, Nehemiah courageously followed the example of earlier leaders such as Moses, who opposed the worship of the gold calf (Exod 32); Samuel, who opposed those involved with Baal worship (1 Sam 7:3-8); Nathan, who opposed David’s sins (2 Sam 12:1-14); and Jehoshaphat, who trusted in God to defeat a much stronger enemy (2 Chr 20:1-37). Like these earlier men of God, Nehemiah took a stand for what was right instead of letting those for whom he was responsible go their own ways. He refused to be discouraged or intimidated by internal difficulties or external threats against him. He consistently depended on God for wisdom and for blessing on his work.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and Paul both outlined some strategies for dealing with internal conflict (Matt 5:23-26; 18:15-17; 1 Cor 6:1-8; 10:23-33) and external conflict (Matt 5:43-47; Rom 12:14-21). Unfortunately, the actions of believers, no matter how upstanding, will sometimes be met with continued—or even increased—opposition. Nonetheless, we are called to handle opposition in a way similar to Nehemiah—with wisdom, patience, prayer, and resolve.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:5-13; 26:12-35; Exod 32:1-35; 1 Sam 7:3-8; 2 Sam 12:1-31; 19:41-43; 2 Chr 20:1-37; 34:3-7; Neh 2:19-20; 4:1-23; 5:1-13; 6:1-14; 13:4-28; Ps 140:1-2; Prov 13:10; 17:14, 19; 25:8; 26:17, 21; 29:22; Hab 1:3; Acts 23:6-11; 2 Cor 7:5-6; Eph 6:10-18; Phil 2:3; 1 Tim 6:4; 2 Tim 2:14, 23-26; Titus 2:15; Jas 3:13-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Dealing with Conflict God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., E...","summary_en":"Dealing with Conflict God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., E...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119989,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"What Is Good","title_en":"What Is Good","content_ro":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","summary_en":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143014,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Famine","title_en":"Famine","content_ro":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","summary_en":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":145079,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Dealing with Conflict","title_en":"Dealing with Conflict","content_ro":"<h3>Dealing with Conflict<\/h3>\n<p>God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., Exod 17:1-4). The book of Nehemiah provides perhaps the most comprehensive example of how a godly person can respond to conflict.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah faced both external and internal opposition to all that God was directing him to do. External opposition came from foreigners such as Sanballat, Geshem, and Tobiah. They fiercely opposed the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s walls and mocked Nehemiah’s leadership (Neh 2:10, 2:19; 4:1-3). The opposition gradually grew to include other Arabs, Ammonites, and people from Ashdod, who plotted to attack the builders (4:7-9, 11). To meet this opposition, Nehemiah posted guards, prayed for God’s help, developed an emergency warning system, and kept working (4:6-23). Israel’s frustrated enemies made several attempts to disgrace or kill Nehemiah (6:1-14). However, Nehemiah had the wisdom to avoid or frustrate their plots while focusing on the task God had given him.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah also faced internal problems. Wealthy Jews were mistreating the poor by charging high interest (5:1-13). Jews had married foreigners who worshiped other gods (13:23-30). Many were not tithing or keeping the Sabbath holy (10:31-39; 13:10-22). Finally, he had to oppose the priest Eliashib, who had allowed Tobiah to use one of the Temple storerooms (13:4-9). Confronting these problems required a firm commitment to the principles explained in Scripture, boldness in insisting that people follow these divine instructions, and compassion in restoring people to fellowship after the confrontation.<\/p>\n<p>In each of these cases, Nehemiah courageously followed the example of earlier leaders such as Moses, who opposed the worship of the gold calf (Exod 32); Samuel, who opposed those involved with Baal worship (1 Sam 7:3-8); Nathan, who opposed David’s sins (2 Sam 12:1-14); and Jehoshaphat, who trusted in God to defeat a much stronger enemy (2 Chr 20:1-37). Like these earlier men of God, Nehemiah took a stand for what was right instead of letting those for whom he was responsible go their own ways. He refused to be discouraged or intimidated by internal difficulties or external threats against him. He consistently depended on God for wisdom and for blessing on his work.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and Paul both outlined some strategies for dealing with internal conflict (Matt 5:23-26; 18:15-17; 1 Cor 6:1-8; 10:23-33) and external conflict (Matt 5:43-47; Rom 12:14-21). Unfortunately, the actions of believers, no matter how upstanding, will sometimes be met with continued—or even increased—opposition. Nonetheless, we are called to handle opposition in a way similar to Nehemiah—with wisdom, patience, prayer, and resolve.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:5-13; 26:12-35; Exod 32:1-35; 1 Sam 7:3-8; 2 Sam 12:1-31; 19:41-43; 2 Chr 20:1-37; 34:3-7; Neh 2:19-20; 4:1-23; 5:1-13; 6:1-14; 13:4-28; Ps 140:1-2; Prov 13:10; 17:14, 19; 25:8; 26:17, 21; 29:22; Hab 1:3; Acts 23:6-11; 2 Cor 7:5-6; Eph 6:10-18; Phil 2:3; 1 Tim 6:4; 2 Tim 2:14, 23-26; Titus 2:15; Jas 3:13-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Dealing with Conflict<\/h3>\n<p>God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., Exod 17:1-4). The book of Nehemiah provides perhaps the most comprehensive example of how a godly person can respond to conflict.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah faced both external and internal opposition to all that God was directing him to do. External opposition came from foreigners such as Sanballat, Geshem, and Tobiah. They fiercely opposed the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s walls and mocked Nehemiah’s leadership (Neh 2:10, 2:19; 4:1-3). The opposition gradually grew to include other Arabs, Ammonites, and people from Ashdod, who plotted to attack the builders (4:7-9, 11). To meet this opposition, Nehemiah posted guards, prayed for God’s help, developed an emergency warning system, and kept working (4:6-23). Israel’s frustrated enemies made several attempts to disgrace or kill Nehemiah (6:1-14). However, Nehemiah had the wisdom to avoid or frustrate their plots while focusing on the task God had given him.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah also faced internal problems. Wealthy Jews were mistreating the poor by charging high interest (5:1-13). Jews had married foreigners who worshiped other gods (13:23-30). Many were not tithing or keeping the Sabbath holy (10:31-39; 13:10-22). Finally, he had to oppose the priest Eliashib, who had allowed Tobiah to use one of the Temple storerooms (13:4-9). Confronting these problems required a firm commitment to the principles explained in Scripture, boldness in insisting that people follow these divine instructions, and compassion in restoring people to fellowship after the confrontation.<\/p>\n<p>In each of these cases, Nehemiah courageously followed the example of earlier leaders such as Moses, who opposed the worship of the gold calf (Exod 32); Samuel, who opposed those involved with Baal worship (1 Sam 7:3-8); Nathan, who opposed David’s sins (2 Sam 12:1-14); and Jehoshaphat, who trusted in God to defeat a much stronger enemy (2 Chr 20:1-37). Like these earlier men of God, Nehemiah took a stand for what was right instead of letting those for whom he was responsible go their own ways. He refused to be discouraged or intimidated by internal difficulties or external threats against him. He consistently depended on God for wisdom and for blessing on his work.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and Paul both outlined some strategies for dealing with internal conflict (Matt 5:23-26; 18:15-17; 1 Cor 6:1-8; 10:23-33) and external conflict (Matt 5:43-47; Rom 12:14-21). Unfortunately, the actions of believers, no matter how upstanding, will sometimes be met with continued—or even increased—opposition. Nonetheless, we are called to handle opposition in a way similar to Nehemiah—with wisdom, patience, prayer, and resolve.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:5-13; 26:12-35; Exod 32:1-35; 1 Sam 7:3-8; 2 Sam 12:1-31; 19:41-43; 2 Chr 20:1-37; 34:3-7; Neh 2:19-20; 4:1-23; 5:1-13; 6:1-14; 13:4-28; Ps 140:1-2; Prov 13:10; 17:14, 19; 25:8; 26:17, 21; 29:22; Hab 1:3; Acts 23:6-11; 2 Cor 7:5-6; Eph 6:10-18; Phil 2:3; 1 Tim 6:4; 2 Tim 2:14, 23-26; Titus 2:15; Jas 3:13-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Dealing with Conflict God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., E...","summary_en":"Dealing with Conflict God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., E...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147615,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"What Is Good","title_en":"What Is Good","content_ro":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","summary_en":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":24008,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Malachi","title_en":"Book of Malachi","content_ro":"<h3>MALACHI, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Last prophetic book of the Jewish canon; last book of the Old Testament.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The name Malachi means “my messenger” or “messenger of the Lord.” Since the word appears in 3:1, some scholars think that it is not a proper name at all and does not provide the name of the author of the book. According to one ancient tradition, the “messenger” was Ezra, the priest responsible for the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. Yet it would be most unusual for the Jews to preserve a prophetic book without explicitly attaching to it the name of the author. All of the other major and minor prophets—including Obadiah—are named after a particular prophet. Moreover, “messenger of the Lord” would be a most appropriate name for a prophet (cf. 2 Chr 36:15-16; Hg 1:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>During the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>, the struggling Jewish community in Judah was greatly assisted by the return of Ezra and Nehemiah. In 458 <span>BC<\/span> Ezra was encouraged by King Artaxerxes of Persia to lead a group of exiles back to Jerusalem and to institute religious reform. About 13 years later, in 445 <span>BC<\/span>, a high-ranking government official named Nehemiah was allowed to go to Jerusalem to rebuild the city walls, a task he accomplished in 52 days (Neh 6:15). As governor, Nehemiah led the people in a financial reform that provided for the poor and encouraged tithing to support the priests and Levites (5:2-13; 10:35-39). Like Ezra, Nehemiah urged the people to keep the Sabbath and avoid intermarrying with pagan neighbors. After a 12-year term, Nehemiah returned to Persia and the spiritual condition of Judah deteriorated. Perhaps discouraged by their lack of political power, tithing became sporadic, the Sabbath was not kept, intermarriage was common, and even the priests could not be trusted. When Nehemiah came back to Jerusalem sometime later, he had to take firm action to straighten out the situation (13:6-31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Since Malachi had to deal with the same sins mentioned in Nehemiah 13 (see Mal 1:6-14; 2:14-16; 3:8-11), it is likely that the prophet ministered either during Nehemiah’s second term as governor or in the years just before his return. The reference to “the governor” in Malachi 1:8 implies that someone other than Nehemiah was in office, so it may be best to place Malachi just after 433 <span>BC<\/span>, the year Nehemiah had returned to Persia.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheology\">Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n<p>Malachi was written to shake the people of Judah from their spiritual lethargy and to warn them that judgment was coming unless they repented. The people doubted God’s love (1:2) and justice (2:17) and did not take his commands seriously (1:6; 3:14-18). Yet God was “a great King” (1:14) with a great name that was to be feared even beyond the border of Israel (vv 5, 11). Malachi repeatedly urged both the priests and the people to revere God and give him the honor he deserved. God was Israel’s Father and Creator (2:10), but the nation showed contempt for his name (1:6; 3:5). In response to this contempt, God would send his messenger to announce the Day of the Lord (3:1). John the Baptist did call the nation to repentance, and Christ came to cleanse the temple (Jn 2:14-15) and to establish the covenant (Mal 3:1-2). Most of the work of refining and purifying will take place at the Second Coming, when Christ returns to purify his people (cf. vv 2-4) and judge the wicked (4:1).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Great Love for Israel (1:1-5)<\/h5>\n<p>To introduce the book, Malachi presents a contrast between God’s love for Israel and his hatred for Edom. Yet the assertion of God’s love is greeted with a strange question: “How have you loved us?” God loved Israel by entering into a covenant with the nation at Mt Sinai, just after he had freed them from the prison of Egypt. He had chosen them as his special people (cf. Gn 12:1-3; Ex 19:5-6), whereas the descendants of Esau were not chosen (cf. Rom 9:10-13). Both Israel and Edom endured invasion and destruction, but only Israel was restored and rebuilt after the exile. The people of Edom were driven from their homeland by the Nabateans between 550 and 400 <span>BC<\/span>, and they never regained their territory. Through the judgment of Edom, God demonstrated that he is the great Ruler over the nations (Mal 1:5) and that he will not forget Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Unacceptable Sacrifices of the Priests (1:6-14)<\/h5>\n<p>Although God deserved the honor and reverence of the Israelites, both the people and the priests openly disdained his laws and regulations. Strangely, it was the priests who led the way into disobedience. Sacrifices and offerings were supposed to atone for sin, but the animals offered by the priests only served to pollute or defile the altar (1:7, 12). According to Leviticus, animals with defects were unacceptable as sacrifices, but Malachi mentions that the priests were offering to the Lord animals that were stolen and mutilated, crippled and sick (v 13; cf. v 8). To emphasize their contempt, the Lord challenged the priests to bring comparable presents to the governor. Would they dare to insult him in this fashion and face sure rejection? Rather than having the priests continue to bring unfit sacrifices to the altar, the Lord asked them to close the temple doors entirely (v 10). Going through the motions never pleased God, either in ancient times (cf. Is 1:12-13) or modern. By calling the altar and its sacrifices “contemptible” (Mal 1:7, 12), the priests were no better than the wicked sons of Eli, whose disregard of the rules for sacrifices sent them to a premature death (cf. 1 Sm 2:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>In sharp contrast to the attitude of the priests stands the emphasis upon God’s greatness in Malachi 1:11 and 14. God is more powerful than the gods of other nations, and even if Israel’s priests and people dishonor the Lord, eventually pure offerings will be brought to God by believing Gentiles. Perhaps these offerings refer to prayer and praise (cf. Ps 19:14; Heb 13:15; Rv 5:8), but others interpret the reference more literally (cf. Is 56:7; 60:7). Peter may be alluding to this verse in connection with the conversion of Cornelius (Acts 10:35).<\/p>\n<h5>The Punishment of the Priests (2:1-9)<\/h5>\n<p>One of the functions of the priests was to pronounce blessings upon the people in the name of God, but their disgraceful behavior turned the blessings into curses (Mal 2:2). Because of the priests’ sinfulness and the poor condition of the animals, their sacrifices were also worthless, and the entrails of the animals will be spread on their faces as a sign that God holds them in contempt. The disgrace heaped upon the priests differs sharply from the honor enjoyed by Aaron and his descendants. Malachi refers to a covenant of life and peace (v 5) made with Levi and more particularly with Aaron’s grandson Phinehas, who courageously took action against the Jews involved in idolatry and immorality (Nm 25:10-13). In those days the priests revered the Lord and turned many from sin (Mal 2:6).<\/p>\n<p>Another responsibility of the priests was to teach the nation the law handed down by Moses (cf. Lv 10:11). Like prophets, they were messengers of the Lord (Mal 2:7) who were supposed to walk close to the Lord, but now the priests disregarded the law and were dishonest in handing down judicial decisions (Mal 2:9; cf. Lv 19:15).<\/p>\n<h5>The Unfaithfulness of the People (2:10-16)<\/h5>\n<p>In light of the attitude of the priests, it is not surprising to discover that the people at large were unfaithful to the Lord. God had formed Israel to be his special people, but the people had broken faith with him. A major factor in their unfaithfulness was intermarriage with foreigners, a sin mentioned in Ezra 9:1-2 and Nehemiah 13:23-29. By marrying pagan women, the men of Israel invariably began to worship pagan gods and turn from the Lord. When such intermarriage occurred, it sometimes followed the divorce of an Israelite wife. In Malachi 2:14-15 God underscores the sacred commitment that he himself witnesses when two people marry. If that marriage covenant is shattered by divorce, God is deeply displeased. And it is even more tragic if divorce became an excuse to marry a more attractive or appealing foreigner.<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Messenger of the Covenant (2:17–3:5)<\/h5>\n<p>The sins of the priests and the people did not go unnoticed, even though the nation doubted that God would take action (2:17). But the third chapter opens with the announcement that the messenger of the covenant will indeed come to his temple. His way will be prepared by another messenger—a prophecy of John the Baptist, who prepared the way for the ministry of Christ (cf. Mt 11:10; Mk 1:2-3). When Christ came, he revealed his anger when he cleansed the temple (cf. Jn 2:13-17) and denounced the scribes and Pharisees (cf. 9:39), but most of his purifying and refining work awaits the Second Coming. Someday the priests and Levites will bring acceptable sacrifices, as they did in the days of Moses and Phinehas (cf. Mal 3:3-4 and 2:4-5). Verse 5 of chapter 3 broadens the scope of the judgment to include the whole nation, as sorcerers, adulterers, and those who oppress the poor are condemned.<\/p>\n<h5>The Benefits of Faithful Tithing (3:6-12)<\/h5>\n<p>Another specific weakness of postexilic Judah was the failure of the people to bring their tithes to the Lord. Encouraged by Nehemiah, the nation promised to tithe faithfully (cf. Neh 10:37-39), but apparently their good intentions were short-lived (cf. 13:10-11). According to Malachi 3:8-9, the tithes of the nation were so dismal that the people were, in effect, robbing God and were therefore under a curse. In verses 10-12 Malachi challenges the nation to bring their tithes; then God would pour out his blessing upon them. Just as the opening of the “windows in heaven” meant the end of a famine in 2 Kings 7:2, 19, so God promises that their crops will be so abundant that they will run out of storage space. The hope of “blessing” in Malachi 3:10 and 12 provides welcome relief from the curses mentioned in 1:14, 2:2, 3:9, and 4:6.<\/p>\n<h5>The Day of the Lord (3:13–4:6)<\/h5>\n<p>Faced with the challenge of Malachi 3:10-12, the people of Israel responded in two different ways. One group denied that serving God brought any benefit (3:13-15), while another segment of the nation bowed low before him with deep reverence (vv 16-18). The unbelievers argued that obeying the Lord was useless and that arrogant and evil people were the ones who prospered. In response to their charge, Malachi noted that God would remember who the righteous were in the Day of Judgment. Although all of Israel was included in the promise made to Abraham, only those who genuinely believed would be God’s treasured possession (3:17; cf. Ex 19:5), with their names written in the Book of Life (cf. Mal 3:16). As for the arrogant and evildoers, the Day of the Lord will consume them and they will have no survivors (4:1). Those who revere the Lord will enjoy spiritual and physical health under the blessing and protection of God, who is called the “sun of righteousness” (v 2). Like calves just released from confinement, the righteous will trample down the wicked and triumph over them (v 3).<\/p>\n<p>In view of the judgment associated with the Day of the Lord, Malachi urged the people to repent. To do this they needed to heed the law of Moses and take seriously the decrees and commands given at Mt Sinai (4:4; cf. 3:7). Just as Elijah called on Israel to turn back to God, so a new “Elijah” will preach repentance to a rebellious nation. When John the Baptist prepared the way for Christ (cf. Mal 3:1), he ministered “in the spirit and power of Elijah” and begged the Jews to turn from their sin and humble themselves before God (Lk 1:17). If they refused to listen, the nation faced the prospect of total destruction, the curse placed upon the people of Canaan (cf. Jos 6:17-19) and upon the nation of Edom, whose collapse was described in Malachi 1:2-5.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Postexilic Period; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MALACHI, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Last prophetic book of the Jewish canon; last book of the Old Testament.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The name Malachi means “my messenger” or “messenger of the Lord.” Since the word appears in 3:1, some scholars think that it is not a proper name at all and does not provide the name of the author of the book. According to one ancient tradition, the “messenger” was Ezra, the priest responsible for the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. Yet it would be most unusual for the Jews to preserve a prophetic book without explicitly attaching to it the name of the author. All of the other major and minor prophets—including Obadiah—are named after a particular prophet. Moreover, “messenger of the Lord” would be a most appropriate name for a prophet (cf. 2 Chr 36:15-16; Hg 1:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>During the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>, the struggling Jewish community in Judah was greatly assisted by the return of Ezra and Nehemiah. In 458 <span>BC<\/span> Ezra was encouraged by King Artaxerxes of Persia to lead a group of exiles back to Jerusalem and to institute religious reform. About 13 years later, in 445 <span>BC<\/span>, a high-ranking government official named Nehemiah was allowed to go to Jerusalem to rebuild the city walls, a task he accomplished in 52 days (Neh 6:15). As governor, Nehemiah led the people in a financial reform that provided for the poor and encouraged tithing to support the priests and Levites (5:2-13; 10:35-39). Like Ezra, Nehemiah urged the people to keep the Sabbath and avoid intermarrying with pagan neighbors. After a 12-year term, Nehemiah returned to Persia and the spiritual condition of Judah deteriorated. Perhaps discouraged by their lack of political power, tithing became sporadic, the Sabbath was not kept, intermarriage was common, and even the priests could not be trusted. When Nehemiah came back to Jerusalem sometime later, he had to take firm action to straighten out the situation (13:6-31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Since Malachi had to deal with the same sins mentioned in Nehemiah 13 (see Mal 1:6-14; 2:14-16; 3:8-11), it is likely that the prophet ministered either during Nehemiah’s second term as governor or in the years just before his return. The reference to “the governor” in Malachi 1:8 implies that someone other than Nehemiah was in office, so it may be best to place Malachi just after 433 <span>BC<\/span>, the year Nehemiah had returned to Persia.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheology\">Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n<p>Malachi was written to shake the people of Judah from their spiritual lethargy and to warn them that judgment was coming unless they repented. The people doubted God’s love (1:2) and justice (2:17) and did not take his commands seriously (1:6; 3:14-18). Yet God was “a great King” (1:14) with a great name that was to be feared even beyond the border of Israel (vv 5, 11). Malachi repeatedly urged both the priests and the people to revere God and give him the honor he deserved. God was Israel’s Father and Creator (2:10), but the nation showed contempt for his name (1:6; 3:5). In response to this contempt, God would send his messenger to announce the Day of the Lord (3:1). John the Baptist did call the nation to repentance, and Christ came to cleanse the temple (Jn 2:14-15) and to establish the covenant (Mal 3:1-2). Most of the work of refining and purifying will take place at the Second Coming, when Christ returns to purify his people (cf. vv 2-4) and judge the wicked (4:1).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Great Love for Israel (1:1-5)<\/h5>\n<p>To introduce the book, Malachi presents a contrast between God’s love for Israel and his hatred for Edom. Yet the assertion of God’s love is greeted with a strange question: “How have you loved us?” God loved Israel by entering into a covenant with the nation at Mt Sinai, just after he had freed them from the prison of Egypt. He had chosen them as his special people (cf. Gn 12:1-3; Ex 19:5-6), whereas the descendants of Esau were not chosen (cf. Rom 9:10-13). Both Israel and Edom endured invasion and destruction, but only Israel was restored and rebuilt after the exile. The people of Edom were driven from their homeland by the Nabateans between 550 and 400 <span>BC<\/span>, and they never regained their territory. Through the judgment of Edom, God demonstrated that he is the great Ruler over the nations (Mal 1:5) and that he will not forget Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Unacceptable Sacrifices of the Priests (1:6-14)<\/h5>\n<p>Although God deserved the honor and reverence of the Israelites, both the people and the priests openly disdained his laws and regulations. Strangely, it was the priests who led the way into disobedience. Sacrifices and offerings were supposed to atone for sin, but the animals offered by the priests only served to pollute or defile the altar (1:7, 12). According to Leviticus, animals with defects were unacceptable as sacrifices, but Malachi mentions that the priests were offering to the Lord animals that were stolen and mutilated, crippled and sick (v 13; cf. v 8). To emphasize their contempt, the Lord challenged the priests to bring comparable presents to the governor. Would they dare to insult him in this fashion and face sure rejection? Rather than having the priests continue to bring unfit sacrifices to the altar, the Lord asked them to close the temple doors entirely (v 10). Going through the motions never pleased God, either in ancient times (cf. Is 1:12-13) or modern. By calling the altar and its sacrifices “contemptible” (Mal 1:7, 12), the priests were no better than the wicked sons of Eli, whose disregard of the rules for sacrifices sent them to a premature death (cf. 1 Sm 2:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>In sharp contrast to the attitude of the priests stands the emphasis upon God’s greatness in Malachi 1:11 and 14. God is more powerful than the gods of other nations, and even if Israel’s priests and people dishonor the Lord, eventually pure offerings will be brought to God by believing Gentiles. Perhaps these offerings refer to prayer and praise (cf. Ps 19:14; Heb 13:15; Rv 5:8), but others interpret the reference more literally (cf. Is 56:7; 60:7). Peter may be alluding to this verse in connection with the conversion of Cornelius (Acts 10:35).<\/p>\n<h5>The Punishment of the Priests (2:1-9)<\/h5>\n<p>One of the functions of the priests was to pronounce blessings upon the people in the name of God, but their disgraceful behavior turned the blessings into curses (Mal 2:2). Because of the priests’ sinfulness and the poor condition of the animals, their sacrifices were also worthless, and the entrails of the animals will be spread on their faces as a sign that God holds them in contempt. The disgrace heaped upon the priests differs sharply from the honor enjoyed by Aaron and his descendants. Malachi refers to a covenant of life and peace (v 5) made with Levi and more particularly with Aaron’s grandson Phinehas, who courageously took action against the Jews involved in idolatry and immorality (Nm 25:10-13). In those days the priests revered the Lord and turned many from sin (Mal 2:6).<\/p>\n<p>Another responsibility of the priests was to teach the nation the law handed down by Moses (cf. Lv 10:11). Like prophets, they were messengers of the Lord (Mal 2:7) who were supposed to walk close to the Lord, but now the priests disregarded the law and were dishonest in handing down judicial decisions (Mal 2:9; cf. Lv 19:15).<\/p>\n<h5>The Unfaithfulness of the People (2:10-16)<\/h5>\n<p>In light of the attitude of the priests, it is not surprising to discover that the people at large were unfaithful to the Lord. God had formed Israel to be his special people, but the people had broken faith with him. A major factor in their unfaithfulness was intermarriage with foreigners, a sin mentioned in Ezra 9:1-2 and Nehemiah 13:23-29. By marrying pagan women, the men of Israel invariably began to worship pagan gods and turn from the Lord. When such intermarriage occurred, it sometimes followed the divorce of an Israelite wife. In Malachi 2:14-15 God underscores the sacred commitment that he himself witnesses when two people marry. If that marriage covenant is shattered by divorce, God is deeply displeased. And it is even more tragic if divorce became an excuse to marry a more attractive or appealing foreigner.<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Messenger of the Covenant (2:17–3:5)<\/h5>\n<p>The sins of the priests and the people did not go unnoticed, even though the nation doubted that God would take action (2:17). But the third chapter opens with the announcement that the messenger of the covenant will indeed come to his temple. His way will be prepared by another messenger—a prophecy of John the Baptist, who prepared the way for the ministry of Christ (cf. Mt 11:10; Mk 1:2-3). When Christ came, he revealed his anger when he cleansed the temple (cf. Jn 2:13-17) and denounced the scribes and Pharisees (cf. 9:39), but most of his purifying and refining work awaits the Second Coming. Someday the priests and Levites will bring acceptable sacrifices, as they did in the days of Moses and Phinehas (cf. Mal 3:3-4 and 2:4-5). Verse 5 of chapter 3 broadens the scope of the judgment to include the whole nation, as sorcerers, adulterers, and those who oppress the poor are condemned.<\/p>\n<h5>The Benefits of Faithful Tithing (3:6-12)<\/h5>\n<p>Another specific weakness of postexilic Judah was the failure of the people to bring their tithes to the Lord. Encouraged by Nehemiah, the nation promised to tithe faithfully (cf. Neh 10:37-39), but apparently their good intentions were short-lived (cf. 13:10-11). According to Malachi 3:8-9, the tithes of the nation were so dismal that the people were, in effect, robbing God and were therefore under a curse. In verses 10-12 Malachi challenges the nation to bring their tithes; then God would pour out his blessing upon them. Just as the opening of the “windows in heaven” meant the end of a famine in 2 Kings 7:2, 19, so God promises that their crops will be so abundant that they will run out of storage space. The hope of “blessing” in Malachi 3:10 and 12 provides welcome relief from the curses mentioned in 1:14, 2:2, 3:9, and 4:6.<\/p>\n<h5>The Day of the Lord (3:13–4:6)<\/h5>\n<p>Faced with the challenge of Malachi 3:10-12, the people of Israel responded in two different ways. One group denied that serving God brought any benefit (3:13-15), while another segment of the nation bowed low before him with deep reverence (vv 16-18). The unbelievers argued that obeying the Lord was useless and that arrogant and evil people were the ones who prospered. In response to their charge, Malachi noted that God would remember who the righteous were in the Day of Judgment. Although all of Israel was included in the promise made to Abraham, only those who genuinely believed would be God’s treasured possession (3:17; cf. Ex 19:5), with their names written in the Book of Life (cf. Mal 3:16). As for the arrogant and evildoers, the Day of the Lord will consume them and they will have no survivors (4:1). Those who revere the Lord will enjoy spiritual and physical health under the blessing and protection of God, who is called the “sun of righteousness” (v 2). Like calves just released from confinement, the righteous will trample down the wicked and triumph over them (v 3).<\/p>\n<p>In view of the judgment associated with the Day of the Lord, Malachi urged the people to repent. To do this they needed to heed the law of Moses and take seriously the decrees and commands given at Mt Sinai (4:4; cf. 3:7). Just as Elijah called on Israel to turn back to God, so a new “Elijah” will preach repentance to a rebellious nation. When John the Baptist prepared the way for Christ (cf. Mal 3:1), he ministered “in the spirit and power of Elijah” and begged the Jews to turn from their sin and humble themselves before God (Lk 1:17). If they refused to listen, the nation faced the prospect of total destruction, the curse placed upon the people of Canaan (cf. Jos 6:17-19) and upon the nation of Edom, whose collapse was described in Malachi 1:2-5.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Postexilic Period; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MALACHI, Book of Last prophetic book of the Jewish canon; last book of the Old Testament. Preview • Author • Background • Date • Purpose and Theology • Content Author The name Malachi means “my messenger” or “messenger of the Lord.” Since the word appears in 3:1, some scholars think that it is not a proper name at all and does not provide the name of the author of the book. According to one ancient tradition, the “messenger” was Ezra, the priest responsible for the books of Ezra and Nehemiah....","summary_en":"MALACHI, Book of Last prophetic book of the Jewish canon; last book of the Old Testament. Preview • Author • Background • Date • Purpose and Theology • Content Author The name Malachi means “my messenger” or “messenger of the Lord.” Since the word appears in 3:1, some scholars think that it is not a proper name at all and does not provide the name of the author of the book. According to one ancient tradition, the “messenger” was Ezra, the priest responsible for the books of Ezra and Nehemiah....","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":48166,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:2","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:2<\/strong> Some farmers had diverted their efforts from raising crops to building the wall, leaving their <em>large families<\/em> in need of <em>food to survive<\/em>. Someone had to feed their families, or they would have to stop work on the wall and go home to work in their fields.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:2<\/strong> Some farmers had diverted their efforts from raising crops to building the wall, leaving their <em>large families<\/em> in need of <em>food to survive<\/em>. Someone had to feed their families, or they would have to stop work on the wall and go home to work in their fields.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:2 Some farmers had diverted their efforts from raising crops to building the wall, leaving their large families in need of food to survive. Someone had to feed their families, or they would have to stop work on the wall and go home to work in their fields.","summary_en":"5:2 Some farmers had diverted their efforts from raising crops to building the wall, leaving their large families in need of food to survive. Someone had to feed their families, or they would have to stop work on the wall and go home to work in their fields.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75792,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:2","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:2<\/strong> Some farmers had diverted their efforts from raising crops to building the wall, leaving their <em>large families<\/em> in need of <em>food to survive<\/em>. Someone had to feed their families, or they would have to stop work on the wall and go home to work in their fields.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:2<\/strong> Some farmers had diverted their efforts from raising crops to building the wall, leaving their <em>large families<\/em> in need of <em>food to survive<\/em>. Someone had to feed their families, or they would have to stop work on the wall and go home to work in their fields.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:2 Some farmers had diverted their efforts from raising crops to building the wall, leaving their large families in need of food to survive. Someone had to feed their families, or they would have to stop work on the wall and go home to work in their fields.","summary_en":"5:2 Some farmers had diverted their efforts from raising crops to building the wall, leaving their large families in need of food to survive. Someone had to feed their families, or they would have to stop work on the wall and go home to work in their fields.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103418,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:2","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:2<\/strong> Some farmers had diverted their efforts from raising crops to building the wall, leaving their <em>large families<\/em> in need of <em>food to survive<\/em>. Someone had to feed their families, or they would have to stop work on the wall and go home to work in their fields.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:2<\/strong> Some farmers had diverted their efforts from raising crops to building the wall, leaving their <em>large families<\/em> in need of <em>food to survive<\/em>. Someone had to feed their families, or they would have to stop work on the wall and go home to work in their fields.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:2 Some farmers had diverted their efforts from raising crops to building the wall, leaving their large families in need of food to survive. Someone had to feed their families, or they would have to stop work on the wall and go home to work in their fields.","summary_en":"5:2 Some farmers had diverted their efforts from raising crops to building the wall, leaving their large families in need of food to survive. Someone had to feed their families, or they would have to stop work on the wall and go home to work in their fields.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":131044,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:2","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:2<\/strong> Some farmers had diverted their efforts from raising crops to building the wall, leaving their <em>large families<\/em> in need of <em>food to survive<\/em>. Someone had to feed their families, or they would have to stop work on the wall and go home to work in their fields.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:2<\/strong> Some farmers had diverted their efforts from raising crops to building the wall, leaving their <em>large families<\/em> in need of <em>food to survive<\/em>. Someone had to feed their families, or they would have to stop work on the wall and go home to work in their fields.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:2 Some farmers had diverted their efforts from raising crops to building the wall, leaving their large families in need of food to survive. Someone had to feed their families, or they would have to stop work on the wall and go home to work in their fields.","summary_en":"5:2 Some farmers had diverted their efforts from raising crops to building the wall, leaving their large families in need of food to survive. Someone had to feed their families, or they would have to stop work on the wall and go home to work in their fields.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":48167,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:3","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:3<\/strong> Some small landowners had <em>mortgaged<\/em> everything to survive. The <em>famine<\/em> made the problem worse because grain was scarce and the price of food naturally increased.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:3<\/strong> Some small landowners had <em>mortgaged<\/em> everything to survive. The <em>famine<\/em> made the problem worse because grain was scarce and the price of food naturally increased.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:3 Some small landowners had mortgaged everything to survive. The famine made the problem worse because grain was scarce and the price of food naturally increased.","summary_en":"5:3 Some small landowners had mortgaged everything to survive. The famine made the problem worse because grain was scarce and the price of food naturally increased.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75793,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:3","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:3<\/strong> Some small landowners had <em>mortgaged<\/em> everything to survive. The <em>famine<\/em> made the problem worse because grain was scarce and the price of food naturally increased.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:3<\/strong> Some small landowners had <em>mortgaged<\/em> everything to survive. The <em>famine<\/em> made the problem worse because grain was scarce and the price of food naturally increased.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:3 Some small landowners had mortgaged everything to survive. The famine made the problem worse because grain was scarce and the price of food naturally increased.","summary_en":"5:3 Some small landowners had mortgaged everything to survive. The famine made the problem worse because grain was scarce and the price of food naturally increased.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103419,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:3","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:3<\/strong> Some small landowners had <em>mortgaged<\/em> everything to survive. The <em>famine<\/em> made the problem worse because grain was scarce and the price of food naturally increased.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:3<\/strong> Some small landowners had <em>mortgaged<\/em> everything to survive. The <em>famine<\/em> made the problem worse because grain was scarce and the price of food naturally increased.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:3 Some small landowners had mortgaged everything to survive. The famine made the problem worse because grain was scarce and the price of food naturally increased.","summary_en":"5:3 Some small landowners had mortgaged everything to survive. The famine made the problem worse because grain was scarce and the price of food naturally increased.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":131045,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:3","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:3<\/strong> Some small landowners had <em>mortgaged<\/em> everything to survive. The <em>famine<\/em> made the problem worse because grain was scarce and the price of food naturally increased.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:3<\/strong> Some small landowners had <em>mortgaged<\/em> everything to survive. The <em>famine<\/em> made the problem worse because grain was scarce and the price of food naturally increased.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:3 Some small landowners had mortgaged everything to survive. The famine made the problem worse because grain was scarce and the price of food naturally increased.","summary_en":"5:3 Some small landowners had mortgaged everything to survive. The famine made the problem worse because grain was scarce and the price of food naturally increased.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":27230,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Nehemiah","title_en":"Book of Nehemiah","content_ro":"<h3>NEHEMIAH, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>One of the last of the Jewish historical books.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Authenticity<\/p>\n<p>• Chronology<\/p>\n<p>• Significance<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>In 597 <span>BC<\/span> Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon took away the first exiles from Jerusalem. In 586 <span>BC<\/span> the Babylonians returned, pillaged and burned the city and its temple, and took an estimated 60,000 to 80,000 Judeans into exile. The expatriates settled in various districts where they enjoyed a measure of freedom. They engaged in agriculture and commerce and in some instances acquired considerable wealth. The elders continued to function, prophets like Ezekiel ministered among the exiles, and resistance to religious apostasy was kept alive in the popular mind.<\/p>\n<p>With the appearance of the Persian king Cyrus the Great (559–530 <span>BC<\/span>), the Jewish exiles’ prospects altered dramatically. Cyrus was a civilized and enlightened statesman, and within a short time after his conquest of Babylon, he issued an edict (Ezr 1:2-4) that granted the expatriates permission to return to their homeland. Two separate groups of exiles returned to Judah and built a new sanctuary in Jerusalem on the site of Solomon’s temple in 516 <span>BC<\/span>. Then, under King Artaxerxes I (464–424 <span>BC<\/span>), two separate groups returned from Babylon under Ezra (458 <span>BC<\/span>) and Nehemiah (445 <span>BC<\/span>), respectively. From this seedbed there sprang the theocratic people of Judah, the Jews, dedicated to the law of God, isolated from foreign influence, and centered in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah’s personal memoirs form a considerable portion of the book that bears his name. These memoirs reveal a man of nobility and piety, who was compassionate, prudent, and patriotic. He was a man of generosity and fidelity, political acumen, and religious zeal, of total dedication to God, outstanding organizational ability, and dynamic leadership. At the same time Nehemiah possessed a capacity for ruthlessness when confronting the sin and waywardness of his compatriots (Neh 5:1-13) and the intrigues of powerful non-Jewish enemies (13:8, 28). Not surprisingly, then, a dispirited and dejected people awoke from their lethargic and apathetic state and responded to Nehemiah’s stringent approach to their situation (2:4; 13:14, 22, 31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalAuthenticity\">Historical Authenticity<\/p>\n<p>According to Josephus and other early writers, the books of Ezra and Nehemiah formed one book in the early Hebrew Bible entitled the book of Ezra. The earliest Hebrew manuscript in which the two books are divided is dated 1448, and modern Hebrew Bibles refer to them as the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. In manuscripts of the Greek OT (LXX) they also formed one book. Origen, in the beginning of the third century, is the first to attest to a division. There is general acknowledgment of the genuineness of the personal memoirs of Nehemiah, which constitute a major part of the book.<\/p>\n<p>The historical framework of the book is confirmed by papyri that were discovered between 1898 and 1908 in Elephantine, an island in the upper Nile. Here Psammetichus II (593–588 <span>BC<\/span>) established a Jewish colony. The Elephantine papyri are well preserved, written in Aramaic, and are the fifth-century <span>BC<\/span> literary remains of this Jewish colony of the Persian period.<\/p>\n<p>The most important item among the papyri is a copy of a letter sent to the Persian governor of Judah in 407 <span>BC<\/span>. Three years earlier the Jewish temple in Elephantine had been destroyed. This disaster was the occasion of a letter to Jehohanan, the high priest in Jerusalem (see Neh 12:12-13). Now, in their letter to the governor in Judah, they asked permission to rebuild their temple and said that they had sent a similar request to Delaiah and Shelamiah, the sons of Sanballat (Nehemiah’s enemy, 2:10, 19; 4:1). The Elephantine papyri reveal that Sanballat was governor of the province of Samaria and that Tobiah was governor of the province of Ammon in Transjordan (2:10, 19). Here, then, is evidence that there was in Judah a twofold authority, civil and religious, and that the high priest of 408–407 <span>BC<\/span> was Jehohanan (12:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Chronology\">Chronology<\/p>\n<p>The question about whether Ezra or Nehemiah came to Jerusalem first has been hotly debated. There is no doubt that Nehemiah arrived in the city in 445 <span>BC<\/span>. The objections to the view that Ezra came to Jerusalem 13 years earlier, in 458 <span>BC<\/span>, raise questions concerning historical and textual data that are of such complexity as to preclude discussion of them here. However, achieving an understanding of the spiritual values of the book does not depend on a correct interpretation of the details of chronology. Arguments against the traditional chronology are neither altogether decisive, nor do they dispel the inherent complexities.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Significance\">Significance<\/p>\n<p>When the exiles returned to Jerusalem, Judah had neither nationhood nor political status. Only one thing remained to them: their religion. They were the “remnant” of Yahweh’s chosen people, from whom would rise the new and glorious Israel. It was this vision that explains Nehemiah’s insistence that the Jewish people maintain the purity and exclusiveness of their religious faith and practice in order to rejuvenate their national life and rebuild the city walls (6:15), because this symbolized the racial and the religious purity of the people. He also insisted on separation from paganism, prohibition of marriage with non-Jews (13:23-28), and careful observance of the laws of the Sabbath (vv 15-22).<\/p>\n<p>It is, therefore, difficult to exaggerate the significance of the book of Nehemiah. Along with the book of Ezra, it furnishes the only consecutive Hebrew account of that period in Jewish history when the foundations of Judaism—with its inflexible segregation of the Jews and its passionate veneration of the Mosaic law—were laid. Of course, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi also contribute to knowledge of the period, but Nehemiah (with Ezra) provides a progressive narrative of this epoch. The return of the expatriates from Babylon to Jerusalem constitutes a resumption of the saving purposes of God for his ancient people, leading to the advent of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The account of the return from Babylon under Nehemiah emphasizes the religious aspect of the community of repatriates in Jerusalem. But other, secondary factors should be noted: Nehemiah’s preoccupation with Judah’s political security and constitutional status to ensure its independence of Samaria; the rebuilding of the city walls; Nehemiah’s resettlements of population (7:4; 11:1-2); and his appointment to the governorship of the new province. However, there is no reference in the book of Nehemiah (or for that matter in Ezra) to a restoration to nationhood under a scion of the house of David—no mention of a Messiah, no allusion to the universal kingdom of God. Nehemiah manifests absolute loyalty to the Persian overlord who, while showing remarkable openness to Nehemiah’s request (2:4-9), still continues to levy taxes (5:4, 15).<\/p>\n<p>The repatriates retreated behind their city’s new walls and congregated around the second temple, completed in 516 <span>BC<\/span>. “The book of the law of Moses” (8:1), recognized by the Persian overlord as the law of the land of Judah, became central to Jewish devotion and worship. Judaism was the product of the restoration, which became both a protective barrier against, and a wall of separation from, the Gentiles. Religious institutions initiated during the Babylonian exile and transplanted to Jerusalem took deep and firm root: the synagogue where the Law and the Prophets were read and the prayers were offered; the scribes who worked with single-minded devotion; and the Sanhedrin that continued to serve the new theocracy.<\/p>\n<p>The Jewish remnant of the fifth century <span>BC<\/span> parallels the modern Christian church in that both share the challenge of spiritual reconstruction and renewal essential to God’s purposes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>In the winter of 445 <span>BC<\/span>, the Persian court was in Susa, the ancient capital of Elam (1:1). There Nehemiah occupied a position of honor and influence (2:1). From Jerusalem, a company of Judeans arrived, among them Nehemiah’s brother, whose description of conditions in Jerusalem horrified and grieved Nehemiah (1:2-4). Four months later, and after much prayer, he reached Jerusalem with an armed escort (1:5–2:11). After a three-day inspection of the situation, Nehemiah realized that rebuilding the walls would be his primary task (2:12–3:32).<\/p>\n<p>An outburst of new national spirit caused latent opposition to surface. Sanballat, Tobiah, and Geshem were powerful, resourceful, astute antagonists. Through ridicule and rumors, they insinuated that work on the walls was a form of rebellion against the king (2:19; 4:1-3, 7-14; 6:1-9). But Nehemiah countered every subterfuge and stratagem with prayer and with an adamant refusal to deviate from his goal. There was also hostility from traitors within the camp (6:10-19). Despite all opposition, Jerusalem’s walls were reconstructed (v 15) and rededicated amid enthusiastic celebration (12:27-43).<\/p>\n<p>The community’s response to the reading by Ezra, priest and scribe, of the law of Moses and to its interpretation by the Levites (8:1-8), was a complex response of sorrow for sin and rejoicing in God (vv 9-18); of fasting and prayer (9:1-37); of renewing the covenant (9:38–10:29); and of self-commitment to obey God’s commandments, ordinances, and statutes (10:30-39). Chapters 11 and 12 refer to various offices and duties, civil and religious, and the names of the people appointed to them. Then follows the decision to exclude all people of foreign descent from Judaism (13:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>At this juncture Nehemiah traveled to Susa to give an account of his stewardship; a further leave of absence being granted, he returned to Jerusalem to find that serious irregularities were again present. His enemy Tobiah and the priest Eliashib were embroiled (13:4-9); the people failed to provide the Levites with adequate maintenance (vv 10-14); the laws of the Sabbath were being violated (vv 15-22); and Jews were marrying non-Jews (vv 23-32). Due to the increase of intermarriage with foreigners, the offspring could not speak Hebrew (vv 23-25). The danger of assimilation was halted by enforcing a policy of exclusivism.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Nehemiah ends rather abruptly with a description of his vigorous and ruthless handling of these deviations from the newly established principles and precepts of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Ezra, Book of; Ezra (Person) #1; Israel, History of; Judaism; Nehemiah (Person) #3; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NEHEMIAH, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>One of the last of the Jewish historical books.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Authenticity<\/p>\n<p>• Chronology<\/p>\n<p>• Significance<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>In 597 <span>BC<\/span> Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon took away the first exiles from Jerusalem. In 586 <span>BC<\/span> the Babylonians returned, pillaged and burned the city and its temple, and took an estimated 60,000 to 80,000 Judeans into exile. The expatriates settled in various districts where they enjoyed a measure of freedom. They engaged in agriculture and commerce and in some instances acquired considerable wealth. The elders continued to function, prophets like Ezekiel ministered among the exiles, and resistance to religious apostasy was kept alive in the popular mind.<\/p>\n<p>With the appearance of the Persian king Cyrus the Great (559–530 <span>BC<\/span>), the Jewish exiles’ prospects altered dramatically. Cyrus was a civilized and enlightened statesman, and within a short time after his conquest of Babylon, he issued an edict (Ezr 1:2-4) that granted the expatriates permission to return to their homeland. Two separate groups of exiles returned to Judah and built a new sanctuary in Jerusalem on the site of Solomon’s temple in 516 <span>BC<\/span>. Then, under King Artaxerxes I (464–424 <span>BC<\/span>), two separate groups returned from Babylon under Ezra (458 <span>BC<\/span>) and Nehemiah (445 <span>BC<\/span>), respectively. From this seedbed there sprang the theocratic people of Judah, the Jews, dedicated to the law of God, isolated from foreign influence, and centered in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah’s personal memoirs form a considerable portion of the book that bears his name. These memoirs reveal a man of nobility and piety, who was compassionate, prudent, and patriotic. He was a man of generosity and fidelity, political acumen, and religious zeal, of total dedication to God, outstanding organizational ability, and dynamic leadership. At the same time Nehemiah possessed a capacity for ruthlessness when confronting the sin and waywardness of his compatriots (Neh 5:1-13) and the intrigues of powerful non-Jewish enemies (13:8, 28). Not surprisingly, then, a dispirited and dejected people awoke from their lethargic and apathetic state and responded to Nehemiah’s stringent approach to their situation (2:4; 13:14, 22, 31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalAuthenticity\">Historical Authenticity<\/p>\n<p>According to Josephus and other early writers, the books of Ezra and Nehemiah formed one book in the early Hebrew Bible entitled the book of Ezra. The earliest Hebrew manuscript in which the two books are divided is dated 1448, and modern Hebrew Bibles refer to them as the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. In manuscripts of the Greek OT (LXX) they also formed one book. Origen, in the beginning of the third century, is the first to attest to a division. There is general acknowledgment of the genuineness of the personal memoirs of Nehemiah, which constitute a major part of the book.<\/p>\n<p>The historical framework of the book is confirmed by papyri that were discovered between 1898 and 1908 in Elephantine, an island in the upper Nile. Here Psammetichus II (593–588 <span>BC<\/span>) established a Jewish colony. The Elephantine papyri are well preserved, written in Aramaic, and are the fifth-century <span>BC<\/span> literary remains of this Jewish colony of the Persian period.<\/p>\n<p>The most important item among the papyri is a copy of a letter sent to the Persian governor of Judah in 407 <span>BC<\/span>. Three years earlier the Jewish temple in Elephantine had been destroyed. This disaster was the occasion of a letter to Jehohanan, the high priest in Jerusalem (see Neh 12:12-13). Now, in their letter to the governor in Judah, they asked permission to rebuild their temple and said that they had sent a similar request to Delaiah and Shelamiah, the sons of Sanballat (Nehemiah’s enemy, 2:10, 19; 4:1). The Elephantine papyri reveal that Sanballat was governor of the province of Samaria and that Tobiah was governor of the province of Ammon in Transjordan (2:10, 19). Here, then, is evidence that there was in Judah a twofold authority, civil and religious, and that the high priest of 408–407 <span>BC<\/span> was Jehohanan (12:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Chronology\">Chronology<\/p>\n<p>The question about whether Ezra or Nehemiah came to Jerusalem first has been hotly debated. There is no doubt that Nehemiah arrived in the city in 445 <span>BC<\/span>. The objections to the view that Ezra came to Jerusalem 13 years earlier, in 458 <span>BC<\/span>, raise questions concerning historical and textual data that are of such complexity as to preclude discussion of them here. However, achieving an understanding of the spiritual values of the book does not depend on a correct interpretation of the details of chronology. Arguments against the traditional chronology are neither altogether decisive, nor do they dispel the inherent complexities.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Significance\">Significance<\/p>\n<p>When the exiles returned to Jerusalem, Judah had neither nationhood nor political status. Only one thing remained to them: their religion. They were the “remnant” of Yahweh’s chosen people, from whom would rise the new and glorious Israel. It was this vision that explains Nehemiah’s insistence that the Jewish people maintain the purity and exclusiveness of their religious faith and practice in order to rejuvenate their national life and rebuild the city walls (6:15), because this symbolized the racial and the religious purity of the people. He also insisted on separation from paganism, prohibition of marriage with non-Jews (13:23-28), and careful observance of the laws of the Sabbath (vv 15-22).<\/p>\n<p>It is, therefore, difficult to exaggerate the significance of the book of Nehemiah. Along with the book of Ezra, it furnishes the only consecutive Hebrew account of that period in Jewish history when the foundations of Judaism—with its inflexible segregation of the Jews and its passionate veneration of the Mosaic law—were laid. Of course, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi also contribute to knowledge of the period, but Nehemiah (with Ezra) provides a progressive narrative of this epoch. The return of the expatriates from Babylon to Jerusalem constitutes a resumption of the saving purposes of God for his ancient people, leading to the advent of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The account of the return from Babylon under Nehemiah emphasizes the religious aspect of the community of repatriates in Jerusalem. But other, secondary factors should be noted: Nehemiah’s preoccupation with Judah’s political security and constitutional status to ensure its independence of Samaria; the rebuilding of the city walls; Nehemiah’s resettlements of population (7:4; 11:1-2); and his appointment to the governorship of the new province. However, there is no reference in the book of Nehemiah (or for that matter in Ezra) to a restoration to nationhood under a scion of the house of David—no mention of a Messiah, no allusion to the universal kingdom of God. Nehemiah manifests absolute loyalty to the Persian overlord who, while showing remarkable openness to Nehemiah’s request (2:4-9), still continues to levy taxes (5:4, 15).<\/p>\n<p>The repatriates retreated behind their city’s new walls and congregated around the second temple, completed in 516 <span>BC<\/span>. “The book of the law of Moses” (8:1), recognized by the Persian overlord as the law of the land of Judah, became central to Jewish devotion and worship. Judaism was the product of the restoration, which became both a protective barrier against, and a wall of separation from, the Gentiles. Religious institutions initiated during the Babylonian exile and transplanted to Jerusalem took deep and firm root: the synagogue where the Law and the Prophets were read and the prayers were offered; the scribes who worked with single-minded devotion; and the Sanhedrin that continued to serve the new theocracy.<\/p>\n<p>The Jewish remnant of the fifth century <span>BC<\/span> parallels the modern Christian church in that both share the challenge of spiritual reconstruction and renewal essential to God’s purposes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>In the winter of 445 <span>BC<\/span>, the Persian court was in Susa, the ancient capital of Elam (1:1). There Nehemiah occupied a position of honor and influence (2:1). From Jerusalem, a company of Judeans arrived, among them Nehemiah’s brother, whose description of conditions in Jerusalem horrified and grieved Nehemiah (1:2-4). Four months later, and after much prayer, he reached Jerusalem with an armed escort (1:5–2:11). After a three-day inspection of the situation, Nehemiah realized that rebuilding the walls would be his primary task (2:12–3:32).<\/p>\n<p>An outburst of new national spirit caused latent opposition to surface. Sanballat, Tobiah, and Geshem were powerful, resourceful, astute antagonists. Through ridicule and rumors, they insinuated that work on the walls was a form of rebellion against the king (2:19; 4:1-3, 7-14; 6:1-9). But Nehemiah countered every subterfuge and stratagem with prayer and with an adamant refusal to deviate from his goal. There was also hostility from traitors within the camp (6:10-19). Despite all opposition, Jerusalem’s walls were reconstructed (v 15) and rededicated amid enthusiastic celebration (12:27-43).<\/p>\n<p>The community’s response to the reading by Ezra, priest and scribe, of the law of Moses and to its interpretation by the Levites (8:1-8), was a complex response of sorrow for sin and rejoicing in God (vv 9-18); of fasting and prayer (9:1-37); of renewing the covenant (9:38–10:29); and of self-commitment to obey God’s commandments, ordinances, and statutes (10:30-39). Chapters 11 and 12 refer to various offices and duties, civil and religious, and the names of the people appointed to them. Then follows the decision to exclude all people of foreign descent from Judaism (13:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>At this juncture Nehemiah traveled to Susa to give an account of his stewardship; a further leave of absence being granted, he returned to Jerusalem to find that serious irregularities were again present. His enemy Tobiah and the priest Eliashib were embroiled (13:4-9); the people failed to provide the Levites with adequate maintenance (vv 10-14); the laws of the Sabbath were being violated (vv 15-22); and Jews were marrying non-Jews (vv 23-32). Due to the increase of intermarriage with foreigners, the offspring could not speak Hebrew (vv 23-25). The danger of assimilation was halted by enforcing a policy of exclusivism.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Nehemiah ends rather abruptly with a description of his vigorous and ruthless handling of these deviations from the newly established principles and precepts of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Ezra, Book of; Ezra (Person) #1; Israel, History of; Judaism; Nehemiah (Person) #3; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NEHEMIAH, Book of One of the last of the Jewish historical books. Preview • Background • Author • Historical Authenticity • Chronology • Significance • Content Background In 597 BC Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon took away the first exiles from Jerusalem. In 586 BC the Babylonians returned, pillaged and burned the city and its temple, and took an estimated 60,000 to 80,000 Judeans into exile. The expatriates settled in various districts where they enjoyed a measure of freedom. They engaged in agric...","summary_en":"NEHEMIAH, Book of One of the last of the Jewish historical books. Preview • Background • Author • Historical Authenticity • Chronology • Significance • Content Background In 597 BC Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon took away the first exiles from Jerusalem. In 586 BC the Babylonians returned, pillaged and burned the city and its temple, and took an estimated 60,000 to 80,000 Judeans into exile. The expatriates settled in various districts where they enjoyed a measure of freedom. They engaged in agric...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":48168,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:4","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:4<\/strong> <em>to pay our taxes:<\/em> Despite the famine, the Persians did not cancel the onerous royal tribute due at harvest time.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:4<\/strong> <em>to pay our taxes:<\/em> Despite the famine, the Persians did not cancel the onerous royal tribute due at harvest time.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:4 to pay our taxes: Despite the famine, the Persians did not cancel the onerous royal tribute due at harvest time.","summary_en":"5:4 to pay our taxes: Despite the famine, the Persians did not cancel the onerous royal tribute due at harvest time.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75794,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:4","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:4<\/strong> <em>to pay our taxes:<\/em> Despite the famine, the Persians did not cancel the onerous royal tribute due at harvest time.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:4<\/strong> <em>to pay our taxes:<\/em> Despite the famine, the Persians did not cancel the onerous royal tribute due at harvest time.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:4 to pay our taxes: Despite the famine, the Persians did not cancel the onerous royal tribute due at harvest time.","summary_en":"5:4 to pay our taxes: Despite the famine, the Persians did not cancel the onerous royal tribute due at harvest time.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103420,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:4","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:4<\/strong> <em>to pay our taxes:<\/em> Despite the famine, the Persians did not cancel the onerous royal tribute due at harvest time.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:4<\/strong> <em>to pay our taxes:<\/em> Despite the famine, the Persians did not cancel the onerous royal tribute due at harvest time.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:4 to pay our taxes: Despite the famine, the Persians did not cancel the onerous royal tribute due at harvest time.","summary_en":"5:4 to pay our taxes: Despite the famine, the Persians did not cancel the onerous royal tribute due at harvest time.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":131046,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:4","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:4<\/strong> <em>to pay our taxes:<\/em> Despite the famine, the Persians did not cancel the onerous royal tribute due at harvest time.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:4<\/strong> <em>to pay our taxes:<\/em> Despite the famine, the Persians did not cancel the onerous royal tribute due at harvest time.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:4 to pay our taxes: Despite the famine, the Persians did not cancel the onerous royal tribute due at harvest time.","summary_en":"5:4 to pay our taxes: Despite the famine, the Persians did not cancel the onerous royal tribute due at harvest time.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":8068,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Law and Punishment*, Criminal","title_en":"Law and Punishment*, Criminal","content_ro":"<h3>CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT*<\/h3>\n<p>The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, “crimes” included all punishable offenses, even religious offenses such as idolatry (worshiping a false god) or blasphemy (speaking or behaving with contempt toward God).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>• Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<p>• Punishment<\/p>\n<p>• Conclusion<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NearEasternContext\">Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>In ancient societies as in modern ones, laws were considered necessary to regulate individual behavior for the good of the community, state, or nation. Today laws are thought of as made by people for their own protection. In contrast, all ancient Near Eastern law codes were considered to have come directly from some divine source. Hebrew law, though distinct, followed the general pattern of Near Eastern law codes, as is known from those that have survived—such as the Code of Hammurabi and Assyrian and Hittite laws.<\/p>\n<p>Conclusions about the “origin” of ancient laws should be made cautiously. Although evidence indicates that Hammurabi based his legislation partially on earlier Sumerian codes, he declared that his code had been received from Shamash, god of justice. That declaration must have been intended to convey primarily that his code had the express sanction of Shamash, since at least some people would recognize it as a compilation based largely on earlier laws. Similarly, the clear biblical statements about Moses receiving the law on Mt Sinai (Ex 19–24) do not rule out the possibility that parts of the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments) may have existed in earlier codes. Possibly the Mosaic legislation included some social rules adapted from the period of Israel’s sojourn in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HebrewCriminalLaw\">Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<h5>Laws Governing Offenses against God<\/h5>\n<p>Since Hebrew law was designed for a group of people for whom religion was of paramount importance and whose faith was endangered by the influence of the beliefs of their pagan neighbors, it is not surprising that so much of Hebrew law dealt with crimes committed against God. The prohibition against worshiping idols is stated and repeated in the Torah, or Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible): “You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them” (Ex 20:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Sacrifice of infants, practiced in some pagan religions, was specifically prohibited in Israel. The penalty for that crime, as for the other forms of murder, was stoning to death (Lv 20:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Leviticus, death by stoning was recorded as the appropriate punishment for blaspheming the name of God (Lv 24:11-16). False prophecy was also a criminal offense; that accusation could apply to a person making a prediction in the name of a god other than the Lord, or implying falsely that one’s prophecy resulted from a communication with God. Jeremiah, whose prophecy of Nebuchadnezzar’s victory over the southern kingdom of Judah was for a time considered to be false, was almost lynched by a mob (Jer 26:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The idea of keeping the seventh day holy stemmed from the celebration of God’s work in creating the universe in six days and resting on the seventh. Keeping the Sabbath required cessation of manual work for the entire family, including farm animals (Ex 16:23; 20:8-11). People were also required to meet together on the Sabbath for worship, which at a later period in Hebrew history included the reading of Scripture, prayer, and preaching. Anyone breaking the Sabbath could be sentenced to death, as happened to a man caught gathering firewood on the Sabbath (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Any type of premeditated crime was considered an offense against God, the giver of all law; hence, it was punishable by death (Nm 15:30-31). Hebrew law also insisted on donation of the firstfruits of harvest to the Lord without delay. That requirement was sometimes carried over to include a first child, whose life was dedicated to service in the temple (Ex 22:29-30; Dt 15:19).<\/p>\n<h5>Personal Injury<\/h5>\n<p>Murder, an offense against “God’s image,” was one of many crimes punishable by death in OT times. The book of Exodus stated unequivocally that “anyone who hits a person hard enough to cause death must be put to death” (Ex 21:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). A murderer who killed by using a weapon such as a stone, a piece of wood, or iron could be killed in revenge by a relative of the deceased. If the original death happened accidentally, the community would sometimes help to conceal the killer and encourage him to hide in a nearby city of refuge, where he would be safe as long as he remained within its gates. He had to stay in that sanctuary until the death of the high priest then in office, after which he was free to return to his own city (Nm 35:10-28). The sixth commandment enjoined, “You shall not kill” (Ex 20:13). The Hebrew word referred specifically to murder, not to all forms of killing. Killing an enemy in battle and the execution of a murderer were considered necessary and were not prohibited. More than one witness was required for any conviction, particularly in a murder case (Nm 35:30; Dt 17:6; 19:15).<\/p>\n<p>In the Code of Hammurabi a man responsible for an accidental injury to another was required to pay for the services of the physician. If the victim died, a fine was payable according to the victim’s rank. In a sense the Hebrews went further by requiring payment for any loss of time suffered by the injured person (Ex 21:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Kidnapping was punishable by death in the OT. Exodus states that “Kidnappers must be killed, whether they are caught in possession of their victims or have already sold them as slaves” (Ex 21:16, <span>nlt<\/span>). Joseph’s being sold into slavery by his brothers illustrates this kind of kidnapping.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws concerning Property<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus is quite specific about anyone responsible for damage to the property or crops of another. If a field caught fire and the fire spread, damaging crops in other fields, the person who started the fire, or perhaps the owner of the first field to catch fire, was responsible for the damage (Ex 22:6). Hammurabi’s code cited a similar instance of a man who neglected to keep a dike in repair and was therefore responsible for flood damage to his neighbor’s crops.<\/p>\n<p>Injuries to animals, especially oxen, or injuries to people or property caused by such animals formed an important area of Hebrew law. If an ox that had been previously good-tempered killed a man, the owner would be blameless, although the ox would be put to death—a severe financial penalty for the owner. If an ox with a history of goring killed a man because its owner failed to restrain it adequately, both ox and owner would be put to death. The owner’s life could be ransomed by payment of an agreed-upon sum. If the person an ox gored was a servant, the ox was stoned and the owner paid a fine (Ex 21:28-32). The Code of Hammurabi also recommended no punishment for a first offense by an animal, but if the owner knew that the ox was dangerous and had taken no steps to prevent harm, a fine in silver was payable—a very large fine for an upper-class victim, slightly less if the victim was a slave. However bad the circumstances and however vicious the ox, the Code of Hammurabi stopped at a fine for the offense, never imposing a death penalty on either the animal or the owner.<\/p>\n<p>Negligence causing injury to an animal was also punished in Hebrew law. If an ox or a donkey fell into a pit carelessly left uncovered, the owner of the animal was reimbursed for its loss (Ex 21:33-36).<\/p>\n<p>In ancient cultures women were generally considered chattel (personal property), much like animals or slaves. A daughter was considered to be her father’s property until her marriage, then the property of her husband. Therefore, any offense against a married woman was regarded as an offense against the property of the husband. According to the Code of Hammurabi, a child could be sold into slavery as a servant or bondsman, usually in payment of the father’s debt (cf. Ex 21:2-7; Neh 5:5-8; Is 50:1). Parental authority was so highly regarded in biblical law that a stubborn and rebellious son could be brought before the elders on the grounds of being disobedient and a glutton or a drunkard. He might then be convicted and stoned to death on the spot by the men of the city (Dt 21:18-21). Even that, however, was a protection of the child’s rights; some Near Eastern legislation allowed a parent to order the death of his offspring without reference to the elders or to anyone else. With daughters in particular being held in such low esteem, it is perhaps remarkable that a daughter could inherit property if there were no sons (Nm 27:8).<\/p>\n<p>Adultery, prohibited in the Decalogue, was another crime against a man’s property, specifically his wife. The book of Deuteronomy goes into considerable detail about cases of adultery—the punishment for both persons being death (Dt 22:22). If a man seduced a young woman who was not betrothed, he was required to pay her father the bride price (50 silver shekels); he could not divorce her but had to keep her as his wife for the rest of his life (Ex 22:16; Dt 22:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>In a situation where a wife was accused of adultery but without evidence, a trial was conducted. The husband would bring his wife to a priest and present a small offering (a tenth of a measure of barley meal, with neither oil nor frankincense on it), indicating the low esteem in which he now held his wife. The woman then stood before the Lord holding an earthen jar of “holy water.” Dust from the floor of the tabernacle was mixed with the water, and the cereal offering was placed in her hands. Her hair was loosened by the priest to show not only her grief but also to give an impression of abandonment. She was then required to take an oath. After that, the priest pronounced a curse upon her to the effect that her womb would be fertilized easily, but that she would have many miscarriages. She had to give her consent to that pronouncement. The priest then wrote the curses in a book and symbolically washed them off into the “bitter water.” The woman was required to drink the water while the priest waved the cereal offering from her hands before the Lord and burned some of it on the altar. The priest told her that if she was guilty, the water would make her thigh rot and her abdomen swell. If that happened, she would become an outcast; but if she were proved innocent, she would be free. Whatever the result, no blame for false accusation fell upon the husband (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a slave was struck by his master in such a manner as to cause instant death, the slave’s death had to be avenged. If the slave lingered, possibly for days, he did not need to be avenged, his loss being a sufficient punishment for the owner (Ex 21:20-21). It is unlikely that the Hebrews had much experience with that law, which had no parallels in Hammurabi’s code. If an owner injured his slave by causing the loss of an eye or a tooth, Hebrew law required that the slave be set free (vv 26-27). The Code of Hammurabi gave an example of a man injuring another man’s slave; the owner had to be paid half the slave’s value.<\/p>\n<p>Little emphasis was placed on burglary or larceny in the Hebrew law code. A burglar was presumed to be repentant and ready to make restitution. After return of the stolen property and payment of a small additional fine, a thief could again “approach the Lord” (Lv 6:2-7). By contrast, the Code of Hammurabi prescribed the death penalty for burglary. In Hebrew law, theft of an animal required restitution to be made in the ratio of at least two to one; if a bull or a cow had been stolen or sold, the thief had to restore the property fivefold. The Code of Hammurabi contained a similar statute: “If a man steal ox or sheep, ass or pig, or goat—if it be from a god or a palace, he shall restore thirtyfold; if it be from a freeman, he shall render tenfold. If the thief have nothing wherewith to pay, he shall be put to death.” In Hebrew law goods stolen from a home were simply to be restored without additional penalty. If the thief no longer had the goods and was unable to pay the equivalent value, he might be sold into slavery until restitution was made (Ex 22:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>General Laws<\/h5>\n<p>The Hebrew code as contained in Exodus and Deuteronomy included many general prohibitions. Some concerned business dealings such as the removal of boundary markers (Dt 19:14). The use of false weights and measures was condemned (Lv 19:35; Dt 25:15; Prv 11:1; 20:23; Mi 6:11). Bribery was strictly forbidden (Ex 23:8), yet no punishment was specified for those who broke that law. In the Code of Hammurabi, if a judge changed his decision and was unable to give a satisfactory explanation, particularly if bribery was suspected, the judge had to pay 12 times the amount of the penalty and lost his seat on the bench. In the Hebrew code, perjury was also dealt with, although again no punishment was specified. The Code of Hammurabi stated that for perjury in cases where the punishment was death, persons giving false testimony were to be sentenced to death themselves (cf. Ex 23:1).<\/p>\n<p>A number of Hebrew laws reflected concern for the poor. For example, poor people were not to be subjected to usury if they were in debt, or left cold at night if their coats were taken as a pledge. Widows, orphans, and strangers were also to be treated with mercy and understanding (Ex 22:21-27; 23:9; Dt 23:19; 24:17).<\/p>\n<p>Some Hebrew laws concerned family behavior, such as those previously mentioned who cursed or disobeyed their parents (Ex 21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 27:16; cf. Prv 20:20; 30:17). Family responsibilities were strong; an entire family frequently suffered punishment for the crime of one of its individual members (Jos 7:20-26; 2 Sm 3:29; 21:1-9; 2 Kgs 5:27; Lam 5:7). Over a period of time, as individual responsibility came to be recognized, parents were no longer put to death for the crimes of their children, or vice versa (cf. Jer 31:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Sorcery and witchcraft were forbidden. The book of Exodus stated explicitly, “A sorceress must not be allowed to live” (22:18, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sexual perversions, such as intercourse with animals, were forbidden under penalty of death. Regulations prohibiting marriage with close relatives were given in detail (Lv 20:17-21).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew law no parallel existed for some interesting items in the Code of Hammurabi concerning surgery. That code mentioned veterinary surgery and even operations on the human eye. A Babylonian surgeon had to be wary, for “if a physician makes a deep incision upon a man with his bronze lancet and causes the man’s death or operates on the eye socket of a man with his bronze lancet and destroys the man’s eye, then they shall cut off his hand.” Surgery was virtually unknown among the ancient Israelites except for the ritual practice of circumcision.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Punishment\">Punishment<\/p>\n<p>Near Eastern punishments for murder and personal injury were retaliatory and often of the same nature as the offense. Other methods of punishment tended to vary with individual countries or traditions. Many kinds of punishment were inflicted on people defeated in both a full-scale war or a small insurrection.<\/p>\n<h5>Physical Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Many forms of punishment stopped short of killing but could nevertheless be quite severe.<\/p>\n<p>1. In the OT beating with rods or switches was the traditional form of discipline for children, fools, and slaves (Ex 21:20; Prv 13:24; 26:3). Scourging (also called flogging) was more severe than beating. The whip employed could be made of several strips of leather fastened at one end or of two interwoven leather strips. A whip nicknamed “scorpion” (because of the barbs in its end) was one of the cruelest instruments of punishment mentioned in the OT (1 Kgs 12:11, 14). The severity of punishment could be increased by inserting pieces of metal or bone into the leather.<\/p>\n<p>Before a scourging, the victim would be examined for physical fitness. If death resulted from the blows, no blame was attached to the person administering the punishment. The victim was stripped to the waist and tied to a pillar, his hands bound with leather thongs. The severity of a scourging depended on the crime, although the Mosaic law set an upper limit of 40 lashes (Dt 25:1-3). To guard against a miscount, that number was later lowered by one (2 Cor 11:24). Lashes might be administered both on the chest and the back. Under some law codes, scourging could be used as a private punishment; in that case, if the victim died, another life was forfeit.<\/p>\n<p>In offenses against the law, synagogue authorities administered scourgings (Mt 10:17). A husband might be scourged by the elders of the city for defamation of his wife’s character (Dt 22:18). Scourging was also used as a means of interrogating a prisoner—hence, a Roman captain’s comment that the apostle Paul should be “examined by scourging” (Acts 22:24).<\/p>\n<p>The Romans usually reserved scourging for non-Roman citizens, such as slaves or aliens, as well as for those condemned to death. Normally, criminals were scourged after they had been condemned to death; it is therefore unusual to find the scourging of Jesus taking place before his condemnation. Pilate may have hoped to soften the people’s hearts by Jesus’ suffering so that they would not demand the death penalty (Lk 23:16, 22; Jn 19:1).<\/p>\n<p>Citizens of the Roman Empire could never be beaten or scourged before sentencing (Acts 22:25). Hence, the magistrates were afraid when they heard that Paul, a Roman citizen, had been beaten under those circumstances (16:37-39).<\/p>\n<li>2. The gouging out of the eyes of prisoners and captives was a common practice in the Near East. The Philistines blinded Samson before imprisoning him (Jgs 16:21). The Babylonians did the same to King Zedekiah in 587 <span>BC<\/span> before taking him into captivity (2 Kgs 25:7). The Ammonite king Nahash was prepared to accept peace overtures from the men of the city of Jabesh on condition that all their right eyes be gouged out. Nahash’s purpose was to disgrace them and prevent them from further active participation in warfare (1 Sm 11:1-4).<\/li>\n<li>3. Several forms of mutilation served as punishments in the Near East. The Israelites considered their own bodies sacred and made in God’s image, but that did not prevent them from mutilating their enemies by cutting off their thumbs and large toes.<\/li>\n<p>The Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian law code prescribed mutilation of the eye, nose, ear, breast, tongue, lip, hand, and finger as punishments for specific crimes. In Assyria, punishment was often inflicted by the victim of the crime under supervision of court officials. The Code of Hammurabi also contained safeguards so that criminals were not punished in excess of the law’s sentence.<\/p>\n<li>4. Stocks are mentioned as a form of punishment in the later OT period. The prophets Hanani (2 Chr 16:10) and Jeremiah (Jer 20:2-3) suffered the indignity of being placed in stocks. Both ankles, and sometimes the wrists and head as well, were placed in holes in two large pieces of wood. In Roman times, stocks were converted to a form of torture, with a prisoner’s legs stretched to holes increasingly far apart. In the NT, Paul and Silas had their feet placed in stocks by a Philippian jailer (Acts 16:24). The same Greek word, meaning “confinement,” can refer to fetters chaining a prisoner or to an iron collar like that worn by runaway Roman slaves.<\/li>\n<h5>Capital Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Capital punishment was common in many Near Eastern countries. Several methods were used.<\/p>\n<p>1. Those who offended a king were beheaded with a sword (2 Sm 16:9; 2 Kgs 6:31-32), as were idolaters and murderers (according to the Mishnah, the Jewish commentary on the law). The sword was probably used for private executions as well. Inhabitants of entire cities were sometimes “put to the sword” for their denial of the faith (Ex 32:27; Dt 13:15).<\/p>\n<li>2. Certain sexual offenses were punished with death by burning (Lv 20:14; 21:9). Tamar, Judah’s daughter-in-law, was accused of adultery and ordered to be burned to death outside the city (Gn 38:24). The Lord instructed that anyone whose feet touched the holy ground of Mt Sinai was to be shot with arrows or stoned (Ex 19:13).<\/li>\n<li>3. Hanging may have been a form of execution in biblical times. But many scholars think the word translated “hanging” or “hanging on a tree” actually meant impalement (Nm 25:4; Dt 21:22-23; Jos 8:29; 2 Sm 21:6, 9; Est 9:14). A spiked wooden stake was set in the ground and the victim’s body was forced onto the spike, the tip of which probably protruded from the chest or mouth. Commonly practiced by the Assyrians, that form of execution was reserved for those guilty of the worst crimes and for prisoners of war or deserters. The Persian king Darius is reputed to have impaled 3,000 men when his army entered Babylon. Impalement was the penalty Darius set for changing his edict concerning the rebuilding of the temple (Ezr 6:11-12). It is not certain whether Haman was hung or impaled (see Est 7:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span> and mg notes).<\/li>\n<p>Usually “hanging” was a means of exhibiting a corpse as a warning to local inhabitants (Gn 40:19; Jos 8:29; 10:26; 2 Sm 4:12). Corpses were exhibited for only one day and were buried before nightfall. The hanging corpse was considered a defilement of the land that God had given (Dt 21:22-23). According to the Mishnah, the hands were tied together and the body hanged from the arm of a wooden gallows.<\/p>\n<li>4. Crucifixion was a punishment employed by the Syrian king Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167–166 <span>BC<\/span>; according to Josephus, a first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish historian, Jews who refused to give up their traditional faith were so executed. During the Maccabean period (167–40 <span>BC<\/span>), Alexander Janneus crucified 800 rebellious Pharisees in an attempt to reestablish his authority. Crucifixion was a widespread form of execution: it was used in most places in the Roman Empire, including India, North Africa, and Germany. Between 4 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 70, on some occasions the number of people crucified at one time reached into the thousands.<\/li>\n<p>Three types of crosses seem to have been used: a cross with the crossbar below the head of the upright bar (Latin cross); a T-shaped cross (St Anthony’s cross); and an X-shaped cross (St Andrew’s cross). Matthew records that an inscription, “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews,” was placed over Jesus’ head (Mt 27:37). That indicates that for Jesus’ crucifixion a Latin cross was used, as artists have traditionally depicted it. In crucifixions the victim was most likely affixed to the cross while it was still lying flat on the ground. Then the cross was raised into position and dropped into a hole. The hands were either nailed or bound to the cross; it is uncertain whether the feet were nailed with one or two nails. The weight of the body was supported by a piece of wood at the feet and possibly by another that was like a spike between the legs.<\/p>\n<li>5. Stoning was the most common Hebrew death penalty. The first stones were thrown by the prosecution witnesses, who were then joined by spectators. Stoning was the punishment for certain religious offenses (Lv 24:16; Nm 15:32-36; Dt 13:1-10; 17:2-5), adultery (Dt 22:23-24), child sacrifice (Lv 20:2), divination of spirits (Lv 20:27), and rebellion (Dt 21:18-21). Before his conversion, the apostle Paul witnessed and consented to the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58-59). Paul himself later survived a stoning at Lystra (14:19). In Roman times, a person would occasionally be stoned as he stood on a gallows.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew law was part of the Torah (“instruction”) given by God to make his covenant people holy. At that time the Israelites were a seminomadic band of former slaves. Although there are similarities with the Code of Hammurabi and other laws of settled Near Eastern cultures, there are also many differences. Hebrew law often had a broader view, even in its less sophisticated cultural setting, as though its purpose was more to teach godly behavior than to stabilize society. The simplicity and directness of the Ten Commandments, in particular, continue to influence jurisprudence, even in modern secular society.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s primary message is God’s love for his covenant people, yet it never overlooks the harsh realities of life in a fallen world. Human beings sin and they commit crimes; they suffer estrangement from God because of their sin and are punished for their crimes. Christians are constantly reminded of the realism of God’s love by the cross as the symbol of Christian faith. They see the crucifixion of Jesus Christ as the fulfillment of OT prophecy that the Lord put our iniquity on him (Is 53:5-6). The NT conviction is that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Courts and Trials; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT*<\/h3>\n<p>The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, “crimes” included all punishable offenses, even religious offenses such as idolatry (worshiping a false god) or blasphemy (speaking or behaving with contempt toward God).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>• Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<p>• Punishment<\/p>\n<p>• Conclusion<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NearEasternContext\">Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>In ancient societies as in modern ones, laws were considered necessary to regulate individual behavior for the good of the community, state, or nation. Today laws are thought of as made by people for their own protection. In contrast, all ancient Near Eastern law codes were considered to have come directly from some divine source. Hebrew law, though distinct, followed the general pattern of Near Eastern law codes, as is known from those that have survived—such as the Code of Hammurabi and Assyrian and Hittite laws.<\/p>\n<p>Conclusions about the “origin” of ancient laws should be made cautiously. Although evidence indicates that Hammurabi based his legislation partially on earlier Sumerian codes, he declared that his code had been received from Shamash, god of justice. That declaration must have been intended to convey primarily that his code had the express sanction of Shamash, since at least some people would recognize it as a compilation based largely on earlier laws. Similarly, the clear biblical statements about Moses receiving the law on Mt Sinai (Ex 19–24) do not rule out the possibility that parts of the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments) may have existed in earlier codes. Possibly the Mosaic legislation included some social rules adapted from the period of Israel’s sojourn in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HebrewCriminalLaw\">Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<h5>Laws Governing Offenses against God<\/h5>\n<p>Since Hebrew law was designed for a group of people for whom religion was of paramount importance and whose faith was endangered by the influence of the beliefs of their pagan neighbors, it is not surprising that so much of Hebrew law dealt with crimes committed against God. The prohibition against worshiping idols is stated and repeated in the Torah, or Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible): “You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them” (Ex 20:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Sacrifice of infants, practiced in some pagan religions, was specifically prohibited in Israel. The penalty for that crime, as for the other forms of murder, was stoning to death (Lv 20:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Leviticus, death by stoning was recorded as the appropriate punishment for blaspheming the name of God (Lv 24:11-16). False prophecy was also a criminal offense; that accusation could apply to a person making a prediction in the name of a god other than the Lord, or implying falsely that one’s prophecy resulted from a communication with God. Jeremiah, whose prophecy of Nebuchadnezzar’s victory over the southern kingdom of Judah was for a time considered to be false, was almost lynched by a mob (Jer 26:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The idea of keeping the seventh day holy stemmed from the celebration of God’s work in creating the universe in six days and resting on the seventh. Keeping the Sabbath required cessation of manual work for the entire family, including farm animals (Ex 16:23; 20:8-11). People were also required to meet together on the Sabbath for worship, which at a later period in Hebrew history included the reading of Scripture, prayer, and preaching. Anyone breaking the Sabbath could be sentenced to death, as happened to a man caught gathering firewood on the Sabbath (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Any type of premeditated crime was considered an offense against God, the giver of all law; hence, it was punishable by death (Nm 15:30-31). Hebrew law also insisted on donation of the firstfruits of harvest to the Lord without delay. That requirement was sometimes carried over to include a first child, whose life was dedicated to service in the temple (Ex 22:29-30; Dt 15:19).<\/p>\n<h5>Personal Injury<\/h5>\n<p>Murder, an offense against “God’s image,” was one of many crimes punishable by death in OT times. The book of Exodus stated unequivocally that “anyone who hits a person hard enough to cause death must be put to death” (Ex 21:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). A murderer who killed by using a weapon such as a stone, a piece of wood, or iron could be killed in revenge by a relative of the deceased. If the original death happened accidentally, the community would sometimes help to conceal the killer and encourage him to hide in a nearby city of refuge, where he would be safe as long as he remained within its gates. He had to stay in that sanctuary until the death of the high priest then in office, after which he was free to return to his own city (Nm 35:10-28). The sixth commandment enjoined, “You shall not kill” (Ex 20:13). The Hebrew word referred specifically to murder, not to all forms of killing. Killing an enemy in battle and the execution of a murderer were considered necessary and were not prohibited. More than one witness was required for any conviction, particularly in a murder case (Nm 35:30; Dt 17:6; 19:15).<\/p>\n<p>In the Code of Hammurabi a man responsible for an accidental injury to another was required to pay for the services of the physician. If the victim died, a fine was payable according to the victim’s rank. In a sense the Hebrews went further by requiring payment for any loss of time suffered by the injured person (Ex 21:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Kidnapping was punishable by death in the OT. Exodus states that “Kidnappers must be killed, whether they are caught in possession of their victims or have already sold them as slaves” (Ex 21:16, <span>nlt<\/span>). Joseph’s being sold into slavery by his brothers illustrates this kind of kidnapping.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws concerning Property<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus is quite specific about anyone responsible for damage to the property or crops of another. If a field caught fire and the fire spread, damaging crops in other fields, the person who started the fire, or perhaps the owner of the first field to catch fire, was responsible for the damage (Ex 22:6). Hammurabi’s code cited a similar instance of a man who neglected to keep a dike in repair and was therefore responsible for flood damage to his neighbor’s crops.<\/p>\n<p>Injuries to animals, especially oxen, or injuries to people or property caused by such animals formed an important area of Hebrew law. If an ox that had been previously good-tempered killed a man, the owner would be blameless, although the ox would be put to death—a severe financial penalty for the owner. If an ox with a history of goring killed a man because its owner failed to restrain it adequately, both ox and owner would be put to death. The owner’s life could be ransomed by payment of an agreed-upon sum. If the person an ox gored was a servant, the ox was stoned and the owner paid a fine (Ex 21:28-32). The Code of Hammurabi also recommended no punishment for a first offense by an animal, but if the owner knew that the ox was dangerous and had taken no steps to prevent harm, a fine in silver was payable—a very large fine for an upper-class victim, slightly less if the victim was a slave. However bad the circumstances and however vicious the ox, the Code of Hammurabi stopped at a fine for the offense, never imposing a death penalty on either the animal or the owner.<\/p>\n<p>Negligence causing injury to an animal was also punished in Hebrew law. If an ox or a donkey fell into a pit carelessly left uncovered, the owner of the animal was reimbursed for its loss (Ex 21:33-36).<\/p>\n<p>In ancient cultures women were generally considered chattel (personal property), much like animals or slaves. A daughter was considered to be her father’s property until her marriage, then the property of her husband. Therefore, any offense against a married woman was regarded as an offense against the property of the husband. According to the Code of Hammurabi, a child could be sold into slavery as a servant or bondsman, usually in payment of the father’s debt (cf. Ex 21:2-7; Neh 5:5-8; Is 50:1). Parental authority was so highly regarded in biblical law that a stubborn and rebellious son could be brought before the elders on the grounds of being disobedient and a glutton or a drunkard. He might then be convicted and stoned to death on the spot by the men of the city (Dt 21:18-21). Even that, however, was a protection of the child’s rights; some Near Eastern legislation allowed a parent to order the death of his offspring without reference to the elders or to anyone else. With daughters in particular being held in such low esteem, it is perhaps remarkable that a daughter could inherit property if there were no sons (Nm 27:8).<\/p>\n<p>Adultery, prohibited in the Decalogue, was another crime against a man’s property, specifically his wife. The book of Deuteronomy goes into considerable detail about cases of adultery—the punishment for both persons being death (Dt 22:22). If a man seduced a young woman who was not betrothed, he was required to pay her father the bride price (50 silver shekels); he could not divorce her but had to keep her as his wife for the rest of his life (Ex 22:16; Dt 22:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>In a situation where a wife was accused of adultery but without evidence, a trial was conducted. The husband would bring his wife to a priest and present a small offering (a tenth of a measure of barley meal, with neither oil nor frankincense on it), indicating the low esteem in which he now held his wife. The woman then stood before the Lord holding an earthen jar of “holy water.” Dust from the floor of the tabernacle was mixed with the water, and the cereal offering was placed in her hands. Her hair was loosened by the priest to show not only her grief but also to give an impression of abandonment. She was then required to take an oath. After that, the priest pronounced a curse upon her to the effect that her womb would be fertilized easily, but that she would have many miscarriages. She had to give her consent to that pronouncement. The priest then wrote the curses in a book and symbolically washed them off into the “bitter water.” The woman was required to drink the water while the priest waved the cereal offering from her hands before the Lord and burned some of it on the altar. The priest told her that if she was guilty, the water would make her thigh rot and her abdomen swell. If that happened, she would become an outcast; but if she were proved innocent, she would be free. Whatever the result, no blame for false accusation fell upon the husband (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a slave was struck by his master in such a manner as to cause instant death, the slave’s death had to be avenged. If the slave lingered, possibly for days, he did not need to be avenged, his loss being a sufficient punishment for the owner (Ex 21:20-21). It is unlikely that the Hebrews had much experience with that law, which had no parallels in Hammurabi’s code. If an owner injured his slave by causing the loss of an eye or a tooth, Hebrew law required that the slave be set free (vv 26-27). The Code of Hammurabi gave an example of a man injuring another man’s slave; the owner had to be paid half the slave’s value.<\/p>\n<p>Little emphasis was placed on burglary or larceny in the Hebrew law code. A burglar was presumed to be repentant and ready to make restitution. After return of the stolen property and payment of a small additional fine, a thief could again “approach the Lord” (Lv 6:2-7). By contrast, the Code of Hammurabi prescribed the death penalty for burglary. In Hebrew law, theft of an animal required restitution to be made in the ratio of at least two to one; if a bull or a cow had been stolen or sold, the thief had to restore the property fivefold. The Code of Hammurabi contained a similar statute: “If a man steal ox or sheep, ass or pig, or goat—if it be from a god or a palace, he shall restore thirtyfold; if it be from a freeman, he shall render tenfold. If the thief have nothing wherewith to pay, he shall be put to death.” In Hebrew law goods stolen from a home were simply to be restored without additional penalty. If the thief no longer had the goods and was unable to pay the equivalent value, he might be sold into slavery until restitution was made (Ex 22:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>General Laws<\/h5>\n<p>The Hebrew code as contained in Exodus and Deuteronomy included many general prohibitions. Some concerned business dealings such as the removal of boundary markers (Dt 19:14). The use of false weights and measures was condemned (Lv 19:35; Dt 25:15; Prv 11:1; 20:23; Mi 6:11). Bribery was strictly forbidden (Ex 23:8), yet no punishment was specified for those who broke that law. In the Code of Hammurabi, if a judge changed his decision and was unable to give a satisfactory explanation, particularly if bribery was suspected, the judge had to pay 12 times the amount of the penalty and lost his seat on the bench. In the Hebrew code, perjury was also dealt with, although again no punishment was specified. The Code of Hammurabi stated that for perjury in cases where the punishment was death, persons giving false testimony were to be sentenced to death themselves (cf. Ex 23:1).<\/p>\n<p>A number of Hebrew laws reflected concern for the poor. For example, poor people were not to be subjected to usury if they were in debt, or left cold at night if their coats were taken as a pledge. Widows, orphans, and strangers were also to be treated with mercy and understanding (Ex 22:21-27; 23:9; Dt 23:19; 24:17).<\/p>\n<p>Some Hebrew laws concerned family behavior, such as those previously mentioned who cursed or disobeyed their parents (Ex 21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 27:16; cf. Prv 20:20; 30:17). Family responsibilities were strong; an entire family frequently suffered punishment for the crime of one of its individual members (Jos 7:20-26; 2 Sm 3:29; 21:1-9; 2 Kgs 5:27; Lam 5:7). Over a period of time, as individual responsibility came to be recognized, parents were no longer put to death for the crimes of their children, or vice versa (cf. Jer 31:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Sorcery and witchcraft were forbidden. The book of Exodus stated explicitly, “A sorceress must not be allowed to live” (22:18, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sexual perversions, such as intercourse with animals, were forbidden under penalty of death. Regulations prohibiting marriage with close relatives were given in detail (Lv 20:17-21).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew law no parallel existed for some interesting items in the Code of Hammurabi concerning surgery. That code mentioned veterinary surgery and even operations on the human eye. A Babylonian surgeon had to be wary, for “if a physician makes a deep incision upon a man with his bronze lancet and causes the man’s death or operates on the eye socket of a man with his bronze lancet and destroys the man’s eye, then they shall cut off his hand.” Surgery was virtually unknown among the ancient Israelites except for the ritual practice of circumcision.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Punishment\">Punishment<\/p>\n<p>Near Eastern punishments for murder and personal injury were retaliatory and often of the same nature as the offense. Other methods of punishment tended to vary with individual countries or traditions. Many kinds of punishment were inflicted on people defeated in both a full-scale war or a small insurrection.<\/p>\n<h5>Physical Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Many forms of punishment stopped short of killing but could nevertheless be quite severe.<\/p>\n<p>1. In the OT beating with rods or switches was the traditional form of discipline for children, fools, and slaves (Ex 21:20; Prv 13:24; 26:3). Scourging (also called flogging) was more severe than beating. The whip employed could be made of several strips of leather fastened at one end or of two interwoven leather strips. A whip nicknamed “scorpion” (because of the barbs in its end) was one of the cruelest instruments of punishment mentioned in the OT (1 Kgs 12:11, 14). The severity of punishment could be increased by inserting pieces of metal or bone into the leather.<\/p>\n<p>Before a scourging, the victim would be examined for physical fitness. If death resulted from the blows, no blame was attached to the person administering the punishment. The victim was stripped to the waist and tied to a pillar, his hands bound with leather thongs. The severity of a scourging depended on the crime, although the Mosaic law set an upper limit of 40 lashes (Dt 25:1-3). To guard against a miscount, that number was later lowered by one (2 Cor 11:24). Lashes might be administered both on the chest and the back. Under some law codes, scourging could be used as a private punishment; in that case, if the victim died, another life was forfeit.<\/p>\n<p>In offenses against the law, synagogue authorities administered scourgings (Mt 10:17). A husband might be scourged by the elders of the city for defamation of his wife’s character (Dt 22:18). Scourging was also used as a means of interrogating a prisoner—hence, a Roman captain’s comment that the apostle Paul should be “examined by scourging” (Acts 22:24).<\/p>\n<p>The Romans usually reserved scourging for non-Roman citizens, such as slaves or aliens, as well as for those condemned to death. Normally, criminals were scourged after they had been condemned to death; it is therefore unusual to find the scourging of Jesus taking place before his condemnation. Pilate may have hoped to soften the people’s hearts by Jesus’ suffering so that they would not demand the death penalty (Lk 23:16, 22; Jn 19:1).<\/p>\n<p>Citizens of the Roman Empire could never be beaten or scourged before sentencing (Acts 22:25). Hence, the magistrates were afraid when they heard that Paul, a Roman citizen, had been beaten under those circumstances (16:37-39).<\/p>\n<li>2. The gouging out of the eyes of prisoners and captives was a common practice in the Near East. The Philistines blinded Samson before imprisoning him (Jgs 16:21). The Babylonians did the same to King Zedekiah in 587 <span>BC<\/span> before taking him into captivity (2 Kgs 25:7). The Ammonite king Nahash was prepared to accept peace overtures from the men of the city of Jabesh on condition that all their right eyes be gouged out. Nahash’s purpose was to disgrace them and prevent them from further active participation in warfare (1 Sm 11:1-4).<\/li>\n<li>3. Several forms of mutilation served as punishments in the Near East. The Israelites considered their own bodies sacred and made in God’s image, but that did not prevent them from mutilating their enemies by cutting off their thumbs and large toes.<\/li>\n<p>The Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian law code prescribed mutilation of the eye, nose, ear, breast, tongue, lip, hand, and finger as punishments for specific crimes. In Assyria, punishment was often inflicted by the victim of the crime under supervision of court officials. The Code of Hammurabi also contained safeguards so that criminals were not punished in excess of the law’s sentence.<\/p>\n<li>4. Stocks are mentioned as a form of punishment in the later OT period. The prophets Hanani (2 Chr 16:10) and Jeremiah (Jer 20:2-3) suffered the indignity of being placed in stocks. Both ankles, and sometimes the wrists and head as well, were placed in holes in two large pieces of wood. In Roman times, stocks were converted to a form of torture, with a prisoner’s legs stretched to holes increasingly far apart. In the NT, Paul and Silas had their feet placed in stocks by a Philippian jailer (Acts 16:24). The same Greek word, meaning “confinement,” can refer to fetters chaining a prisoner or to an iron collar like that worn by runaway Roman slaves.<\/li>\n<h5>Capital Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Capital punishment was common in many Near Eastern countries. Several methods were used.<\/p>\n<p>1. Those who offended a king were beheaded with a sword (2 Sm 16:9; 2 Kgs 6:31-32), as were idolaters and murderers (according to the Mishnah, the Jewish commentary on the law). The sword was probably used for private executions as well. Inhabitants of entire cities were sometimes “put to the sword” for their denial of the faith (Ex 32:27; Dt 13:15).<\/p>\n<li>2. Certain sexual offenses were punished with death by burning (Lv 20:14; 21:9). Tamar, Judah’s daughter-in-law, was accused of adultery and ordered to be burned to death outside the city (Gn 38:24). The Lord instructed that anyone whose feet touched the holy ground of Mt Sinai was to be shot with arrows or stoned (Ex 19:13).<\/li>\n<li>3. Hanging may have been a form of execution in biblical times. But many scholars think the word translated “hanging” or “hanging on a tree” actually meant impalement (Nm 25:4; Dt 21:22-23; Jos 8:29; 2 Sm 21:6, 9; Est 9:14). A spiked wooden stake was set in the ground and the victim’s body was forced onto the spike, the tip of which probably protruded from the chest or mouth. Commonly practiced by the Assyrians, that form of execution was reserved for those guilty of the worst crimes and for prisoners of war or deserters. The Persian king Darius is reputed to have impaled 3,000 men when his army entered Babylon. Impalement was the penalty Darius set for changing his edict concerning the rebuilding of the temple (Ezr 6:11-12). It is not certain whether Haman was hung or impaled (see Est 7:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span> and mg notes).<\/li>\n<p>Usually “hanging” was a means of exhibiting a corpse as a warning to local inhabitants (Gn 40:19; Jos 8:29; 10:26; 2 Sm 4:12). Corpses were exhibited for only one day and were buried before nightfall. The hanging corpse was considered a defilement of the land that God had given (Dt 21:22-23). According to the Mishnah, the hands were tied together and the body hanged from the arm of a wooden gallows.<\/p>\n<li>4. Crucifixion was a punishment employed by the Syrian king Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167–166 <span>BC<\/span>; according to Josephus, a first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish historian, Jews who refused to give up their traditional faith were so executed. During the Maccabean period (167–40 <span>BC<\/span>), Alexander Janneus crucified 800 rebellious Pharisees in an attempt to reestablish his authority. Crucifixion was a widespread form of execution: it was used in most places in the Roman Empire, including India, North Africa, and Germany. Between 4 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 70, on some occasions the number of people crucified at one time reached into the thousands.<\/li>\n<p>Three types of crosses seem to have been used: a cross with the crossbar below the head of the upright bar (Latin cross); a T-shaped cross (St Anthony’s cross); and an X-shaped cross (St Andrew’s cross). Matthew records that an inscription, “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews,” was placed over Jesus’ head (Mt 27:37). That indicates that for Jesus’ crucifixion a Latin cross was used, as artists have traditionally depicted it. In crucifixions the victim was most likely affixed to the cross while it was still lying flat on the ground. Then the cross was raised into position and dropped into a hole. The hands were either nailed or bound to the cross; it is uncertain whether the feet were nailed with one or two nails. The weight of the body was supported by a piece of wood at the feet and possibly by another that was like a spike between the legs.<\/p>\n<li>5. Stoning was the most common Hebrew death penalty. The first stones were thrown by the prosecution witnesses, who were then joined by spectators. Stoning was the punishment for certain religious offenses (Lv 24:16; Nm 15:32-36; Dt 13:1-10; 17:2-5), adultery (Dt 22:23-24), child sacrifice (Lv 20:2), divination of spirits (Lv 20:27), and rebellion (Dt 21:18-21). Before his conversion, the apostle Paul witnessed and consented to the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58-59). Paul himself later survived a stoning at Lystra (14:19). In Roman times, a person would occasionally be stoned as he stood on a gallows.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew law was part of the Torah (“instruction”) given by God to make his covenant people holy. At that time the Israelites were a seminomadic band of former slaves. Although there are similarities with the Code of Hammurabi and other laws of settled Near Eastern cultures, there are also many differences. Hebrew law often had a broader view, even in its less sophisticated cultural setting, as though its purpose was more to teach godly behavior than to stabilize society. The simplicity and directness of the Ten Commandments, in particular, continue to influence jurisprudence, even in modern secular society.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s primary message is God’s love for his covenant people, yet it never overlooks the harsh realities of life in a fallen world. Human beings sin and they commit crimes; they suffer estrangement from God because of their sin and are punished for their crimes. Christians are constantly reminded of the realism of God’s love by the cross as the symbol of Christian faith. They see the crucifixion of Jesus Christ as the fulfillment of OT prophecy that the Lord put our iniquity on him (Is 53:5-6). The NT conviction is that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Courts and Trials; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT* The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, ...","summary_en":"CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT* The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, ...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11934,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Family Life and Relations","title_en":"Family Life and Relations","content_ro":"<h3>FAMILY LIFE AND RELATIONS<\/h3>\n<p>In Bible times, the family comprised members of a household, including not only parents and children, along with other relatives and concubines, but also servants, travelers, aliens, and anyone else who happened to be within the house and was therefore under the protection of the head of the family. The family of Jacob, for example, comprised three generations (Gn 46:8-26). Biblically, the term “family” is interchangeable with “house,” and “founding a house” can refer to setting up a separate dwelling as well as establishing a family. In the broader sense, “house” may refer to an entire nation (“house of Israel”). The heads of families returning from Babylon in the postexilic period controlled sometimes several hundred family members (Ezr 8:1-14). The family was a smaller part of a clan and tribe. In nomadic times the responsibilities and allegiances centered on the larger family group.<\/p>\n<p>Those who belonged to the clan knew that they had to work for common interests and accept responsibility for the whole group. All members of the family were to be protected and assisted in time of need.<\/p>\n<p>As the life of the Israelites became more settled, families (in the wider sense of the term) lived in villages surrounded by fields of wheat, barley, and flax, with areas of grazing land for sheep and goats. Each group of villages consisted of an intermarried, interdependent family group, such as that of the Danites of Zorah and Eshtaol (Jgs 18:11). The hard life of those days demanded a sharing of work and the loyal cooperation of the entire family for survival.<\/p>\n<p>As crafts and trades developed, along with a more sedentary lifestyle, sons learned their fathers’ skills and continued the family trade. Consequently, the whole village might follow a particular craft (1 Chr 4:14; Neh 11:35). By specializing in such trades, however, the villagers became less self-sufficient, depending more on farmers for food and on other specialized villages for the production of cloth or pottery (1 Chr 4:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>With the growth of cities, related groups lived together in specific areas. Many members of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah were listed in the census of Jerusalem by Nehemiah (Neh 11:4-8), and by the writer of Chronicles (1 Chr 9:3-9). One consequence of life in the cities was the fragmentation of the family group. As the bonds of the wider family were loosened, the unit consisted increasingly of a husband and wife with their children, living in one house. The size of houses that have been excavated precludes the idea of any larger family unit as the norm in OT societies.<\/p>\n<p>During the kingdom period, King David’s sons Amnon and Absalom set up their own separate houses (2 Sm 13:7-8, 20). At that time there were few slaves in Hebrew society, but they also were considered members of the family. As bonds of the wider family loosened, and the master of the household lost a degree of authority, the society became one in which the king was sovereign and all the people were his subjects.<\/p>\n<p>The early kings of Israel promoted such a change in order to establish a central ruling authority for the entire country. The king’s subjects fell broadly into the categories of employers and employees, corresponding to the rich and poor of society. By the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, members of the wider family no longer worked for the communal good under the authority of the clan’s head; rather, individuals worked primarily for the good of their own immediate family. Hence one’s labor and devotion were focused more narrowly, and the greatest beneficiary was the king, the personal symbol of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>Emphasis on the smaller family unit increased, and old duties that had been willingly accepted by the wider groups in former times came to be neglected. People did not always help relatives in times of need, and they frequently had to be reminded of their obligations, particularly toward widows and orphans (Is 1:17; Jer 7:6). Family feuds also declined because members no longer felt responsible to take vengeance as a way to uphold the honor of the clan (2 Sm 3:27; 16:8; 2 Kgs 9:26). Nevertheless, Nehemiah expected Israelites to fight for their family honor (Neh 4:14). In NT times, the family was such a unit that it could be sold for a debt incurred by one of its members (Mt 18:25).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew religion’s emphasis on family participation in certain celebrations strengthened the small unit. The Passover, for example, was always celebrated as a family thanksgiving meal (Ex 12:3-4, 46). The prophet Samuel’s parents made a traditional annual pilgrimage to the shrine at Shiloh (1 Sm 2:19). In modern times, a young Jewish boy’s arrival at the threshold of manhood is celebrated with the Bar Mitzvah ceremony. Being so honored in the midst of a religious family preserves the ancient Hebrew tradition of family participation in religious ceremonies.<\/p>\n<p>In his preaching Jesus used the family as a symbol for the relationship of God to his people (Mt 19:14; 23:9; Lk 8:21). From the cross he handed over responsibility for the care of his mother to his disciple John (Jn 19:27).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times, the communion meals in the Jerusalem church took place by households (Acts 2:46). Early Christian meetings were held in the homes of believers because of opposition by the authorities. The book of Acts contains examples of entire families being converted to Christianity (Acts 10:24, 44-48; 16:15, 31-32). Timothy learned the gospel from his grandmother and mother (2 Tm 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Status of Family Members<\/p>\n<p>• Marital Security<\/p>\n<p>• Position of Children<\/p>\n<p>• The Rights of Children<\/p>\n<p>• Daily Life of the Hebrew Family<\/p>\n<p>• In New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"StatusofFamilyMembers\">Status of Family Members<\/p>\n<p>From nomadic times, a father’s authority held the family group together in their encampment, and he became the symbol of their security. In ancient patriarchal societies, the father was an absolute master who had the power of life and death over family members, ruling with unchallenged authority. Although he had extensive responsibilities for those under his care, his power was awesome and his status unquestioned.<\/p>\n<p>A man’s possessions included his wife, servants, slaves, and animals (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21). In fact, the phrase “to marry a wife” comes from a Hebrew root meaning “to become the master of a wife.” A husband was as much the master of his wife as he was of his home or his fields. Consequently, the wife addressed him in a subservient manner, as a slave would address a master (Gn 18:12; Jgs 19:26). This low status for a woman extended to a daughter’s position in the ancient household. Females were always under the authority of a male relative: first, the father; then a husband. If a woman became a widow, she was subject to her husband’s nearest male relative, who became her “redeemer.” The bride price (Gn 29:18, 27; Ex 22:16-17; 1 Sm 18:25; 2 Sm 3:14) paid by her husband was not exactly a purchase of the woman from her father, but the exchange of money did stigmatize her. The amount of a bride price depended on the father’s status (Gn 34:12). The usual price was probably 20 to 30 shekels of silver. The bride received gifts of jewelry, ornaments, and clothing from her future husband, and she occasionally enjoyed some sort of financial or material return from the bride price for her own use (Jos 15:19; Jgs 1:15). When her father or husband died, the money frequently reverted to her.<\/p>\n<p>An engaged woman was considered her fiancé’s property just as much as if she were already married to him (Dt 22:23-27). The woman left her own family at marriage, to live with and become part of her new husband’s family. Normally, any succeeding marriages would be with members of that family.<\/p>\n<p>Despite the low legal status of the mother of the family, her life was not as bad as one might suppose. She was the legal wife, not an unpaid servant, and she frequently took a strong role as adviser to her husband in family affairs. Her most important function, aside from childbearing, was organization of the household, of which she was generally the respected manager. Even though the wife might have been acquired through capture in war (Dt 21:10-14), she could not be sold as a slave or daughter could (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5).<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, her position was precarious, in that she could be disowned or divorced by her husband as the result of a simple renunciation: “She is no longer my wife, and I am no longer her husband.” Perhaps he had found fault with her culinary skills, or possibly he was casting his eyes on another woman. In any event, a husband knew that if his wife did not obey even a signal or a glance, he was within his rights to obtain a divorce (cf. Ecclus 25:26). The wife, however, obtained a certain degree of protection in the letter of repudiation, by which her freedom was formally restored. Under Jewish tradition, a wife could not divorce her husband.<\/p>\n<p>In matters of domestic protocol, the Hebrew wife was not introduced to her husband’s guests, a tradition that subsequently led to considerable embarrassment for Abraham’s wife, Sarah, and for Rebekah (Gn 20:16). A woman normally remained veiled in public (24:65; 38:14; Is 47:2).<\/p>\n<p>The imagery in Proverbs 19:13 and 27:15 draws a vigorous comparison between a contentious woman and water dripping from a leaky roof. The OT leaves little doubt about the type of behavior expected from a woman. She was expected to be charming, soft-spoken, discreet, and calm (Prv 9:13; 11:16, 22; 21:9). She was also to be responsible, well-organized, intelligent, thoughtful, reverent, and a good manager of both the household and the family purse (31:10-31). A woman should also be pious and beautiful, and in NT tradition, submissive to her husband, as befitted a woman adorned with the priceless jewel of a gentle and quiet spirit (Ti 2:4-5; 1 Pt 3:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The actions of a few women whose roles in life do not seem to fit the pattern of the meek, passive female pictured above, are recorded in the Bible and the Apocrypha. The books of Judith and Esther recount heroic tales of how national fortunes were saved by women. Deborah and Jael were renowned heroines (Jgs 4–5), and the kingdom of Judah was ruled by a vicious woman, Athaliah, for several years (2 Kgs 11). The women who stepped to the forefront of public life were exceptional and few in number. Judith was a rich widow, an unusual thing in Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MaritalSecurity\">Marital Security<\/p>\n<p>The security of a wife’s position improved considerably when she produced her first child, particularly if it was a son. A woman’s primary duty to her husband and his family was procreation (Gn 1:28; 9:1), and until she gave birth to a son, she feared displacement by a second wife or a concubine. Polygamous marriages were by no means rare, especially in wealthy families. They resulted in two ill-defined family groups, controlled by the mothers but under the overall authority of fathers; there were inevitable jealousies and frictions.<\/p>\n<p>The legal status of a woman was consistently poor in Bible times. With no evidence at all, a husband could accuse his wife of adultery, and she was compelled to face a trial by ordeal. She had to abase herself by taking an oath, eating dust and a cereal offering, and drinking bitter water. A priest, meanwhile, made pronouncements regarding the dire results that would come to her if she were guilty: she would become an outcast with no hope of survival. But if she maintained her serenity, and if her thigh did not rot nor her abdomen swell, she was considered to have “proved” her innocence. In such an event she would go free, and her husband bore no blame whatsoever for his false accusation (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a woman took a vow, it was legal only as long as her father or husband approved it. If she became a widow, the vow still remained in force and could be used against her (Nm 30:3-15).<\/p>\n<p>A woman in Israel was always under the protection of a male, be it her father, grandfather, great-grandfather, brother, husband, or some other member of her husband’s family. She had few legal rights and, in contrast to Babylonian traditions, could not inherit at her husband’s death. It is small wonder that widows were classed with orphans and the poor. A childless widow could on occasion return to her father’s family (Gn 38:11; Lv 22:13; Ru 1:8), thus becoming subject again to the authority of her father. A Hebrew widow could also remain with her late husband’s family. She would then come under the protection of her “redeemer,” a male relative of her husband’s family who assumed responsibility for her. If a husband died leaving a woman childless, it was the responsibility of the husband’s brother to marry her. The first son born of such a union was then regarded as the heir of the first husband.<\/p>\n<p>It was normal for a brother to accept the obligation for such a marriage (levirate). It could be refused on various grounds, but such refusal was considered dishonorable, for it was a man’s duty to perpetuate his brother’s name and to safeguard the family fortune.<\/p>\n<p>A redeemer’s responsibilities were considerable. In addition to the marriage, he was perhaps involved in avenging the family reputation, and he had to ensure that family property increased and remained within family control.<\/p>\n<p>If an Israelite fell into debt and was forced to sell himself into slavery, he would normally be “redeemed” by one of his relatives (Lv 25:47-49). If in his penury an Israelite had to sell his land or his house, the redeemer had the right of first refusal over all other prospective purchasers. It was as much his duty as his right to prevent family property from passing into the hands of strangers (v 25). The prophet Jeremiah bought his cousin Hanamel’s field under similar circumstances (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most familiar OT story of a childless widow, her “redeemer,” and their levirate marriage is recorded in the book of Ruth. One of Naomi’s two sons married Ruth. When Ruth was widowed, her impoverished mother-in-law, Naomi, left her home in Moab and returned to Bethlehem to sell some of the family property. Although a close relative was prepared to buy the land and keep it in the family, he was not ready to marry Ruth as well (Ru 3:12; 4:4). He knew that a son of that union would be deemed a son of the deceased, bearing the dead husband’s name, and thus ultimately inheriting the land (4:4-6). The next relative in order of kinship was Boaz, who became Ruth’s “redeemer.” He was prepared to accept the double obligation of purchasing the land and marrying Ruth (4:9-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PositionofChildren\">Position of Children<\/p>\n<p>Children were generally well loved, but their childhood was short and they were often regarded as laborers for the house or fields. According to the law of primogeniture, the eldest son received a double portion of the estate as his birthright (Dt 21:17). Thus, he was assured of the position of family head. Even during his father’s lifetime, the eldest son took precedence over his brothers and sisters (Gn 43:33). Where twins were born, the first to emerge from the womb was considered the elder, with all the attendant privileges (25:24-26; 38:27-30).<\/p>\n<p>For a serious offense, the eldest son could lose the right of primogeniture (Gn 35:22; 49:3-4; 1 Chr 5:1), or it could be surrendered voluntarily, as Esau did by selling his birthright to his brother Jacob (Gn 25:29-34). There was a law protecting the eldest son from his father’s favoritism for a younger brother (Dt 21:15-17). Nevertheless, King David gave his kingdom to Solomon, his youngest son (1 Kgs 2:15).<\/p>\n<p>In a family with no sons, a daughter could inherit property (Nm 27:8). Frequently, parents consulted neither sons nor daughters when marriage partners were arranged for them. Marriage was often an alliance or contract between two families, and thus the wishes and concerns of individuals were considered unimportant. Love matches were few, although occasionally a son would marry in defiance of his parents, as Esau did (Gn 26:34-35). Although it was rare for young people to express their feelings and preferences about marriage in an open fashion, Saul’s daughter, Michal, made known her love for David (1 Sm 18:20).<\/p>\n<p>There is no record of legal adoption among the Hebrews, but it was practiced from ancient times in Mesopotamia. It was especially useful as a means of ensuring a childless couple that their land would be tilled and that they would be cared for in their old age. All examples of adoption mentioned in the OT took place outside the land of Israel (Ex 2:10; 1 Kgs 11:20; Est 2:7, 15) and are not examples of true adoption as a lifetime member of a family.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRightsofChildren\">The Rights of Children<\/p>\n<p>The nature of patriarchal society made for unfortunate distinctions between male and female children. The position of a daughter, who could be sold into slavery or sold to be the concubine of a man and then possibly sold again (Ex 21:7-11), was certainly inferior to that of a son. In the patriarchal period, however, both a son and a daughter could be put to death for disobeying the head of the family. One’s children could also be sacrificed in worship rituals (see Gn 22; Jgs 11). It is probable that infant sacrifice was practiced by nations neighboring Israel, including Canaan and Ammon.<\/p>\n<p>The rights of children were improved considerably with the promulgation of the code of Mosaic law. A father was no longer permitted to put his child to death without referring the case to the elders (Dt 21:18-21). Both sons and daughters could be brought before such authorities and accused of being disobedient, gluttonous, or drunkards. A father’s absolute authority even extended to his married son and family if they were living under his roof. The law also prohibited children from being held responsible for the crimes of their parents (Dt 24:16). In King David’s time a person convicted by the community had the right of appeal to the king (2 Sm 14:4-11).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew families both parents were held in high respect. Honor had to be given to both mother and father (Ex 20:12), and the law condemned offenses against either parent (21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 21:18; 27:16). Respect due to the mother is a recurrent theme in the Wisdom Literature (Prv 19:26; 20:20; cf. Ecclus 3:1-16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DailyLifeoftheHebrewFamily\">Daily Life of the Hebrew Family<\/p>\n<p>In the everyday affairs of a Hebrew household, it was the father’s responsibility to maintain the family fortune and to be the provider. He might work in the fields, most probably with crops of flax, barley, or wheat. Or he would work at a trade, possibly as a weaver, builder, potter, dyer, fuller, or a worker in copper or bronze. If he lived near the shore, he might be a fisherman.<\/p>\n<p>The father was also responsible for the religious well-being of the family. It was his duty to take over his sons’ education from the mother at an early age, teaching them the tenets of Hebrew religion (Ex 10:2; 12:26; Dt 4:9; 6:7). He also explained all the facets of the law and the interwoven history of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>The father was the disciplinarian of the family, with the rod being used to drive home the lessons taught (Prv 13:24; 22:15; 29:15-17). Though children were loved and valued, they were not pampered (Ecclus 30:9-12). In postexilic times education also took place within the precincts of the synagogue, and shortly before the time of Christ, a general elementary education was introduced. It was also imperative that a father teach his sons a trade, normally his own, for a man without a trade either starved or became a thief. Another important paternal responsibility was to provide wives for male offspring in the household.<\/p>\n<p>The mother was responsible for her sons’ and daughters’ early education (Prv 1:8; 6:20), teaching them religious songs and prayers as soon as they could talk. A father took over the education of his sons, but the mother continued with the daughters, training them to spin, weave, cook, clean, trim the lamps, and generally to become competent in all the household duties (31:13-31).<\/p>\n<p>With little furniture, keeping a house clean meant sweeping the floors to keep them free from dust and dirt. Cooking was at once simple and difficult. It was simple in that much of the food was cooked in the form of a soup or stew, or else made into a cake and cooked on a griddle. It was difficult in that the corn had to be ground by hand and bread was baked daily.<\/p>\n<p>A mother was expected to take wool, card it, spin it, and often weave and make clothes for her family. In addition, she would help her husband in the fields at harvesttime. Because many families had one or more olive trees, a few grapevines, and fig trees, the mother would also assist in picking the fruit. She would sometimes work at the press when the olives or grapes were being processed. Frequently the treading of grapes in the family vat would be done together by husband and wife. Drawing water from the well was considered a menial task and was generally the wife’s responsibility, although sometimes it was assigned to the children (Gn 24:15-16).<\/p>\n<p>As in all societies, there was a time when children laughed and played together (Zec 8:5; Mt 11:16), although childhood and adolescence were not recognized as specific stages of development. Children were considered as sucklings if under three, but were regarded as boys or girls when they were able to take care of themselves. A small child sat on his mother’s lap and was played with (Is 66:12). There is no evidence of organized sports for children. Toys, including whistles, rattles, dolls, and miniature cooking utensils, have been excavated at Palestinian sites.<\/p>\n<p>As soon as a boy was old enough, he took his place in the family and accepted his appointed task. Among other things, children were expected to gather fuel (Jer 7:18). Young boys and girls tended the flocks. The sheep had to be protected from marauding wild beasts, guarded against their own folly when they wandered near crevices, steered toward good pasture and water, and carried home when sick or injured (Gn 29:6; Ex 2:16). The care of cattle was also the responsibility of children (1 Sm 16:11). Of necessity, boys were trained in the various arts of war.<\/p>\n<p>Children sometimes joined their fathers in the fields, and their presence was always welcome. From earliest times, boys in particular would watch their fathers until they too picked up a tool or implement to try their skill; girls watched and learned from their mothers. Young children frequently listened to the talk of the elders at the city gates or in the villages. A visit to a sanctuary at festival time was a family affair, furnishing an ideal learning experience. As a child, Jesus accompanied his parents, Mary and Joseph, to the temple in Jerusalem (Lk 2:42-47).<\/p>\n<p>Young girls were surprisingly free to go about their appointed tasks. They were not secluded or veiled and could visit uninhibited with friends and neighbors (Gn 34:1). They were also able to converse with men without embarrassment (24:15-25; 29:11-12; 1 Sm 9:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>Mealtimes were strictly family times. It is doubtful whether a meal comparable to a breakfast was eaten, and a farmer would probably have a light lunch in the fields. The main meal of the day was prepared by the mother, and it would be eaten in the early evening. Although the variety of food available was limited, its preparation was time-consuming.<\/p>\n<p>Feast times were periods of great religious significance and were also the days when family members participated in the symbolic rituals of their faith. Among the Israelites several kinds of food were fundamental to their religious ritual. Family unity and the national religion were molded together by special meals in the home.<\/p>\n<p>Daylight played an important part in the daily habits of the people in antiquity. Although oil lamps were readily available in later periods, it was customary to rise with the sun and go to bed relatively soon after dark. The wife would probably be up before sunrise and might continue her labor after dark.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InNewTestamentTimes\">In New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>By NT times, for those who followed the Greek and Roman style, life became more elegant. Despite that, the status of many family members did not change substantially. Wealthier families had more slaves, and the children were more likely to have formal education, sometimes spending less effort on family chores. Even in Roman times, however, the father still had a legal right to accept or reject his child.<\/p>\n<p>The status of the woman had definitely improved by the NT period. A Roman matron was highly respected and exerted a strong influence over her husband. She was not sequestered in a particular section of the house, as a Greek woman was, but managed and supervised tasks in any part of her home. She helped her husband in business, had her own place in theaters, games, and religious festivals, and sometimes managed her own property. Palestinian women began to enjoy a new status and dignity as the result of Jesus’ attitude toward women and its influence on the early Christian church.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Education; Marriage, Marriage Customs; Sex, Sexuality; Widow; Woman.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FAMILY LIFE AND RELATIONS<\/h3>\n<p>In Bible times, the family comprised members of a household, including not only parents and children, along with other relatives and concubines, but also servants, travelers, aliens, and anyone else who happened to be within the house and was therefore under the protection of the head of the family. The family of Jacob, for example, comprised three generations (Gn 46:8-26). Biblically, the term “family” is interchangeable with “house,” and “founding a house” can refer to setting up a separate dwelling as well as establishing a family. In the broader sense, “house” may refer to an entire nation (“house of Israel”). The heads of families returning from Babylon in the postexilic period controlled sometimes several hundred family members (Ezr 8:1-14). The family was a smaller part of a clan and tribe. In nomadic times the responsibilities and allegiances centered on the larger family group.<\/p>\n<p>Those who belonged to the clan knew that they had to work for common interests and accept responsibility for the whole group. All members of the family were to be protected and assisted in time of need.<\/p>\n<p>As the life of the Israelites became more settled, families (in the wider sense of the term) lived in villages surrounded by fields of wheat, barley, and flax, with areas of grazing land for sheep and goats. Each group of villages consisted of an intermarried, interdependent family group, such as that of the Danites of Zorah and Eshtaol (Jgs 18:11). The hard life of those days demanded a sharing of work and the loyal cooperation of the entire family for survival.<\/p>\n<p>As crafts and trades developed, along with a more sedentary lifestyle, sons learned their fathers’ skills and continued the family trade. Consequently, the whole village might follow a particular craft (1 Chr 4:14; Neh 11:35). By specializing in such trades, however, the villagers became less self-sufficient, depending more on farmers for food and on other specialized villages for the production of cloth or pottery (1 Chr 4:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>With the growth of cities, related groups lived together in specific areas. Many members of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah were listed in the census of Jerusalem by Nehemiah (Neh 11:4-8), and by the writer of Chronicles (1 Chr 9:3-9). One consequence of life in the cities was the fragmentation of the family group. As the bonds of the wider family were loosened, the unit consisted increasingly of a husband and wife with their children, living in one house. The size of houses that have been excavated precludes the idea of any larger family unit as the norm in OT societies.<\/p>\n<p>During the kingdom period, King David’s sons Amnon and Absalom set up their own separate houses (2 Sm 13:7-8, 20). At that time there were few slaves in Hebrew society, but they also were considered members of the family. As bonds of the wider family loosened, and the master of the household lost a degree of authority, the society became one in which the king was sovereign and all the people were his subjects.<\/p>\n<p>The early kings of Israel promoted such a change in order to establish a central ruling authority for the entire country. The king’s subjects fell broadly into the categories of employers and employees, corresponding to the rich and poor of society. By the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, members of the wider family no longer worked for the communal good under the authority of the clan’s head; rather, individuals worked primarily for the good of their own immediate family. Hence one’s labor and devotion were focused more narrowly, and the greatest beneficiary was the king, the personal symbol of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>Emphasis on the smaller family unit increased, and old duties that had been willingly accepted by the wider groups in former times came to be neglected. People did not always help relatives in times of need, and they frequently had to be reminded of their obligations, particularly toward widows and orphans (Is 1:17; Jer 7:6). Family feuds also declined because members no longer felt responsible to take vengeance as a way to uphold the honor of the clan (2 Sm 3:27; 16:8; 2 Kgs 9:26). Nevertheless, Nehemiah expected Israelites to fight for their family honor (Neh 4:14). In NT times, the family was such a unit that it could be sold for a debt incurred by one of its members (Mt 18:25).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew religion’s emphasis on family participation in certain celebrations strengthened the small unit. The Passover, for example, was always celebrated as a family thanksgiving meal (Ex 12:3-4, 46). The prophet Samuel’s parents made a traditional annual pilgrimage to the shrine at Shiloh (1 Sm 2:19). In modern times, a young Jewish boy’s arrival at the threshold of manhood is celebrated with the Bar Mitzvah ceremony. Being so honored in the midst of a religious family preserves the ancient Hebrew tradition of family participation in religious ceremonies.<\/p>\n<p>In his preaching Jesus used the family as a symbol for the relationship of God to his people (Mt 19:14; 23:9; Lk 8:21). From the cross he handed over responsibility for the care of his mother to his disciple John (Jn 19:27).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times, the communion meals in the Jerusalem church took place by households (Acts 2:46). Early Christian meetings were held in the homes of believers because of opposition by the authorities. The book of Acts contains examples of entire families being converted to Christianity (Acts 10:24, 44-48; 16:15, 31-32). Timothy learned the gospel from his grandmother and mother (2 Tm 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Status of Family Members<\/p>\n<p>• Marital Security<\/p>\n<p>• Position of Children<\/p>\n<p>• The Rights of Children<\/p>\n<p>• Daily Life of the Hebrew Family<\/p>\n<p>• In New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"StatusofFamilyMembers\">Status of Family Members<\/p>\n<p>From nomadic times, a father’s authority held the family group together in their encampment, and he became the symbol of their security. In ancient patriarchal societies, the father was an absolute master who had the power of life and death over family members, ruling with unchallenged authority. Although he had extensive responsibilities for those under his care, his power was awesome and his status unquestioned.<\/p>\n<p>A man’s possessions included his wife, servants, slaves, and animals (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21). In fact, the phrase “to marry a wife” comes from a Hebrew root meaning “to become the master of a wife.” A husband was as much the master of his wife as he was of his home or his fields. Consequently, the wife addressed him in a subservient manner, as a slave would address a master (Gn 18:12; Jgs 19:26). This low status for a woman extended to a daughter’s position in the ancient household. Females were always under the authority of a male relative: first, the father; then a husband. If a woman became a widow, she was subject to her husband’s nearest male relative, who became her “redeemer.” The bride price (Gn 29:18, 27; Ex 22:16-17; 1 Sm 18:25; 2 Sm 3:14) paid by her husband was not exactly a purchase of the woman from her father, but the exchange of money did stigmatize her. The amount of a bride price depended on the father’s status (Gn 34:12). The usual price was probably 20 to 30 shekels of silver. The bride received gifts of jewelry, ornaments, and clothing from her future husband, and she occasionally enjoyed some sort of financial or material return from the bride price for her own use (Jos 15:19; Jgs 1:15). When her father or husband died, the money frequently reverted to her.<\/p>\n<p>An engaged woman was considered her fiancé’s property just as much as if she were already married to him (Dt 22:23-27). The woman left her own family at marriage, to live with and become part of her new husband’s family. Normally, any succeeding marriages would be with members of that family.<\/p>\n<p>Despite the low legal status of the mother of the family, her life was not as bad as one might suppose. She was the legal wife, not an unpaid servant, and she frequently took a strong role as adviser to her husband in family affairs. Her most important function, aside from childbearing, was organization of the household, of which she was generally the respected manager. Even though the wife might have been acquired through capture in war (Dt 21:10-14), she could not be sold as a slave or daughter could (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5).<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, her position was precarious, in that she could be disowned or divorced by her husband as the result of a simple renunciation: “She is no longer my wife, and I am no longer her husband.” Perhaps he had found fault with her culinary skills, or possibly he was casting his eyes on another woman. In any event, a husband knew that if his wife did not obey even a signal or a glance, he was within his rights to obtain a divorce (cf. Ecclus 25:26). The wife, however, obtained a certain degree of protection in the letter of repudiation, by which her freedom was formally restored. Under Jewish tradition, a wife could not divorce her husband.<\/p>\n<p>In matters of domestic protocol, the Hebrew wife was not introduced to her husband’s guests, a tradition that subsequently led to considerable embarrassment for Abraham’s wife, Sarah, and for Rebekah (Gn 20:16). A woman normally remained veiled in public (24:65; 38:14; Is 47:2).<\/p>\n<p>The imagery in Proverbs 19:13 and 27:15 draws a vigorous comparison between a contentious woman and water dripping from a leaky roof. The OT leaves little doubt about the type of behavior expected from a woman. She was expected to be charming, soft-spoken, discreet, and calm (Prv 9:13; 11:16, 22; 21:9). She was also to be responsible, well-organized, intelligent, thoughtful, reverent, and a good manager of both the household and the family purse (31:10-31). A woman should also be pious and beautiful, and in NT tradition, submissive to her husband, as befitted a woman adorned with the priceless jewel of a gentle and quiet spirit (Ti 2:4-5; 1 Pt 3:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The actions of a few women whose roles in life do not seem to fit the pattern of the meek, passive female pictured above, are recorded in the Bible and the Apocrypha. The books of Judith and Esther recount heroic tales of how national fortunes were saved by women. Deborah and Jael were renowned heroines (Jgs 4–5), and the kingdom of Judah was ruled by a vicious woman, Athaliah, for several years (2 Kgs 11). The women who stepped to the forefront of public life were exceptional and few in number. Judith was a rich widow, an unusual thing in Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MaritalSecurity\">Marital Security<\/p>\n<p>The security of a wife’s position improved considerably when she produced her first child, particularly if it was a son. A woman’s primary duty to her husband and his family was procreation (Gn 1:28; 9:1), and until she gave birth to a son, she feared displacement by a second wife or a concubine. Polygamous marriages were by no means rare, especially in wealthy families. They resulted in two ill-defined family groups, controlled by the mothers but under the overall authority of fathers; there were inevitable jealousies and frictions.<\/p>\n<p>The legal status of a woman was consistently poor in Bible times. With no evidence at all, a husband could accuse his wife of adultery, and she was compelled to face a trial by ordeal. She had to abase herself by taking an oath, eating dust and a cereal offering, and drinking bitter water. A priest, meanwhile, made pronouncements regarding the dire results that would come to her if she were guilty: she would become an outcast with no hope of survival. But if she maintained her serenity, and if her thigh did not rot nor her abdomen swell, she was considered to have “proved” her innocence. In such an event she would go free, and her husband bore no blame whatsoever for his false accusation (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a woman took a vow, it was legal only as long as her father or husband approved it. If she became a widow, the vow still remained in force and could be used against her (Nm 30:3-15).<\/p>\n<p>A woman in Israel was always under the protection of a male, be it her father, grandfather, great-grandfather, brother, husband, or some other member of her husband’s family. She had few legal rights and, in contrast to Babylonian traditions, could not inherit at her husband’s death. It is small wonder that widows were classed with orphans and the poor. A childless widow could on occasion return to her father’s family (Gn 38:11; Lv 22:13; Ru 1:8), thus becoming subject again to the authority of her father. A Hebrew widow could also remain with her late husband’s family. She would then come under the protection of her “redeemer,” a male relative of her husband’s family who assumed responsibility for her. If a husband died leaving a woman childless, it was the responsibility of the husband’s brother to marry her. The first son born of such a union was then regarded as the heir of the first husband.<\/p>\n<p>It was normal for a brother to accept the obligation for such a marriage (levirate). It could be refused on various grounds, but such refusal was considered dishonorable, for it was a man’s duty to perpetuate his brother’s name and to safeguard the family fortune.<\/p>\n<p>A redeemer’s responsibilities were considerable. In addition to the marriage, he was perhaps involved in avenging the family reputation, and he had to ensure that family property increased and remained within family control.<\/p>\n<p>If an Israelite fell into debt and was forced to sell himself into slavery, he would normally be “redeemed” by one of his relatives (Lv 25:47-49). If in his penury an Israelite had to sell his land or his house, the redeemer had the right of first refusal over all other prospective purchasers. It was as much his duty as his right to prevent family property from passing into the hands of strangers (v 25). The prophet Jeremiah bought his cousin Hanamel’s field under similar circumstances (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most familiar OT story of a childless widow, her “redeemer,” and their levirate marriage is recorded in the book of Ruth. One of Naomi’s two sons married Ruth. When Ruth was widowed, her impoverished mother-in-law, Naomi, left her home in Moab and returned to Bethlehem to sell some of the family property. Although a close relative was prepared to buy the land and keep it in the family, he was not ready to marry Ruth as well (Ru 3:12; 4:4). He knew that a son of that union would be deemed a son of the deceased, bearing the dead husband’s name, and thus ultimately inheriting the land (4:4-6). The next relative in order of kinship was Boaz, who became Ruth’s “redeemer.” He was prepared to accept the double obligation of purchasing the land and marrying Ruth (4:9-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PositionofChildren\">Position of Children<\/p>\n<p>Children were generally well loved, but their childhood was short and they were often regarded as laborers for the house or fields. According to the law of primogeniture, the eldest son received a double portion of the estate as his birthright (Dt 21:17). Thus, he was assured of the position of family head. Even during his father’s lifetime, the eldest son took precedence over his brothers and sisters (Gn 43:33). Where twins were born, the first to emerge from the womb was considered the elder, with all the attendant privileges (25:24-26; 38:27-30).<\/p>\n<p>For a serious offense, the eldest son could lose the right of primogeniture (Gn 35:22; 49:3-4; 1 Chr 5:1), or it could be surrendered voluntarily, as Esau did by selling his birthright to his brother Jacob (Gn 25:29-34). There was a law protecting the eldest son from his father’s favoritism for a younger brother (Dt 21:15-17). Nevertheless, King David gave his kingdom to Solomon, his youngest son (1 Kgs 2:15).<\/p>\n<p>In a family with no sons, a daughter could inherit property (Nm 27:8). Frequently, parents consulted neither sons nor daughters when marriage partners were arranged for them. Marriage was often an alliance or contract between two families, and thus the wishes and concerns of individuals were considered unimportant. Love matches were few, although occasionally a son would marry in defiance of his parents, as Esau did (Gn 26:34-35). Although it was rare for young people to express their feelings and preferences about marriage in an open fashion, Saul’s daughter, Michal, made known her love for David (1 Sm 18:20).<\/p>\n<p>There is no record of legal adoption among the Hebrews, but it was practiced from ancient times in Mesopotamia. It was especially useful as a means of ensuring a childless couple that their land would be tilled and that they would be cared for in their old age. All examples of adoption mentioned in the OT took place outside the land of Israel (Ex 2:10; 1 Kgs 11:20; Est 2:7, 15) and are not examples of true adoption as a lifetime member of a family.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRightsofChildren\">The Rights of Children<\/p>\n<p>The nature of patriarchal society made for unfortunate distinctions between male and female children. The position of a daughter, who could be sold into slavery or sold to be the concubine of a man and then possibly sold again (Ex 21:7-11), was certainly inferior to that of a son. In the patriarchal period, however, both a son and a daughter could be put to death for disobeying the head of the family. One’s children could also be sacrificed in worship rituals (see Gn 22; Jgs 11). It is probable that infant sacrifice was practiced by nations neighboring Israel, including Canaan and Ammon.<\/p>\n<p>The rights of children were improved considerably with the promulgation of the code of Mosaic law. A father was no longer permitted to put his child to death without referring the case to the elders (Dt 21:18-21). Both sons and daughters could be brought before such authorities and accused of being disobedient, gluttonous, or drunkards. A father’s absolute authority even extended to his married son and family if they were living under his roof. The law also prohibited children from being held responsible for the crimes of their parents (Dt 24:16). In King David’s time a person convicted by the community had the right of appeal to the king (2 Sm 14:4-11).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew families both parents were held in high respect. Honor had to be given to both mother and father (Ex 20:12), and the law condemned offenses against either parent (21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 21:18; 27:16). Respect due to the mother is a recurrent theme in the Wisdom Literature (Prv 19:26; 20:20; cf. Ecclus 3:1-16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DailyLifeoftheHebrewFamily\">Daily Life of the Hebrew Family<\/p>\n<p>In the everyday affairs of a Hebrew household, it was the father’s responsibility to maintain the family fortune and to be the provider. He might work in the fields, most probably with crops of flax, barley, or wheat. Or he would work at a trade, possibly as a weaver, builder, potter, dyer, fuller, or a worker in copper or bronze. If he lived near the shore, he might be a fisherman.<\/p>\n<p>The father was also responsible for the religious well-being of the family. It was his duty to take over his sons’ education from the mother at an early age, teaching them the tenets of Hebrew religion (Ex 10:2; 12:26; Dt 4:9; 6:7). He also explained all the facets of the law and the interwoven history of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>The father was the disciplinarian of the family, with the rod being used to drive home the lessons taught (Prv 13:24; 22:15; 29:15-17). Though children were loved and valued, they were not pampered (Ecclus 30:9-12). In postexilic times education also took place within the precincts of the synagogue, and shortly before the time of Christ, a general elementary education was introduced. It was also imperative that a father teach his sons a trade, normally his own, for a man without a trade either starved or became a thief. Another important paternal responsibility was to provide wives for male offspring in the household.<\/p>\n<p>The mother was responsible for her sons’ and daughters’ early education (Prv 1:8; 6:20), teaching them religious songs and prayers as soon as they could talk. A father took over the education of his sons, but the mother continued with the daughters, training them to spin, weave, cook, clean, trim the lamps, and generally to become competent in all the household duties (31:13-31).<\/p>\n<p>With little furniture, keeping a house clean meant sweeping the floors to keep them free from dust and dirt. Cooking was at once simple and difficult. It was simple in that much of the food was cooked in the form of a soup or stew, or else made into a cake and cooked on a griddle. It was difficult in that the corn had to be ground by hand and bread was baked daily.<\/p>\n<p>A mother was expected to take wool, card it, spin it, and often weave and make clothes for her family. In addition, she would help her husband in the fields at harvesttime. Because many families had one or more olive trees, a few grapevines, and fig trees, the mother would also assist in picking the fruit. She would sometimes work at the press when the olives or grapes were being processed. Frequently the treading of grapes in the family vat would be done together by husband and wife. Drawing water from the well was considered a menial task and was generally the wife’s responsibility, although sometimes it was assigned to the children (Gn 24:15-16).<\/p>\n<p>As in all societies, there was a time when children laughed and played together (Zec 8:5; Mt 11:16), although childhood and adolescence were not recognized as specific stages of development. Children were considered as sucklings if under three, but were regarded as boys or girls when they were able to take care of themselves. A small child sat on his mother’s lap and was played with (Is 66:12). There is no evidence of organized sports for children. Toys, including whistles, rattles, dolls, and miniature cooking utensils, have been excavated at Palestinian sites.<\/p>\n<p>As soon as a boy was old enough, he took his place in the family and accepted his appointed task. Among other things, children were expected to gather fuel (Jer 7:18). Young boys and girls tended the flocks. The sheep had to be protected from marauding wild beasts, guarded against their own folly when they wandered near crevices, steered toward good pasture and water, and carried home when sick or injured (Gn 29:6; Ex 2:16). The care of cattle was also the responsibility of children (1 Sm 16:11). Of necessity, boys were trained in the various arts of war.<\/p>\n<p>Children sometimes joined their fathers in the fields, and their presence was always welcome. From earliest times, boys in particular would watch their fathers until they too picked up a tool or implement to try their skill; girls watched and learned from their mothers. Young children frequently listened to the talk of the elders at the city gates or in the villages. A visit to a sanctuary at festival time was a family affair, furnishing an ideal learning experience. As a child, Jesus accompanied his parents, Mary and Joseph, to the temple in Jerusalem (Lk 2:42-47).<\/p>\n<p>Young girls were surprisingly free to go about their appointed tasks. They were not secluded or veiled and could visit uninhibited with friends and neighbors (Gn 34:1). They were also able to converse with men without embarrassment (24:15-25; 29:11-12; 1 Sm 9:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>Mealtimes were strictly family times. It is doubtful whether a meal comparable to a breakfast was eaten, and a farmer would probably have a light lunch in the fields. The main meal of the day was prepared by the mother, and it would be eaten in the early evening. Although the variety of food available was limited, its preparation was time-consuming.<\/p>\n<p>Feast times were periods of great religious significance and were also the days when family members participated in the symbolic rituals of their faith. Among the Israelites several kinds of food were fundamental to their religious ritual. Family unity and the national religion were molded together by special meals in the home.<\/p>\n<p>Daylight played an important part in the daily habits of the people in antiquity. Although oil lamps were readily available in later periods, it was customary to rise with the sun and go to bed relatively soon after dark. The wife would probably be up before sunrise and might continue her labor after dark.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InNewTestamentTimes\">In New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>By NT times, for those who followed the Greek and Roman style, life became more elegant. Despite that, the status of many family members did not change substantially. Wealthier families had more slaves, and the children were more likely to have formal education, sometimes spending less effort on family chores. Even in Roman times, however, the father still had a legal right to accept or reject his child.<\/p>\n<p>The status of the woman had definitely improved by the NT period. A Roman matron was highly respected and exerted a strong influence over her husband. She was not sequestered in a particular section of the house, as a Greek woman was, but managed and supervised tasks in any part of her home. She helped her husband in business, had her own place in theaters, games, and religious festivals, and sometimes managed her own property. Palestinian women began to enjoy a new status and dignity as the result of Jesus’ attitude toward women and its influence on the early Christian church.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Education; Marriage, Marriage Customs; Sex, Sexuality; Widow; Woman.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FAMILY LIFE AND RELATIONS In Bible times, the family comprised members of a household, including not only parents and children, along with other relatives and concubines, but also servants, travelers, aliens, and anyone else who happened to be within the house and was therefore under the protection of the head of the family. The family of Jacob, for example, comprised three generations (Gn 46:8-26). Biblically, the term “family” is interchangeable with “house,” and “founding a house” can refe...","summary_en":"FAMILY LIFE AND RELATIONS In Bible times, the family comprised members of a household, including not only parents and children, along with other relatives and concubines, but also servants, travelers, aliens, and anyone else who happened to be within the house and was therefore under the protection of the head of the family. The family of Jacob, for example, comprised three generations (Gn 46:8-26). Biblically, the term “family” is interchangeable with “house,” and “founding a house” can refe...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24471,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Marriage Customs Marriage","title_en":"Marriage Customs Marriage","content_ro":"<h3>MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS<\/h3>\n<p>The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24).<\/p>\n<p>Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the early monarchy, it is difficult to be certain about the matter, despite the importance in Egypt, and perhaps elsewhere, of the role of the mother in determining descent.<\/p>\n<p>Generally, the bride left her parents when she married and went to live with her husband’s clan, as Rebekah did (Gn 24:58-59). The phrase “to marry a wife” is from a root meaning to “become master” (Dt 21:13), and the wife frequently treated her husband as, and referred to him as, master.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew genealogical lists indicate that descent was reckoned through the male line (Gn 5:10; 36:9-43; Nm 1:1-15; Ru 4:18-22; 1 Chr 1:1-9). The important right of naming a child, indicating power and authority over that child, was exercised almost equally between father and mother in biblical references (cf. Gn 4:1, 25-26; 5:29; 35:18; 1 Sm 1:20; 4:21; Is 8:3; Hos 1:4-9). Sons were frequently named after their fathers and were identified with them.<\/p>\n<p>The father was the authority figure in the home in a patriarchal society. His wife and children were regarded as his possessions in somewhat the same way as his fields and livestock (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21). He had the right to sell his daughters (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5), and even had the power of life and death over his children.<\/p>\n<p>The ease with which a man could terminate a marriage by divorcing his wife also shows the measure of his authority in the family (Dt 24:1-4; cf. 22:13-21).<\/p>\n<p>A levirate marriage was instituted to preserve a family name and inheritance. When a man died, the responsibility for maintaining his widow and any children that she might have fell upon her husband’s closest male relative. The order of responsibility is set out in Deuteronomy 25:5-10. Normally, the brother of the deceased husband living with the clan was expected to enter into a levirate marriage with the widow. If she was childless, the firstborn of the new marriage was regarded as a child of the deceased. Levirate marriage was also known to the Canaanites, Assyrians, and Hittites.<\/p>\n<p>The most familiar levirate situation in the OT, although not conforming strictly to the law of Deuteronomy 25, is described in the book of Ruth. It was essential for Ruth to find some close male relative to marry her so that the family name and property could be preserved. The closest male relative declined the responsibility, feeling that it was a double imposition, first, to have to purchase the land and support Ruth, and second, to know that the first son would be regarded as her dead husband’s child, bearing his name and inheriting the land. Boaz agreed to undertake the responsibility (Ru 2:20–4:10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite numerous examples of polygamy cited in the OT, there is no doubt that the vast majority of the Israelites were monogamous. There are no examples given of large polygamous marriages in the families of commoners.<\/p>\n<p>The original instruction to Adam was that a “man . . . cleaves to his wife” (Gn 2:24). Hebrew laws generally imply that a marriage with one wife is the most acceptable form of marriage (Ex 20:17; 21:5; Lv 18:8, 16-20; 20:10; Nm 5:12; Dt 5:21). Although this seems to have become the norm by the time of the monarchy, a king such as Solomon did not follow Hebrew traditions in this matter. In the postexilic period marriages were predominantly monogamous, although they were being terminated increasingly by divorce. In the NT period monogamy seems to have been the rule, although persons such as Herod the Great were polygamous. Christ taught that marriage should last the lifetime of the partners, and if a man divorced his wife and married another woman during his previous spouse’s lifetime, he committed adultery (Mt 5:31-32).<\/p>\n<p>Marriage generally took place with those who were close to the immediate family circle, and it was imperative, therefore, that limits on acceptable consanguinity should be imposed. In patriarchal times a man could marry his half sister on his father’s side (Gn 20:12), and this continued to be the case even under David (2 Sm 13:13), although it was specifically forbidden in Leviticus 20:17. As there is some contradiction between the marriage laws of Deuteronomy and those in the Law of Holiness (Dt 25:5; Lv 18:16), it is possible that there was some modification of the stricter Levitical regulations. Marriages between cousins, such as Isaac with Rebekah, and Jacob with Rachel and Leah, were common. When a close relative was interested in marriage, it was almost impossible to refuse (Tb 6:13; 7:11-12). Moses was the offspring of a marriage between nephew and aunt (Ex 6:20; Nm 26:59), which would have been forbidden in Leviticus 18:12-13 and 20:19, as would Jacob’s marriage with two sisters at the same time (Gn 29:30).<\/p>\n<p>When the Israelites settled in Canaan, many of them married Canaanite women, much to the consternation of those who desired to maintain the purity of the Hebrew religion (1 Kgs 11:4). Such intermarriage was prohibited under Mosaic law (Ex 34:15-16; Dt 7:3-4), although many Israelites ignored these regulations and continued to indulge in mixed marriages. If a woman was captured in war and was prepared to abandon her native country, an exception could be made (Dt 21:10-14). By contrast, Samson married a Philistine woman who remained with her own people, but who received conjugal visits from her husband periodically (Jgs 14:8–15:2).<\/p>\n<p>The danger of intermarriage affecting the purity of Hebrew religion was considered so great that in the postexilic period wholesale divorce was ordered where Jews had married foreign wives (Ezr 9:2; 10:3, 16-17). The intent was that the national religion should remain pure, even though homes and families were destroyed. Even in NT times, Paul denounced marriage with non-Christians (2 Cor 6:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to estimate at what age young people married. A boy was considered to be a man by his early teens, and late in Jewish tradition this transition was celebrated by the bar mitzvah, which generally occurred when the boy was 13.<\/p>\n<p>Normally the young man’s parents chose the bride. The resulting discussion about the marriage occurred between the groom’s parents and the bride’s parents, and often neither of the young people was consulted. It was not essential for the eldest in the family to be married first (Gn 29:26). When Abraham decided that Isaac should be married, a servant was sent to choose a bride from among Abraham’s relatives in Mesopotamia. The servant made contact with the bride’s brother and mother (24:33-53), and it was only afterward that Rebekah was asked to give her consent (vv 57-58). Her father was possibly incapacitated; otherwise, it would have been unlikely that her consent would have been asked at all.<\/p>\n<p>One of the reasons why the average young man would not have been able to afford more than one wife was the practice of the bride-price, which had to be paid to the bride’s father. It was possible to substitute service for the bride-price (Gn 29:15-30), or the completion of an appointed task (1 Sm 18:25-27). A specific sum is mentioned for the bride-price in the case of a virgin who had been raped and who had to be purchased by her seducer. The price was set at 50 shekels, but this was considered to be a punishment; it is probable that the normal amount was between 10 and 320 shekels (Lv 27:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of the second temple, a virgin bride was considered to be worth 50 shekels, and a widow or divorced woman about half that sum. During this period, a virgin bride was normally married in midweek so that, if her husband found her not to be a virgin, he could bring proof to the court the following day, which would still be in advance of the Sabbath. A widow or a divorced woman normally married on the equivalent of a Thursday, giving her a full day with her husband before the Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>Marriage was a covenant or alliance between two families. It thus united them, and by extending the kinship, the overall size of the group was increased. This was important in a society where responsibilities for relatives, however distant, were accepted unhesitatingly. The covenant concept also could have political overtones, as with the marriage between Solomon and the Egyptian princess (1 Kgs 11:1) or Ahab of Israel and Jezebel of Tyre (16:31).<\/p>\n<p>The sealing of the covenant included the transfer of gifts, which would establish the wealth and status of the donor and of the bride (Gn 34:12). In the ancient Near East, the giving of a gift was thought to include a part of the donor, so that the giver was actually offering a portion of himself. The gift that sealed the covenant also established the donor’s authority over the bride.<\/p>\n<p>The next stage in the marriage procedure was the betrothal. First mentioned in Exodus 22:16, the term is used several times in Deuteronomy (Dt 20:7; 22:23-24). The betrothal had the legal status of a marriage (Dt 28:30; 2 Sm 3:14), and anyone violating a betrothed virgin would be stoned, according to the law of Deuteronomy, for violating his neighbor’s “wife” (Dt 22:23-24). The meaning of a betrothal involved taking possession, in a manner similar to that of receiving tribute. Nevertheless, there remained a distinction between betrothing a woman and taking her as a wife (20:7). During the period of betrothal, the prospective groom was exempt from military service. It was assumed that the betrothal was a formal part of a permanent relationship (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:27; 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>A man who was to marry another’s daughter was already regarded as a son-in-law at the time of betrothal (Gn 19:14). Mary, as Joseph’s betrothed, was actually considered his wife, although he did not have intercourse with her until after the birth of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The first biblical record of a wedding being celebrated by a feast is in the story of Jacob (Gn 29:22). There was no actual marriage contract recorded until its mention in the book of Tobit (Tb 7:12). This contract was not considered valid until the couple had cohabited for a week (Gn 29:27; Jgs 14:12, 18). When Samson left his bride before the end of the seven-day period, the bride’s parents considered the marriage void and gave her to another man (Jgs 14:20).<\/p>\n<p>The wedding was an occasion of great family rejoicing. The special clothing of the bride and groom (Is 61:10; Ez 16:9-13) included for the bride a fine dress often adorned with jewels (Ps 45:14-15; Is 61:10) and other ornaments, while the bridegroom had fine clothing and wore a diadem (Sg 3:11; Is 61:10). The bride wore a veil (Gn 24:65; Sg 4:3), which was removed in the bridal chamber. This would account for Rebekah’s need to veil herself in the presence of Isaac, her fiancé (Gn 24:65), and also for the ease with which Laban was able to replace Rachel with Leah on Jacob’s wedding night (29:23-25).<\/p>\n<p>Symbolic ceremonies may sometimes have been included as part of the betrothal or wedding ceremonies, such as Ruth’s request that Boaz spread his skirt over her to indicate that he was taking her to wife (Ru 3:9). Another ritual may have been the ceremonial removal of the bride’s girdle by the groom in the nuptial chamber, which was a room or tent specially prepared for the newly married couple. The marriage was normally consummated on the first night (Gn 29:23; Tb 8:1), and the stained linen would be retained as evidence of the bride’s virginity.<\/p>\n<p>In a contrast to the elaborate procession and feasting of the marriage, divorce was simple. A man could divorce his wife if he found fault with her in any particular matter, and this right was not abolished until the 11th century <span>AD<\/span>. Divorce was discouraged, however, and gradually the procedure became more complex, being hedged about with a number of deterrents.<\/p>\n<p>As the laws regarding divorce became more complex, so the procedure became increasingly expensive. At a later time a lawyer, or sometimes a rabbi, would give advice, especially on such matters as the return of property rightly belonging to the bride or her family.<\/p>\n<p>If a bride was found to have committed adultery, the husband was thought to be entitled to a divorce. This was also the case if he even suspected her of infidelity. He could also divorce his wife if he felt that she had violated normal morality, had become apostate, or had been less than efficient in the management of her household. If a woman refused her husband his conjugal rights for a period of at least one year, she could be divorced. Other grounds for divorcing a wife included insulting behavior to a husband or his relatives, contracting an incurable disease, or refusing to accompany her husband when he moved the domicile to a new area.<\/p>\n<p>In general, the status of the wife was low. Despite the fact that she gave advice, managed the household, educated the young children, and worked alongside her husband when necessary, he was still her master, and her role was to obey. She was little more than a servant, although better than a slave, for she could not be sold even though she could be divorced.<\/p>\n<p>In the frequent figurative uses of marriage in the OT, the Hebrew people and God are referred to in terms of bride and bridegroom (Is 62:4-5; Jer 2:2). The desolation that is about to overtake Judah is contrasted by Jeremiah with the celebration of a wedding feast (Jer 7:34; 16:9; 25:10). Figurative forms are used again in Hosea, where God rejects the relationship with his wife, Israel (Hos 2:2), but is prepared to accept her again if she resumes her faithful practices (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, John the Baptist compares his sense of joy with that of a friend of the groom at a wedding (Jn 3:29), while Jesus himself made reference to the wedding preparations in the parable of the wise and foolish virgins (Mt 25:1-12). In the story of the marriage feast (22:1-14) Christ mentions quite incidentally the fact that wedding robes were provided for the guests at such ceremonies. The theme of the Christian church as the bride of Christ occurs in such books as 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, and Revelation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusTeachingsonMarriageandAdultery\">Jesus’ Teachings on Marriage and Adultery<\/p>\n<p>In the realm of civil law there are changes of emphasis in Jesus’ teaching over against the OT. For example, the OT did not regard infidelity by a husband as adultery against his wife. When challenged by the Jews, Jesus said that originally God had made one wife for a man; therefore, there should be no divorce (Mk 10:2-9). Further, he stated if a man does divorce his wife and marry again, he “commits adultery against her” (v 11). Thus, Jesus made man and woman equal as regards adultery. An unfaithful husband is just as adulterous as an unfaithful wife. This revolutionary teaching struck the disciples as severe (see Mt 19:10), but it illustrates what Jesus meant when he said their righteousness must be greater than that of the Jewish leaders (5:20).<\/p>\n<p>There is a slight difference in Matthew’s account of Jesus’ teaching, which has led some scholars to argue that Jesus was not quite as strict as the above summary suggests. According to Matthew 19:9, a wife’s “unchastity” (probably some sexual misconduct) allows an aggrieved husband to divorce her and marry again. If this remark concluded the passage, this interpretation would be the simplest. However, from the context it is more likely that Jesus allowed innocent spouses to separate from their wives but not to remarry. This explains why the disciples were so shocked and why Jesus went on to speak about some who refuse to marry for the sake of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 19:12). This was also the way the church interpreted the passage for the first five centuries. They allowed Christians to separate but not to remarry (cf. 1 Cor 7:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adultery; Civil Law and Justice; Concubinage, Concubines; Divorce; Family Life and Relations; Sex, Sexuality; Virgin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS<\/h3>\n<p>The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24).<\/p>\n<p>Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the early monarchy, it is difficult to be certain about the matter, despite the importance in Egypt, and perhaps elsewhere, of the role of the mother in determining descent.<\/p>\n<p>Generally, the bride left her parents when she married and went to live with her husband’s clan, as Rebekah did (Gn 24:58-59). The phrase “to marry a wife” is from a root meaning to “become master” (Dt 21:13), and the wife frequently treated her husband as, and referred to him as, master.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew genealogical lists indicate that descent was reckoned through the male line (Gn 5:10; 36:9-43; Nm 1:1-15; Ru 4:18-22; 1 Chr 1:1-9). The important right of naming a child, indicating power and authority over that child, was exercised almost equally between father and mother in biblical references (cf. Gn 4:1, 25-26; 5:29; 35:18; 1 Sm 1:20; 4:21; Is 8:3; Hos 1:4-9). Sons were frequently named after their fathers and were identified with them.<\/p>\n<p>The father was the authority figure in the home in a patriarchal society. His wife and children were regarded as his possessions in somewhat the same way as his fields and livestock (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21). He had the right to sell his daughters (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5), and even had the power of life and death over his children.<\/p>\n<p>The ease with which a man could terminate a marriage by divorcing his wife also shows the measure of his authority in the family (Dt 24:1-4; cf. 22:13-21).<\/p>\n<p>A levirate marriage was instituted to preserve a family name and inheritance. When a man died, the responsibility for maintaining his widow and any children that she might have fell upon her husband’s closest male relative. The order of responsibility is set out in Deuteronomy 25:5-10. Normally, the brother of the deceased husband living with the clan was expected to enter into a levirate marriage with the widow. If she was childless, the firstborn of the new marriage was regarded as a child of the deceased. Levirate marriage was also known to the Canaanites, Assyrians, and Hittites.<\/p>\n<p>The most familiar levirate situation in the OT, although not conforming strictly to the law of Deuteronomy 25, is described in the book of Ruth. It was essential for Ruth to find some close male relative to marry her so that the family name and property could be preserved. The closest male relative declined the responsibility, feeling that it was a double imposition, first, to have to purchase the land and support Ruth, and second, to know that the first son would be regarded as her dead husband’s child, bearing his name and inheriting the land. Boaz agreed to undertake the responsibility (Ru 2:20–4:10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite numerous examples of polygamy cited in the OT, there is no doubt that the vast majority of the Israelites were monogamous. There are no examples given of large polygamous marriages in the families of commoners.<\/p>\n<p>The original instruction to Adam was that a “man . . . cleaves to his wife” (Gn 2:24). Hebrew laws generally imply that a marriage with one wife is the most acceptable form of marriage (Ex 20:17; 21:5; Lv 18:8, 16-20; 20:10; Nm 5:12; Dt 5:21). Although this seems to have become the norm by the time of the monarchy, a king such as Solomon did not follow Hebrew traditions in this matter. In the postexilic period marriages were predominantly monogamous, although they were being terminated increasingly by divorce. In the NT period monogamy seems to have been the rule, although persons such as Herod the Great were polygamous. Christ taught that marriage should last the lifetime of the partners, and if a man divorced his wife and married another woman during his previous spouse’s lifetime, he committed adultery (Mt 5:31-32).<\/p>\n<p>Marriage generally took place with those who were close to the immediate family circle, and it was imperative, therefore, that limits on acceptable consanguinity should be imposed. In patriarchal times a man could marry his half sister on his father’s side (Gn 20:12), and this continued to be the case even under David (2 Sm 13:13), although it was specifically forbidden in Leviticus 20:17. As there is some contradiction between the marriage laws of Deuteronomy and those in the Law of Holiness (Dt 25:5; Lv 18:16), it is possible that there was some modification of the stricter Levitical regulations. Marriages between cousins, such as Isaac with Rebekah, and Jacob with Rachel and Leah, were common. When a close relative was interested in marriage, it was almost impossible to refuse (Tb 6:13; 7:11-12). Moses was the offspring of a marriage between nephew and aunt (Ex 6:20; Nm 26:59), which would have been forbidden in Leviticus 18:12-13 and 20:19, as would Jacob’s marriage with two sisters at the same time (Gn 29:30).<\/p>\n<p>When the Israelites settled in Canaan, many of them married Canaanite women, much to the consternation of those who desired to maintain the purity of the Hebrew religion (1 Kgs 11:4). Such intermarriage was prohibited under Mosaic law (Ex 34:15-16; Dt 7:3-4), although many Israelites ignored these regulations and continued to indulge in mixed marriages. If a woman was captured in war and was prepared to abandon her native country, an exception could be made (Dt 21:10-14). By contrast, Samson married a Philistine woman who remained with her own people, but who received conjugal visits from her husband periodically (Jgs 14:8–15:2).<\/p>\n<p>The danger of intermarriage affecting the purity of Hebrew religion was considered so great that in the postexilic period wholesale divorce was ordered where Jews had married foreign wives (Ezr 9:2; 10:3, 16-17). The intent was that the national religion should remain pure, even though homes and families were destroyed. Even in NT times, Paul denounced marriage with non-Christians (2 Cor 6:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to estimate at what age young people married. A boy was considered to be a man by his early teens, and late in Jewish tradition this transition was celebrated by the bar mitzvah, which generally occurred when the boy was 13.<\/p>\n<p>Normally the young man’s parents chose the bride. The resulting discussion about the marriage occurred between the groom’s parents and the bride’s parents, and often neither of the young people was consulted. It was not essential for the eldest in the family to be married first (Gn 29:26). When Abraham decided that Isaac should be married, a servant was sent to choose a bride from among Abraham’s relatives in Mesopotamia. The servant made contact with the bride’s brother and mother (24:33-53), and it was only afterward that Rebekah was asked to give her consent (vv 57-58). Her father was possibly incapacitated; otherwise, it would have been unlikely that her consent would have been asked at all.<\/p>\n<p>One of the reasons why the average young man would not have been able to afford more than one wife was the practice of the bride-price, which had to be paid to the bride’s father. It was possible to substitute service for the bride-price (Gn 29:15-30), or the completion of an appointed task (1 Sm 18:25-27). A specific sum is mentioned for the bride-price in the case of a virgin who had been raped and who had to be purchased by her seducer. The price was set at 50 shekels, but this was considered to be a punishment; it is probable that the normal amount was between 10 and 320 shekels (Lv 27:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of the second temple, a virgin bride was considered to be worth 50 shekels, and a widow or divorced woman about half that sum. During this period, a virgin bride was normally married in midweek so that, if her husband found her not to be a virgin, he could bring proof to the court the following day, which would still be in advance of the Sabbath. A widow or a divorced woman normally married on the equivalent of a Thursday, giving her a full day with her husband before the Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>Marriage was a covenant or alliance between two families. It thus united them, and by extending the kinship, the overall size of the group was increased. This was important in a society where responsibilities for relatives, however distant, were accepted unhesitatingly. The covenant concept also could have political overtones, as with the marriage between Solomon and the Egyptian princess (1 Kgs 11:1) or Ahab of Israel and Jezebel of Tyre (16:31).<\/p>\n<p>The sealing of the covenant included the transfer of gifts, which would establish the wealth and status of the donor and of the bride (Gn 34:12). In the ancient Near East, the giving of a gift was thought to include a part of the donor, so that the giver was actually offering a portion of himself. The gift that sealed the covenant also established the donor’s authority over the bride.<\/p>\n<p>The next stage in the marriage procedure was the betrothal. First mentioned in Exodus 22:16, the term is used several times in Deuteronomy (Dt 20:7; 22:23-24). The betrothal had the legal status of a marriage (Dt 28:30; 2 Sm 3:14), and anyone violating a betrothed virgin would be stoned, according to the law of Deuteronomy, for violating his neighbor’s “wife” (Dt 22:23-24). The meaning of a betrothal involved taking possession, in a manner similar to that of receiving tribute. Nevertheless, there remained a distinction between betrothing a woman and taking her as a wife (20:7). During the period of betrothal, the prospective groom was exempt from military service. It was assumed that the betrothal was a formal part of a permanent relationship (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:27; 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>A man who was to marry another’s daughter was already regarded as a son-in-law at the time of betrothal (Gn 19:14). Mary, as Joseph’s betrothed, was actually considered his wife, although he did not have intercourse with her until after the birth of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The first biblical record of a wedding being celebrated by a feast is in the story of Jacob (Gn 29:22). There was no actual marriage contract recorded until its mention in the book of Tobit (Tb 7:12). This contract was not considered valid until the couple had cohabited for a week (Gn 29:27; Jgs 14:12, 18). When Samson left his bride before the end of the seven-day period, the bride’s parents considered the marriage void and gave her to another man (Jgs 14:20).<\/p>\n<p>The wedding was an occasion of great family rejoicing. The special clothing of the bride and groom (Is 61:10; Ez 16:9-13) included for the bride a fine dress often adorned with jewels (Ps 45:14-15; Is 61:10) and other ornaments, while the bridegroom had fine clothing and wore a diadem (Sg 3:11; Is 61:10). The bride wore a veil (Gn 24:65; Sg 4:3), which was removed in the bridal chamber. This would account for Rebekah’s need to veil herself in the presence of Isaac, her fiancé (Gn 24:65), and also for the ease with which Laban was able to replace Rachel with Leah on Jacob’s wedding night (29:23-25).<\/p>\n<p>Symbolic ceremonies may sometimes have been included as part of the betrothal or wedding ceremonies, such as Ruth’s request that Boaz spread his skirt over her to indicate that he was taking her to wife (Ru 3:9). Another ritual may have been the ceremonial removal of the bride’s girdle by the groom in the nuptial chamber, which was a room or tent specially prepared for the newly married couple. The marriage was normally consummated on the first night (Gn 29:23; Tb 8:1), and the stained linen would be retained as evidence of the bride’s virginity.<\/p>\n<p>In a contrast to the elaborate procession and feasting of the marriage, divorce was simple. A man could divorce his wife if he found fault with her in any particular matter, and this right was not abolished until the 11th century <span>AD<\/span>. Divorce was discouraged, however, and gradually the procedure became more complex, being hedged about with a number of deterrents.<\/p>\n<p>As the laws regarding divorce became more complex, so the procedure became increasingly expensive. At a later time a lawyer, or sometimes a rabbi, would give advice, especially on such matters as the return of property rightly belonging to the bride or her family.<\/p>\n<p>If a bride was found to have committed adultery, the husband was thought to be entitled to a divorce. This was also the case if he even suspected her of infidelity. He could also divorce his wife if he felt that she had violated normal morality, had become apostate, or had been less than efficient in the management of her household. If a woman refused her husband his conjugal rights for a period of at least one year, she could be divorced. Other grounds for divorcing a wife included insulting behavior to a husband or his relatives, contracting an incurable disease, or refusing to accompany her husband when he moved the domicile to a new area.<\/p>\n<p>In general, the status of the wife was low. Despite the fact that she gave advice, managed the household, educated the young children, and worked alongside her husband when necessary, he was still her master, and her role was to obey. She was little more than a servant, although better than a slave, for she could not be sold even though she could be divorced.<\/p>\n<p>In the frequent figurative uses of marriage in the OT, the Hebrew people and God are referred to in terms of bride and bridegroom (Is 62:4-5; Jer 2:2). The desolation that is about to overtake Judah is contrasted by Jeremiah with the celebration of a wedding feast (Jer 7:34; 16:9; 25:10). Figurative forms are used again in Hosea, where God rejects the relationship with his wife, Israel (Hos 2:2), but is prepared to accept her again if she resumes her faithful practices (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, John the Baptist compares his sense of joy with that of a friend of the groom at a wedding (Jn 3:29), while Jesus himself made reference to the wedding preparations in the parable of the wise and foolish virgins (Mt 25:1-12). In the story of the marriage feast (22:1-14) Christ mentions quite incidentally the fact that wedding robes were provided for the guests at such ceremonies. The theme of the Christian church as the bride of Christ occurs in such books as 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, and Revelation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusTeachingsonMarriageandAdultery\">Jesus’ Teachings on Marriage and Adultery<\/p>\n<p>In the realm of civil law there are changes of emphasis in Jesus’ teaching over against the OT. For example, the OT did not regard infidelity by a husband as adultery against his wife. When challenged by the Jews, Jesus said that originally God had made one wife for a man; therefore, there should be no divorce (Mk 10:2-9). Further, he stated if a man does divorce his wife and marry again, he “commits adultery against her” (v 11). Thus, Jesus made man and woman equal as regards adultery. An unfaithful husband is just as adulterous as an unfaithful wife. This revolutionary teaching struck the disciples as severe (see Mt 19:10), but it illustrates what Jesus meant when he said their righteousness must be greater than that of the Jewish leaders (5:20).<\/p>\n<p>There is a slight difference in Matthew’s account of Jesus’ teaching, which has led some scholars to argue that Jesus was not quite as strict as the above summary suggests. According to Matthew 19:9, a wife’s “unchastity” (probably some sexual misconduct) allows an aggrieved husband to divorce her and marry again. If this remark concluded the passage, this interpretation would be the simplest. However, from the context it is more likely that Jesus allowed innocent spouses to separate from their wives but not to remarry. This explains why the disciples were so shocked and why Jesus went on to speak about some who refuse to marry for the sake of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 19:12). This was also the way the church interpreted the passage for the first five centuries. They allowed Christians to separate but not to remarry (cf. 1 Cor 7:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adultery; Civil Law and Justice; Concubinage, Concubines; Divorce; Family Life and Relations; Sex, Sexuality; Virgin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures. The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24). Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the...","summary_en":"MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures. The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24). Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35611,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Slavery Slave","title_en":"Slavery Slave","content_ro":"<h3>SLAVE, SLAVERY<\/h3>\n<p>Person owned as property by another, and the relationship that bound the owner and the slave. Slavery was widespread in the ancient Near East, although the economy was not dependent upon it. By Roman times, slavery was so extensive that in the early Christian period one out of every two people was a slave. From at least 3000 <span>BC<\/span>, captives in war were the primary source of slaves (Gn 14:21; Nm 31:9; Dt 20:14; Jgs 5:30; 1 Sm 4:9; 2 Kgs 5:2; 2 Chr 28:8).<\/p>\n<p>Slaves could be purchased locally from other owners or from foreign traveling merchants who sold slaves along with cloth, bronzeware, and other goods (Jl 3:4-8). Joseph was sold by Midianites and Ishmaelites to an Egyptian (Gn 37:36; 39:1) in this manner. Debt was the basic cause for many families being reduced to slavery; an entire family could be subject to slavery (2 Kgs 4:1; Neh 5:5-8). The law code of Hammurabi stipulated a maximum of three years of slavery for the family (Section 117), as opposed to a maximum of six years under Hebrew law (Dt 15:18). Voluntary slavery was widespread as a means of escape from abject poverty and starvation (Lv 25:47-48). Selling a kidnapped person into slavery, the crime of Joseph’s brothers (Gn 37:27-28), was a capital offense under the law code of Hammurabi (Section 14) and the Mosaic law (Ex 21:11; Dt 24:7).<\/p>\n<p>In Sumerian society, slaves had legal rights, could borrow money, and could engage in business. As the normal price for a slave was probably less than that for a strong donkey, the slave always had the hope that he could save sufficient money to purchase his freedom. Slaves performed tedious labor on farms and in households, though some gifted individuals occupied executive positions in households. Despite provisions in ancient law, the release of slaves was not always honored on schedule. A Hebrew who voluntarily entered slavery was normally released the next jubilee year, and theoretically no Hebrew could be enslaved for life (Ex 21:2; Lv 25:10-13; Dt 15:12-14).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites made a deliberate attempt to safeguard the slave from brutality by a master or overseer. By law, a maimed slave had to be released (Ex 21:26-27). The few Hebrew slaves in a household frequently toiled alongside their masters in the fields, and they and household slaves often had a reasonable and secure existence, compared with the threat of starvation and destitution of the poorest free men.<\/p>\n<p>In Greek and especially in Roman times, when the number of slaves increased dramatically, household slaves remained the best treated. Many became servants and confidants; some even established good businesses to their own and their masters’ benefit.<\/p>\n<p>Information from Ur, Nuzi, and the book of Genesis shows that where a wife was childless, the female slave could bear the master’s child (Gn 16:2-4). Legally a Hebrew master could agree to marry a young female slave, have his own son marry her, or establish her as a concubine. If subsequently she was discarded, or if the agreement was not fulfilled, she would be released from her slavery (Ex 21:7-11). Conquered people were required to perform forced labor for the state (2 Sm 12:31; 1 Kgs 9:15, 21-23), including the Israelites themselves in Lebanon (1 Kgs 5:13-18). Captured in war, the Midianites (Nm 31:28-30, 47) and Gibeonites (Jos 9:23-25) were made slaves to serve the temple. The practice continued through the reigns of David and Solomon (Ezr 2:58; 8:20). Nehemiah records that foreign slaves helped make repairs on the walls of Jerusalem (Neh 3:26, 31).<\/p>\n<p>The NT attitude toward slavery indicates that the status of a slave was more like that of a servant and that the institution of slavery generally was declining. There was no strong opposition to slavery from Jesus or the apostles, but an admonition that slaves and servants should serve their masters faithfully and that masters should treat their slaves humanely and fairly (Eph 6:9; Col 4:1; 1 Tm 6:2; Phlm 1:16). Paul never preached against slavery, but he personally tried to attain freedom for the slave Onesimus from his Christian master, Philemon (see the discussion on this in Philemon, Letter to).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bond, Bondage; Liberty.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SLAVE, SLAVERY<\/h3>\n<p>Person owned as property by another, and the relationship that bound the owner and the slave. Slavery was widespread in the ancient Near East, although the economy was not dependent upon it. By Roman times, slavery was so extensive that in the early Christian period one out of every two people was a slave. From at least 3000 <span>BC<\/span>, captives in war were the primary source of slaves (Gn 14:21; Nm 31:9; Dt 20:14; Jgs 5:30; 1 Sm 4:9; 2 Kgs 5:2; 2 Chr 28:8).<\/p>\n<p>Slaves could be purchased locally from other owners or from foreign traveling merchants who sold slaves along with cloth, bronzeware, and other goods (Jl 3:4-8). Joseph was sold by Midianites and Ishmaelites to an Egyptian (Gn 37:36; 39:1) in this manner. Debt was the basic cause for many families being reduced to slavery; an entire family could be subject to slavery (2 Kgs 4:1; Neh 5:5-8). The law code of Hammurabi stipulated a maximum of three years of slavery for the family (Section 117), as opposed to a maximum of six years under Hebrew law (Dt 15:18). Voluntary slavery was widespread as a means of escape from abject poverty and starvation (Lv 25:47-48). Selling a kidnapped person into slavery, the crime of Joseph’s brothers (Gn 37:27-28), was a capital offense under the law code of Hammurabi (Section 14) and the Mosaic law (Ex 21:11; Dt 24:7).<\/p>\n<p>In Sumerian society, slaves had legal rights, could borrow money, and could engage in business. As the normal price for a slave was probably less than that for a strong donkey, the slave always had the hope that he could save sufficient money to purchase his freedom. Slaves performed tedious labor on farms and in households, though some gifted individuals occupied executive positions in households. Despite provisions in ancient law, the release of slaves was not always honored on schedule. A Hebrew who voluntarily entered slavery was normally released the next jubilee year, and theoretically no Hebrew could be enslaved for life (Ex 21:2; Lv 25:10-13; Dt 15:12-14).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites made a deliberate attempt to safeguard the slave from brutality by a master or overseer. By law, a maimed slave had to be released (Ex 21:26-27). The few Hebrew slaves in a household frequently toiled alongside their masters in the fields, and they and household slaves often had a reasonable and secure existence, compared with the threat of starvation and destitution of the poorest free men.<\/p>\n<p>In Greek and especially in Roman times, when the number of slaves increased dramatically, household slaves remained the best treated. Many became servants and confidants; some even established good businesses to their own and their masters’ benefit.<\/p>\n<p>Information from Ur, Nuzi, and the book of Genesis shows that where a wife was childless, the female slave could bear the master’s child (Gn 16:2-4). Legally a Hebrew master could agree to marry a young female slave, have his own son marry her, or establish her as a concubine. If subsequently she was discarded, or if the agreement was not fulfilled, she would be released from her slavery (Ex 21:7-11). Conquered people were required to perform forced labor for the state (2 Sm 12:31; 1 Kgs 9:15, 21-23), including the Israelites themselves in Lebanon (1 Kgs 5:13-18). Captured in war, the Midianites (Nm 31:28-30, 47) and Gibeonites (Jos 9:23-25) were made slaves to serve the temple. The practice continued through the reigns of David and Solomon (Ezr 2:58; 8:20). Nehemiah records that foreign slaves helped make repairs on the walls of Jerusalem (Neh 3:26, 31).<\/p>\n<p>The NT attitude toward slavery indicates that the status of a slave was more like that of a servant and that the institution of slavery generally was declining. There was no strong opposition to slavery from Jesus or the apostles, but an admonition that slaves and servants should serve their masters faithfully and that masters should treat their slaves humanely and fairly (Eph 6:9; Col 4:1; 1 Tm 6:2; Phlm 1:16). Paul never preached against slavery, but he personally tried to attain freedom for the slave Onesimus from his Christian master, Philemon (see the discussion on this in Philemon, Letter to).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bond, Bondage; Liberty.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SLAVE, SLAVERY Person owned as property by another, and the relationship that bound the owner and the slave. Slavery was widespread in the ancient Near East, although the economy was not dependent upon it. By Roman times, slavery was so extensive that in the early Christian period one out of every two people was a slave. From at least 3000 BC, captives in war were the primary source of slaves (Gn 14:21; Nm 31:9; Dt 20:14; Jgs 5:30; 1 Sm 4:9; 2 Kgs 5:2; 2 Chr 28:8). Slaves could be purchased l...","summary_en":"SLAVE, SLAVERY Person owned as property by another, and the relationship that bound the owner and the slave. Slavery was widespread in the ancient Near East, although the economy was not dependent upon it. By Roman times, slavery was so extensive that in the early Christian period one out of every two people was a slave. From at least 3000 BC, captives in war were the primary source of slaves (Gn 14:21; Nm 31:9; Dt 20:14; Jgs 5:30; 1 Sm 4:9; 2 Kgs 5:2; 2 Chr 28:8). Slaves could be purchased l...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":48169,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:5","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:5<\/strong> <em>we must sell our children into slavery:<\/em> See Exod 21:1-11. These families were desperate to survive.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:5<\/strong> <em>we must sell our children into slavery:<\/em> See Exod 21:1-11. These families were desperate to survive.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:5 we must sell our children into slavery: See Exod 21:1-11. These families were desperate to survive.","summary_en":"5:5 we must sell our children into slavery: See Exod 21:1-11. These families were desperate to survive.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75795,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:5","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:5<\/strong> <em>we must sell our children into slavery:<\/em> See Exod 21:1-11. These families were desperate to survive.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:5<\/strong> <em>we must sell our children into slavery:<\/em> See Exod 21:1-11. These families were desperate to survive.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:5 we must sell our children into slavery: See Exod 21:1-11. These families were desperate to survive.","summary_en":"5:5 we must sell our children into slavery: See Exod 21:1-11. These families were desperate to survive.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103421,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:5","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:5<\/strong> <em>we must sell our children into slavery:<\/em> See Exod 21:1-11. These families were desperate to survive.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:5<\/strong> <em>we must sell our children into slavery:<\/em> See Exod 21:1-11. These families were desperate to survive.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:5 we must sell our children into slavery: See Exod 21:1-11. These families were desperate to survive.","summary_en":"5:5 we must sell our children into slavery: See Exod 21:1-11. These families were desperate to survive.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":131047,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:5","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:5<\/strong> <em>we must sell our children into slavery:<\/em> See Exod 21:1-11. These families were desperate to survive.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:5<\/strong> <em>we must sell our children into slavery:<\/em> See Exod 21:1-11. These families were desperate to survive.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:5 we must sell our children into slavery: See Exod 21:1-11. These families were desperate to survive.","summary_en":"5:5 we must sell our children into slavery: See Exod 21:1-11. These families were desperate to survive.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":3629,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Banking Banker","title_en":"Banking Banker","content_ro":"<h3>BANKER, BANKING<\/h3>\n<p>A person who engages in loaning, exchanging, and issuing money. The development of interstate and international trade made it imperative to devise a method of banking to facilitate the transfer of funds. The appearance of coinage in the seventh century <span>BC<\/span> brought the money changer into being. The royal monopoly in commerce (2 Sm 5:11; 1 Kgs 10:14-29) gave place to a system that resembled modern banking.<\/p>\n<p>In NT times money changers represented one aspect of the banking system. They spent their time converting Roman money into orthodox coinage for the temple half-shekel (Mt 17:24; 21:12; 25:27; Mk 11:15; Lk 19:23; Jn 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>Those who lent money (lenders) and those who gave credit in financial transactions (creditors) were protected by a system of guarantees such as pieces of movable property or a pledge of some kind. Interest was theoretically forbidden by Israelite law (Ex 22:25; Dt 15:1-18), although the law was not always observed and exorbitant rates of interest were sometimes charged. Prophets and some national leaders deplored the practice (Neh 5:6-13; Ez 18:8, 13, 17; 22:12). Often, the people of Israel were afraid of their creditors (2 Kgs 4:1; Ps 109:11; Is 24:2; 50:1), who might invade their homes to recover a debt, even carrying off children as slaves (2 Kgs 4:1; Is 50:1). The parable of the creditor and the two debtors in Luke 7:41-42 represents a kindly creditor (cf. Mt 25:14-30; Lk 19:11-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Money; Money Changer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BANKER, BANKING<\/h3>\n<p>A person who engages in loaning, exchanging, and issuing money. The development of interstate and international trade made it imperative to devise a method of banking to facilitate the transfer of funds. The appearance of coinage in the seventh century <span>BC<\/span> brought the money changer into being. The royal monopoly in commerce (2 Sm 5:11; 1 Kgs 10:14-29) gave place to a system that resembled modern banking.<\/p>\n<p>In NT times money changers represented one aspect of the banking system. They spent their time converting Roman money into orthodox coinage for the temple half-shekel (Mt 17:24; 21:12; 25:27; Mk 11:15; Lk 19:23; Jn 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>Those who lent money (lenders) and those who gave credit in financial transactions (creditors) were protected by a system of guarantees such as pieces of movable property or a pledge of some kind. Interest was theoretically forbidden by Israelite law (Ex 22:25; Dt 15:1-18), although the law was not always observed and exorbitant rates of interest were sometimes charged. Prophets and some national leaders deplored the practice (Neh 5:6-13; Ez 18:8, 13, 17; 22:12). Often, the people of Israel were afraid of their creditors (2 Kgs 4:1; Ps 109:11; Is 24:2; 50:1), who might invade their homes to recover a debt, even carrying off children as slaves (2 Kgs 4:1; Is 50:1). The parable of the creditor and the two debtors in Luke 7:41-42 represents a kindly creditor (cf. Mt 25:14-30; Lk 19:11-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Money; Money Changer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BANKER, BANKING A person who engages in loaning, exchanging, and issuing money. The development of interstate and international trade made it imperative to devise a method of banking to facilitate the transfer of funds. The appearance of coinage in the seventh century BC brought the money changer into being. The royal monopoly in commerce (2 Sm 5:11; 1 Kgs 10:14-29) gave place to a system that resembled modern banking. In NT times money changers represented one aspect of the banking system. T...","summary_en":"BANKER, BANKING A person who engages in loaning, exchanging, and issuing money. The development of interstate and international trade made it imperative to devise a method of banking to facilitate the transfer of funds. The appearance of coinage in the seventh century BC brought the money changer into being. The royal monopoly in commerce (2 Sm 5:11; 1 Kgs 10:14-29) gave place to a system that resembled modern banking. In NT times money changers represented one aspect of the banking system. T...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9159,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Debt","title_en":"Debt","content_ro":"<h3>DEBT<\/h3>\n<p>Something owed to another person, such as goods, property, or money. In the Bible, righteous conduct is something one “owes” to God; hence, in theology, sin is described figuratively as being “in debt.”<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew culture, debt was usually connected with usury (the business of lending money on interest). The Hebrew verbs describing usury picture a painful situation. One word for usury means “to bite,” a vivid image for the way high interest “ate up” any kind of business transaction so that borrowers never received the full value of the money. People could be ruined financially by heartless exaction of interest (2 Kgs 4:1-7). Another verb is usually translated as “increase” or “profit” (Lv 25:37), since lenders profited from others’ labor. Ancient Near Eastern interest rates on produce and goods might be as much as 30 percent of the loan per year; on money, as much as 20 percent. Clay tablets from Nuzi, an ancient town in northeastern Mesopotamia, indicate interest rates of even 50 percent.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLawofMoses\">The Law of Moses<\/p>\n<p>The Mosaic covenant given to Israel immediately after the exodus sought to eliminate extortionist practices from Hebrew life. Thus God’s revelation had many rules and restrictions relating to debt and credit in Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>Protection for the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Portions of the legislative sections of the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible) regulated the practice of lending in a way that protected the poor and secured each person’s right to earn a living and support a family. Many popular Hebrew proverbs dealt with that theme. The positive thrust of the biblical laws was to ensure help for the financially needy, without interest. No personal profit was to be made at the expense of the poor (Ex 22:25; Dt 23:19-20); God was their special advocate. Thus, by lending without interest, the Israelites could demonstrate their reverence for God (Lv 25:35-37).<\/p>\n<p>That point was reemphasized 40 years later when Moses renewed the covenant with Israel just before their entrance into the Promised Land. God was the landlord, and his tenants were to respect his word. God promised the Israelites that if they would lend so as to alleviate human misery, they would be unusually blessed by the Lord (Dt 15:6; 23:19-20; 28:12). Interest could be charged to a foreigner not living under the Mosaic law, which was a condition parallel to commercial treaties prevalent in the ancient Near East.<\/p>\n<p>In ancient Israel, financial ruin was frequently brought about by poor harvests. Often they were taken as an indication that the relationship between God and his people was not right (Lv 26:14, 20). The wealthy were expected to help, not to add more burdens to those who suffered from poor harvests.<\/p>\n<h5>Violation of the Law<\/h5>\n<p>The law was so often violated that eventually exorbitant interest became a social plague, making the situation of debtors hopeless. Many of the fighting men who rallied around David early in his military career were “outlaws” unable to repay their loans and interest (1 Sm 22:2). The prophet Ezekiel called people to task for their failure to observe God’s commands about usury (Ez 18:5-18; 22:12). When Nehemiah returned from the exile to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem, he brought charges against the government officials whose interest rates had enslaved the people (Neh 5:6-13).<\/p>\n<p>The Wisdom Literature, which included Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, added that those who acquired riches by usury would not profit in the long run, because God would give their profits to others who looked after the welfare of the poor (e.g., Prv 28:8). The prophet Amos gave a similar warning to corrupt merchants in Israel: “Because you trample upon the poor and take from him exactions of wheat, . . . you have planted pleasant vineyards, but you shall not drink their wine” (Am 5:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). In spite of such warnings, the law was often ignored, and burdensome interest charges were laid on borrowers who were already poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Pledges and Surety<\/h5>\n<p>When it was necessary to borrow, the law provided alternatives to the unfair practice of usury. When taking out a loan, a borrower would surrender some movable property as collateral to ensure repayment. That “pledge” represented a tangible sign of the debtor’s intention to repay the loan. Certain restrictions applied to such pledges. For example, a creditor could not take a widow’s clothes (Dt 24:17). Tools (such as millstones) or animals (such as oxen) necessary for daily life were forbidden as pledges (v 6). Clothing absolutely essential to the borrower (e.g., to keep warm) could be temporarily offered as a pledge, but the temporary token had to be returned before nightfall (Ex 22:26-27; Dt 24:10-13).<\/p>\n<p>In drastic circumstances, where there was no collateral, a debtor could pledge a son, daughter, or slave. The value of the child’s or slave’s labor could then be credited against both interest and principal. An account in the Bible of a widow’s two sons about to go into slavery shows how cruel the custom could be (2 Kgs 4:1-7). Pledging labor or their children’s labor was the only way slaves could pay off a debt when they had to borrow.<\/p>\n<p>A borrower could also have a wealthy friend assume responsibility as a cosigner on a loan and thus become the pledge, or surety. The book of Proverbs cautioned against standing surety for others, however, especially for strangers (Prv 6:1-3; 11:15; 17:18; 22:26; 27:13).<\/p>\n<h5>Sabbatical and Jubilee Years<\/h5>\n<p>Two legal provisions to curb the enslavement of people by long-standing debts were the sabbatical year and the jubilee year. The sabbatical year, or “year of release,” took place every seventh year. At that time debts were canceled and slates wiped clean (Dt 15:1-12; cf. Ex 21:2; 23:10-11; Lv 25:2-7). The law clearly forbade lenders to withhold loans to those in desperate need during a sixth year. Jewish tradition held strict injunctions against a lender trying to collect on a loan that should have been forgiven in the sabbatical year.<\/p>\n<p>Every 50 years Israel had its Year of Jubilee. In that year land reverted to its original owner if it had not already been redeemed by some relative. That provision prevented the buildup of landed estates by the wealthy few while the many poor suffered in slavery (Lv 25:13-17). Although the Mosaic law could not guarantee economic utopia, it sought to curb the greediness in human nature. It also aimed at providing everyone with an equal opportunity and a fresh start every 50 years.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DebtintheNewTestament\">Debt in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT shows how various cultures handled the matter of loans and debts. There were Jewish people who adhered strictly to the Mosaic law and refused to charge their fellow Jews high interest. Hellenistic and Roman legal practices, however, penetrated parts of Jewish society.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus alluded to non-Jewish economic practices in his parable of a servant who jailed a fellow slave for not repaying a loan (Mt 18:23-35). The parable illustrates the ordinary Hellenistic and Roman custom of jailing or restraining such a person as surety. That practice forced a debtor to sell his property, to ask family and friends to cover the loss, or to sell himself into slavery. The parable of the talents (25:14-28) and the parable of the pounds (Lk 19:12-24), speaking allegorically about the kingdom of God, mention earning interest on money invested with bankers.<\/p>\n<h5>Economic and Theological Instruction<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle Paul instructed Christians to “owe nothing to anyone” (Rom 13:8), which means at the very least that Christians should make good on loans promptly. On the other hand, a Christian’s economic activity should be characterized by kindness toward those in need, generosity, and willingness to help (Mt 5:42; Lk 6:35).<\/p>\n<p>The NT also presents a number of lessons in doctrine based on a figurative use of “debts” and “debtors.” Jesus once referred to sinners (Lk 13:2) with a word literally meaning “debtors” (v 4). In the Lord’s Prayer “debts” is paralleled with “sins” (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4).<\/p>\n<p>Sin is seen as an enslavement (Jn 8:34), and all men and women as debtors to God. Redemption can be made only by God, who “gave his only Son” to set people free (3:16-18). The writer to the Hebrews showed that Jesus was made the surety of the new covenant (Heb 7:22).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul felt indebted to all people because of his own salvation, a debt he could pay by preaching the gospel (Rom 1:14-15). The NT teaches that all who receive the gospel are likewise in debt and therefore should devote themselves to serving others as a way of serving God (cf. 15:26-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Banker, Banking; Money.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEBT<\/h3>\n<p>Something owed to another person, such as goods, property, or money. In the Bible, righteous conduct is something one “owes” to God; hence, in theology, sin is described figuratively as being “in debt.”<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew culture, debt was usually connected with usury (the business of lending money on interest). The Hebrew verbs describing usury picture a painful situation. One word for usury means “to bite,” a vivid image for the way high interest “ate up” any kind of business transaction so that borrowers never received the full value of the money. People could be ruined financially by heartless exaction of interest (2 Kgs 4:1-7). Another verb is usually translated as “increase” or “profit” (Lv 25:37), since lenders profited from others’ labor. Ancient Near Eastern interest rates on produce and goods might be as much as 30 percent of the loan per year; on money, as much as 20 percent. Clay tablets from Nuzi, an ancient town in northeastern Mesopotamia, indicate interest rates of even 50 percent.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLawofMoses\">The Law of Moses<\/p>\n<p>The Mosaic covenant given to Israel immediately after the exodus sought to eliminate extortionist practices from Hebrew life. Thus God’s revelation had many rules and restrictions relating to debt and credit in Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>Protection for the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Portions of the legislative sections of the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible) regulated the practice of lending in a way that protected the poor and secured each person’s right to earn a living and support a family. Many popular Hebrew proverbs dealt with that theme. The positive thrust of the biblical laws was to ensure help for the financially needy, without interest. No personal profit was to be made at the expense of the poor (Ex 22:25; Dt 23:19-20); God was their special advocate. Thus, by lending without interest, the Israelites could demonstrate their reverence for God (Lv 25:35-37).<\/p>\n<p>That point was reemphasized 40 years later when Moses renewed the covenant with Israel just before their entrance into the Promised Land. God was the landlord, and his tenants were to respect his word. God promised the Israelites that if they would lend so as to alleviate human misery, they would be unusually blessed by the Lord (Dt 15:6; 23:19-20; 28:12). Interest could be charged to a foreigner not living under the Mosaic law, which was a condition parallel to commercial treaties prevalent in the ancient Near East.<\/p>\n<p>In ancient Israel, financial ruin was frequently brought about by poor harvests. Often they were taken as an indication that the relationship between God and his people was not right (Lv 26:14, 20). The wealthy were expected to help, not to add more burdens to those who suffered from poor harvests.<\/p>\n<h5>Violation of the Law<\/h5>\n<p>The law was so often violated that eventually exorbitant interest became a social plague, making the situation of debtors hopeless. Many of the fighting men who rallied around David early in his military career were “outlaws” unable to repay their loans and interest (1 Sm 22:2). The prophet Ezekiel called people to task for their failure to observe God’s commands about usury (Ez 18:5-18; 22:12). When Nehemiah returned from the exile to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem, he brought charges against the government officials whose interest rates had enslaved the people (Neh 5:6-13).<\/p>\n<p>The Wisdom Literature, which included Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, added that those who acquired riches by usury would not profit in the long run, because God would give their profits to others who looked after the welfare of the poor (e.g., Prv 28:8). The prophet Amos gave a similar warning to corrupt merchants in Israel: “Because you trample upon the poor and take from him exactions of wheat, . . . you have planted pleasant vineyards, but you shall not drink their wine” (Am 5:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). In spite of such warnings, the law was often ignored, and burdensome interest charges were laid on borrowers who were already poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Pledges and Surety<\/h5>\n<p>When it was necessary to borrow, the law provided alternatives to the unfair practice of usury. When taking out a loan, a borrower would surrender some movable property as collateral to ensure repayment. That “pledge” represented a tangible sign of the debtor’s intention to repay the loan. Certain restrictions applied to such pledges. For example, a creditor could not take a widow’s clothes (Dt 24:17). Tools (such as millstones) or animals (such as oxen) necessary for daily life were forbidden as pledges (v 6). Clothing absolutely essential to the borrower (e.g., to keep warm) could be temporarily offered as a pledge, but the temporary token had to be returned before nightfall (Ex 22:26-27; Dt 24:10-13).<\/p>\n<p>In drastic circumstances, where there was no collateral, a debtor could pledge a son, daughter, or slave. The value of the child’s or slave’s labor could then be credited against both interest and principal. An account in the Bible of a widow’s two sons about to go into slavery shows how cruel the custom could be (2 Kgs 4:1-7). Pledging labor or their children’s labor was the only way slaves could pay off a debt when they had to borrow.<\/p>\n<p>A borrower could also have a wealthy friend assume responsibility as a cosigner on a loan and thus become the pledge, or surety. The book of Proverbs cautioned against standing surety for others, however, especially for strangers (Prv 6:1-3; 11:15; 17:18; 22:26; 27:13).<\/p>\n<h5>Sabbatical and Jubilee Years<\/h5>\n<p>Two legal provisions to curb the enslavement of people by long-standing debts were the sabbatical year and the jubilee year. The sabbatical year, or “year of release,” took place every seventh year. At that time debts were canceled and slates wiped clean (Dt 15:1-12; cf. Ex 21:2; 23:10-11; Lv 25:2-7). The law clearly forbade lenders to withhold loans to those in desperate need during a sixth year. Jewish tradition held strict injunctions against a lender trying to collect on a loan that should have been forgiven in the sabbatical year.<\/p>\n<p>Every 50 years Israel had its Year of Jubilee. In that year land reverted to its original owner if it had not already been redeemed by some relative. That provision prevented the buildup of landed estates by the wealthy few while the many poor suffered in slavery (Lv 25:13-17). Although the Mosaic law could not guarantee economic utopia, it sought to curb the greediness in human nature. It also aimed at providing everyone with an equal opportunity and a fresh start every 50 years.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DebtintheNewTestament\">Debt in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT shows how various cultures handled the matter of loans and debts. There were Jewish people who adhered strictly to the Mosaic law and refused to charge their fellow Jews high interest. Hellenistic and Roman legal practices, however, penetrated parts of Jewish society.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus alluded to non-Jewish economic practices in his parable of a servant who jailed a fellow slave for not repaying a loan (Mt 18:23-35). The parable illustrates the ordinary Hellenistic and Roman custom of jailing or restraining such a person as surety. That practice forced a debtor to sell his property, to ask family and friends to cover the loss, or to sell himself into slavery. The parable of the talents (25:14-28) and the parable of the pounds (Lk 19:12-24), speaking allegorically about the kingdom of God, mention earning interest on money invested with bankers.<\/p>\n<h5>Economic and Theological Instruction<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle Paul instructed Christians to “owe nothing to anyone” (Rom 13:8), which means at the very least that Christians should make good on loans promptly. On the other hand, a Christian’s economic activity should be characterized by kindness toward those in need, generosity, and willingness to help (Mt 5:42; Lk 6:35).<\/p>\n<p>The NT also presents a number of lessons in doctrine based on a figurative use of “debts” and “debtors.” Jesus once referred to sinners (Lk 13:2) with a word literally meaning “debtors” (v 4). In the Lord’s Prayer “debts” is paralleled with “sins” (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4).<\/p>\n<p>Sin is seen as an enslavement (Jn 8:34), and all men and women as debtors to God. Redemption can be made only by God, who “gave his only Son” to set people free (3:16-18). The writer to the Hebrews showed that Jesus was made the surety of the new covenant (Heb 7:22).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul felt indebted to all people because of his own salvation, a debt he could pay by preaching the gospel (Rom 1:14-15). The NT teaches that all who receive the gospel are likewise in debt and therefore should devote themselves to serving others as a way of serving God (cf. 15:26-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Banker, Banking; Money.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEBT Something owed to another person, such as goods, property, or money. In the Bible, righteous conduct is something one “owes” to God; hence, in theology, sin is described figuratively as being “in debt.” In Hebrew culture, debt was usually connected with usury (the business of lending money on interest). The Hebrew verbs describing usury picture a painful situation. One word for usury means “to bite,” a vivid image for the way high interest “ate up” any kind of business transaction so tha...","summary_en":"DEBT Something owed to another person, such as goods, property, or money. In the Bible, righteous conduct is something one “owes” to God; hence, in theology, sin is described figuratively as being “in debt.” In Hebrew culture, debt was usually connected with usury (the business of lending money on interest). The Hebrew verbs describing usury picture a painful situation. One word for usury means “to bite,” a vivid image for the way high interest “ate up” any kind of business transaction so tha...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":48170,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:6","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:6-7<\/strong> Nehemiah was <em>very angry<\/em><em>,<\/em> but he controlled himself, thought it over, and then <em>spoke out<\/em> in order to resolve the conflict rather than make it worse (see Jas 1:19-20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:6-7<\/strong> Nehemiah was <em>very angry<\/em><em>,<\/em> but he controlled himself, thought it over, and then <em>spoke out<\/em> in order to resolve the conflict rather than make it worse (see Jas 1:19-20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:6-7 Nehemiah was very angry, but he controlled himself, thought it over, and then spoke out in order to resolve the conflict rather than make it worse (see Jas 1:19-20).","summary_en":"5:6-7 Nehemiah was very angry, but he controlled himself, thought it over, and then spoke out in order to resolve the conflict rather than make it worse (see Jas 1:19-20).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75796,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:6","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:6-7<\/strong> Nehemiah was <em>very angry<\/em><em>,<\/em> but he controlled himself, thought it over, and then <em>spoke out<\/em> in order to resolve the conflict rather than make it worse (see Jas 1:19-20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:6-7<\/strong> Nehemiah was <em>very angry<\/em><em>,<\/em> but he controlled himself, thought it over, and then <em>spoke out<\/em> in order to resolve the conflict rather than make it worse (see Jas 1:19-20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:6-7 Nehemiah was very angry, but he controlled himself, thought it over, and then spoke out in order to resolve the conflict rather than make it worse (see Jas 1:19-20).","summary_en":"5:6-7 Nehemiah was very angry, but he controlled himself, thought it over, and then spoke out in order to resolve the conflict rather than make it worse (see Jas 1:19-20).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103422,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:6","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:6-7<\/strong> Nehemiah was <em>very angry<\/em><em>,<\/em> but he controlled himself, thought it over, and then <em>spoke out<\/em> in order to resolve the conflict rather than make it worse (see Jas 1:19-20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:6-7<\/strong> Nehemiah was <em>very angry<\/em><em>,<\/em> but he controlled himself, thought it over, and then <em>spoke out<\/em> in order to resolve the conflict rather than make it worse (see Jas 1:19-20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:6-7 Nehemiah was very angry, but he controlled himself, thought it over, and then spoke out in order to resolve the conflict rather than make it worse (see Jas 1:19-20).","summary_en":"5:6-7 Nehemiah was very angry, but he controlled himself, thought it over, and then spoke out in order to resolve the conflict rather than make it worse (see Jas 1:19-20).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":131048,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:6","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:6-7<\/strong> Nehemiah was <em>very angry<\/em><em>,<\/em> but he controlled himself, thought it over, and then <em>spoke out<\/em> in order to resolve the conflict rather than make it worse (see Jas 1:19-20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:6-7<\/strong> Nehemiah was <em>very angry<\/em><em>,<\/em> but he controlled himself, thought it over, and then <em>spoke out<\/em> in order to resolve the conflict rather than make it worse (see Jas 1:19-20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:6-7 Nehemiah was very angry, but he controlled himself, thought it over, and then spoke out in order to resolve the conflict rather than make it worse (see Jas 1:19-20).","summary_en":"5:6-7 Nehemiah was very angry, but he controlled himself, thought it over, and then spoke out in order to resolve the conflict rather than make it worse (see Jas 1:19-20).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"9":[{"id":48171,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:9","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:9<\/strong> <em>walk in the fear of our God:<\/em> See Lev 25:35-43. • <em>avoid being mocked:<\/em> See also Neh 1:3; 2:19; 4:1-3.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:9<\/strong> <em>walk in the fear of our God:<\/em> See Lev 25:35-43. • <em>avoid being mocked:<\/em> See also Neh 1:3; 2:19; 4:1-3.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:9 walk in the fear of our God: See Lev 25:35-43. • avoid being mocked: See also Neh 1:3; 2:19; 4:1-3.","summary_en":"5:9 walk in the fear of our God: See Lev 25:35-43. • avoid being mocked: See also Neh 1:3; 2:19; 4:1-3.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75797,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:9","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:9<\/strong> <em>walk in the fear of our God:<\/em> See Lev 25:35-43. • <em>avoid being mocked:<\/em> See also Neh 1:3; 2:19; 4:1-3.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:9<\/strong> <em>walk in the fear of our God:<\/em> See Lev 25:35-43. • <em>avoid being mocked:<\/em> See also Neh 1:3; 2:19; 4:1-3.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:9 walk in the fear of our God: See Lev 25:35-43. • avoid being mocked: See also Neh 1:3; 2:19; 4:1-3.","summary_en":"5:9 walk in the fear of our God: See Lev 25:35-43. • avoid being mocked: See also Neh 1:3; 2:19; 4:1-3.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103423,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:9","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:9<\/strong> <em>walk in the fear of our God:<\/em> See Lev 25:35-43. • <em>avoid being mocked:<\/em> See also Neh 1:3; 2:19; 4:1-3.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:9<\/strong> <em>walk in the fear of our God:<\/em> See Lev 25:35-43. • <em>avoid being mocked:<\/em> See also Neh 1:3; 2:19; 4:1-3.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:9 walk in the fear of our God: See Lev 25:35-43. • avoid being mocked: See also Neh 1:3; 2:19; 4:1-3.","summary_en":"5:9 walk in the fear of our God: See Lev 25:35-43. • avoid being mocked: See also Neh 1:3; 2:19; 4:1-3.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":131049,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:9","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:9<\/strong> <em>walk in the fear of our God:<\/em> See Lev 25:35-43. • <em>avoid being mocked:<\/em> See also Neh 1:3; 2:19; 4:1-3.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:9<\/strong> <em>walk in the fear of our God:<\/em> See Lev 25:35-43. • <em>avoid being mocked:<\/em> See also Neh 1:3; 2:19; 4:1-3.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:9 walk in the fear of our God: See Lev 25:35-43. • avoid being mocked: See also Neh 1:3; 2:19; 4:1-3.","summary_en":"5:9 walk in the fear of our God: See Lev 25:35-43. • avoid being mocked: See also Neh 1:3; 2:19; 4:1-3.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":48172,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:10","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:10<\/strong> <em>I myself . . . have been lending:<\/em> Nehemiah and his associates were evidently making loans without burdening people. Nehemiah’s example was the solution: to give financial help without pushing people further into debt by <em>charging interest<\/em> (see Deut 15:7-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:10<\/strong> <em>I myself . . . have been lending:<\/em> Nehemiah and his associates were evidently making loans without burdening people. Nehemiah’s example was the solution: to give financial help without pushing people further into debt by <em>charging interest<\/em> (see Deut 15:7-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:10 I myself . . . have been lending: Nehemiah and his associates were evidently making loans without burdening people. Nehemiah’s example was the solution: to give financial help without pushing people further into debt by charging interest (see Deut 15:7-11).","summary_en":"5:10 I myself . . . have been lending: Nehemiah and his associates were evidently making loans without burdening people. Nehemiah’s example was the solution: to give financial help without pushing people further into debt by charging interest (see Deut 15:7-11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75798,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:10","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:10<\/strong> <em>I myself . . . have been lending:<\/em> Nehemiah and his associates were evidently making loans without burdening people. Nehemiah’s example was the solution: to give financial help without pushing people further into debt by <em>charging interest<\/em> (see Deut 15:7-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:10<\/strong> <em>I myself . . . have been lending:<\/em> Nehemiah and his associates were evidently making loans without burdening people. Nehemiah’s example was the solution: to give financial help without pushing people further into debt by <em>charging interest<\/em> (see Deut 15:7-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:10 I myself . . . have been lending: Nehemiah and his associates were evidently making loans without burdening people. Nehemiah’s example was the solution: to give financial help without pushing people further into debt by charging interest (see Deut 15:7-11).","summary_en":"5:10 I myself . . . have been lending: Nehemiah and his associates were evidently making loans without burdening people. Nehemiah’s example was the solution: to give financial help without pushing people further into debt by charging interest (see Deut 15:7-11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103424,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:10","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:10<\/strong> <em>I myself . . . have been lending:<\/em> Nehemiah and his associates were evidently making loans without burdening people. Nehemiah’s example was the solution: to give financial help without pushing people further into debt by <em>charging interest<\/em> (see Deut 15:7-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:10<\/strong> <em>I myself . . . have been lending:<\/em> Nehemiah and his associates were evidently making loans without burdening people. Nehemiah’s example was the solution: to give financial help without pushing people further into debt by <em>charging interest<\/em> (see Deut 15:7-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:10 I myself . . . have been lending: Nehemiah and his associates were evidently making loans without burdening people. Nehemiah’s example was the solution: to give financial help without pushing people further into debt by charging interest (see Deut 15:7-11).","summary_en":"5:10 I myself . . . have been lending: Nehemiah and his associates were evidently making loans without burdening people. Nehemiah’s example was the solution: to give financial help without pushing people further into debt by charging interest (see Deut 15:7-11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":131050,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:10","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:10<\/strong> <em>I myself . . . have been lending:<\/em> Nehemiah and his associates were evidently making loans without burdening people. Nehemiah’s example was the solution: to give financial help without pushing people further into debt by <em>charging interest<\/em> (see Deut 15:7-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:10<\/strong> <em>I myself . . . have been lending:<\/em> Nehemiah and his associates were evidently making loans without burdening people. Nehemiah’s example was the solution: to give financial help without pushing people further into debt by <em>charging interest<\/em> (see Deut 15:7-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:10 I myself . . . have been lending: Nehemiah and his associates were evidently making loans without burdening people. Nehemiah’s example was the solution: to give financial help without pushing people further into debt by charging interest (see Deut 15:7-11).","summary_en":"5:10 I myself . . . have been lending: Nehemiah and his associates were evidently making loans without burdening people. Nehemiah’s example was the solution: to give financial help without pushing people further into debt by charging interest (see Deut 15:7-11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"11":[{"id":48173,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:11","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:11<\/strong> Nehemiah demanded that the rich lenders <em>restore their fields<\/em> and <em>repay the interest<\/em> (literally <em>the hundredth part<\/em>), which they should not have collected (see also Exod 22:25; Lev 25:35-37). The literal <em>hundredth part<\/em> suggests that the interest was one percent per month, lower than the twenty percent annual rate found in some documents of that time, or the sixty percent annual rate charged at Elephantine in Egypt. But even a relatively low rate of interest violated God’s covenant.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:11<\/strong> Nehemiah demanded that the rich lenders <em>restore their fields<\/em> and <em>repay the interest<\/em> (literally <em>the hundredth part<\/em>), which they should not have collected (see also Exod 22:25; Lev 25:35-37). The literal <em>hundredth part<\/em> suggests that the interest was one percent per month, lower than the twenty percent annual rate found in some documents of that time, or the sixty percent annual rate charged at Elephantine in Egypt. But even a relatively low rate of interest violated God’s covenant.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:11 Nehemiah demanded that the rich lenders restore their fields and repay the interest (literally the hundredth part), which they should not have collected (see also Exod 22:25; Lev 25:35-37). The literal hundredth part suggests that the interest was one percent per month, lower than the twenty percent annual rate found in some documents of that time, or the sixty percent annual rate charged at Elephantine in Egypt. But even a relatively low rate of interest violated God’s covenant.","summary_en":"5:11 Nehemiah demanded that the rich lenders restore their fields and repay the interest (literally the hundredth part), which they should not have collected (see also Exod 22:25; Lev 25:35-37). The literal hundredth part suggests that the interest was one percent per month, lower than the twenty percent annual rate found in some documents of that time, or the sixty percent annual rate charged at Elephantine in Egypt. But even a relatively low rate of interest violated God’s covenant.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75799,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:11","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:11<\/strong> Nehemiah demanded that the rich lenders <em>restore their fields<\/em> and <em>repay the interest<\/em> (literally <em>the hundredth part<\/em>), which they should not have collected (see also Exod 22:25; Lev 25:35-37). The literal <em>hundredth part<\/em> suggests that the interest was one percent per month, lower than the twenty percent annual rate found in some documents of that time, or the sixty percent annual rate charged at Elephantine in Egypt. But even a relatively low rate of interest violated God’s covenant.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:11<\/strong> Nehemiah demanded that the rich lenders <em>restore their fields<\/em> and <em>repay the interest<\/em> (literally <em>the hundredth part<\/em>), which they should not have collected (see also Exod 22:25; Lev 25:35-37). The literal <em>hundredth part<\/em> suggests that the interest was one percent per month, lower than the twenty percent annual rate found in some documents of that time, or the sixty percent annual rate charged at Elephantine in Egypt. But even a relatively low rate of interest violated God’s covenant.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:11 Nehemiah demanded that the rich lenders restore their fields and repay the interest (literally the hundredth part), which they should not have collected (see also Exod 22:25; Lev 25:35-37). The literal hundredth part suggests that the interest was one percent per month, lower than the twenty percent annual rate found in some documents of that time, or the sixty percent annual rate charged at Elephantine in Egypt. But even a relatively low rate of interest violated God’s covenant.","summary_en":"5:11 Nehemiah demanded that the rich lenders restore their fields and repay the interest (literally the hundredth part), which they should not have collected (see also Exod 22:25; Lev 25:35-37). The literal hundredth part suggests that the interest was one percent per month, lower than the twenty percent annual rate found in some documents of that time, or the sixty percent annual rate charged at Elephantine in Egypt. But even a relatively low rate of interest violated God’s covenant.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103425,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:11","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:11<\/strong> Nehemiah demanded that the rich lenders <em>restore their fields<\/em> and <em>repay the interest<\/em> (literally <em>the hundredth part<\/em>), which they should not have collected (see also Exod 22:25; Lev 25:35-37). The literal <em>hundredth part<\/em> suggests that the interest was one percent per month, lower than the twenty percent annual rate found in some documents of that time, or the sixty percent annual rate charged at Elephantine in Egypt. But even a relatively low rate of interest violated God’s covenant.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:11<\/strong> Nehemiah demanded that the rich lenders <em>restore their fields<\/em> and <em>repay the interest<\/em> (literally <em>the hundredth part<\/em>), which they should not have collected (see also Exod 22:25; Lev 25:35-37). The literal <em>hundredth part<\/em> suggests that the interest was one percent per month, lower than the twenty percent annual rate found in some documents of that time, or the sixty percent annual rate charged at Elephantine in Egypt. But even a relatively low rate of interest violated God’s covenant.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:11 Nehemiah demanded that the rich lenders restore their fields and repay the interest (literally the hundredth part), which they should not have collected (see also Exod 22:25; Lev 25:35-37). The literal hundredth part suggests that the interest was one percent per month, lower than the twenty percent annual rate found in some documents of that time, or the sixty percent annual rate charged at Elephantine in Egypt. But even a relatively low rate of interest violated God’s covenant.","summary_en":"5:11 Nehemiah demanded that the rich lenders restore their fields and repay the interest (literally the hundredth part), which they should not have collected (see also Exod 22:25; Lev 25:35-37). The literal hundredth part suggests that the interest was one percent per month, lower than the twenty percent annual rate found in some documents of that time, or the sixty percent annual rate charged at Elephantine in Egypt. But even a relatively low rate of interest violated God’s covenant.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":131051,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:11","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:11<\/strong> Nehemiah demanded that the rich lenders <em>restore their fields<\/em> and <em>repay the interest<\/em> (literally <em>the hundredth part<\/em>), which they should not have collected (see also Exod 22:25; Lev 25:35-37). The literal <em>hundredth part<\/em> suggests that the interest was one percent per month, lower than the twenty percent annual rate found in some documents of that time, or the sixty percent annual rate charged at Elephantine in Egypt. But even a relatively low rate of interest violated God’s covenant.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:11<\/strong> Nehemiah demanded that the rich lenders <em>restore their fields<\/em> and <em>repay the interest<\/em> (literally <em>the hundredth part<\/em>), which they should not have collected (see also Exod 22:25; Lev 25:35-37). The literal <em>hundredth part<\/em> suggests that the interest was one percent per month, lower than the twenty percent annual rate found in some documents of that time, or the sixty percent annual rate charged at Elephantine in Egypt. But even a relatively low rate of interest violated God’s covenant.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:11 Nehemiah demanded that the rich lenders restore their fields and repay the interest (literally the hundredth part), which they should not have collected (see also Exod 22:25; Lev 25:35-37). The literal hundredth part suggests that the interest was one percent per month, lower than the twenty percent annual rate found in some documents of that time, or the sixty percent annual rate charged at Elephantine in Egypt. But even a relatively low rate of interest violated God’s covenant.","summary_en":"5:11 Nehemiah demanded that the rich lenders restore their fields and repay the interest (literally the hundredth part), which they should not have collected (see also Exod 22:25; Lev 25:35-37). The literal hundredth part suggests that the interest was one percent per month, lower than the twenty percent annual rate found in some documents of that time, or the sixty percent annual rate charged at Elephantine in Egypt. But even a relatively low rate of interest violated God’s covenant.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":31423,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Promise","title_en":"Promise","content_ro":"<h3>PROMISE<\/h3>\n<p>Declaration by one person to another that something will or will not be done, giving the person to whom it is made the right to expect the performance of whatever has been specified.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofPromise\">Types of Promise<\/p>\n<p>In biblical usage there are scattered examples of promises that people give either to one another (e.g., Nm 22:17; Est 4:7) or to God (e.g., Neh 5:12), but the promises that God gives to man are far more significant. These divine promises are absolutely trustworthy because the one who gives them is totally able to perform that which he has promised (Rom 4:21).<\/p>\n<p>Divine promises in Scripture assure their recipients of many spiritual and temporal benefits, including sonship (2 Cor 6:16–7:1), forgiveness of sin (1 Jn 1:9), answer to prayer (Lk 11:9), deliverance from temptations (1 Cor 10:13), sustaining grace for difficult times (2 Cor 12:9), provision for all needs (Phil 4:19), reward for obedience (Jas 1:12), and eternal life (Lk 18:29-30; Jn 3:16; Rom 6:22-23). God’s promises are certain and sure, but participation in their blessing often requires that certain conditions on which they are predicated be met. Divine promises also are not always guarantees of blessing. Indeed, there are promises announcing the certainty of judgment on those who refuse to obey the gospel of the Lord Jesus (2 Thes 1:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the promises of God, which have subjective and individual application to many different people in widely different times and places, there are a great many promises that pertain to the programmatic unfolding of God’s plan of redemption in a grand procession of historical events. These promises have neither repeated applications nor conditional natures. In such cases, promise becomes nearly synonymous with prophecy, and promises of this type, along with their subsequent fulfillment, are intricately intertwined in the entire fabric of redemptive history.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PromisesintheOldTestament\">Promises in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The highlights of the promise theme in the OT can be seen in the promise of what is often termed the protevangelium (i.e., the first announcement of the gospel) given to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden immediately after the fall into sin (Gn 3:15). Subsequent promises are the covenants God made with Abraham (chs 12; 15; 17) and with David (2 Sm 7), followed by the promise of a new covenant (Jer 31).<\/p>\n<h5>The Protevangelium<\/h5>\n<p>Genesis 3:15b says: “Your [Satan’s] offspring and her [Eve’s] offspring will be enemies. He will crush your head, and you will strike his heel” (<span>nlt<\/span>). This statement is a promise that at some future time the offspring of the woman will crush Satan. The offspring of the woman is individualized in the “he” of the last phrase. “He” shall strike you (i.e., Satan) on the head, although Satan will inflict a wound on the offspring of the woman. Here, then, is the promise that gives Adam and Eve, as well as their descendants, the basis to expect the eventual destruction of their adversary Satan through their offspring.<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise to Abraham<\/h5>\n<p>In Genesis 12:1-7 Abraham is told to leave his people and country and to go to a land that the Lord would show to him. God, in turn, promises him that (1) his offspring would become a great nation; (2) he would be blessed and his name made great; (3) through him other nations would be blessed; and (4) the land of Canaan would be given to his descendants. Of particular significance among these promises given to Abraham is that through his offspring he will bless many nations. This promise is repeated five times in the book of Genesis (Gn 12:3; 18:18; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14) and points back to the promise of Genesis 3:15 as well as forward to Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise to David<\/h5>\n<p>In 2 Samuel 7, God gave a promise to King David that his dynasty would endure forever (2 Sm 7:16; Ps 89:34-37). It is with this Davidic covenant that the promised line, which had previously run from Adam through Seth, Shem, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Judah, is now narrowed to the royal line of the house of David. David is to be the ancestor of the Messiah-King to come (Ps 89:3, 27-37). David thus became a central figure in the history of God’s plan to redeem the world. Jesus Christ is referred to as the son of David, the son of Abraham (Mt 1:1).<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise of a New Covenant<\/h5>\n<p>In Jeremiah 31:31-37, it is promised that in future days the Lord would make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. The content of this new covenant reemphasizes and extends the basic promises of the former covenant: “I will be their God, and they will be my people. . . . I will forgive their wickedness and will never again remember their sins” (vv 33-34, <span>nlt<\/span>). It would appear that the “new covenant” of Jeremiah is to be viewed as a restatement of the same basic promises included in the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant was inaugurated with the first advent of Christ, and believers in Christ are now recipients by the Holy Spirit of the blessings of that new covenant (Heb 8:6-13). The complete and final realization of these blessings in all their fullness awaits the return of Christ, the complete establishment of his kingdom in its outward and final form, and the blessedness of life in the new heavens and new earth. In the intervening time, God’s people live in a day in which some of the benefits of the age to come are a present reality but the fullness of the new age is yet future.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePromiseThemeintheNewTestament\">The Promise Theme in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>New Testament writers refer to the OT promises in a way that indicates that they did not view these promises as separate and isolated assertions but rather as portions of a unitary promise that is ultimately fulfilled in Christ (see Lk 1:54-55, 69-73; Acts 13:23, 32-33; 26:6-7; 2 Cor 1:20). Jesus is the fulfillment of the promises made to the patriarchs and David, and these promises are accordingly to be viewed as having a single focal point in him.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of Galatians and Ephesians, Paul develops this idea in more detail, saying to the Gentile Christians that they are made “heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus” (Eph 3:6, <span>niv<\/span>). In fact, Paul says that Gentiles who trust in Christ are incorporated into the seed of Abraham and are thus heirs according to the promise (Gal 3:29), and he even goes so far as to equate the gospel with the promise given to Abraham when he states, “The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: ‘All nations will be blessed through you’ ” (Gal 3:8, <span>niv<\/span>). These and other NT texts establish the close connection between the coming of Christ and the fulfillment of the promise. The promises of God find their point of convergence in Christ and all that he accomplished, and will yet accomplish, for his people.<\/p>\n<p>One further aspect of the promise particularly emphasized in the NT concerns the coming of the Holy Spirit. Paul refers to believers as sealed with the promised Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13), and as receiving the promise of the Spirit (Gal 3:14). The gift of the Holy Spirit is not only the fulfillment of an OT promise (Is 32:15; Ez 36:27; Jl 2:28), and that of Christ himself (Lk 24:49; Jn 14:16, 20; Acts 1:4), but it is also itself a promise of something yet future. Paul speaks of the Holy Spirit’s presence within the believer as a guarantee of our inheritance (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:14). The Holy Spirit is the “firstfruit” of future glory (Rom 8:23).<\/p>\n<p>One final aspect of the promise theme in the NT concerns the assurance of Christ’s second advent and the establishment of the new heavens and the new earth (cf. Jn 14:1-3; 2 Pt 3:4, 9, 13).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Covenant; God, Being and Attributes of; Hope; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PROMISE<\/h3>\n<p>Declaration by one person to another that something will or will not be done, giving the person to whom it is made the right to expect the performance of whatever has been specified.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofPromise\">Types of Promise<\/p>\n<p>In biblical usage there are scattered examples of promises that people give either to one another (e.g., Nm 22:17; Est 4:7) or to God (e.g., Neh 5:12), but the promises that God gives to man are far more significant. These divine promises are absolutely trustworthy because the one who gives them is totally able to perform that which he has promised (Rom 4:21).<\/p>\n<p>Divine promises in Scripture assure their recipients of many spiritual and temporal benefits, including sonship (2 Cor 6:16–7:1), forgiveness of sin (1 Jn 1:9), answer to prayer (Lk 11:9), deliverance from temptations (1 Cor 10:13), sustaining grace for difficult times (2 Cor 12:9), provision for all needs (Phil 4:19), reward for obedience (Jas 1:12), and eternal life (Lk 18:29-30; Jn 3:16; Rom 6:22-23). God’s promises are certain and sure, but participation in their blessing often requires that certain conditions on which they are predicated be met. Divine promises also are not always guarantees of blessing. Indeed, there are promises announcing the certainty of judgment on those who refuse to obey the gospel of the Lord Jesus (2 Thes 1:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the promises of God, which have subjective and individual application to many different people in widely different times and places, there are a great many promises that pertain to the programmatic unfolding of God’s plan of redemption in a grand procession of historical events. These promises have neither repeated applications nor conditional natures. In such cases, promise becomes nearly synonymous with prophecy, and promises of this type, along with their subsequent fulfillment, are intricately intertwined in the entire fabric of redemptive history.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PromisesintheOldTestament\">Promises in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The highlights of the promise theme in the OT can be seen in the promise of what is often termed the protevangelium (i.e., the first announcement of the gospel) given to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden immediately after the fall into sin (Gn 3:15). Subsequent promises are the covenants God made with Abraham (chs 12; 15; 17) and with David (2 Sm 7), followed by the promise of a new covenant (Jer 31).<\/p>\n<h5>The Protevangelium<\/h5>\n<p>Genesis 3:15b says: “Your [Satan’s] offspring and her [Eve’s] offspring will be enemies. He will crush your head, and you will strike his heel” (<span>nlt<\/span>). This statement is a promise that at some future time the offspring of the woman will crush Satan. The offspring of the woman is individualized in the “he” of the last phrase. “He” shall strike you (i.e., Satan) on the head, although Satan will inflict a wound on the offspring of the woman. Here, then, is the promise that gives Adam and Eve, as well as their descendants, the basis to expect the eventual destruction of their adversary Satan through their offspring.<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise to Abraham<\/h5>\n<p>In Genesis 12:1-7 Abraham is told to leave his people and country and to go to a land that the Lord would show to him. God, in turn, promises him that (1) his offspring would become a great nation; (2) he would be blessed and his name made great; (3) through him other nations would be blessed; and (4) the land of Canaan would be given to his descendants. Of particular significance among these promises given to Abraham is that through his offspring he will bless many nations. This promise is repeated five times in the book of Genesis (Gn 12:3; 18:18; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14) and points back to the promise of Genesis 3:15 as well as forward to Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise to David<\/h5>\n<p>In 2 Samuel 7, God gave a promise to King David that his dynasty would endure forever (2 Sm 7:16; Ps 89:34-37). It is with this Davidic covenant that the promised line, which had previously run from Adam through Seth, Shem, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Judah, is now narrowed to the royal line of the house of David. David is to be the ancestor of the Messiah-King to come (Ps 89:3, 27-37). David thus became a central figure in the history of God’s plan to redeem the world. Jesus Christ is referred to as the son of David, the son of Abraham (Mt 1:1).<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise of a New Covenant<\/h5>\n<p>In Jeremiah 31:31-37, it is promised that in future days the Lord would make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. The content of this new covenant reemphasizes and extends the basic promises of the former covenant: “I will be their God, and they will be my people. . . . I will forgive their wickedness and will never again remember their sins” (vv 33-34, <span>nlt<\/span>). It would appear that the “new covenant” of Jeremiah is to be viewed as a restatement of the same basic promises included in the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant was inaugurated with the first advent of Christ, and believers in Christ are now recipients by the Holy Spirit of the blessings of that new covenant (Heb 8:6-13). The complete and final realization of these blessings in all their fullness awaits the return of Christ, the complete establishment of his kingdom in its outward and final form, and the blessedness of life in the new heavens and new earth. In the intervening time, God’s people live in a day in which some of the benefits of the age to come are a present reality but the fullness of the new age is yet future.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePromiseThemeintheNewTestament\">The Promise Theme in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>New Testament writers refer to the OT promises in a way that indicates that they did not view these promises as separate and isolated assertions but rather as portions of a unitary promise that is ultimately fulfilled in Christ (see Lk 1:54-55, 69-73; Acts 13:23, 32-33; 26:6-7; 2 Cor 1:20). Jesus is the fulfillment of the promises made to the patriarchs and David, and these promises are accordingly to be viewed as having a single focal point in him.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of Galatians and Ephesians, Paul develops this idea in more detail, saying to the Gentile Christians that they are made “heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus” (Eph 3:6, <span>niv<\/span>). In fact, Paul says that Gentiles who trust in Christ are incorporated into the seed of Abraham and are thus heirs according to the promise (Gal 3:29), and he even goes so far as to equate the gospel with the promise given to Abraham when he states, “The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: ‘All nations will be blessed through you’ ” (Gal 3:8, <span>niv<\/span>). These and other NT texts establish the close connection between the coming of Christ and the fulfillment of the promise. The promises of God find their point of convergence in Christ and all that he accomplished, and will yet accomplish, for his people.<\/p>\n<p>One further aspect of the promise particularly emphasized in the NT concerns the coming of the Holy Spirit. Paul refers to believers as sealed with the promised Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13), and as receiving the promise of the Spirit (Gal 3:14). The gift of the Holy Spirit is not only the fulfillment of an OT promise (Is 32:15; Ez 36:27; Jl 2:28), and that of Christ himself (Lk 24:49; Jn 14:16, 20; Acts 1:4), but it is also itself a promise of something yet future. Paul speaks of the Holy Spirit’s presence within the believer as a guarantee of our inheritance (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:14). The Holy Spirit is the “firstfruit” of future glory (Rom 8:23).<\/p>\n<p>One final aspect of the promise theme in the NT concerns the assurance of Christ’s second advent and the establishment of the new heavens and the new earth (cf. Jn 14:1-3; 2 Pt 3:4, 9, 13).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Covenant; God, Being and Attributes of; Hope; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PROMISE Declaration by one person to another that something will or will not be done, giving the person to whom it is made the right to expect the performance of whatever has been specified. Types of Promise In biblical usage there are scattered examples of promises that people give either to one another (e.g., Nm 22:17; Est 4:7) or to God (e.g., Neh 5:12), but the promises that God gives to man are far more significant. These divine promises are absolutely trustworthy because the one who giv...","summary_en":"PROMISE Declaration by one person to another that something will or will not be done, giving the person to whom it is made the right to expect the performance of whatever has been specified. Types of Promise In biblical usage there are scattered examples of promises that people give either to one another (e.g., Nm 22:17; Est 4:7) or to God (e.g., Neh 5:12), but the promises that God gives to man are far more significant. These divine promises are absolutely trustworthy because the one who giv...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":48174,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:12","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:12<\/strong> <em>made the nobles and officials swear:<\/em> Both God and the community would hold them accountable.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:12<\/strong> <em>made the nobles and officials swear:<\/em> Both God and the community would hold them accountable.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:12 made the nobles and officials swear: Both God and the community would hold them accountable.","summary_en":"5:12 made the nobles and officials swear: Both God and the community would hold them accountable.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75800,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:12","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:12<\/strong> <em>made the nobles and officials swear:<\/em> Both God and the community would hold them accountable.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:12<\/strong> <em>made the nobles and officials swear:<\/em> Both God and the community would hold them accountable.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:12 made the nobles and officials swear: Both God and the community would hold them accountable.","summary_en":"5:12 made the nobles and officials swear: Both God and the community would hold them accountable.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103426,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:12","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:12<\/strong> <em>made the nobles and officials swear:<\/em> Both God and the community would hold them accountable.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:12<\/strong> <em>made the nobles and officials swear:<\/em> Both God and the community would hold them accountable.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:12 made the nobles and officials swear: Both God and the community would hold them accountable.","summary_en":"5:12 made the nobles and officials swear: Both God and the community would hold them accountable.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":131052,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:12","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:12<\/strong> <em>made the nobles and officials swear:<\/em> Both God and the community would hold them accountable.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:12<\/strong> <em>made the nobles and officials swear:<\/em> Both God and the community would hold them accountable.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:12 made the nobles and officials swear: Both God and the community would hold them accountable.","summary_en":"5:12 made the nobles and officials swear: Both God and the community would hold them accountable.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"14":[{"id":30937,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Period*, Postexilic","title_en":"Period*, Postexilic","content_ro":"<h3>POSTEXILIC PERIOD*<\/h3>\n<p>A period in the Jews’ history after their exile to Babylon. This period extends from 539–c. 331 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Biblical Perspective<\/p>\n<p>• The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire<\/p>\n<p>• The Policy of Persia<\/p>\n<p>• The Return from Exile<\/p>\n<p>• The Return of Ezra<\/p>\n<p>• Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• The Remainder of the Persian Period<\/p>\n<p>• Religious Features of the Postexilic Period<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBiblicalPerspective\">The Biblical Perspective<\/p>\n<p>The books that specifically cover the history of the postexilic or Persian period are Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, and Zechariah. These cover a period of over a century, only a portion of which is dealt with in detail, as the following table shows:<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCollapseoftheBabylonianEmpire\">The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire<\/p>\n<p>This occurred with dramatic suddenness, largely because of internal resistance to the policies of the last Babylonian king, Nabonidus (555–539 <span>BC<\/span>). His neglect of the traditional Babylonian deity, Marduk, in favor of the moon god, Sin, was particularly resented. Nabonidus lived in Taima during the last decade of his reign, refusing to enter Babylon, where his son Belshazzar ruled as virtual king, as noted in Daniel 5. Babylon fell to the Persians in October 538 <span>BC<\/span> and the entire empire passed into their control.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePolicyofPersia\">The Policy of Persia<\/p>\n<p>This is well documented through contemporary inscriptions, notably the record of Cyrus, the first king of the Persian Empire (559–530 <span>BC<\/span>), in the “Cyrus Cylinder.” A new phase in the relationship of conqueror to conquered peoples opened up, which contrasted with the policy of the Assyrian and Babylonian empires of crushing any opposition by massive force. Cyrus and his successors followed a conciliatory line, allowing exiled groups to return home, encouraging local faiths, posing as the champions of the territorial deities, and allowing local autonomy except where Persian interests were affected adversely. The cost of this operation, although considerable, must have been infinitesimal compared with that of keeping rebellious subjects under constant subjection.<\/p>\n<p>The new enlightened policy is reflected in the decree of Cyrus, dated 538 <span>BC<\/span> (Ezr 1:1) and preserved in two versions. The first (vv 1-4) is clearly the official proclamation, while the second (6:3-5) is a more prosaic memorandum dealing with building specifications, a record of Cyrus’s commitment stored in the official archives (vv 1-2). The critical tendency to question the narrative in Ezra 1, especially on the score of the favorable references to the God of Israel and the vast financial support promised, has been nullified by the archaeological evidence, which shows an identical policy elsewhere. The Cyrus Cylinder, for example, notes, “The gods who live within them [i.e., the cities] I returned to their places. . . . All of their inhabitants I collected and restored to their dwelling places.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judah itself there is no evidence for any warfare in this period, which suggests that the Persian takeover of the area was nonviolent. Judah was incorporated into the fifth Persian province, which included the entire area west of the Euphrates River (Ezr 7:21). It was no more than a minor subdistrict, governed through Samaria.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheReturnfromExile\">The Return from Exile<\/p>\n<p>The continuance of a large Jewish community in Babylonia shows that not all the Jews responded to the invitation to return to their homeland, probably because of the prosperity acquired in exile. But 42,360 dedicated Jews (Ezr 2:64) braved the challenge of a four-month 900-mile (1,448-kilometer) journey under Sheshbazzar (1:8), the officially appointed leader, and Zerubbabel his nephew (3:2), who was probably the one to whom the Jews looked as leader. With great enthusiasm the Jews rebuilt the altar of sacrifice and resumed the observance of the traditional feasts (vv 1-6), revealing both a sense of stewardship (2:68-69) and careful attention to the requirements of the Law (3:2-4). Soon after, work on the second temple commenced—the materials and master craftsmen being imported from Tyre and Sidon (Ezr 3:7-9; cf. 1 Kgs 5). When the foundations were laid, the worshipers were doubtless aware that they were fulfilling God’s promise through Jeremiah (Ezr 3:10-11; cf. Jer 33:10-11). But their high hopes were thwarted when there was opposition from neighboring areas (Ezr 4:4-5), selfishness in giving their own accommodations a higher priority than the Lord’s house (Hg 1:2-4, 9), and a series of crop failures that further reduced morale (1:6, 10-11; 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Work on the temple was not resumed until Haggai and Zechariah appeared in 520 <span>BC<\/span>. They encouraged Zerubbabel and Joshua (Jeshua) the high priest, rebuked the people for their apathy and selfishness, and promised God’s presence and blessing upon the temple project (Hg 1:12–2:9). Zechariah’s preaching went beyond the building of the temple, including the rebuilding of Jerusalem itself (Zec 2:1-5) and its world reputation (2:1-5, 11-12; 8:22). The two leaders were addressed in ways that anticipated the Messiah (Hg 2:21-23; Zec 6:10-14). But the Persian king Darius (521–486 <span>BC<\/span>) was not alarmed when the rebuilding operation was reported to him (Ezr 5:1–6:13) and allowed the work to continue. In February 515 <span>BC<\/span> it was dedicated (6:14-16). The Jewish community again had a focal point for its religion, but the political situation remained difficult, with no real security in a still-shattered city.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheReturnofEzra\">The Return of Ezra<\/p>\n<p>The traditional date of Ezra’s return is 458 <span>BC<\/span> (preceding that of Nehemiah in 445 <span>BC<\/span>). This is based on the premise that the King Artaxerxes noted in Ezra 7:7 was Artaxerxes I Longimanus (464–424 <span>BC<\/span>) and not Artaxerxes II Mnemon (404–359 <span>BC<\/span>). However, some scholars, allowing that the king was Artaxerxes I, but believing that Nehemiah preceded Ezra, suggest that a tens unit has dropped out of “seventh” in Ezra 7:7, and that the date of Ezra’s return should be the 27th (438 <span>BC<\/span>) or 37th year (428 <span>BC<\/span>) of Artaxerxes I, making Ezra’s return a few years after Nehemiah’s. While this is plausible, there remains strong support for the traditional view. It accords with the order of the two books in the OT and requires no textual emendation. It also accounts for the section in Ezra 4:7-23, where, in the reign of Artaxerxes, an abortive effort was made by a recently returned group to rebuild the wall of Jerusalem. Nehemiah 1:1-4 suggests that this was regarded as important and its abrupt termination, by a decree of the king, caused Nehemiah great distress. The probability is that Ezra, recently returned, realized that little could be done in the way of major religious reformation until Jerusalem was secure, but in attempting to rebuild the wall he exceeded his mandate and was not able to function adequately until Nehemiah arrived, when the new security of Jerusalem allowed the great Law-reading ceremony of Nehemiah 8:1-12 to take place.<\/p>\n<p>Ezra’s ministry concerned the teaching of the Law of Moses, the Pentateuch, which had long been extant in its final form by this time. Ezra 7 shows that Artaxerxes was following the traditional Persian policy of encouraging good relationships with his subject peoples. Ezra’s appointment (Ezr 7:12) was to a state office; it has frequently been paraphrased as “Secretary of State for Jewish Religious Affairs.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NehemiahsReturnandMinistry\">Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry<\/p>\n<p>Hanani and others (Neh 1:1-3) informed Nehemiah of the complete failure of a recent attempt to rebuild the wall, probably that recorded in Ezra 4:7-23, and sought his mediation before the very king who had authorized the decree that compelled work on the wall to cease. A friend in high places was vital, and Nehemiah, a trusted and influential member of the court (Neh 1:11), was approached for this delicate and dangerous task. Nehemiah 1:4–2:8 shows how well he prepared for and seized his opportunity. His appointment as the governor of Judah (5:14) involved the removal of this area from the control of the governor of Samaria, which accounts for the unrelenting hostility of Sanballat (2:19; 4:1). The evidence of Nehemiah 3 suggests that the extent of Judah at this time was limited, probably not reaching as far north as Bethel or as far south as Hebron. Nehemiah was faced with opposition that included ridicule (2:19; 4:1-3), armed force (4:8, 11), discouragement (v 10), internal economic problems (5:1-18), intrigue (6:1-2), intimidation, and blackmail (vv 5-14). In spite of these obstacles, the wall was completed in the incredibly brief period of 52 days (v 15).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to this monumental achievement, Nehemiah completely reorganized the social and economic life of Jerusalem, dealing with alienated mortgages, excessive interest rates (Neh 5:1-13), mixed marriages (10:30; 13:23-30), Sabbath observance (10:31; 13:15-21), and temple supplies (10:32-40; 13:10-13). Almost certainly, it was this political and economic security that allowed Ezra, who probably arrived 13 years earlier, to proceed with his great religious reformation based on the Law. Nehemiah’s book, usually called the “Nehemiah Memoirs,” was probably presented by him in the temple as a “votive offering” (as indicated by the form of 5:19; 13:14, 22, 31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRemainderofthePersianPeriod\">The Remainder of the Persian Period<\/p>\n<p>Persian control, which probably centered on Lachish, was traditionally mild, except where her interests were directly threatened. There is no evidence of any major discontent in Judah, which enjoyed a considerable degree of autonomy. The Phoenician revolt of 351 <span>BC<\/span>, which took Artaxerxes III (359–338 <span>BC<\/span>) three years to subdue, was the only serious disturbance in the area. While Artaxerxes deported some Jews to Hyrcania, southeast of the Caspian Sea, that was probably a precautionary measure, and Judah does not appear to have been greatly involved in the revolt. The Jerusalem priests were allowed to mint their own coinage and levy a temple tax. Under the wider influence of the Persian Empire, Hebrew gradually fell out of popular usage as a spoken language, being replaced by Aramaic. As the international stature of Greece increased, so the influence of Hellenism began to be felt, even in Judah.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ReligiousFeaturesofthePostexilicPeriod\">Religious Features of the Postexilic Period<\/p>\n<h5>The Decline of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>There were three main reasons for this:<\/p>\n<p>1. The prophetic movement as a whole became discredited after Jerusalem fell in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. The large number of popular cult prophets who had foretold a sudden end to the Babylonian oppression (e.g., Jer 28:1-4) were proved decisively wrong. The suspicion that henceforth became attached to prophecy was increased further in the Persian period, when large numbers of itinerant “prophets” of various religions traveled widely. Zechariah 13:2-6 shows the stern measures advocated against such false prophets and fortune-tellers.<\/p>\n<li>2. There was a markedly different historical situation. The chastened remnant that survived had turned away from the blatant apostasy that characterized the preexilic period, so that the prophetic condemnation was not required with the same urgency. The temple and the Law had acquired a new prominence, and postexilic prophecy generally was concerned either with the rebuilding of the temple (e.g., Haggai and Zechariah) or the purification of its cult (e.g., Malachi). Once this goal had been realized, the role of the prophet was diminished. Another historical factor was the relatively large number of priests who returned from captivity, doubtless encouraged by the prospect of serving in the rebuilt temple. The main need at this time was for the priest, who revealed God’s will on the basis of the Law.<\/li>\n<li>3. There was an increasing stress on the transcendence of God, caused partly by an emphasis upon priestly mediation and partly by a fear of God that resulted from the recent judgment. The apocalyptic movement, with its emphasis on angelic intermediaries between humans and a transcendent God, encouraged this tendency. Correspondingly, the prophetic appeal for a personal, moral walk with God weakened.<\/li>\n<h5>The Rise of the Synagogue<\/h5>\n<p>Some type of local worship, independent of the temple and its sacrifices, must have developed in the Captivity, with the Law increasingly occupying a dominant position. Later on, the prophetic books were read and expounded, but the primary stress was always on the Law. This mode of worship later took root in the homeland, and the synagogue gradually developed into the focal point of the community for social relationships, education, and worship. It facilitated the worldwide continuance and expansion of the Jewish faith, independent of Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Diaspora of the Jews; Ezra, Book of; Haggai, Book of; Israel, History of; Nehemiah, Book of; Zechariah, Book of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>POSTEXILIC PERIOD*<\/h3>\n<p>A period in the Jews’ history after their exile to Babylon. This period extends from 539–c. 331 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Biblical Perspective<\/p>\n<p>• The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire<\/p>\n<p>• The Policy of Persia<\/p>\n<p>• The Return from Exile<\/p>\n<p>• The Return of Ezra<\/p>\n<p>• Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• The Remainder of the Persian Period<\/p>\n<p>• Religious Features of the Postexilic Period<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBiblicalPerspective\">The Biblical Perspective<\/p>\n<p>The books that specifically cover the history of the postexilic or Persian period are Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, and Zechariah. These cover a period of over a century, only a portion of which is dealt with in detail, as the following table shows:<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCollapseoftheBabylonianEmpire\">The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire<\/p>\n<p>This occurred with dramatic suddenness, largely because of internal resistance to the policies of the last Babylonian king, Nabonidus (555–539 <span>BC<\/span>). His neglect of the traditional Babylonian deity, Marduk, in favor of the moon god, Sin, was particularly resented. Nabonidus lived in Taima during the last decade of his reign, refusing to enter Babylon, where his son Belshazzar ruled as virtual king, as noted in Daniel 5. Babylon fell to the Persians in October 538 <span>BC<\/span> and the entire empire passed into their control.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePolicyofPersia\">The Policy of Persia<\/p>\n<p>This is well documented through contemporary inscriptions, notably the record of Cyrus, the first king of the Persian Empire (559–530 <span>BC<\/span>), in the “Cyrus Cylinder.” A new phase in the relationship of conqueror to conquered peoples opened up, which contrasted with the policy of the Assyrian and Babylonian empires of crushing any opposition by massive force. Cyrus and his successors followed a conciliatory line, allowing exiled groups to return home, encouraging local faiths, posing as the champions of the territorial deities, and allowing local autonomy except where Persian interests were affected adversely. The cost of this operation, although considerable, must have been infinitesimal compared with that of keeping rebellious subjects under constant subjection.<\/p>\n<p>The new enlightened policy is reflected in the decree of Cyrus, dated 538 <span>BC<\/span> (Ezr 1:1) and preserved in two versions. The first (vv 1-4) is clearly the official proclamation, while the second (6:3-5) is a more prosaic memorandum dealing with building specifications, a record of Cyrus’s commitment stored in the official archives (vv 1-2). The critical tendency to question the narrative in Ezra 1, especially on the score of the favorable references to the God of Israel and the vast financial support promised, has been nullified by the archaeological evidence, which shows an identical policy elsewhere. The Cyrus Cylinder, for example, notes, “The gods who live within them [i.e., the cities] I returned to their places. . . . All of their inhabitants I collected and restored to their dwelling places.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judah itself there is no evidence for any warfare in this period, which suggests that the Persian takeover of the area was nonviolent. Judah was incorporated into the fifth Persian province, which included the entire area west of the Euphrates River (Ezr 7:21). It was no more than a minor subdistrict, governed through Samaria.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheReturnfromExile\">The Return from Exile<\/p>\n<p>The continuance of a large Jewish community in Babylonia shows that not all the Jews responded to the invitation to return to their homeland, probably because of the prosperity acquired in exile. But 42,360 dedicated Jews (Ezr 2:64) braved the challenge of a four-month 900-mile (1,448-kilometer) journey under Sheshbazzar (1:8), the officially appointed leader, and Zerubbabel his nephew (3:2), who was probably the one to whom the Jews looked as leader. With great enthusiasm the Jews rebuilt the altar of sacrifice and resumed the observance of the traditional feasts (vv 1-6), revealing both a sense of stewardship (2:68-69) and careful attention to the requirements of the Law (3:2-4). Soon after, work on the second temple commenced—the materials and master craftsmen being imported from Tyre and Sidon (Ezr 3:7-9; cf. 1 Kgs 5). When the foundations were laid, the worshipers were doubtless aware that they were fulfilling God’s promise through Jeremiah (Ezr 3:10-11; cf. Jer 33:10-11). But their high hopes were thwarted when there was opposition from neighboring areas (Ezr 4:4-5), selfishness in giving their own accommodations a higher priority than the Lord’s house (Hg 1:2-4, 9), and a series of crop failures that further reduced morale (1:6, 10-11; 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Work on the temple was not resumed until Haggai and Zechariah appeared in 520 <span>BC<\/span>. They encouraged Zerubbabel and Joshua (Jeshua) the high priest, rebuked the people for their apathy and selfishness, and promised God’s presence and blessing upon the temple project (Hg 1:12–2:9). Zechariah’s preaching went beyond the building of the temple, including the rebuilding of Jerusalem itself (Zec 2:1-5) and its world reputation (2:1-5, 11-12; 8:22). The two leaders were addressed in ways that anticipated the Messiah (Hg 2:21-23; Zec 6:10-14). But the Persian king Darius (521–486 <span>BC<\/span>) was not alarmed when the rebuilding operation was reported to him (Ezr 5:1–6:13) and allowed the work to continue. In February 515 <span>BC<\/span> it was dedicated (6:14-16). The Jewish community again had a focal point for its religion, but the political situation remained difficult, with no real security in a still-shattered city.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheReturnofEzra\">The Return of Ezra<\/p>\n<p>The traditional date of Ezra’s return is 458 <span>BC<\/span> (preceding that of Nehemiah in 445 <span>BC<\/span>). This is based on the premise that the King Artaxerxes noted in Ezra 7:7 was Artaxerxes I Longimanus (464–424 <span>BC<\/span>) and not Artaxerxes II Mnemon (404–359 <span>BC<\/span>). However, some scholars, allowing that the king was Artaxerxes I, but believing that Nehemiah preceded Ezra, suggest that a tens unit has dropped out of “seventh” in Ezra 7:7, and that the date of Ezra’s return should be the 27th (438 <span>BC<\/span>) or 37th year (428 <span>BC<\/span>) of Artaxerxes I, making Ezra’s return a few years after Nehemiah’s. While this is plausible, there remains strong support for the traditional view. It accords with the order of the two books in the OT and requires no textual emendation. It also accounts for the section in Ezra 4:7-23, where, in the reign of Artaxerxes, an abortive effort was made by a recently returned group to rebuild the wall of Jerusalem. Nehemiah 1:1-4 suggests that this was regarded as important and its abrupt termination, by a decree of the king, caused Nehemiah great distress. The probability is that Ezra, recently returned, realized that little could be done in the way of major religious reformation until Jerusalem was secure, but in attempting to rebuild the wall he exceeded his mandate and was not able to function adequately until Nehemiah arrived, when the new security of Jerusalem allowed the great Law-reading ceremony of Nehemiah 8:1-12 to take place.<\/p>\n<p>Ezra’s ministry concerned the teaching of the Law of Moses, the Pentateuch, which had long been extant in its final form by this time. Ezra 7 shows that Artaxerxes was following the traditional Persian policy of encouraging good relationships with his subject peoples. Ezra’s appointment (Ezr 7:12) was to a state office; it has frequently been paraphrased as “Secretary of State for Jewish Religious Affairs.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NehemiahsReturnandMinistry\">Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry<\/p>\n<p>Hanani and others (Neh 1:1-3) informed Nehemiah of the complete failure of a recent attempt to rebuild the wall, probably that recorded in Ezra 4:7-23, and sought his mediation before the very king who had authorized the decree that compelled work on the wall to cease. A friend in high places was vital, and Nehemiah, a trusted and influential member of the court (Neh 1:11), was approached for this delicate and dangerous task. Nehemiah 1:4–2:8 shows how well he prepared for and seized his opportunity. His appointment as the governor of Judah (5:14) involved the removal of this area from the control of the governor of Samaria, which accounts for the unrelenting hostility of Sanballat (2:19; 4:1). The evidence of Nehemiah 3 suggests that the extent of Judah at this time was limited, probably not reaching as far north as Bethel or as far south as Hebron. Nehemiah was faced with opposition that included ridicule (2:19; 4:1-3), armed force (4:8, 11), discouragement (v 10), internal economic problems (5:1-18), intrigue (6:1-2), intimidation, and blackmail (vv 5-14). In spite of these obstacles, the wall was completed in the incredibly brief period of 52 days (v 15).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to this monumental achievement, Nehemiah completely reorganized the social and economic life of Jerusalem, dealing with alienated mortgages, excessive interest rates (Neh 5:1-13), mixed marriages (10:30; 13:23-30), Sabbath observance (10:31; 13:15-21), and temple supplies (10:32-40; 13:10-13). Almost certainly, it was this political and economic security that allowed Ezra, who probably arrived 13 years earlier, to proceed with his great religious reformation based on the Law. Nehemiah’s book, usually called the “Nehemiah Memoirs,” was probably presented by him in the temple as a “votive offering” (as indicated by the form of 5:19; 13:14, 22, 31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRemainderofthePersianPeriod\">The Remainder of the Persian Period<\/p>\n<p>Persian control, which probably centered on Lachish, was traditionally mild, except where her interests were directly threatened. There is no evidence of any major discontent in Judah, which enjoyed a considerable degree of autonomy. The Phoenician revolt of 351 <span>BC<\/span>, which took Artaxerxes III (359–338 <span>BC<\/span>) three years to subdue, was the only serious disturbance in the area. While Artaxerxes deported some Jews to Hyrcania, southeast of the Caspian Sea, that was probably a precautionary measure, and Judah does not appear to have been greatly involved in the revolt. The Jerusalem priests were allowed to mint their own coinage and levy a temple tax. Under the wider influence of the Persian Empire, Hebrew gradually fell out of popular usage as a spoken language, being replaced by Aramaic. As the international stature of Greece increased, so the influence of Hellenism began to be felt, even in Judah.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ReligiousFeaturesofthePostexilicPeriod\">Religious Features of the Postexilic Period<\/p>\n<h5>The Decline of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>There were three main reasons for this:<\/p>\n<p>1. The prophetic movement as a whole became discredited after Jerusalem fell in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. The large number of popular cult prophets who had foretold a sudden end to the Babylonian oppression (e.g., Jer 28:1-4) were proved decisively wrong. The suspicion that henceforth became attached to prophecy was increased further in the Persian period, when large numbers of itinerant “prophets” of various religions traveled widely. Zechariah 13:2-6 shows the stern measures advocated against such false prophets and fortune-tellers.<\/p>\n<li>2. There was a markedly different historical situation. The chastened remnant that survived had turned away from the blatant apostasy that characterized the preexilic period, so that the prophetic condemnation was not required with the same urgency. The temple and the Law had acquired a new prominence, and postexilic prophecy generally was concerned either with the rebuilding of the temple (e.g., Haggai and Zechariah) or the purification of its cult (e.g., Malachi). Once this goal had been realized, the role of the prophet was diminished. Another historical factor was the relatively large number of priests who returned from captivity, doubtless encouraged by the prospect of serving in the rebuilt temple. The main need at this time was for the priest, who revealed God’s will on the basis of the Law.<\/li>\n<li>3. There was an increasing stress on the transcendence of God, caused partly by an emphasis upon priestly mediation and partly by a fear of God that resulted from the recent judgment. The apocalyptic movement, with its emphasis on angelic intermediaries between humans and a transcendent God, encouraged this tendency. Correspondingly, the prophetic appeal for a personal, moral walk with God weakened.<\/li>\n<h5>The Rise of the Synagogue<\/h5>\n<p>Some type of local worship, independent of the temple and its sacrifices, must have developed in the Captivity, with the Law increasingly occupying a dominant position. Later on, the prophetic books were read and expounded, but the primary stress was always on the Law. This mode of worship later took root in the homeland, and the synagogue gradually developed into the focal point of the community for social relationships, education, and worship. It facilitated the worldwide continuance and expansion of the Jewish faith, independent of Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Diaspora of the Jews; Ezra, Book of; Haggai, Book of; Israel, History of; Nehemiah, Book of; Zechariah, Book of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"POSTEXILIC PERIOD* A period in the Jews’ history after their exile to Babylon. This period extends from 539–c. 331 BC. Preview • The Biblical Perspective • The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire • The Policy of Persia • The Return from Exile • The Return of Ezra • Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry • The Remainder of the Persian Period • Religious Features of the Postexilic Period The Biblical Perspective The books that specifically cover the history of the postexilic or Persian period are Ezra, N...","summary_en":"POSTEXILIC PERIOD* A period in the Jews’ history after their exile to Babylon. This period extends from 539–c. 331 BC. Preview • The Biblical Perspective • The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire • The Policy of Persia • The Return from Exile • The Return of Ezra • Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry • The Remainder of the Persian Period • Religious Features of the Postexilic Period The Biblical Perspective The books that specifically cover the history of the postexilic or Persian period are Ezra, N...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36819,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Taxation Tax","title_en":"Taxation Tax","content_ro":"<h3>TAX, TAXATION<\/h3>\n<p>Amount of money or goods that was extracted by the powerful nations from those whom they subjected. It commonly consisted of gold, silver, animals, produce, or forced labor. Taxes were also levied on the people both by their ruler and by the priesthood to pay for the maintenance of the temple. The term “tribute” is first used in the <span>kjv<\/span> in Genesis 49:15 (<span>nlt<\/span> “forced labor”). In Numbers 31:28 the spoils of battle were divided up to include a tribute or levy for the priesthood. For the Hebrews the temple tribute was originally a voluntary offering to the Lord (Dt 16:10) but later became a prescribed tax (Mt 17:24).<\/p>\n<p>Even in 2500 <span>BC<\/span> in the city of Lagash, taxes were imposed on most facets of life, from the means of earning a livelihood, to marriage, divorce, and death. Like many ancient peoples, the Sumerians believed that the land belonged to the god and his representative the king, and that therefore a rent or levy was payable to the owner.<\/p>\n<p>In Egypt, Joseph exacted a burdensome 20-percent tax in grain during the seven years of plenty, which alleviated the food shortages during the subsequent seven years of famine (Gn 41:25–42:5). The tax on the crops was facilitated because in Egypt the ownership of the land was vested in the ruler.<\/p>\n<p>Warrior kings, such as David, were able to maintain a healthy treasury without taxing their own people. The Canaanites and neighboring conquered peoples contributed great wealth to the treasury (2 Sm 8:6-14; 1 Chr 27:25-31), one list of which included silver, gold, bronze, 1,700 horsemen, and 20,000 foot soldiers. Forced labor was often required by David and his successors of aliens who remained within the boundaries of the Israelite kingdom (Jos 16:10; 17:13; Jgs 1:28).<\/p>\n<p>Israel was probably first taxed during Solomon’s reign. In this more stable period, income came from tribute but not from booty. To maintain the grandeur of the court and the extensive building program, Solomon divided Israel into 12 areas, each under an officer, each of whom provided food and support for the king and his household for one month per year (1 Kgs 4:7). Solomon also derived considerable income from levying custom duties on trading caravans that passed regularly through his kingdom. In addition to all of this, both foreigners and native Israelites were subject to forced labor for major building projects, especially for the temple (1 Kgs 5:13; 9:20-21; 2 Chr 8:7-8). Handles from ten-gallon (37.9-liter) jars have been excavated, bearing a Hebrew stamp “to the king,” indicating that they formed part of a levy (2 Chr 2:10).<\/p>\n<p>Jehoshaphat was equally successful in taxing the people at home (2 Chr 17:5) and maintaining the tribute from abroad, including silver and gold from the Philistines and 7,700 rams and 7,700 he-goats from the Arabs (2 Chr 17:11-12). As the power of the surrounding empires increased, Judah found itself forced to pay tribute. Sennacherib, king of Assyria, required 300 talents of silver and 30 talents of gold, which necessitated the removal of the gold from the temple doors (2 Kgs 18:14-16). Approximately a century later, Pharaoh Neco required 100 talents of silver and a talent of gold from Judah (23:33), and shortly thereafter Nebuchadnezzar removed all the treasure from the temple and the royal palace, together with 10,000 captives, all the craftsmen, and 1,000 smiths, leaving few in Jerusalem except the poor (24:13-16).<\/p>\n<p>A definite, regular, organized tax system was instituted by the Persians, whose satraps, ruling each province, were required to make payment of fixed sums into the royal treasury (Est 10:1). Tax exemption was introduced by Artaxerxes I, who stated that levies should not be collected from priests, Levites, or any others occupied in any way with the service of the temple (Ezr 7:24). An additional tax was required for the maintenance of the governor’s household; it consisted of food, wine, and 40 shekels of silver (Neh 5:14-15). As governor, Nehemiah did not claim this allowance of food because he considered the taxes already burdensome, causing the mortgaging of fields, vineyards, and houses “for the king’s tax.” Simultaneously, a levy was imposed upon the Jews for the rebuilding of the walls of Jerusalem (4:6). Darius was politically astute enough to encourage the rebuilding of the temple and to allow the Jews to use some of the royal tax money for this purpose (Ezr 6:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Under the Seleucids, the Ptolemies, and subsequently the Romans, there was a change in the collection of taxes, whereby the office of tax collector was sold to the highest bidder, who in turn extracted the maximum payment from the people and built up his own wealth from the surplus generated. At times, the Jews were paying tithes for the maintenance of the temple, in addition to taxes of as much as one-third of the grain and half of the fruit grown. Excise, sales, and poll taxes were also collected.<\/p>\n<p>After the extortionate level of tax imposed by Pompey, Julius Caesar reduced the amount paid by the Jews and exempted them from all payment in the sabbatical year. The provinces were considered booty by the Romans and were plundered physically by the army and financially by the tax collectors. In imperial times there was greater regulation of the tax system. An income tax was imposed on produce from the field and from artisans and tradesmen, as well as a poll tax, port duties, sales taxes, an auction tax, and an estate duty.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the taxes paid to foreign powers, all Jews worldwide who were 20 years of age and older (Ex 30:11-16) were assessed a half-shekel per person annually as a tax to support the temple in Jerusalem (Mt 17:24), a tax that continued to be levied even after the destruction of the temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70. Jesus was questioned on the validity of this tax (v 25) as well as the lawfulness of payment of taxes to Rome (Mt 22:17; Mk 12:14-15; Lk 20:22). Despite Jesus’ famous reply—“render to Caesar that which is Caesar’s and to God that which is God’s” (Mt 22:21; Mk 12:17; Lk 20:25)—he was still accused before Pilate of forbidding the Jews to give taxes to Caesar (Lk 23:2). The early church also reinforced the legality of taxation as a legitimate responsibility required of all people (Rom 13:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Money; Banker, Banking; Tax Collector.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TAX, TAXATION<\/h3>\n<p>Amount of money or goods that was extracted by the powerful nations from those whom they subjected. It commonly consisted of gold, silver, animals, produce, or forced labor. Taxes were also levied on the people both by their ruler and by the priesthood to pay for the maintenance of the temple. The term “tribute” is first used in the <span>kjv<\/span> in Genesis 49:15 (<span>nlt<\/span> “forced labor”). In Numbers 31:28 the spoils of battle were divided up to include a tribute or levy for the priesthood. For the Hebrews the temple tribute was originally a voluntary offering to the Lord (Dt 16:10) but later became a prescribed tax (Mt 17:24).<\/p>\n<p>Even in 2500 <span>BC<\/span> in the city of Lagash, taxes were imposed on most facets of life, from the means of earning a livelihood, to marriage, divorce, and death. Like many ancient peoples, the Sumerians believed that the land belonged to the god and his representative the king, and that therefore a rent or levy was payable to the owner.<\/p>\n<p>In Egypt, Joseph exacted a burdensome 20-percent tax in grain during the seven years of plenty, which alleviated the food shortages during the subsequent seven years of famine (Gn 41:25–42:5). The tax on the crops was facilitated because in Egypt the ownership of the land was vested in the ruler.<\/p>\n<p>Warrior kings, such as David, were able to maintain a healthy treasury without taxing their own people. The Canaanites and neighboring conquered peoples contributed great wealth to the treasury (2 Sm 8:6-14; 1 Chr 27:25-31), one list of which included silver, gold, bronze, 1,700 horsemen, and 20,000 foot soldiers. Forced labor was often required by David and his successors of aliens who remained within the boundaries of the Israelite kingdom (Jos 16:10; 17:13; Jgs 1:28).<\/p>\n<p>Israel was probably first taxed during Solomon’s reign. In this more stable period, income came from tribute but not from booty. To maintain the grandeur of the court and the extensive building program, Solomon divided Israel into 12 areas, each under an officer, each of whom provided food and support for the king and his household for one month per year (1 Kgs 4:7). Solomon also derived considerable income from levying custom duties on trading caravans that passed regularly through his kingdom. In addition to all of this, both foreigners and native Israelites were subject to forced labor for major building projects, especially for the temple (1 Kgs 5:13; 9:20-21; 2 Chr 8:7-8). Handles from ten-gallon (37.9-liter) jars have been excavated, bearing a Hebrew stamp “to the king,” indicating that they formed part of a levy (2 Chr 2:10).<\/p>\n<p>Jehoshaphat was equally successful in taxing the people at home (2 Chr 17:5) and maintaining the tribute from abroad, including silver and gold from the Philistines and 7,700 rams and 7,700 he-goats from the Arabs (2 Chr 17:11-12). As the power of the surrounding empires increased, Judah found itself forced to pay tribute. Sennacherib, king of Assyria, required 300 talents of silver and 30 talents of gold, which necessitated the removal of the gold from the temple doors (2 Kgs 18:14-16). Approximately a century later, Pharaoh Neco required 100 talents of silver and a talent of gold from Judah (23:33), and shortly thereafter Nebuchadnezzar removed all the treasure from the temple and the royal palace, together with 10,000 captives, all the craftsmen, and 1,000 smiths, leaving few in Jerusalem except the poor (24:13-16).<\/p>\n<p>A definite, regular, organized tax system was instituted by the Persians, whose satraps, ruling each province, were required to make payment of fixed sums into the royal treasury (Est 10:1). Tax exemption was introduced by Artaxerxes I, who stated that levies should not be collected from priests, Levites, or any others occupied in any way with the service of the temple (Ezr 7:24). An additional tax was required for the maintenance of the governor’s household; it consisted of food, wine, and 40 shekels of silver (Neh 5:14-15). As governor, Nehemiah did not claim this allowance of food because he considered the taxes already burdensome, causing the mortgaging of fields, vineyards, and houses “for the king’s tax.” Simultaneously, a levy was imposed upon the Jews for the rebuilding of the walls of Jerusalem (4:6). Darius was politically astute enough to encourage the rebuilding of the temple and to allow the Jews to use some of the royal tax money for this purpose (Ezr 6:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Under the Seleucids, the Ptolemies, and subsequently the Romans, there was a change in the collection of taxes, whereby the office of tax collector was sold to the highest bidder, who in turn extracted the maximum payment from the people and built up his own wealth from the surplus generated. At times, the Jews were paying tithes for the maintenance of the temple, in addition to taxes of as much as one-third of the grain and half of the fruit grown. Excise, sales, and poll taxes were also collected.<\/p>\n<p>After the extortionate level of tax imposed by Pompey, Julius Caesar reduced the amount paid by the Jews and exempted them from all payment in the sabbatical year. The provinces were considered booty by the Romans and were plundered physically by the army and financially by the tax collectors. In imperial times there was greater regulation of the tax system. An income tax was imposed on produce from the field and from artisans and tradesmen, as well as a poll tax, port duties, sales taxes, an auction tax, and an estate duty.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the taxes paid to foreign powers, all Jews worldwide who were 20 years of age and older (Ex 30:11-16) were assessed a half-shekel per person annually as a tax to support the temple in Jerusalem (Mt 17:24), a tax that continued to be levied even after the destruction of the temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70. Jesus was questioned on the validity of this tax (v 25) as well as the lawfulness of payment of taxes to Rome (Mt 22:17; Mk 12:14-15; Lk 20:22). Despite Jesus’ famous reply—“render to Caesar that which is Caesar’s and to God that which is God’s” (Mt 22:21; Mk 12:17; Lk 20:25)—he was still accused before Pilate of forbidding the Jews to give taxes to Caesar (Lk 23:2). The early church also reinforced the legality of taxation as a legitimate responsibility required of all people (Rom 13:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Money; Banker, Banking; Tax Collector.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TAX, TAXATION Amount of money or goods that was extracted by the powerful nations from those whom they subjected. It commonly consisted of gold, silver, animals, produce, or forced labor. Taxes were also levied on the people both by their ruler and by the priesthood to pay for the maintenance of the temple. The term “tribute” is first used in the kjv in Genesis 49:15 (nlt “forced labor”). In Numbers 31:28 the spoils of battle were divided up to include a tribute or levy for the priesthood. Fo...","summary_en":"TAX, TAXATION Amount of money or goods that was extracted by the powerful nations from those whom they subjected. It commonly consisted of gold, silver, animals, produce, or forced labor. Taxes were also levied on the people both by their ruler and by the priesthood to pay for the maintenance of the temple. The term “tribute” is first used in the kjv in Genesis 49:15 (nlt “forced labor”). In Numbers 31:28 the spoils of battle were divided up to include a tribute or levy for the priesthood. Fo...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":48175,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:14","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:14-19<\/strong> This section describes Nehemiah’s consistent policy of servant leadership and personal generosity.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:14-19<\/strong> This section describes Nehemiah’s consistent policy of servant leadership and personal generosity.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:14-19 This section describes Nehemiah’s consistent policy of servant leadership and personal generosity.","summary_en":"5:14-19 This section describes Nehemiah’s consistent policy of servant leadership and personal generosity.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":48176,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:14","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:14<\/strong> This is the first mention of Nehemiah’s status as <em>governor<\/em><em>,<\/em> a position not mentioned when the king first sent Nehemiah to Jerusalem. • Persia’s government officials usually <em>drew<\/em> an <em>official food allowance<\/em> from the local population, but Nehemiah and his associates instead purchased food out of their regular pay.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:14<\/strong> This is the first mention of Nehemiah’s status as <em>governor<\/em><em>,<\/em> a position not mentioned when the king first sent Nehemiah to Jerusalem. • Persia’s government officials usually <em>drew<\/em> an <em>official food allowance<\/em> from the local population, but Nehemiah and his associates instead purchased food out of their regular pay.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:14 This is the first mention of Nehemiah’s status as governor, a position not mentioned when the king first sent Nehemiah to Jerusalem. • Persia’s government officials usually drew an official food allowance from the local population, but Nehemiah and his associates instead purchased food out of their regular pay.","summary_en":"5:14 This is the first mention of Nehemiah’s status as governor, a position not mentioned when the king first sent Nehemiah to Jerusalem. • Persia’s government officials usually drew an official food allowance from the local population, but Nehemiah and his associates instead purchased food out of their regular pay.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75801,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:14","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:14-19<\/strong> This section describes Nehemiah’s consistent policy of servant leadership and personal generosity.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:14-19<\/strong> This section describes Nehemiah’s consistent policy of servant leadership and personal generosity.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:14-19 This section describes Nehemiah’s consistent policy of servant leadership and personal generosity.","summary_en":"5:14-19 This section describes Nehemiah’s consistent policy of servant leadership and personal generosity.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75802,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:14","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:14<\/strong> This is the first mention of Nehemiah’s status as <em>governor<\/em><em>,<\/em> a position not mentioned when the king first sent Nehemiah to Jerusalem. • Persia’s government officials usually <em>drew<\/em> an <em>official food allowance<\/em> from the local population, but Nehemiah and his associates instead purchased food out of their regular pay.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:14<\/strong> This is the first mention of Nehemiah’s status as <em>governor<\/em><em>,<\/em> a position not mentioned when the king first sent Nehemiah to Jerusalem. • Persia’s government officials usually <em>drew<\/em> an <em>official food allowance<\/em> from the local population, but Nehemiah and his associates instead purchased food out of their regular pay.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:14 This is the first mention of Nehemiah’s status as governor, a position not mentioned when the king first sent Nehemiah to Jerusalem. • Persia’s government officials usually drew an official food allowance from the local population, but Nehemiah and his associates instead purchased food out of their regular pay.","summary_en":"5:14 This is the first mention of Nehemiah’s status as governor, a position not mentioned when the king first sent Nehemiah to Jerusalem. • Persia’s government officials usually drew an official food allowance from the local population, but Nehemiah and his associates instead purchased food out of their regular pay.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103427,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:14","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:14-19<\/strong> This section describes Nehemiah’s consistent policy of servant leadership and personal generosity.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:14-19<\/strong> This section describes Nehemiah’s consistent policy of servant leadership and personal generosity.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:14-19 This section describes Nehemiah’s consistent policy of servant leadership and personal generosity.","summary_en":"5:14-19 This section describes Nehemiah’s consistent policy of servant leadership and personal generosity.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103428,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:14","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:14<\/strong> This is the first mention of Nehemiah’s status as <em>governor<\/em><em>,<\/em> a position not mentioned when the king first sent Nehemiah to Jerusalem. • Persia’s government officials usually <em>drew<\/em> an <em>official food allowance<\/em> from the local population, but Nehemiah and his associates instead purchased food out of their regular pay.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:14<\/strong> This is the first mention of Nehemiah’s status as <em>governor<\/em><em>,<\/em> a position not mentioned when the king first sent Nehemiah to Jerusalem. • Persia’s government officials usually <em>drew<\/em> an <em>official food allowance<\/em> from the local population, but Nehemiah and his associates instead purchased food out of their regular pay.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:14 This is the first mention of Nehemiah’s status as governor, a position not mentioned when the king first sent Nehemiah to Jerusalem. • Persia’s government officials usually drew an official food allowance from the local population, but Nehemiah and his associates instead purchased food out of their regular pay.","summary_en":"5:14 This is the first mention of Nehemiah’s status as governor, a position not mentioned when the king first sent Nehemiah to Jerusalem. • Persia’s government officials usually drew an official food allowance from the local population, but Nehemiah and his associates instead purchased food out of their regular pay.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":131053,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:14","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:14-19<\/strong> This section describes Nehemiah’s consistent policy of servant leadership and personal generosity.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:14-19<\/strong> This section describes Nehemiah’s consistent policy of servant leadership and personal generosity.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:14-19 This section describes Nehemiah’s consistent policy of servant leadership and personal generosity.","summary_en":"5:14-19 This section describes Nehemiah’s consistent policy of servant leadership and personal generosity.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":131054,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:14","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:14<\/strong> This is the first mention of Nehemiah’s status as <em>governor<\/em><em>,<\/em> a position not mentioned when the king first sent Nehemiah to Jerusalem. • Persia’s government officials usually <em>drew<\/em> an <em>official food allowance<\/em> from the local population, but Nehemiah and his associates instead purchased food out of their regular pay.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:14<\/strong> This is the first mention of Nehemiah’s status as <em>governor<\/em><em>,<\/em> a position not mentioned when the king first sent Nehemiah to Jerusalem. • Persia’s government officials usually <em>drew<\/em> an <em>official food allowance<\/em> from the local population, but Nehemiah and his associates instead purchased food out of their regular pay.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:14 This is the first mention of Nehemiah’s status as governor, a position not mentioned when the king first sent Nehemiah to Jerusalem. • Persia’s government officials usually drew an official food allowance from the local population, but Nehemiah and his associates instead purchased food out of their regular pay.","summary_en":"5:14 This is the first mention of Nehemiah’s status as governor, a position not mentioned when the king first sent Nehemiah to Jerusalem. • Persia’s government officials usually drew an official food allowance from the local population, but Nehemiah and his associates instead purchased food out of their regular pay.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":48177,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:15","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:15<\/strong> <em>The former governors<\/em> were probably Nehemiah’s immediate predecessors, not Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1:8, about ninety years earlier) or Zerubbabel (Hag 1:1, about eighty years earlier).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:15<\/strong> <em>The former governors<\/em> were probably Nehemiah’s immediate predecessors, not Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1:8, about ninety years earlier) or Zerubbabel (Hag 1:1, about eighty years earlier).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:15 The former governors were probably Nehemiah’s immediate predecessors, not Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1:8, about ninety years earlier) or Zerubbabel (Hag 1:1, about eighty years earlier).","summary_en":"5:15 The former governors were probably Nehemiah’s immediate predecessors, not Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1:8, about ninety years earlier) or Zerubbabel (Hag 1:1, about eighty years earlier).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75803,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:15","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:15<\/strong> <em>The former governors<\/em> were probably Nehemiah’s immediate predecessors, not Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1:8, about ninety years earlier) or Zerubbabel (Hag 1:1, about eighty years earlier).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:15<\/strong> <em>The former governors<\/em> were probably Nehemiah’s immediate predecessors, not Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1:8, about ninety years earlier) or Zerubbabel (Hag 1:1, about eighty years earlier).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:15 The former governors were probably Nehemiah’s immediate predecessors, not Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1:8, about ninety years earlier) or Zerubbabel (Hag 1:1, about eighty years earlier).","summary_en":"5:15 The former governors were probably Nehemiah’s immediate predecessors, not Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1:8, about ninety years earlier) or Zerubbabel (Hag 1:1, about eighty years earlier).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103429,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:15","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:15<\/strong> <em>The former governors<\/em> were probably Nehemiah’s immediate predecessors, not Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1:8, about ninety years earlier) or Zerubbabel (Hag 1:1, about eighty years earlier).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:15<\/strong> <em>The former governors<\/em> were probably Nehemiah’s immediate predecessors, not Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1:8, about ninety years earlier) or Zerubbabel (Hag 1:1, about eighty years earlier).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:15 The former governors were probably Nehemiah’s immediate predecessors, not Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1:8, about ninety years earlier) or Zerubbabel (Hag 1:1, about eighty years earlier).","summary_en":"5:15 The former governors were probably Nehemiah’s immediate predecessors, not Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1:8, about ninety years earlier) or Zerubbabel (Hag 1:1, about eighty years earlier).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":131055,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:15","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:15<\/strong> <em>The former governors<\/em> were probably Nehemiah’s immediate predecessors, not Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1:8, about ninety years earlier) or Zerubbabel (Hag 1:1, about eighty years earlier).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:15<\/strong> <em>The former governors<\/em> were probably Nehemiah’s immediate predecessors, not Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1:8, about ninety years earlier) or Zerubbabel (Hag 1:1, about eighty years earlier).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:15 The former governors were probably Nehemiah’s immediate predecessors, not Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1:8, about ninety years earlier) or Zerubbabel (Hag 1:1, about eighty years earlier).","summary_en":"5:15 The former governors were probably Nehemiah’s immediate predecessors, not Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1:8, about ninety years earlier) or Zerubbabel (Hag 1:1, about eighty years earlier).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":5047,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Birds","title_en":"Birds","content_ro":"<h3>BIRDS<\/h3>\n\n<p>Feathered vertebrates of the class Aves. Over 8,000 species of birds are known. Approximately 400 species are found in the Holy Land and about 40 are mentioned in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Modern scientists classify organisms on the basis of internal and external structure, but the biblical writers generally classified organisms according to habitat. Thus, in the Bible, bats are listed with birds as creatures of the air (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>Precise identification of biblical birds is often difficult or impossible. The biblical languages were not highly specialized scientific languages. People in biblical times generally knew the difference between similar animals now categorized as separate species. For birds, however, they frequently used poetic, descriptive terms. Biblical scholars attempt to overcome the difficulties in identification by comparing the Hebrew words with similar words in related languages and by attention to the habitat, habits, and characteristics attributed to the birds in Scripture. Nevertheless, different scholars sometimes arrive at different identifications.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalReferencestoBirds\">Biblical References to Birds<\/p>\n<p>The Bible refers to birds both in literal and figurative senses. The biblical writers were keen observers of nature, their awareness of birds and bird life being reflected in many passages. They asserted that God knows all the birds (Ps 50:11) and cares for them (Mt 10:29). They saw God’s covenant with Noah after the flood, his promise never to destroy life again by flood, as extending even to the birds and animals (Gn 9:10).<\/p>\n<p>The Mosaic law declared many birds “unclean,” mostly species that were scavengers or predators, or inhabited waste places. Centuries later the early Christians came to regard unclean species as clean by God’s decree, revealed in the apostle Peter’s vision (Acts 10:12). Other birds, like quail, sustained the Israelites in their wanderings (Ex 16:13). The Law prescribed birds as sacrifices for a firstborn child (Lk 2:24), for a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10), for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:22), and as a burnt offering and sin offering (12:8).<\/p>\n<p>Birds are easily subject to extinction, especially through human activity. God required the Israelites to practice conservation to prevent any birds from becoming extinct in the Holy Land, both for the birds’ sake and so the Israelites would have a continuous source of food. The Law allowed foraging Israelites to take eggs or the young from a bird’s nest, but they were not permitted to kill both a mother bird and her young (Dt 22:6).<\/p>\n<p>Biblical writers turned to nature frequently for illustrations of divine principles or human characteristics. Comparisons of humans to birds sometimes carry a sense of lowness, as when King Nebuchadnezzar developed claws like a bird in his madness (Dn 4:33), or when Job remarked that birds did not know the source of wisdom (Jb 28:21). In Jesus’ parable of the sower, the birds that ate the seed scattered by the wayside may represent indifference and a lack of spiritual understanding (Mt 13:4).<\/p>\n<p>Scripture also contains sympathetic images of the plight of birds. A lonely man praying was likened to a lonely bird on a housetop (Ps 102:7). If someone was unjustly hunted by his enemies, he would understand a hunted bird’s plight (Lam 3:52). Birds were said to be affected by curses on evildoers as they fled from Jerusalem or from the face of the earth (Jer 9:10; Zep 1:3).<\/p>\n<p>In spite of such misfortune visited upon birds, Scripture affirms that, like other creatures, they are cared for and delighted in by God (Ps 50:11; Mt 6:26; 10:29). Both Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar were compared to a tree that gives shelter to the birds (Ez 31:6; Dn 4:12; cf. 2:38). Human power, however, fails eventually as when the tree representing Nebuchadnezzar was cut down, forcing the birds to flee (Dn 4:14). God’s protection, by contrast, is unfailing. Jesus likened the kingdom of God to a mustard seed, growing to become a shelter for birds (Mt 13:32). God provides a habitation for birds (Ps 104:12), although Jesus, the Son of Man, had nowhere to rest his head (Mt 8:20).<\/p>\n<p>Birds were considered evidence of God’s handiwork (Jb 12:7). Bird lore provided examples of good sense in learning from a mistake (Prv 1:17; 6:5) and of bad judgment in failing to avoid the snares of immorality (7:23). Birds and other creatures could be tamed, unlike the wicked human tongue (Jas 3:7). Birds flying without alighting were an image of an undeserved curse (Prv 26:2). Without trust in God, people might be forced by evil to flee like a bird to the mountains (Ps 11:1). Birdsong was said to bring joy (Sg 2:12). The return of God’s people to the Promised Land would be like birds returning (Hos 11:11). Jesus expressed his love for Jerusalem by saying that he longed to gather his people to himself as a hen gathers her brood under her wing (Mt 23:37).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, birds were occasionally regarded as ominous signs. For example, Pharaoh’s baker learned of impending death because in a dream birds ate the food from a basket on his head (Gn 40:17). Solomon warned against cursing the king, even in private, because “a little bird may tell them what you said” (Eccl 10:20). A vivid biblical image is that of scavenging, carrion-eating birds consuming the bodies of evildoers. To the Israelites, such a desecration of humanity was an image of ultimate horror (Dt 28:26; 1 Sm 17:44; Is 46:11; Jer 7:33; 12:9; Ez 29:5; 39:4; Rv 19:17, 21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IndividualSpecies\">Individual Species<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Bittern\">Bittern<\/p>\n<p>Long-legged wading bird <em>(Botaurus stellaris)<\/em> similar to the heron, but with shorter legs and a smaller, more compact body. Bitterns inhabit marshes, where it is easy for them to hide with their natural camouflage. A bittern’s mottled plumage of barred brown and black so duplicates the color and shape of swamp vegetation that at times the bird seems to disappear before the observer’s eyes. The neck is covered with long, soft feathers, making it appear disproportionately heavy. Bitterns are wary and solitary. During mating season the bittern’s larynx is modified to produce a mysterious-sounding cry. The body twists in an unusual manner in harmony with the notes. Bitterns nest alone in grassy marshes. Because they are shy, they have become symbols of places of desolation and loneliness.<\/p>\n<p>There is some question as to whether the bittern is actually mentioned in the Bible. The <span>kjv<\/span> has “bittern” in three places (Is 14:23; 34:11; Zep 2:14). Many biblical scholars believe the Hebrew word in those verses refers not to the bittern but to the hedgehog (Is 14:23; Zep 2:14, <span>rsv<\/span>) or porcupine (Is 34:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). The Hebrew word is similar to an Arabic word meaning “porcupine.” Other scholars point out that the references suggest a bird rather than a mammal, especially Zephaniah 2:14, which speaks of the creature making its “lodge in her capitals” (i.e., above Nineveh’s doorposts). Bitterns are particularly abundant in the swamps of the Tigris River (near Nineveh). The bittern’s characteristics may fit the references in the three passages better than do the hedgehog’s.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Hedgehog; Animals (Porcupine).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Buzzard\">Buzzard<\/p>\n<p>Hawklike soaring bird <em>(Buteo vulgaris<\/em> or <em>Buteo ferox).<\/em> It resembles the kite, though its tail is straight and not cleft. It is mentioned in the list of unclean birds (Dt 14:13). But other translations render the word as “glede” (<span>kjv<\/span>) or “kite” (<span>nasb<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>). The parallel list in Leviticus 11, however, substitutes “kite” (<span>rsv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>) or “vulture” (<span>kjv<\/span>) for “buzzard.” Thus, it is difficult to determine whether the buzzard is actually mentioned in the Bible, even though it is a common resident of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Like other great soaring birds, the buzzard is noted for its sharp eyesight, and may be the bird mentioned for that quality in Job 28:7 (variously translated “falcon,” “eagle,” or “vulture”). It will trail its prey for hours, and has a remarkable ability to see a carcass on which it descends to feed. Somewhat larger than the common buzzard is the long-legged buzzard, found in Israel, western Asia, and Syria.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Kestrel; Kite; Vulture (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Cormorant\">Cormorant<\/p>\n<p>Large, black gooselike bird <em>(Phalacrocorax carbo),<\/em> repeatedly depicted in art from Egypt and the Holy Land. Its length varies from 19 to 40 inches (48.3 to 101.6 centimeters). Its feet have webs between all four toes. The feet, attached far back on the body, serve as propellers when the cormorant dives to catch its meal of fish, crustacea, or amphibia. The long bill is curved at the tip, and under the bill is a sac in which the cormorant keeps the captured fish.<\/p>\n<p>Cormorants live in large companies, making nests of sticks and other vegetation that they carry to trees or to rocky shelves near coasts. Up to four eggs are incubated, and the young are fed by both parents.<\/p>\n<p>The cormorant frequents swamps around the Sea of Galilee, Lake Huleh (the waters of Merom), and the Mediterranean coast. Its Hebrew name originally denoted the “hurling down” of the bird at its prey. Cormorants dive into deep water and sometimes seem to zoom beneath the surface in their hunt for fish. The cormorant’s greed is proverbial. It was ceremonially unclean for the Israelites (Lv 11:17; Dt 14:17).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Pelican (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Crane\">Crane<\/p>\n<p>Tall wading birds <em>(Grus grus)<\/em> resembling storks and herons but with shorter talons. The plumage has a silvery gloss and the tail feathers are wavy. Large flocks of cranes flying in wedge-shaped formations pass over the Holy Land during the daylight hours each fall on their way to Africa from the northern countries of Europe and again in the spring when they return north to breed. Migratory flocks may number as many as 2,000 birds. Jeremiah 8:7 refers to the crane’s migratory habits.<\/p>\n<p>The usual call of the crane is best described as a bellow, but during migratory flight they emit a chattering sound that may be referred to in Isaiah 38:14. Cranes have remarkably powerful voices, their calls seeming to carry for miles. Migrating flocks usually have a flock leader who does the calling.<\/p>\n<p>A crane’s height may reach 40 to 60 inches (101.6 to 152.4 centimeters). Except for the ostrich, the crane is the tallest bird ever to inhabit the Holy Land. A crane’s wingspread may exceed 90 inches (228.6 centimeters). The overall color is steel gray; the head and neck are black with a longitudinal white stripe. The crane feeds on land rather than in shallow water. It feeds primarily on grass and grain yet may devour insects, snakes, small alligators, frogs, and worms, using its long, powerful bill as a sharp hammer for killing such creatures.<\/p>\n<p>The crane usually nests in solitary places, often in shallow water or nearby. Its nest is a mass of vegetation, holding two or three eggs that are light-colored with darker spots.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Cuckoo\">Cuckoo<\/p>\n<p>Small, drab brown bird known for its parasitic habits. The term the <span>kjv<\/span> used in Leviticus 11:16 and Deuteronomy 14:15 may refer either to the common cuckoo <em>(Cuculus canorus)<\/em> or to the great spotted cuckoo <em>(Clamator glandarius).<\/em> The bird acts as a brood parasite, laying its eggs in the nest of another species after pushing out one of the eggs of the host species. The young cuckoo hatches before the young of the host species and evicts the other young. The foster parents raise it as their own.<\/p>\n<p>The cuckoo, an insect eater, is considered ritually unclean in Scripture, which might imply that it is a predator or carrion-eater. For that reason some believe the Hebrew word actually refers to the seagull or sea mew rather than the cuckoo. Gulls, terns, and petrels are all common on the seashore and lakes of the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>Other scholars believe that the Hebrew word refers not to the cuckoo but to one of the owls, possibly the long-eared owl.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl; Seagull (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Eagle\">Eagle<\/p>\n<p>Large bird of prey, genus <em>Aquila.<\/em> Vultures were often confused with eagles, making identification of the biblical birds difficult. Eagles’ heads are not bald as are the heads of vultures, but from a distance they appear similar. It is possible that the Hebrew word translated “eagle” (which literally means “to tear with the beak”) may have referred to all large birds of prey, eagles and vultures alike. A number of references to the eagle in Scripture are actually references to the griffon vulture (e.g., Hos 8:1; perhaps Mt 24:28). In certain passages, however, the true eagle may be meant.<\/p>\n<p>The Holy Land has several varieties of eagle, including the imperial eagle <em>(Aquila heliaca)<\/em> and the less common golden eagle <em>(Aquila chrysaetos).<\/em> These birds are powerfully built with strong wings; their movements reveal suppleness and strength. A distinctive hooked beak, which enhances the eagle’s dignified and somewhat ferocious appearance, provides it with an effective instrument for tearing and killing prey. Short, powerful legs and prehensile claws enable an eagle to apply an almost unbreakable grip on a struggling victim. The strong talons have sharp points and edges. The eagle hunts by day.<\/p>\n<p>For Jeremiah and other prophets, the eagle was the epitome of swiftness. The golden eagle, which can fly three or four miles (5–7 kilometers) in ten minutes, may have evoked the comparisons in 2 Samuel 1:23;Jeremiah 4:13; 49:22; Lamentations 4:19 (<span>kjv<\/span>), and Habakkuk 1:8. Moses used a similar comparison to emphasize the sudden striking power of a hostile enemy (Dt 28:49). The author of Proverbs, observing the high altitude to which the eagle soars, applied that image to the human situation (Prv 23:4-5; cf. Rv 12:14).<\/p>\n<p>The eagle’s strength and invincibility were mentioned often with reference to powerful nations attacking Israel. The prophet Ezekiel described Nebuchadnezzar as an eagle (Ez 17:3). Both the Babylonians and Assyrians frequently depicted the eagle in their art, especially as a deity with a man’s body and an eagle’s head. Nebuchadnezzar even had an experience of temporary insanity in which “his hair grew as long as eagles’ feathers, and his nails were like birds’ claws” (Dn 4:33, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eagle builds its nest on inaccessible mountain peaks or at the top of the tallest trees, a fact noted by Jeremiah (Jer 49:16; cf. Jb 39:27-28; Ob 1:4). The brood consists of two or occasionally three eggs. Only the female sits on the nest, but the young eaglets are fed by both parents. Eagles are devoted to their offspring and train them with great care in the art of flying. Some commentators interpret Exodus 19:4 and Deuteronomy 32:11 as evidence of the eagle’s practice of catching its young on its wings. There is virtually no evidence from observation, however, that any eagle can perform such a feat. In some versions the wording avoids a direct statement that eagles bear their young on their wings.<\/p>\n<p>Some eagles in captivity have lived to an age of over 100 years. This remarkable longevity caused the psalmist to speak of the eagle whose youth is renewed (Ps 103:5). Confronted by its impressive qualities, biblical authors observed the eagle with awe and wonder (Jb 39:27-30; Prv 30:18-19). Those awesome qualities also contributed to several prophetic visions, including Ezekiel’s vision of a creature with an eagle’s face (Ez 1:10) and the apostle John’s vision of a holy beast like a flying eagle (Rv 4:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Vulture (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"FowlDomestic\">Fowl, Domestic<\/p>\n<p>Domesticated poultry <em>(Gallus gallus domesticus),<\/em> probably derived from the red jungle fowl of India. They seem to have been known already in OT times (Prv 30:31). A seal of Jaazaniah (see 2 Kgs 25:23), dating from about 600 <span>BC<\/span>, bears the image of a fighting cock. A reference to fowls or poultry for Nehemiah’s table, however, may be to wild game rather than domestic fowl (Neh 5:18).<\/p>\n<p>Poultry symbolized fertility, and the Jews carried a cock and hen in front of bridal couples at weddings. The motherly concern of hens gathering their broods was familiar to Jesus’ hearers (Mt 23:37; Lk 13:34).<\/p>\n<p>Since roosters habitually crow an hour or two before dawn, the third watch of the night, from midnight to 3:00 <span>am<\/span>, was known as the cockcrow. According to the Talmud (a commentary on Jewish law), keeping chickens was prohibited in Jerusalem in NT times to prevent the insects and larvae that breed in chicken droppings from contaminating sacrificial flesh. For that reason the cock that Peter heard (Mt 26:34, 74; Lk 22:34, 60-61) probably belonged to Romans living there or to Jews who did not follow Jewish regulations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"GoatsuckerorNightHawk\">Goatsucker or Night Hawk<\/p>\n<p>Migratory bird, dark in color and short-legged, similar to the American whippoorwill. The goatsucker (genus <em>Caprimulgus<\/em>) resembles an owl with a flat head, large eyes, soft plumage, and a noiseless flight. It hunts insects at night, catches them on the wing, and during the day rests on branches. Goatsuckers were so named because they were thought by the ancients to milk goats. According to Leviticus 11:16 and Deuteronomy 14:15, they were ritually unclean. Although some scholars believe that an owl is intended, there seems to be good reason to accept the “night hawk” translation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Goose\">Goose<\/p>\n<p>Long-necked, web-footed water birds with waterproof feathers (genus <em>Anser<\/em>). Domestic geese were known to the Greeks of Homer’s day, since they are mentioned in the <em>Odyssey.<\/em> They were domesticated in Egypt perhaps as early as the Old Kingdom (c. 2500 <span>BC<\/span>) and certainly by the time of the New Kingdom (c. 1500– 1100 <span>BC<\/span>). They were used for food and sacrifice. The breeding of geese was widespread in Canaan in biblical times; ivory carvings of the 13th or 12th century <span>BC<\/span> showing geese have been found in excavations at Megiddo in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Many species of geese spend most of their lives on land even though they are waterfowl; some even build their nests in trees. Wild geese tend to inhabit flatlands and prairies rather than mountainous terrain.<\/p>\n<p>Geese may have graced the table of King Solomon. In 1 Kings 4:23 they are referred to as “fatted fowl,” a term that may also refer to ducks, swans, guineas, pigeons, or other domestic edible birds.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Hawk\">Hawk<\/p>\n<p>Small birds of prey found in the Holy Land. Most references are probably to the sparrow hawk <em>(Accipter nisus).<\/em> This bird is slightly larger than the kestrel, has a grayish-brown back and a white belly with black and brown bars. It has short feathers, long, curved talons, and broad wings, rounded at the outer ends, which enable it to soar on updrafts. The long tail, acting as a rudder, helps the bird change its course swiftly in flight. It is hence very maneuverable in the air when chasing warblers or other small birds. It does not seize its prey on the ground, as does the kestrel, but hunts and attacks small birds in flight. Hawks hunt in the daytime, unlike owls that are adapted for nighttime hunting. With their eyes located on the side of the head, hawks are very keen-sighted. They usually nest in tall trees and their nests are often occupied by the same pair year after year.<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptians embalmed sparrow hawks and regarded all hawks highly. The god Horus was depicted with the head of a hawk hawk was ceremonially unclean to the Israelites (Lv 11:16; Dt 14:15). It was not a permanent resident of Israel but stopped off as it migrated from north to south. Its southward migration is mentioned in Job 39:26. A reference in Isaiah 34:11 to “hawk” (“cormorant,” <span>kjv<\/span>) is uncertain. <em>See<\/em> Kestrel or Falcon; Kite (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Heron\">Heron<\/p>\n<p>Wading bird (genus <em>Ardea<\/em>) with a long, thin neck and long legs. It has a characteristic comblike growth on the inner side of the third toe.<\/p>\n<p>Herons are generally white, blue, green, or gray. They nest together in rookeries, and both parents bring in food for the young. Herons feed on fish, small reptiles, and insects, gulping them down in one swallow. Adults and young migrate in the late fall to warm southern climates. The white heron attains a length of more than 3 feet (.9 meter), whereas the dwarf heron is only about 22 inches (55.9 centimeters) long.<\/p>\n<p>At least seven varieties of heron are reported in the Holy Land. The white ibis, or buff-backed heron (<em>Buphus russatus<\/em>), was probably the most common species. The purple heron <em>(Ardea purpureus)<\/em> is a summer breeder found in all parts of the Holy Land where there is standing water.<\/p>\n<p>The blue-gray heron (<em>Ardea cinerea<\/em>) winters in southern Europe and North Africa, migrating to northern Europe in the early spring. In Israel it builds its winter nest near water, in swamps and along riverbanks, where it feeds on fish and frogs. It will stand patiently in the water for hours, and then suddenly its long, pointed beak darts down with lightning speed to catch its prey. Often the blue-gray heron builds its nest in a tall tree to which it may return year after year.<\/p>\n<p>According to Leviticus 11:19 and Deuteronomy 14:18, the heron was ceremonially unclean to the Israelites. Some scholars believe those references are to the cormorant, but most scholars think they refer to one of the herons.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cormorant (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Hoopoe\">Hoopoe<\/p>\n<p>One of the Holy Land’s most beautiful birds (<em>Upupa epops<\/em>). It has vividly colored plumage, a lovely crown-shaped crest that becomes erect when the bird is alarmed, and a long, slender curved bill. The pinkish-brown hoopoe is about 11 inches (27.9 centimeters) long, with black and white bands on its back, tail, and wings. Hoopoes are basically desert-dwelling birds.<\/p>\n<p>The name “hoopoe” is derived from the sound of the bird’s call. To emit the sound, the neck feathers are puffed up and the head snapped in the air. When on the ground, the bird hammers its beak into the earth.<\/p>\n<p>The hoopoe arrives in the Holy Land in February, breeds in the summer, and leaves in September. It was held in religious reverence by the Egyptians. It was listed as ritually unclean (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18), probably because it searches for grubs and small insects in such unsanitary places as dunghills.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Ibis\">Ibis<\/p>\n<p>Wading bird (<em>Threskiornis aethiopica<\/em>) presently unknown in the Holy Land but possibly known there in biblical times. It was well known in ancient Egypt, where it was sacred to the god Thoth. Today it has practically vanished with the disappearance of swamps along the Nile.<\/p>\n<p>There is some question as to whether the ibis is meant in Leviticus 11:17, where it is classified as ceremonially unclean. The same Hebrew word in Deuteronomy 14:16 and Isaiah 34:11 is translated “great owl,” a translation preferred by most scholars.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl, Great (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"KestrelorFalcon\">Kestrel or Falcon<\/p>\n<p>Small hawk (<em>Falco tinnunculus<\/em>) about a foot (30.5 centimeters) long with brown, black, and yellow feathers on its breast. It was abundant in the Holy Land in villages and in the countryside, nesting on rooftops and among rocks. Like most hawks, the kestrel is able to hover and float in midair and then swoop down on its prey, seizing it with sharp, hooklike talons. It feeds largely on mice, small reptiles, and insects.<\/p>\n<p>Embalmed kestrels have been found in ancient Egyptian tombs. The Egyptians also embalmed the hunting kestrel <em>(Falco cherug),<\/em> which can be tamed and trained to hunt rabbits and other small game. Falconry (hunting with hawks of various species) was well known among the ancients and is still practiced today. That the Assyrians were familiar with falconry is seen in the records of Ashurbanipal. Because the kestrel is a predator, it was ceremonially unclean (Lv 11:14). Some translations render the word as “kite” (Lv 11:14, <span>kjv<\/span>; Dt 14:13, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>rsv<\/span>), an illustration of the difficulty of identifying biblical birds precisely.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Kite or Glede (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"KiteorGlede\">Kite or Glede<\/p>\n<p>Large bird of prey <em>(Milvus milvus).<\/em> The average length of the kite is about 19 inches (48.3 centimeters). The upper part is generally dark, but the belly is white. Kites nest high in trees and build nests of vegetation, including sticks. They rarely have more than two or three young, which they feed on snakes, grasshoppers, and so on. Sometimes kites are called snake hawks.<\/p>\n<p>The kite is a migratory bird that stays in Israel during the summer, especially in the mountains of southern Judea, in the trackless wastes west of the Dead Sea, and in the wilderness of Beersheba.<\/p>\n<p>The red kite or glede is a medium-sized bird of prey. The edges of the upper part of the bill overlap with the lower one, forming sharp scissors. The tail is forked or cleft like that of a fish. Its loud cry often includes sharp whistling notes. Other Holy Land species include the black kite <em>(Milvus migrans)<\/em> and the black-winged kite <em>(Elanus caeruleus).<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The kite is listed among the unclean birds in Mosaic law (Lv 11:14; Dt 14:13), but the precise identification of the birds mentioned there is disputed by some scholars and translators.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Buzzard; Kestrel or Falcon (above).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Lammergeier\">Lammergeier<\/p>\n<p>Largest of the vultures and less common than the other members of the family. It is grayish brown with white streaks and has a black tuft of stiff hairs in the facial area that gives it the name “bearded vulture.” Another name for it is “lamb vulture.”<\/p>\n<p>The lammergeier <em>(Gypaetus barbatus)<\/em> has a unique way of killing its prey; since its beak is not particularly powerful it carries its victim high in the air and then drops it on rocks.<\/p>\n<p>The lammergeier is especially partial to tortoises and to marrow bone. After jackals and smaller vultures have reduced a carcass to bone, the lammergeier crushes the bones to obtain the marrow, or swallows the pieces intact. Hence it is also known as the ossifrage, from a Latin word meaning “bone crusher.” The lammergeier was unclean in Mosaic law (Lv 11:13; Dt 14:13; both translated “vulture” in <span>nlt<\/span> and “ossifrage” in <span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Vulture (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Ostrich\">Ostrich<\/p>\n<p>Two-toed, swift-running, flightless bird (<em>Struthio camelus<\/em>) that lives in deserts or in areas covered with stunted bushes.<\/p>\n<p>In biblical times ostriches ranged as far north as Syria and were found over the entire wasteland of the Negev Desert, but they have since become extinct there. Its Hebrew name means “daughter of the desert.” It is the largest of all living birds, attaining a height of about 10 feet (3 meters) and a weight of 175 pounds (79.5 kilograms), though some males may weigh as much as 300 pounds (136.4 kilograms). The female is considerably smaller. Powerful thighs and long legs give the ostrich great speed, reported to be as high as 40 <span>mph<\/span> (64 <span>kph<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The ostrich is omnivorous. It eats grass, fruits, small mammals, birds, snakes, and lizards, as well as large pebbles that assist in the breakdown of food in its gizzard. The ostrich is hunted, but its eggs are generally more sought after than the bird itself. The empty shells are traded throughout the Mediterranean area for use as utensils, or when broken up as raw material for beads. The eggs—as many as 25 in one clutch—are laid in a shallow nest of sand, with some left uncovered. They may appear to be neglected by day, but only because they are ordinarily incubated at night. The cock does most of the incubating; the female participates only during cold days. The strong, thick eggshell protects the embryo from the heat of the desert.<\/p>\n<p>Occasionally the ostrich is used for riding or even for pulling small carts. Ostrich feathers are in great demand. Ostrich plumes graced ancient royal courts as fans. An ivory-handled fan of Pharaoh Tutankhamen (King Tut) had lovely ostrich plumes. The plumes are white in the male and brownish gray in the female. The reputation of the ostrich for stupidity comes from its behavior when hunted and cornered; it fails to take evasive action even when doing so would save it. In open country, however, it is very wary and runs at great speed to escape. In contrast to the partridge, an ostrich will run away from its eggs and chicks when pursued.<\/p>\n<p>Most biblical references to ostriches emphasize their negative characteristics. They were regarded as unclean in Jewish law (Lv 11:16; Dt 14:15). Several references associate ostriches with images of wilderness and desolation (Jb 30:29; Is 13:21; 34:13; 43:20; Jer 50:39). Their night cry, which has been compared to an ox’s lowing in pain, is referred to in Micah 1:8. Biblical writers also noted the apparent indifference of the ostrich to its brood (Jb 39:13-18; Lam 4:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Owl\">Owl<\/p>\n<p>Nocturnal birds (order Strigiformes) with large heads and large, forward-looking eyes. Their wing and tail feathers are soft as velvet, helping to make their flight noiseless. The owl’s body is small and slender, about the size of a pigeon, but it appears bulky because of the thick covering of feathers. Owls have been considered bearers of misfortune and omens of disaster. In the Near East, owls now live in temple ruins and pyramids in Egypt, and in rock-hewn graves, ruins, and caves on both sides of the Jordan River in Israel. They seldom come near inhabited dwellings.<\/p>\n<p>Owls have excellent night vision, which they use to capture rodents or other animals. Although unusually large, the owl’s eyes are almost useless in the daylight because the light dazzles them. The owl is able to swallow its prey whole because of its elastic esophagus. Indigestible hair and bones are regurgitated as pellets. The bill is short but sharply hooked.<\/p>\n<p>Owls may lay up to ten eggs. The young are cared for on the nest by both parents. Both adults and young tend to remain in the area in which they were hatched. Eight species of owls are found in the Holy Land, of which five are plentiful. It is difficult, however, to identify a particular species with any of the four Hebrew words translated “owl” in Scripture. A fifth word translated “owl” (<span>kjv<\/span>) is more appropriately identified with the ostrich (<span>rsv<\/span>). Owls appear in the lists of unclean birds (Lv 11:17; Dt 14:16), and although translations differ, they concur that all species of owls, being predators, are unclean.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ostrich (above); Owl, Barn or White; Owl, Great; Owl, Little; Owl, Scops (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlBarnorWhite\">Owl, Barn or White<\/p>\n<p>Large owl <em>(Tyto alloa)<\/em> with a distinct heart-shaped face. It may get its Hebrew name from a snoring sound it makes when breathing in the nest. In flight it emits a frightening screech, and thus is sometimes referred to as the screech owl. Its somewhat sinister features—a large head and wide pop eyes—have led some people to consider it demonic, but they have also inspired another name, the monkey-faced owl. It is a useful bird, however, devouring rodents that raid fields and damage stored grain. Like other owls, it sleeps during the day and hunts at night with a well-developed sense of hearing and sight. Its color is light brownish yellow with a white mask around the eyes and cheeks. The whole leg is covered with feathers that protect it against the bites of struggling victims in its talons.<\/p>\n<p>Some modern translations mention the barn or white owl by name (Lv 11:17, <span>njb<\/span>; 11:18, <span>nasb<\/span>; Dt 14:16, <span>njb<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl (above), Owl, Scops (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlGreat\">Owl, Great<\/p>\n<p>Large owl, standing nearly two feet (60.9 centimeters) tall <em>(Asio otus).<\/em> The color is mouse gray with gray-brown spots and black stripes. As one of its names indicates, it has tufted “ears” and is sometimes called the great horned owl. It feeds on rodents, such as rats and mice. It winters in Israel among ruins and in groves.<\/p>\n<p>The great owl may be the owl mentioned in the Bible among the birds of desolation that will inhabit devastated Edom (Is 34:11, <span>nasb<\/span> mg). It is also mentioned by name in some translations of the lists of ritually unclean birds (Lv 11:17, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>; Dt 14:16, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlLittle\">Owl, Little<\/p>\n<p>Smallest of all nocturnal birds of prey. Chiefly insectivorous, the little owl <em>(Athene noctua glaux)<\/em> also feeds at times on tiny birds. It is the most common owl in the Holy Land, dwelling among ruins, tombstones, rocks, and thickets (perhaps the owl of Ps 102:6). Its voice sounds like that of a dying person. On occasion it may be observed perched on a rock with its large eyes gazing off into the distance, a pose that the ancients considered a sign of wisdom. The Greeks associated the little owl with the goddess Athena. It is mentioned by name in several translations (Lv 11:17, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>; Dt 14:16, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlScops\">Owl, Scops<\/p>\n<p>Small owl <em>(Otus scops)<\/em> distinguished by two horn-shaped crests of hairlike feathers on its head. It perches in an inclined posture and hops and dances like a goat. During the hatching period, the male’s hooting sounds like a moan. The scops owl feeds on insects, rodents, and birds. During invasions of mice or locusts, these owls have appeared in large flocks and helped to destroy the pests. They have been known to attack humans who intrude on their nests. They are well-known inhabitants of Eurasia and Africa.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars suggest that the scops is the true screech owl, because of its whistling calls that resound through the night. The screech owl is mentioned only once in Scripture (Is 34:14, <span>kjv<\/span>), but that translation is the subject of scholarly debate. Following traditional Jewish mythology, some translations use the Hebrew word <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">lilith<\/span><em>)<\/em> as a proper name. In Jewish tradition Lilith was a witch-demon who, before Eve’s creation, was Adam’s wife. She became the mother of demons and was thought to attack children during the night; thus the name “Lilith” is translated “night hag” (<span>rsv<\/span>) or “night monster” (<span>nasb<\/span>). Most scholars favoring the mythical interpretation, however, suggest that Isaiah was using a popular legend to evoke a sense of desolation and did not himself believe in the existence of Lilith. There is little support for “screech owl” as an appropriate translation of the name.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl; Owl, Barn or White (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Partridge\">Partridge<\/p>\n<p>Most common game bird in the Holy Land. The partridge resembles a chicken in its basic anatomy but has a less chunky body and a longer tail. Two species of partridge inhabit the Holy Land: the sand partridge <em>(Ammoperdix heyi),<\/em> found near the Dead Sea, in the Jordan River valley, and in the Sinai Desert; and the chukar partridge <em>(Alectoris graeca).<\/em> The sand partridge is a medium-sized bird with yellow feet. The male has sandy-buff plumage, upper tail feathers penciled and barred with brown, and a chestnut and white undersurface. The female is a grayish buff. The chukar partridge resembles the common French partridge of Europe, having a body about 16 inches (40.6 centimeters) long. It is covered with beautiful and radiantly colored feathers.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical reference (1 Sm 26:20; probably the sand partridge because of the geographical context) alludes to the common method of catching it by chasing. It was also hunted with snares (cf. Ps 91:3) or by hunters hiding in a blind. The fast-running partridge soon becomes exhausted, which enables hunters to run it to the ground and kill it. Nevertheless, by running and jumping, it can ascend very steep cliffs. The bird finds refuge among bushes into which its brownish-green feathers blend protectively. If it were not such a prolific breeder, it would probably have become extinct by being hunted for food.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical description of the partridge gathering a brood she did not hatch (Jer 17:11) seems to be based on the fact that the hen lays at least two clutches of eggs, one for herself and one for the cock to incubate.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Peacock\">Peacock<\/p>\n<p>Member of the quail, partridge, and pheasant family, the peacock <em>(Pavo cristatus)<\/em> is actually the male peafowl. Its mate is properly known as the peahen. The male attracts attention because of a stately, luxurious appearance enhanced by magnificent feathers. The breast is a brilliant metallic blue, and each tail feather has a brilliant eye near the tip. When lowered, the unusually long tail feathers form a train behind the peacock on the ground, giving it an overall length of up to six feet (1.8 meters). The train can also be raised to form a huge fan adorned with the multicolored eyes. During courtship the feathers are raised and vibrated to make a distinct rustling noise. The rather drab peahen lacks the long train.<\/p>\n<p>Because it is not native to the Holy Land, the peacocks referred to in 1 Kings 10:22 and 2 Chronicles 9:21 are thought by some scholars to be Old World monkeys or baboons brought from east Africa, or guinea hens from the upper Nile River region. There is evidence, however, that the Phoenicians introduced peacocks to the Egyptian pharaoh, perhaps as early as the time of King Solomon. It is possible that Solomon’s trade expeditions ranged as far as India, where the peacock is native. The peacock was also well known to the Greeks and Romans. Alexander the Great prized its beauty and forbade his soldiers to kill the bird.<\/p>\n<p>In the early Christian church the peacock became a symbol of the immortality promised in the resurrection of Christ. In addition, the eyes of its tail came to represent the all-seeing eye of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Pelican\">Pelican<\/p>\n<p>Largest of all aquatic birds, considerably larger even than the swan. The pelican <em>(Pelecanus onocrotalus)<\/em> is generally about 50 inches (127 centimeters) long with a 16-inch (40.6-centimeters) beak, the upper part of which is hooked downward at the end, facilitating fish catching. The lower part of the bill supports a yellow pouch extending down the throat. The pouch may hold up to three gallons (11.4 liters) of food (small fish) and water. The pelican’s webbed feet are peculiar in having webs between all four toes. Pelicans are expert swimmers as well as efficient fliers. The pelican’s massive body, long neck, and comparatively small head give it proportions that make rising from the water difficult. To take off, a pelican must first flap awkwardly along the surface, pounding at the water with its legs.<\/p>\n<p>Pelicans fly and nest in groups. Both sexes care for the young that hatch from the one to four eggs. Whereas most birds feed their young by placing food into their mouths, the pelican reverses the process; the young pelican sticks its head and most of its body into its mother’s throat and plucks partially digested food from the mother’s crop. The deep penetration of the young’s beak into the mother’s gullet led ancients to believe that the young were feeding on the blood of the mother’s breast, thus giving rise to wide usage of the pelican as a symbol of Christ’s atonement, and of charity in general.<\/p>\n<p>The roseate pelican is white, at times with a faint rose tinge, and has black feathers growing from the wing joint farthest from the body. The legs, pouch, and skin around the eyes are yellow; the hook of the beak is red. This species may grow up to six feet (1.8 meters) long with a wingspread of up to eight feet (2.4 meters). During the breeding season, the coloration of the exposed areas of the roseate pelican’s legs and face changes from gray to bright orange or red. At the same time the white feathers acquire a beautiful pink tint originating from an oil-gland secretion. The oil is spread throughout the plumage by the bird as it preens.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars question whether “pelican” is an appropriate translation of the Hebrew in several verses, believing rather that the word refers to one of the owls, hawks, or vultures. Most translations include the pelican in the lists of ritually unclean birds (Lv 11:18; Dt 14:17). Opinion on the other references is more sharply divided. Some scholars maintain that the desert context of the verses eliminates the possibility of a water bird like the pelican (cf. Ps 102:6, “vulture,” <span>rsv<\/span>; Is 34:11, “cormorant,” <span>kjv<\/span>; “hawk,” <span>rsv<\/span>; Zep 2:14, “cormorant,” <span>kjv<\/span>; “vulture,” <span>rsv<\/span>). On the other hand, the roseate pelican frequents the rivers, lakes, and marshes of the Holy Land. After flying out to sea as far as 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) to swoop down on fish near the surface, the pelican often returns inland to a deserted place to digest its enormous meal. Thus, the pelican may be the lonely wilderness bird of those passages.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PigeonorDove\">Pigeon or Dove<\/p>\n<p>Species of the pigeon family (Columbidae). In common usage the names “pigeon” and “dove” are virtually interchangeable. The common domestic pigeon familiar to city dwellers the world over, for example, is actually a descendant of the wild rock dove. Both names are used in English translations of the Bible to translate the same Hebrew word. A second Hebrew word is usually translated “turtledove.” Nevertheless, it seems clear that the ancient Hebrews recognized differences among dove species.<\/p>\n<p>At least six species of pigeon or dove reside in modern Israel: the rock, ring, and stock doves (genus <em>Columba<\/em>), and the turtle, collared, and palm doves (genus <em>Streptopelia<\/em>). Of the six, the rock dove <em>(Columba livia)<\/em> and the turtledove <em>(Streptopelia turtur)<\/em> seem to be the two most often referred to in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Pigeons vary in size from 6 to over 12 inches (15 to 30 centimeters). The most colorful Israeli species is the rock dove, which can be a beautiful silvery gray with grayish-green iridescent plumage on the wings (noted by David, Ps 68:13). The smaller doves <em>(Streptopelia)<\/em> are less colorful, mostly gray or buff with a blackish or checkered half collar on the back of the neck. Pigeons have short necks and small heads, plump bodies, and short wings controlled by strong muscles that enable them to fly considerable distances. The smaller doves have longer tails.<\/p>\n<p>At present, the wild rock dove is found primarily in the area around the Sea of Galilee and farther to the south in the many ravines leading down to the Dead Sea. Wild rock doves prefer to build their nests on rocks and cliff faces, a fact precisely described in Scripture (Sg 2:14; Jer 48:28). All Israeli doves build fragile nests of scraps of vegetation. Eggs are hatched twice a year. Doves seldom lay more than two eggs. The young are cared for in the nest by both parents, who rove over the fields eating seeds and weeds. The adult’s crop contains digested food in a milky condition, called pigeon’s milk, which can be regurgitated and fed to the young.<\/p>\n<p>During courtship there is a great deal of rivalry among the male doves. The turtledove’s courtship dance is an awesome aerial display. The attention to courtship, the joint care of young, and the solicitude of the parents for each other, noted from earliest times, have made the dove one of the most popular symbols of love and peace (Sg 1:15; 2:14; 4:1; 5:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major distinction between pigeons (ring doves) and turtledoves seems to have been recognized by ancient writers. Pigeons are year-round residents and easily tamed, whereas turtledoves are migratory. Turtledoves were confined in cages singly or in pairs as pets or for sacrifices. Pigeons were probably the first birds to be domesticated, perhaps as early as Noah’s time (Gn 8:8-12). They were depicted on the earliest Egyptian monuments, and their edibility was mentioned in early Egyptian texts. Before long, domestic pigeons were regarded as evidence of a household’s prosperity. In the more prosperous households they nested in dovecotes of molded pottery clay fashioned in latticelike structures (hence the “windows” of Is 60:8).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times there were many dovecotes in the parks around Herod the Great’s palace in Jerusalem. The dove’s popularity was due not only to its docility but also to its desirability as food and as an acceptable and relatively inexpensive sacrifice. The turtledove may have been regarded more highly as a sacrifice because of its wildness and consequent lesser availability. The two biblical references to turtledoves not in a sacrificial context refer to their migratory habits and to their arrival in Israel in the spring (Sg 2:12; Jer 8:7; cf. Hos 11:11).<\/p>\n<p>Most of the references to doves and pigeons in the Bible are in statements about sacrificial procedures (Gn 15:7-10; Lv 1:14; 5:7; 12:6; Nm 6:10; Lk 2:24). Other references, however, include a range of observations and symbolic usages of the dove. Its throaty moaning was often observed (Is 38:14; 59:11; Ez 7:16; Na 2:7). Its power of flight was well known (Ps 55:6), as were its beauty (Sg 1:15; 4:1; 5:12), its gentleness and loyalty to its mate (Sg 2:14; 5:2; 6:9), its affection (Ps 74:19), and its innocence (Mt 10:16). The one negative reference to doves is in Hosea 7:11, where they are said to be senseless and foolish, perhaps in reference to their overly trusting nature.<\/p>\n<p>Of NT references, perhaps the most significant is the description of the Holy Spirit at Christ’s baptism as a descending dove (Mt 3:16). The dove’s loving nature made it natural for early Christians to connect the dove image with the concept of the Comforter. Since then the dove has remained the most popular symbol of the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Quail\">Quail<\/p>\n<p>Short, stocky birds with bills and feet similar to those of chickens; hence they are adapted to eating seeds or insects. Quail <em>(Coturnix coturnix)<\/em> are the smallest of the subfamily of poultry that also includes pheasants and partridges. Quail (or “quails,” another plural form) are about ten inches (25.4 centimeters) long and have small, rounded wings. They burst from their hiding places in the grass or bushes with a whirring sound. The belly of the quail is white. Up to 18 eggs are laid, and if the mother dies, the male has been known to assume the care of the young. Quail of the Mediterranean region winter in the Sudan and migrate northward in vast flocks in the spring. Quail cannot maintain a long sustained flight but make use of wind currents to keep them aloft.<\/p>\n<p>Enormous flocks of quail twice served as food for the Israelites in the wilderness of Sinai, when the birds were driven down in the desert miraculously by winds (Ex 16:13; Nm 11:31-32; Ps 105:40). The second time they were probably flying along the Gulf of Aqaba and were blown off course by the east wind (Nm 11:31; Ps 78:26-28). Their inability to sustain long flight may account for their low flying level—two cubits, or about 40 inches (101.6 centimeters). When exhausted, they were easily caught by hand (Nm 11:31-32). Quail were considered clean and the most delicate eating of all game birds, and they were preserved by drying in the sun.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Raven\">Raven<\/p>\n<p>Member of the crow family (Corvidae). The Hebrew word for “raven” means “black one.” The raven (<em>Corvus corax<\/em>) weighs about three pounds (1.36 kilograms) and varies from 22 to 26 inches (56 to 66 centimeters) in length. Its tail is broader in the middle than at either end. Eight species are found in Israel: three ravens, two jackdaws, one crow, one rook, and one chough. The crow, about 20 inches (50.8 centimeters) long, is smaller than a raven, and its tail is uniform in width. The raven’s most conspicuous feature is its glossy black iridescent plumage.<\/p>\n<p>Ravens and crows have survived in spite of the dislike many humans have for them. Excellent fliers, they migrate by day and congregate in great flocks of up to several hundred thousand. During the nesting season, they make nests of sticks in which two to seven eggs are laid. Ravens mate for life. Equipped with strong wings, a strong bill, and strong feet, ravens can live in isolated places from which they range widely for food. That it did not return to the ark was a good sign to Noah, indicating that the raven could find food and possibly a place to rest on dry mountaintops (Gn 8:7).<\/p>\n<p>The raven, essentially a scavenger, was ceremonially unclean (Lv 11:15; Dt 14:14). Yet ravens fed Elijah at God’s command (1 Kgs 17:4-6). Job was told that God gave the raven its food (Jb 38:41), as the psalmist and Jesus repeated (Ps 147:9; Lk 12:24). The raven’s glistening black plumage inspired the bride’s comparison of her beloved’s hair (Sg 5:11). They prefer desolate, uninhabited areas as their home territory (Is 34:11). Ravens are crafty, active birds. Some are capable of speaking, solving puzzles, and performing feats of memory. Bold and curious, they sometimes use their talents for theft.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Seagull\">Seagull<\/p>\n<p>Robust seabirds, primarily scavengers (family Laridae). Several species of gulls live along the seacoast of the Holy Land. They are usually gray-backed with white heads and underparts and black wing tips. The slender bill ends in a downward curve.<\/p>\n<p>Seagulls may be 8 to 30 inches (20 to 76 centimeters) long. Many species migrate, traveling long distances with their superb flying ability. Gulls can also swim easily because of their webbed feet. Their voice is like a harsh scream or squawk. In nesting season many nest together in any available place, such as a cliff or tree. Both male and female incubate and care for the young.<\/p>\n<p>Because gulls will eat almost anything, they are listed as ritually unclean birds (Lv 11:16; Dt 14:15, <span>asv<\/span> has “sea mew,” a common European gull). Some commentators believe that those passages refer to an owl or to the cuckoo and not to the seagull.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cuckoo (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Sparrow\">Sparrow<\/p>\n<p>Small bird of the finch family (Fringillidae) or the weaver finch family (Ploceidae), considered to be of little worth. The Hebrew word is a general term for “bird” and refers to any small bird such as a sparrow, finch, thrush, or starling. In translation, however, the word sometimes refers to the common English or house sparrow (<em>Passer domestica;<\/em> Ps 84:3; Prv 26:2).<\/p>\n<p>Dull in color with a black throat, the male house sparrow is a noisy and energetic creature. The nest, when built in open places, has an opening on the side and is made of almost anything available. Sparrows also nest in sheltered places, in dwellings, boxes, or holes in trees. They lay four to seven eggs.<\/p>\n<p>The common or house sparrow was known in ancient Greece and Egypt. There it had a reputation for invading fields in large swarms and picking the seeds from them. It is a permanent resident of the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>The sparrow is prolific and lives in close association with humans. It was considered ritually clean. Sparrows brought low prices in countries where they were sold (Mt 10:29; Lk 12:6). Today in Near Eastern marketplaces, boys offer live sparrows for sale. Tied together in groups of four to six by strings attached to one leg, the birds fly about over the boys’ heads. Evidently such a sight was common in NT times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Stork\">Stork<\/p>\n<p>Long-legged, white wading bird (genus <em>Ciconia<\/em>) having large, powerful wings with glossy black primary and secondary feathers. The flapping of its wings produces a loud rushing sound. Connecting membranes between the toes prevent the bird from sinking into the mud. Its red bill is sharp and long, serving to seize and lift its prey out of the water. Storks are mute, lacking a voice box.<\/p>\n<p>Flocks of storks pass through the Holy Land during their September migration on the way to central and southern Africa and likewise in the spring on their return flight to their homes in northern Israel, Syria, and Europe. Storks travel in vast flocks during the day, spreading out against the sky.<\/p>\n<p>The stork’s faithful tending of the young is proverbial, as is its habit of returning annually to the same nesting place. Storks have the habit of adding to their nests each year, and it is possible to find nests that are 100 years old and have a height of more than three feet (.9 meter).<\/p>\n<p>Two species of storks frequent the Holy Land. The white stork <em>(Ciconia alba)<\/em> is 40 inches (101.6 centimeters) tall, and its wingspread is six feet (1.8 meters), enabling it to move with a slow, sustained flight or to soar. In folklore the white stork is sometimes considered to be a harbinger of good fortune.<\/p>\n<p>The black stork <em>(Ciconia nigra),<\/em> common around the Dead Sea valley, nests in trees; hence it may be the tree-dwelling species referred to in Psalm 104:17. The Hebrew name for “stork” means literally the “kingly one,” or the “loyal one,” a reference to the care of the bird for its young. Like the heron, the stork was ceremonially unclean because of its diet of aquatic organisms, refuse, small animals, birds, and reptiles (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18). Jeremiah mentioned the stork’s uncanny and instinctive knowledge of the time of its migration (Jer 8:7). Its impressive wings figured in one of Zechariah’s visions (Zec 5:9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Swallow\">Swallow<\/p>\n<p>Small, nearly black, forked-tailed bird with long, tapering wings, noted for its graceful flight <em>(hirundo rustica).<\/em> The small, weak feet are poorly adapted for walking. Swallows resemble swifts in shape and life habits but are somewhat smaller.<\/p>\n<p>The swallow’s large mouth enables it to catch insects while in flight. Colors vary from brown and blue to white. Swallows often nest in buildings, a feature noticed by the psalmist, who reported a swallow’s home at the temple (Ps 84:3).<\/p>\n<p>Swallows are basically resident in Israel, whereas the swift is a migratory bird noted for the regularity of its migratory schedule. The “swallow” of Isaiah 38:14 probably refers to a swift, as does Jeremiah 8:7, where the dependability of the bird is contrasted with the irregularity of God’s people. Proverbs 26:2 may be a reference to either the swallow or the swift.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Swift (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Swan\">Swan<\/p>\n<p>Large, graceful water birds. Two species of swan (genus <em>Cygnus<\/em>) are found in the Middle East as passing migrants <em>(Cygnus olor<\/em> and <em>Cygnus musicus).<\/em> Swans are known as the best musicians among the birds and were considered sacred to the god Apollo by the Greeks. Their voices sound like flutes and harps.<\/p>\n<p>The references in Leviticus 11:18 and Deuteronomy 14:16 (<span>kjv<\/span>) are probably not to the swan but to the water hen or the barn owl, since there seems little reason to declare the vegetarian swan an unclean animal. <em>See also<\/em> Owl, Barn or White (above); Water Hen (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Swift\">Swift<\/p>\n<p>Small, strong flyers (genus <em>Apus<\/em>). Like the swallow, the swift has long, bent wings and a cleft tail, enabling it to obtain great speed as it skims the ground and sweeps through the air. A swift devours a great many harmful insects, catching them in its mouth in flight. Many swifts make their nests in rooftops and in nooks and crannies of city walls. Their nests are built with strong feathers cemented together with saliva. Other swifts live in caves and clefts of rocks.<\/p>\n<p>Common swifts are native to Israel, and in the Jordan Valley they occur in large flocks. Isaiah 38:14 (<span>niv<\/span>) seems to be clear reference to the swift’s plaintive call, since the swallow’s sharp chirp is not a striking simile for a distraught king’s cry. The swift has a soft, delicate voice, and its cry could be easily interpreted as melodious wailing.<\/p>\n<p>The migratory swifts arrive on a precise schedule in the Holy Land in late winter, and immense flocks fill the cities with their cries. Thus the reference in Jeremiah 8:7 to swallows, which are largely permanent residents, is probably to swifts.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Swallow (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Vulture\">Vulture<\/p>\n<p>Subfamily (Aegypiinae) of the hawk family (Accipitridae). Each of the four species of Old World vultures is found in the Holy Land: the Egyptian, griffon, black, and bearded vulture (the bearded vulture is also known as the lammergeier). These birds range in size from the 24-inch (61-centimeters) Egyptian vulture to the huge bearded vulture, largest of all flying birds in the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>Most vultures are brown or black, having a short neck and a short, hooked bill with which they tear the dead animal flesh of which they are fond. All vultures, except the bearded, have bare or down-covered heads and necks, enabling these scavengers to penetrate deep into a carcass without spoiling the plumage. Excellent eyesight enables a vulture to locate a carcass from a lofty soaring position. Considering the decayed condition of most of its food, a vulture’s poor sense of smell may be a fortunate limitation. Vultures nest in any convenient place; both parents care for the young.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word usually translated “eagle” in the OT may have been a general term for all large birds of prey, including vultures. Thus many of the passages about eagles may refer to either the eagle or the vulture (cf. Lv 11:13; Dt 14:12, <span>nasb<\/span> mg). Such passages include references to nesting habits (Jb 39:27-28; Jer 49:16; Ob 1:4), care for fledglings (Dt 32:11), powers of flight (Ex 19:4; Dt 28:49; Jb 9:26; Lam 4:19), and extremely high soaring altitude (Prv 23:5; 30:19; Is 40:31). Despite variations among translations, the vulture clearly belongs in the list of unclean birds because of its foul diet (Lv 11:13, 18; Dt 14:12, 17).<\/p>\n<p>Several references to the eagle in the <span>kjv<\/span> have been changed to “vulture” in modern translations. The change seems appropriate in the references to the vulture as a sign of present or impending doom (Lam 4:19; Hos 8:1). Likewise the eye-plucking bird of Proverbs 30:17 is probably a vulture. The phrase “bald as the eagle” (Mi 1:16) clearly should read “bald as the vulture,” since there are no bald eagles in Israel and most vultures are bald. Since the vulture, like the eagle, was a symbol of sovereignty and domination in the ancient Near East, some gods were represented as vultures. Thus Ezekiel’s comparison of the kings of Babylon and Egypt to eagles may be conceived alternatively as comparisons to vultures (Ez 17:3, 7). Jesus’ reference to the eagles congregating around corpses at the end times (Mt 24:28) should also be revised to vultures, since eagles are usually solitary eaters, whereas vultures generally flock together around carrion.<\/p>\n<p>Several <span>kjv<\/span> references to vultures are usually translated “kite” or “falcon” in modern translations (cf. various versions of Lv 11:14; Dt 14:13; Jb 28:7; Is 34:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eagle; Kestrel; Kite; Lammergeier; Vulture, Black, or Osprey; Vulture, Egyptian; Vulture, Griffon.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"VultureBlackorOsprey\">Vulture, Black, or Osprey<\/p>\n<p>Diurnal flesh eater, a little over three feet (.9 meter) long with a wingspread of over three yards (2.7 meters). The feathers of the black or osprey vulture (<em>Aegypius monachus<\/em>) are black and the head and upper part of the neck are bald like those of other carrion eaters. It nests in the Jordan River valley and seems to have been abundant in biblical times. Today it is quite rare. The black vulture is probably the osprey of Leviticus 11:13 and Deuteronomy 14:12.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Vulture (above).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"VultureEgyptian\">Vulture, Egyptian<\/p>\n<p>Also known as the gier eagle or as pharaoh’s hen. The plumage of the Egyptian vulture (<em>Neophron percnopterus<\/em>) is basically white with a naked head and yellow neck. The Egyptian vulture breaks bones left by other vultures. Its flight is slow and easy, and its voice is a croak. Measuring about 24 inches (61 centimeters) in length, it is the smallest of all the carrion-eating birds found in the Holy Land. It may be referred to in the list of unclean birds (Lv 11:18; Dt 14:17, “gier eagle,” <span>kjv<\/span>; “carrion vulture,” <span>rsv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>nlt<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Vulture (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"VultureGriffon\">Vulture, Griffon<\/p>\n<p>One of the largest flying birds in the Holy Land <em>(Gyps fulvus).<\/em> Until a generation ago, the griffon vulture was one of the most common birds in the Holy Land. Today it is on the verge of extinction. Many have been killed by eating poisonous bait meant for foxes and jackals. In addition, its reproduction is limited; the female lays only one or two eggs a year.<\/p>\n<p>The griffon vulture measures about four feet (121.9 centimeters) in length and up to ten feet (3 meters) between wing tips. Its beak is extremely strong, and its short toes are fitted with blunt talons. It is a light-brown bird with a pale yellow head and neck that are almost bare, being covered only with a very fine down.<\/p>\n<p>The griffon vulture feeds mostly on carrion, but also on locusts and small tortoises. It is able to go without food for several days with no ill effects, but when it does break its fast, it gorges itself. It is found especially in the region of the Sea of Galilee. Most biblical references to the vulture are likely to be to the griffon vulture.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eagle; Vulture (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"WaterHen\">Water Hen<\/p>\n<p>Small water bird of the rail family. The water hen listed among unclean birds (Lv 11:18; Dt 14:16, <span>rsv<\/span> only) may be the biblical bird most difficult to identify. Several alternatives have been suggested, including the swan (<span>kjv<\/span>), one of the owls (<span>nasb<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>), or the marsh hen (<span>tlb<\/span>). Most scholars rule out the swan, since it is a vegetarian bird and thus should not be considered unclean. An owl remains a possibility.<\/p>\n<p>The marsh hen is a rail, several species of which inhabit Israel. One of those species is the purple gallinule <em>(Porphyrio porphyrio).<\/em> Rails are very thin birds varying from 6 to 20 inches (15 to 51 centimeters) in length. They live in marshes, where they eat a great variety of animal and vegetable matter, thus making them a candidate for inclusion in the Mosaic lists of unclean animals.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Animals.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIRDS<\/h3>\n\n<p>Feathered vertebrates of the class Aves. Over 8,000 species of birds are known. Approximately 400 species are found in the Holy Land and about 40 are mentioned in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Modern scientists classify organisms on the basis of internal and external structure, but the biblical writers generally classified organisms according to habitat. Thus, in the Bible, bats are listed with birds as creatures of the air (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>Precise identification of biblical birds is often difficult or impossible. The biblical languages were not highly specialized scientific languages. People in biblical times generally knew the difference between similar animals now categorized as separate species. For birds, however, they frequently used poetic, descriptive terms. Biblical scholars attempt to overcome the difficulties in identification by comparing the Hebrew words with similar words in related languages and by attention to the habitat, habits, and characteristics attributed to the birds in Scripture. Nevertheless, different scholars sometimes arrive at different identifications.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalReferencestoBirds\">Biblical References to Birds<\/p>\n<p>The Bible refers to birds both in literal and figurative senses. The biblical writers were keen observers of nature, their awareness of birds and bird life being reflected in many passages. They asserted that God knows all the birds (Ps 50:11) and cares for them (Mt 10:29). They saw God’s covenant with Noah after the flood, his promise never to destroy life again by flood, as extending even to the birds and animals (Gn 9:10).<\/p>\n<p>The Mosaic law declared many birds “unclean,” mostly species that were scavengers or predators, or inhabited waste places. Centuries later the early Christians came to regard unclean species as clean by God’s decree, revealed in the apostle Peter’s vision (Acts 10:12). Other birds, like quail, sustained the Israelites in their wanderings (Ex 16:13). The Law prescribed birds as sacrifices for a firstborn child (Lk 2:24), for a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10), for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:22), and as a burnt offering and sin offering (12:8).<\/p>\n<p>Birds are easily subject to extinction, especially through human activity. God required the Israelites to practice conservation to prevent any birds from becoming extinct in the Holy Land, both for the birds’ sake and so the Israelites would have a continuous source of food. The Law allowed foraging Israelites to take eggs or the young from a bird’s nest, but they were not permitted to kill both a mother bird and her young (Dt 22:6).<\/p>\n<p>Biblical writers turned to nature frequently for illustrations of divine principles or human characteristics. Comparisons of humans to birds sometimes carry a sense of lowness, as when King Nebuchadnezzar developed claws like a bird in his madness (Dn 4:33), or when Job remarked that birds did not know the source of wisdom (Jb 28:21). In Jesus’ parable of the sower, the birds that ate the seed scattered by the wayside may represent indifference and a lack of spiritual understanding (Mt 13:4).<\/p>\n<p>Scripture also contains sympathetic images of the plight of birds. A lonely man praying was likened to a lonely bird on a housetop (Ps 102:7). If someone was unjustly hunted by his enemies, he would understand a hunted bird’s plight (Lam 3:52). Birds were said to be affected by curses on evildoers as they fled from Jerusalem or from the face of the earth (Jer 9:10; Zep 1:3).<\/p>\n<p>In spite of such misfortune visited upon birds, Scripture affirms that, like other creatures, they are cared for and delighted in by God (Ps 50:11; Mt 6:26; 10:29). Both Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar were compared to a tree that gives shelter to the birds (Ez 31:6; Dn 4:12; cf. 2:38). Human power, however, fails eventually as when the tree representing Nebuchadnezzar was cut down, forcing the birds to flee (Dn 4:14). God’s protection, by contrast, is unfailing. Jesus likened the kingdom of God to a mustard seed, growing to become a shelter for birds (Mt 13:32). God provides a habitation for birds (Ps 104:12), although Jesus, the Son of Man, had nowhere to rest his head (Mt 8:20).<\/p>\n<p>Birds were considered evidence of God’s handiwork (Jb 12:7). Bird lore provided examples of good sense in learning from a mistake (Prv 1:17; 6:5) and of bad judgment in failing to avoid the snares of immorality (7:23). Birds and other creatures could be tamed, unlike the wicked human tongue (Jas 3:7). Birds flying without alighting were an image of an undeserved curse (Prv 26:2). Without trust in God, people might be forced by evil to flee like a bird to the mountains (Ps 11:1). Birdsong was said to bring joy (Sg 2:12). The return of God’s people to the Promised Land would be like birds returning (Hos 11:11). Jesus expressed his love for Jerusalem by saying that he longed to gather his people to himself as a hen gathers her brood under her wing (Mt 23:37).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, birds were occasionally regarded as ominous signs. For example, Pharaoh’s baker learned of impending death because in a dream birds ate the food from a basket on his head (Gn 40:17). Solomon warned against cursing the king, even in private, because “a little bird may tell them what you said” (Eccl 10:20). A vivid biblical image is that of scavenging, carrion-eating birds consuming the bodies of evildoers. To the Israelites, such a desecration of humanity was an image of ultimate horror (Dt 28:26; 1 Sm 17:44; Is 46:11; Jer 7:33; 12:9; Ez 29:5; 39:4; Rv 19:17, 21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IndividualSpecies\">Individual Species<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Bittern\">Bittern<\/p>\n<p>Long-legged wading bird <em>(Botaurus stellaris)<\/em> similar to the heron, but with shorter legs and a smaller, more compact body. Bitterns inhabit marshes, where it is easy for them to hide with their natural camouflage. A bittern’s mottled plumage of barred brown and black so duplicates the color and shape of swamp vegetation that at times the bird seems to disappear before the observer’s eyes. The neck is covered with long, soft feathers, making it appear disproportionately heavy. Bitterns are wary and solitary. During mating season the bittern’s larynx is modified to produce a mysterious-sounding cry. The body twists in an unusual manner in harmony with the notes. Bitterns nest alone in grassy marshes. Because they are shy, they have become symbols of places of desolation and loneliness.<\/p>\n<p>There is some question as to whether the bittern is actually mentioned in the Bible. The <span>kjv<\/span> has “bittern” in three places (Is 14:23; 34:11; Zep 2:14). Many biblical scholars believe the Hebrew word in those verses refers not to the bittern but to the hedgehog (Is 14:23; Zep 2:14, <span>rsv<\/span>) or porcupine (Is 34:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). The Hebrew word is similar to an Arabic word meaning “porcupine.” Other scholars point out that the references suggest a bird rather than a mammal, especially Zephaniah 2:14, which speaks of the creature making its “lodge in her capitals” (i.e., above Nineveh’s doorposts). Bitterns are particularly abundant in the swamps of the Tigris River (near Nineveh). The bittern’s characteristics may fit the references in the three passages better than do the hedgehog’s.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Hedgehog; Animals (Porcupine).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Buzzard\">Buzzard<\/p>\n<p>Hawklike soaring bird <em>(Buteo vulgaris<\/em> or <em>Buteo ferox).<\/em> It resembles the kite, though its tail is straight and not cleft. It is mentioned in the list of unclean birds (Dt 14:13). But other translations render the word as “glede” (<span>kjv<\/span>) or “kite” (<span>nasb<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>). The parallel list in Leviticus 11, however, substitutes “kite” (<span>rsv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>) or “vulture” (<span>kjv<\/span>) for “buzzard.” Thus, it is difficult to determine whether the buzzard is actually mentioned in the Bible, even though it is a common resident of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Like other great soaring birds, the buzzard is noted for its sharp eyesight, and may be the bird mentioned for that quality in Job 28:7 (variously translated “falcon,” “eagle,” or “vulture”). It will trail its prey for hours, and has a remarkable ability to see a carcass on which it descends to feed. Somewhat larger than the common buzzard is the long-legged buzzard, found in Israel, western Asia, and Syria.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Kestrel; Kite; Vulture (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Cormorant\">Cormorant<\/p>\n<p>Large, black gooselike bird <em>(Phalacrocorax carbo),<\/em> repeatedly depicted in art from Egypt and the Holy Land. Its length varies from 19 to 40 inches (48.3 to 101.6 centimeters). Its feet have webs between all four toes. The feet, attached far back on the body, serve as propellers when the cormorant dives to catch its meal of fish, crustacea, or amphibia. The long bill is curved at the tip, and under the bill is a sac in which the cormorant keeps the captured fish.<\/p>\n<p>Cormorants live in large companies, making nests of sticks and other vegetation that they carry to trees or to rocky shelves near coasts. Up to four eggs are incubated, and the young are fed by both parents.<\/p>\n<p>The cormorant frequents swamps around the Sea of Galilee, Lake Huleh (the waters of Merom), and the Mediterranean coast. Its Hebrew name originally denoted the “hurling down” of the bird at its prey. Cormorants dive into deep water and sometimes seem to zoom beneath the surface in their hunt for fish. The cormorant’s greed is proverbial. It was ceremonially unclean for the Israelites (Lv 11:17; Dt 14:17).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Pelican (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Crane\">Crane<\/p>\n<p>Tall wading birds <em>(Grus grus)<\/em> resembling storks and herons but with shorter talons. The plumage has a silvery gloss and the tail feathers are wavy. Large flocks of cranes flying in wedge-shaped formations pass over the Holy Land during the daylight hours each fall on their way to Africa from the northern countries of Europe and again in the spring when they return north to breed. Migratory flocks may number as many as 2,000 birds. Jeremiah 8:7 refers to the crane’s migratory habits.<\/p>\n<p>The usual call of the crane is best described as a bellow, but during migratory flight they emit a chattering sound that may be referred to in Isaiah 38:14. Cranes have remarkably powerful voices, their calls seeming to carry for miles. Migrating flocks usually have a flock leader who does the calling.<\/p>\n<p>A crane’s height may reach 40 to 60 inches (101.6 to 152.4 centimeters). Except for the ostrich, the crane is the tallest bird ever to inhabit the Holy Land. A crane’s wingspread may exceed 90 inches (228.6 centimeters). The overall color is steel gray; the head and neck are black with a longitudinal white stripe. The crane feeds on land rather than in shallow water. It feeds primarily on grass and grain yet may devour insects, snakes, small alligators, frogs, and worms, using its long, powerful bill as a sharp hammer for killing such creatures.<\/p>\n<p>The crane usually nests in solitary places, often in shallow water or nearby. Its nest is a mass of vegetation, holding two or three eggs that are light-colored with darker spots.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Cuckoo\">Cuckoo<\/p>\n<p>Small, drab brown bird known for its parasitic habits. The term the <span>kjv<\/span> used in Leviticus 11:16 and Deuteronomy 14:15 may refer either to the common cuckoo <em>(Cuculus canorus)<\/em> or to the great spotted cuckoo <em>(Clamator glandarius).<\/em> The bird acts as a brood parasite, laying its eggs in the nest of another species after pushing out one of the eggs of the host species. The young cuckoo hatches before the young of the host species and evicts the other young. The foster parents raise it as their own.<\/p>\n<p>The cuckoo, an insect eater, is considered ritually unclean in Scripture, which might imply that it is a predator or carrion-eater. For that reason some believe the Hebrew word actually refers to the seagull or sea mew rather than the cuckoo. Gulls, terns, and petrels are all common on the seashore and lakes of the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>Other scholars believe that the Hebrew word refers not to the cuckoo but to one of the owls, possibly the long-eared owl.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl; Seagull (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Eagle\">Eagle<\/p>\n<p>Large bird of prey, genus <em>Aquila.<\/em> Vultures were often confused with eagles, making identification of the biblical birds difficult. Eagles’ heads are not bald as are the heads of vultures, but from a distance they appear similar. It is possible that the Hebrew word translated “eagle” (which literally means “to tear with the beak”) may have referred to all large birds of prey, eagles and vultures alike. A number of references to the eagle in Scripture are actually references to the griffon vulture (e.g., Hos 8:1; perhaps Mt 24:28). In certain passages, however, the true eagle may be meant.<\/p>\n<p>The Holy Land has several varieties of eagle, including the imperial eagle <em>(Aquila heliaca)<\/em> and the less common golden eagle <em>(Aquila chrysaetos).<\/em> These birds are powerfully built with strong wings; their movements reveal suppleness and strength. A distinctive hooked beak, which enhances the eagle’s dignified and somewhat ferocious appearance, provides it with an effective instrument for tearing and killing prey. Short, powerful legs and prehensile claws enable an eagle to apply an almost unbreakable grip on a struggling victim. The strong talons have sharp points and edges. The eagle hunts by day.<\/p>\n<p>For Jeremiah and other prophets, the eagle was the epitome of swiftness. The golden eagle, which can fly three or four miles (5–7 kilometers) in ten minutes, may have evoked the comparisons in 2 Samuel 1:23;Jeremiah 4:13; 49:22; Lamentations 4:19 (<span>kjv<\/span>), and Habakkuk 1:8. Moses used a similar comparison to emphasize the sudden striking power of a hostile enemy (Dt 28:49). The author of Proverbs, observing the high altitude to which the eagle soars, applied that image to the human situation (Prv 23:4-5; cf. Rv 12:14).<\/p>\n<p>The eagle’s strength and invincibility were mentioned often with reference to powerful nations attacking Israel. The prophet Ezekiel described Nebuchadnezzar as an eagle (Ez 17:3). Both the Babylonians and Assyrians frequently depicted the eagle in their art, especially as a deity with a man’s body and an eagle’s head. Nebuchadnezzar even had an experience of temporary insanity in which “his hair grew as long as eagles’ feathers, and his nails were like birds’ claws” (Dn 4:33, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eagle builds its nest on inaccessible mountain peaks or at the top of the tallest trees, a fact noted by Jeremiah (Jer 49:16; cf. Jb 39:27-28; Ob 1:4). The brood consists of two or occasionally three eggs. Only the female sits on the nest, but the young eaglets are fed by both parents. Eagles are devoted to their offspring and train them with great care in the art of flying. Some commentators interpret Exodus 19:4 and Deuteronomy 32:11 as evidence of the eagle’s practice of catching its young on its wings. There is virtually no evidence from observation, however, that any eagle can perform such a feat. In some versions the wording avoids a direct statement that eagles bear their young on their wings.<\/p>\n<p>Some eagles in captivity have lived to an age of over 100 years. This remarkable longevity caused the psalmist to speak of the eagle whose youth is renewed (Ps 103:5). Confronted by its impressive qualities, biblical authors observed the eagle with awe and wonder (Jb 39:27-30; Prv 30:18-19). Those awesome qualities also contributed to several prophetic visions, including Ezekiel’s vision of a creature with an eagle’s face (Ez 1:10) and the apostle John’s vision of a holy beast like a flying eagle (Rv 4:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Vulture (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"FowlDomestic\">Fowl, Domestic<\/p>\n<p>Domesticated poultry <em>(Gallus gallus domesticus),<\/em> probably derived from the red jungle fowl of India. They seem to have been known already in OT times (Prv 30:31). A seal of Jaazaniah (see 2 Kgs 25:23), dating from about 600 <span>BC<\/span>, bears the image of a fighting cock. A reference to fowls or poultry for Nehemiah’s table, however, may be to wild game rather than domestic fowl (Neh 5:18).<\/p>\n<p>Poultry symbolized fertility, and the Jews carried a cock and hen in front of bridal couples at weddings. The motherly concern of hens gathering their broods was familiar to Jesus’ hearers (Mt 23:37; Lk 13:34).<\/p>\n<p>Since roosters habitually crow an hour or two before dawn, the third watch of the night, from midnight to 3:00 <span>am<\/span>, was known as the cockcrow. According to the Talmud (a commentary on Jewish law), keeping chickens was prohibited in Jerusalem in NT times to prevent the insects and larvae that breed in chicken droppings from contaminating sacrificial flesh. For that reason the cock that Peter heard (Mt 26:34, 74; Lk 22:34, 60-61) probably belonged to Romans living there or to Jews who did not follow Jewish regulations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"GoatsuckerorNightHawk\">Goatsucker or Night Hawk<\/p>\n<p>Migratory bird, dark in color and short-legged, similar to the American whippoorwill. The goatsucker (genus <em>Caprimulgus<\/em>) resembles an owl with a flat head, large eyes, soft plumage, and a noiseless flight. It hunts insects at night, catches them on the wing, and during the day rests on branches. Goatsuckers were so named because they were thought by the ancients to milk goats. According to Leviticus 11:16 and Deuteronomy 14:15, they were ritually unclean. Although some scholars believe that an owl is intended, there seems to be good reason to accept the “night hawk” translation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Goose\">Goose<\/p>\n<p>Long-necked, web-footed water birds with waterproof feathers (genus <em>Anser<\/em>). Domestic geese were known to the Greeks of Homer’s day, since they are mentioned in the <em>Odyssey.<\/em> They were domesticated in Egypt perhaps as early as the Old Kingdom (c. 2500 <span>BC<\/span>) and certainly by the time of the New Kingdom (c. 1500– 1100 <span>BC<\/span>). They were used for food and sacrifice. The breeding of geese was widespread in Canaan in biblical times; ivory carvings of the 13th or 12th century <span>BC<\/span> showing geese have been found in excavations at Megiddo in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Many species of geese spend most of their lives on land even though they are waterfowl; some even build their nests in trees. Wild geese tend to inhabit flatlands and prairies rather than mountainous terrain.<\/p>\n<p>Geese may have graced the table of King Solomon. In 1 Kings 4:23 they are referred to as “fatted fowl,” a term that may also refer to ducks, swans, guineas, pigeons, or other domestic edible birds.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Hawk\">Hawk<\/p>\n<p>Small birds of prey found in the Holy Land. Most references are probably to the sparrow hawk <em>(Accipter nisus).<\/em> This bird is slightly larger than the kestrel, has a grayish-brown back and a white belly with black and brown bars. It has short feathers, long, curved talons, and broad wings, rounded at the outer ends, which enable it to soar on updrafts. The long tail, acting as a rudder, helps the bird change its course swiftly in flight. It is hence very maneuverable in the air when chasing warblers or other small birds. It does not seize its prey on the ground, as does the kestrel, but hunts and attacks small birds in flight. Hawks hunt in the daytime, unlike owls that are adapted for nighttime hunting. With their eyes located on the side of the head, hawks are very keen-sighted. They usually nest in tall trees and their nests are often occupied by the same pair year after year.<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptians embalmed sparrow hawks and regarded all hawks highly. The god Horus was depicted with the head of a hawk hawk was ceremonially unclean to the Israelites (Lv 11:16; Dt 14:15). It was not a permanent resident of Israel but stopped off as it migrated from north to south. Its southward migration is mentioned in Job 39:26. A reference in Isaiah 34:11 to “hawk” (“cormorant,” <span>kjv<\/span>) is uncertain. <em>See<\/em> Kestrel or Falcon; Kite (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Heron\">Heron<\/p>\n<p>Wading bird (genus <em>Ardea<\/em>) with a long, thin neck and long legs. It has a characteristic comblike growth on the inner side of the third toe.<\/p>\n<p>Herons are generally white, blue, green, or gray. They nest together in rookeries, and both parents bring in food for the young. Herons feed on fish, small reptiles, and insects, gulping them down in one swallow. Adults and young migrate in the late fall to warm southern climates. The white heron attains a length of more than 3 feet (.9 meter), whereas the dwarf heron is only about 22 inches (55.9 centimeters) long.<\/p>\n<p>At least seven varieties of heron are reported in the Holy Land. The white ibis, or buff-backed heron (<em>Buphus russatus<\/em>), was probably the most common species. The purple heron <em>(Ardea purpureus)<\/em> is a summer breeder found in all parts of the Holy Land where there is standing water.<\/p>\n<p>The blue-gray heron (<em>Ardea cinerea<\/em>) winters in southern Europe and North Africa, migrating to northern Europe in the early spring. In Israel it builds its winter nest near water, in swamps and along riverbanks, where it feeds on fish and frogs. It will stand patiently in the water for hours, and then suddenly its long, pointed beak darts down with lightning speed to catch its prey. Often the blue-gray heron builds its nest in a tall tree to which it may return year after year.<\/p>\n<p>According to Leviticus 11:19 and Deuteronomy 14:18, the heron was ceremonially unclean to the Israelites. Some scholars believe those references are to the cormorant, but most scholars think they refer to one of the herons.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cormorant (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Hoopoe\">Hoopoe<\/p>\n<p>One of the Holy Land’s most beautiful birds (<em>Upupa epops<\/em>). It has vividly colored plumage, a lovely crown-shaped crest that becomes erect when the bird is alarmed, and a long, slender curved bill. The pinkish-brown hoopoe is about 11 inches (27.9 centimeters) long, with black and white bands on its back, tail, and wings. Hoopoes are basically desert-dwelling birds.<\/p>\n<p>The name “hoopoe” is derived from the sound of the bird’s call. To emit the sound, the neck feathers are puffed up and the head snapped in the air. When on the ground, the bird hammers its beak into the earth.<\/p>\n<p>The hoopoe arrives in the Holy Land in February, breeds in the summer, and leaves in September. It was held in religious reverence by the Egyptians. It was listed as ritually unclean (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18), probably because it searches for grubs and small insects in such unsanitary places as dunghills.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Ibis\">Ibis<\/p>\n<p>Wading bird (<em>Threskiornis aethiopica<\/em>) presently unknown in the Holy Land but possibly known there in biblical times. It was well known in ancient Egypt, where it was sacred to the god Thoth. Today it has practically vanished with the disappearance of swamps along the Nile.<\/p>\n<p>There is some question as to whether the ibis is meant in Leviticus 11:17, where it is classified as ceremonially unclean. The same Hebrew word in Deuteronomy 14:16 and Isaiah 34:11 is translated “great owl,” a translation preferred by most scholars.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl, Great (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"KestrelorFalcon\">Kestrel or Falcon<\/p>\n<p>Small hawk (<em>Falco tinnunculus<\/em>) about a foot (30.5 centimeters) long with brown, black, and yellow feathers on its breast. It was abundant in the Holy Land in villages and in the countryside, nesting on rooftops and among rocks. Like most hawks, the kestrel is able to hover and float in midair and then swoop down on its prey, seizing it with sharp, hooklike talons. It feeds largely on mice, small reptiles, and insects.<\/p>\n<p>Embalmed kestrels have been found in ancient Egyptian tombs. The Egyptians also embalmed the hunting kestrel <em>(Falco cherug),<\/em> which can be tamed and trained to hunt rabbits and other small game. Falconry (hunting with hawks of various species) was well known among the ancients and is still practiced today. That the Assyrians were familiar with falconry is seen in the records of Ashurbanipal. Because the kestrel is a predator, it was ceremonially unclean (Lv 11:14). Some translations render the word as “kite” (Lv 11:14, <span>kjv<\/span>; Dt 14:13, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>rsv<\/span>), an illustration of the difficulty of identifying biblical birds precisely.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Kite or Glede (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"KiteorGlede\">Kite or Glede<\/p>\n<p>Large bird of prey <em>(Milvus milvus).<\/em> The average length of the kite is about 19 inches (48.3 centimeters). The upper part is generally dark, but the belly is white. Kites nest high in trees and build nests of vegetation, including sticks. They rarely have more than two or three young, which they feed on snakes, grasshoppers, and so on. Sometimes kites are called snake hawks.<\/p>\n<p>The kite is a migratory bird that stays in Israel during the summer, especially in the mountains of southern Judea, in the trackless wastes west of the Dead Sea, and in the wilderness of Beersheba.<\/p>\n<p>The red kite or glede is a medium-sized bird of prey. The edges of the upper part of the bill overlap with the lower one, forming sharp scissors. The tail is forked or cleft like that of a fish. Its loud cry often includes sharp whistling notes. Other Holy Land species include the black kite <em>(Milvus migrans)<\/em> and the black-winged kite <em>(Elanus caeruleus).<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The kite is listed among the unclean birds in Mosaic law (Lv 11:14; Dt 14:13), but the precise identification of the birds mentioned there is disputed by some scholars and translators.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Buzzard; Kestrel or Falcon (above).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Lammergeier\">Lammergeier<\/p>\n<p>Largest of the vultures and less common than the other members of the family. It is grayish brown with white streaks and has a black tuft of stiff hairs in the facial area that gives it the name “bearded vulture.” Another name for it is “lamb vulture.”<\/p>\n<p>The lammergeier <em>(Gypaetus barbatus)<\/em> has a unique way of killing its prey; since its beak is not particularly powerful it carries its victim high in the air and then drops it on rocks.<\/p>\n<p>The lammergeier is especially partial to tortoises and to marrow bone. After jackals and smaller vultures have reduced a carcass to bone, the lammergeier crushes the bones to obtain the marrow, or swallows the pieces intact. Hence it is also known as the ossifrage, from a Latin word meaning “bone crusher.” The lammergeier was unclean in Mosaic law (Lv 11:13; Dt 14:13; both translated “vulture” in <span>nlt<\/span> and “ossifrage” in <span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Vulture (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Ostrich\">Ostrich<\/p>\n<p>Two-toed, swift-running, flightless bird (<em>Struthio camelus<\/em>) that lives in deserts or in areas covered with stunted bushes.<\/p>\n<p>In biblical times ostriches ranged as far north as Syria and were found over the entire wasteland of the Negev Desert, but they have since become extinct there. Its Hebrew name means “daughter of the desert.” It is the largest of all living birds, attaining a height of about 10 feet (3 meters) and a weight of 175 pounds (79.5 kilograms), though some males may weigh as much as 300 pounds (136.4 kilograms). The female is considerably smaller. Powerful thighs and long legs give the ostrich great speed, reported to be as high as 40 <span>mph<\/span> (64 <span>kph<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The ostrich is omnivorous. It eats grass, fruits, small mammals, birds, snakes, and lizards, as well as large pebbles that assist in the breakdown of food in its gizzard. The ostrich is hunted, but its eggs are generally more sought after than the bird itself. The empty shells are traded throughout the Mediterranean area for use as utensils, or when broken up as raw material for beads. The eggs—as many as 25 in one clutch—are laid in a shallow nest of sand, with some left uncovered. They may appear to be neglected by day, but only because they are ordinarily incubated at night. The cock does most of the incubating; the female participates only during cold days. The strong, thick eggshell protects the embryo from the heat of the desert.<\/p>\n<p>Occasionally the ostrich is used for riding or even for pulling small carts. Ostrich feathers are in great demand. Ostrich plumes graced ancient royal courts as fans. An ivory-handled fan of Pharaoh Tutankhamen (King Tut) had lovely ostrich plumes. The plumes are white in the male and brownish gray in the female. The reputation of the ostrich for stupidity comes from its behavior when hunted and cornered; it fails to take evasive action even when doing so would save it. In open country, however, it is very wary and runs at great speed to escape. In contrast to the partridge, an ostrich will run away from its eggs and chicks when pursued.<\/p>\n<p>Most biblical references to ostriches emphasize their negative characteristics. They were regarded as unclean in Jewish law (Lv 11:16; Dt 14:15). Several references associate ostriches with images of wilderness and desolation (Jb 30:29; Is 13:21; 34:13; 43:20; Jer 50:39). Their night cry, which has been compared to an ox’s lowing in pain, is referred to in Micah 1:8. Biblical writers also noted the apparent indifference of the ostrich to its brood (Jb 39:13-18; Lam 4:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Owl\">Owl<\/p>\n<p>Nocturnal birds (order Strigiformes) with large heads and large, forward-looking eyes. Their wing and tail feathers are soft as velvet, helping to make their flight noiseless. The owl’s body is small and slender, about the size of a pigeon, but it appears bulky because of the thick covering of feathers. Owls have been considered bearers of misfortune and omens of disaster. In the Near East, owls now live in temple ruins and pyramids in Egypt, and in rock-hewn graves, ruins, and caves on both sides of the Jordan River in Israel. They seldom come near inhabited dwellings.<\/p>\n<p>Owls have excellent night vision, which they use to capture rodents or other animals. Although unusually large, the owl’s eyes are almost useless in the daylight because the light dazzles them. The owl is able to swallow its prey whole because of its elastic esophagus. Indigestible hair and bones are regurgitated as pellets. The bill is short but sharply hooked.<\/p>\n<p>Owls may lay up to ten eggs. The young are cared for on the nest by both parents. Both adults and young tend to remain in the area in which they were hatched. Eight species of owls are found in the Holy Land, of which five are plentiful. It is difficult, however, to identify a particular species with any of the four Hebrew words translated “owl” in Scripture. A fifth word translated “owl” (<span>kjv<\/span>) is more appropriately identified with the ostrich (<span>rsv<\/span>). Owls appear in the lists of unclean birds (Lv 11:17; Dt 14:16), and although translations differ, they concur that all species of owls, being predators, are unclean.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ostrich (above); Owl, Barn or White; Owl, Great; Owl, Little; Owl, Scops (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlBarnorWhite\">Owl, Barn or White<\/p>\n<p>Large owl <em>(Tyto alloa)<\/em> with a distinct heart-shaped face. It may get its Hebrew name from a snoring sound it makes when breathing in the nest. In flight it emits a frightening screech, and thus is sometimes referred to as the screech owl. Its somewhat sinister features—a large head and wide pop eyes—have led some people to consider it demonic, but they have also inspired another name, the monkey-faced owl. It is a useful bird, however, devouring rodents that raid fields and damage stored grain. Like other owls, it sleeps during the day and hunts at night with a well-developed sense of hearing and sight. Its color is light brownish yellow with a white mask around the eyes and cheeks. The whole leg is covered with feathers that protect it against the bites of struggling victims in its talons.<\/p>\n<p>Some modern translations mention the barn or white owl by name (Lv 11:17, <span>njb<\/span>; 11:18, <span>nasb<\/span>; Dt 14:16, <span>njb<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl (above), Owl, Scops (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlGreat\">Owl, Great<\/p>\n<p>Large owl, standing nearly two feet (60.9 centimeters) tall <em>(Asio otus).<\/em> The color is mouse gray with gray-brown spots and black stripes. As one of its names indicates, it has tufted “ears” and is sometimes called the great horned owl. It feeds on rodents, such as rats and mice. It winters in Israel among ruins and in groves.<\/p>\n<p>The great owl may be the owl mentioned in the Bible among the birds of desolation that will inhabit devastated Edom (Is 34:11, <span>nasb<\/span> mg). It is also mentioned by name in some translations of the lists of ritually unclean birds (Lv 11:17, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>; Dt 14:16, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlLittle\">Owl, Little<\/p>\n<p>Smallest of all nocturnal birds of prey. Chiefly insectivorous, the little owl <em>(Athene noctua glaux)<\/em> also feeds at times on tiny birds. It is the most common owl in the Holy Land, dwelling among ruins, tombstones, rocks, and thickets (perhaps the owl of Ps 102:6). Its voice sounds like that of a dying person. On occasion it may be observed perched on a rock with its large eyes gazing off into the distance, a pose that the ancients considered a sign of wisdom. The Greeks associated the little owl with the goddess Athena. It is mentioned by name in several translations (Lv 11:17, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>; Dt 14:16, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlScops\">Owl, Scops<\/p>\n<p>Small owl <em>(Otus scops)<\/em> distinguished by two horn-shaped crests of hairlike feathers on its head. It perches in an inclined posture and hops and dances like a goat. During the hatching period, the male’s hooting sounds like a moan. The scops owl feeds on insects, rodents, and birds. During invasions of mice or locusts, these owls have appeared in large flocks and helped to destroy the pests. They have been known to attack humans who intrude on their nests. They are well-known inhabitants of Eurasia and Africa.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars suggest that the scops is the true screech owl, because of its whistling calls that resound through the night. The screech owl is mentioned only once in Scripture (Is 34:14, <span>kjv<\/span>), but that translation is the subject of scholarly debate. Following traditional Jewish mythology, some translations use the Hebrew word <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">lilith<\/span><em>)<\/em> as a proper name. In Jewish tradition Lilith was a witch-demon who, before Eve’s creation, was Adam’s wife. She became the mother of demons and was thought to attack children during the night; thus the name “Lilith” is translated “night hag” (<span>rsv<\/span>) or “night monster” (<span>nasb<\/span>). Most scholars favoring the mythical interpretation, however, suggest that Isaiah was using a popular legend to evoke a sense of desolation and did not himself believe in the existence of Lilith. There is little support for “screech owl” as an appropriate translation of the name.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl; Owl, Barn or White (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Partridge\">Partridge<\/p>\n<p>Most common game bird in the Holy Land. The partridge resembles a chicken in its basic anatomy but has a less chunky body and a longer tail. Two species of partridge inhabit the Holy Land: the sand partridge <em>(Ammoperdix heyi),<\/em> found near the Dead Sea, in the Jordan River valley, and in the Sinai Desert; and the chukar partridge <em>(Alectoris graeca).<\/em> The sand partridge is a medium-sized bird with yellow feet. The male has sandy-buff plumage, upper tail feathers penciled and barred with brown, and a chestnut and white undersurface. The female is a grayish buff. The chukar partridge resembles the common French partridge of Europe, having a body about 16 inches (40.6 centimeters) long. It is covered with beautiful and radiantly colored feathers.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical reference (1 Sm 26:20; probably the sand partridge because of the geographical context) alludes to the common method of catching it by chasing. It was also hunted with snares (cf. Ps 91:3) or by hunters hiding in a blind. The fast-running partridge soon becomes exhausted, which enables hunters to run it to the ground and kill it. Nevertheless, by running and jumping, it can ascend very steep cliffs. The bird finds refuge among bushes into which its brownish-green feathers blend protectively. If it were not such a prolific breeder, it would probably have become extinct by being hunted for food.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical description of the partridge gathering a brood she did not hatch (Jer 17:11) seems to be based on the fact that the hen lays at least two clutches of eggs, one for herself and one for the cock to incubate.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Peacock\">Peacock<\/p>\n<p>Member of the quail, partridge, and pheasant family, the peacock <em>(Pavo cristatus)<\/em> is actually the male peafowl. Its mate is properly known as the peahen. The male attracts attention because of a stately, luxurious appearance enhanced by magnificent feathers. The breast is a brilliant metallic blue, and each tail feather has a brilliant eye near the tip. When lowered, the unusually long tail feathers form a train behind the peacock on the ground, giving it an overall length of up to six feet (1.8 meters). The train can also be raised to form a huge fan adorned with the multicolored eyes. During courtship the feathers are raised and vibrated to make a distinct rustling noise. The rather drab peahen lacks the long train.<\/p>\n<p>Because it is not native to the Holy Land, the peacocks referred to in 1 Kings 10:22 and 2 Chronicles 9:21 are thought by some scholars to be Old World monkeys or baboons brought from east Africa, or guinea hens from the upper Nile River region. There is evidence, however, that the Phoenicians introduced peacocks to the Egyptian pharaoh, perhaps as early as the time of King Solomon. It is possible that Solomon’s trade expeditions ranged as far as India, where the peacock is native. The peacock was also well known to the Greeks and Romans. Alexander the Great prized its beauty and forbade his soldiers to kill the bird.<\/p>\n<p>In the early Christian church the peacock became a symbol of the immortality promised in the resurrection of Christ. In addition, the eyes of its tail came to represent the all-seeing eye of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Pelican\">Pelican<\/p>\n<p>Largest of all aquatic birds, considerably larger even than the swan. The pelican <em>(Pelecanus onocrotalus)<\/em> is generally about 50 inches (127 centimeters) long with a 16-inch (40.6-centimeters) beak, the upper part of which is hooked downward at the end, facilitating fish catching. The lower part of the bill supports a yellow pouch extending down the throat. The pouch may hold up to three gallons (11.4 liters) of food (small fish) and water. The pelican’s webbed feet are peculiar in having webs between all four toes. Pelicans are expert swimmers as well as efficient fliers. The pelican’s massive body, long neck, and comparatively small head give it proportions that make rising from the water difficult. To take off, a pelican must first flap awkwardly along the surface, pounding at the water with its legs.<\/p>\n<p>Pelicans fly and nest in groups. Both sexes care for the young that hatch from the one to four eggs. Whereas most birds feed their young by placing food into their mouths, the pelican reverses the process; the young pelican sticks its head and most of its body into its mother’s throat and plucks partially digested food from the mother’s crop. The deep penetration of the young’s beak into the mother’s gullet led ancients to believe that the young were feeding on the blood of the mother’s breast, thus giving rise to wide usage of the pelican as a symbol of Christ’s atonement, and of charity in general.<\/p>\n<p>The roseate pelican is white, at times with a faint rose tinge, and has black feathers growing from the wing joint farthest from the body. The legs, pouch, and skin around the eyes are yellow; the hook of the beak is red. This species may grow up to six feet (1.8 meters) long with a wingspread of up to eight feet (2.4 meters). During the breeding season, the coloration of the exposed areas of the roseate pelican’s legs and face changes from gray to bright orange or red. At the same time the white feathers acquire a beautiful pink tint originating from an oil-gland secretion. The oil is spread throughout the plumage by the bird as it preens.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars question whether “pelican” is an appropriate translation of the Hebrew in several verses, believing rather that the word refers to one of the owls, hawks, or vultures. Most translations include the pelican in the lists of ritually unclean birds (Lv 11:18; Dt 14:17). Opinion on the other references is more sharply divided. Some scholars maintain that the desert context of the verses eliminates the possibility of a water bird like the pelican (cf. Ps 102:6, “vulture,” <span>rsv<\/span>; Is 34:11, “cormorant,” <span>kjv<\/span>; “hawk,” <span>rsv<\/span>; Zep 2:14, “cormorant,” <span>kjv<\/span>; “vulture,” <span>rsv<\/span>). On the other hand, the roseate pelican frequents the rivers, lakes, and marshes of the Holy Land. After flying out to sea as far as 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) to swoop down on fish near the surface, the pelican often returns inland to a deserted place to digest its enormous meal. Thus, the pelican may be the lonely wilderness bird of those passages.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PigeonorDove\">Pigeon or Dove<\/p>\n<p>Species of the pigeon family (Columbidae). In common usage the names “pigeon” and “dove” are virtually interchangeable. The common domestic pigeon familiar to city dwellers the world over, for example, is actually a descendant of the wild rock dove. Both names are used in English translations of the Bible to translate the same Hebrew word. A second Hebrew word is usually translated “turtledove.” Nevertheless, it seems clear that the ancient Hebrews recognized differences among dove species.<\/p>\n<p>At least six species of pigeon or dove reside in modern Israel: the rock, ring, and stock doves (genus <em>Columba<\/em>), and the turtle, collared, and palm doves (genus <em>Streptopelia<\/em>). Of the six, the rock dove <em>(Columba livia)<\/em> and the turtledove <em>(Streptopelia turtur)<\/em> seem to be the two most often referred to in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Pigeons vary in size from 6 to over 12 inches (15 to 30 centimeters). The most colorful Israeli species is the rock dove, which can be a beautiful silvery gray with grayish-green iridescent plumage on the wings (noted by David, Ps 68:13). The smaller doves <em>(Streptopelia)<\/em> are less colorful, mostly gray or buff with a blackish or checkered half collar on the back of the neck. Pigeons have short necks and small heads, plump bodies, and short wings controlled by strong muscles that enable them to fly considerable distances. The smaller doves have longer tails.<\/p>\n<p>At present, the wild rock dove is found primarily in the area around the Sea of Galilee and farther to the south in the many ravines leading down to the Dead Sea. Wild rock doves prefer to build their nests on rocks and cliff faces, a fact precisely described in Scripture (Sg 2:14; Jer 48:28). All Israeli doves build fragile nests of scraps of vegetation. Eggs are hatched twice a year. Doves seldom lay more than two eggs. The young are cared for in the nest by both parents, who rove over the fields eating seeds and weeds. The adult’s crop contains digested food in a milky condition, called pigeon’s milk, which can be regurgitated and fed to the young.<\/p>\n<p>During courtship there is a great deal of rivalry among the male doves. The turtledove’s courtship dance is an awesome aerial display. The attention to courtship, the joint care of young, and the solicitude of the parents for each other, noted from earliest times, have made the dove one of the most popular symbols of love and peace (Sg 1:15; 2:14; 4:1; 5:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major distinction between pigeons (ring doves) and turtledoves seems to have been recognized by ancient writers. Pigeons are year-round residents and easily tamed, whereas turtledoves are migratory. Turtledoves were confined in cages singly or in pairs as pets or for sacrifices. Pigeons were probably the first birds to be domesticated, perhaps as early as Noah’s time (Gn 8:8-12). They were depicted on the earliest Egyptian monuments, and their edibility was mentioned in early Egyptian texts. Before long, domestic pigeons were regarded as evidence of a household’s prosperity. In the more prosperous households they nested in dovecotes of molded pottery clay fashioned in latticelike structures (hence the “windows” of Is 60:8).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times there were many dovecotes in the parks around Herod the Great’s palace in Jerusalem. The dove’s popularity was due not only to its docility but also to its desirability as food and as an acceptable and relatively inexpensive sacrifice. The turtledove may have been regarded more highly as a sacrifice because of its wildness and consequent lesser availability. The two biblical references to turtledoves not in a sacrificial context refer to their migratory habits and to their arrival in Israel in the spring (Sg 2:12; Jer 8:7; cf. Hos 11:11).<\/p>\n<p>Most of the references to doves and pigeons in the Bible are in statements about sacrificial procedures (Gn 15:7-10; Lv 1:14; 5:7; 12:6; Nm 6:10; Lk 2:24). Other references, however, include a range of observations and symbolic usages of the dove. Its throaty moaning was often observed (Is 38:14; 59:11; Ez 7:16; Na 2:7). Its power of flight was well known (Ps 55:6), as were its beauty (Sg 1:15; 4:1; 5:12), its gentleness and loyalty to its mate (Sg 2:14; 5:2; 6:9), its affection (Ps 74:19), and its innocence (Mt 10:16). The one negative reference to doves is in Hosea 7:11, where they are said to be senseless and foolish, perhaps in reference to their overly trusting nature.<\/p>\n<p>Of NT references, perhaps the most significant is the description of the Holy Spirit at Christ’s baptism as a descending dove (Mt 3:16). The dove’s loving nature made it natural for early Christians to connect the dove image with the concept of the Comforter. Since then the dove has remained the most popular symbol of the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Quail\">Quail<\/p>\n<p>Short, stocky birds with bills and feet similar to those of chickens; hence they are adapted to eating seeds or insects. Quail <em>(Coturnix coturnix)<\/em> are the smallest of the subfamily of poultry that also includes pheasants and partridges. Quail (or “quails,” another plural form) are about ten inches (25.4 centimeters) long and have small, rounded wings. They burst from their hiding places in the grass or bushes with a whirring sound. The belly of the quail is white. Up to 18 eggs are laid, and if the mother dies, the male has been known to assume the care of the young. Quail of the Mediterranean region winter in the Sudan and migrate northward in vast flocks in the spring. Quail cannot maintain a long sustained flight but make use of wind currents to keep them aloft.<\/p>\n<p>Enormous flocks of quail twice served as food for the Israelites in the wilderness of Sinai, when the birds were driven down in the desert miraculously by winds (Ex 16:13; Nm 11:31-32; Ps 105:40). The second time they were probably flying along the Gulf of Aqaba and were blown off course by the east wind (Nm 11:31; Ps 78:26-28). Their inability to sustain long flight may account for their low flying level—two cubits, or about 40 inches (101.6 centimeters). When exhausted, they were easily caught by hand (Nm 11:31-32). Quail were considered clean and the most delicate eating of all game birds, and they were preserved by drying in the sun.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Raven\">Raven<\/p>\n<p>Member of the crow family (Corvidae). The Hebrew word for “raven” means “black one.” The raven (<em>Corvus corax<\/em>) weighs about three pounds (1.36 kilograms) and varies from 22 to 26 inches (56 to 66 centimeters) in length. Its tail is broader in the middle than at either end. Eight species are found in Israel: three ravens, two jackdaws, one crow, one rook, and one chough. The crow, about 20 inches (50.8 centimeters) long, is smaller than a raven, and its tail is uniform in width. The raven’s most conspicuous feature is its glossy black iridescent plumage.<\/p>\n<p>Ravens and crows have survived in spite of the dislike many humans have for them. Excellent fliers, they migrate by day and congregate in great flocks of up to several hundred thousand. During the nesting season, they make nests of sticks in which two to seven eggs are laid. Ravens mate for life. Equipped with strong wings, a strong bill, and strong feet, ravens can live in isolated places from which they range widely for food. That it did not return to the ark was a good sign to Noah, indicating that the raven could find food and possibly a place to rest on dry mountaintops (Gn 8:7).<\/p>\n<p>The raven, essentially a scavenger, was ceremonially unclean (Lv 11:15; Dt 14:14). Yet ravens fed Elijah at God’s command (1 Kgs 17:4-6). Job was told that God gave the raven its food (Jb 38:41), as the psalmist and Jesus repeated (Ps 147:9; Lk 12:24). The raven’s glistening black plumage inspired the bride’s comparison of her beloved’s hair (Sg 5:11). They prefer desolate, uninhabited areas as their home territory (Is 34:11). Ravens are crafty, active birds. Some are capable of speaking, solving puzzles, and performing feats of memory. Bold and curious, they sometimes use their talents for theft.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Seagull\">Seagull<\/p>\n<p>Robust seabirds, primarily scavengers (family Laridae). Several species of gulls live along the seacoast of the Holy Land. They are usually gray-backed with white heads and underparts and black wing tips. The slender bill ends in a downward curve.<\/p>\n<p>Seagulls may be 8 to 30 inches (20 to 76 centimeters) long. Many species migrate, traveling long distances with their superb flying ability. Gulls can also swim easily because of their webbed feet. Their voice is like a harsh scream or squawk. In nesting season many nest together in any available place, such as a cliff or tree. Both male and female incubate and care for the young.<\/p>\n<p>Because gulls will eat almost anything, they are listed as ritually unclean birds (Lv 11:16; Dt 14:15, <span>asv<\/span> has “sea mew,” a common European gull). Some commentators believe that those passages refer to an owl or to the cuckoo and not to the seagull.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cuckoo (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Sparrow\">Sparrow<\/p>\n<p>Small bird of the finch family (Fringillidae) or the weaver finch family (Ploceidae), considered to be of little worth. The Hebrew word is a general term for “bird” and refers to any small bird such as a sparrow, finch, thrush, or starling. In translation, however, the word sometimes refers to the common English or house sparrow (<em>Passer domestica;<\/em> Ps 84:3; Prv 26:2).<\/p>\n<p>Dull in color with a black throat, the male house sparrow is a noisy and energetic creature. The nest, when built in open places, has an opening on the side and is made of almost anything available. Sparrows also nest in sheltered places, in dwellings, boxes, or holes in trees. They lay four to seven eggs.<\/p>\n<p>The common or house sparrow was known in ancient Greece and Egypt. There it had a reputation for invading fields in large swarms and picking the seeds from them. It is a permanent resident of the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>The sparrow is prolific and lives in close association with humans. It was considered ritually clean. Sparrows brought low prices in countries where they were sold (Mt 10:29; Lk 12:6). Today in Near Eastern marketplaces, boys offer live sparrows for sale. Tied together in groups of four to six by strings attached to one leg, the birds fly about over the boys’ heads. Evidently such a sight was common in NT times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Stork\">Stork<\/p>\n<p>Long-legged, white wading bird (genus <em>Ciconia<\/em>) having large, powerful wings with glossy black primary and secondary feathers. The flapping of its wings produces a loud rushing sound. Connecting membranes between the toes prevent the bird from sinking into the mud. Its red bill is sharp and long, serving to seize and lift its prey out of the water. Storks are mute, lacking a voice box.<\/p>\n<p>Flocks of storks pass through the Holy Land during their September migration on the way to central and southern Africa and likewise in the spring on their return flight to their homes in northern Israel, Syria, and Europe. Storks travel in vast flocks during the day, spreading out against the sky.<\/p>\n<p>The stork’s faithful tending of the young is proverbial, as is its habit of returning annually to the same nesting place. Storks have the habit of adding to their nests each year, and it is possible to find nests that are 100 years old and have a height of more than three feet (.9 meter).<\/p>\n<p>Two species of storks frequent the Holy Land. The white stork <em>(Ciconia alba)<\/em> is 40 inches (101.6 centimeters) tall, and its wingspread is six feet (1.8 meters), enabling it to move with a slow, sustained flight or to soar. In folklore the white stork is sometimes considered to be a harbinger of good fortune.<\/p>\n<p>The black stork <em>(Ciconia nigra),<\/em> common around the Dead Sea valley, nests in trees; hence it may be the tree-dwelling species referred to in Psalm 104:17. The Hebrew name for “stork” means literally the “kingly one,” or the “loyal one,” a reference to the care of the bird for its young. Like the heron, the stork was ceremonially unclean because of its diet of aquatic organisms, refuse, small animals, birds, and reptiles (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18). Jeremiah mentioned the stork’s uncanny and instinctive knowledge of the time of its migration (Jer 8:7). Its impressive wings figured in one of Zechariah’s visions (Zec 5:9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Swallow\">Swallow<\/p>\n<p>Small, nearly black, forked-tailed bird with long, tapering wings, noted for its graceful flight <em>(hirundo rustica).<\/em> The small, weak feet are poorly adapted for walking. Swallows resemble swifts in shape and life habits but are somewhat smaller.<\/p>\n<p>The swallow’s large mouth enables it to catch insects while in flight. Colors vary from brown and blue to white. Swallows often nest in buildings, a feature noticed by the psalmist, who reported a swallow’s home at the temple (Ps 84:3).<\/p>\n<p>Swallows are basically resident in Israel, whereas the swift is a migratory bird noted for the regularity of its migratory schedule. The “swallow” of Isaiah 38:14 probably refers to a swift, as does Jeremiah 8:7, where the dependability of the bird is contrasted with the irregularity of God’s people. Proverbs 26:2 may be a reference to either the swallow or the swift.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Swift (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Swan\">Swan<\/p>\n<p>Large, graceful water birds. Two species of swan (genus <em>Cygnus<\/em>) are found in the Middle East as passing migrants <em>(Cygnus olor<\/em> and <em>Cygnus musicus).<\/em> Swans are known as the best musicians among the birds and were considered sacred to the god Apollo by the Greeks. Their voices sound like flutes and harps.<\/p>\n<p>The references in Leviticus 11:18 and Deuteronomy 14:16 (<span>kjv<\/span>) are probably not to the swan but to the water hen or the barn owl, since there seems little reason to declare the vegetarian swan an unclean animal. <em>See also<\/em> Owl, Barn or White (above); Water Hen (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Swift\">Swift<\/p>\n<p>Small, strong flyers (genus <em>Apus<\/em>). Like the swallow, the swift has long, bent wings and a cleft tail, enabling it to obtain great speed as it skims the ground and sweeps through the air. A swift devours a great many harmful insects, catching them in its mouth in flight. Many swifts make their nests in rooftops and in nooks and crannies of city walls. Their nests are built with strong feathers cemented together with saliva. Other swifts live in caves and clefts of rocks.<\/p>\n<p>Common swifts are native to Israel, and in the Jordan Valley they occur in large flocks. Isaiah 38:14 (<span>niv<\/span>) seems to be clear reference to the swift’s plaintive call, since the swallow’s sharp chirp is not a striking simile for a distraught king’s cry. The swift has a soft, delicate voice, and its cry could be easily interpreted as melodious wailing.<\/p>\n<p>The migratory swifts arrive on a precise schedule in the Holy Land in late winter, and immense flocks fill the cities with their cries. Thus the reference in Jeremiah 8:7 to swallows, which are largely permanent residents, is probably to swifts.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Swallow (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Vulture\">Vulture<\/p>\n<p>Subfamily (Aegypiinae) of the hawk family (Accipitridae). Each of the four species of Old World vultures is found in the Holy Land: the Egyptian, griffon, black, and bearded vulture (the bearded vulture is also known as the lammergeier). These birds range in size from the 24-inch (61-centimeters) Egyptian vulture to the huge bearded vulture, largest of all flying birds in the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>Most vultures are brown or black, having a short neck and a short, hooked bill with which they tear the dead animal flesh of which they are fond. All vultures, except the bearded, have bare or down-covered heads and necks, enabling these scavengers to penetrate deep into a carcass without spoiling the plumage. Excellent eyesight enables a vulture to locate a carcass from a lofty soaring position. Considering the decayed condition of most of its food, a vulture’s poor sense of smell may be a fortunate limitation. Vultures nest in any convenient place; both parents care for the young.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word usually translated “eagle” in the OT may have been a general term for all large birds of prey, including vultures. Thus many of the passages about eagles may refer to either the eagle or the vulture (cf. Lv 11:13; Dt 14:12, <span>nasb<\/span> mg). Such passages include references to nesting habits (Jb 39:27-28; Jer 49:16; Ob 1:4), care for fledglings (Dt 32:11), powers of flight (Ex 19:4; Dt 28:49; Jb 9:26; Lam 4:19), and extremely high soaring altitude (Prv 23:5; 30:19; Is 40:31). Despite variations among translations, the vulture clearly belongs in the list of unclean birds because of its foul diet (Lv 11:13, 18; Dt 14:12, 17).<\/p>\n<p>Several references to the eagle in the <span>kjv<\/span> have been changed to “vulture” in modern translations. The change seems appropriate in the references to the vulture as a sign of present or impending doom (Lam 4:19; Hos 8:1). Likewise the eye-plucking bird of Proverbs 30:17 is probably a vulture. The phrase “bald as the eagle” (Mi 1:16) clearly should read “bald as the vulture,” since there are no bald eagles in Israel and most vultures are bald. Since the vulture, like the eagle, was a symbol of sovereignty and domination in the ancient Near East, some gods were represented as vultures. Thus Ezekiel’s comparison of the kings of Babylon and Egypt to eagles may be conceived alternatively as comparisons to vultures (Ez 17:3, 7). Jesus’ reference to the eagles congregating around corpses at the end times (Mt 24:28) should also be revised to vultures, since eagles are usually solitary eaters, whereas vultures generally flock together around carrion.<\/p>\n<p>Several <span>kjv<\/span> references to vultures are usually translated “kite” or “falcon” in modern translations (cf. various versions of Lv 11:14; Dt 14:13; Jb 28:7; Is 34:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eagle; Kestrel; Kite; Lammergeier; Vulture, Black, or Osprey; Vulture, Egyptian; Vulture, Griffon.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"VultureBlackorOsprey\">Vulture, Black, or Osprey<\/p>\n<p>Diurnal flesh eater, a little over three feet (.9 meter) long with a wingspread of over three yards (2.7 meters). The feathers of the black or osprey vulture (<em>Aegypius monachus<\/em>) are black and the head and upper part of the neck are bald like those of other carrion eaters. It nests in the Jordan River valley and seems to have been abundant in biblical times. Today it is quite rare. The black vulture is probably the osprey of Leviticus 11:13 and Deuteronomy 14:12.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Vulture (above).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"VultureEgyptian\">Vulture, Egyptian<\/p>\n<p>Also known as the gier eagle or as pharaoh’s hen. The plumage of the Egyptian vulture (<em>Neophron percnopterus<\/em>) is basically white with a naked head and yellow neck. The Egyptian vulture breaks bones left by other vultures. Its flight is slow and easy, and its voice is a croak. Measuring about 24 inches (61 centimeters) in length, it is the smallest of all the carrion-eating birds found in the Holy Land. It may be referred to in the list of unclean birds (Lv 11:18; Dt 14:17, “gier eagle,” <span>kjv<\/span>; “carrion vulture,” <span>rsv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>nlt<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Vulture (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"VultureGriffon\">Vulture, Griffon<\/p>\n<p>One of the largest flying birds in the Holy Land <em>(Gyps fulvus).<\/em> Until a generation ago, the griffon vulture was one of the most common birds in the Holy Land. Today it is on the verge of extinction. Many have been killed by eating poisonous bait meant for foxes and jackals. In addition, its reproduction is limited; the female lays only one or two eggs a year.<\/p>\n<p>The griffon vulture measures about four feet (121.9 centimeters) in length and up to ten feet (3 meters) between wing tips. Its beak is extremely strong, and its short toes are fitted with blunt talons. It is a light-brown bird with a pale yellow head and neck that are almost bare, being covered only with a very fine down.<\/p>\n<p>The griffon vulture feeds mostly on carrion, but also on locusts and small tortoises. It is able to go without food for several days with no ill effects, but when it does break its fast, it gorges itself. It is found especially in the region of the Sea of Galilee. Most biblical references to the vulture are likely to be to the griffon vulture.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eagle; Vulture (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"WaterHen\">Water Hen<\/p>\n<p>Small water bird of the rail family. The water hen listed among unclean birds (Lv 11:18; Dt 14:16, <span>rsv<\/span> only) may be the biblical bird most difficult to identify. Several alternatives have been suggested, including the swan (<span>kjv<\/span>), one of the owls (<span>nasb<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>), or the marsh hen (<span>tlb<\/span>). Most scholars rule out the swan, since it is a vegetarian bird and thus should not be considered unclean. An owl remains a possibility.<\/p>\n<p>The marsh hen is a rail, several species of which inhabit Israel. One of those species is the purple gallinule <em>(Porphyrio porphyrio).<\/em> Rails are very thin birds varying from 6 to 20 inches (15 to 51 centimeters) in length. They live in marshes, where they eat a great variety of animal and vegetable matter, thus making them a candidate for inclusion in the Mosaic lists of unclean animals.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Animals.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIRDS Feathered vertebrates of the class Aves. Over 8,000 species of birds are known. Approximately 400 species are found in the Holy Land and about 40 are mentioned in Scripture. Modern scientists classify organisms on the basis of internal and external structure, but the biblical writers generally classified organisms according to habitat. Thus, in the Bible, bats are listed with birds as creatures of the air (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18). Precise identification of biblical birds is often difficult ...","summary_en":"BIRDS Feathered vertebrates of the class Aves. Over 8,000 species of birds are known. Approximately 400 species are found in the Holy Land and about 40 are mentioned in Scripture. Modern scientists classify organisms on the basis of internal and external structure, but the biblical writers generally classified organisms according to habitat. Thus, in the Bible, bats are listed with birds as creatures of the air (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18). Precise identification of biblical birds is often difficult ...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":30953,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Period*, Postexilic","title_en":"Period*, Postexilic","content_ro":"<h3>POSTEXILIC PERIOD*<\/h3>\n<p>A period in the Jews’ history after their exile to Babylon. This period extends from 539–c. 331 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Biblical Perspective<\/p>\n<p>• The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire<\/p>\n<p>• The Policy of Persia<\/p>\n<p>• The Return from Exile<\/p>\n<p>• The Return of Ezra<\/p>\n<p>• Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• The Remainder of the Persian Period<\/p>\n<p>• Religious Features of the Postexilic Period<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBiblicalPerspective\">The Biblical Perspective<\/p>\n<p>The books that specifically cover the history of the postexilic or Persian period are Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, and Zechariah. These cover a period of over a century, only a portion of which is dealt with in detail, as the following table shows:<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCollapseoftheBabylonianEmpire\">The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire<\/p>\n<p>This occurred with dramatic suddenness, largely because of internal resistance to the policies of the last Babylonian king, Nabonidus (555–539 <span>BC<\/span>). His neglect of the traditional Babylonian deity, Marduk, in favor of the moon god, Sin, was particularly resented. Nabonidus lived in Taima during the last decade of his reign, refusing to enter Babylon, where his son Belshazzar ruled as virtual king, as noted in Daniel 5. Babylon fell to the Persians in October 538 <span>BC<\/span> and the entire empire passed into their control.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePolicyofPersia\">The Policy of Persia<\/p>\n<p>This is well documented through contemporary inscriptions, notably the record of Cyrus, the first king of the Persian Empire (559–530 <span>BC<\/span>), in the “Cyrus Cylinder.” A new phase in the relationship of conqueror to conquered peoples opened up, which contrasted with the policy of the Assyrian and Babylonian empires of crushing any opposition by massive force. Cyrus and his successors followed a conciliatory line, allowing exiled groups to return home, encouraging local faiths, posing as the champions of the territorial deities, and allowing local autonomy except where Persian interests were affected adversely. The cost of this operation, although considerable, must have been infinitesimal compared with that of keeping rebellious subjects under constant subjection.<\/p>\n<p>The new enlightened policy is reflected in the decree of Cyrus, dated 538 <span>BC<\/span> (Ezr 1:1) and preserved in two versions. The first (vv 1-4) is clearly the official proclamation, while the second (6:3-5) is a more prosaic memorandum dealing with building specifications, a record of Cyrus’s commitment stored in the official archives (vv 1-2). The critical tendency to question the narrative in Ezra 1, especially on the score of the favorable references to the God of Israel and the vast financial support promised, has been nullified by the archaeological evidence, which shows an identical policy elsewhere. The Cyrus Cylinder, for example, notes, “The gods who live within them [i.e., the cities] I returned to their places. . . . All of their inhabitants I collected and restored to their dwelling places.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judah itself there is no evidence for any warfare in this period, which suggests that the Persian takeover of the area was nonviolent. Judah was incorporated into the fifth Persian province, which included the entire area west of the Euphrates River (Ezr 7:21). It was no more than a minor subdistrict, governed through Samaria.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheReturnfromExile\">The Return from Exile<\/p>\n<p>The continuance of a large Jewish community in Babylonia shows that not all the Jews responded to the invitation to return to their homeland, probably because of the prosperity acquired in exile. But 42,360 dedicated Jews (Ezr 2:64) braved the challenge of a four-month 900-mile (1,448-kilometer) journey under Sheshbazzar (1:8), the officially appointed leader, and Zerubbabel his nephew (3:2), who was probably the one to whom the Jews looked as leader. With great enthusiasm the Jews rebuilt the altar of sacrifice and resumed the observance of the traditional feasts (vv 1-6), revealing both a sense of stewardship (2:68-69) and careful attention to the requirements of the Law (3:2-4). Soon after, work on the second temple commenced—the materials and master craftsmen being imported from Tyre and Sidon (Ezr 3:7-9; cf. 1 Kgs 5). When the foundations were laid, the worshipers were doubtless aware that they were fulfilling God’s promise through Jeremiah (Ezr 3:10-11; cf. Jer 33:10-11). But their high hopes were thwarted when there was opposition from neighboring areas (Ezr 4:4-5), selfishness in giving their own accommodations a higher priority than the Lord’s house (Hg 1:2-4, 9), and a series of crop failures that further reduced morale (1:6, 10-11; 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Work on the temple was not resumed until Haggai and Zechariah appeared in 520 <span>BC<\/span>. They encouraged Zerubbabel and Joshua (Jeshua) the high priest, rebuked the people for their apathy and selfishness, and promised God’s presence and blessing upon the temple project (Hg 1:12–2:9). Zechariah’s preaching went beyond the building of the temple, including the rebuilding of Jerusalem itself (Zec 2:1-5) and its world reputation (2:1-5, 11-12; 8:22). The two leaders were addressed in ways that anticipated the Messiah (Hg 2:21-23; Zec 6:10-14). But the Persian king Darius (521–486 <span>BC<\/span>) was not alarmed when the rebuilding operation was reported to him (Ezr 5:1–6:13) and allowed the work to continue. In February 515 <span>BC<\/span> it was dedicated (6:14-16). The Jewish community again had a focal point for its religion, but the political situation remained difficult, with no real security in a still-shattered city.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheReturnofEzra\">The Return of Ezra<\/p>\n<p>The traditional date of Ezra’s return is 458 <span>BC<\/span> (preceding that of Nehemiah in 445 <span>BC<\/span>). This is based on the premise that the King Artaxerxes noted in Ezra 7:7 was Artaxerxes I Longimanus (464–424 <span>BC<\/span>) and not Artaxerxes II Mnemon (404–359 <span>BC<\/span>). However, some scholars, allowing that the king was Artaxerxes I, but believing that Nehemiah preceded Ezra, suggest that a tens unit has dropped out of “seventh” in Ezra 7:7, and that the date of Ezra’s return should be the 27th (438 <span>BC<\/span>) or 37th year (428 <span>BC<\/span>) of Artaxerxes I, making Ezra’s return a few years after Nehemiah’s. While this is plausible, there remains strong support for the traditional view. It accords with the order of the two books in the OT and requires no textual emendation. It also accounts for the section in Ezra 4:7-23, where, in the reign of Artaxerxes, an abortive effort was made by a recently returned group to rebuild the wall of Jerusalem. Nehemiah 1:1-4 suggests that this was regarded as important and its abrupt termination, by a decree of the king, caused Nehemiah great distress. The probability is that Ezra, recently returned, realized that little could be done in the way of major religious reformation until Jerusalem was secure, but in attempting to rebuild the wall he exceeded his mandate and was not able to function adequately until Nehemiah arrived, when the new security of Jerusalem allowed the great Law-reading ceremony of Nehemiah 8:1-12 to take place.<\/p>\n<p>Ezra’s ministry concerned the teaching of the Law of Moses, the Pentateuch, which had long been extant in its final form by this time. Ezra 7 shows that Artaxerxes was following the traditional Persian policy of encouraging good relationships with his subject peoples. Ezra’s appointment (Ezr 7:12) was to a state office; it has frequently been paraphrased as “Secretary of State for Jewish Religious Affairs.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NehemiahsReturnandMinistry\">Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry<\/p>\n<p>Hanani and others (Neh 1:1-3) informed Nehemiah of the complete failure of a recent attempt to rebuild the wall, probably that recorded in Ezra 4:7-23, and sought his mediation before the very king who had authorized the decree that compelled work on the wall to cease. A friend in high places was vital, and Nehemiah, a trusted and influential member of the court (Neh 1:11), was approached for this delicate and dangerous task. Nehemiah 1:4–2:8 shows how well he prepared for and seized his opportunity. His appointment as the governor of Judah (5:14) involved the removal of this area from the control of the governor of Samaria, which accounts for the unrelenting hostility of Sanballat (2:19; 4:1). The evidence of Nehemiah 3 suggests that the extent of Judah at this time was limited, probably not reaching as far north as Bethel or as far south as Hebron. Nehemiah was faced with opposition that included ridicule (2:19; 4:1-3), armed force (4:8, 11), discouragement (v 10), internal economic problems (5:1-18), intrigue (6:1-2), intimidation, and blackmail (vv 5-14). In spite of these obstacles, the wall was completed in the incredibly brief period of 52 days (v 15).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to this monumental achievement, Nehemiah completely reorganized the social and economic life of Jerusalem, dealing with alienated mortgages, excessive interest rates (Neh 5:1-13), mixed marriages (10:30; 13:23-30), Sabbath observance (10:31; 13:15-21), and temple supplies (10:32-40; 13:10-13). Almost certainly, it was this political and economic security that allowed Ezra, who probably arrived 13 years earlier, to proceed with his great religious reformation based on the Law. Nehemiah’s book, usually called the “Nehemiah Memoirs,” was probably presented by him in the temple as a “votive offering” (as indicated by the form of 5:19; 13:14, 22, 31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRemainderofthePersianPeriod\">The Remainder of the Persian Period<\/p>\n<p>Persian control, which probably centered on Lachish, was traditionally mild, except where her interests were directly threatened. There is no evidence of any major discontent in Judah, which enjoyed a considerable degree of autonomy. The Phoenician revolt of 351 <span>BC<\/span>, which took Artaxerxes III (359–338 <span>BC<\/span>) three years to subdue, was the only serious disturbance in the area. While Artaxerxes deported some Jews to Hyrcania, southeast of the Caspian Sea, that was probably a precautionary measure, and Judah does not appear to have been greatly involved in the revolt. The Jerusalem priests were allowed to mint their own coinage and levy a temple tax. Under the wider influence of the Persian Empire, Hebrew gradually fell out of popular usage as a spoken language, being replaced by Aramaic. As the international stature of Greece increased, so the influence of Hellenism began to be felt, even in Judah.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ReligiousFeaturesofthePostexilicPeriod\">Religious Features of the Postexilic Period<\/p>\n<h5>The Decline of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>There were three main reasons for this:<\/p>\n<p>1. The prophetic movement as a whole became discredited after Jerusalem fell in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. The large number of popular cult prophets who had foretold a sudden end to the Babylonian oppression (e.g., Jer 28:1-4) were proved decisively wrong. The suspicion that henceforth became attached to prophecy was increased further in the Persian period, when large numbers of itinerant “prophets” of various religions traveled widely. Zechariah 13:2-6 shows the stern measures advocated against such false prophets and fortune-tellers.<\/p>\n<li>2. There was a markedly different historical situation. The chastened remnant that survived had turned away from the blatant apostasy that characterized the preexilic period, so that the prophetic condemnation was not required with the same urgency. The temple and the Law had acquired a new prominence, and postexilic prophecy generally was concerned either with the rebuilding of the temple (e.g., Haggai and Zechariah) or the purification of its cult (e.g., Malachi). Once this goal had been realized, the role of the prophet was diminished. Another historical factor was the relatively large number of priests who returned from captivity, doubtless encouraged by the prospect of serving in the rebuilt temple. The main need at this time was for the priest, who revealed God’s will on the basis of the Law.<\/li>\n<li>3. There was an increasing stress on the transcendence of God, caused partly by an emphasis upon priestly mediation and partly by a fear of God that resulted from the recent judgment. The apocalyptic movement, with its emphasis on angelic intermediaries between humans and a transcendent God, encouraged this tendency. Correspondingly, the prophetic appeal for a personal, moral walk with God weakened.<\/li>\n<h5>The Rise of the Synagogue<\/h5>\n<p>Some type of local worship, independent of the temple and its sacrifices, must have developed in the Captivity, with the Law increasingly occupying a dominant position. Later on, the prophetic books were read and expounded, but the primary stress was always on the Law. This mode of worship later took root in the homeland, and the synagogue gradually developed into the focal point of the community for social relationships, education, and worship. It facilitated the worldwide continuance and expansion of the Jewish faith, independent of Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Diaspora of the Jews; Ezra, Book of; Haggai, Book of; Israel, History of; Nehemiah, Book of; Zechariah, Book of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>POSTEXILIC PERIOD*<\/h3>\n<p>A period in the Jews’ history after their exile to Babylon. This period extends from 539–c. 331 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Biblical Perspective<\/p>\n<p>• The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire<\/p>\n<p>• The Policy of Persia<\/p>\n<p>• The Return from Exile<\/p>\n<p>• The Return of Ezra<\/p>\n<p>• Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• The Remainder of the Persian Period<\/p>\n<p>• Religious Features of the Postexilic Period<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBiblicalPerspective\">The Biblical Perspective<\/p>\n<p>The books that specifically cover the history of the postexilic or Persian period are Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, and Zechariah. These cover a period of over a century, only a portion of which is dealt with in detail, as the following table shows:<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCollapseoftheBabylonianEmpire\">The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire<\/p>\n<p>This occurred with dramatic suddenness, largely because of internal resistance to the policies of the last Babylonian king, Nabonidus (555–539 <span>BC<\/span>). His neglect of the traditional Babylonian deity, Marduk, in favor of the moon god, Sin, was particularly resented. Nabonidus lived in Taima during the last decade of his reign, refusing to enter Babylon, where his son Belshazzar ruled as virtual king, as noted in Daniel 5. Babylon fell to the Persians in October 538 <span>BC<\/span> and the entire empire passed into their control.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePolicyofPersia\">The Policy of Persia<\/p>\n<p>This is well documented through contemporary inscriptions, notably the record of Cyrus, the first king of the Persian Empire (559–530 <span>BC<\/span>), in the “Cyrus Cylinder.” A new phase in the relationship of conqueror to conquered peoples opened up, which contrasted with the policy of the Assyrian and Babylonian empires of crushing any opposition by massive force. Cyrus and his successors followed a conciliatory line, allowing exiled groups to return home, encouraging local faiths, posing as the champions of the territorial deities, and allowing local autonomy except where Persian interests were affected adversely. The cost of this operation, although considerable, must have been infinitesimal compared with that of keeping rebellious subjects under constant subjection.<\/p>\n<p>The new enlightened policy is reflected in the decree of Cyrus, dated 538 <span>BC<\/span> (Ezr 1:1) and preserved in two versions. The first (vv 1-4) is clearly the official proclamation, while the second (6:3-5) is a more prosaic memorandum dealing with building specifications, a record of Cyrus’s commitment stored in the official archives (vv 1-2). The critical tendency to question the narrative in Ezra 1, especially on the score of the favorable references to the God of Israel and the vast financial support promised, has been nullified by the archaeological evidence, which shows an identical policy elsewhere. The Cyrus Cylinder, for example, notes, “The gods who live within them [i.e., the cities] I returned to their places. . . . All of their inhabitants I collected and restored to their dwelling places.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judah itself there is no evidence for any warfare in this period, which suggests that the Persian takeover of the area was nonviolent. Judah was incorporated into the fifth Persian province, which included the entire area west of the Euphrates River (Ezr 7:21). It was no more than a minor subdistrict, governed through Samaria.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheReturnfromExile\">The Return from Exile<\/p>\n<p>The continuance of a large Jewish community in Babylonia shows that not all the Jews responded to the invitation to return to their homeland, probably because of the prosperity acquired in exile. But 42,360 dedicated Jews (Ezr 2:64) braved the challenge of a four-month 900-mile (1,448-kilometer) journey under Sheshbazzar (1:8), the officially appointed leader, and Zerubbabel his nephew (3:2), who was probably the one to whom the Jews looked as leader. With great enthusiasm the Jews rebuilt the altar of sacrifice and resumed the observance of the traditional feasts (vv 1-6), revealing both a sense of stewardship (2:68-69) and careful attention to the requirements of the Law (3:2-4). Soon after, work on the second temple commenced—the materials and master craftsmen being imported from Tyre and Sidon (Ezr 3:7-9; cf. 1 Kgs 5). When the foundations were laid, the worshipers were doubtless aware that they were fulfilling God’s promise through Jeremiah (Ezr 3:10-11; cf. Jer 33:10-11). But their high hopes were thwarted when there was opposition from neighboring areas (Ezr 4:4-5), selfishness in giving their own accommodations a higher priority than the Lord’s house (Hg 1:2-4, 9), and a series of crop failures that further reduced morale (1:6, 10-11; 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Work on the temple was not resumed until Haggai and Zechariah appeared in 520 <span>BC<\/span>. They encouraged Zerubbabel and Joshua (Jeshua) the high priest, rebuked the people for their apathy and selfishness, and promised God’s presence and blessing upon the temple project (Hg 1:12–2:9). Zechariah’s preaching went beyond the building of the temple, including the rebuilding of Jerusalem itself (Zec 2:1-5) and its world reputation (2:1-5, 11-12; 8:22). The two leaders were addressed in ways that anticipated the Messiah (Hg 2:21-23; Zec 6:10-14). But the Persian king Darius (521–486 <span>BC<\/span>) was not alarmed when the rebuilding operation was reported to him (Ezr 5:1–6:13) and allowed the work to continue. In February 515 <span>BC<\/span> it was dedicated (6:14-16). The Jewish community again had a focal point for its religion, but the political situation remained difficult, with no real security in a still-shattered city.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheReturnofEzra\">The Return of Ezra<\/p>\n<p>The traditional date of Ezra’s return is 458 <span>BC<\/span> (preceding that of Nehemiah in 445 <span>BC<\/span>). This is based on the premise that the King Artaxerxes noted in Ezra 7:7 was Artaxerxes I Longimanus (464–424 <span>BC<\/span>) and not Artaxerxes II Mnemon (404–359 <span>BC<\/span>). However, some scholars, allowing that the king was Artaxerxes I, but believing that Nehemiah preceded Ezra, suggest that a tens unit has dropped out of “seventh” in Ezra 7:7, and that the date of Ezra’s return should be the 27th (438 <span>BC<\/span>) or 37th year (428 <span>BC<\/span>) of Artaxerxes I, making Ezra’s return a few years after Nehemiah’s. While this is plausible, there remains strong support for the traditional view. It accords with the order of the two books in the OT and requires no textual emendation. It also accounts for the section in Ezra 4:7-23, where, in the reign of Artaxerxes, an abortive effort was made by a recently returned group to rebuild the wall of Jerusalem. Nehemiah 1:1-4 suggests that this was regarded as important and its abrupt termination, by a decree of the king, caused Nehemiah great distress. The probability is that Ezra, recently returned, realized that little could be done in the way of major religious reformation until Jerusalem was secure, but in attempting to rebuild the wall he exceeded his mandate and was not able to function adequately until Nehemiah arrived, when the new security of Jerusalem allowed the great Law-reading ceremony of Nehemiah 8:1-12 to take place.<\/p>\n<p>Ezra’s ministry concerned the teaching of the Law of Moses, the Pentateuch, which had long been extant in its final form by this time. Ezra 7 shows that Artaxerxes was following the traditional Persian policy of encouraging good relationships with his subject peoples. Ezra’s appointment (Ezr 7:12) was to a state office; it has frequently been paraphrased as “Secretary of State for Jewish Religious Affairs.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NehemiahsReturnandMinistry\">Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry<\/p>\n<p>Hanani and others (Neh 1:1-3) informed Nehemiah of the complete failure of a recent attempt to rebuild the wall, probably that recorded in Ezra 4:7-23, and sought his mediation before the very king who had authorized the decree that compelled work on the wall to cease. A friend in high places was vital, and Nehemiah, a trusted and influential member of the court (Neh 1:11), was approached for this delicate and dangerous task. Nehemiah 1:4–2:8 shows how well he prepared for and seized his opportunity. His appointment as the governor of Judah (5:14) involved the removal of this area from the control of the governor of Samaria, which accounts for the unrelenting hostility of Sanballat (2:19; 4:1). The evidence of Nehemiah 3 suggests that the extent of Judah at this time was limited, probably not reaching as far north as Bethel or as far south as Hebron. Nehemiah was faced with opposition that included ridicule (2:19; 4:1-3), armed force (4:8, 11), discouragement (v 10), internal economic problems (5:1-18), intrigue (6:1-2), intimidation, and blackmail (vv 5-14). In spite of these obstacles, the wall was completed in the incredibly brief period of 52 days (v 15).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to this monumental achievement, Nehemiah completely reorganized the social and economic life of Jerusalem, dealing with alienated mortgages, excessive interest rates (Neh 5:1-13), mixed marriages (10:30; 13:23-30), Sabbath observance (10:31; 13:15-21), and temple supplies (10:32-40; 13:10-13). Almost certainly, it was this political and economic security that allowed Ezra, who probably arrived 13 years earlier, to proceed with his great religious reformation based on the Law. Nehemiah’s book, usually called the “Nehemiah Memoirs,” was probably presented by him in the temple as a “votive offering” (as indicated by the form of 5:19; 13:14, 22, 31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRemainderofthePersianPeriod\">The Remainder of the Persian Period<\/p>\n<p>Persian control, which probably centered on Lachish, was traditionally mild, except where her interests were directly threatened. There is no evidence of any major discontent in Judah, which enjoyed a considerable degree of autonomy. The Phoenician revolt of 351 <span>BC<\/span>, which took Artaxerxes III (359–338 <span>BC<\/span>) three years to subdue, was the only serious disturbance in the area. While Artaxerxes deported some Jews to Hyrcania, southeast of the Caspian Sea, that was probably a precautionary measure, and Judah does not appear to have been greatly involved in the revolt. The Jerusalem priests were allowed to mint their own coinage and levy a temple tax. Under the wider influence of the Persian Empire, Hebrew gradually fell out of popular usage as a spoken language, being replaced by Aramaic. As the international stature of Greece increased, so the influence of Hellenism began to be felt, even in Judah.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ReligiousFeaturesofthePostexilicPeriod\">Religious Features of the Postexilic Period<\/p>\n<h5>The Decline of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>There were three main reasons for this:<\/p>\n<p>1. The prophetic movement as a whole became discredited after Jerusalem fell in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. The large number of popular cult prophets who had foretold a sudden end to the Babylonian oppression (e.g., Jer 28:1-4) were proved decisively wrong. The suspicion that henceforth became attached to prophecy was increased further in the Persian period, when large numbers of itinerant “prophets” of various religions traveled widely. Zechariah 13:2-6 shows the stern measures advocated against such false prophets and fortune-tellers.<\/p>\n<li>2. There was a markedly different historical situation. The chastened remnant that survived had turned away from the blatant apostasy that characterized the preexilic period, so that the prophetic condemnation was not required with the same urgency. The temple and the Law had acquired a new prominence, and postexilic prophecy generally was concerned either with the rebuilding of the temple (e.g., Haggai and Zechariah) or the purification of its cult (e.g., Malachi). Once this goal had been realized, the role of the prophet was diminished. Another historical factor was the relatively large number of priests who returned from captivity, doubtless encouraged by the prospect of serving in the rebuilt temple. The main need at this time was for the priest, who revealed God’s will on the basis of the Law.<\/li>\n<li>3. There was an increasing stress on the transcendence of God, caused partly by an emphasis upon priestly mediation and partly by a fear of God that resulted from the recent judgment. The apocalyptic movement, with its emphasis on angelic intermediaries between humans and a transcendent God, encouraged this tendency. Correspondingly, the prophetic appeal for a personal, moral walk with God weakened.<\/li>\n<h5>The Rise of the Synagogue<\/h5>\n<p>Some type of local worship, independent of the temple and its sacrifices, must have developed in the Captivity, with the Law increasingly occupying a dominant position. Later on, the prophetic books were read and expounded, but the primary stress was always on the Law. This mode of worship later took root in the homeland, and the synagogue gradually developed into the focal point of the community for social relationships, education, and worship. It facilitated the worldwide continuance and expansion of the Jewish faith, independent of Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Diaspora of the Jews; Ezra, Book of; Haggai, Book of; Israel, History of; Nehemiah, Book of; Zechariah, Book of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"POSTEXILIC PERIOD* A period in the Jews’ history after their exile to Babylon. This period extends from 539–c. 331 BC. Preview • The Biblical Perspective • The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire • The Policy of Persia • The Return from Exile • The Return of Ezra • Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry • The Remainder of the Persian Period • Religious Features of the Postexilic Period The Biblical Perspective The books that specifically cover the history of the postexilic or Persian period are Ezra, N...","summary_en":"POSTEXILIC PERIOD* A period in the Jews’ history after their exile to Babylon. This period extends from 539–c. 331 BC. Preview • The Biblical Perspective • The Collapse of the Babylonian Empire • The Policy of Persia • The Return from Exile • The Return of Ezra • Nehemiah’s Return and Ministry • The Remainder of the Persian Period • Religious Features of the Postexilic Period The Biblical Perspective The books that specifically cover the history of the postexilic or Persian period are Ezra, N...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":48178,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:19","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:19<\/strong> Nehemiah’s prayer for God to <em>remember<\/em> and <em>bless<\/em> him was a sign of his dependence on God.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:19<\/strong> Nehemiah’s prayer for God to <em>remember<\/em> and <em>bless<\/em> him was a sign of his dependence on God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:19 Nehemiah’s prayer for God to remember and bless him was a sign of his dependence on God.","summary_en":"5:19 Nehemiah’s prayer for God to remember and bless him was a sign of his dependence on God.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":75804,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:19","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:19<\/strong> Nehemiah’s prayer for God to <em>remember<\/em> and <em>bless<\/em> him was a sign of his dependence on God.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:19<\/strong> Nehemiah’s prayer for God to <em>remember<\/em> and <em>bless<\/em> him was a sign of his dependence on God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:19 Nehemiah’s prayer for God to remember and bless him was a sign of his dependence on God.","summary_en":"5:19 Nehemiah’s prayer for God to remember and bless him was a sign of his dependence on God.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":103430,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:19","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:19<\/strong> Nehemiah’s prayer for God to <em>remember<\/em> and <em>bless<\/em> him was a sign of his dependence on God.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:19<\/strong> Nehemiah’s prayer for God to <em>remember<\/em> and <em>bless<\/em> him was a sign of his dependence on God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:19 Nehemiah’s prayer for God to remember and bless him was a sign of his dependence on God.","summary_en":"5:19 Nehemiah’s prayer for God to remember and bless him was a sign of his dependence on God.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":131056,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Neemia 5:19","title_en":"Study Note: Neemia 5:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:19<\/strong> Nehemiah’s prayer for God to <em>remember<\/em> and <em>bless<\/em> him was a sign of his dependence on God.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:19<\/strong> Nehemiah’s prayer for God to <em>remember<\/em> and <em>bless<\/em> him was a sign of his dependence on God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:19 Nehemiah’s prayer for God to remember and bless him was a sign of his dependence on God.","summary_en":"5:19 Nehemiah’s prayer for God to remember and bless him was a sign of his dependence on God.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}]},"labels":{"article":"Articol","map":"Hartă","chart":"Diagramă","textbox":"Notă explicativă","picture":"Imagine","profile":"Profil","study_note":"Notă de studiu","theme_note":"Temă biblică"},"icons":{"article":"📖","map":"🗺️","chart":"📊","textbox":"💡","picture":"🖼️","profile":"👤","study_note":"📝","theme_note":"🎯"},"typeColors":{"article":"#d4af37","map":"#2d7d46","chart":"#3b82f6","textbox":"#8b5cf6","picture":"#ec4899","profile":"#f59e0b","study_note":"#06b6d4","theme_note":"#ef4444"}}
🔍
Niciun rezultat
Nu am găsit versete care să conțină textul căutat.
Neemia 5
📘 Info carte
Se încarcă...
📖 Resurse
Muzică de relaxareSelectează o piesă
0:00
Redare audio
0 piese
🍪 Folosim cookie-uri
Folosim cookie-uri esențiale pentru funcționarea platformei și cookie-uri de analiză pentru a îmbunătăți experiența ta.
Află mai multe
✝️
Logosasistentul Biserica Online
✝️
Bine ai venit! 👋
Sunt Logos, prietenul tău spiritual. Începe conversația — te ascult cu drag! ✨