1 When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. 3 Then the Lord said, "My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal; his days will be a hundred and twenty years."
4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days-and also afterward-when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.
5 The Lord saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time. 6 The Lord was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain. 7 So the Lord said, "I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth-men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air-for I am grieved that I have made them." 8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord.
9 This is the account of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked with God. 10 Noah had three sons: Shem, Ham and Japheth.
11 Now the earth was corrupt in God's sight and was full of violence. 12 God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people on earth had corrupted their ways. 13 So God said to Noah, "I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth. 14 So make yourself an ark of cypress wood; make rooms in it and coat it with pitch inside and out. 15 This is how you are to build it: The ark is to be 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet high. 16 Make a roof for it and finish the ark to within 18 inches of the top. Put a door in the side of the ark and make lower, middle and upper decks. 17 I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it. Everything on earth will perish. 18 But I will establish my covenant with you, and you will enter the ark-you and your sons and your wife and your sons' wives with you. 19 You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you. 20 Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive. 21 You are to take every kind of food that is to be eaten and store it away as food for you and for them."
22 Noah did everything just as God commanded him.
1 The Lord then said to Noah, "Go into the ark, you and your whole family, because I have found you righteous in this generation. 2 Take with you seven of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and two of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate, 3 and also seven of every kind of bird, male and female, to keep their various kinds alive throughout the earth. 4 Seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made."
5 And Noah did all that the Lord commanded him.
6 Noah was six hundred years old when the floodwaters came on the earth. 7 And Noah and his sons and his wife and his sons' wives entered the ark to escape the waters of the flood. 8 Pairs of clean and unclean animals, of birds and of all creatures that move along the ground, 9 male and female, came to Noah and entered the ark, as God had commanded Noah. 10 And after the seven days the floodwaters came on the earth.
11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, on the seventeenth day of the second month-on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. 12 And rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights.
13 On that very day Noah and his sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth, together with his wife and the wives of his three sons, entered the ark. 14 They had with them every wild animal according to its kind, all livestock according to their kinds, every creature that moves along the ground according to its kind and every bird according to its kind, everything with wings. 15 Pairs of all creatures that have the breath of life in them came to Noah and entered the ark. 16 The animals going in were male and female of every living thing, as God had commanded Noah. Then the Lord shut him in.
17 For forty days the flood kept coming on the earth, and as the waters increased they lifted the ark high above the earth. 18 The waters rose and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. 19 They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered. 20 The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than twenty feet. , 21 Every living thing that moved on the earth perished-birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. 22 Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. 23 Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; men and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds of the air were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark.
24 The waters flooded the earth for a hundred and fifty days.
1 But God remembered Noah and all the wild animals and the livestock that were with him in the ark, and he sent a wind over the earth, and the waters receded. 2 Now the springs of the deep and the floodgates of the heavens had been closed, and the rain had stopped falling from the sky. 3 The water receded steadily from the earth. At the end of the hundred and fifty days the water had gone down, 4 and on the seventeenth day of the seventh month the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat. 5 The waters continued to recede until the tenth month, and on the first day of the tenth month the tops of the mountains became visible.
6 After forty days Noah opened the window he had made in the ark 7 and sent out a raven, and it kept flying back and forth until the water had dried up from the earth. 8 Then he sent out a dove to see if the water had receded from the surface of the ground. 9 But the dove could find no place to set its feet because there was water over all the surface of the earth; so it returned to Noah in the ark. He reached out his hand and took the dove and brought it back to himself in the ark. 10 He waited seven more days and again sent out the dove from the ark. 11 When the dove returned to him in the evening, there in its beak was a freshly plucked olive leaf! Then Noah knew that the water had receded from the earth. 12 He waited seven more days and sent the dove out again, but this time it did not return to him.
13 By the first day of the first month of Noah's six hundred and first year, the water had dried up from the earth. Noah then removed the covering from the ark and saw that the surface of the ground was dry. 14 By the twenty-seventh day of the second month the earth was completely dry.
15 Then God said to Noah, 16 Come out of the ark, you and your wife and your sons and their wives. 17 Bring out every kind of living creature that is with you-the birds, the animals, and all the creatures that move along the ground-so they can multiply on the earth and be fruitful and increase in number upon it.
18 So Noah came out, together with his sons and his wife and his sons' wives. 19 All the animals and all the creatures that move along the ground and all the birds-everything that moves on the earth-came out of the ark, one kind after another.
20 Then Noah built an altar to the Lord and, taking some of all the clean animals and clean birds, he sacrificed burnt offerings on it. 21 The Lord smelled the pleasing aroma and said in his heart: "Never again will I curse the ground because of man, even though every inclination of his heart is evil from childhood. And never again will I destroy all living creatures, as I have done.
22 As long as the earth endures, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night will never cease.
Building Boats That Float
Genesis 6:1
Sermon
by J. Howard Olds
According to an e-mail making the rounds these days, everything you need to know about life you can learn from Noah. Among his most important lessons are these: 1) Don’t miss the boat. 2) We are all in the same boat. 3) In troubled times, travel in pairs. 4) When you are stressed out, float awhile. 5) Remember, the ark was built by amateurs and the Titanic by professionals.
No character in the Bible gets more present-day attention than Noah. This great-grandson of Enoch and grandson of Methuselah, has present-day water parks named after him and the Quick Bird Satellite looking for his ark. Everybody knows the story of Noah. Could we learn from Noah how to build a boat for ourselves that will float us through the floods of time? That is the question that I would like to pose with you today.
There are some things that this Old Testament hero did that you and I could well do in our time. First of all, Noah walked with God. Verse 9: “Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time and he walked with God.” That is a pretty good epitaph! He walked with God.
There is an old joke about an atheistic jogger who found himself at the pearly gates upon death and he asked St. Peter, “How can I get in this place?” St. Peter replied, “Name the name of God’s son and you will have eternal life.” Could it be Andy?” said the jogger. “Why would you say Andy?” asked St. Peter. “I don’t really know,” said the jogger. “I just know when I pass by the neighborhood church on Sunday morning they are forever singing, ‘“Andy” walks with me, “Andy” talks with me, “Andy” tells me I am his own.”
Noah walked with God. When you walk with somebody you get to know the person. Joys are doubled and sorrows are shared. It has been said that people who live together for a long time begin to look alike. My wife is praying that is not true! I do know they think alike. I know they can predict each other’s behavior without saying a word and read each other’s mind without entering a conversation. It comes through walking with one another.
The key to a spiritual life is to live in such a way that you only want to be where God is. When you develop this kind of relationship with God, you discover that there is never a burden that he does not carry, never a sorrow that he does not share. Whether the days may be sunny or dreary, God is always there.
Noah walked with God. When everybody else was walking alone, chasing their own desires, following their own dreams, doing their own thing, Noah walked with God.
Lee Strobel opens his book, The Case for Faith, by describing an interview he had with Charles Templeton. A half- century ago Billy Graham and Charles Templeton were traveling the world preaching the Good News of the Gospel together. Many people thought Charles Templeton was the better preacher of the two. Then Templeton began to doubt his faith. He distanced himself from Graham and then he distanced himself from God. He became an agnostic and wrote a book entitled, Farewell to God: My Reasons for Rejecting the Christian Faith. Strobel says, “As I sat in his penthouse living room listening to his arguments against God, I said to him, “Mr. Templeton, is there anything you miss about your faith?” The 83 year old Alzheimer-stricken Charles Templeton, with a tear in his eye replied, “I miss my friendship with Jesus Christ.”
Noah walked with God and you can, too. Don’t let the cares of the world, the pressures of the day, the doubts of your faith, the success of the hour, keep you from that intimate, daily relationship with your Lord. Noah walked with God.
Noah was willing to follow instructions. Verses 14–16: And God said, “So make yourself an ark of cypress wood. Make rooms in it and coat it with pitch inside and out. This is how you are to build it. The ark is to be 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, 45 feet high. Make a roof for it and finish the ark within 18 inches of the top. Put a door on the side of the ark and make lower, middle and upper decks.” Isn’t it interesting how detailed this building plan really was? Have you any feel for the ship we have just described? This is 1 1/2 football fields long. When my grandson first walked into this Sanctuary, we walked hand-in-hand down to the front. He took one look at this expansive space and looked up to me and he said, “Poppy, this is your big boat!”
From the mouths of children come sermons. Do you realize that the ark was about four stories high? Do you know how high this Sanctuary is? Four stories. Do you realize that the footprint of this Sanctuary, including the Narthex, is about 33,000 square feet, give or take a little? Do you know that the footprint of the ark was about 33,000 square feet give or take a little? Can you imagine getting that building permit? Can you fathom the whining of the neighbors? Can you imagine what it was like for this man, however they counted in Genesis, to hammer away at something for 100 years? Could it float? Verse 22 says, “Noah did everything just as God commanded.”
Following instructions has never been one of my strong suits. I would much rather do it myself than to follow somebody else’s instructions. When our boys were little we bought a swing set with some assembly required. Some of you have been there! In typical fashion, I immediately tore open the box, threw away the instruction sheet, and proceeded to put the thing together. Six hours later with darkness settling in, I still had way too many pieces. Furthermore, our young son kept saying, “Daddy, are you done yet, are you done yet?” More often than not, I have ignored God’s plan and tried to piece my life together on my own. Far too slowly I am learning all I really need to do in life is follow. Just follow.
God’s blueprints of life have been clearly drawn. Dare I build my life by them even though they seem inconvenient and sometimes impossible? The key to Noah’s fate was that he was willing to follow instructions. I understand that our world needs great leaders but let me tell you, as a Christian, we need to be great followers of the way. Noah knew how to follow instructions.
There is something else about this Old Testament hero. He endured the floods. Noah’s ark was no pleasure cruise. It was a floating zoo. I do not know what you do with this story, but sometimes I find myself asking questions. Did the animals fight like cats and dogs? Did the donkeys bray and the coyotes howl at night? Did these eight relatives really get along with one another or did they fight like normal relatives do? Imagine the work involved. As an old farm boy, I begin to wonder who cleaned the stables, milked the cows, and fed the chickens day after day after day? Could anybody have stood the stink inside had it not been for the flood outside?
Lewis Smedes says in one of his books, “life is messy.” Indeed it is. Every parent knows that when they change a diaper. When families fight, spouses flee, and children suffer. Life is messy. When evil comes, terrorists strike and death arrives, life is messy. When jobs end and hope fails and despair dawns, life gets messy. What I need to tell you today from this ancient story is that when life gets messy, don’t abandon the ship. There is a flood out there. You need to stay inside.
Jewish author, Elie Wiesel, tells the parable about a man in a boat. The man is not alone although he acts as if he were. One night without warning, the man decides to cut a hole under his seat. Other people on the boat are totally alarmed. “What on earth are you doing? You are going to destroy us all!” The man replied, “What I am doing is none of your business. I paid my fare. This is my seat and I can do as I please. Leave me alone.” Elie Wiesel concludes his parable with this comment, “What a fanatic will not accept, but you and I cannot forget, is that we are all in the same boat”. As long as we are on the same boat, our survival depends upon our cooperation, our consideration, and our community. Don’t jump ship in a flood! Ride it out. This thing lasted for a year and several days, but Noah stayed there for the whole time.
Noah walked with God. Noah knew how to follow directions. Noah was willing to endure the floods. Now, one more lesson from this old story. Noah celebrated the rainbow. The rains stop, the skies clear, the floods rescind and after a year and 10 days and 4 doves, Noah flings open the door of the ark and steps back on earth. In our imagination we would have Noah stepping from his extended cruise onto a velvet carpet of lush green grass with vegetation waiting for harvest. In reality, he steps from an ark into a barren land with bloated corpses and rotting plants. Have you ever tried to sweep up after a flood? It is a mess. Here, in this God-forsaken place called Earth, Noah builds an altar and worships God, celebrating the fact that he is alive.
By the grace of God and the righteousness of one man, humanity is redeemed for all time. Never underestimate the power of one faithful person. As Bonaro Overstreet wrote:
You say the little efforts that I make
Will do no good. They never will prevail
To tip the hovering scale
where injustice hangs in the balance.
I don’t think, I ever thought they would
But I am prejudiced beyond debate
In favor of my right to choose which side
Shall find the stubborn ounces of my weight.
One man saved humanity. The Lord, smelling the sweet aroma of Noah’s acts of worship says, “Never again will life be cut off by the waters of a flood. I set my rainbow in the sky as a sign of my covenant between me and the earth. No wonder Longfellow wrote, “My heart leaps when I behold a rainbow in the sky.”
Over in Wilmore, Kentucky, every year ten to twelve thousand people from all across the country gather for a Christian rock festival entitled Icthus. One year my youth minister happened to check the weather forecast and conveniently got sick, so I volunteered to go. I need to say to you that hard rock music is not my favorite form of entertainment. Furthermore, it had rained for the entire week and it was pouring down by the weekend. The concert was all outside. The tents flooded and the bus was muddied. In fact, I wrecked it. I ran it into the side of somebody’s car before it was all over. The fastest way to move was just to dive head first and slide in the mud, which you regularly did in an involuntary way! That was the scene for the Icthus rock festival. Finally, late Saturday afternoon, the mud-covered teenagers and adults assembled on a hillside for Holy Communion. As if it had been orchestrated, just as the bread was broken and the cup was offered, bright sunlight flashed through the sky and a rainbow made an arch across the horizon. I will never forget it as long as I live.
Every time I am tempted to bury my face in the mud, I remember the rainbow. Every time I have blown it again, feeling myself unforgivable, I remember the rainbow. Every time I am tempted to take the cash and let the credit go, I remember the rainbow.
God, of the rainbow, God of the cross,
God of the empty grave,
How does the creature say Grace
How does the creature say Thanks
Oh Lord, my God. May I be as faithful and as thankful as Noah!
ChristianGlobe Networks, Inc., Faith Breaks, by J. Howard Olds
Time passes and generations go by. There are now lots of people in the world (5:1-32). As the population grows and spreads, sin seemsto keep pace, as Genesis 6:5 declares, "The Lord saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of his heart was only evil all the time." Fortunately, there are exceptions to this indictment, and a man named Noah finds grace in God's eyes.
The wickedness is so bad that God decides to destroy the creation and start over. Genesis 6–9 describes the flood that God sends on the earth. In general, the description of the flood uses the same terminology as was used of the creation in Genesis 1–2, only in reverse. In Genesis 1, “God saw that it was good” (1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31). Now in 6:5, “The Lord saw how great man’s wicked…
The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016
1 When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. 3 Then the Lord said, "My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal; his days will be a hundred and twenty years."
4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days-and also afterward-when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.
5 The Lord saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time. 6 The Lord was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain. 7 So the Lord said, "I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth-men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air-for I am grieved that I have made them." 8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord.
9 This is the account of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked with God. 10 Noah had three sons: Shem, Ham and Japheth.
11 Now the earth was corrupt in God's sight and was full of violence. 12 God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people on earth had corrupted their ways. 13 So God said to Noah, "I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth. 14 So make yourself an ark of cypress wood; make rooms in it and coat it with pitch inside and out. 15 This is how you are to build it: The ark is to be 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet high. 16 Make a roof for it and finish the ark to within 18 inches of the top. Put a door in the side of the ark and make lower, middle and upper decks. 17 I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it. Everything on earth will perish. 18 But I will establish my covenant with you, and you will enter the ark-you and your sons and your wife and your sons' wives with you. 19 You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you. 20 Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive. 21 You are to take every kind of food that is to be eaten and store it away as food for you and for them."
22 Noah did everything just as God commanded him.
1 The Lord then said to Noah, "Go into the ark, you and your whole family, because I have found you righteous in this generation. 2 Take with you seven of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and two of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate, 3 and also seven of every kind of bird, male and female, to keep their various kinds alive throughout the earth. 4 Seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made."
5 And Noah did all that the Lord commanded him.
6 Noah was six hundred years old when the floodwaters came on the earth. 7 And Noah and his sons and his wife and his sons' wives entered the ark to escape the waters of the flood. 8 Pairs of clean and unclean animals, of birds and of all creatures that move along the ground, 9 male and female, came to Noah and entered the ark, as God had commanded Noah. 10 And after the seven days the floodwaters came on the earth.
11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, on the seventeenth day of the second month-on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. 12 And rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights.
13 On that very day Noah and his sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth, together with his wife and the wives of his three sons, entered the ark. 14 They had with them every wild animal according to its kind, all livestock according to their kinds, every creature that moves along the ground according to its kind and every bird according to its kind, everything with wings. 15 Pairs of all creatures that have the breath of life in them came to Noah and entered the ark. 16 The animals going in were male and female of every living thing, as God had commanded Noah. Then the Lord shut him in.
17 For forty days the flood kept coming on the earth, and as the waters increased they lifted the ark high above the earth. 18 The waters rose and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. 19 They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered. 20 The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than twenty feet. , 21 Every living thing that moved on the earth perished-birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. 22 Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. 23 Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; men and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds of the air were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark.
24 The waters flooded the earth for a hundred and fifty days.
1 But God remembered Noah and all the wild animals and the livestock that were with him in the ark, and he sent a wind over the earth, and the waters receded. 2 Now the springs of the deep and the floodgates of the heavens had been closed, and the rain had stopped falling from the sky. 3 The water receded steadily from the earth. At the end of the hundred and fifty days the water had gone down, 4 and on the seventeenth day of the seventh month the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat. 5 The waters continued to recede until the tenth month, and on the first day of the tenth month the tops of the mountains became visible.
6 After forty days Noah opened the window he had made in the ark 7 and sent out a raven, and it kept flying back and forth until the water had dried up from the earth. 8 Then he sent out a dove to see if the water had receded from the surface of the ground. 9 But the dove could find no place to set its feet because there was water over all the surface of the earth; so it returned to Noah in the ark. He reached out his hand and took the dove and brought it back to himself in the ark. 10 He waited seven more days and again sent out the dove from the ark. 11 When the dove returned to him in the evening, there in its beak was a freshly plucked olive leaf! Then Noah knew that the water had receded from the earth. 12 He waited seven more days and sent the dove out again, but this time it did not return to him.
13 By the first day of the first month of Noah's six hundred and first year, the water had dried up from the earth. Noah then removed the covering from the ark and saw that the surface of the ground was dry. 14 By the twenty-seventh day of the second month the earth was completely dry.
15 Then God said to Noah, 16 Come out of the ark, you and your wife and your sons and their wives. 17 Bring out every kind of living creature that is with you-the birds, the animals, and all the creatures that move along the ground-so they can multiply on the earth and be fruitful and increase in number upon it.
18 So Noah came out, together with his sons and his wife and his sons' wives. 19 All the animals and all the creatures that move along the ground and all the birds-everything that moves on the earth-came out of the ark, one kind after another.
20 Then Noah built an altar to the Lord and, taking some of all the clean animals and clean birds, he sacrificed burnt offerings on it. 21 The Lord smelled the pleasing aroma and said in his heart: "Never again will I curse the ground because of man, even though every inclination of his heart is evil from childhood. And never again will I destroy all living creatures, as I have done.
22 As long as the earth endures, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night will never cease.
6:1–22 · Few episodes in Scripture defy dogmatic interpretation as does Genesis 6:1–4. The sons of God marry the daughters of men; and Nephilim are said to be on the earth. Until this point Genesis has dealt only with the sins of individuals—Cain, Lamech, Eve, Adam. Now the emphasis is on the sin of a group, the sons of God. Who are these sons of God? The term “sons of God” elsewhere in the Old Testament designates angels (see Job 1:6; 38:7; Ps. 29:1; 89:7). The New Testament, however, teaches that angels do not marry (Matt. 22:29–30; Mark 12:24–25; Luke 20:34–35). Furthermore, if the angels are the villains, then why is God’s anger directed against humans? Recall, however, that in the following flood story all of God’s creation suffers for the sin of humanity.
The sons of God, if not angels, may be the Sethites (the godly line), while the daughters of men are the Cainites (the ungodly line). The trespass would be the unequal yoking together of believer and unbeliever. This interpretation is not without its problems, but it is quite entrenched in Christian tradition.
Whatever the correct interpretation, the union is illicit, for God is provoked. It is interesting that the reference to God’s displeasure (6:3) comes before the reference to the Nephilim (6:4). This shows that God’s annoyance is with the nuptial arrangement itself. More than likely, the 120 years does not refer to a shortened life span (for only Joseph lives less than 120 years in Genesis) but to a period of grace before the flood commences. As such it may be compared with Jonah 3:4, “forty more days and Nineveh will be overturned.” The text does not say that the Nephilim (“those who were made to fall”) are the offspring of this alliance. Rather they are contemporaries of the other two parties (sons/daughters/Nephilim). According to Numbers 13:33, they form part of the pre-Israelite population of Palestine.
There is a clear-cut reason for the flood (6:5–22). The sons of God see how beautiful the daughters of men are. The Lord sees how terrible the earth has become (wickedness). The problem is not only what humankind does; even their thoughts are evil. Sin is both extensive and intensive. Verse 6 says God repents (KJV); the NIV reads that he “regretted” (NIV 1984 “was grieved,” 6:6). In the majority of cases when the Hebrew verb for “repent” is used, surprisingly the subject is God. It is important to observe that God is not on this occasion angry or vengeful, but grieved, hurt. That is, 6:6 emphasizes God’s “tender” emotions rather than his “raw” emotions.
Noah stands out among his peers. He is righteous and blameless and walks with God. Thus verse 9 supplies the answer to why Noah finds favor in the Lord’s eyes (6:8). Divine favor is not something Noah wins; it is something he finds. The essence of favor or grace is that it cannot be defined by the recipient’s worthiness. It always comes from another source. To say that Noah (or any of us) found grace is to say grace found Noah (or us).
God spoke to himself his first intention to destroy the earth (6:7). Now he shares that information with Noah (6:13), just as he later tells Abraham that he intends to destroy Sodom (18:17–21).
Noah is told to build an ark about 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high. It is really a ship, but Genesis calls it an “ark.” The only other place this Hebrew word is used is in Exodus 2, to refer to “the ark” into which baby Moses is placed. In both instances an individual destined to be used by God is saved from drowning by being placed in an ark. Again, note the announcement of a covenant (6:18) before the flood starts. Here again is grace before judgment.
7:1–24 ·God now repeats his earlier word to Noah (6:18–20) to enter the ark (7:1–10). What the narrator earlier observed about Noah’s character (6:9), God confirms (7:1). This time Noah is told to take aboard, in addition to his family, seven of every kind of clean animal and two of every kind of unclean animal. In 6:19–20 and 7:15–16 we read that Noah is to take two of all living creatures. Is this a discrepancy, and thus evidence for the blending in Genesis 6–9 of two flood stories? One pair or seven pairs? Not necessarily. Genesis 6:19–20 and 7:15–16 provide general information. Noah is to bring aboard pairs of animals. In 7:2, specific information is given about how many pairs—seven. It is not surprising that God desires salvation of the clean animals. But why spare the unclean animals? Does God’s compassion extend to them too?
Noah is given a week’s warning before the flood begins. The Hebrew word for “rain” in verse 4 is different than the word for “rain” in verse 12. That used in verse 12 designates a heavy downpour. Thus the rain of verse 4 is no shower—it is to last forty days and forty nights. Noah does what God says (7:7–9) and God fulfills his word (7:10).
As the flood starts (7:11–16), again we find the deliberate use of repetition and summarization. This is a characteristic of epic composition. Note: the flood (7:6), entry into the ark (7:7–9), the flood (7:10–12), entry into the ark (7:13–16). Actually there are two references to the flood’s beginning: verse 10 and verse 11. The additional data given in verse 11 are about the two sources of the rain: the springs of the great deep and the floodgates of heaven. But verse 12 refers only to the second of these.
Although Noah’s wife, sons, and daughters-in-law are also saved, there is no reference to their character. Their salvation is due to their husband/father/father-in-law. Interestingly it is “God” who commands the group to enter the ark (7:16a), but “the Lord” who shuts them in (16b). Perhaps this shift to God’s more personal name suggests that God is the protector of the ark.
As the waters rise (7:17–24), verses 13–16 focus on the action inside the ark, while verses 17–24 focus outside the ark. To be outside the ark is akin to being outside the garden. Salvation inside the ark is total; destruction outside the ark is total.
The reference to 150 days (7:24) includes the forty days of rainfall, plus the length of time before the floodwaters begin to diminish (40 + 110 = 150; not 40 + 150 = 190). This is confirmed by 8:4, which states that the ark rested on a mountain peak five months later (second month to seventh month). This period of time represents five months of thirty days.
8:1–22 · Suddenly the story shifts; God remembers Noah (8:1–2). Not Noah’s righteousness or blamelessness or his walk with God. Just Noah. There are seventy-three instances in the Old Testament where God is said to “remember.” This remembrance moves God to send a wind over the earth. One Hebrew word (ruah) translates “wind” and “Spirit.” In 1:2 it is the Spirit who hovers over the waters. Twice the divine ruah encounters the waters, first restraining them, now evaporating them. The sun plays no role in the drying up of the waters. In pagan myths this is exactly what happens. The ark finally comes to rest on the mountains of Ararat (in modern Armenia and eastern Turkey).
Noah must now determine whether the waters have receded sufficiently for dry land to reappear (8:6–14). To find out, Noah sends out first a raven, then a dove (twice). God does not tell Noah when the ground has dried out even though he did tell him about when the flood would start and exactly how to build the ark. Here Noah moves from being the passive recipient of revelation to being the active investigator of what and when the next move is.
The raven does not return because, as a carrion eater, it is able to feed on the animal corpses on the mountaintops. The dove, by contrast, is a valley bird that feeds off food in the lower areas, the last to dry out. This is why it returns to the ark.
In verses 13 and 14 we have two Hebrew words for “dry,” just as we had two words for “rain” in chapter 7. The first (8:13) means to be free of moisture. The second (8:14) refers to the complete absence of waters. Thus the choice of verb and the progression from verse 13 to verse 14 is logical.
Twice God speaks in 8:15–22, once to Noah (8:15–17), and once to himself (8:21–22). Between these two speeches is the departure of Noah from the ark (8:18–19) and his act of worship (8:20). Even though the dove does not return, Noah does not leave the ark until God tells him. God, and only God, can give the green light.
The divine soliloquy is composed of a negative statement (8:21) and a positive one (8:22). In spite of man’s congenital proclivity to sin, the God of mercy will not exterminate him (8:21). There will be predictability in the natural world (8:22). And all this will be a gracious gift from God. No rites associated with fertility cults will bring about this condition. Only grace will.
The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary by Gary M. Burge, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
The Increase of Wickedness on Earth: This passage explains why God had to judge the inhabited earth with a deluge (6:9–8:22). It has two distinct sections: a description of the rapid increase in population, when the sons of God married daughters of men (vv. 1–4), and God’s response to human violence (vv. 5–8).
The first section reports the population explosion, presumably spurred by the extraordinary marriages between the sons of God and the daughters of men. During that era superheroes are said to have lived in the land. This passage is as enigmatic as it is intriguing. Its brevity, combined with a possible disturbance in the order of the verses, contributes to its obscurity. The first two verses speak of mixed marriages taking place after the population had begun to increase. Verses 3 and 4 present two facts: Yahweh would not let his Spirit continue to contend with humans, and the Nephilim were on the earth at that time. The text does not explicitly connect these facts and the marriages. With so many difficulties no certain interpretation of this passage is possible.
In the second section God decides to execute judgment on every living creature because human society has become completely wicked. The juxtaposition of these two sections suggests that the rapid increase in population has taken place in a way that has compounded wickedness. The worship of the one God, which is attested in Seth’s genealogy (4:25–5:32), has been snuffed out save for a single household. The theological principle underlying God’s judgment is that gross acts of immorality so pollute nature that the earth can no longer support its inhabitants (Lev. 18:24–28).
6:1–2 The sons of God married the daughters of men. The major interpretive issue is the identification of these men and women. Assuming that these verses offer the primary reason for the terrible wickedness in human society (v. 5), a secondary issue is to determine what transgression these marriages caused.
There are three leading proposals for the identification of the sons of God. The first is that they were heavenly beings. Consumed by lust, angels cohabited with human women, thereby transgressing the boundary between the divine and the human realms. The offspring from these unions possessed extraordinary abilities. Lacking moral constraints, they used their abilities to promote wickedness. A second proposal is that the sons of God were the mighty rulers of old. Flaunting their power, they built harems by marrying whomever they wished. Thus, their sin was polygamy, which led to a rapid increase in population. The third possibility is that the sons of God were the men of Seth’s line and the daughters of men were the offspring of Cain. These women from the rebellious line of Cain led the Sethites into the pleasures of sin, thereby over time squelching the worship of the one God Yahweh. The scenario of righteous men chasing or marrying beautiful, foreign women and being led into the worship of other gods is a recurring theme in the OT, as in the incident at Baal-Peor (Num. 25:1–2) and the apostasy of Solomon (1 Kgs. 11:1–13).
Tradition favors the first view, and the allusions to it in Jude 6–7 and 2 Peter 2:4–6 support it, but the third view fits the context best by accounting for the loss of true worship on earth among Seth’s offspring. Another point in favor of the third position is that God’s coming judgment was against all humanity, not against superheroes produced from a blending of divine and human elements. As put forth in the second view, there is not sufficient information for choosing one position over the other. Also making polygamy the grave sin does not find support in the OT.
6:3 Yahweh said that his Spirit would not contend with humans forever. Many sources take the Hebrew word rendered “contend” to mean “abide.” With either meaning, God was restraining his life-giving Spirit so that humans would not live longer than a hundred and twenty years (2:7; Job 27:3). The context suggests that God limited the length of human life because the offspring of the unions described in verse 2 possessed such extraordinary energy that they lived a very long time and multiplied the doing of evil. One interpretation is that in the future humans would not live to be older than 120. If this is the meaning, it took centuries for that boundary to be put in place. The only major figure in Genesis whose recorded age at death was less than 120 years was Joseph, who died at 110. In another interpretation, God would put an end to the existence of these antediluvians after 120 years. This interpretation is possible given the position of this passage in Genesis. In either case Yahweh was asserting his sovereignty by limiting the life span of these mighty giants.
6:4 A parenthetical note states that the Nephilim were on the earth in those days. The identity of the Nephilim is far from certain. This name occurs in Numbers 13:33 for giants who did vile exploits. But given that the deluge wiped out all humans, it is doubtful that there is any genealogical connection between these two groups called Nephilim. If Nephilim comes from the root nafal, it could mean “the fallen ones.” Many ancient legends recount how giant warriors or semi-gods lost a major battle and were then imprisoned in the region of the dead. Thus it could refer to those who had fallen from heaven or to great men who at death descended to the grave or hell (Ezek. 32:20–27).
The NIV renders the Hebrew to read that the Nephilim came from the unions of the sons of God and the daughters of men and that these were the heroes of old, men of renown. But the more normal way of reading the Hebrew is that the heroes, but not necessarily the Nephilim, were offspring of these unions. The context suggests that these men were heroes because of their unusual exploits at wrongdoing. It is implied, though, that both the Nephilim and these heroes contributed to the increasing state of wickedness.
6:5–8 In this second section Yahweh expresses his resolve to wipe out all humans and animals because of the gross wickedness on earth. Although God’s goal that humans fill the earth was being realized, his desire that they live together in harmony had been shattered. Humans hurt humans, and people satisfied their own pleasure by oppressing others. These terrible conditions required the Creator to intervene with judgment. The starkcontrast between God’s coming in both judgment and mercy is amplified by a play on the Hebrew letters n, kh, and m: “was grieved” (nkhm), “wipe out” (makhah), Noah (noakh), and “found favor” (hen).
Yahweh saw that wickedness in society had reached an intolerable level. This assessment stands in bold contrast to the sixth day of creation, when God saw all that he had made was very good (1:31). Now every inclination of the thoughts in the hearts of humans was only evil all the time. Inclination means one’s orientation or disposition. “Thoughts” is literally “heart,” for the Hebrews took the heart as the center of a person’s thinking, feeling, and willing. Also, “thoughts” refers to plans that are about to be acted on, not to imaginations that have little likelihood of ever becoming reality. Because people’s hearts were corrupt, they were continually planning and doing baser things. This terrible state of human society grieved (nikhem) Yahweh, motivating him to take a different course in the way he was relating to humanity. The debased demeanor of those who bore the image of God filled God’s heart . . . with pain so that God regretted having made humans (hit’atseb; 34:7; 1 Sam. 20:34; Isa. 54:6). God’s response to human injustice reveals his intimate concern about how those who bear his image think and behave. Furthermore, this wording informs us that in bringing universal judgment on the earth, God did not act out of cold calculation or judge with indifference.
Yahweh declared that he was going to wipe out all humans, animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds. Joining animals with humans in judgment witnesses again to the close connection between these two orders.
A ray of hope shines through this bleak picture in verse 8: Noah found favor with Yahweh. This man worshiped Yahweh faithfully and lived righteously (v. 9). Therefore, Yahweh would deliver him and his family from the coming judgment.
Additional Notes
6:1–4 It is possible that at one time v. 4 followed v. 2; then v. 2 would describe the offspring of the extraordinary unions recounted in v. 4. Another difficulty in interpreting this passage is that the precise meaning of three key terms is unknown: yadon (v. 3; NIV “contend”), beshaggam (v. 3; NIV “for”), and nefilim (v. 4; NIV “Nephilim”).
Late in the Second Temple period (ca. 200 B.C.) apocalyptic writers became so fascinated with this narrative that they composed intricate stories of how a host of angels rebelled against God, fell from their high position, and spread evil on earth. According to these writers, the rebellion of the ancients resulted from their entering into unnatural unions with human women (e.g., 1 En. 6–11).
6:2 The daughters are described as good (tobot). Most often “good” is translated “beautiful,” the usual understanding for the attraction of the sons of God. However, it may mean that they were morally good, especially since this is the dominant meaning of the word in the primeval account (e.g., 1:31; 2:9; E. van Wolde, Words Become Worlds: Semantic Studies of Genesis 1–11 [Biblical Interpretation Series 6; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1994], pp. 73–74). In that case it may support the position that the daughters were from Seth’s line, the line that worshiped Yahweh (4:26); only his genealogy customarily mentions the birth of daughters. So for van Wolde vv. 1–3 do not recount some sin; rather they give the reason that God placed a limit on the life span of the children from this union. For her the issue in this narrative is immortality, not immorality.
6:3 Suggestions for the meaning of yadon include “be humbled, humiliated” (based on Arab. dun) and “be strong, powerful” (based on Akk. dananu). Most translators follow the LXX and Vg. rendering “remain,” but the basis for this meaning is unknown.
6:6 “Grieve” (nkhm) is very difficult to translate, especially when God is the subject. One of its meanings is to take a different course of action as a result of one’s compassion being either warmed (Hos. 11:8–9) or grieved (here). Translating it “grieve” captures the emotion behind the action but fails to convey the person’s strong resolve to take a different course of action. Often nkhm is translated “repent” or “relent.” However, when God is the subject “repent” is a poor Eng. translation, for repent carries the idea of remorse for wrongdoing. The sense of “relent” or “change the mind” fails to capture the deep emotions that compel God to take a different course. Thus no Eng. equivalent proves satisfactory.
God’s relenting usually means that out of mercy he foregoes intended punishment (e.g., Exod. 32:12, 14; Amos 7:3, 6). Only twice in the OT does “relenting” describe God’s turning from favor to punishment (here and God’s rejection of Saul in 1 Sam. 15:11).
There is a linguistic tie between v. 6 and 5:29. Lamech named his son Noah that he might comfort (nkhm) people from their labor (ma’aseh) and painful toil (’itsabon). Here God was grieved (nkhm) that he had made (’asah) humans, and he was filled with pain (hit’atseb; Cassuto, From Adam to Noah, p. 303).
The Great Deluge
Because violence has increased to an intolerable level (6:1–8), God enters as judge. The Creator produces a great flood whose waters inundate the dry ground, wiping out all animal life. God thereby uncreates the earth by returning it to a chaotic condition similar to that described in 1:2. In mercy God delivers Noah, his family, and representatives of all the animals in order that they may populate a renewed earth. Afterward God declares that human life will never again be wiped out by a flood.
Frequent references to time with two distinct numbering systems structure this account. One system is based on the day, month, and year of Noah’s age, and a second defines a period in the number of days between stages:
Dates (month, day, year) Verse 2-17-600 Waters begin 7:11 7-17-600 Ark rests on Ararat 8:4 10-1-600 Tops of mountains appear 8:5 1-1-601 Waters dry up 8:13 2-27-601 Noah leaves ark 8:14–15 Days 7 days for the flood to begin 7:4 7 days for loading the ark 7:10 40 days of rain 7:12 40 days of deluge 7:17 150 days of floodwaters 7:24 150 days for floodwaters to recede 8:3 40 days before sending out raven 8:6-7 7 days later sending out a dove 8:10 7 days later sending out a dove 8:12 The second system gives the number of days leading to the deluge, for the deluge, and for disembarking. The forty days of rain and the forty days of the deluge refer to the same period and seem to be included in the 150 days of floodwaters. If this is correct, this numbering system has the flood lasting 361 days, or 368 days if the first dove was sent out seven days after the raven. According to the system of dates, the deluge lasted around 370 days, assuming months of thirty days. If the months lasted 29.5 days, the duration of the flood was a solar year of 365 days. Thus the numbers are very close. Since the numbers of days have symbolic value and are set in a palistrophic pattern, the two numbering systems mesh quite well.
Using repetition and numerous words for totality, the author conveys that all the dry land inhabited by humans was inundated. Forty-four times “all” modifies a word pertaining to the deluge. In 7:18–24 there is a concentration of categorical terms. These verses say four times that the waters swelled (i.e., “triumphed”; gabar, 7:18, 19, 20, 24; NIV has “rose,” and “flooded” in 7:24). Many words are modified by “all”: the entire heavens (v. 19), all the high mountains (v. 19), all the creatures (basar; v. 21), all humankind (v. 21), every living thing (yequm, v. 23), everything that had the breath of life (v. 22), and all on dry ground (v. 22, NIV blends these last two phrases). The statements that “only” Noah survived (v. 23) and that “the waters covered the mountains to a depth of more than twenty feet” (v. 20) add to this emphasis.
This account contains nine units arranged in a palistrophic (chiastic) pattern (A, B, C, D, E, D′, C′, B′, A′):
A Noah’s righteous character in a violent culture (6:9–12)
B God instructs Noah to build an ark (6:13–22) and the remnant enters the ark (7:1–10)
C The start of the deluge (7:11–16)
D The waters rise (7:17–24)
E God remembers Noah (8:1a)
D′ The waters recede (8:1b–5)
C′ The waters dry up (8:6–14)
B′ God instructs Noah to leave the ark (8:15–19)
A′ Noah sacrifices (8:20–22)
God’s remembrance of Noah stands at the center (8:1a) of this arrangement. This pattern also augments the theme of the ebb and flow of the waters (Wenham, Genesis 1–15, p. 157).
6:9–10 Noah’s toledoth heads the account of the cataclysmic flood. Verse 9 identifies him as a righteous man (tsaddiq), blameless (tamim) among the people. “Righteous” describes a person who faithfully observes God’s laws and avoids wrongdoing; “blameless” depicts a person of integrity who zealously seeks to please God in everything. Like Enoch before him (5:22), Noah walked in close fellowship with God. He had three sons: Shem, Ham and Japheth (5:32).
6:11–12 During Noah’s time the earth had become utterly corrupt and was full of violence (6:5). Such wickedness polluted the earth (Lev. 18:24–28). There is a wordplay on “corrupt” (shakhat) in verses 11–13. Since the earth was corrupt (vv. 11, 12), made corrupt by humans sinning (v. 12), God would destroy (lit. “cause corruption,” v. 13) both the humans and the earth. The repetition of this root stresses that God was acting justly in bringing judgment.
6:13–22 God informed Noah of the imminent deluge and instructed him to build an ark (tebah) in order that he and his household might survive. The text does not mention the time it took Noah to build the ark. God spoke to Noah three times (see also 7:1; 8:15), but no verbal reply from Noah is recorded. Instead, Noah demonstrated that he was truly righteous by faithfully carrying out God’s instructions (6:22; 7:5, 9, 16). God instructed Noah to make an ark of cypress wood, having rooms, and to coat it with pitch. It was to have three decks, a roof, and a door in the side. It measured 450 feet long, seventy-five feet wide, and forty-five feet high with a displacement of about forty-three thousand tons. Given that the Hebrew term tebah (“ark”) occurs only here and in reference to the basket in which baby Moses was placed (Exod. 2:3, 5), it describes a vessel capable of floating in order to deliver its occupant(s) from danger. Strictly speaking the ark was not a boat, for it lacked both a means of power and a steering mechanism. Consequently, the course it tookand its ability to deliver its occupants were completely under God’s direction.
God told Noah that he was going to bring floodwaters (mabbul) on the earth to destroy all life in which there was breath (v. 17). However, God promised to establish his covenant, a formal agreement that defines a variety of relationships, with Noah. God spoke of it as “my covenant,” because he was committing to it unilaterally. “Establish” (qum) usually occurs with a covenant that is already in existence (9:9, 11, 17; 17:7, 19, 21). This covenant, then, was either the one God had made with humans at creation (implied by humans’ being made in the image of God, 1:28), or God was anticipating the covenant he would establish after the deluge (9:8–17).
Noah was to enter the ark with his sons, his wife, and his sons’ wives. Also he was to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, including every kind of bird, beast, and creature that moves along the ground. The account does not mention fish; these inhabitants of the waters would survive the flood. God also instructed Noah to put on board an abundant supply of food. Obediently Noah did everything just as God commanded.
7:1–10 Seven days before the deluge was to begin, Yahweh commanded Noah to enter the ark with his whole family. This time God directed him to take seven pairs of every clean animal and every bird and two of every kind of unclean animal. These instructions about clean animals supplement the earlier ones God gave (6:19–20) and explain how Noah could make sacrifices after the deluge without depleting any species. Prior to the Sinaitic law, animals were most likely classified as clean and unclean in regard to which ones could be sacrificed, not according to which were edible (Sarna, Genesis, p. 54). Noah had seven days to load the ark before God would send rain . . . for forty days and forty nights. Doing as Yahweh commanded, Noah, his family, and the animals . . . entered the ark.
7:11–24 On the seventeenth day of the second month of Noah’s six hundredth year, God produced a cataclysmic flood by letting all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and opening the floodgates of the heavens. God hereby reversed the steps taken on the second and third days of creation, when he divided the primordial water into two main bodies and set them securely in place, one beneath the earth and one above the heavenly dome (1:6–10). Once released, these waters inundated the inhabited earth. After the occupants had entered the ark, Yahweh shut the door. This statement is theologically crucial, for it informs us that God, the sovereign Judge, took sole responsibility for those who were not permitted to board the ark.
The waters continued to rise for forty days. Four references to the death of the animals, with differing verbs, stress that outside the ark no life that breathed survived. As the waters bore the ark away, the occupants were safe from the turbulence.
8:1–5 God remembered Noah and all the occupants of the ark. This short, powerful statement is underscored by its position at the center of the palistrophic pattern of this account. “Remember” (cf. 19:29; 30:22) means that God was entering the scene to reverse the destructive forces of water in order to reclaim the earth for habitation. This simple but powerful sentence stands at the center of the account as it marks God’s putting a stop to the forces of destruction and initiating the restoration of the earth. God sent a wind over the earth, and the waters receded. The springs of the deep and the floodgates of the heavens were closed. Just as the Spirit manifest as wind controlled the chaotic waters prior to creation (1:2), so God again employed the wind to drive the waters back to their reservoirs, where they would be securely held. By the seventeenth day of the seventh month the waters had receded sufficiently for the ark to come to rest on the mountains of Ararat.
8:6–13 After forty days Noah opened the window. In order to discover how far the waters had receded, he sent out a raven. Possibly it went out from the ark several times; then one time it did not return. Since it was a feeder on carrion, it must have eventually found abundant food. Presumably seven days later, Noah sent out a dove, a gentler bird that prefers lowlands and whose food sources would require land that had been dry for a while. This bird would let him know if the water had receded from the valleys. The dove returned. Seven days later he released the dove. This time it returned with a freshly plucked olive leaf, informing Noah that plant life was growing and the earth could again sustain the animals that were on board. Seven days later Noah sent the dove out again. When it did not return, Noah knew that the waters had fully receded so that the animals might safely leave the ark. He took the covering from the ark and saw for himself that the ground was dry.
8:14–19 Nevertheless, Noah waited patiently for God’s orders before leaving the ark. Those orders came on the twenty-seventh day of the second month. God charged all those leaving the ark to be fruitful and increase on earth. This command reiterated the one God had given humans at creation (1:28), indicating that God’s purpose for the population of the earth remained the same.
8:20–21 As his first act on dry ground Noah built an altar to Yahweh. He took some of all the clean animals and clean birds, slaughtered them, and offered burnt offerings. He presented these animals as praise offerings, lauding God for deliverance from the terrors of the deluge. In contrast to other gods of the ancient Near East, Yahweh was not dependent on sacrifices for sustenance; God’s acceptance of a sacrifice is therefore noted by God’s smelling a pleasant aroma. Smell is a powerful sense, being crucial to enjoying and discerning different tastes in foods and being a great stimulator of the memory. The smoke of this sacrifice stirred God’s compassion, moving him to be favorably disposed to humanity.
God then declared that he never again would curse the ground by a deluge because of humans, even though every inclination of the human heart is evil from childhood. Westermann (Genesis 1–11, p. 456) points out that “curse” (qillel) in this form and in this context has a broad meaning (“treat disdainfully”). It says that the deluge had not changed human nature. This statement underscores God’s mercy toward humans in the continuation of human life on earth, and it alerts humans not to expect that societies from then on would be free from wickedness. Thus God had caused the deluge to punish intolerable violence on earth, not to transform human nature (6:5).
Nevertheless, despite the human inclination toward evil, God promised that never again would he destroy all living creatures. In other judgment accounts in Genesis, such as the Tower of Babel (11:1–9) and Sodom and Gomorrah (ch. 19), God judged selectively, not universally. From now on God would hold communities accountable in a manner that would prevent the entire earth from becoming corrupted by human wickedness. Furthermore, God’s mercy, not anger, would set the tone for divine-human relationships. Since humans would continue to do wicked deeds, God did not want them to fear extinction.
8:22 From now on the movement of the seasons would be dependable, despite the crises humans face. The seasons—seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter—along with day and night, mark the flow of time. This assures humans that life on earth continues uninterrupted, while at the same time letting them know that as individuals they are getting older.
Additional Notes
The relationship of this account to the Babylonian flood accounts, the literary character of this account, and the extent of the deluge need some comment. First, numerous flood accounts from throughout the world have survived. The biblical account has most in common with those from Mesopotamia, namely, Ziusudra, Atrahasis, and tablet eleven of the Gilgamesh Epic. The similarity of the biblical account to the Babylonian accounts suggests either that the biblical author adapted a Babylonian account or that both accounts go back to a common source. A. Heidel argued persuasively for the latter position (The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels [Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1949], pp. 260–67).
Two major characteristics set the biblical account apart from the Babylonian accounts: the sovereignty of God and moral principle. Unlike the Babylonian gods, who cowered in fear before the rising waters (Gilgamesh Epic 11:113–26), the one God was not threatened by the waters (Ps. 29:10). When Utnapishtim, the Babylonian Noah, offered a sacrifice after the flood, the gods crowded about the ascending smoke as flies (11:160–61). Apparently they were very hungry, since the catastrophe had prevented humans from providing them food. God, however, accepted Noah’s sacrifice just like any other offering of praise.
Furthermore, God judged righteously in Genesis, punishing the wicked and rescuing the righteous. God forewarned Noah, giving him instructions to deliver his household and the animals from the flood. But Enlil, the god of the storm, brought on the flood irrationally (11:168), making no distinction between the characters of those who were destroyed and those who survived the flood (11:179–88). Ea, the Babylonian god of wisdom, however, devised a scheme to alert Utnapishtim, a resident of Shurippak, about the coming destruction. Ea did so indirectly, by speaking to the reed hut where Utnapishtim lived (11:20–31) so that some humans might survive. Ea took this devious means in order to avoid Enlil’s wrath, threatened against any of the gods who would forewarn any human of the coming deluge (11:170–73). No reason is given for Ea’s favoring Utnapishtim.
After building a boat in seven days, Utnapishtim took on board a variety of skilled workers, seemingly with no regard for their character (11:84–85). Utnapishtim, however, duped the people of his city by telling them that he had to leave their city because Enlil had turned hostile to him, while Enlil was going to make them prosper (11:39–47). Just before the deluge Utnapishtim made a great feast with rivers of liquor so that the citizens would not be alarmed by the rising waters (11:70–74). After the flood Enlil granted Utnapishtim and his wife eternal life, but they had to live at the mouth of the rivers, which was far removed from society (11:189–95). By contrast, God delivered only Noah and his household because of Noah’s righteous character. Nothing is reported in the biblical account of how Noah responded to his neighbors (but see 2 Pet. 2:5). God displayed his mercy after the deluge by establishing a unilateral covenant of peace with all humans, not just Noah. In fact, Noah continued to live like the other primeval peoples until his death.
A second problem is the literary issue of how to explain the repetitions that mark this account. Those repetitions include two names for God, Yahweh and Elohim; a flood of forty days (7:4, 12, 17a) and a deluge of 150 days (7:24; 8:3); the command to take on board a pair of all animals (6:19–20) in contrast to the command to preserve seven pairs of clean animals (7:2–3); and the twofold command to enter the ark (6:18b–20 and 7:1–3), along with the double report of taking occupants on board (7:7–9 and 13–16a). Throughout the twentieth century, scholars attributed these repetitions to an editor who wove together two flood stories that had circulated independently in the collections of the Yahwist (J) and of the priestly source (P). The segments they assigned to the respective sources are as follows: J (Yahwist): 6:5–8; 7:1–5, 7–8, 10, 12, 16b, 17, 22–23; 8:2b, 3a, 6–12, 13b, 20–22; and P: 6:9–22; 7:6, 9, 11, 13–16a, 18–21, 24; 8:1–2a, 3b-5, 13a, 14–19.
Several studies have reevaluated this literary analysis and discovered that the final form of this account of the deluge was composed as a whole (e.g., B. Anderson, “From Analysis to Synthesis: The Interpretation of Genesis 1–11,” JBL 97 [1978], pp. 23–39). Its palistrophic construction is as a story that moves in stages toward and away from a center, with the respective stages echoing each other. The time spans also follow such a pattern: 7, 7, 40, 40, 150, 150, 40, 7, and 7 days. G. Wenham discovers other examples of this pattern in smaller segments of the account (“The Coherence of the Flood Narrative,” VT 28 [1978], pp. 337–42). This intricate, unified structure requires a final author who used the repetition for emphasis.
A third perplexing issue is whether this account reports a universal or a local flood. It is important to stress that the cosmology of the OT allowed for a universal flood. At creation God divided the sea into two parts and then formed the mountains (1:6–10). In ancient thought God could reverse the steps of creation at will, causing the mountains to sink and the seas to rise (Ps. 104:5–9). Furthermore, the view of chaos-cosmos is tied into that of God’s blessing and cursing. Thus in judgment God moves the earth toward chaos (see on 1:2), but in blessing he brings the forces of cosmic order to flourish. Second, we know from the great number of flood accounts that the tradition of a great flood was widespread. This evidence, however, is offset by the fact that several peoples in a variety of locations lack a flood account, including two of ancient Israel’s closest neighbors, Egypt and Ugarit. Another difficulty is the lack of geological evidence of a global flood after humans occupied the earth.
The local flood view is not necessarily the opposite of a global view. Since, from the biblical author’s perspective, the deluge covered the known land mass, the flood is spoken of in categorical terms. But for that author the earth was a landmass surrounded by water, not a giant sphere. Consequently the categorical language does not require a global flood. Thus, the acceptance of a deluge of reduced dimensions squarely faces the lack of geological evidence that a common flood covered the entire Levant. Future geological studies might close the gap between the written record and human knowledge. In the meantime this text teaches soundly that all humans are morally accountable to God.
6:14 The precise meaning of goper, translated either “cypress” or “cedar wood,” has been lost. “Rooms” is qinnim (lit. “nests”), but others prefer to read qanim (“reeds”), for both Moses’ ark and the ark in the Babylonian account were made from reeds.
6:17 Mabbul (“floodwaters”) is used for this deluge. The precise meaning is debated. It may mean “destruction,” or it may refer to the part of the great body of water confined above the expanse (1:7). The only other occurrence of this term is Ps. 29:10: “The LORD sits enthroned over the flood.”
8:4 The ark came to rest somewhere in the mountain range of Ararat, in Urartu in the area of Lake Van, not necessarily on the highest peak, Mount Massia, which is about seventeen thousand feet in elevation. Over the centuries this mountain has often been identified as Mount Ararat.
Understanding the Bible Commentary Series by John E. Hartley, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
Direct Matches
Altars were places of sacrifice and worship constructed of various materials. They could be either temporary or permanent. Some altars were in the open air; others were set apart in a holy place. They could symbolize either God’s presence and protection or false worship that would lead to God’s judgment.
Ararat refers to a mountainous region in eastern Asia Minor. The best-known reference to Ararat is as the location where Noah’s ark comes to rest after the flood. Genesis 8:4 actually speaks of the “mountains of Ararat,” not one particular mountain. In Gen. 8:214 the perspective is of the rain stopping and the floodwaters slowly receding in an extended process during which the ark is deposited on the Ararat mountain range. Tradition has favored Agri Dag, an extinct volcano rising 16,916 feet on the northeastern border of Turkey, as a viable site for Ararat.
God announced to Noah that he was going to destroy all the inhabitants of the earth and commanded him to build an “ark” (Heb. tebah; Gen. 6:14 16). Apart from the Genesis flood narrative, Exod. 2:3–5 is the only other passage in the Bible where this word is used, there for the ark of bulrushes in which the infant Moses was placed. Both arks were made waterproof by a coating of pitch (tar). An ark is something built to save people from drowning. It is not the name of a kind of boat as such (e.g., yacht), but rather a geometric boxlike shape. The ark was without rudder, sail, or any navigational aid. The NT refers to Noah’s construction of the ark (Heb. 11:7; 1Pet. 3:20) and his entering it (Matt. 24:38; Luke 17:27).
The OT employs thirty-five different words for birds (both wild and domestic), but the identification of these words with known species has proved to be very difficult. Like other words for animals, terminology for birds often is employed in personal names (e.g., Jonah, Oreb, Zippor, Zipporah). There is significant evidence for fowling practices in ancient Israel, usually by means of nets and snares (Pss. 124:7; 140:5; Prov. 6:5; 7:23; Lam. 3:52; Hos. 7:12; Amos 3:5). Small birds and chickens are occasionally even depicted on Iron AgeII (1000586 BC) seals and vessels from sites such as el-Jib (Gibeon) and Tell en-Nasbeh (Mizpah).
Like other animals in the Bible, birds are depicted as agents of God. Divine agency is especially evident in instances such as the ravens feeding Elijah (1Kings 17:4–6) and the dove bringing an olive leaf to Noah (Gen. 8:11). The Bible also employs bird-related imagery such as in descriptions of divine judgment (Prov. 30:17; Jer. 12:9). Birds may also serve as ominous signs of impending judgment (Hos. 8:1). God’s “wings” can offer both healing (Mal. 4:2 KJV, RSV) and protection (Ruth 2:12; Pss. 17:8; 36:7; 57:1; 61:4; 63:7; 91:4). The metaphor of the soul or spirit as a bird is referenced in the description of the Holy Spirit descending like a dove (Matt. 3:16; Mark 1:10; Luke 3:22; John 1:32). The observation that birds “do not sow or reap” is employed as an image of worry-free living (Luke 12:24; cf. Job 38:41; Ps. 147:9). Jesus’ reference to “when the rooster crows” (Mark 13:35) is not strictly literal but rather refers to a watch of the night: the quarter of the night after midnight.
The prominence of sacrificial birds (especially doves and pigeons) in ritual literature indicates that they were likely raised for such purposes in ancient Israel. All birds could be eaten except those listed as unclean in Lev. 11:13–19 (twenty species) and Deut. 14:12–18 (twenty-one species). Generally speaking, birds of prey and those that feed on carrion or fish were considered unclean. Birds often served as food for the poor (Matt. 10:29–31; Luke 12:6–7). Poor people could offer birds as a substitute for expensive livestock (Lev. 5:7; 12:8; 14:21–22; cf. Luke 2:24), while the poorest of the poor were permitted to bring grain (Lev. 5:11). Finally, in one purgation ritual a live bird is used to carry away impurities (Lev. 14:52–53; cf. 16:22).
In the OT, the Hebrew words ruakh (“breath, spirit”) and neshamah (“blast, spirit”) are the standard terms, even collectively translated “wind.” Constructively, these terms reflect the vibrant relationship between God and humankind. However, God’s “breath” can also be an agent of judgment. So “breath/wind” is the invasive power of God—proof of his supremacy—capable of disruption or transformation of human life.
It is in human creation that God’s breath is given one of its most dynamic illustrations. Formed of “dust,” the human being must be enlivened by the Creator’s breath. In the OT, human flesh remains dormant and helplessly passive until God breathes; then a living human being is animated (Gen. 2:7; 6:17; cf. Pss. 33:6; 104:29).
“Breath/wind” is also a powerful force in God’s anger, when a “blast of breath from his nostrils” can undo and destroy (2Sam. 22:16). Similarly, a “strong east wind” rolls back the Red Sea for the Israelites’ crossing (Exod. 14:21), but the very same force is the undoing of Pharaoh’s army, which was destroyed as God, Israel’s warrior, “blew” with his “breath” (Exod. 15:10).
Not surprisingly, themes combining breath, wind, and spirit are also used to describe new creation (Ezek. 37:9). The life-generating force of the ruakh/spirit emerges in the NT as the Holy Spirit, manifested in wind, a breath, or Spirit (Gk. pneuma). At Pentecost “a violent wind came from heaven,” enacting another creation (Acts 2:2). John clearly symbolizes Jesus’ “breathing” on the disciples (John 20:22). Not only does this illustrate John’s theology of being born “from above” (3:3 NRSV), but also “he breathed” reenacts the enlivening of Gen. 2:7. The two creations are connected: God’s enlivening in Gen. 2:7 and Jesus’ creation of eternal life following his own resurrection.
A holy God wants a holy people. He had described the nation of Israel as holy (cf. Exod. 19:56) but also wanted them to live holy lives and grow increasingly holy. Holiness came, in part, by keeping the law; an important part of the law was the concept of cleanness.
Cleanness does not refer to good hygiene, nor is it synonymous with morality, since a person could be unclean and still righteous. Cleanness allowed the OT believer to live a holy life and enabled that person to be made increasingly holy by “Yahweh, your sanctifier” (NIV: “the Lord, who makes you holy,” Lev. 20:8; cf. 21:8, 15, 23; 22:9, 16, 32; 31:13). Impurity traveled along four channels: sexuality (various discharges; e.g., nocturnal emission, menstruation, childbirth), diet (e.g., eating certain types of animals), disease (e.g., skin diseases, mildew), and death (i.e., contact with animal or human corpses). Impurities occurring naturally and unavoidably in the course of life (e.g., menstruation) were tolerated, representing no danger to the person or community as long as they were promptly addressed. Other impurities had to be avoided at all costs or else grave consequences would result to the person and community.
One prohibited impurity arose from eating food declared off-limits by God. All meat had to be thoroughly bled before being eaten (Gen. 9:3–4; Lev. 17:10–14; Deut. 12:16, 23). Edible land animals must both have a completely divided hoof and chew the cud (Lev. 11:3; Deut. 14:6), while water creatures had to have both fins and scales (Lev. 11:9; Deut. 14:9). Most birds were acceptable for food (exceptions are given in Lev. 11:13–19; Deut. 14:11–18), as were most insects (Lev. 11:20–23; Deut. 14:19–20) and some crawling animals (Lev. 11:29–31, 41–42).
Why did God declare certain things clean and others unclean? Some suggest that the distinction is arbitrary; the rules are given as a test of obedience. Others argue that the original audience knew of reasons now lost to us. Still others believe that God was protecting his people from disease. It is true that certain kinds of meat improperly prepared can transmit disease, but not all laws can be explained this way. Some believe that God identified things as clean because they represented a state of normalcy (e.g., fish normally propel themselves with fins, so those lacking fins are abnormal and thus unclean). A related view considers things as clean or unclean based on what they symbolized. So, for example, God identified objects as unclean if they were associated with death (e.g., vultures, corpses) because he is for life. Here again, it is difficult to explain all the laws by appeal to normalcy or symbolism.
Ceremonial cleansing is not just a topic in the OT; it appears in the opening chapters of the Gospels. Mary underwent the required purification rituals after Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:22–24), and Jesus “cleansed” people from leprosy, instructing them to carry out the Mosaic purification rituals (Matt. 8:2–4; Mark 1:40–42; Luke 5:12–14; 17:11–19; cf. Matt. 10:8; 11:5; Luke 4:27; 7:22).
In one of his confrontations with the Pharisees, Jesus signaled a departure from how these laws had been practiced. He announced, “Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them. Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles them” (Mark 7:15), to which Mark adds an explanation: “In saying this, Jesus declared all foods ‘clean’” (7:19). Peter’s rooftop vision in Acts 10 reflects this same perspective, as do the church’s decision regarding Gentile conversion (Acts 15) and Paul’s comments to the church at Rome (Rom. 14:14, 20–21).
A pact/compact or an agreement (Heb. berit). The NT counterpart word is diathēkē, defined as a “legal disposition of personal goods.”
The covenant is something that binds parties together or obligates one party to the other. Although there are legal implications associated with covenant, the relational aspect of covenant should not be overlooked. A covenant is best understood as a relationship with related legalities. Marriage, for example, is a covenant that establishes and defines a relationship. This perhaps explains why God chose from the realm of relationships among humans the covenant metaphor to establish and communicate his intent in divine-human relationships.
Some covenants are between persons of equal status (parity treaties); others are between a master and a servant (suzerainty treaties), between nations, between clans, and between a husband and a wife (Mal. 2:14). To “cut a covenant” at any level of society implies a solemn commitment to a relationship.
The most significant covenant relationship in the biblical material is the one between God and humankind. The uniqueness of Israel’s covenant relationship with Yahweh in contrast to all surrounding nations is established on the basis of Deut. 32:89. Although Yahweh gave the nations their inheritance, he selected Israel for his own personal care; he established a relationship with the nation independent of and prior to the nation’s association with his land.
Covenant is a dominant theme that gives cohesiveness to the structure of the OT and distinguishes the history of Israel. The phrase “covenant history” can be used to describe the biblical literature that recounts the events and episodes of Israelite life. It is a macrogenre that characterizes the historical narratives of the OT. Although this large literary corpus of historical narrative shares a covenant perspective, the individual books within the narrative corpus are noted for the attention they give to various aspects of the covenant relationship. For example, Gen. 12–50 develops the covenant promises of seed and blessing through a number of subgenres such as genealogies and family stories. Joshua, on the other hand, engages several military subgenres to recount the tension between the promise of land occupation and the responsibility of Israel to occupy the land. Covenant history is a realistic presentation of the tensions associated with the covenant relationship between Yahweh and the nation of Israel.
Finally, the psalms have a direct covenant connection emphasizing covenant worship. Psalm 119 (esp. vv. 57–64) is filled with covenant terms that relate to God’s word (testimonies, laws, oath, judgments). Marching to the place of worship designated by the covenant is reflected in the Psalms of Ascent.
Although the covenant theme is less pervasive in the NT, its christological significance is profound. The NT highlights the significant messianic role of Christ in relation to the covenants. Paul references the new covenant in both books of Corinthians (1Cor. 11:25; 2Cor. 3:6). Each celebration of the Lord’s Supper reminds us that the shed blood of Christ is the blood of the new covenant. The new covenant is cut in connection with or on the basis of his death, burial, and resurrection (1Cor. 11:25). The writer of the book of Hebrews gives detailed attention to how the new covenant functions in contrast to the old Mosaic covenant. The writer explains that Jesus is the guarantor of a better covenant (7:22; 8:6–7). Finally, Paul indicates that we are now considered ministers of the new covenant ministry (2Cor. 3:6).
Whether animal or human, “creature” assumes creator. God’s unique creative activity is showcased in his majestic work: “creatures.” While the infinite God is not confined in the lives of his creatures, both are linked in a relationship of fidelity (Ps. 104).
A creature is a gift and has an obligation of service (Ps. 150). Scripture celebrates divine rule and creaturely dependence (Ps. 96). Creatures have roles, and the liturgy of doxology revels in a cosmic and eschatological drama (Ps. 148; Isa. 40:1231; 65:17–25). Humans are caretaking creatures (Ps. 8).
A translation of the Hebrew word remes, referring to a category of animals that includes reptiles, crawling insects, and other small animals that travel low to the ground. In the OT, such creatures are regularly distinguished from humans, large animals, livestock, flying animals, and fish, each of which constitutes its own class, and which, taken together with creeping things, represent all nonplant life. Creeping things are mentioned significantly in the creation account (Gen. 1:2426) and in the Noah story (6:7, 20; 7:14, 23; 8:17, 19; 9:3). They are also found in 1Kings 4:33; Pss. 104:25; 148:10; Ezek. 8:10; 38:20; Hos. 2:18; Hab. 1:14.
The metrological systems employed in biblical times span the same concepts as our own modern-day systems: weight, linear distance, and volume or capacity. However, the systems of weights and measurements employed during the span of biblical times were not nearly as accurate or uniform as the modern units employed today.
Weights
Weights in biblical times were carried in a bag or a satchel (Deut. 25:13; Prov. 16:11; Mic. 6:11) and were stones, usually carved into various animal shapes for easy identification. Their side or flat bottom was inscribed with the associated weight and unit of measurement. Thousands of historical artifacts, which differ by significant amounts, have been discovered by archaeologists and thus have greatly complicated the work of determining accurate modern-day equivalents.
Beka. Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahs or ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measure metals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).
Gerah. 1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20 shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).
Mina. Approximately 1¼ pounds, or 0.56 kilograms. Equivalent to 50 shekels. Used to weigh gold (1Kings 10:17; Ezra 2:69), silver (Neh. 7:71 72), and other goods. The prophet Ezekiel redefined the proper weight: “The shekel is to consist of twenty gerahs. Twenty shekels plus twenty-five shekels plus fifteen shekels equal one mina” (Ezek. 45:12). Before this redefinition, there were arguably 50 shekels per mina. In Jesus’ parable of the servants, he describes the master entrusting to his three servants varying amounts—10 minas, 5 minas, 1 mina—implying a monetary value (Luke 19:11–24), probably of either silver or gold. One mina was equivalent to approximately three months’ wages for a laborer.
Pim. Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3 shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1Sam. 13:21).
Shekel. Approximately 2⁄5 ounce, or 11 grams. Equivalent to approximately 2 bekas. The shekel is the basic unit of weight measurement in Israelite history, though its actual weight varied significantly at different historical points. Examples include the “royal shekel” (2Sam. 14:26), the “common shekel” (2Kings 7:1), and the “sanctuary shekel,” which was equivalent to 20 gerahs (e.g., Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25; Num. 3:47). Because it was used to weigh out silver or gold, the shekel also functioned as a common monetary unit in the NT world.
Talent. Approximately 75 pounds, or 34 kilograms. Equivalent to approximately 60 minas. Various metals were weighed using talents: gold (Exod. 25:39; 37:24; 1Chron. 20:2), silver (Exod. 38:27; 1Kings 20:39; 2Kings 5:22), and bronze (Exod. 38:29). This probably is derived from the weight of a load that a man could carry.
Litra. Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight. Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to the modern British pound.
Linear Measurements
Linear measurements were based upon readily available natural measurements such as the distance between the elbow and the hand or between the thumb and the little finger. While convenient, this method of measurement gave rise to significant inconsistencies.
Cubit. Approximately 18 inches, or 45.7 centimeters. Equivalent to 6 handbreadths. The standard biblical measure of linear distance, as the shekel is the standard measurement of weight. The distance from the elbow to the outstretched fingertip. Used to describe height, width, length (Exod. 25:10), distance (John 21:8), and depth (Gen. 7:20). Use of the cubit is ancient. For simple and approximate conversion into modern units, divide the number of cubits in half for meters, then multiply the number of meters by 3 to arrive at feet.
1 cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths
Day’s journey. An approximate measure of distance equivalent to about 20–25 miles, or 32–40 kilometers. Several passages reference a single or multiple days’ journey as a description of the distance traveled or the distance between two points: “a day’s journey” (Num. 11:31; 1Kings 19:4), “a three-day journey” (Gen. 30:36; Exod. 3:18; 8:27; Jon. 3:3), “seven days” (Gen. 31:23), and “eleven days” (Deut. 1:2). After visiting Jerusalem for Passover, Jesus’ parents journeyed for a day (Luke 2:44) before realizing that he was not with them.
Fingerbreadth. The width of the finger, or ¼ of a handbreadth, approximately ¾ inch, or 1.9 centimeters. The fingerbreadth was the beginning building block of the biblical metrological system for linear measurements. Used only once in the Scriptures, to describe the bronze pillars (Jer. 52:21).
Handbreadth. Approximately 3 inches, or 7.6 centimeters. Equivalent to 1⁄6 cubit, or four fingerbreadths. Probably the width at the base of the four fingers. A short measure of length, thus compared to a human’s brief life (Ps. 39:5). Also the width of the rim on the bread table (Exod. 25:25) and the thickness of the bronze Sea (1Kings 7:26).
Milion. Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration of Roman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”
Orguia. Approximately 5 feet 11 inches, or 1.8 meters. Also translated as “fathom.” A Greek unit of measurement. Probably the distance between outstretched fingertip to fingertip. Used to measure the depth of water (Acts 27:28).
Reed/rod. Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a general term for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance (Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).
Sabbath day’s journey. Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About 2,000 cubits.
Stadion. Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai. Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13; John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).
Span. Approximately 9 inches, or 22.8 centimeters. Equivalent to three handbreadths, and ½ cubit. The distance from outstretched thumb tip to little-finger tip. The length and width of the priest’s breastpiece (Exod. 28:16).
Land Area
Seed. The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis of how much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1Kings 18:32).
Yoke. Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. In biblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animals could plow in one day (1Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).
Capacity
Cab. Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer. Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria (2Kings 6:25).
Choinix. Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement, mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).
Cor. Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equal to the homer, and to 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularly of flour and grains (1Kings 4:22; 5:11; 2Chron. 2:10; 27:5; Ezra 7:22). In the LXX, cor is also a measure of liquid volume, particularly oil (1Kings 5:11; 2Chron. 2:10; Ezra 45:14).
Ephah. Approximately 3⁄5 bushel (6 gallons, or 22.7 liters). Equivalent to 10 omers, or 1⁄10 homer. Used for measuring flour and grains (e.g., Exod. 29:40; Lev. 6:20). Isaiah prophesied a day of reduced agricultural yield, when a homer of seed would produce only an ephah of grain (Isa. 5:10). The ephah was equal in size to the bath (Ezek. 45:11), which typically was used for liquid measurements.
Homer. Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equivalent to 1 cor, or 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularly of various grains (Lev. 27:16; Isa. 5:10; Ezek. 45:11, 13–14; Hos. 3:2). This is probably a natural measure of the load that a donkey can carry, in the range of 90 kilograms. There may have existed a direct link between capacity and monetary value, given Lev. 27:16: “fifty shekels of silver to a homer of barley seed.” A logical deduction of capacity and cost based on known equivalences might look something like this:
1 homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1omer = 1 beka
Koros. Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measure of grain (Luke 16:7).
Omer. Approximately 2 quarts, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄10 ephah, 1⁄100 homer (Ezek. 45:11). Used by Israel in the measurement and collection of manna in the wilderness (Exod. 16:16–36) and thus roughly equivalent to a person’s daily food ration.
Saton. Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. The measurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).
Seah. Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah, or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various dry goods (e.g., 2Kings 7:1; 1Sam. 25:18).
Liquid Volume
Bath. Approximately 6 gallons, or 22.7 liters. Equivalent to 1 ephah, which typically was used for measurements of dry capacity. Used in the measurement of water (1Kings 7:26), oil (1Kings 5:11), and wine (2Chron. 2:10; Isa. 5:10).
Batos. Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration of the Hebrew word bath (see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).
Hin. Approximately 4 quarts (1gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to 1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek. 4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).
Log. Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72 bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture, specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).
Metretes. Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement of water at the wedding feast (John 2:6).
The blessings and curses of Scripture are grounded in a worldview that understands the sovereign God to be the ultimate dispenser of each. God is the giver of blessing and ultimately the final judge who determines withdrawal or ban. He is the source of every good gift (James 1:17) and the one who gives power and strength to prosper (Deut. 8:17).
Old Testament. The sovereign God sometimes employs agents of blessing in his creation. The blessing extends to the nations through Abraham (Gen. 12:3), to Jacob through Isaac (Gen. 2627), and to the people through the priests (Num. 6:24–26).
The theme of blessing/curse is used to structure Deut. 27–28 and Lev. 26 (cf. Josh. 8:34) in the overall covenant format of these books. Scholars have observed that the object of this format is not symmetry or logical unity but fullness. From this perspective, the blessing/curse structure functions to enforce obedience for the purpose of ensuring a relationship. The blessing of Deuteronomy also includes the benefits of prosperity, power, and fertility. The curse, on the other hand, is the lack or withdrawal of benefits associated with the relationship.
The creation narratives are marked with the theme and terminology of blessing (Gen. 1:22, 28; 2:3; cf. 5:2; 9:1). The objects of blessing in Gen. 1:22, 28 (cf. 5:2; 9:1) are the living creatures and human beings created in the image of God. As the revelation progresses, the blessing of God is particularized in the lives of Noah (Gen. 6–8), Abraham (Gen. 12–25) and his descendants, and the nation of Israel and its leadership (Gen. 26–50). In these contexts, the blessing is intended to engender offspring and to prosper recipients in material and physical ways (compare a similar NT emphasis in Acts 17:25; cf. Matt. 5:45; 6:25–33; Acts 14:17).
The blessing of God is also extended to inanimate objects that enhance and prosper one’s quality of life. The seventh day of creation is the object of blessing (Gen. 2:7; Exod. 20:11), perhaps giving it a sense of well-being and health. Objects and activities of life such as baskets and kneading troughs (Deut. 28:5), barns (Deut. 28:8), and work (Job 1:10; Ps. 90:17) are blessed.
God promises to bless those who fear him (Ps. 128:1). Blessing is designed for those who, out of a deep sense of awe of God’s character, love and trust him. The God-fearer confidently embraces God’s promises, obediently serves, and takes seriously God’s warnings. The blessings itemized in Ps. 128 are comparable to those detailed in Deut. 28 relating to productivity and fruitfulness (cf. Ps. 128:2 with Deut. 28:12; Ps. 128:3 with Deut. 28:4, 11). The Deuteronomic concept of blessing and curse is questioned when God-fearers undergo a period of suffering or experience God’s apparent absence (e.g., Joseph, Job; cf. Jesus).
New Testament. In the NT, blessings are not exclusively spiritual. God gives both food and joy (Acts 14:17) and provides the necessities of life (Matt. 6:25–33). The NT does connect blessing with Christ, and it focuses attention on the spiritual quality of the gift that originates from Christ himself and its intended benefit for spiritual individuals.
Regarding curse, the NT explains that Christ bore the curse of the law to free us from its deadening effect (Gal. 3:10–13). Revelation 22:3 anticipates a time when the curse associated with sin will be completely removed and the blessing associated with creation will prevail. “Anathema” is a transliteration of a Greek word that means “curse” (see NIV). Paul invokes it for those who pervert or reject the gospel of God’s free grace (1Cor. 16:22; Gal. 1:8–9).
The rock dove was domesticated throughout the ancient Near East and used for carrying messages long before Roman times. It breeds prolifically, and its homing instinct brings it swiftly back to its dovecote (Isa. 60:8; Hos. 11:11) or the buildings or crevices where it nests (Jer. 48:28). Israel also has three species of turtledove (Heb. tor; Gk. trygōn), one being a summer migrant (Song 2:12; Jer. 8:7).
In Israel, the dove was considered clean for food and designated for sacrifice, often as a poor person’s substitute for a lamb (Gen. 15:9; Lev. 1:14; 5:7, 11; 12:6, 8; 14:22, 30; 15:14, 29; Num. 6:10; Matt. 21:12; Mark 11:15; Luke 2:24; John 2:14, 16). The dove is first mentioned in Scripture when Noah sends out a dove from the ark (Gen. 8:812). In the NT, the dove is an image of purity (Matt. 10:16) and also symbolizes the Holy Spirit (Matt. 3:16; Mark 1:10; Luke 3:22; John 1:32), but in the Song of Songs, where the beloved, and in particular the beloved’s eyes, are likened to doves (1:15; 2:14; 4:1; 5:2, 12; 6:9), it may also connote fertility.
The dove is also, however, mournful (Isa. 38:14; 59:11; Ezek. 7:16; Nah. 2:7), vulnerable (Ps. 74:19), and easily deceived (Hos. 7:11). When frightened, it takes flight to lonely places (Ps. 55:6; Isa. 60:8), which perhaps adds interest to the fact that Jonah’s name literally means “dove.”
Israel shared the cosmology of its ancient Near Eastern neighbors. This worldview understood the earth as a “disk” upon the primeval waters (Job 38:13; Isa. 40:22), with the earth having four rims or “corners” (Ps. 135:7; Isa. 11:12). These rims were sealed at the horizon to prevent the influx of cosmic waters. God speaks to Job about the dawn grasping the edges of the earth and shaking the evil people out of it (Job 38:1213).
Israel’s promised land was built on the sanctuary prototype of Eden (Gen. 13:10; Deut. 6:3; 31:20); both were defined by divine blessing, fertility, legal instruction, secure boundaries, and were orienting points for the world. Canaan was Israel’s new paradise, “flowing with milk and honey” (Exod. 3:8; Num. 13:27). Conversely, the lack of fertile land was tantamount to insecurity and judgment. As Eden illustrated for Israel, any rupture of relationship with God brought alienation between humans, God, and the land; this could ultimately bring exile, as an ethically nauseated land “vomits” people out (Lev. 18:25, 28; 20:22; see also Deut. 4; 30).
For Israel, land involved both God’s covenant promise (Gen. 15:18–21; 35:9–12) and the nation’s faithful obedience (Gen. 17:1; Exod. 19:5; 1Kings 2:1–4). Yahweh was the earth’s Lord (Ps. 97:5), Judge (Gen. 18:25), and King (Ps. 47:2, 7). Both owner and giver, he was the supreme landlord, who gifted the land to Israel (Exod. 19:5; Lev. 25:23; Josh. 22:19; Ps. 24:1). The land was God’s “inheritance” to give (1Sam. 26:19; 2Sam. 14:16; Ps. 79:1; Jer. 2:7). The Levites, however, did not receive an allotment of land as did the other tribes, since God was their “portion” (Num. 18:20; Ps. 73:26). Israel’s obedience was necessary both to enter and to occupy the land (Deut. 8:1–3; 11:8–9; 21:1; 27:1–3). Ironically, the earth swallowed rebellious Israelites when they accused Moses of bringing them “up out of a land flowing with milk and honey” (Num. 16:13). As the conquest shows, however, no tribe was completely obedient, taking its full “inheritance” (Josh. 13:1).
People in the Bible were family-centered and staunchly loyal to their kin. Families formed the foundation of society. The extended family was the source of people’s status in the community and provided the primary economic, educational, religious, and social interactions.
Marriage and divorce. Marriage in the ancient Near East was a contractual arrangement between two families, arranged by the bride’s father or a male representative. The bride’s family was paid a dowry, a “bride’s price.” Paying a dowry was not only an economic transaction but also an expression of family honor. Only the rich could afford multiple dowries. Thus, polygamy was minimal. The wedding itself was celebrated with a feast provided by the father of the groom.
The primary purpose for marriage in the ancient Near East was to produce a male heir to ensure care for the couple in their old age. The concept of inheritance was a key part of the marriage customs, especially with regard to passing along possessions and property.
Marriage among Jews in the NT era still tended to be endogamous; that is, Jews sought to marry close kin without committing incest violations (Lev. 18:617). A Jewish male certainly was expected to marry a Jew. Exogamy, marrying outside the remote kinship group, and certainly outside the ethnos, was understood as shaming God’s holiness. Thus, a Jew marrying a Gentile woman was not an option. The Romans did practice exogamy. For them, marrying outside one’s kinship group (not ethnos) was based predominantly on creating strategic alliances between families.
Greek and Roman law allowed both men and women to initiate divorce. In Jewish marriages, only the husband could initiate divorce proceedings. If a husband divorced his wife, he had to release her and repay the dowry. Divorce was common in cases of infertility (in particular if the woman had not provided male offspring). Ben Sira comments that barrenness in a woman is a cause of anxiety to the father (Sir. 42:9–10). Another reason for divorce was adultery (Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). Jesus, though, taught a more restrictive use of divorce than the OT (Mark 10:1–12).
Children and parenting. Childbearing was considered representative of God’s blessing on a woman and her entire family, in particular her husband. In contrast to this blessing, barrenness brought shame on women, their families, and specifically their husbands.
Children were of low social status in society. Infant mortality was high. An estimated 60percent of the children in the first-century Mediterranean society were dead by the age of sixteen.
Ancient Near Eastern and Mediterranean societies exhibited a parenting style based on their view of human nature as a mixture of good and evil tendencies. Parents relied on physical punishment to prevent evil tendencies from developing into evil deeds (Prov. 29:15). The main concern of parents was to socialize the children into family loyalty. Lack of such loyalty was punished (Lev. 20:9). At a very early stage children were taught to accept the total authority of the father. The rearing of girls was entirely the responsibility of the women. Girls were taught domestic roles and duties as soon as possible so that they could help with household tasks.
Family identity was used as a metaphor in ancient Israel to speak of fidelity, responsibility, judgment, and reconciliation. In the OT, the people of Israel often are described as children of God. In their overall relationship to God, the people of Israel are referred to in familial terms—sons and daughters, spouse, and firstborn (Exod. 4:22). God is addressed as the father of the people (Isa. 63:16; 64:8) and referred to as their mother (Isa. 49:14–17).
The church as the family of God. Throughout his ministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a call to loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26), a call to fictive kinship, the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50; Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call to community. Entrance into the community was granted through adopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–63; John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9). Jesus’ presence as the head of the community was eventually replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18). Through the Spirit, Jesus’ ministry continues in the community of his followers, God’s family—the church. See also Adoption.
Recounted in Gen. 6:59:19, the flood is the event whereby God destroys all creatures except for Noah, his family, and a gathering of animals. The account is highly literary and God-centered. It opens and closes with Noah’s three sons (6:10; 9:18–19). Noah’s obedience is highlighted (7:5, 9, 16). God is the protagonist, and Noah remains silent.
In Gen. 6:5–22, God observes the grand scale of human wickedness, determines to destroy all life, and selects righteous Noah to build an ark. God’s “seeing” is judicial investigation (6:5, 13) that counters the sons of God who “saw” (6:2), just as his pained heart counters humankind’s wicked heart (6:5–6). God’s second statement, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race” (6:7), is his judicial sentence (cf. 3:15–19), affecting all life in the domain of human care (1:28; cf. Job 38:41; Ps. 36:6; Hos. 4:3; Joel 1:20).
The earth’s corruption and violence (Gen. 6:12–13) reflect a spectrum of evil that has despoiled a creation that was once “very good” (1:31; cf. 6:17; 7:21; 8:17; 9:11). God’s destruction responds to the moral corruption of the earth. The ark is a rectangular vessel designed for floating rather than sailing (6:14–15). Noah builds a microcosm of the earth to save its life. The boat’s windowlike openings and three decks reflect the cosmology of Gen. 1 (heavens, water, earth [cf. 6:16]). God makes a promise that Noah will survive and receive a covenant from God (6:18), fulfilled in the Noahic covenant following the flood (9:9, 11, 14–17).
Genesis 7:1–24 recounts the boarding of the ark and then the rising waters. Two numbering systems are used by the narrator in the flood narrative: one for dates of Noah’s age (day, month, year) and one for periods between flood stages. Both systems number between 365 and 370 days. The flood is portrayed as a reversal of the second and third days of creation. Watery boundaries that God once separated collapse (cf. 1:6–10). The rising flood is described in three phases: rising and lifting the ark (7:17), increasing greatly and floating the ark on the surface (7:18), and covering all the high mountains (7:19). Total destruction is amplified by reversing the order of creation—people, animals, birds (7:23)—with “all/every” occurring repeatedly in 7:21–23.
Genesis 8:1–22 recounts the disembarking and Noah’s sacrifice. Genesis 8:1 is the structural and theological center, with God fulfilling (=“remember”) his covenant promise for Noah’s safety. The ark rests on one mountain within the range in eastern Turkey (Kurdistan). The earth’s drying occurs as a process (8:3, 5, 9, 11, 13, 14), and echoes of creation reappear (e.g., “wind” [8:1; cf. 1:2]). Although the old curse is not lifted (cf. 5:29), God promises not to add to it (8:21). The flood has not reformed the human heart; it has only stopped the violence. God’s oath of restoration reaffirms the seamless rhythm of seasons that compose a full year (8:22).
Genesis 9:1–19 recounts the restoration of world order. Since murder was part of the antediluvian violence (6:11, 13), God’s law recalibrates earthly morality (9:5). God’s second postdiluvian speech encodes his plan for the broader preservation of creation (9:8–17). “My rainbow” is God’s confirming sign (9:13). The meteorological phenomenon of the storm is now harnessed as an image of peace. The cosmic warrior “hangs up” his bow in divine disarmament. Humankind now shares the responsibility of justice with God, illustrated in Noah’s first speech of cursing and blessing (9:20–27).
Grace is the nucleus, the critical core element, of the redemptive and sanctifying work of the triune God detailed throughout the entire canon of Scripture. The variegated expressions of grace are rooted in the person and work of God, so that his graciousness and favor effectively demonstrated in every aspect of the created realm glorify him as they are shared and enjoyed with one another.
The biblical terminology informing an understanding of grace defines it as a gift or a favorable reaction or disposition toward someone. Grace is generosity, thanks, and good will between humans and from God to humans. Divine expressions of grace are loving, merciful, and effective. The biblical texts provide a context for a more robust understanding of divine gift. The overall redemptive-historical context of grace is the desire of the eternal God to bring glory to himself through a grace-based relationship with his creation. The Creator-Redeemer gives grace, and the recipients of grace give him glory.
The second of Noah’s three sons, his descendants included Cush, Mizraim (Egypt), Put, and Canaan. After Ham informed his brothers that he saw their naked father, Noah cursed Ham’s son Canaan, who was possibly involved. The name can designate one branch of Ham’s descendants, the Egyptians, or their land (Pss. 78:51; 105:23, 27; 106:22).
The harvest was a major event on the yearly calendar of Israel’s agrarian society (Lev. 25:11; Judg. 15:1; Ruth 1:22; 2Sam. 21:910). Life was dependent on the harvest. As a result, God set certain rules with respect to the harvest to help the Israelites keep proper priorities. Every seven years and every fiftieth year, the people were to give the land a rest (Exod. 23:10; Lev. 25:20–22). The people were to rest on the Sabbath, even during the harvesttime (Exod. 34:21). Some portions of crops were to be left in the field so that the poor might have food (Lev. 19:9; 23:22; Deut. 24:21). The people were to acknowledge God as the source of the harvest by offering the first of the produce (Lev. 23:10). Celebrating the harvest was commanded (Exod. 23:16; Deut. 16:15; Isa. 9:3). Planning for the harvest was a mark of wisdom (Prov. 6:8; 10:5; 20:4). Even as a good harvest was the blessing of God (Ps. 67:6; Isa. 62:9), so a bad harvest was a curse from God and the plight of a fool (1Sam. 12:17; Job 5:5; Prov. 26:1; Isa. 18:4–5; Jer. 8:13, 20; Joel 3:12; Mic. 6:15). Failure to acknowledge God for the harvest was a sin (Jer. 5:24).
The harvest is often used in Scripture as an analogy. The prophets talk about the negative harvest of idolatry (Isa. 17:11). Israel is called the firstfruits of God’s harvest (Jer. 2:3). Hosea uses the idea of harvest to indicate that God’s people have a future (Hos. 6:11). In the Gospels, the harvest is used as an analogy for those needing to hear the good news (Matt. 9:37–38), for the end times (Matt. 13:24–30; Rev. 14:15), and for a lesson about unfaithful leadership (Matt. 21:33–46; 25:24). In the remainder of the NT, the harvest analogy usually refers to Christian growth and salvation (Rom. 1:13; 1Cor. 9:10–11; 2Cor. 9:10; Gal. 6:9; Heb. 12:11; James 3:18).
Physiologically, the heart is an organ in the body, and in the Bible it is also used in a number of metaphors.
Metaphorically, the heart refers to the mind, the will, the seat of emotions, or even the whole person. It also refers to the center of something or its inner part. These metaphors come from the heart’s importance and location.
Mind. The heart refers to the mind, but not the brain, and in these cases does not involve human physiology. It is a metaphor, and while the neurophysiology of the heart may be interesting in its own right, it has no bearing on this use of language. Deuteronomy 6:5 issues the command to love God with all one’s heart, soul, and strength. When the command is repeated in the Gospels, it occurs in three variations (Matt. 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27). Common to all three is the addition of the word “mind.” The Gospel writers want to be sure that the audience hears Jesus adding “mind,” but this addition is based on the fact that the meaning of the Hebrew word for “heart” includes the mind.
The mental activities of the metaphorical heart are abundant. The heart is where a person thinks (Gen. 6:5; Deut. 7:17; 1Chron. 29:18; Rev. 18:7), where a person comprehends and has understanding (1Kings 3:9; Job 17:4; Ps. 49:3; Prov. 14:13; Matt. 13:15). The heart makes plans and has intentions (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Prov. 20:5; 1Chron. 29:18; Jer. 23:20). One believes with the heart (Luke 24:25; Acts 8:37; Rom. 10:9). The heart is the site of wisdom, discernment, and skill (Exod. 35:34; 36:2; 1Kings 3:9; 10:24). The heart is the place of memory (Deut. 4:9; Ps. 119:11). The heart plays the role of conscience (2Sam. 24:10; 1John 3:2021).
It is often worth the effort to substitute “mind” for “heart” when reading the Bible in order to grasp the mental dimension. For example, after telling the Israelites to love God with all their heart, Moses says, “These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts” (Deut. 6:6). Reading it instead as “be on your mind” changes our perspective, and in this case the idiom “on your mind” is clearer and more accurate. The following verses instruct parents to talk to their children throughout the day about God’s words. In order for parents to do this, God’s requirements and deeds need to be constantly on their minds, out of their love for him. Similarly, love for God and loyalty are expressed by meditation on and determination to obey his law (Ps. 119:11, 112). The law is not merely a list of rules; it is also a repository of a worldview in which the Lord is the only God. To live consistently with this truth requires careful, reflective thought.
Emotions and attitude. The heart, as the seat of emotion, is associated with a number of feelings and sentiments, such as gladness (Exod. 4:14; Acts 2:26), hatred (Lev. 19:17), pride (Deut. 8:14), resentment (Deut. 15:10), dread (Deut. 28:67), sympathy (Judg. 5:9), love (Judg. 16:15), sadness (1Sam. 1:8; John 16:6), and jealousy and ambition (James 3:14). The heart is also the frame of reference for attitudes such as willingness, courage, and desire.
The present abode of God and the final dwelling place of the righteous. The ancient Jews distinguished three different heavens. The first heaven was the atmospheric heavens of the clouds and where the birds fly (Gen. 1:20). The second heaven was the celestial heavens of the sun, the moon, and the stars. The third heaven was the present home of God and the angels. Paul builds on this understanding of a third heaven in 2Cor. 12:24, where he describes himself as a man who “was caught up to the third heaven” or “paradise,” where he “heard inexpressible things.” This idea of multiple heavens also shows itself in how the Jews normally spoke of “heavens” in the plural (Gen. 1:1), while most other ancient cultures spoke of “heaven” in the singular.
Although God is present everywhere, God is also present in a special way in “heaven.” During Jesus’ earthly ministry, the Father is sometimes described as speaking in “a voice from heaven” (Matt. 3:17). Similarly, Jesus instructs us to address our prayers to “Our Father in heaven” (6:9). Even the specific request in the Lord’s Prayer that “your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven” (6:10) reminds us that heaven is a place already under God’s full jurisdiction, where his will is presently being done completely and perfectly. Jesus also warns of the dangers of despising “one of these little ones,” because “their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven” (18:10). Jesus “came down from heaven” (John 6:51) for his earthly ministry, and after his death and resurrection, he ascended back “into heaven,” from where he “will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11).
Given this strong connection between heaven and God’s presence, there is a natural connection in Scripture between heaven and the ultimate hope of believers. Believers are promised a reward in heaven (“Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven” [Matt. 5:12]), and even now believers can “store up for [themselves] treasures in heaven” (6:20). Even in this present life, “our citizenship is in heaven” (Phil. 3:20), and our hope at death is to “depart and be with Christ, which is better by far” (1:23). Since Christ is currently in heaven, deceased believers are already present with Christ in heaven awaiting his return, when “God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him” (1Thess. 4:14).
One of the sons of Noah, listed last in most lists (Gen. 9:18; 10:1) but also listed as the older brother of Shem (Gen. 10:21; or younger [see NIV mg.]). The third son, Ham, is said to be the youngest (Gen. 9:24). Along with his wife, Japheth was one of eight persons saved on Noah’s ark (1Pet. 3:20). After Japheth acted nobly with his brother Shem by covering up his sleeping and naked father, Noah gave a blessing to Japheth, asking God to extend his territory and bless his offspring. His name means “widespread” or “God will enlarge.” Japheth had seven sons, and it is suggested that his descendants settled in eastern Europe and northern Asia (Gen. 10:25).
God begins his creation with light, which precedes the creation of sun, moon, and stars and throughout Scripture is an unqualified good (Gen. 1:35, 15–18; Exod. 10:23; 13:21). In the ancient world, people rarely traveled at night and usually went to bed soon after sunset. The only light in the home was a small oil lamp set on a stand, which burned expensive olive oil. Light is a biblical synonym for life (Job 3:20; John 8:12). Seeing the light means living (Ps. 49:19; see also Job 33:30). Conversely, darkness is often a symbol of adversity, disaster, and death (Job 30:26; Isa. 8:22; Jer. 23:12; Lam. 3:2).
John, who offers perhaps the most profound meditations on light, claims that God is light (1John 1:5). The predicate appropriates the intrinsic beauty of light, a quality that draws people’s hearts back to the author of beauty. For the apostle, light represents truth and signifies God’s will in opposition to the deception of the world (John 1:9; 12:46). Light stands for purity and signifies God’s holiness as opposed to the unrighteousness of the world (John 3:19–21). Light is where God is, and it radiates from the place of fellowship between God and his creation (John 1:7).
The Hebrew word nepilim occurs only in Gen. 6:4; Num. 13:33. Some translations render the word as “giants.” Literally, it means “fallen ones.” Some scholars have considered the Nephilim to be offspring from the unions between the “sons of God” and the “daughters of humans,” but it is also possible that the writer was distinguishing between the Nephilim and the children of those unions who became the “heroes of old” and “men of renown” (Gen. 6:4). Descendants of the Nephilim were purported to have also lived after the flood (Deut. 2:1011, 20–23; Josh. 14:15; 15:13–14; 2Sam. 21:16–22; 1Chron. 20:6–8). Since the entire human race, except for Noah and his family, was destroyed in the deluge, these descendants who lived in Canaan at the time of the exodus most likely descended through Ham, one of Noah’s sons (Gen. 10:8–20).
The eighth descendant listed in the line of Seth and the grandson of Methuselah, Noah was used by God to preserve the human race through the flood. His name means “rest,” chosen because his father, Lamech, believed that God would use his son to bring rest from the toil of life resulting from the fall (Gen. 5:29). Enoch was his great-grandfather, and like him, Noah is described as one who “walked faithfully with God” (Gen. 6:9; cf. 5:22, 24). He was the father of Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
Noah is mentioned two other times in the OT. God cites his promise that the “waters of Noah” never again would destroy the earth to affirm his covenant faithfulness to Israel (Isa. 54:9), and in another text groups Noah together with Job and Daniel as those who could deliver themselves by their righteousness, but not disobedient Israel (Ezek. 14:14, 20). In the NT, Jesus cites the conditions in Noah’s day as being representative of conditions at the time of his coming (Matt. 24:3738; Luke 17:26–27). Peter mentions Noah twice, once to refer to the spirits of those who perished in the flood (1Pet. 3:20) and once to use Noah as an example of God’s ability to deliver his people (2Pet. 2:5). Hebrews 11:7 lists Noah as a hero of faith.
In an agrarian society with an unpredictable climate, such as Israel, rainfall was of the utmost importance. Two rainy periods could be hoped for each year, in February/March and in October/November, and these seasons were critical in producing a good crop. Regular rainfall thus formed a significant part of God’s promise of a good and fruitful land for his people (Lev. 26:4). Solomon’s prayer acknowledges the conditional nature of this promise: rain would be withheld from a sinful nation but would be given to a forgiven and obedient people (1Kings 8:3536).
Rain could also be sent in judgment, most notably in the flood narratives, where God sent rain in order to destroy all living things on the face of the earth (Gen. 7:4), and in the exodus narrative, where rain accompanied hail and thunder in the seventh plague (Exod. 9:23).
Since rain is completely beyond human control, it naturally became a symbol of God’s sovereignty in both blessing and curse. A striking example of this is in 1Kings 17–18, when for three years the rains were withheld, until finally Elijah’s trust in God was vindicated above the prophets of Baal, and the rain followed. The effectiveness of Elijah’s prayers, first for drought and later for rain, is held up in the NT as an example for all believers (James 5:17–18).
An omnivorous member of the crow family, the raven is listed among the unclean birds in Lev. 11:15 because it is a scavenger that feeds on live prey and carrion. Despite this, the raven is used as an example of God’s care for his creation (Job 38:41; Ps. 147:9; Luke 12:24). God uses ravens to bring food to Elijah while he is hiding in the wilderness (1Kings 17:46). A raven is the first bird sent out by Noah at the end of the flood (Gen. 8:6–7). It does not return, presumably because it was able to find its own source of food. As part of God’s vengeance against Edom, ravens and other birds of prey will nest in the city (Isa. 34:11). Together with the vulture, the raven is used as a metaphor for vicious destruction (Prov. 30:17).
The eldest son of Noah (Gen. 9:24; 10:21) and the brother of Ham and Japheth. He and his wife were among the eight survivors of the flood (6:69). He was the father of the Semites, ancestor of the Hebrews (Gen. 11:10–14), and in the lineage of the Messiah (Luke 3:36).
In the OT, heavenly beings or angels are sometimes referred to as “sons of God” (Gen. 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Pss. 82:6; 89:6). The more important background for the NT, however, is the use of the term with reference to the nation Israel and the messianic king from David’s line. Israel was God’s son by virtue of God’s unique calling, deliverance, and protection. Hosea 11:1 reads, “When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.” Similar references to God as the father of his people appear throughout the OT (Exod. 4:22; Num. 11:12; Deut. 14:1; 32:5, 19; Isa. 43:6; 45:11; Jer. 3:4, 19; 31:9, 20; Hos. 2:1). The king from the line of David is referred to as the son of God by virtue of his special relationship to God and his representative role among the people. In the Davidic covenant, God promises David concerning his descendant, “I will be his father, and he will be my son” (2Sam. 7:14; cf. Pss. 2:7; 89:26). Later Judaism appears to have taken up these passages and identified the coming Messiah as the “son of God.”
In the world of the Bible, a person was viewed as a unity of being with the pervading breath and thus imprint of the loving and holy God. The divine-human relationship consequently is portrayed in the Bible as predominantly spiritual in nature. God is spirit, and humankind may communicate with him in the spiritual realm. The ancients believed in an invisible world of spirits that held most, if not all, reasons for natural events and human actions in the visible world.
The OT writers used the common Hebrew word ruakh (“wind” or “breath”) to describe force and even life from the God of the universe. In its most revealing first instance, God’s ruakh hovered above the waters of the uncreated world (Gen. 1:2). In the next chapter of Genesis a companion word, neshamah (“breath”), is used as God breathed into Adam’s nostrils “the breath of life” (2:7). God thus breathed his own image into the first human being. Humankind’s moral obligations in the remainder of the Bible rest on this breathing act of God.
The OT authors often employ ruakh simply to denote air in motion or breath from a person’s mouth. However, special instances of the use of ruakh include references to the very life of a person (Gen. 7:22; Ps. 104:29), an attitude or emotion (Gen. 41:8; Num. 14:24; Ps. 77:3), the negative traits of pride or temper (Ps. 76:12), a generally good disposition (Prov. 11:13; 18:14), the seat of conversion (Ezek. 18:31; 36:26), and determination given by God (2Chron. 36:22; Hag. 1:14).
The NT authors used the Greek term pneuma to convey the concept of spirit. In the world of the NT, the human spirit was understood as the divine part of human reality as distinct from the material realm. The spirit appears conscious and capable of rejoicing (Luke 1:47). Jesus was described by Luke as growing and becoming “strong in spirit” (1:80). In “spirit” Jesus “knew” what certain teachers of the law were thinking in their hearts (Mark 2:8). Likewise, Jesus “was deeply moved in spirit and troubled” at the sickness of a loved one (John 11:33). At the end of his life, Jesus gave up his spirit (John 19:30).
According to Jesus, the spirit is the place of God’s new covenant work of conversion and worship (John 3:5; 4:24). He declared the human spirit’s dependence on God and ascribed great virtue to those people who were “poor in spirit” (Matt. 5:3).
Human beings who were possessed by an evil spirit were devalued in Mediterranean society. In various places in the Synoptic Gospels and the book of Acts, either Jesus or the disciples were involved in exorcisms of such spirits (Matt. 8:2833; Mark 1:21–28; 7:24–30; 9:14–29; 5:1–20; 9:17–29; Luke 8:26–33; 9:37–42; Acts 5:16).
The apostle Paul pointed to the spirit as the seat of conversion (Rom. 7:6; 1Cor. 5:5). He described believers as facing a struggle between flesh and spirit in regard to living a sanctified life (Rom. 8:2–17; Gal. 5:16–17). A contradiction seems apparent in Pauline thinking as he appears to embrace Greek dualistic understanding of body (flesh) and spirit while likewise commanding that “spirit, soul and body be kept blameless” (1Thess. 5:23). However, the Christian struggle between flesh and Spirit (the Holy Spirit) centers around the believer’s body being dead because of sin but the spirit being alive because of the crucified and resurrected Christ (Rom. 8:10). Believers therefore are encouraged to lead a holistic life, lived in the Spirit.
Water is mentioned extensively in the Bible due to its prevalence in creation and its association with life and purity. The cosmic waters of Gen. 1 are held back by the sky (Gen. 1:67; cf. Pss. 104:6, 13; 148:4). God is enthroned on these waters in his cosmic temple (Pss. 29:10; 104:3, 13; cf. Gen. 1:2; Ps. 78:69; Isa. 66:1). These same waters were released in the time of Noah (Gen. 7:10–12; Ps. 104:7–9).
Water is also an agent of life and fertility and is therefore associated with the presence of God. Both God himself and his temple are described as the source of life-giving water (Jer. 2:13; 17:13; Joel 3:18; cf. Isa. 12:2–3). Ezekiel envisions this water flowing from beneath the temple and streaming down into the Dead Sea, where it brings life and fecundity (Ezek. 47:1–12; cf. Zech. 14:8). The book of Revelation, employing the same image, describes “the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb” (22:1). This imagery is also illustrated in archaeological remains associated with temples. Cisterns are attested beneath the Dome of the Rock (presumably the location of the Jerusalem temple) and beneath the Judahite temple at Arad. Other temples, such as the Israelite high place at Tel Dan, are located close to freshwater springs. The Gihon spring in the City of David may also be associated with the Jerusalem temple (Ps. 46:4; cf. Gen. 2:13).
This OT imagery forms the background for Jesus’ teaching regarding eternal life in the writings of the apostle John. Jesus claims to be the source of living water, and he offers it freely to everyone who thirsts (John 4:10–15; 7:37; Rev. 21:6; 22:17; cf. Rev. 7:17). This water, which produces “a spring of water welling up to eternal life” (John 4:14), is the work of the Holy Spirit in the believer (John 7:38–39).
Water is also described in the Bible as an agent of cleansing. It is extensively employed in purification rituals in the OT. In the NT, the ritual of water baptism signifies the purity and new life of the believer (Matt. 3:11, 16; Mark 1:8–10; Luke 3:16; John 1:26, 31–33; 3:23; Acts 1:5; 8:36–39; 10:47; 11:16; 1Pet. 3:20–21; cf. Eph. 5:26; Heb. 10:22).
Finally, the NT also reveals Jesus as the Lord of water. He walks on water (Matt. 14:28–29; John 6:19), turns water into wine (John 2:7–9; 4:46), and controls water creatures (Matt. 17:27; John 21:6). Most important, Jesus commands “the winds and the water, and they obey him” (Luke 8:25; cf. Ps. 29:3).
Direct Matches
Altars were places of sacrifice and worship constructed ofvarious materials. They could be either temporary or permanent. Somealtars were in the open air; others were set apart in a holy place.They could symbolize either God’s presense and protection orfalse worship that would lead to God’s judgment.
OldTestament
Noahand the patriarchs. Thefirst reference in the Bible is to an altar built by Noah after theflood (Gen. 8:20). This action suggests the sanctuary character ofthe mountain on which the ark landed, so that theologically the ark’sresting place was a (partial) return to Eden. The purpose of theextra clean animals loaded onto the ark was revealed (cf. 7:2–3).They were offered up as “burnt offerings,” symbolizingself-dedication to God at this point of new beginning for the humanrace.
Abrambuilt altars “to the Lord” at places where God appearedand spoke to him (Gen. 12:7) and where he encamped (12:8; 13:3–4,18). No sacrifice is explicitly mentioned in association with thesealtars. Thus, they may have had the character of monuments ormemorials of significant events. In association with Abram’saltars, he is said to have “called on the name of the Lord”(12:8)—that is, to pray. The elaborate cultic proceduresassociated with later Israelite altars (e.g., the mediation ofpriests) were absent in the patriarchal period. Succeedinggenerations followed the same practices: Isaac (26:25) and Jacob(33:20; 34:1, 3, 7). God’s test of Abraham involved the demandthat he sacrifice his son Isaac as a burnt offering. In obedience,Abraham built an altar for this purpose, but through God’sintervention a reprieve was granted, and a ram was substituted (22:9,13). Moses erected an altar after the defeat of Amalek at Rephidim,to commemorate this God-given victory (Exod. 17:15–16).
Mosesand the tabernacle.In the context of making the covenant with Israel at Sinai, God gaveMoses instructions on how to construct an altar (Exod. 20:24–26;cf. Josh. 8:31). It could be “an altar of earth” (ofsun-dried mud-brick construction?) or else made of loose naturalstones. The Israelites were expressly forbidden to use hewn stones,perhaps for fear of an idolatrous image being carved (making thisprohibition an application of Exod. 20:4; cf. Deut. 27:5–6).Even if the altar was large, it was not to be supplied with steps forthe priest to ascend, lest his nakedness be shown to God. Therequirement that priests wear undergarments reflects the same concern(Exod. 28:42–43). An altar made of twelve stones, the numberrepresenting the number of the tribes of Israel, was built by Mosesfor the covenant-making ceremony (Exod. 24:4), in which half theblood of the sacrifice was sprinkled on the altar (representing God?)and the other half on the people, the action symbolizing the covenantbond created (24:6–8).
Forthe tabernacle, a portable “altar of burnt offering” wasmade (Exod. 27:1–8; 38:1–7). It had wooden framessheathed in bronze and featured a horn at each corner. There was aledge around the altar halfway up its sides, from which was hungbronze grating, and it had four bronze rings into which poles wereslipped for transport. As part of the cultic ritual, blood wassmeared on the horns (29:12). This altar stood in the open air in thecourtyard of the tabernacle, near the entrance to the tabernacle.Included among the tabernacle furnishings was a smaller “altarof incense,” with molding around the top rim (30:1–10;37:25–28). This altar was, however, overlaid with gold, for itstood closer to God’s ritual presence, inside the tabernacle,“in front of the curtain that shields the Ark of the Covenantlaw,” the curtain that separated the most holy place from theholy place. The high priest placed fragrant incense on this altarevery morning and evening. The fact that this was a daily procedureand the description of the positioning of the tabernacle furnishingsin Exod. 40:26–28 (mentioning the altar of incense afterspeaking about the lampstand) might be taken as implying that theincense altar was in the holy place, but 1 Kings 6:22 and Heb.9:4 suggest that it was actually in the most holy place, near theark.
God,through Moses, instructed the people that on entering the PromisedLand they were to destroy all Canaanite altars along with the otherparaphernalia of their pagan worship (Deut. 7:5; 12:3). Bronze Agealtars discovered at Megiddo include horned limestone incense altarsand a large circular altar mounted by a flight of steps. In Josh. 22the crisis caused by the building of “an imposing altar”by the Transjordanian tribes was averted when these tribes explainedto the rest of the Israelites that it was intended as a replica ofthe altar outside the tabernacle and not for the offering ofsacrifices. The worship of all Israel at the one sanctuary bothexpressed and protected the religious unity and purity of the nationat this vital early stage of occupation of the land. In laternarratives, however, Gideon (Judg. 6), Samuel (1 Sam. 7:17),Saul (1 Sam. 14:35), and David (2 Sam. 24) are said tobuild altars for sacrifice and to have done so with impunity, and infact with the apparent approval of the biblical author. Theestablished custom of seeking sanctuary from threat of death in thenation’s shrine is reflected in 1 Kings 1:50–53;2:28–35, where Adonijah and Joab are described as “clingingto the horns of the altar.”
Solomon’stemple and rival worship centers.In the temple built by Solomon, the altar of incense that belonged tothe “inner sanctuary” was overlaid with gold (1 Kings6:20, 22). Solomon’s prayer at the dedication of the temple wasmade before the bronze altar in the courtyard (1 Kings 8:22,54). The altar for sacrifices was much larger than the one that hadbeen in the tabernacle (1 Chron. 4:1 gives its dimensions).
Althoughmany of the psalms may originally have been used in worship in thefirst temple, there are surprisingly few references to the altar inthe Psalter (only Pss. 26:6; 43:4; 51:19; 84:3; 118:27). They expressthe psalmist’s devotion to God and the temple as the placewhere God’s presence is enjoyed as the highest blessing.
Afterthe division of the kingdom, Jeroboam offered sacrifices at the rivalaltar that he set up in Bethel (1 Kings 12:32–33). Anunnamed “man of God” (= prophet) predicted Josiah’sdesecration of this altar, which lay many years in the future(1 Kings 13:1–5). Amos and Hosea, who prophesied in thenorthern kingdom of the eighth century BC, condemned this and theother altars in that kingdom (e.g., Amos 3:14; Hos. 8:11–13).Ahab set up an altar to Baal in Samaria (1 Kings 16:32), and thesuppression of Yahwism by Jezebel included the throwing down of theLord’s altars in Israel (19:10, 14). The competition on MountCarmel between Elijah and the prophets of Baal involved rival altars(1 Kings 18), and Elijah’s twelve-stone altar recalls thatof Exod. 24, for he was calling the nation back to the exclusivemonotheism preached by Moses (1 Kings 18:30–32).
Withregard to the southern kingdom, the spiritual declension in the timeof Ahaz manifested itself in this king making an altar modeled on theAssyrian prototype that he had seen on a visit to Damascus (2 Kings16:10–14). He shifted the Lord’s altar from in front ofthe temple, where it had previously stood. Godly Hezekiah’sreligious reform included the removal of the altars at the highplaces that up to that time had been centers of deviant worship(2 Kings 18:4, 22). The apostasy of King Manasseh showed itselfin his rebuilding the high places that Hezekiah his father haddestroyed and in erecting altars to Baal (2 Kings 21), thusrepeating the sin of Ahab (cf. 1 Kings 16:32). Josiah’sreform included the destruction of all altars outside Jerusalem(2 Kings 23) and the centralizing of worship in the Jerusalemtemple.
InEzekiel’s vision of the new temple of the future, thesacrificial altar is its centerpiece (Ezek. 43:13–17). Thealtar was to be a large structure, with three-stepped stages and ahorn on each corner, and it was to be fitted with steps on itseastern side for the use of the priests.
Thesecond temple.The Israelites’ return from Babylonian exile was with theexpress aim of rebuilding the temple. The first thing that thepriests did was to build “the altar on its foundation”(i.e., its original base; Ezra 3:2–3). The returnees placed thealtar on the precise spot that it had occupied before the Babyloniansdestroyed it along with the temple. They took such care because theywanted to ensure that God would accept their sacrifices and so grantthem protection. At the very end of the OT period, the prophetMalachi condemned the insincerity of Israel’s worship that wasmanifested in substandard sacrifices being offered on God’saltar (Mal. 1:7, 10; 2:13).
NewTestament
Inthe NT, the altar is mentioned in a number of Jesus’ sayings(e.g., Matt. 5:23–24; 23:18–20). In the theology of thebook of Hebrews, which teaches about the priesthood of Jesus Christ(in the order of Melchizedek), the role of the priest is defined asone who “serve[s] at the altar” (7:13), and Christ’saltar (and that of Christ’s followers) is the cross on which heoffered himself as a sacrifice for sin (13:10). Another argument ofHebrews is that since on the most important day in the Jewish ritualcalendar (the Day of Atonement), the flesh of the sacrifice was noteaten (see Lev. 16:27), the eating of Jewish ceremonial foods is notrequired, nor is it of any spiritual value. The altar in the heavenlysanctuary is mentioned a number of times in the book of Revelation(6:9; 8:3, 5; 9:13; 11:1; 14:18; 16:7). It is most likely the altarof incense and is related to the prayers of God’s persecutedpeople, which are answered by the judgments of God upon the people ofthe earth.
Ararat refers to a mountainous region in eastern Asia Minor.The LXX uses “Armenia” for Ararat (except at Isa. 37:38),implying the modern country of Armenia or eastern Turkey (Kurdistan),two hundred miles southeast of the Black Sea around Lake Van (cf.Josephus, Ant. 1.3).
Asearly as the thirteenth century BC, Assyrian texts call this area“Urartu” (inscription of Shalmaneser I). As akingdom, Urartu reached its peak of power in the eighth century. Thesame location occurs in 2 Kings 19:37 (cf. Isa. 37:38). Thesetexts show that Ararat could be the enemy not only of Assyria(2 Kings 19:37) but also of Babylon (Jer. 51:27). Along with thekingdoms of Minni and Ashkenaz, Ararat is summoned by God to fightagainst Babylon and vindicate Zion. In God’s hands such nationsare instruments, and God’s supremacy will be preserved.
Thebest-known reference to Ararat is as the location where Noah’sark comes to rest after the flood. Genesis 8:4 actually speaks of the“mountains of Ararat,” not one particular mountain. InGen. 8:2–14 the perspective is of the rain stopping and thefloodwaters slowly receding in an extended process during which theark is deposited on the Ararat mountain range. Tradition has favoredAgri Dag, an extinct volcano rising 16,916 feet on the northeasternborder of Turkey, as a viable site for Ararat. See also Armenia.
God announced to Noah that he was going to destroy all theinhabitants of the earth and commanded him to build an “ark”(Heb. tebah; Gen. 6:14–16). Apart from the Genesis floodnarrative, Exod. 2:3–5 is the only other passage in the Biblewhere this word is used, there for the ark of bulrushes in which theinfant Moses was placed. Both arks were made waterproof by a coatingof pitch (tar). An ark is something built to save people fromdrowning. It is not the name of a kind of boat as such (e.g., yacht),but rather a geometric boxlike shape. The ark was without rudder,sail, or any navigational aid.
Noahwas told to make it of “gopher wood” (Heb. goper), whichthe early Jewish Aramaic translations (Targumim) identified as cedar(NIV, NRSV, NET: “cypress wood”). The Hebrew word goperoccurs only here in the Bible, but the Akkadian equivalent (kupru) isfound at a similar point in the Epic of Gilgamesh. It was, then, theright kind of wood for a boat. The ark was to have “rooms”—thatis, cubicles (lit., “nests”)—for the differentanimals to be housed in and kept apart from other animals.
Afterthe general description of the ark (Gen. 6:14), details were providedby God on how to build it (6:15). Its length (300 cubits), width (50cubits), and height (30 cubits) were specified. “Cubit”literally means “forearm” (the distance from elbow to tipof middle finger), so the ark was approximately 450 feet (140 meters)long, 75 feet (23 meters) wide, and 45 feet (13.5 meters) high (seeNIV mg.). We cannot be exactly sure if “roof” (6:16) isthe correct translation of the Hebrew word tsohar, which may refer toa hatchway or skylight (Vulg.: fenestra [“window”]; notethe NIV 1984 mg.: “Make an opening for light”). Anotherpossibility is “pitched roof.” The usual Hebrew word,gag, is not used because that refers to a flat roof (see Josh. 2:6,8; 2 Sam. 11:2). The instruction to “finish it to a cubitabove” (RSV) refers to the pitch of the roof or its overhang.The “window” (Heb. khallon) that Noah opens in Gen. 8:6is probably to be equated with this skylight in the roof, not awindow in the side (since Noah cannot see out). In Gen. 8:13 Noahremoves the “covering” (Heb. mikseh) from the ark, so asto see the surface of the earth. (Gen. 5:1-32; Gen. 6:1-22; Gen7:1-24; Gen. 8:1-22).
Theark was to have a door in its side, which was closed by God (Gen.6:16; 7:16). The structure was also to have three decks, whichsuggests that the ark was viewed as a microcosmos, with its threelevels matching sky, earth, and sea. Genesis 6:17 explains why an arkis needed. The destruction will be by means of water, and the arkwill carry Noah and his family (eight persons), as well as at leastone pair of every living creature. The NT refers to Noah’sconstruction of the ark (Heb. 11:7; 1 Pet. 3:20) and hisentering it (Matt. 24:38; Luke 17:27).
Over 350 species of birds have been recorded in the land ofmodern-day Israel. The OT employs thirty-five different words forbirds (both wild and domestic), but the identification of these wordswith known species has proved to be very difficult. Like other wordsfor animals, terminology for birds often is employed in personalnames (e.g., Jonah, Oreb, Zippor, Zipporah). There is significantevidence for fowling practices in ancient Israel, usually by means ofnets and snares (Pss. 124:7; 140:5; Prov. 6:5; 7:23; Lam. 3:52; Hos.7:12; Amos 3:5). Small birds and chickens are occasionally evendepicted on Iron Age II (1000–586 BC) seals and vesselsfrom sites such as el-Jib (Gibeon) and Tell en-Nasbeh (Mizpah).
Likeother animals in the Bible, birds are depicted as agents of God.Divine agency is especially evident in instances such as the ravensfeeding Elijah (1 Kings 17:4–6) and the dove bringing anolive leaf to Noah (Gen. 8:11). The Bible also employs bird-relatedimagery such as in descriptions of divine judgment (Prov. 30:17; Jer.12:9). Birds may also serve as ominous signs of impending judgment(Hos. 8:1). God’s “wings” can offer both healing(Mal. 4:2 KJV, RSV) and protection (Ruth 2:12; Pss. 17:8; 36:7; 57:1;61:4; 63:7; 91:4). The metaphor of the soul or spirit as a bird isreferenced in the description of the Holy Spirit descending like adove (Matt. 3:16; Mark 1:10; Luke 3:22; John 1:32). The observationthat birds “do not sow or reap” is employed as an imageof worry-free living (Luke 12:24; cf. Job 38:41; Ps. 147:9). Jesus’reference to “when the rooster crows” (Mark 13:35) is notstrictly literal but rather refers to a watch of the night: thequarter of the night after midnight.
Theprominence of sacrificial birds (especially doves and pigeons) inritual literature indicates that they were likely raised for suchpurposes in ancient Israel. All birds could be eaten except thoselisted as unclean in Lev. 11:13–19 (twenty species) and Deut.14:12–18 (twenty-one species). Generally speaking, birds ofprey and those that feed on carrion or fish were considered unclean.Birds often served as food for the poor (Matt. 10:29–31; Luke12:6–7). Poor people could offer birds as a substitute forexpensive livestock (Lev. 5:7; 12:8; 14:21–22; cf. Luke 2:24),while the poorest of the poor were permitted to bring grain (Lev.5:11). Finally, in one purgation ritual a live bird is used to carryaway impurities (Lev. 14:52–53; cf. 16:22).
A tarlike substance used as mortar for setting bricks, as inGen. 11:3 (NIV: “tar”) with the building of a ziggurat.It was also used, along with pitch, as a waterproofing agent forNoah’s ark (Gen. 6:14) and for the reed basket in which Moseswas placed as an infant (Exod. 2:3).
In the OT, the Hebrew words ruakh (“breath, spirit”)and neshamah (“blast, spirit”) are the standard terms,even collectively translated “wind.” Constructively,these terms reflect the vibrant relationship between God andhumankind. However, God’s “breath” can also be anagent of judgment. So “breath/wind” is the invasive powerof God—proof of his supremacy—capable of disruption ortransformation of human life.
Itis in human creation that God’s breath is given one of its mostdynamic illustrations. Formed of “dust” (’apar),the human being must be enlivened by the Creator’s breath. Inthe OT, human flesh remains dormant and helplessly passive until Godbreathes; then a living human being (nepesh) is animated (Gen. 2:7;6:17; cf. Pss. 33:6; 104:29). “Soul” (nepesh) must bethought of in a holistic way in the OT, not as part of a dualism:“Praise the Lord, my soul; all my inmost being, praise his holyname” (Ps. 103:1). For human existence, “breath” isGod’s gracious gift that mortals cannot “possess.”Reflecting on this, the psalmist writes, “When you take awaytheir breath, they die and return to the dust” (Ps. 104:29; cf.Gen. 7:22). Theologically, Israel understood that life is utterlydependent on God; the “self” has no permanent propertiesof its own.
“Breath/wind”is also a powerful force in God’s anger, when a “blast ofbreath from his nostrils” can undo and destroy (2 Sam.22:16). Similarly, a “strong east wind” rolls back theRed Sea for the Israelites’ crossing (Exod. 14:21), but thevery same force is the undoing of Pharaoh’s army, which wasdestroyed as God, Israel’s warrior, “blew” with his“breath” (Exod. 15:10). Whether in the aimless waters ofcreation (Gen. 1:2; 8:1) or the mighty waters of “un-creation”(Exod. 15:10), the same cosmic might of God’s ruakh is evident.
Notsurprisingly, themes combining breath, wind, and spirit are also usedto describe new creation (Ezek. 37:9). The life-generating force ofthe ruakh/spirit emerges in the NT as the Holy Spirit, manifested inwind, a breath, or Spirit (Gk. pneuma). At Pentecost “a violentwind came from heaven,” enacting another creation (Acts 2:2).John clearly symbolizes Jesus’ “breathing” on thedisciples (John 20:22). Not only does this illustrate John’stheology of being born “from above” (3:3 NRSV), but also“he breathed” reenacts the enlivening of Gen. 2:7. Thetwo creations are connected: God’s enlivening in Gen. 2:7 andJesus’ creation of eternal life following his own resurrection.
The Hebrew expression “sons of God” (often translated as “children of God” in contemporary usage) is an important biblical concept and is used to describe a range of referents.
In the OT, the term is used to refer to angels (e.g., Job 1:6). They are subordinate divine beings, carrying out God’s mission on earth (Job 2:1). Compared to them, Yahweh’s incomparability is asserted in divine council (Ps. 89:6; cf. Deut. 32:8 NIV mg.). They are called upon to praise Yahweh for his creation (Ps. 29:1). They shout for joy at God’s creation (Job 38:7). In Gen. 6:2 the term refers to beings that are apparently of divine origin and to be contrasted with the “daughters of men” in that same passage. The sin mentioned in this passage refers to the cohabitation of divine beings and humans. This union is one of the impetuses for the flood, an indication of how bad things had gotten. The “order” of creation (Gen. 1), where humans are meant to be fruitful with their own kind, is here transgressed. Hence, God introduces further disorder by bringing back the waters of chaos to flood the earth.
Israel as a covenant nation is called “my son, my firstborn” by Yahweh (Exod. 4:22; Jer. 31:9; Hos. 11:1). As son, Israel is expected to give proper reverence and honor for his father (Mal. 1:6). Although only one of many metaphors for Israel in the OT, Israel’s status as son is important for understanding the movement of the book of Exodus. Israel is to be delivered from Egyptian rule because Israel is God’s son. If Pharaoh continues to mistreat Israel, God will call judgment upon Egypt’s firstborn, as he did in the plague of death and the Red Sea incident.
Sonship is not exclusive to Israel. The Gentiles are also included in the future of God’s program (Isa. 19:25; Zech. 14:16). Likewise, in the NT all humans are God’s children (Eph. 4:6). More often, though, the term refers to those who are in Christ. The bond is spiritual, and often the concept of adoption is used (John 1:12; Rom. 9:6; Gal. 3:26; 4:5–7; 1 John 5:1). See also Sons of God
Covenant is one of the most significant concepts in thebiblical material that affects our understanding of God, hisrelationship with his people (past, present, and future), and thestructure and message of his word. Since the covenant concept is nota unique biblical idea, comparative literature from the world of theScriptures has enriched our understanding of the nature and thefunction of covenant. This article highlights the covenant conceptand the genre of covenant and provides a brief overview of the majorbiblical covenants.
Terminology
Defining“covenant.”What is a covenant (Heb. berit)? Most dictionaries refer to it as apact/compact or an agreement. Although there is some uncertaintyregarding the etymology of berit, the two most commonly suggestedetymological derivations are from the Akkadian burru, which refers tothe establishment of a legal situation by a testimony with an oath,or the Akkadian bittu, often translated as “to bind, fetter.”The NT counterpart word is diathēkē, defined as a “legaldisposition of personal goods.” Interestingly, this NT term isused in reference to the initiative of one person who establishes theterms and provisions of the relationship, which is in keeping withunilateral OT covenants. Some OT dictionaries list the “covenant”root with the root for the word “to eat,” perhapsassociating the covenant with a covenant meal.
Ifthe concept of binding best represents the covenant terminology, thenthe covenant is something that binds parties together or obligatesone party to the other. Although there are legal implicationsassociated with covenant, the relational aspect of covenant shouldnot be overlooked. A covenant is best understood as a relationshipwith related legalities. Marriage, for example, is a covenant thatestablishes and defines a relationship. This perhaps explains why Godchose from the realm of relationships among humans the covenantmetaphor to establish and communicate his intent in divine-humanrelationships. The concept of a covenant relationship between God andpeople is uniquely developed in the biblical material.
Somecovenants are between persons of equal status (parity treaties);others are between a master and a servant (suzerainty treaties),between nations, between clans, and between a husband and a wife(Mal. 2:14). To “cut a covenant” at any level of societyimplies a solemn commitment to a relationship. Hittite treatiesillustrate reports of covenant commitments that include a record ofnegotiations, formulations of terms, a statement that the act ofcovenant making actually happened, and a closure of negotiations withsolemn ratification of the terms.
Themost significant covenant relationship in the biblical material isthe one between God and humankind. The uniqueness of Israel’scovenant relationship with Yahweh in contrast to all surroundingnations is established on the basis of Deut. 32:8–9. AlthoughYahweh gave the nations their inheritance, he selected Israel for hisown personal care; he established a relationship with the nationindependent of and prior to the nation’s association with hisland. This was a unique application of the covenant that ran counterto the prevailing Semitic mind-set, which connected deities tospecific geographic territories first and was concerned with theinhabitants of those areas only in a secondary sense. Individual OTbelievers celebrated their relationship with Yahweh and proclaimedhim as the unrivaled universal God (Exod. 15; 1 Sam. 2; Isa.40).
Otherkey terms.In addition to the “covenant” terminology word group,several other key terms fill out our understanding of this importantconcept.
“Oath”is a term used synonymously with “covenant” and functionsat times to describe the making of a covenant. The oath emphasizesthe liability and obligation associated in the relationship (Deut.29:19). The oath can be taken by both parties (Gen. 26:28) or by justone party (Ezek. 17:13).
Theword “testimony” refers to the contents of the twotablets of stone (Exod. 31:18) received by Moses from God at MountSinai. The Ark of the Covenant is also identified by the phrase “arkof the testimony” (Exod. 26:34; 30:6; 31:7 KJV, ESV). Testimonyin the context of the covenant refers to the obligations placed uponthe nation in covenant with Yahweh.
Theterm “word” can be understood in connection with covenantcommunication. The conquest of the land (a covenant promise) isviewed as a performance of the word of God (Deut. 9:5 KJV). Thephrases “establish his covenant” (Deut. 8:18 KJV) and“perform his word” (Deut. 9:5 KJV) are parallel ideaswithin the overall concept of covenant. The sure “word of theLord” to David in 2 Sam. 7:4 can be contrasted withworthless words of the nation used in making a covenant with God(Hos. 10:4).
Torahis a Hebrew term related to covenant. The terms berit and torah arefound in parallel structure in Ps. 78:10. The binding arrangementbetween God and his people is ultimately based upon and regulated bythe instructions of his word. The phrase “Book of the Law”(2 Kings 22:8) has the same covenant implications as the phrase“tablets of the Testimony” (Exod. 31:18 ESV, NASB). Godindicted the priesthood for misguiding the people and causing them tostumble at the law (Mal. 2:5–8) and ultimately to be misguidedin their relationship with him.
Khesedis another Hebrew term that is frequently used with relation to acovenant. Defined as “steadfast covenant loyalty,” it isalso understood as grace, mercy, kindness, loving-kindness. Khesed isthat characteristic of God which causes him to act consistently andfaithfully regarding self-imposed obligations in covenantrelationships despite the failure or success of the other party. Thekhesed of God will never cease (Lam. 3:19–21) because he keepscovenant and mercy (Deut. 7:9, 12). The loyalty of God to David isstated in 2 Sam. 7:14–15 and celebrated in Ps. 89:14, 24,28, 33–34, 49. In contrast, the people are indicted for theirlack of loyalty (Hos. 4:1).
Commonphrases. Themost common covenant-making phrase is “to cut a covenant.”Two possible practices lie behind this phrase. The first reflects apractice in Mesopotamia and Syria, cutting a covenant into a tabletwith a stylus. This may be somewhat similar to what is found in Exod.31:18, where it is said that the two tablets of stone were “inscribedby the finger of God.” The second practice behind this phraseis the cutting of sacrificial animals. The halving of animals waspart of the covenant made with Abraham in Gen. 15:9–18. In asituation of covenant violation God tells Israel that he will treatthem like the calf they cut in covenant making (Jer. 34:17–19).Covenant making is also described as establishing a covenant (2 Sam.23:5), giving a covenant (Gen. 9:12), and erecting a covenant (Exod.6:4).
Faithfulnessand loyalty to a covenant are expressed by several phrases. “Keepa covenant” exhorts the covenant parties to watch, guard,exercise faithfulness to the terms of the relationship established(Exod. 34:7). “Observe a covenant” implies thedemonstration of covenant fidelity in observing and doing (Gen.17:9–10; Exod. 19:5; NIV: “keep my covenant”). Godis obviously faithful in observing the covenant (Deut. 7:9–12).“Remember a covenant” conveys more than just a mentalexercise, especially when God is the subject of the verbal action ofremembering. When God remembers a covenant, he acts with resolve andintervention (Gen. 8:1; 19:29; 30:22; Exod. 2:24).
Covenantinfidelity is expressed by the phrases “break the covenant”(Lev. 26:14–16; Jer. 11:10; 31:32; 33:20–21), “notfaithful” (Ps. 78:37), “violate the covenant”(Deut. 17:2; Josh. 7:11, 15; 23:16), and “forsake the covenant”(Jer. 22:9; cf. Deut. 29:25; 1 Kings 19:10, 14).
TheCovenant Genre
Wenow turn to the form, content, and function of a covenant, or thecovenant genre. There is evidence of a common treaty form used byancient Near Eastern peoples to govern relationships between nationsand tribes. This evidence dates back to the third millennium BC andis derived from literary texts discovered in the ancient Near East.The most helpful contributions to this discussion come from theHittites (1400–1200 BC), the Assyrians (800–600 BC), andthe Babylonians. From this evidence, we are able to identify fourancient Near Eastern arrangements.
1. Theintertribal treaty was a legal arrangement between tribes and clansfor various purposes such as the purchase of land, trading, orpeaceful coexistence. The arrangements made in this format wereequally binding on both parties. A possible biblical example is thearrangement between Abraham and Abimelek in Gen. 21:22–34 orthe arrangement between Abimelek and Isaac in Gen. 26:28.
2.The parity treaty was an arrangement made between kings and princeswho were equal in each other’s eyes. This arrangement involvedmutual participation, as illustrated in the economic relationshipestablished between King Solomon and King Hiram of Tyre in 1 Kings5:1–12.
3.The suzerainty treaty was established between two parties, oneinferior and one superior. The distinctive emphasis of the treaty wason the superior party, the suzerain. In this arrangement the suzerainagrees to make certain provisions for the vassal. He agrees to defendthe vassal in the case of attack, along with permitting the existenceof the vassal nation. In addition, the suzerain has the right to taketribute from the vassal at any time. The vassal, for his part, agreesto a position of servanthood but not slavery. Vassals honor thesuzerain with tribute and material goods.
Thereare six basic parts to the format of this treaty. Many scholarsbelieve that the suzerainty treaty form has influenced the structureof the book of Deuteronomy.
(a) Thetreaty begins with the preamble that identifies the treaty’sauthor/originator (cf. Deut. 1:1–6a; 5:6a, 23–27).
(b) Thesecond part is the prologue, which contains a review of the pastrelationship between the vassal and the suzerain constructed in an“I-Thou” format (cf. Deut. 1:6b–3:29; 2:7;4:32–38). The purpose of this section is to review the previousacts of benevolence demonstrated by the suzerain toward the vassal.The faithfulness of the suzerain to the vassal would perhaps instillsome measure of confidence for entrance into this relationship. InHittite treaties there was often a grace ethic ideology thatcharacterized the prologue and served as a basis of appeal forobedience. The Hittites demonstrated a measure of appreciation forconquered vassals and treated them with dignity by allowing themlimited sovereignty. The Assyrians operated with a power ethic thatmotivated obedience by threatening dismemberment, torture, and evendeath. Yahweh appealed to Israel on the basis of the grace ofredemption (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15) and theprivilege of revelation (Deut. 4:12; cf. Rom. 3:2).
(c) Thestipulations are the third part of the treaty form. These are theexpectations of the suzerain for the vassal (cf. Deut. 4:1–23;6:4–7:2; 10:12–22; 12–26). The stipulations callfor the vassal to be loyal in war, to loyally return politicalrefugees, and to not murmur against the suzerain and his kingdom. Theheart of the stipulation in Deuteronomy is the appeal to “lovethe Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and withall your strength” (6:5), one of the most important verses ofthe OT.
(d) Thedeposit and public reading of the treaty is the next division. Thissection instructs the vassal to place the treaty in his sanctuary anddirects the vassal to publicly read the document from one to fourtimes per year (cf. Deut. 10:1–5; 31:9–13). A regularreading was designed to keep the stipulations before the vassal inorder to nurture respect for the suzerain.
(e) Inthe next part, a list of witnesses, usually gods, are called upon toobserve the covenant and to punish any breach of it (cf. Deut.30:19–20).
(f) Thefinal part of the treaty is a section of blessing and curse. Thissection contains a list of potential rewards for faithfulness andterrifying possibilities of retribution for covenant violations (cf.Deut. 28–29).
4.The royal grant treaty, used in both biblical and secular literature,is somewhat similar to the suzerainty treaty. The distinctivedifference is that the obligation of the grant is not on the vassalbut rather on the suzerain to protect the rights of the vassal. Inthis format the curse is directed against any third party that wouldoppose the vassal or against the suzerain who would act unfaithfullyagainst the vassal.
Covenantsin the Bible
Typesof covenants. Thematerial on covenant form, content, and structure comes into playwhen attempts are made to interpret the major covenants recorded inthe Bible (Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, and new). Initialdiscussions usually revolve around whether these covenants areconditional or unconditional. Although there is merit to thisdiscussion, covenants should also be understood in light of whichparty is bearing the treaty obligation. As described above, theobligation of the suzerainty treaty is upon the vassal to fulfill theexpectations of the suzerain. In the grant treaty the obligation isplaced upon the suzerain to fulfill the treaty promises made to thevassal. There is a sense of conditionality and unconditionality inboth treaty forms.
Onthis basis, the Mosaic covenant is most fittingly understood in lightof the suzerainty treaty. This covenant made at Mount Sinaiestablished Israel as a covenant nation. Yahweh never intended tocreate a relationship with Israel on the basis of this covenant.Rather, he chose this covenant form as the means to regulate hisrelationship with Israel, the nation that he had just graciouslyredeemed. The Mosaic covenant addressed every aspect of Israelitelife. so that the prophetic charges against the nation’stransgressions were considered covenant violations.
TheAbrahamic and Davidic covenants are more like a grant. In theAbrahamic covenant Yahweh is obligating himself to gift Israel withland, seed, and blessing (Gen. 12–17). The halving of animalsin Gen. 15:9–20 resembles a covenant-cutting ceremony in whichYahweh, in the form of a smoking firepot, walks between the animals,obligating himself to the terms of the covenant. In the Davidiccovenant (2 Sam. 7; Ps. 89), Yahweh obligates himself to provideDavid and his descendants a king and a kingdom. The new covenant isfirst referenced by Moses in Deut. 30:6 and then developed moreextensively in Jer. 31:31–33 and Ezek. 36. Scholars debate thenature of this covenant and the promises associated with it. Somedefine it as a grant and speak of it in unconditional terms, whileothers view it as an administrative covenant. The new covenantanticipates a change in the heart of the vassal that ultimatelyfacilitates keeping of the law. The OT Scriptures see this happeningin connection with Israel’s occupation of the land at a futuretime.
Covenantleadership positions. Inaddition to the very specific covenant arrangements made by God inthe OT defining and regulating the life and future of Israel, Godestablished three key covenant leadership positions for the nation:prophet, priest, and king (Deut. 17–18). Their connection withthe covenant is evident from the fact that their origin and functionare detailed in the covenant book of Deuteronomy.
Godprovided a prophet (Deut. 18:9–22) for the nation so that itwould not learn the abominations of the Canaanites and surroundingnations. God desired spiritual integrity for his people andestablished the prophet as his mouthpiece to speak what he commanded(Deut. 18:18–20). The prophet was to be an Israelite who fit aMoses-like pattern (Deut. 18:18–19). The writing and nonwritingprophets often called Israel back to covenant fidelity. They did thisby using legal terminology to illustrate covenant violations, thusestablishing covenant lawsuits against them. Isaiah 1 is a case madeby God against the nation. In this lawsuit God functions as judge,jury, and lawyer.
Thepriest (Deut. 17:8–13; 18:1–8; 33:8–11) had athreefold function within the covenant community. He was a mediatorof people before God and of God before people. This particularfunction of the priesthood was broad and encompassed much of itswork. The priest was a teacher who sought from the Torah resolutionto disagreements between parties (cf. Jer. 18:18). It is also worthnoting that the teaching of the priest preceded sacrifice. Finally,he was a minister of sacrifice. The priest led Israel in worship andsacrifice, giving instruction concerning what was clean and unclean(Lev. 13–15).
Theking was also a provision of the covenant (Deut. 17). Kingship wasnot a divine accommodation to the desire of Israel (1 Sam. 8)but rather a part of the overall covenant plan of God revealed toAbraham (Gen. 17:16). The promise of kingship was reiterated in Gen.35:11; 49:10. The duty of the king involved administration of thekingdom on the basis of the word of God (Deut. 17:18–20; cf.Prov. 29:4, 14).
Covenantin the Old Testament.Covenant is a dominant theme that gives cohesiveness to the structureof the OT and distinguishes the history of Israel. The phrase“covenant history” can be used to describe the biblicalliterature that recounts the events and episodes of Israelite life.It is a macrogenre that characterizes the historical narratives ofthe OT. Although this large literary corpus of historical narrativeshares a covenant perspective, the individual books within thenarrative corpus are noted for the attention they give to variousaspects of the covenant relationship. For example, Gen. 12–50develops the covenant promises of seed and blessing through a numberof subgenres such as genealogies and family stories. Joshua, on theother hand, engages several military subgenres to recount the tensionbetween the promise of land occupation and the responsibility ofIsrael to occupy the land. Covenant history is a realisticpresentation of the tensions associated with the covenantrelationship between Yahweh and the nation of Israel.
Finally,the psalms have a direct covenant connection emphasizing covenantworship. Psalm 119 (esp. vv. 57–64) is filled with covenantterms that relate to God’s word (testimonies, laws, oath,judgments). Marching to the place of worship designated by thecovenant is reflected in the Psalms of Ascent.
Covenantin the New Testament. Althoughthe covenant theme is less pervasive in the NT, its christologicalsignificance is profound. The NT highlights the significant messianicrole of Christ in relation to the covenants. Paul references the newcovenant in both books of Corinthians (1 Cor. 11:25; 2 Cor.3:6). Each celebration of the Lord’s Supper reminds us that theshed blood of Christ is the blood of the new covenant. The newcovenant is cut in connection with or on the basis of his death,burial, and resurrection (1 Cor. 11:25). The writer of the bookof Hebrews gives detailed attention to how the new covenant functionsin contrast to the old Mosaic covenant. The writer explains thatJesus is the guarantor of a better covenant (7:22; 8:6–7).Finally, Paul indicates that we are now considered ministers of thenew covenant ministry (2 Cor. 3:6).
Geography
Whereasthe principal direction in the modern world is north, in the ancientworld different cultures used a variety of orientations as theysought to describe their relationship to their geographicalenvironment. In Israel the primary direction was determined by thesunrise: east. This is reflected in Hebrew, where the main word usedto refer to east as a direction was qedem, which could also be usedto simply refer to that which was directly ahead or in front of thespeaker (e.g., Ps. 139:5). Elsewhere, east is designated by the termsmizrakh (“rising” [Josh. 11:3]) or mizrakh hashamesh(“rising of the sun” [Num. 21:11]), both of which derivefrom the direction of sunrise. By way of contrast, in Egypt theprimary direction was south, in alignment with the source of the NileRiver.
Theancient world employed the same notion of four cardinal directions,which persists to the present, and the terminology related to thesewas influenced by the choice of primary direction. Thus, in Israelnorth is often designated by “left”; south could bedesignated by “right,” and west by “behind.”In addition, directions could be specified by reference togeographical features found in those directions. North could bespecified by the word tsapon, which was derived from the name of anorthern Syrian mountain (Zaphon); south by negeb, a name for theregion south of Israel (Negev); and west by yam (“sea”),since the Mediterranean Sea lay to the west.
Symbolism
Asidefrom their purely geographical significance, the directions also cameto bear figurative significance. Some caution is warranted inassigning symbolic significance to language, for there is danger ofreading invalid meanings into texts. Furthermore, given the ambiguityinherent in the use of terms to refer to directions, which also havealternate significances, there is danger of assigning a symbolicmeaning to the direction that actually resides in the alternate. So,for example, while yam (“sea”) carries significantsymbolic overtones in the Bible, this association does not appear tohave been extended to encompass the term when used to designate awesterly direction.
Eastand west.Nonetheless, there is, for example, probably some significance in theexpulsion from Eden and progressive movement eastward to the tower ofBabel through Gen. 1–11, followed by a return to the promisedland, which was approached by reversing the easterly migration andreturning toward Eden. Eden itself was said to lie “in theeast” (Heb. miqqedem; Gen. 2:8), although the same Hebrewexpression in Pss. 74:12; 77:5, 11; 78:2; 143:5 means “inancient times,” and there is perhaps a deliberate ambiguity inthe use of the expression in Gen. 2:8. In Isa. 2:6 the east is thesource of influences on the people that lead them astray. Followingthe exile, Ezekiel sees the glory of God returning to the temple fromthe east (Ezek. 43:1–2). Thus, when used symbolically, “east”is often viewed negatively or else may be used to mark a connectionwith distant antiquity (Gen. 2:8; Job 1:3). Any symbolic significanceassigned to west appears primarily to be associated with it being theantithesis of east. The distance between east and west was usedpoetically to express vast distance (Ps. 103:12).
Northand south.North is significant for two primary reasons. First, it is thedirection from which invading armies most often descended upon Israel(Jer. 1:13) as well as from which Babylon’s destruction is saidto come (Jer. 50:3). In light of this, Ezekiel’s vision of Godapproaching from the north strikes an ominous tone of impendingjudgment (Ezek. 1:1–4). Second, in Canaanite mythology theabode of the gods, and specifically Baal, lay to the north, on MountZaphon. Thus, the king of Babylon’s plans in Isa. 14:13 amountto a claim to establish himself as one of the gods. In contrast tothis, Ps. 48:2 pre-sents Mount Zion as supplanting Mount Zaphon andthus implicitly presents Israel’s one God as supplanting theCanaanite pantheon.
Aswith west, there is little symbolic significance associated with thedirection south in the Bible, aside from its use in combination withother directions.
Thefour directions.The four directions (or sometimes just pairs of directions) are usedtogether to describe both the scattering of the Israelites as well astheir being gathered by God back to the promised land (Ps. 107:3;Isa. 43:5–6; Luke 13:29). They are also used together toexpress the extent of the promised land (Gen. 13:14) or else todescribe something that is all-encompassing (1Chron. 9:24).
Nineteenth-century BC Egyptian reliefs show city gates inSyria-Palestine. Arched gates were found in the second millennium BC.A door (Heb. petakh) often had side posts, a top post (lintel), and athreshold. The temple door was made of juniper wood (1Kings6:34). Doorposts and lintels (Heb. mashqop) are mentioned in thestory of the exodus (Exod. 12:7, 22–23).
Doorsseparated external and internal space. In the OT story of the flood,the ark contained a door (petakh; Gen. 6:16). God closed the doorbehind those inside the ark (Gen. 7:16), separating them from theoutside world.
Inthe Greco-Roman world, doors represented turning points. Janus, theRoman god of doors (Lat. ianua), prevented evil from entering thehome. Janus had two faces, one looking inward and one lookingoutward. The Romans named a month after Janus, Januarius, at the turnof their year, as a door between past and future.
InMatthew, a door (thyra) separated the unprepared from the prepared inkingdom life (Matt. 25:10–12). Likewise, life and destructionwere separated by a door or gate (Matt. 7:13–14; Luke 13:24).The NT records Jesus referring to himself as “the door”(John 10:1–9 ESV, NASB; NIV: “gate”) and, in turn,standing at the door of preparedness by (Matt. 24:33; Mark 13:29) andin fellowship with (Rev. 3:20) his followers.
The rock dove (Heb. yonah; Gk. peristera) was domesticatedthroughout the ancient Near East and used for carrying messages longbefore Roman times. It breeds prolifically, and its homing instinctbrings it swiftly back to its dovecote (Isa. 60:8; Hos. 11:11) or thebuildings or crevices where it nests (Jer. 48:28). Israel also hasthree species of turtledove (Heb. tor; Gk. trygōn), one being asummer migrant (Song 2:12; Jer. 8:7).
InIsrael, the dove was considered clean for food and designated forsacrifice, often as a poor person’s substitute for a lamb (Gen.15:9; Lev. 1:14; 5:7, 11; 12:6, 8; 14:22, 30; 15:14, 29; Num. 6:10;Matt. 21:12; Mark 11:15; Luke 2:24; John 2:14, 16). The dove is firstmentioned in Scripture when Noah sends out a dove from the ark (Gen.8:8–12). In the NT, the dove is an image of purity (Matt.10:16) and also symbolizes the Holy Spirit (Matt. 3:16; Mark 1:10;Luke 3:22; John 1:32), but in the Song of Songs, where the beloved,and in particular the beloved’s eyes, are likened to doves(1:15; 2:14; 4:1; 5:2, 12; 6:9), it may also connote fertility.
Thedove is also, however, mournful (Isa. 38:14; 59:11; Ezek. 7:16; Nah.2:7), vulnerable (Ps. 74:19), and easily deceived (Hos. 7:11). Whenfrightened, it takes flight to lonely places (Ps. 55:6; Isa. 60:8),which perhaps adds interest to the fact that Jonah’s nameliterally means “dove.”
The Hebrew word ’erets occurs 2,505 times in the OT andis most frequently translated “country” or “land.”“Earth” renders the Greek word gē in the NT. Notsurprisingly, ’erets appears 311 times in Genesis alone, thebook that initiates Israel’s landed covenant (Gen. 15:18). Theprimary uses of ’erets are cosmological (e.g., the earth) andgeographical (e.g., the land of Israel). Other uses of ’eretsinclude physical (e.g., the ground on which one stands) and political(e.g., governed countries) designations. Less frequently, “earth”translates the Hebrew word ’adamah (“country, ground,land, soil”).
Heavenand Earth
Israelshared the cosmology of its ancient Near Eastern neighbors. Thisworldview understood the earth as a “disk” upon theprimeval waters (Job 38:13; Isa. 40:22), with the earth having fourrims or “corners” (Ps. 135:7; Isa. 11:12). These rimswere sealed at the horizon to prevent the influx of cosmic waters.God speaks to Job about the dawn grasping the edges of the earth andshaking the evil people out of it (Job 38:12–13). Similarly,the Akkadian text Hymn to the Sun-God states, “You [Shamash]are holding the ends of the earth suspended from the midst of heaven”(I:22). The earth’s boundaries were set against chaos (Ps.104:7–9; Isa. 40:12). In this way, the Creator and the Saviorcannot be separated because, taken together, God works against chaosin the mission of redemption (Ps. 74:12–17; Isa. 51:9–11).The phrase “heavens and earth” is a merism (two extremesrepresenting the whole) for the entire universe (Gen. 1:1; Ps.102:25). Over the earth arched a firm “vault” (Gen. 1:6).Heaven’s vault rested on the earth’s “pillars,”the mountains (Deut. 32:22; 1Sam. 2:8). Below the heavens isthe sea, part of the earth’s flat surface.
Therewas no term for “world” in the OT. The perception ofworld was basically bipartite (heaven and earth), though sometripartite expressions also occur (e.g., heaven, earth, sea [Exod.20:11; Rev. 5:3, 13]). Though rare, some uses of ’erets mayrefer to the “underworld” or Sheol (Exod. 15:12; Jer.17:13; Jon. 2:6). The earth can be regarded as the realm of the dead(Matt. 12:40; Eph. 4:9). However, the OT is less concerned with theorganic structure of the earth than with what fills the earth:inhabitants (Ps. 33:14; Isa. 24:1), people groups (Gen. 18:18; Deut.28:10), and kingdoms (Deut. 28:25; 2Kings 19:15). The term’erets can be used symbolically to indicate its inhabitants(Gen. 6:11). However, unlike its neighbors, Israel acknowledged nodivine “Mother Earth,” given the cultural associationswith female consorts.
TheTheology of Land
Inbiblical faith, the concept of land combines geography with theology.The modern person values land more as a place to build than for itsproductive capacities. But from the outset, human beings and the“earth” (’erets) functioned in a symbioticrelationship with the Creator (Gen. 1:28). God even gave the landagency to “bring forth living creatures” (Gen. 1:24). The“ground” (’adamah) also provided the raw substanceto make the human being (’adam [Gen. 2:7]). In turn, the humanbeing was charged with developing and protecting the land (Gen. 2:5,15). Showing divine care, the Noahic covenant was “between[God] and the earth” (Gen. 9:13). Thus, land was no mereonlooker; human rebellion had cosmic effects (Gen. 6:7, 17). The landcould be cursed and suffer (Gen. 3:17; cf. 4:11).
Israel’spromised land was built on the sanctuary prototype of Eden (Gen.13:10; Deut. 6:3; 31:20); both were defined by divine blessing,fertility, legal instruction, secure boundaries, and were orientingpoints for the world. Canaan was Israel’s new paradise,“flowing with milk and honey” (Exod. 3:8; Num. 13:27).Conversely, the lack of fertile land was tantamount to insecurity andjudgment. As Eden illustrated for Israel, any rupture of relationshipwith God brought alienation between humans, God, and the land; thiscould ultimately bring exile, as an ethically nauseated land “vomits”people out (Lev. 18:25, 28; 20:22; see also Deut. 4; 30).
ForIsrael, land involved both God’s covenant promise (Gen.15:18–21; 35:9–12) and the nation’s faithfulobedience (Gen. 17:1; Exod. 19:5; 1Kings 2:1–4).Conditionality and unconditionality coexisted in Israel’srelationship of “sonship” with Yahweh (Exod. 4:22; Hos.11:1). Yahweh was the earth’s Lord (Ps. 97:5), Judge (Gen.18:25), and King (Ps. 47:2, 7). Both owner and giver, he was thesupreme landlord, who gifted the land to Israel (Exod. 19:5; Lev.25:23; Josh. 22:19; Ps. 24:1). The land was God’s “inheritance”to give (1 Sam. 26:19; 2 Sam. 14:16; Ps. 79:1; Jer. 2:7). TheLevites, however, did not receive an allotment of land as did theother tribes, since God was their “portion” (Num. 18:20;Ps. 73:26). Israel’s obedience was necessary both to enter andto occupy the land (Deut. 8:1–3; 11:8–9; 21:1; 27:1–3).Ironically, the earth swallowed rebellious Israelites when theyaccused Moses of bringing them “up out of a land flowing withmilk and honey” (Num. 16:13). As the conquest shows, however,no tribe was completely obedient, taking its full “inheritance”(Josh. 13:1).
Landpossession had serious ethical and religious ramifications (Deut.26:1–11). Israel was not chosen to receive a special land;rather, land was the medium of Israel’s relationship with God.Land functioned as a spiritual barometer (Ps. 78:56–64; Lam.1:3–5). The heavens and earth stood as covenant witnesses(Deut. 4:26). Blood, in particular, could physically pollute the land(Num. 35:30–34). National sin could culminate in expulsion(Lev. 26:32–39), and eventually the land was lost (Jer.25:1–11). For this reason, Israel’s exiles prompted aprofound theological crisis.
Inheritance
Thenotion of inheritance connected Israel’s religious worship withpractical stewardship. Land was not owned; it was passed down throughpatrimonial succession. God entrusted each family with an inheritancethat was to be safeguarded (Lev. 25:23–28; Mic. 2:1–2).This highlights the serious crime when Naboth’s vineyard wasforcibly stolen (1Kings 21). It was Israel’s filialsonship with Yahweh and Israel’s land tenure that formedYahweh’s solidarity with the nation. The law helped limitIsrael’s attachment to mere real estate: Yahweh was to beIsrael’s preoccupation (see Jer. 3:6–25). When the nationwas finally exiled, the message of the new covenant transcendedgeographical boundaries (Jer. 32:36–44; Ezek. 36–37; cf.Lev. 26:40–45; Deut. 30:1–10). In postexilic Israel,sanctuary was prioritized (Hag. 1:9–14).
Itwas Israel’s redefinition of land through the exile thatprepared the way for the incorporation of the Gentiles (Ezek.47:22–23), an integration already anticipated (Isa. 56:3–7).The prophets saw a time when the nations would share in theinheritance of God previously guarded by Israel (Isa. 60; Zech. 2:11;cf. Gen. 12:3). Viewed as a political territory, land receives nosubstantial theological treatment in the NT; rather, inheritancesurpasses covenant metaphor. Using the language of sonship andinheritance, Paul develops this new Gentile mission in Galatians (cf.Col. 1:13–14). The OT land motif fully flowers in the NTteaching of adoption (cf. 1Pet. 1:3–5). Both curse andcovenant are resolved eschatologically (Rom. 8:19–22).Inheritance is now found in Christ (Eph. 2:11–22; 1Pet.1:4). In the economy of the new covenant, land tenure has matured infellowship (koinōnia). Koinōnia recalibrates the ethicalsignificance of OT land themes, reapplying them practically throughinclusion, lifestyle, economic responsibility, and social equity.
Beyondcosmological realms, heaven and earth are also theological horizonsstill under God’s ownership. What began as the creation mandateto fill and subdue the earth (Gen. 1:28) culminates in the newcreation with Christ (Rom. 8:4–25). Under the power of Satan,the earth “lags behind” heaven. Christ’s missionbrings what is qualitatively of heaven onto the earthly stage, oftenusing signs of the budding rule of God (Matt. 6:10; Mark 2:10–11;John 3:31–36; Eph. 4:9–13; Heb. 12:25). As Israel was tostand out in a hostile world (Deut. 4:5–8), now those ofAbrahamic faith stand out through Christian love (John 13:34–35;Rom. 4:9–16). According to Heb. 4:1–11, Israel’sinitial rest in the land (see Exod. 33:14; Deut. 12:9) culminates inthe believers’ rest in Christ (Heb. 4:3, 5). The formerinheritance of space gives way to the inheritance of Christ’spresence. The OT theme of land is ultimately fulfilled in Jesus’exhortation to “abide in me” (John 15).
Earthquake–InPalestine there have been about seventeen recorded major earthquakesin the past two millennia. One of the major sources of theseearthquakes is believed to originate from the Jordan Rift Valley. Inantiquity earthquakes were viewed as fearful events because themountains, which represented everlasting durability, were disturbed.The confession of faith is pronounced in association with suchphenomena (“We will not fear, though the earth give way”[Ps. 46:2]). An earthquake must have made a great impact in Amos’sday (“two years before the earthquake” [Amos 1:1; cf.Zech. 14:5]).
Anearthquake has many symbolic meanings. First, the power of God andhis divine presence are manifested through it (Job 9:6; Ps. 68:8;Hag. 2:6). It accompanied theophanic revelation (Exod. 19:18; Isa.6:4; 1Kings 19:11–12) when the glory of the Lord appeared(Ezek. 3:12). His divine presence was especially felt whenearthquakes occurred during the time of the crucifixion and theresurrection of Jesus Christ (Matt. 27:54; 28:2). It led thecenturion to confess of Christ, “Surely he was the Son of God!”(Matt. 27:54). God’s salvation power is represented when anearthquake comes at the appropriate moment, such as when it freedPaul and Silas from prison (Acts 16:26).
Second,it is used in the context of God’s judgment (Isa. 13:13; Amos9:1; Nah. 1:5). It becomes the symbol of God’s anger and wrath(Ps. 18:7). God brought earthquakes upon the people to destroy evilin the world and to punish those who had sinned against him (Num.16:31–33; Isa. 29:6; Ezek. 38:19). Earthquake activity possiblyexplains the background to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen.19:24).
Third,earthquakes are said to precede the end of time (Matt. 24:7; Mark13:8; Luke 21:11). In the apocalyptic book of Revelation, earthquakesare regular occurrences (Rev. 6:12; 11:13, 19; 16:18).
The organ of visual perception. The eye is the lamp of the body, so that someone who has a sound or healthy eye can experience light, but someone with a deficient eye experiences only darkness (Matt. 6:22–23). Bright eyes signify alertness and good health (1Sam. 14:27–29; Ps. 38:10), whereas dim eyes signify poor vision, often from old age (Gen. 27:1; 48:10; 1Sam. 3:2). Blindness may be cured by opening the eyes (Isa. 35:5; John 9:14), although Paul was blind even with his eyes open (Acts 9:8). To lift or raise the eyes is to take a look around or look toward something (Gen. 13:10; 18:2; John 11:41). To turn the eyes from something is to no longer look at it (Ps. 119:37; Song 6:5; Isa. 22:4). Something hidden from the eyes is unknown (Num. 5:13; Job 28:21; Luke 19:42), but hiding the eyes from something is to ignore it (Isa. 1:15; Ezek. 22:26; cf. Lev. 20:4). The expression “before the eyes” signifies that an event has taken place in the presence of others, and they have witnessedit.
The eye is an important part of the body (1Cor. 12:16–21). A defective eye disqualified a priest from certain duties (Lev. 21:17–20). A conquering army often gouged out the eyes of the defeated enemy (Judg. 16:21; 2Kings 25:7), rendering them ineffective in battle (1Sam. 11:2). Destroying Israel’s eyes is the first among many punishments listed for breaking God’s covenant (Lev. 26:16). Paul testifies that the Galatians cared enough for him even to pluck out their eyes in order to give them to him (Gal. 4:15). The importance of the eye highlights the importance of Jesus’ demand to pluck it out if it causes one to stumble (Matt. 5:29; 18:9).
Perception and enlightenment. Opening eyes is a theme that runs through both Testaments. At times, opening the eyes simply refers to making one aware of previously unknown information. It may be in this sense that the eyes of Adam and Eve are opened, since they become aware of their nakedness (Gen. 3:7). This same kind of opening occurs when God reveals a well to Hagar (Gen. 21:19), when Balaam sees the angel of the Lord standing in his way (Num. 22:31), and when the disciples on the road to Emmaus recognize Jesus (Luke 24:31). This sense is extended into the spiritual realm, so that the eye is used figuratively as the principal organ of spiritual perception. To open or enlighten the eyes in this sense involves one of the following: (1)allowing one to understand spiritual truth in the law of God (Ps. 119:18), prophetic utterance (Num. 24:3), or by the Spirit of God (Eph. 1:18); or (2)leading someone to repentance and conversion (Acts 26:18). These spiritual eyes may also be blinded or closed, hindering the person from repenting (Isa. 6:10; Matt. 13:13; cf. 2Cor. 4:4).
The eye not only allows one to perceive the world but also helps others perceive the person. David has beautiful eyes, highlighting his handsome appearance (1Sam. 16:12). Leah has weak eyes, a characteristic that is contrasted to the beautiful appearance of her sister, Rachel (Gen. 29:17). A bountiful eye reveals a generous spirit (Prov. 22:9). Haughty eyes reveal arrogance (Ps. 18:27; Prov. 6:17), as do eyes that are exalted (Ps. 131:1; Prov. 30:13). Eyes may reveal one’s pity for another (Ezek. 16:5), but in the administration of justice, the eye is not allowed to pity or spare, meaning that the law will be executed to its fullest extent (Deut. 7:16; Ezek. 5:11). The eye that mocks a father or a mother reveals a person who holds them in contempt (Prov. 30:17).
Direction and evaluation. The eye also serves as a symbol for direction, care, and vast knowledge. Since the eye allows one to see, it helps set the proper course forward, physically (Num. 10:31) or spiritually (1John 2:11). The fact that God’s eyes are always upon the land of Israel demonstrates his care for it (Deut. 11:12). Likewise, his eyes are always upon the righteous, ready to help them (Ps. 34:15). Especially in apocalyptic literature, the many eyes of the living creatures are symbols of God’s omniscience (Ezek. 1:18; Rev. 4:6), while the eyes of God in general are symbols of his awareness (1Kings 9:3; Jer. 32:19; Amos 9:8; Heb. 4:13).
Finally, the eyes are associated with evaluation. The eyes of God often represent his favor or disfavor (Gen. 6:8; Deut. 21:9; 2Kings 10:30). Those who evaluate themselves in their own eyes are often led astray because the eyes can lead to sinful lust (Num. 15:39; Deut. 12:8; Judg. 17:6; Prov. 3:7; 1John 2:16).
In the NIV, “fashion” is a verb meaning “tocraft, shape, form.” Often it is used pejoratively, as in thecrafting of an idol out of wood, stone, or metal (Exod. 32:4; 2Kings19:18; Isa. 37:19; 40:19; 44:15; Hos. 13:2). Job speaks of thecunning and scheming of those who think they are wise but aregodless: “their womb fashions deceit” (Job 15:35). In apositive sense, items are fashioned for God’s purpose: Aaron’sbreastpiece is fashioned by “the work of skilled hands”(Exod. 28:15; cf. 39:8). God is the master craftsman who “fashionedand made the earth” (Isa. 45:18). But God’s fashioning isa synonym for creation rather than crafting; he fashions his work outof nothing.
Inthe KJV God’s fashioning extends to his creation of humanbeings (Job 10:8; 31:15; Ps. 119:73), his oversight of the humanheart (Ps. 33:15), his ordaining of a person’s life span (Ps.139:16), and his transformative work in the glorification ofbelievers (Phil. 3:21).
Themost common noun usage for the word “fashion” in the KJVOT is as a plan, blueprint, or specification (2Kings 16:10)—forexample, of the ark (Gen. 6:15), the tabernacle (Exod. 26:30), andthe temple (1Kings 6:38; Ezek. 43:11). “Fashion” isalso used as a synonym for “likeness, appearance, manner, form”(Exod. 37:19; Mark 2:12; Luke 9:29; 1Cor. 7:31; Phil. 2:8;James 1:11). Finally, Peter cautions believers against “fashioning[themselves] according to the former lusts” (1Pet. 1:14KJV), a warning not to model or conform to worldly desires.
In an agrarian society with an unpredictable climate, such asIsrael, rainfall was of the utmost importance. Two rainy periodscould be hoped for each year, in February/March and inOctober/November, and these seasons were critical in producing a goodcrop. Regular rainfall thus formed a significant part of God’spromise of a good and fruitful land for his people (Lev. 26:4).Solomon’s prayer acknowledges the conditional nature of thispromise: rain would be withheld from a sinful nation but would begiven to a forgiven and obedient people (1Kings 8:35–36).
Raincould also be sent in judgment, most notably in the flood narratives,where God sent rain in order to destroy all living things on the faceof the earth (Gen. 7:4), and in the exodus narrative, where rainaccompanied hail and thunder in the seventh plague (Exod. 9:23).
Sincerain is completely beyond human control, it naturally became a symbolof God’s sovereignty in both blessing and curse. A strikingexample of this is in 1Kings 17–18, when for three yearsthe rains were withheld, until finally Elijah’s trust in Godwas vindicated above the prophets of Baal, and the rain followed. Theeffectiveness of Elijah’s prayers, first for drought and laterfor rain, is held up in the NT as an example for all believers (James5:17–18).
Beyond its obvious literal sense, “flesh” denotesthe physicality of one’s life in this world, often in contrastto the spiritual dimension. Both the OT (Heb. she’er, basar)and NT (Gk. sarx) use “flesh” to refer to the physicaldimension of human existence, often assigning varying degrees offigurative and contextual nuances to the word. “Flesh” asthe cover term for fallen humanity and sinfulness is a distinctive NTdevelopment. For example, the expression “all flesh” inthe OT is often merely equivalent to the collective human race (e.g.,Gen. 6:12; Isa. 40:5 KJV). Even when the term is used in contrast to“spirit” (e.g., Isa. 31:3; Jer. 17:5), “flesh”is not so much “antispiritual” as “nonspiritual.”John even refers to the mystery of incarnation as the Word becomingflesh (John 1:14).
Itis mostly in Paul’s letters that we find clear depiction offlesh as the seat of the carnal and sinful nature of humanity. Theflesh stands for the totality of destructive effects of the originalsin on the human nature. Thus, the flesh is in essence the sinfulnature that Adam left for all subsequent generations to inherit (Gal.5:17). Before it is redeemed and transformed, it is “sinfulflesh” (Rom. 8:3 NRSV) waiting to be condemned by the holy Godand his law, and inevitably leading to death (7:5). It is inseparablefrom lust (Gal. 5:16; 1Pet. 4:2). In the reprobate,unregenerate state, human nature in its entirety is under the controlof the flesh (Eph. 2:3). Since corrupt humans basically sow the fleshand reap the flesh, they can neither please God nor obey the law(Rom. 8:3, 8). It is significant that salvation is expressed in termsof overcoming the flesh. In wrapping up an exhortation regardingspiritual life, Paul concludes that those who nailed their flesh tothe cross along with its passions and desires are “those whobelong to Christ Jesus” (Gal. 5:24).
Recounted in Gen. 6:5–9:19, the flood is the event whereby God destroys all creatures except for Noah, his family, and a gathering of animals. The account is highly literary and God-centered. It opens and closes with Noah’s three sons (6:10; 9:18–19). Noah’s obedience is highlighted (7:5, 9, 16). God is the protagonist, and Noah remains silent.
Terminology. The Hebrew word for “flood” is mabbul, and the Greek word is kataklysmos. Outside of the Gen. 6–9 narrative and references to the flood in Gen. 10:1, 32; 11:10, mabbul occurs only in Ps. 29:10, probably a reference to the primordial water stored above the firmament in jars (cf. Gen. 1:7; 7:11). The LXX translates mabbul with kataklysmos in Sir. 40:10; 44:17–18; 4 Macc. 15:31. Hebrew Sirach and the Aramaic Genesis Apocryphon also use mabbul for the flood (Sir. 44:17; 1QapGenar 12:9–10). All four uses of kataklysmos in the NT refer to the flood (Matt. 24:38–39; Luke 17:27; 2Pet. 2:5).
The flood narrative. In Gen. 6:5–22, God observes the grand scale of human wickedness, determines to destroy all life, and selects righteous Noah to build an ark. God’s “seeing” is judicial investigation (6:5, 13) that counters the sons of God who “saw” (6:2), just as his pained heart counters humankind’s wicked heart (6:5–6). God’s second statement, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race” (6:7), is his judicial sentence (cf. 3:15–19), affecting all life in the domain of human care (1:28; cf. Job 38:41; Ps. 36:6; Hos. 4:3; Joel 1:20).
The earth’s corruption and violence (Gen. 6:12–13) reflect a spectrum of evil that has despoiled a creation that was once “very good” (1:31; cf. 6:17; 7:21; 8:17; 9:11). God’s destruction responds to the moral corruption of the earth. The ark is a rectangular vessel designed for floating rather than sailing (6:14–15). Noah builds a microcosm of the earth to save its life. The boat’s windowlike openings and three decks reflect the cosmology of Gen. 1 (heavens, water, earth [cf. 6:16]). God makes a promise that Noah will survive and receive a covenant from God (6:18), fulfilled in the Noahic covenant following the flood (9:9, 11, 14–17).
Genesis 7:1–24 recounts the boarding of the ark and then the rising waters. Two numbering systems are used by the narrator in the flood narrative: one for dates of Noah’s age (day, month, year) and one for periods between flood stages. Both systems number between 365 and 370 days. The flood is portrayed as a reversal of the second and third days of creation. Watery boundaries that God once separated collapse (cf. 1:6–10). The rising flood is described in three phases: rising and lifting the ark (7:17), increasing greatly and floating the ark on the surface (7:18), and covering all the high mountains (7:19). Total destruction is amplified by reversing the order of creation—people, animals, birds (7:23)—with “all/every” occurring repeatedly in 7:21–23.
Genesis 8:1–22 recounts the disembarking and Noah’s sacrifice. Genesis 8:1 is the structural and theological center, with God fulfilling (=“remember”) his covenant promise for Noah’s safety. The ark rests on one mountain within the range in eastern Turkey (Kurdistan). The earth’s drying occurs as a process (8:3, 5, 9, 11, 13, 14), and echoes of creation reappear (e.g., “wind” [8:1; cf. 1:2]). Although the old curse is not lifted (cf. 5:29), God promises not to add to it (8:21). The flood has not reformed the human heart; it has only stopped the violence. God’s oath of restoration reaffirms the seamless rhythm of seasons that comprise a full year (8:22).
Genesis 9:1–19 recounts the restoration of world order. Since murder was part of the antediluvian violence (6:11, 13), God’s law recalibrates earthly morality (9:5). God’s second postdiluvian speech encodes his plan for the broader preservation of creation (9:8–17). “My rainbow” is God’s confirming sign (9:13). The meteorological phenomenon of the storm is now harnessed as an image of peace. The cosmic warrior “hangs up” his bow in divine disarmament. Humankind now shares the responsibility of justice with God, illustrated in Noah’s first speech of cursing and blessing (9:20–27).
Ancient Near Eastern parallels. Without literary dependence on the biblical story, parallels to the biblical account exist in the Akkadian Atrahasis Epic, Gilgamesh TabletXI, and the Sumerian King List. The exact relationship between the biblical account and these Near Eastern accounts is a debated subject. Perhaps they are variants of a similar story based on the same historical event.
A source of running water. Often, the word “fountain”carries the connotation of handmade architecture designed to enhanceaccess to or the aesthetics of a natural spring. The vocabulary ofthe biblical languages does not rigidly distinguish betweenartificial fountains and natural springs, so that several Hebrew(’ayin, ma’yan, maqor) and Greek (pēgē, phrear)words can be rendered “fountain,” “spring,”“flow,” and so forth, depending on the context.
InProverbs, the phrase “fountain [maqor] of life” refers tothe mouth of a righteous man (10:11), the law of the wise (13:14; cf.18:4), the fear of the Lord (14:27; cf. Ps. 36:9), and understanding(Prov. 16:22). Similarly, Jer. 2:13 describes God as a fountain ofliving water, an idea echoed in Rev. 21:6. In Prov. 5:18 the fountain(along with wells, cisterns, streams, and springs) symbolizes thefecundity of marriage.
The“fountains of the deep” mentioned in Gen. 7:11; 8:2 (NIV:“springs of the deep”); Prov. 8:28 refer to a particularaspect of ancient cosmology: the notion that the terrestrial earth issupported by pillars (see Job 9:6; Ps. 75:3) above a subterraneansea. In the story of the great flood, the “fountains” ofthis sea, the “great deep,” were a source of the watersof the flood. See also Fountain Gate.
A biblical genealogy is a listing of names showing theinterrelationships of individuals, clans, or nations. They are foundmainly, though not exclusively, in the Pentateuch, Ezra-Nehemiah, andChronicles. The arrangement of names in such listings is most oftenforward in time, from ancestor to descendant (e.g., Ruth 4:18–22,tracing a family line down to David), and this is the genealogyproper. At other times, names are listed in the opposite direction,backward in time, from the individual to ancestor (e.g., Ezra 7:1–5,where Ezra’s ancestry is traced back to Aaron “the chiefpriest”), and this is, strictly speaking, a pedigree. Theunusually lengthy pedigree (even by biblical standards) of Ezra “thepriest” is an effective way to highlight his temple interestwhen he is first introduced to the reader. The pedigree of 1Chron.6:33–47 shows the impeccable Levitical credentials of Heman,Asaph, and Ethan, who served before the ark of the covenant under theleadership of David. Genealogical information is always supplied fora reason.
Typesof Genealogies
Thetwo main terms used in the OT are toledot (“genealogicalhistory”; e.g., Gen. 2:4; 5:1; 6:9; NIV: “account”)and yakhas (“genealogical record”; only in Neh. 7:5, butthe related verb, “to register by genealogy,” occurs inEzra 2// Neh. 7 and elsewhere). In Ezra-Nehemiah the supplyingof a credible genealogy is necessary for acceptance as an Israelite(Ezra 2:59–60) or for securing priestly privileges (Ezra2:61–63). The concern is not racial purity as such, but ratherIsrael’s theological integrity (Ezra 9:1–2). Thepejorative references to “genealogies” in 1Tim. 1:4and Titus 3:9 do not condemn the OT lists but instead reject theconcocted genealogies in the mythic speculations of Jewishintertestamental books such as Jubilees.
Lineageis almost invariably traced through the male line. Most often inbiblical narrative an individual is supplied only with a patronym(e.g., “Isaiah son of Amoz” [Isa. 1:1]), or sometimesthree generations are specified (e.g., “Bezalel son of Uri, theson of Hur” [Exod. 35:30]). In Exod. 6:16–20 theforeshortened genealogy of Aaron and Moses is not to be understood assaying that there were only four generations between them and Levi.
Somegenealogies involve ethnic and geographical relations—forexample, between the nations of the ancient world in Gen. 11, andbetween Israel and surrounding peoples in Gen. 19:37–38;25:1–4. In lists, the father-son relation can be broader thanimmediate descent and may refer to remote ancestors (grandson,great-grandson, etc.) (e.g., Ezra 5:1; cf. Zech. 1:1).
TheImportance of Genealogies
Genealogiesare an important feature of biblical storytelling. The modern readershould not simply leap over them, and the works of J.R.R.Tolkien show that genealogy is not dead in literary terms. When abiblical genealogy is supplied, it has a narratorial role. Itcontributes something essential to the presentation of the biblicalwriter. For example, 1Chron. 1 is not a bare listing of namesbut rather, beginning with Adam, provides a world context for thehistory of Israel that follows; and 1Chron. 2–9emphasizes the twelve-tribal structure of God’s people, thuspreventing the misapprehension that Chronicles is just a history ofthe southern kingdom of Judah. Also, lists are usually not justnames; they include thematically significant material contributing tothe overall message of the particular book—for example, thetechnological advances of Cain’s descendants told in Gen.4:17–22 and the military exploits recounted in 1Chron.5:18–22.
Theten-generation genealogy of Gen. 5 bridges the antediluvian and thedeluge eras. The repeated refrain “and he died” depictsthe reign of death over the human race. Another ten-generationgenealogy joins the flood generation to Abram (Gen. 11:10–26).In this case, the deleterious effect of sin on humans is shown by thegradual decrease in human life span. There is often an element ofschema in biblical genealogies (e.g., the limitation of generationsto ten). Genesis 5 displays the convention of the seventh generation,which is deemed worthy of special attention (Enoch). There is alsothe Bible’s delight in multiples of seven—for example,the seventy nations in Gen. 10, the 3×14generational schema in Matt. 1, and the seventy members in thepedigree of Christ in Luke 3:23–38. Hence, none of thesegenealogies should be understood as comprehensive in scope; rather,they are highly selective and stylized. Their purpose is to supportand underscore the writer’s theological message.
Becauseit is rare for females to be mentioned in biblical genealogies, whenthey are there is special significance—for example, Sarai inGen. 11:29: though barren, she will become the mother of the line ofpromise; Rebekah in Gen. 22:23: she will become the wife of Isaac;the daughters of Zelophehad in Num. 26:33: their story will beelaborated in Num. 27; 36; the five women in the genealogy of Jesus(Matt. 1): several of them are non-Israelites, suggesting that Jesuscomes as the Savior of the world.
Generation has three primary meanings in the Bible: (1)alength of time, (2)a group of people of the same period oftime, and (3)a stage in the line of a person’s lineage.It also has three metaphorical or secondary uses.
First,“generation” as a length of time generally involves theduration of time between a person’s birth and the birth of thatperson’s children. The number “forty” is oftenassociated with the length of a generation because God made theIsraelites wander in the wilderness for forty years so that onegeneration would pass away and another arise (cf. Num. 32:13).However, two points should be noted. First, the actual number ofyears was determined to be forty because the people had spied out theland for forty days (Num. 14:34), not because a generation lastedforty years. Second, the forty years applied to those who were agetwenty or older. Since the purpose of the forty years in thewilderness was to allow one generation of adults to pass on(14:30–35), the forty years may represent the upper limit ofthe expected length of an adult’s life in the wildernessconditions, which would be sixty years. In fact, when Moses speaks toIsrael on the plains of Moab, he mentions that Israel crossed theZered Valley thirty-eight years after the wilderness wanderings hadbegun, and that the entire previous generation had died (Deut. 2:14).This comment shows that forty years has less to do with a generationthan with the expected life span of an adult in the wilderness. Otherpassages provide no hints for the length of a generation, such thatthe specific length of a generation is not recorded in the Bible.Furthermore, since a generation represents the duration of timebetween a person’s birth and the birth of that person’schildren, it is also not a fixed number but rather represents animprecise period of time. In one passage “generations”are even set alongside “ages,” which represent longerdurations of an indefinite period of time (Col. 1:26).
Second,“generation” often is used to represent a group of peopleof the same period of time. It may refer to a group of people wholive during the same time (Gen. 7:1) or those who were born atapproximately the same time (Exod. 1:6; Num. 32:13; Deut. 1:35).
Third,“generation” is also commonly used to represent a stagein the line of a person’s lineage. This use often is precededby an ordinal number (first, second, third, etc.). On severaloccasions it occurs in a context highlighting the severity of sin. Itoccurs in the formulaic statement of God’s self-revelationfound in Exod. 20:5; 34:7 and repeated in Num. 14:18; Deut. 5:9. Godis described as loving, merciful, and forgiving, but also as jealous,not leaving the guilty unpunished to the third and fourth generation.It also occurs in legal contexts concerning the inclusion of Gentilesinto the assembly of the Lord (Deut. 23:1–8). Its use in thisway highlights the continuity of God’s work even through thetransitions of a family from one generation to another.
Finally,the word “generation” often is used in a secondary way orin a formulaic statement. First, several times the word describes oneaspect of God’s relationship to a particular person and hisdescendants or a nation. Sometimes it describes the long-lastingnature of God’s promise (Gen. 9:12; 17:7); at other times, itdescribes the long-lasting responsibility of the person and hisdescendants or a nation, especially as it relates to Israel and thelaw given at Sinai (Gen. 17:9–21; Exod. 12:14; 16:32–33;27:21; 29:42). Second, the word may emphasize the continuous natureof a condition or obligation (Exod. 3:15; 17:16; Esther 9:28; Pss.33:11; 45:17; 49:11; 72:5; 79:13). Third, the word refers to aparticular class or type of people, such as the righteous (Pss. 14:5[in some translations]; 112:2) or the wicked (Deut. 32:5; Prov. 30:11[in some translations]; Matt. 11:16; Mark 8:38; Luke 9:41; Acts2:40).
Various terms in the OT have been interpreted as referencesto giants. “Anakim,” “Emim,” and “Zamzummim”(ESV, NRSV, NKJV; NIV: “Anakites,” “Emites,”“Zamzummites”) are the names designated by individualnations (i.e., the Israelites, the Moabites, and the Ammonites) forthe giant aboriginal inhabitants of their respective territories(Num. 13:31–33; Deut. 2:10–21). “Rephaim” and“Nephilim,” on the other hand, are more generaldesignations that are not necessarily restricted to specificterritories. The two terms are difficult to define, but they seem todesignate certain types of people such as those with legendaryqualities or reputation (Gen. 6:4; Num. 13:33; Deut. 2:11; 3:11;1Chron. 20:4). Thus, Rephaim and Nephilim are not necessarilypeople of gigantic proportions, but a gigantic person would certainlybe regarded among them (Num. 13:33; Deut. 2:11; 3:11). It is likelythat all these terms had pejorative meanings (e.g., “Nephilim”might literally mean “fallen ones”). Furthermore, theseterms share a common literary function in that they designate peoplewho must be destroyed or displaced. Their demise was something thatGod required or even executed himself (e.g., Deut. 2:21; 9:1–6;Amos 2:9).
Somescholars have theorized that the biblical references to giants are aform of military hyperbole, or that they are embellished legendsstemming from the sight of megalithic structures, but these theoriesfail to account for the fact that the Bible represents giants asliving simultaneously (and interacting) with the Israelites. TheBible even preserves the personal names of giants such as “Og,”“Talmai,” and “Goliath.” Although no giganticskeletal remains have yet been recovered from excavations, there issome evidence for giants in Egyptian texts. Papyrus AnastasiIdescribes Canaanites who were four or five cubits tall (i.e., between7 and 8.5 feet) in the late thirteenth century BC. The Execrationtexts also refer to a place called “Anaq” (cf. “Anakim”)in southern Canaan (c.1800BC).
The wood that many Bible versions identify as being used toconstruct Noah’s ark. “Gopher” is a transliterationof the Hebrew word goper, found only in Gen. 6:14. The NIV renders it“cypress,” acknowledging that the meaning of the Hebrewis uncertain. Other suggested translations include “pine,”“cedar,” “fir,” “reed,” and“willow.”
Grace is the nucleus, the critical core element, of theredemptive and sanctifying work of the triune God detailed throughoutthe entire canon of Scripture. The variegated expressions of graceare rooted in the person and work of God, so that his graciousnessand favor effectively demonstrated in every aspect of the createdrealm glorify him as they are shared and enjoyed with one another.
Thebiblical terminology informing an understanding of grace defines itas a gift or a favorable reaction or disposition toward someone.Grace is generosity, thanks, and goodwill between humans and from Godto humans. Divine expressions of grace are loving, merciful, andeffective. The biblical texts provide a context for a more robustunderstanding of divine gift. The overall redemptive-historicalcontext of grace is the desire of the eternal God to bring glory tohimself through a grace-based relationship with his creation. TheCreator-Redeemer gives grace, and the recipients of grace give himglory.
OldTestament
Genesis.The grace of the creation narratives is summarized with the repeateduse of the term “good” (Gen. 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25,31). God is good, and he made a good creation with abundant gifts forAdam and Eve to enjoy. When Adam and Eve rebelled against God, herighteously judged and graciously provided for an ongoingrelationship. God clothed the naked Adam and Eve (3:21) and announcedthat the seed of the woman would yield a redeemer (3:15).
Gracein the postcreation narratives (Gen. 4–6) is focused onindividuals. God looked with favor on Abel and his offering (4:4),and Noah found grace in God’s eyes (6:8). God looked at and hadregard for the offering of Abel (Gen. 4). Jacob confessed to Esauthat God graced him with descendants and with possessions (33:5).
Graceand graciousness also characterize interaction between individuals.The Jacob and Esau exchange uses grace vocabulary for the gift andthe disposition of grace. Jacob invited Esau to accept his gift if hehad a favorable disposition toward him (Gen. 33:11). The covenant sonJoseph received favorable treatment from the prison warden because ofhis disposition toward him (39:21).
Exodus.The exodus narrative recounts how the seed of Abraham multiplies, isredeemed, and then is given the law, which defines the relationshipof God to Israel. All these events are tied to the gracious promisesthat God made to Abraham and his descendants (Gen. 12; 15; 17; seealso Gen. 21; 27).
Thegrace associated with the redemption of Israel from Egypt iscelebrated in the song of Exod. 15. God’s victory over theEgyptian army and his covenant fidelity to the patriarchs are thesong’s themes. Moses and the Israelites sing because God heardIsrael’s groaning; he remembered his covenant with Abraham andlooked on Israel with concern (2:24). God made Egypt favorablydisposed toward Israel (3:21) and parted the sea for Israel to escape(11:3; 12:36). The confession “He is my God ... myfather’s God” ties together major sections of redemptivehistory and affirms the constancy of God’s grace throughout theperiods (15:2). God’s tenacious covenant loyalty (khesed) tothe nation and his covenant grace (15:13) to Israel cannot bemerited.
Thegiving of the law in Exod. 20 is prefaced by a gracious and powerfulpresentation of God to the nation in Exod. 19. In the organizationand development of Exod. 19–20, grace themes emerge. The graceassociated with redemption and covenant life is marked in Exod. 19.God took Israel from Egyptian bondage, redeemed it, and brought thenation to himself (19:4). Through this action, the nation will becomea special treasure, a holy nation, a kingdom of priests (19:5–6).In sum, Israel exists because God created, loved, and redeemed it.
Second,the Decalogue of Exod. 20 follows upon the redemption effected byGod, defining how Israel will relate to its God. In this sense, lawis viewed as a gift that expresses the divine will. When compared andcontrasted with ancient Near Eastern laws, Torah reflects the graceof God’s character and his genuine concern for the poor,slaves, aliens, and widows. In addition, there is a grace ethic thatmotivates obedience to the law. The motivational statements in theDecalogue in Exod. 20 relate to the grace of redemption (v.2),the righteousness of God (vv. 4–7), the creation work of God(vv. 8–11), and long life (v.12).
Exodus32–34 is a key passage that links the covenant with graceterminology. This section begins with the story of the golden calf(chap. 32) and ends with the account of Moses’ radiant face(34:29–35). The grace terminology is observed in 33:19; 34:6–7.The context of 33:19 involves Moses meeting with God face-to-face.According to 33:12–17, Moses wanted to know who would be leftafter the purge of 33:5. He acknowledged God’s favor in hislife and wondered who else might enjoy it. Moses reminded God thatthe nation was his people (33:13). The grace of this account is God’sassurance of his presence with Israel and the unmerited purposefulexpression of his grace.
Exodus34:6–7 employs a series of adjectives in a grace confessionalstatement. This statement arises out of God’s instructions toMoses to cut two new tablets of stone like the first ones (34:1; seealso 24:12), which were broken after the incident of the golden calf(32:19). God descended in a cloud, stood with Moses, and proclaimedhis name to him (34:5). The rhetoric of the passage emphasizes thespeech of God, who defines himself in connection with covenantmaking. God is merciful and gracious, long-suffering, anddistinguished by steadfast love.
Graceand covenant loyalty.These key passages are foundational for understanding the grace andsteadfast loyalty of God expressed in the subsequent events ofcovenant history. Grace and khesed are expressed in connection withcovenant curse implementation (Num. 14:18; Hos. 4:1; 6:4, 6), in theoverall structure of Deuteronomy (5:10; 7:9, 12), in the Davidiccovenant (2Sam. 7:15; 1Chron. 17:13), in the future hopeof Israel (Isa. 54:8), in restoration (Jer. 32:18), in the newcovenant (Jer. 31:31), and in exile (Dan. 9:4).
Toround out the OT discussion, we may note that covenant siblings wereto be gracious and loyal in their ongoing relationships with oneanother. The book of Ruth illustrates covenant grace in action (2:2,10, 13). In addition, grace is to be expressed toward the poor (Prov.28:8), the young and the old (Deut. 28:50), and those who suffer (Job19:21).
NewTestament
TheNT focus of grace is developed in keeping with the foundation laid inthe OT. The triune God is the center and source of grace: it is thegrace of God (Rom. 1:7), the Spirit of grace (Heb. 10:29), and thegrace of Christ (John 1:17). The grace of God revealed in the OT isunveiled uniquely in the person and work of Christ.
TheGospel of John.The canonical development of the grace theme between the Testamentsis explained in the opening chapter of John’s Gospel. JesusChrist is the Word, who was with God, who is God, and who created theworld (John 1:1–3). Christ then became flesh and dwelled amongus (1:14). In doing so, he made known the glory of God to us. At thispoint in the development of chapter 1, John connects Christ (theWord) with the adjectives describing God in Exod. 34:6 to affirm thatChrist has the very same virtues that God has. The assertion in John1:17 that Jesus is full of grace and truth parallels the statement inExod. 34:6 of God’s steadfast love and faithfulness. In Christwe are able to see the glory that Moses hoped to see in God (John1:18). Christ is both the message and the messenger of grace andtruth.
TheEpistles and Acts.The NT Epistles develop the “full of grace and truth”statement about Christ (John 1:14) in several ways. The grace andtruth found in Christ are given to his servants (1Cor. 1:4) andare a reason for praise (2Cor. 8:9; Gal. 1:6, 15; Eph. 4:7;1Tim. 1:2; 2Tim. 2:1). This grace from Christ iseffective in bringing about redemption and sustaining a life ofgodliness. Ephesians 2:8–9 is the classic statement affirmingthat God’s favor is the source of salvation. Paul makes thispoint by repeating “it is by grace” in 2:5, 8 andclarifying the grace of salvation with the “it is the gift ofGod” statement in 2:8. This design of salvation celebrates theincomparable riches of Christ’s grace and the expression of hiskindness to us (cf. Eph. 1:7). Salvation is devoid of human merit,gifts, or favor (2:8). Keeping the law as a means of entrance into arelationship with God and as a means of gaining favor with God isantithetical to the nature of grace. God’s favor expressed topeople in salvation is an expression of his sovereign will.
Romans5 declares many of the same themes found in Eph. 2. In Rom. 5 Paulcontrasts the action and result of Adam’s transgression withthe obedience of Christ. Salvation is God’s grace and giftbrought by the grace of one man, Jesus Christ (v.15). The giftand grace of Christ brought about justification.
Theeffective operation of God’s grace in salvation is illustratedin the historical narratives of Acts. The men involved in the heateddebate of the Jerusalem council (Acts 15:2) affirmed the salvation ofthe Gentiles by grace after hearing the report of Barnabas and Paul(15:12). Those in Achaia (18:27) are another illustration of aneffective operation of grace.
Thegrace of God that saves is also the grace that sanctifies. Titus 2:11declares that redemptive grace instructs the redeemed to say no to alife of ungodliness. The instructional nature of grace is highlightedin the development of the Titus 2 context. The teacher in 2:1–10,15 is Titus, who is to nurture godly people. There is a change ofinstructors in 2:11, with grace now teaching. Redemptive grace worksin harmony with sanctifying grace to provide for godly living.
Accordingto Titus 3:8, those who trust in the generosity of God’s graceshould devote themselves to doing what is good. By God’s grace,justified sinners will find their delight and satisfaction in thepromises of God for a life of persevering godliness.
Gracealso functions as an enablement for life and ministry. Paul oftenrehearses this feature of grace in his letters. In Rom. 1:5 Paultestifies about the grace associated with a commission to be anapostle. When reflecting on his role in the church, he affirms thatby God’s grace he has been able to lay a foundation (1Cor.3:10). Paul’s testimony in 1Cor. 15:10 demonstrates theessential role of grace in making him who he is and effectivelyenabling what he does. Giving is also viewed as an exercise of grace(2Cor. 8:7) reflecting the grace received by individualbelievers. This gift of grace for life and ministry is somehowrecognizable. Peter, James, and John recognized it in Paul (Gal.2:9). It was upon the apostles (Acts 4:33), and it was seen in thechurch of Antioch (11:23).
Giventhe source and the effective nature of grace, one can understand theappropriateness of appealing to grace in greetings and salutations(Rom. 1:7; 16:20; Gal. 1:3; 6:18).
Commongrace.Finally, grace does operate beyond the context of the elect and thework of salvation and sanctification. Theologians define this as“common grace.” God’s sending rain and givingcreatures intellectual and artistic abilities are expressions ofcommon grace.
Physiologically, the heart is an organ in the body, and inthe Bible it is also used in a number of metaphors. The NT uses theGreek term kardia similarly to the OT Hebrew terms leb and lebab andin some cases depends on OT usage.
Mindand Emotions
Metaphorically,the heart refers to the mind, the will, the seat of emotions, or eventhe whole person. It also refers to the center of something or itsinner part. These metaphors come from the heart’s importanceand location.
Mind.The heart refers to the mind, but not the brain, and in these casesdoes not involve human physiology. It is a metaphor, and while theneurophysiology of the heart may be interesting in its own right, ithas no bearing on this use of language. We also should not confusesome modern English idioms or distinctions as being related to thebiblical viewpoint. The Bible does not make a distinction between“head knowledge” and “heart knowledge,” nordoes it employ language making the “heart” good orsuperior and the “head/mind” bad, inferior, or merelyintellectual. It does not prize the emotional over the thoughtful; ithas a more integrated viewpoint.
Deuteronomy6:5 issues the command to love God with all one’s heart, soul,and strength. When the command is repeated in the Gospels, it occursin three variations (Matt. 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27). Common toall three is the addition of the word “mind.” The Gospelwriters want to be sure that the audience hears Jesus adding “mind,”but this addition is based on the fact that the meaning of the Hebrewword for “heart” includes the mind.
Themental activities of the metaphorical heart are abundant. The heartis where a person thinks (Gen. 6:5; Deut. 7:17; 1Chron. 29:18;Rev. 18:7), where a person comprehends and has understanding (1Kings3:9; Job 17:4; Ps. 49:3; Prov. 14:13; Matt. 13:15). The heart makesplans and has intentions (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Prov. 20:5; 1Chron.29:18; Jer. 23:20). One believes with the heart (Luke 24:25; Acts8:37; Rom. 10:9). The heart is the site of wisdom, discernment, andskill (Exod. 35:34; 36:2; 1Kings 3:9; 10:24). The heart is theplace of memory (Deut. 4:9; Ps. 119:11). The heart plays the role ofconscience (2Sam. 24:10; 1John 3:20–21).
Itis often worth the effort to substitute “mind” for“heart” when reading the Bible in order to grasp themental dimension. For example, after telling the Israelites to loveGod with all their heart, Moses says, “These commandments thatI give you today are to be upon your hearts” (Deut. 6:6).Reading it instead as “be on your mind” changes ourperspective, and in this case the idiom “on your mind” isclearer and more accurate. The following verses instruct parents totalk to their children throughout the day about God’s words. Inorder for parents to do this, God’s requirements and deeds needto be constantly on their minds, out of their love for him.Similarly, love for God and loyalty are expressed by meditation onand determination to obey his law (Ps. 119:11, 112). The law is notmerely a list of rules; it is also a repository of a worldview inwhich the Lord is the only God. To live consistently with this truthrequires careful, reflective thought.
Emotionsand attitude.The heart, as the seat of emotion, is associated with a number offeelings and sentiments, such as gladness (Exod. 4:14; Acts 2:26),hatred (Lev. 19:17), pride (Deut. 8:14), resentment (Deut. 15:10),dread (Deut. 28:67), sympathy (Judg. 5:9), love (Judg. 16:15),sadness (1Sam. 1:8; John 16:6), and jealousy and ambition(James 3:14). The heart is also the frame of reference for attitudessuch as willingness, courage, and desire.
Idioms
Theword “heart” also appears in several idioms.
Hardnessof heart.A hard heart is obstinate or averse (Mark 3:5), while a tender heartis humble (2Kings 22:19). In the book of Exodus thetranslations typically say that God or Pharaoh hardened Pharaoh’s/hisheart. These passages in Exodus use not the Hebrew words for hardnessbut rather those for being heavy or for strengthening. The neutralsense of strengthening the heart takes on nuances in context forbeing bold or obstinate. Pharaoh was strengthened in his oppositionto God, and this obstinacy fits the idiom of having a hard heart.
Uncircumcised/circumcisedheart.An uncircumcised heart is a metaphor for an obstinate and rebelliousheart, while a circumcised heart is linked to being humble andfaithful (Lev. 26:41; Deut. 30:6; Jer. 4:4; Acts 7:51). Perhaps themetaphor is based on the role of circumcision in the covenant.
“Aman after his [God’s] own heart” (1Sam. 13:14).This description of David may mean either “according to his[God’s] choice” (cf. 2Sam. 7:21), stressing God’schoice over the people’s choice, or it may mean “inaccordance with his [God’s] desire” (1Sam. 14:7;1Kings 15:3), referring to how David showed conformity withGod’s agenda.
Allthe heart.The phrase “with all [one’s] heart” in some casesmeans “wholeheartedly” or “single-mindedly,”which emphasizes unity of purpose and focus. In other cases it seemsto mean, more broadly, “with all of one’s thinking orperspective” and implies the work of adjusting our worldviewaway from common cultural assumptions and toward God’steaching.
Sayin one’s heart.This expression denotes talking to oneself (i.e., thinking) ratherthan out loud or indicates reflection or deliberation. There areseveral warnings not to lie to oneself—that is, not todeliberate, believe, and act on the stated false premise.
Take[a matter] to heart.To take something to heart is to take it very seriously or to give ithigh priority.
Often used in a negative sense, the words translated“imagine” and “imagination” relate to theability to think with the mind, to devise or construct a plan, orone’s own thoughts in contrast to God’s thoughts (Ezek.13:2, 17). In the OT, imagination is often related to plans with evilintent (Gen. 8:21; Deut. 31:21; Jer. 3:17; 7:24 KJV). Occasionally itrefers to using one’s imagination to remain focused on God’splans (1Chron. 28:9; 29:18; Isa. 26:3). The NT word isconcerned with the product of reasoning and is used negatively (Matt.9:4; 12:25; Col. 1:21), positively (2Pet. 3:1), and neutrally(Heb. 4:12). When it derives from the human ability to reason, theend product seems to more consistently lead to negative outcomes(Gen. 6:5).
The Hebrew word ’erets occurs 2,505 times in the OT andis most frequently translated “country” or “land.”“Earth” renders the Greek word gē in the NT. Notsurprisingly, ’erets appears 311 times in Genesis alone, thebook that initiates Israel’s landed covenant (Gen. 15:18). Theprimary uses of ’erets are cosmological (e.g., the earth) andgeographical (e.g., the land of Israel). Other uses of ’eretsinclude physical (e.g., the ground on which one stands) and political(e.g., governed countries) designations. Less frequently, “earth”translates the Hebrew word ’adamah (“country, ground,land, soil”).
Heavenand Earth
Israelshared the cosmology of its ancient Near Eastern neighbors. Thisworldview understood the earth as a “disk” upon theprimeval waters (Job 38:13; Isa. 40:22), with the earth having fourrims or “corners” (Ps. 135:7; Isa. 11:12). These rimswere sealed at the horizon to prevent the influx of cosmic waters.God speaks to Job about the dawn grasping the edges of the earth andshaking the evil people out of it (Job 38:12–13). Similarly,the Akkadian text Hymn to the Sun-God states, “You [Shamash]are holding the ends of the earth suspended from the midst of heaven”(I:22). The earth’s boundaries were set against chaos (Ps.104:7–9; Isa. 40:12). In this way, the Creator and the Saviorcannot be separated because, taken together, God works against chaosin the mission of redemption (Ps. 74:12–17; Isa. 51:9–11).The phrase “heavens and earth” is a merism (two extremesrepresenting the whole) for the entire universe (Gen. 1:1; Ps.102:25). Over the earth arched a firm “vault” (Gen. 1:6).Heaven’s vault rested on the earth’s “pillars,”the mountains (Deut. 32:22; 1Sam. 2:8). Below the heavens isthe sea, part of the earth’s flat surface.
Therewas no term for “world” in the OT. The perception ofworld was basically bipartite (heaven and earth), though sometripartite expressions also occur (e.g., heaven, earth, sea [Exod.20:11; Rev. 5:3, 13]). Though rare, some uses of ’erets mayrefer to the “underworld” or Sheol (Exod. 15:12; Jer.17:13; Jon. 2:6). The earth can be regarded as the realm of the dead(Matt. 12:40; Eph. 4:9). However, the OT is less concerned with theorganic structure of the earth than with what fills the earth:inhabitants (Ps. 33:14; Isa. 24:1), people groups (Gen. 18:18; Deut.28:10), and kingdoms (Deut. 28:25; 2Kings 19:15). The term’erets can be used symbolically to indicate its inhabitants(Gen. 6:11). However, unlike its neighbors, Israel acknowledged nodivine “Mother Earth,” given the cultural associationswith female consorts.
TheTheology of Land
Inbiblical faith, the concept of land combines geography with theology.The modern person values land more as a place to build than for itsproductive capacities. But from the outset, human beings and the“earth” (’erets) functioned in a symbioticrelationship with the Creator (Gen. 1:28). God even gave the landagency to “bring forth living creatures” (Gen. 1:24). The“ground” (’adamah) also provided the raw substanceto make the human being (’adam [Gen. 2:7]). In turn, the humanbeing was charged with developing and protecting the land (Gen. 2:5,15). Showing divine care, the Noahic covenant was “between[God] and the earth” (Gen. 9:13). Thus, land was no mereonlooker; human rebellion had cosmic effects (Gen. 6:7, 17). The landcould be cursed and suffer (Gen. 3:17; cf. 4:11).
Israel’spromised land was built on the sanctuary prototype of Eden (Gen.13:10; Deut. 6:3; 31:20); both were defined by divine blessing,fertility, legal instruction, secure boundaries, and were orientingpoints for the world. Canaan was Israel’s new paradise,“flowing with milk and honey” (Exod. 3:8; Num. 13:27).Conversely, the lack of fertile land was tantamount to insecurity andjudgment. As Eden illustrated for Israel, any rupture of relationshipwith God brought alienation between humans, God, and the land; thiscould ultimately bring exile, as an ethically nauseated land “vomits”people out (Lev. 18:25, 28; 20:22; see also Deut. 4; 30).
ForIsrael, land involved both God’s covenant promise (Gen.15:18–21; 35:9–12) and the nation’s faithfulobedience (Gen. 17:1; Exod. 19:5; 1Kings 2:1–4).Conditionality and unconditionality coexisted in Israel’srelationship of “sonship” with Yahweh (Exod. 4:22; Hos.11:1). Yahweh was the earth’s Lord (Ps. 97:5), Judge (Gen.18:25), and King (Ps. 47:2, 7). Both owner and giver, he was thesupreme landlord, who gifted the land to Israel (Exod. 19:5; Lev.25:23; Josh. 22:19; Ps. 24:1). The land was God’s “inheritance”to give (1 Sam. 26:19; 2 Sam. 14:16; Ps. 79:1; Jer. 2:7). TheLevites, however, did not receive an allotment of land as did theother tribes, since God was their “portion” (Num. 18:20;Ps. 73:26). Israel’s obedience was necessary both to enter andto occupy the land (Deut. 8:1–3; 11:8–9; 21:1; 27:1–3).Ironically, the earth swallowed rebellious Israelites when theyaccused Moses of bringing them “up out of a land flowing withmilk and honey” (Num. 16:13). As the conquest shows, however,no tribe was completely obedient, taking its full “inheritance”(Josh. 13:1).
Landpossession had serious ethical and religious ramifications (Deut.26:1–11). Israel was not chosen to receive a special land;rather, land was the medium of Israel’s relationship with God.Land functioned as a spiritual barometer (Ps. 78:56–64; Lam.1:3–5). The heavens and earth stood as covenant witnesses(Deut. 4:26). Blood, in particular, could physically pollute the land(Num. 35:30–34). National sin could culminate in expulsion(Lev. 26:32–39), and eventually the land was lost (Jer.25:1–11). For this reason, Israel’s exiles prompted aprofound theological crisis.
Inheritance
Thenotion of inheritance connected Israel’s religious worship withpractical stewardship. Land was not owned; it was passed down throughpatrimonial succession. God entrusted each family with an inheritancethat was to be safeguarded (Lev. 25:23–28; Mic. 2:1–2).This highlights the serious crime when Naboth’s vineyard wasforcibly stolen (1Kings 21). It was Israel’s filialsonship with Yahweh and Israel’s land tenure that formedYahweh’s solidarity with the nation. The law helped limitIsrael’s attachment to mere real estate: Yahweh was to beIsrael’s preoccupation (see Jer. 3:6–25). When the nationwas finally exiled, the message of the new covenant transcendedgeographical boundaries (Jer. 32:36–44; Ezek. 36–37; cf.Lev. 26:40–45; Deut. 30:1–10). In postexilic Israel,sanctuary was prioritized (Hag. 1:9–14).
Itwas Israel’s redefinition of land through the exile thatprepared the way for the incorporation of the Gentiles (Ezek.47:22–23), an integration already anticipated (Isa. 56:3–7).The prophets saw a time when the nations would share in theinheritance of God previously guarded by Israel (Isa. 60; Zech. 2:11;cf. Gen. 12:3). Viewed as a political territory, land receives nosubstantial theological treatment in the NT; rather, inheritancesurpasses covenant metaphor. Using the language of sonship andinheritance, Paul develops this new Gentile mission in Galatians (cf.Col. 1:13–14). The OT land motif fully flowers in the NTteaching of adoption (cf. 1Pet. 1:3–5). Both curse andcovenant are resolved eschatologically (Rom. 8:19–22).Inheritance is now found in Christ (Eph. 2:11–22; 1Pet.1:4). In the economy of the new covenant, land tenure has matured infellowship (koinōnia). Koinōnia recalibrates the ethicalsignificance of OT land themes, reapplying them practically throughinclusion, lifestyle, economic responsibility, and social equity.
Beyondcosmological realms, heaven and earth are also theological horizonsstill under God’s ownership. What began as the creation mandateto fill and subdue the earth (Gen. 1:28) culminates in the newcreation with Christ (Rom. 8:4–25). Under the power of Satan,the earth “lags behind” heaven. Christ’s missionbrings what is qualitatively of heaven onto the earthly stage, oftenusing signs of the budding rule of God (Matt. 6:10; Mark 2:10–11;John 3:31–36; Eph. 4:9–13; Heb. 12:25). As Israel was tostand out in a hostile world (Deut. 4:5–8), now those ofAbrahamic faith stand out through Christian love (John 13:34–35;Rom. 4:9–16). According to Heb. 4:1–11, Israel’sinitial rest in the land (see Exod. 33:14; Deut. 12:9) culminates inthe believers’ rest in Christ (Heb. 4:3, 5). The formerinheritance of space gives way to the inheritance of Christ’spresence. The OT theme of land is ultimately fulfilled in Jesus’exhortation to “abide in me” (John 15).
Earthquake–InPalestine there have been about seventeen recorded major earthquakesin the past two millennia. One of the major sources of theseearthquakes is believed to originate from the Jordan Rift Valley. Inantiquity earthquakes were viewed as fearful events because themountains, which represented everlasting durability, were disturbed.The confession of faith is pronounced in association with suchphenomena (“We will not fear, though the earth give way”[Ps. 46:2]). An earthquake must have made a great impact in Amos’sday (“two years before the earthquake” [Amos 1:1; cf.Zech. 14:5]).
Anearthquake has many symbolic meanings. First, the power of God andhis divine presence are manifested through it (Job 9:6; Ps. 68:8;Hag. 2:6). It accompanied theophanic revelation (Exod. 19:18; Isa.6:4; 1Kings 19:11–12) when the glory of the Lord appeared(Ezek. 3:12). His divine presence was especially felt whenearthquakes occurred during the time of the crucifixion and theresurrection of Jesus Christ (Matt. 27:54; 28:2). It led thecenturion to confess of Christ, “Surely he was the Son of God!”(Matt. 27:54). God’s salvation power is represented when anearthquake comes at the appropriate moment, such as when it freedPaul and Silas from prison (Acts 16:26).
Second,it is used in the context of God’s judgment (Isa. 13:13; Amos9:1; Nah. 1:5). It becomes the symbol of God’s anger and wrath(Ps. 18:7). God brought earthquakes upon the people to destroy evilin the world and to punish those who had sinned against him (Num.16:31–33; Isa. 29:6; Ezek. 38:19). Earthquake activity possiblyexplains the background to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen.19:24).
Third,earthquakes are said to precede the end of time (Matt. 24:7; Mark13:8; Luke 21:11). In the apocalyptic book of Revelation, earthquakesare regular occurrences (Rev. 6:12; 11:13, 19; 16:18).
Outgrowth(s), usually green, of the stem of a plant. In Gen.8:8–11, an olive leaf in the beak of a dove signals to Noahthat the waters of the flood are receding. Many OT passages containreferences to leaves as a metaphor for prosperity (Ps. 1:3; Prov.11:28) as well as for destitution (Job 13:25; Isa. 1:30; 34:4; 64:6).A key difference between the two metaphors depends on whether theleaf is withered. The righteous will thrive like a green leaf (Prov.11:28), whereas Job, discussing his suffering, refers to himself as awindblown leaf (Job 13:25). In the NT, Jesus curses a fig tree thathas leaves but no fruit, immediately causing it to wither (Matt.21:18–22; Mark 11:13–14, 20–25). Leaves are alsoused as an illustration by which Jesus teaches about expectations forthe Son of Man to return (Mark 13:26–28). In Revelation, theleaves of the tree of life are for the healing of the nations (22:2).
Life is a complex, multifaceted concept in the Bible. VariousHebrew and Greek terms convey the idea of life. Life is described inboth a natural and a theological sense.
Lifein the Natural Sense
Inits natural sense, “life” may convey the following:(1)the vital principle of animals and humans, (2)thelength of time that one has life, (3)the complete plot and castof characters of an individual’s lifetime, or (4)themeans for maintaining life.
First,life is the vital principle of animals and humans. This use of theterm is its popular sense. It refers to the quality of having ananimate existence or the state of being animate. Therefore, it isexpressed in terms of ability or power; one who has life has thepower to act. On the other hand, “death” is its antonym;one who is dead no longer acts. In the Bible, life in this senseapplies to both animals and humans; however, the quality of lifediffers because humans are made in the image of God (Gen. 1:26; 5:1;9:6). Life is manifested in the breath of life, so that one who nolonger has the breath of life no longer has life (Gen. 2:7; 6:17; Job12:10; 27:3; Rev. 11:11). At the same time, life is seated in theblood. For this reason, blood should not be consumed but shouldinstead be poured out and buried (Gen. 9:3–5; Lev. 17:10–16;Deut. 12:23–25). Although life may cease because of physicalcauses (whether disease, murder, accident, etc.), God is ultimatelythe Lord of life. He gives life through his breath of life (Gen. 2:7;Ezek. 37:4–14); he sustains life through his spirit (Ps.104:29–30; cf. Gen. 6:3; 1Cor. 15:45); he delivers fromdeath (Gen. 5:24; Ps. 30:3; 1Cor. 15); he gives life and putsto death (Deut. 32:39; 1Sam. 2:6). Life, therefore, is firstand foremost a gift from God.
Ina discussion of life as the vital principle, it is important toaddress the question of the afterlife. The Bible affirms thesignificance of both the material and the immaterial components of ahuman being. The body is not merely a shell in which the true personis housed. Death is not the soul’s escape from the body’sprison, as evidenced by the resurrection of the dead (Ezek. 37:1–14;Dan. 12:2; Luke 14:14; 1Cor. 15). Human beings are not createdto live a disembodied existence ultimately. The fate for those whoexperience eternal life is the resurrection of the body made from anincorruptible source (1Cor. 15, esp. vv. 42–50). Forothers, their fate lies in eternal death (Matt. 25:46; Rev. 20:6–15;21:8).
Second,in both Testaments, “life” may also refer to the durationof animate existence—one’s lifetime. The duration ofone’s life in this sense begins at birth and ends at death(Gen. 23:1; 25:7; 47:9, 28; Luke 16:25; Heb. 2:15). This period oftime is brief (Ps. 90:10; James 4:14). The Bible describes two waysthat one’s lifetime may be extended: first, God givesadditional time to a person’s life (2Kings 20:6; Ps.61:6; Isa. 38:5); second, one gains longer life by living wisely andhonoring God (Prov. 3:2; 4:10; 9:11; 10:27).
Third,sometimes “life” refers to the complete plot and cast ofcharacters of an individual’s lifetime. In other words, “life”may refer to all a person’s activities and relationships(1Sam. 18:18 KJV; Job 10:1; Luke 12:15; James 4:14).
Fourth,“life” rarely may refer to the means of livelihood (Deut.24:6; Prov. 27:27; Matt. 6:25; Luke 12:22–23). These passageshighlight two aspects of life in this sense: (1)people areresponsible to guard life; (2)God gives this life because ofhis great concern, which exceeds his care for the birds and flowers.
Lifeas a Theological Concept
Beyondits natural sense, life is developed as a theological conceptthroughout the Bible.
OldTestament.The first chapters of Genesis set the stage for a rich theologicalunderstanding of life. First, God creates all things and preparesthem for his purposes. He is the creator of life, and life is a giftfrom his hand. The pinnacle of his creative activity is the creationof humankind. God blesses the man (Adam) and the woman (Eve) whom hecreates. God prepares a special place, a garden, for them, so thatthey may be able to live in perfect communion with him, under hisblessing. At the center of the garden lies the tree of life. The treeof life demonstrates that the garden is both the sphere of God’sprovision and the symbol of life itself. At the same time, Godcommands the man not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good andevil, “for when you eat from it you will certainly die”(Gen. 2:17).
Atthis point, life and death take center stage. What follows in thenarrative (Gen. 3) is a presentation of the meaning of life and deathas theological concepts. Adam and Eve disobey the divine commandment.As a result, they die. However, their death is not death in thenatural sense. Instead, when they disobey God’s commandment,there are three results: (1)a curse is pronounced, (2)theyare exiled from the garden away from God, and (3)they areprevented from eating from the tree of life (3:14–24). Death inthis case is not ceasing to breathe and move but is curse and exile;in other words, to die is to be removed from the place of God’spresence and blessing and be placed under a curse. Life, then, is theopposite: to live is to be settled in the place of God’spresence and blessing.
Itis also important to recognize in this narrative that obedience toGod’s commandment leads to life, but disobedience to hiscommandment leads to death. This principle is picked up throughoutthe Bible. Its clearest expression is found in Lev. 18:5: “Keepmy decrees and laws, for the person who obeys them will live bythem.”
Thisnarrative also draws an important connection taken up in other partsof the Bible, especially Proverbs: the connection between life andwisdom. In the garden there are two trees at the center: the tree oflife and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Although thereis some question concerning what is precisely meant by the knowledgeof good and evil, it is likely that wisdom is in view. Two pieces ofevidence support this conclusion: (1)knowledge and wisdom aswell as good and evil are central concerns for the book of Proverbs;(2)the narrative associates the tree with wisdom. When Eveconsiders eating from the tree, she notices that it is like the othertrees in that it has a pleasant appearance and is good for food (Gen.2:9), but it is also distinct from the other trees because it isdesirable for making one wise (3:6). By eating the fruit, she andAdam attempt to gain wisdom contrary to God’s command. As aresult, this type of wisdom leads to death. However, true wisdom hasthe opposite effect. It leads to life, being a tree of life itself(esp. Prov. 3:18; also 3:1–2; 4:10–23; 6:23).
Althoughthese themes—life, blessing, obedience, and wisdom—arefound in various places throughout the Bible, they come together mostexplicitly in Deuteronomy. There devotion and obedience to God areviewed as the means of attaining wisdom and understanding (Deut.4:5–9). Following God leads to living in the land that God hadpromised and enjoying his blessings there (28:1–14); however,forsaking God leads to all kinds of curses and ultimately to utterdefeat and exile from the land (28:15–68). The choice to followGod and obey him or to forsake God and disobey him results in eitherlife or death, good or bad, blessing or curse (30:15–20).
Lifeas a theological concept therefore has the following characteristics:being in the presence of God rather than exile, and experiencing hisblessings rather than his curses. Such life may be attained throughdevotion and obedience to God and through the wisdom that comes fromGod.
NewTestament.This concept of life forms the background for that of the NT as well.The NT often speaks of eternal life, especially in the writings ofJohn. Eternal life is being in fellowship with God the Father andJesus Christ (John 17:3). One may experience eternal life beforenatural death and beyond it into the eternal future (John 3:36; 5:24;6:54; 10:28). At the same time, eternal life may refer more narrowlyonly to the time of perfect fellowship with God that lies beyondnatural life (Matt. 25:46; Mark 10:30; Rom. 2:7). Because lifeconsists of being in fellowship with God and living in his blessings,John can state that the one who believes in Jesus “has eternallife and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life”(John 5:24). In other words, the person who believes in Jesus hasbeen transferred from God’s curse to his blessing, from deathto life. Furthermore, Jesus declares that he is life, and that thosewho believe in him will live and not die; that is, they will never beremoved from his presence and blessing (John 11:25–26).
The Hebrew word nepilim occurs only in Gen. 6:4; Num. 13:33.Some translations render the word as “giants.” Literally,it means “fallen ones.” Some scholars have considered theNephilim to be offspring from the unions between the “sons ofGod” and the “daughters of humans,” but it is alsopossible that the writer was distinguishing between the Nephilim andthe children of those unions who became the “heroes of old”and “men of renown” (Gen. 6:4). Descendants of theNephilim were purported to have also lived after the flood (Deut.2:10–11, 20–23; Josh. 14:15; 15:13–14; 2Sam.21:16–22; 1Chron. 20:6–8). Since the entire humanrace, except for Noah and his family, was destroyed in the deluge,these descendants who lived in Canaan at the time of the exodus mostlikely descended through Ham, one of Noah’s sons (Gen.10:8–20).
(1)Theeighth descendant listed in the line of Seth and the grandson ofMethuselah, Noah was used by God to preserve the human race throughthe flood. His name means “rest,” chosen because hisfather, Lamech, believed that God would use his son to bring restfrom the toil of life resulting from the fall (Gen. 5:29). Enoch washis great-grandfather, and like him, Noah is described as one who“walked faithfully with God” (Gen. 6:9; cf. 5:22, 24). Hewas the father of Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
Hisstory is told mainly in Gen. 6–9. Because of its greatwickedness, God resolved to destroy the human race. But Noah foundgrace in God’s sight, so God instructed him to build a largeboat as directed and to take aboard provisions for his family as wellas selected representatives of animal life. Noah dutifully obeyed,and his family thus was preserved through the ensuing catastrophe.From them the earth was repopulated (Gen. 10), and Noah was therecipient of various directives for the governance of thepostdiluvian world, often referred to as the Noahic covenant (Gen.9:1–17). Noah’s personal story ends with the curiousepisode of him getting drunk and subsequently cursing a son of Hamfor some offense that Ham committed, the nature of which is describedonly as seeing “the nakedness of his father” (Gen. 9:22ESV, NRSV, NASB). His age at the time of his death is given as 950.
Noahis mentioned two other times in the OT. God cites his promise thatthe “waters of Noah” never again would destroy the earthto affirm his covenant faithfulness to Israel (Isa. 54:9), and inanother text groups Noah together with Job and Daniel as those whocould deliver themselves by their righteousness, but not disobedientIsrael (Ezek. 14:14, 20). In the NT, Jesus cites the conditions inNoah’s day as being representative of conditions at the time ofhis coming (Matt. 24:37–38; Luke 17:26–27). Petermentions Noah twice, once to refer to the spirits of those whoperished in the flood (1Pet. 3:20) and once to use Noah as anexample of God’s ability to deliver his people (2Pet.2:5). Hebrews 11:7 lists Noah as a hero of faith.
(2)Oneof the five daughters of Zelophehad. Their petition for a portion oftheir deceased father’s property helped set a precedent forinheritance law in ancient Israel (Num. 27:1–11; cf. Josh.17:1–6). When it came time for the daughters of Zelophehad tomarry, a further decree was issued that inherited land must not passfrom tribe to tribe (Num. 36).
God announced to Noah that he was going to destroy all theinhabitants of the earth and commanded him to build an “ark”(Heb. tebah; Gen. 6:14–16). Apart from the Genesis floodnarrative, Exod. 2:3–5 is the only other passage in the Biblewhere this word is used, there for the ark of bulrushes in which theinfant Moses was placed. Both arks were made waterproof by a coatingof pitch (tar). An ark is something built to save people fromdrowning. It is not the name of a kind of boat as such (e.g., yacht),but rather a geometric boxlike shape. The ark was without rudder,sail, or any navigational aid.
Noahwas told to make it of “gopher wood” (Heb. goper), whichthe early Jewish Aramaic translations (Targumim) identified as cedar(NIV, NRSV, NET: “cypress wood”). The Hebrew word goperoccurs only here in the Bible, but the Akkadian equivalent (kupru) isfound at a similar point in the Epic of Gilgamesh. It was, then, theright kind of wood for a boat. The ark was to have “rooms”—thatis, cubicles (lit., “nests”)—for the differentanimals to be housed in and kept apart from other animals.
Afterthe general description of the ark (Gen. 6:14), details were providedby God on how to build it (6:15). Its length (300 cubits), width (50cubits), and height (30 cubits) were specified. “Cubit”literally means “forearm” (the distance from elbow to tipof middle finger), so the ark was approximately 450 feet (140 meters)long, 75 feet (23 meters) wide, and 45 feet (13.5 meters) high (seeNIV mg.). We cannot be exactly sure if “roof” (6:16) isthe correct translation of the Hebrew word tsohar, which may refer toa hatchway or skylight (Vulg.: fenestra [“window”]; notethe NIV 1984 mg.: “Make an opening for light”). Anotherpossibility is “pitched roof.” The usual Hebrew word,gag, is not used because that refers to a flat roof (see Josh. 2:6,8; 2 Sam. 11:2). The instruction to “finish it to a cubitabove” (RSV) refers to the pitch of the roof or its overhang.The “window” (Heb. khallon) that Noah opens in Gen. 8:6is probably to be equated with this skylight in the roof, not awindow in the side (since Noah cannot see out). In Gen. 8:13 Noahremoves the “covering” (Heb. mikseh) from the ark, so asto see the surface of the earth.
Theark was to have a door in its side, which was closed by God (Gen.6:16; 7:16). The structure was also to have three decks, whichsuggests that the ark was viewed as a microcosmos, with its threelevels matching sky, earth, and sea. Genesis 6:17 explains why an arkis needed. The destruction will be by means of water, and the arkwill carry Noah and his family (eight persons), as well as at leastone pair of every living creature. The NT refers to Noah’sconstruction of the ark (Heb. 11:7; 1 Pet. 3:20) and hisentering it (Matt. 24:38; Luke 17:27).
Mentioned only in the OT in most Bible versions (MSG uses“nose” in the NT as part of English idioms; e.g., Matt.13:57; 21:32), the nose often is referred to in the context ofjewelry, as nose rings for women were a fine adornment in ancientHebrew culture (Gen. 24:47; Ezek. 16:12), in some cases indicative ofextravagance (Isa. 3:16–24). Other times, a stronger partywould direct a weaker party by means of a hook or a cord in theirnose (2Kings 19:28; 2Chron. 33:11; Job 40:24).
TheHebrew word for nose, ’ap, could be used metaphorically foranger, much as English speakers might say that an angry person “hassteam coming out of his nose.” Thus, the NIV’s “[he]became angry” can translate the Hebrew phrase “[his] noseburned” (Gen. 30:2; Judg. 10:7). The same Hebrew term can alsorefer to nostrils. The NIV uses the translation “nostrils”several times in the OT, often in poetry, usually in connection withbreath (Gen. 2:7; 7:22; 2Sam. 22:16 [cf. Ps. 18:15]; Job 27:3)or as a source of smoke (2Sam. 22:9 [cf. Ps. 18:8]; Job 41:20).
TheHebrews also used ’ap to refer to the entire face, normallywhen a person was bowing facedown. In such instances, “boweddown with his face to the ground” translates the Hebrew phrase“bowed down with nostrils [’appayim] toward the ground”(Gen. 19:1; 1Sam. 25:41).
The words “sacrifice” and “offering”often are used interchangeably, but “offering” refers toa gift more generally, while “sacrifice” indicates a giftconsecrated for a divine being. In biblical Hebrew “sacrifice”is more narrowly equated with the peace offering. All other“sacrifices” are referred to as gifts. Sacrifices wereoffered to honor God, thanking him for his goodness. More important,they enabled persons to be made right with God by atoning for theirsins. Whereas sin upset the fellowship God desired to have withpeople and kindled his wrath, sacrifice restored the relationship.
OldTestament
OTofferings included cereals (whether the grain was whole, ground intoflour, or mixed with other elements), liquids (wine, oil, or water),and animals (or parts thereof, such as the blood and fat). Althoughthe Bible acknowledges that other ancient Near Eastern people hadtheir own sacrificial rites, it rejects them as unworthy of the Godof Israel. The people of God therefore were instructed how tosacrifice properly while at Sinai. Even so, offerings and sacrificesare recorded as taking place before the law was given.
Priorto the law.Cain and Abel brought the earliest offerings. Contrary to a commoninterpretation, Cain’s offering was not rejected because it didnot include blood; the Hebrew word for the brothers’ gifts,minkhah,usually denotes grain offerings. A better conclusion is that Cainonly brought some of his produce (no mention of firstfruits), whileAbel brought the best of the best (the fat portions from thefirstborn of the flock).
Immediatelyafter the flood, Noah built an altar and presented the first burntoffering mentioned in the Bible (Gen. 8:20). That this (and othersacrifices) was received as a “pleasing aroma” indicatesthat God approved of and accepted it. It is significant thatimmediately after the offering, God made a covenant with Noah, hisdescendants, and every living creature. Sacrifices are closelyrelated to covenant relationships, as can be seen in the story ofAbraham enacting a covenant ceremony in Gen. 15 and in Israelreceiving many instructions about sacrifice while at Sinai (cf. Gen.31:43–54).
Sacrificiallaws in Leviticus.Sacrificial laws are found throughout the Pentateuch, the most beingin Lev. 1–7. As Leviticus makes clear, Israel understoodsacrifice to have a number of different purposes. It was a means tobring a gift to God, to express communion with him and others in thecommunity, to consecrate something or someone for God’s use,and to deal with personal uncleanness or sin. These ideas aredeveloped in the descriptions of the different sacrifices that Israelwas required to bring to God. In general, the sacrifices were made ofclean animals raised by the one making the offering or of grain orwine produced by the person. In some cases, the offering wasconnected with the person’s economic ability, a poorer personbeing allowed to present doves or even cereal if a lamb or goat wasunaffordable for a sin offering (Lev. 5:6–13). In all cases,only the best—what was “without defect”—wasto be offered.
Priestas mediator.Three parties were involved in the sacrifices: the worshiper, thepriest, and God. The worshiper—the person who had sinned orbecome unclean in some way—brought an animal to God, laid ahand upon it, and then killed it. Whether the animal’s deathrepresents the death that the worshiper deserves due to sin orwhether the sin is transferred to the animal that bears it instead isunclear. The priest served as a mediator who offered the blood of thesacrifice to God and, in many instances, burned all or part of theoffering. In response to the offering, God, who had graciously giventhe sacrificial system so that those who had sinned could be restoredto fellowship with him, forgave the person. Uniquely in the ancientworld, Israelite sacrifices were not considered magical acts thatcould manipulate God to act on behalf of the worshiper. Presenting animproper sacrifice while exhibiting an improper attitude or motiveresulted in rejection.
Typesof sacrifices.Leviticus introduced five main sacrifices: the ’olah (1:1–17;6:8–18), the minkhah (2:1–16; 6:14–23), theshelamim (3:1–17; 7:11–36), the khatta’t(4:1–5:13), and the ’asham (5:14–6:7). Most ofthese focused on uncleanness or sin. The worshiper who brought suchan offering was not allowed to eat any of it, as it was wholly givento God. Even when priests were allowed to eat part of a sacrifice,their portion was “waved” before God, indicating that itbelonged to him.
1.The ’olah, or burnt offering, is the basic OT sacrificeconnected with atonement for sin (Lev. 1:4). When rightly offered, itwas accepted as “an aroma pleasing to the Lord.” Theworshiper brought a male animal (young bull, sheep, goat, dove, oryoung pigeon) without blemish, laid a hand upon it, and then killedit. After the priest sprinkled some of the blood on the altar, therest was burned up.
2.The minkhah is simply a gift or offering. The Hebrew word is oftenused for a present given to another person or tribute to a ruler.When used of sacrifice, it is usually rendered as “grainoffering” or “meal offering.” A minkhah can, onoccasion, include flesh or fat (Gen. 4:4; Judg. 6:18–21).Considered “an aroma pleasing to the Lord,” it consistedof unground grain or fine flour mixed with oil and incense and waspresented either cooked or uncooked. Part of the offering was burnedas a “memorial portion,” the rest being given to thepriests (Lev. 2:1–3). It usually was accompanied by a drinkoffering—wine poured out on the altar. Grain offeringsfrequently complemented burnt offerings or fellowship offerings. Theshowbread may have been considered a grain offering.
3.The shelamim (NIV: “fellowship offering”) hastraditionally been called the “peace offering,” as theterm is related to shalom. This offering most likely indicated thatthe worshiper was at peace with God and others; all the worshiper’srelationships were whole. Classified into three types, it could beused to express thanksgiving, to signify the fulfillment of a vow, orsimply to denote one’s desire to bring an offering to God outof free will. Only those who made a vow were required to offer ashelamim; the other forms were wholly optional. The worshiper broughta male or female animal (ox, sheep, or goat) without blemish, laid ahand on its head, and slaughtered it. The priest sprinkled its bloodon the sides of the altar and burned the fat surrounding the majororgans. It is described as “an aroma pleasing to the Lord.”
Thisoffering significantly recognized the covenant relationship existingbetween those who shared in it. God received the fatty portions, theofficiating priest received the right thigh, the other priests thebreast, and the remainder was shared among members of a family, clan,tribe, or some other group. According to Leviticus, a thanksgivingoffering was to be eaten on the day it was offered, and a vow orfreewill offering could be eaten within two days. Anything not eatenin the prescribed time period was to be burned.
4.The khatta’t, or sin offering, atoned for the sin of anindividual or of the nation and cleansed the sacred items in thetabernacle that had been corrupted by sin. Since a sin offering couldpurify ceremonial as well as moral uncleanness, people who wereunclean due to childbirth, skin diseases, bodily discharges, and soforth also brought them (Lev. 12–15).
Thekind of animal sacrificed and the sacrificial ritual varied with theoffender and the offense. If a priest or the entire congregationsinned, a bull was sacrificed and its blood was sprinkled before theveil of the tabernacle and on the incense altar in the holy place.The rest was burned, leaving nothing to be eaten. Leaders who sinnedsacrificed a male goat. Its blood was sprinkled on the bronze altar,and the remainder was given to the priest. A commoner brought andslaughtered a she-goat or lamb, the priest sprinkled its blood on thehorns of the altar, and the fat was burned for God and the rest givento the priests. A poor person could bring two doves or pigeons, andthe very poor could bring a grain offering. This differentiationapparently indicated that the sins of some members of the communityhad more serious consequences than others. Those in closest contactwith the tabernacle contaminated it at a deeper level, requiring amore costly sacrifice. The poor were not required to bring more thanthey could afford.
5.The ’asham, or guilt offering, provided compensation for sins.A ram without blemish was sacrificed, its blood was sprinkled on thealtar, and its fatty portions, kidneys, and liver were burned. Therest was given to the priest. In addition, the value of what wasmisappropriated plus one-fifth of its value was given to the personwronged or to the priests.
Altars.According to Leviticus, only the Aa-ron-ic priests could handle theblood or other parts of a sacrifice brought to the altar at thetabernacle. Even so, throughout Israel’s history othersacrificial altars were built. While some of these were illicitlyused for syncretistic practices, others were constructed at God’sinstruction (Josh. 8:30–35; Judg. 6:25–26). Some of thesewere used by priests making rounds so that people from differentareas could sacrifice to God (1Sam. 7:17). Others were used byindividuals who were not priests yet desired to call upon the name ofthe Lord or sacrifice for communal meals. The solitary altars weremainly used for burnt offerings and peace offerings, although grainand drink offerings also were known. Sin and guilt offerings wereoffered only at the tabernacle or temple.
Timesand purposes.The OT regulates a number of different occasions upon which regularsacrifices were to be made. Burnt offerings were presented everymorning and evening (Exod. 29:38–41; Num. 28:1–8).Additional offerings were sacrificed on the Sabbath and the new moon(Num. 28:9–15). Special sacrifices were brought to celebratethe major festivals of the year (Num. 28:16–29:39),particularly the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16). Sacrifices might alsoaccompany requests for safety or deliverance or in response to God’sdeliverance. Thus, burnt and fellowship offerings could be broughtalong with prayers that God would put an end to a plague (2Sam.24:18–25). King David brought burnt offerings and fellowshipofferings when the ark of the covenant was returned after having beencaptured by the Philistines (2Sam. 6:1–19).
Sacrificescould also be made to consecrate people or things for a special task.When the tabernacle was consecrated, special offerings were broughtfor twelve continuous days (Num. 7). Later, fellowship, burnt, andgrain offerings were sacrificed when the temple was dedicated(1Kings 8:62–64). Sin offerings were presented when apriest was ordained (Lev. 8–9). Those who completed a vowdedicating themselves as Naz-i-rites brought sacrifices to God sothat they could again become a normal member of the congregation(Num. 6:9–21). Fellowship offerings often accompanied theannouncement of or installation of a king (1Sam. 11:14–15;1Kings 1:9,25).
Althoughthe sacrificial system was intended to bring the Israelites back intofellowship with God, at times their misuse of it separated them fromhim. When his people showed more interest in sacrificial ritual thanin obeying God’s instructions, they were chastened (1Sam.15:13–22; Jer. 7:21–28). When the people of Israel wereguilty of confusing the worship of Yahweh with Canaanite fertilitycults, God sent prophets to warn them (Isa. 1:11–16; Amos4:4–5). Prophetic statements denouncing sacrificial rites wereaimed at the misuse of sacrifices rather than their existence.Jeremiah and Ezekiel were so positive about sacrificial worship thatthey looked forward to a time when it would be reestablished in itspure form (Jer. 17:26; Ezek. 43:18–27; 46:1–24).
NewTestament
TheNT indicates that the OT sacrificial system was still in place in theearly first century AD. Following directions given in Leviticus, Marybrought a sacrifice to the temple in Jerusalem so that she could bepurified after giving birth to Jesus (Luke 2:21–24; cf. Lev.12:3, 8). Mary and Joseph would have sacrificed and eaten a Passoverlamb during their annual pilgrimage to Jerusalem to celebrate theFeast of Passover. It is not recorded whether Jesus always went withthem, but he did join them at the Passover celebration when he wastwelve years old. It is safe to assume that at this time and after hegrew up, Jesus took part in the sacrifices when he visited Jerusalemto celebrate the feasts.
Jesus’disciples attend several feasts with him. In addition, after hisresurrection they frequently went to the temple to pray at the timewhen sacrifices were made. Encouraged by the Jerusalem churchleaders, Paul went to the temple to join in and pay for thepurification rites of some men who had taken a vow, perhaps to serveas Nazirites (Acts 21:23–26). He later testified before Felixthat he had returned to Jerusalem in order to bring gifts to the poorand present offerings in the temple (24:17). Although Gentilebelievers were exempt from these practices (15:1–29), earlyJewish believers clearly saw no contradiction between believing thegospel of Jesus Christ and engaging in sacrificial rituals. Theylikely followed Jewish piety until the destruction of the temple inAD 70, when all sacrifices at the temple ceased.
Evenso, Christians quickly came to understand Christ’s death as thefinal sacrifice that completed the OT system. Various NT authorsconsider the nature of Christ’s death and metaphorically relateit to OT sacrifices, but the writer of Hebrews develops this in themost detail. According to Hebrews, the sacrificial system was merelythe shadow that pointed to Jesus. Although the blood of animals couldnot adequately deal with sins, Jesus’ sacrifice could (Heb.10:1–10). Jesus is regularly identified as the sacrificial lambwhose blood purifies humanity from sin (John 1:29, 36; Rom. 8:3;1Cor. 5:7; Eph. 5:2; 1Pet. 1:19; 1John 1:7; Rev.5:6, 12; 7:14; 12:11; 13:8). His sacrifice is considered apropitiation that turns away God’s wrath (Rom. 3:25; 1John2:2).
Theend of the OT sacrificial system does not mean that those who come toGod through Jesus Christ no longer bring sacrifices. Instead ofanimal and grain offerings, spiritual sacrifices are to be made(1Pet. 2:5). Emulating their Savior, Christ’s followersshould offer themselves as living sacrifices, devoted to God (Rom.12:1). This implies that everything done in this life could beconsidered a sacrifice. Simply believing the gospel makes one anacceptable offering to God (Rom. 15:16). Labor for the sake of thegospel, or perhaps martyrdom, can be viewed as a drink offering(Phil. 2:17). The author of Hebrews identifies three types ofsacrifices that believers should offer: praise, good deeds, andsharing with those in need (13:15–16). In line with the last ofthese points, Paul counts the gift sent by the Philippian church as afragrant offering that pleases God (Phil. 4:18).
The word “perfect” is used to translate Hebrewand Greek terms for ritual and moral wholeness. In the biblical textthe terms “whole,” “complete,” and “mature”are related to “perfect.” Often, “perfect”conveys the sense of something reaching its end and therefore its“completion” or “perfection.”
TheOT describes an animal or crop intended for sacrificial offering as“unblemished,” “whole,” or “perfect”(Heb. tamim). Though not translated “perfect” in the NIV,the term tamim frequently appears in cultic contexts of Israel’sworship (e.g., Exod. 12:5; Lev. 1:3, 10; 3:1, 6; 4:3). Neitherimperfect animals nor priests with physical defects were consideredfit for service in the temple because of their lack of wholeness(Lev. 21:16–23; 22:17–25). Wholeness itself reflectedGod’s holiness through physical wholeness (see Lev. 10:3).
Figuratively,the term tamim (or tam) refers to wholeness of heart and is appliedto human action or conduct, where it describes walking blamelesslybefore God (Noah [Gen. 6:9]; Abraham [Gen. 17:1; cf. Deut. 18:13];Job [Job 1:1]). God’s way is described as “perfect”(2Sam. 22:31), as is his knowledge (Job 37:16), and Ps. 19:7recounts how the “law of the Lord is perfect, refreshing thesoul.” Thus, God’s perfection or holiness must bereflected in God’s people: “Speak to the entire assemblyof Israel and say to them: ‘Be holy because I, the Lord yourGod, am holy’” (Lev. 19:2).
Inthe NT, “perfect” can refer to something of the higheststandard (James 1:17, 25) or to a fully “mature” adult(Eph. 4:13). “To make perfect” often appears with culticovertones. In Hebrews, Christ, our high priest, is “perfected”through suffering (2:10) and made eternally “perfect”(7:28). God’s love reaches “perfection” whenbelievers obey God’s word: “If anyone obeys his word,love for God is truly made complete in them” (1John 2:5).When “perfect” appears in the NT letters as applied tohumans, the idea is not of ethical perfection by degrees, but ratherit conveys a sense of undivided wholeness of heart before God. Thenotion of “perfection” in contemporary English conveysthe idea of “sinlessness,” but the biblical idea refersmore to something that is “whole” or “complete.”For something to be “perfect” means that it fulfills itsintended design: a house is “perfect” if it has fourwalls and a roof and can provide shelter.
The word “perfect” is used to translate Hebrewand Greek terms for ritual and moral wholeness. In the biblical textthe terms “whole,” “complete,” and “mature”are related to “perfect.” Often, “perfect”conveys the sense of something reaching its end and therefore its“completion” or “perfection.”
TheOT describes an animal or crop intended for sacrificial offering as“unblemished,” “whole,” or “perfect”(Heb. tamim). Though not translated “perfect” in the NIV,the term tamim frequently appears in cultic contexts of Israel’sworship (e.g., Exod. 12:5; Lev. 1:3, 10; 3:1, 6; 4:3). Neitherimperfect animals nor priests with physical defects were consideredfit for service in the temple because of their lack of wholeness(Lev. 21:16–23; 22:17–25). Wholeness itself reflectedGod’s holiness through physical wholeness (see Lev. 10:3).
Figuratively,the term tamim (or tam) refers to wholeness of heart and is appliedto human action or conduct, where it describes walking blamelesslybefore God (Noah [Gen. 6:9]; Abraham [Gen. 17:1; cf. Deut. 18:13];Job [Job 1:1]). God’s way is described as “perfect”(2Sam. 22:31), as is his knowledge (Job 37:16), and Ps. 19:7recounts how the “law of the Lord is perfect, refreshing thesoul.” Thus, God’s perfection or holiness must bereflected in God’s people: “Speak to the entire assemblyof Israel and say to them: ‘Be holy because I, the Lord yourGod, am holy’” (Lev. 19:2).
Inthe NT, “perfect” can refer to something of the higheststandard (James 1:17, 25) or to a fully “mature” adult(Eph. 4:13). “To make perfect” often appears with culticovertones. In Hebrews, Christ, our high priest, is “perfected”through suffering (2:10) and made eternally “perfect”(7:28). God’s love reaches “perfection” whenbelievers obey God’s word: “If anyone obeys his word,love for God is truly made complete in them” (1John 2:5).When “perfect” appears in the NT letters as applied tohumans, the idea is not of ethical perfection by degrees, but ratherit conveys a sense of undivided wholeness of heart before God. Thenotion of “perfection” in contemporary English conveysthe idea of “sinlessness,” but the biblical idea refersmore to something that is “whole” or “complete.”For something to be “perfect” means that it fulfills itsintended design: a house is “perfect” if it has fourwalls and a roof and can provide shelter.
A viscous substance used for waterproofing vessels, such asNoah’s wooden ark (Gen. 6:14) and the papyrus basket containingthe infant Moses (Exod. 2:3). Pitch may have been a softer form ofbitumen or asphalt, resinous substances made by distilling organicmatter. The image of burning pitch describes divine judgment on Edomin Isa. 34:9.
A technical term for “promise” does not appear inthe OT, but its concept is present throughout Scripture. God unfoldsthe history of redemption by employing the idea of promises. Thewriters of the NT repeatedly assert that Jesus Christ has fulfilledGod’s promises in the OT (e.g., Luke 24:44–48; 1Cor.15:3–8).
OldTestament
Thepromises in the OT are closely related to the history of salvation.At each stage of redemptive history, God delivered a new messageabout redemption, usually in the form of a covenant. Immediatelyafter the fall of humankind, God first revealed his plan ofsalvation: the promise that the seed of the woman would ultimatelycrush the head of the serpent (Gen. 3:15). After the flood, God madea covenant with Noah, promising never again to destroy the earth witha flood (Gen. 8:21–9:17).
Mostremarkable is the promise that God made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob(Gen. 12:1–3; 13:14–17; 17:4–8; 22:17–18;26:1–5; 28:13–15). God called Abraham in order to givehim three specific blessings: the land, descendants, and the channelof blessing among the nations. As a sign of his promise, God made acovenant of circumcision with Abraham and his descendants (17:10–14).With Isaac (26:1–5) and Jacob (28:13–15), God repeatedlyreconfirmed the promise made to Abraham. At the time of the exodusand later the settlement in Canaan, God’s promise to Abrahamwas partially fulfilled by multiplying his descendants into millionsand by giving them the promised land.
AtMount Sinai, God made another covenant with the Israelites. In thiscovenant, God promised that they would be his “treasuredpossession” among the nations if they would obey him and keephis covenant (Exod. 19:5). God’s special blessings werepronounced for them to be “a kingdom of priests and a holynation” (19:6). For this purpose, God gave them the TenCommandments, which became the religious and ethical standard for hiscovenant people (20:1–17). In the book of Deuteronomy,moreover, God’s promises were made in the form of blessings tothe obedient and of curses to the disobedient (Deut. 28). Later thesebecame the criteria by which the kings of Israel were judged todetermine whether they had lived an obedient life.
Accordingto 2 Sam. 7:11–16, God made an eternal covenant with David,promising the permanence of David’s house, kingdom, and throne.In this covenant it was also promised that his offspring would buildthe house of the Lord. The Davidic covenant was partially fulfilledat the time of Solomon, who as king built the house of the Lord, thefirst temple in Jerusalem (1Kings 8:15–25). Later, in theperiod of the classical prophets, when the hope for the Davidicthrone was endangered, the permanence of the Davidic throne andkingdom reappeared in the form of messianic prophecy (Jer. 23:5–8;Ezek. 37:24–28). This promise was ultimately fulfilled by thecoming of Jesus Christ from the line of David (Matt. 1:1–17).
Thehistory of Israel shows that although the nation repeatedly brokeGod’s covenants, he remained faithful to them. According toNum. 23:19, God’s promises are absolutely trustworthy: “Godis not human, that he should lie, not a human being, that he shouldchange his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise andnot fulfill?” The trustworthiness of God’s promisesresults from his unchanging character (Ps. 110:4; Mal. 3:6–7).The almighty God has the power to fulfill his promises (Isa. 55:11).When Joshua finished conquering the land of Canaan, he confessed thatGod was faithful in keeping all his promises to his ancestors (Josh.21:45; 23:14–15). Joshua himself witnessed that trusting God’spromises is a life-and-death issue. Those who had not trusted hispromise to give them the land of Canaan perished in the wilderness,but those who had trusted his promise were allowed to enter it (Num.14:1–35).
NewTestament
Thecentral message of the NT is that God’s promises in the OT arefulfilled with the coming of Jesus Christ. Matthew’s numerouscitation formulas are evidence of this theme. In Luke 4:16–21Jesus pronounces the fulfillment of Isaiah’s promise (about theMessiah’s ministry [Isa. 61:1–3]) in his own life. Thebook of Acts specifically states that Jesus’ suffering andresurrection and the coming of the Holy Spirit are the fulfillment ofthe OT promises (2:29–31; 13:32–34). Jesus’identity both as the descendant of David (Acts 13:23) and as theprophet like Moses (Acts 3:21–26; cf. Deut. 18:15–18) isalso regarded as the fulfillment of theOT.
Paul’sview of God’s promises is summarized in this statement: “Forno matter how many promises God has made, they are ‘Yes’in Christ” (2Cor. 1:20). According to Rom. 1:2–3,Paul regards the gospel as the message that God “promisedbeforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures regarding hisSon.” In Rom. 4 Abraham’s faith is described in terms ofhis trust in God’s promises, which leads to his righteousness.He is presented as our model of faith in God’s promises. Thefamous phrase “according to the Scriptures” in 1Cor.15:3–4 is, in a sense, understood by Paul as the fulfillment ofGod’s promises regarding Christ’s death and resurrection.
Inthe book of Hebrews, the concept of promise plays an important role.In Heb. 6 Abraham is presented as the exemplary man who trusted inGod’s promise. The author exhorts the Hebrew Christians tofollow Abraham’s model of trust in God’s promise(6:12–20). The author also asserts that Jesus’ newcovenant is superior to the old one because his ministry “isestablished on better promises” (8:6). In Heb. 11 the faith ofthe great OT saints is acclaimed in terms of their faith in God’spromises.
Inthe NT, God makes new promises based on the work of Christ, includingthe final resurrection and the second coming of Christ (John 5:29;11:25–26; 1Cor. 15:48–57; 2Cor. 4:14;1Thess. 4:13–18). Furthermore, the message of the gospelis presented as multiple promises, including eternal life, thefullness of life in Christ, the forgiveness of sins, the indwellingof the Holy Spirit, the peace of God, the knowledge of God, and thejoy of God (Matt. 28:18–20; John 3:16; 10:10; 14:16, 27;16:20–24; 17:25–26; Phil. 4:4–9; 1John 1:9).
HumanPromises
TheScriptures contain many cases of people making promises to otherpeople. For example, Abraham made promises to the king of Sodom andto Abimelek (Gen. 14:22–24; 21:22–24). The Israelitespies made a promise to Rahab (Josh. 2:12–21). People also makepromises to God: Jacob, Jephthah, Hannah, and the returning exiles(Gen. 28:20–21; Judg. 11:29–40; 1Sam. 1:11–20;Neh. 10:28–29). Human promises usually are accompanied by thetaking of an oath (Gen. 14:22; 21:24; Deut. 6:13; Josh. 2:12–14)or the declaration of a curse in case of its breach (Ruth 1:17;1Sam. 14:24; 2Sam. 3:35; 1Kings 2:23). It isimperative to keep the promise that one makes to a human being or toGod (Num. 30:1–2; Ps. 50:14). In Mal. 2:14–16, divorce isregarded as a breaking of the oath between husband and wife. In OTtimes, people were afraid of curses falling upon them when they brokea promise. The Bible warns of the danger of making false promises, asdoing so will bring about sin and judgment (Lev. 19:12; Deut. 23:21;Zech. 8:17). It is an axiom of the wisdom literature that one shouldnot make promises rashly or lightly (Prov. 20:25; Eccles. 5:1–7),and Jesus prohibits the taking of any oath because of the possibilityof its breach (Matt. 5:33–37).
In an agrarian society with an unpredictable climate, such asIsrael, rainfall was of the utmost importance. Two rainy periodscould be hoped for each year, in February/March and inOctober/November, and these seasons were critical in producing a goodcrop. Regular rainfall thus formed a significant part of God’spromise of a good and fruitful land for his people (Lev. 26:4).Solomon’s prayer acknowledges the conditional nature of thispromise: rain would be withheld from a sinful nation but would begiven to a forgiven and obedient people (1Kings 8:35–36).
Raincould also be sent in judgment, most notably in the flood narratives,where God sent rain in order to destroy all living things on the faceof the earth (Gen. 7:4), and in the exodus narrative, where rainaccompanied hail and thunder in the seventh plague (Exod. 9:23).
Sincerain is completely beyond human control, it naturally became a symbolof God’s sovereignty in both blessing and curse. A strikingexample of this is in 1Kings 17–18, when for three yearsthe rains were withheld, until finally Elijah’s trust in Godwas vindicated above the prophets of Baal, and the rain followed. Theeffectiveness of Elijah’s prayers, first for drought and laterfor rain, is held up in the NT as an example for all believers (James5:17–18).
The act of repudiating sin and returning to God. Implicit inthis is sorrow over the evil that one has committed and a completeturnabout in one’s spiritual direction: turning fromidols—anything that wrests away the affection that we oweGod—to God (1Sam. 7:3; 2Chron. 7:14; Isa. 55:6;1Thess. 1:9; James 4:8–10).
Terminology.TwoHebrew word groups are associated with the concept of repentance:nakham and shub. Nakham means “to pant, sigh, groan, howl.”When used with respect to the circ*mstances of others and the feelingof sympathy that they engender, it refers to compassion. When used inreference to feelings generated by one’s own actions, it means“grief” or “remorse.” In this regard, nakhampredominantly has God as the subject. The KJV translates it aboutforty times as “repent.” While one of the senses ofnakham is that of grief over one’s actions, those actions areethically neutral: it does not presuppose that they are inherentlyevil. The NIV is correct, therefore, in never translating nakham as“repent” where God is the subject. In most cases whereGod is its subject, the term highlights God’s compassion andcomfort for the afflicted (Isa. 40:1–2; 49:13), or his griefover the dire consequences brought upon or intended for thedisobedient and his subsequent commutation of their punishment (Exod.32:12–14; Judg. 2:18; 2Sam. 24:16; Jon. 3:10), or hisgrief over human self-ruinous obstinacy (Gen. 6:6–7; 1Sam.15:11). Even in the few cases where nakham has human subjects, itneed not always be rendered “repent,” their concern forchange of heart notwithstanding (cf. Exod. 13:17; Judg. 21:6).
Theconcept of repentance is better conveyed by the Hebrew verb shub(“to turn, return back, restore, reverse, bring back”) orits noun form in rabbinic Judaism, teshubah (“repentance”).While shub has many nonreligious uses, its theological significancederives from the sense of either “turning away from God”(apostasy [cf. Hos. 11:7; Jer. 11:10]) or “turning to God”(repentance [cf. 1Sam. 7:3–4; Hos. 14:1]). Our concern iswith the latter sense, which normally would be followed by God’sreturn to his people (Zech. 1:3; Mal. 3:7).
Inthe OT, shub is central to the concept of repentance. It is the keyterm employed in the entreaty to God’s people to return to him(2Chron. 30:6; Isa. 44:22; Ezek. 14:6). The outward signs ofrepentance in the OT include fasting, mourning (sometimes whilesitting in dust or pouring ashes or dust upon one’s head),rending garments, wearing sackcloth, and offering sacrifices (Lev.5:5–12; 2Kings 22:11, 19; Neh. 9:1; Joel 2:12–17).The Israelites became so preoccupied with these outward forms thatGod told them repeatedly that he no longer had interest in them, butrather sought contrition of the heart (Ps. 34:18; Isa. 1:10–16;58; 66:2; Joel 2:13).
Inthe NT, the dominant terms used for repentance are the verb metanoeōand the cognate noun metanoia; the overwhelming majority of theseoccur in Luke-Acts. These terms are used to expressthe complete turnaround in one’s way of life, includingconversion,faith, and regeneration (Acts 2:28; 3:19; 5:31; 20:21). Occasionallythese two terms are complemented by epistrephō to stress thepositive side of repentance, that of turning from sin oridols to God (Acts 9:35; 11:21; 26:20).
Elementsof repentance.The constituent elements of biblical repentance include thefollowing: (1)A recognition of one’s sin, its damagingeffects on life and nature, its affront to God’s word andauthority, and its dire consequences (Ezek. 18:4; Rom. 3:23; 8:19–22;Rev. 21:8). (2)Personal outrage and remorse over one’ssin, grief at one’s helplessness, and a deep longing forforgiveness, reconciliation, and restoration. (3)A personalresponse to God’s grace in choosing a new spiritual directionby breaking with the past and returning to God. This includesconfession and renunciation of sin, and prayer for God’sforgiveness (Lev. 5:5; Prov. 28:13; 1John 1:9). (4)Insome circ*mstances, repentance may require restitution (Exod.22:1–15; 1Sam. 12:3; 2Sam. 12:6; Luke 19:8). (5)Atit* core, repentance is a rejection of the autonomous life and thesurrender of oneself to the lordship of Christ (Jer. 3:22; Mark8:34–38). (6)The proof of true repentance is the worthyfruit of a changed life (Luke 3:7–14; Eph. 4:17–32; Col.1:10).
God’s “repenting” (KJV) or “relenting”(NIV) may seem to be in tension with his sovereignty, but it makessense on several assumptions. God wills to accomplish certain overallends, but he retains freedom to modify the path that he takes toachieve them, as needed. This in turn assumes that God’sinteraction with humanity involves genuine give-and-take. Therefore,God’s way in history may be recounted as a story with surprisetwists and turns that are integral to the plot. We may affirm allthis and also uphold divine sovereignty if we understand both humanprayer and God’s response as divinely ordained means for God toachieve his purposes.
Textsthat speak of God relenting indicate that God is adopting a newcourse of action, a change of mind. In a sense, divine judgmentit*elf represents a kind of “change of mind” from God’sbasic, original intent to bless. Whereas judgment is “hisstrange work ... his alien task” (Isa. 28:21),undertaken when necessary, God’s character is to be graciousand compassionate, to relent from sending calamity (Isa. 48:9; Joel2:13), and to bring restoration after judgment (Gen. 9:11; Isa.54:7–8; Hos.2).
Terminology.To portray God relenting, the OT often uses the Hebrew word nakham,which carries a strong emotional content and an element of regret. Oncertain occasions, it refers to profound grief that God feels inreaction to human sin and calamity (Gen. 6:6–7; Judg. 2:18;1Sam. 15:35; 2Sam. 24:16). This is not to suggest thatGod is making amends for wrongs or has the same kinds of regret formistakes that humans have. But we should recognize that when nakhamis used to speak of God “relenting,” it means somethingmore than a change in the direction of the wind: it involves theheart of God, engaged deeply with his people’s welfare (cf.Hos. 11:8–9). Conversely, the human cry for God to relent iswrung from experiences of deep crisis (Job 6:29; Pss. 90:13;106:44–45).
Exodusand Jonah.Two classic OT narratives about divine relenting may be contrasted.In Exod. 32 the Israelites’ idolatry with the golden calf isfollowed by God’s indictment and intention to destroy them. Adramatic turning point comes with Moses’ intercession, inresponse to which God relents. The book of Jonah turns this sequenceon its head. Here the prophet resists his mission of announcingNineveh’s doom because he fears that its people may repent,which they do (Jon. 3:5–9), and that God may then relent frombringing on them the judgment that he had sent Jonah to announce,which he does (4:2). The book of Jonah portrays the prophet as anantihero, out of step with the compassion and larger purposes of God,unhappy with the freedom of God. But it preserves the link betweenhuman repentance for sin and divine relenting from previouslyannounced judgment, as seen in Exod. 32.
Theprophets.Through the OT prophets, God wrestles with Israel, announcing onecourse of action, judgment, while often holding open the possibilityof an alternate ending: if Israel repents (Jer. 18:8; 26:3, 13) or ifa prophet (Amos 7:1–6) or a king (Jer. 26:19) intercedes, thenGod may relent. At the end of the day, relenting remains a move thatGod chooses to make or not to make (Isa. 57:6; Jer. 7:16–20;Ezek. 24:14), in faithfulness to his own purpose (Ps. 7:10–12;Jer. 23:20; 30:24; Zech. 8:14–15).
Inthe book of Amos, God does both. Amos 1–2 comprises a cycle ofseven judgment speeches against Israel’s neighbors, culminatingin the eighth, lengthiest judgment speech against Israel. Each speechopens with the formula “For three sins of X, and for four, Iwill not turn back [my wrath].” Here God declares that he hascommitted himself to carrying out judgment. With the use of the verbshub (“to turn, turn back”), any implied question ofreprieve is answered immediately: the nation’s condemnation isirrevocable. But in 7:1–6 God is twice said to “relent”(nakham) from sending the locusts and fire that he has just shownAmos in visions. Granting stays from specific forms of punishment isnot the same as forgiving Israel’s sin, however, and thesetemporary measures are followed by a reassertion of God’sdetermination to spare Israel no longer (7:7–9). Moreover, eventhough Israel’s doom is sealed, Amos can still urge his hearersto repent and turn to God, on the grounds that God may relent—thatis, freely respond with mercy and allow some to survive the nation’sfall (5:4–6, 14–15).
Salvationand judgment.This divine freedom, compassion, and judgment that dovetail in OTaccounts of God relenting are embodied in Jesus’ announcementof the kingdom, which signals both salvation and its corollary,judgment. Hence come his summons to “Repent and believe thegood news” (Mark 1:15) and the apostolic call for hearers toescape their generation’s doom by repentance and faith in Jesus(Acts 2:40).
In the OT, heavenly beings or angels are sometimes referredto as “sons of God” (Gen. 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Pss.82:6; 89:6). The more important background for the NT, however, isthe use of the term with reference to the nation Israel and themessianic king from David’s line. Israel was God’s son byvirtue of God’s unique calling, deliverance, and protection.Hosea 11:1 reads, “When Israel was a child, I loved him, andout of Egypt I called my son.” Similar references to God as thefather of his people appear throughout the OT (Exod. 4:22; Num.11:12; Deut. 14:1; 32:5, 19; Isa. 43:6; 45:11; Jer. 3:4, 19; 31:9,20; Hos. 2:1). The king from the line of David is referred to as theson of God by virtue of his special relationship to God and hisrepresentative role among the people. In the Davidic covenant, Godpromises David concerning his descendant, “I will be hisfather, and he will be my son” (2Sam. 7:14; cf. Pss. 2:7;89:26). Later Judaism appears to have taken up these passages andidentified the coming Messiah as the “son of God.”
Inthe Synoptic Gospels, Jesus’ divine sonship is closely linkedto his messiahship. The angel Gabriel connects Jesus’ status as“Son of the Most High” with his reception of the throneof David (Luke 1:32). At Jesus’ baptism (which Luke identifiesas Jesus’ messianic anointing [Luke 3:21; 4:1, 14, 18]), theFather declares Jesus to be “my Son, whom I love” (3:22),an allusion to Ps. 2:7. Satan tempts Jesus as the Son of God toabandon obedience to the Father and claim independent authority(Matt. 4:1–11; Luke 4:1–13). Peter confesses that Jesusis “the Messiah, the Son of the living God” (Matt.16:16), and the high priest questions whether Jesus is “theMessiah, the Son of the Blessed One” (Mark 14:61; Matt. 26:63).In these and other texts “Son of God” is almostsynonymous with “Messiah” (cf. Mark 1:1; Luke 4:41;22:70; John 11:27; 20:31; Acts 9:20, 22). In other contexts, Jesus’divine sonship appears to exceed messianic categories. Jesus prays toGod as his Father (“Abba” [Mark 14:36]) and refers tohimself as the Son, who uniquely knows and reveals the Father. TheFather has committed all things to him. No one knows the Father butthe Son and those to whom the Son reveals him (Matt. 11:25–27;Luke 10:21–22). It is by virtue of Jesus’ unique sonshipthat he invites his disciples to pray to God as their Father (Matt.6:9).
Inthe Fourth Gospel, the status of Jesus as the Son of God isespecially important, indicating both Jesus’ uniquerelationship with the Father and his essential deity. John introducesthe notion of preexistent sonship in which the “Word”from creation is the Son (John 1:1–18; 17:5, 24). God sendsinto the world his Son (3:16), who reflects the glory of the Father(1:14; 14:6–11) and who will soon return (14:28). Jesus affirmsthat “I and the Father are one” (10:30), that “theFather is in me, and I in the Father” (10:38). John’spurpose in writing is to provoke faith “that Jesus is theMessiah, the Son of God” (20:31).
Somescholars reject the royal Jewish background of “the Son of God”when investigating the phrase in the Gospels. Instead, they appeal toHellenistic sources to argue that Jesus as the Son of God is a“divineman” (theios anēr), which accounts for his ability to workmiracles. This line of thinking, however, is fraught with manydifficulties, not least of which is that the epithet is never used todescribe the “divineman” in Greek literature.
InPaul’s thinking, the corporate, Israelite background of “Sonof God” is renewed with reference to the NT people of God. Paulstates that “theirs [the people of Israel] is the adoption tosonship” (Rom. 9:4). Although ethnic Israelites are rightfullycalled “sons of God,” this status is contingent uponbeing people of faith: “So in Jesus Christ you are all childrenof God through faith” (Gal. 3:26); Jesus’ death as theSon effects salvation (Rom. 8:2, 32; Gal. 2:20). The Spirit alsoplays a role in testifying with the spirits of believers that theyare indeed children of God (Rom. 8:15–16), by which they cry,“Abba, Father” (Gal. 4:3–6). The believers’status as God’s children will be completely revealed when theyshare in Christ’s glory (Rom. 8:17).
The Hebrew expression “sons of God” (often translated as “children of God” in contemporary usage) is an important biblical concept and is used to describe a range of referents.
In the OT, the term is used to refer to angels (e.g., Job 1:6). They are subordinate divine beings, carrying out God’s mission on earth (Job 2:1). Compared to them, Yahweh’s incomparability is asserted in divine council (Ps. 89:6; cf. Deut. 32:8 NIV mg.). They are called upon to praise Yahweh for his creation (Ps. 29:1). They shout for joy at God’s creation (Job 38:7). In Gen. 6:2 the term refers to beings that are apparently of divine origin and to be contrasted with the “daughters of men” in that same passage. The sin mentioned in this passage refers to the cohabitation of divine beings and humans. This union is one of the impetuses for the flood, an indication of how bad things had gotten. The “order” of creation (Gen. 1), where humans are meant to be fruitful with their own kind, is here transgressed. Hence, God introduces further disorder by bringing back the waters of chaos to flood the earth.
Israel as a covenant nation is called “my son, my firstborn” by Yahweh (Exod. 4:22; Jer. 31:9; Hos. 11:1). As son, Israel is expected to give proper reverence and honor for his father (Mal. 1:6). Although only one of many metaphors for Israel in the OT, Israel’s status as son is important for understanding the movement of the book of Exodus. Israel is to be delivered from Egyptian rule because Israel is God’s son. If Pharaoh continues to mistreat Israel, God will call judgment upon Egypt’s firstborn, as he did in the plague of death and the Red Sea incident.
Sonship is not exclusive to Israel. The Gentiles are also included in the future of God’s program (Isa. 19:25; Zech. 14:16). Likewise, in the NT all humans are God’s children (Eph. 4:6). More often, though, the term refers to those who are in Christ. The bond is spiritual, and often the concept of adoption is used (John 1:12; Rom. 9:6; Gal. 3:26; 4:5–7; 1 John 5:1). See also Sons of God
In the world of the Bible, a person was viewed as a unity ofbeing with the pervading breath and thus imprint of the loving andholy God. The divine-human relationship consequently is portrayed inthe Bible as predominantly spiritual in nature. God is spirit, andhumankind may communicate with him in the spiritual realm. Theancients believed in an invisible world of spirits that held most, ifnot all, reasons for natural events and human actions in the visibleworld.
OldTestament
TheOT writers used the common Hebrew word ruakh(“wind” or “breath”) to describe force andeven life from the God of the universe. In its most revealing firstinstance, God’s ruakh hovered above the waters of the uncreatedworld (Gen. 1:2). In the next chapter of Genesis a companion word,neshamah (“breath”) is used as God breathed into Adam’snostrils “the breath of life” (2:7). God thus breathedhis own image into the first human being. Humankind’s moralobligations in the remainder of the Bible rest on this breathing actof God.
TheOT authors often employ ruakh simply to denote air in motion orbreath from a person’s mouth. However, special instances of theuse of ruakh include references to the very life of a person (Gen.7:22; Ps. 104:29), an attitude or emotion (Gen. 41:8; Num. 14:24; Ps.77:3), the negative traits of pride or temper (Ps. 76:12), agenerally good disposition (Prov. 11:13; 18:14), the seat ofconversion (Ezek. 18:31; 36:26), and determination given by God(2Chron. 36:22; Hag. 1:14).
Onoccasion in the OT, spirits are labeled “evil” (Judg.9:23 ESV, NRSV, NASB). In the case of an evil spirit tormenting KingSaul, the spirit was identified as “from the Lord”(1Sam. 16:14–15, 23). According to the perspective of theancients, once a person was possessed by a divine spirit, departureof such a spirit meant possession by a different spirit (1Sam.16:14). Such a perspective was common in the ancient Near Eastern andMediterranean worlds and stemmed from the religious fervor of Semiticnomads.
NewTestament
TheNT authors used the Greek term pneumato convey the concept of spirit. In the world of the NT, the humanspirit was understood as the divine part of human reality as distinctfrom the material realm. The spirit appears conscious and capable ofrejoicing (Luke 1:47). Jesus was described by Luke as growing andbecoming “strong in spirit” (1:80). In “spirit”Jesus “knew” what certain teachers of the law werethinking in their hearts (Mark 2:8). Likewise, Jesus “wasdeeply moved in spirit and troubled” at the sickness of a lovedone (John 11:33). At the end of his life, Jesus gave up his spirit(John 19:30).
Accordingto Jesus, the spirit is the place of God’s new covenant work ofconversion and worship (John 3:5; 4:24). He declared the humanspirit’s dependence on God and ascribed great virtue to thosepeople who were “poor in spirit” (Matt. 5:3).
Humanbeings who were possessed by an evil spirit were devalued inMediterranean society. In various places in the Synoptic Gospels andthe book of Acts, either Jesus or the disciples were involved inexorcisms of such spirits (Matt. 8:28–33; Mark 1:21–28;7:24–30; 9:14–29; 5:1–20; 9:17–29; Luke8:26–33; 9:37–42; Acts 5:16).
Theapostle Paul pointed to the spirit as the seat of conversion (Rom.7:6; 1Cor. 5:5). He described believers as facing a strugglebetween flesh and spirit in regard to living a sanctified life (Rom.8:2–17; Gal. 5:16–17). A contradiction seems apparent inPauline thinking as he appears to embrace Greek dualisticunderstanding of body (flesh) and spirit while likewise commandingthat “spirit, soul and body be kept blameless” (1Thess.5:23). However, the Christian struggle between flesh and Spirit (theHoly Spirit) centers around the believer’s body being deadbecause of sin but the spirit being alive because of the crucifiedand resurrected Christ (Rom. 8:10). Believers therefore areencouraged to lead a holistic life, lived in the Spirit.
HolySpirit
God’sSpirit is described in the opening chapters of Genesis as partakingin creation. His Spirit likewise is seen throughout the OT as anagent in establishing God’s people as a nation and a people ofhis own. Leaders of Israel were chosen and possessed by the Spirit toassist in leading the people into God’s will (Deut. 34:9; Judg.6:34; 15:14; 1Sam. 11:6; 16:23). Typically, the moment theSpirit of God descended on a leader, miraculous fortitude, wisdom,and power resulted. The Spirit also provided whatever was needed forGod’s prophets—courage, inspiration, and miracles (Num.11:25; 1Sam. 10:10; Isa. 11:2; Ezek. 2:2; Dan. 4:8; Joel 2:28).The office of prophet included prophesying both in the king’scourt and among the people of the land. As the Spirit came on aprophet of God, the prophet would correct the king’s andothers’ behavior and at times foretell the future or theoutcome of possible decisions.
Inthe Synoptic Gospels, the Holy Spirit functions in much the same wayas in the OT. One such function appears in Luke’s birthnarrative when the angel answers Mary’s question as to how shemight conceive while a virgin (Luke 1:34): “The Holy Spiritwill come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you”(1:35). The Greek verb translated “will overshadow you”is used in the LXX to describe God’s protective nature (Pss.91:4; 140:7). Likewise, the coming of God’s Spirit presentedempowerment (Acts 1:8). Thus, Mary received both divine empowermentand protection. As the birth narrative continues, Luke records howother characters in the story, Elizabeth and Zechariah, were filledwith the Spirit when Mary came to visit while pregnant with Jesus andwhen John the Baptist, the forerunner of the Messiah, was born (1:41,67). The evangelists record the Spirit descending on Jesus at thetime of his baptism (Matt. 3:16; Mark 1:10; Luke 3:22; John 1:32–34)and describe him as full ofthe Spirit when he was led by theSpirit into the desert (Luke 4:1). Finally, in John’s Gospelthe Spirit is the promised comforter whom Jesus will give to hisfollowers. He will testify about Christ (John 15:26).
Inthe new covenant the Spirit-possession of the OT gave way tobelievers’ reception of the Spirit at conversion. In Acts theHoly Spirit is presented as instrumental in carrying out the missionof the church, providing power and signs as well as moving andmotivating missionaries. The apostle Paul attributes to the HolySpirit the function of imbuing believers and the church with anassortment of virtues (Gal. 5:22), gifts (Rom. 12:7–8; 1Cor.12:1–11), and ministers (Eph. 4:7–13). He uses the ideaof life in the Spirit as a point of contrast with life in the flesh.In John’s letters the Spirit is described as providingdiscernment of truth (1John 4:6). See also Holy Spirit.
“The deep” (Heb. tehom; Gk. abyssos) refers tothe deep sea or the depths of the sea, in particular to the primevalsea that was understood to exist prior to God’s creative work,which brought order to the chaotic initial state of the world (Gen.1:2), and that re-covered the earth as creation was reversed in theflood (Gen. 7:11; 8:2). The Hebrew term is etymologically related tothe primeval Babylonian goddess who, according to the creation mythin the Mesopotamian text known as the Enuma Elish, was slain by thegod Marduk and from whose carcass the universe was formed. In spiteof this, there is no indication that the term as used in the Biblewas in any way associated with the Babylonian deity, particularlygiven that the root itself was also used at Ugarit and Ebla to mean“the deep.”
Althoughthe OT does not import the mythological and religious ideasassociated with the deep from Mesopotamia, the deep neverthelessoften represents a somewhat ominous place, a fearful place of chaos(e.g., Ps. 148:7; Jon. 2:5), sometimes symbolically representing thedepths of despair (Ps. 71:20). Yet the OT affirms God’scomplete control and sovereignty over the deep (Pss. 33:7; 77:16;135:6; Isa. 51:10). Elsewhere, however, the term can simply refer tothe source of springs and appears to reflect an abundant supply ofwater (Deut. 8:7; Ps. 78:15).
Inthe NT, the deep (or the abyss) is presented as a place of the dead(Rom. 10:7) or a prison for demons (Luke 8:31; Rev. 9:1–11)from which opposition to God arises. Revelation also continues theview that the deep sea is a place of darkness and opposition to Godwith the pronouncement that in the new heaven and new earth there isno longer any sea (Rev. 21:1).
Hostile action carried out against someone or something.While used in Ezek. 22:26 to describe the manner in which Israel’spriests had utilized God’s law, violence most often involvesthe infliction of physical harm against a person or group. Thesubject of violence in the Bible, while extensive, is far fromsimple. Many OT passages refer to participation in violence assomething to be avoided, belonging to the life of the wicked ratherthan to that of the righteous (Ps. 27:12; Prov. 4:17). In the NT,violence is discouraged as well (Rom. 12:19–21). Violence isaddictive and ultimately destructive for those who live by it (Prov.13:2; 21:7). Violence begets violence (Ps. 137; Matt. 26:52). Arecurring biblical depiction of violence entails the spilling ofblood, due to a close association of blood with life (Jer. 51:35; cf.Lev. 17:14).
Manypassages assert or assume that God disapproves of violence (e.g., Job16:17; Ps. 17:4; Mal. 2:16; 1Tim. 1:13; Titus 1:7). God is arefuge against violence (2Sam. 22:3). Widespread violence onthe earth is the reason God gives for bringing about the flood (Gen.6:13). Violence is the sin of Nineveh (Jon. 3:8) as well as that ofIsrael, a point emphasized by the prophets when declaring that Israelwould go into exile (Isa. 53:9; Jer. 22:3; Ezek. 8:17; Hos. 12:1).
Yetthere are also passages that tolerate and even advocate violence.Scripture contains numerous stories of God’s people actingviolently. While in some cases these individuals may be acting ontheir own (see Judges), in some passages God explicitly commandsviolence (e.g., Deut. 7:1–2). In biblical military life,violence seems to be an accepted and even useful tool (e.g., 1Sam.17; 1Chron. 12). God is often described as, among other things,a warrior (Exod. 15:3; Matt. 10:34; Rev. 19:11–16).
Thequestion of the persistence of violence is voiced in Scripture butnot answered (Hab. 1:2–3), suggesting that there is no simpleanswer. Perhaps God’s recognition of the wickedness of thehuman heart (Gen. 8:21) leads him to be involved even in the violenceof this world, as instigator and also as recipient (Jesus). That theBible acknowledges the prevalence of violence in the world certainlyis significant. Yet the Bible also bears witness that this too shallpass as it describes God’s future plans, in which violence willbe no more (see Isa. 60:18).
Walking was the primary mode of transportation in Bibletimes, and metaphorically it referred to one’s conduct of life.It is used figuratively in both Testaments. For example, Noah isintroduced as a righteous and blameless man who “walkedfaithfully with God” (Gen. 6:9), and Christians are to “walkin the light” (1John 1:7) and “walk just as [Jesus]walked” (1John 2:6 NRSV).
Water is mentioned extensively in the Bible due to itsprevalence in creation and its association with life and purity. Thecosmic waters of Gen. 1 are held back by the sky (Gen. 1:6–7;cf. Pss. 104:6, 13; 148:4). God is enthroned on these waters in hiscosmic temple (Pss. 29:10; 104:3, 13; cf. Gen. 1:2; Ps. 78:69; Isa.66:1). These same waters were released in the time of Noah (Gen.7:10–12; Ps. 104:7–9).
Wateris also an agent of life and fertility and is therefore associatedwith the presence of God. Both God himself and his temple aredescribed as the source of life-giving water (Jer. 2:13; 17:13; Joel3:18; cf. Isa. 12:2–3). Ezekiel envisions this water flowingfrom beneath the temple and streaming down into the Dead Sea, whereit brings life and fecundity (Ezek. 47:1–12; cf. Zech. 14:8).The book of Revelation, employing the same image, describes “theriver of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from thethrone of God and of the Lamb” (22:1). This imagery is alsoillustrated in archaeological remains associated with temples.Cisterns are attested beneath the Dome of the Rock (presumably thelocation of the Jerusalem temple) and beneath the Judahite temple atArad. Other temples, such as the Israelite high place at Tel Dan, arelocated close to freshwater springs. The Gihon Spring in the City ofDavid may also be associated with the Jerusalem temple (Ps. 46:4; cf.Gen. 2:13).
ThisOT imagery forms the background for Jesus’ teaching regardingeternal life in the writings of the apostle John. Jesus claims to bethe source of living water, and he offers it freely to everyone whothirsts (John 4:10–15; 7:37; Rev. 21:6; 22:17; cf. Rev. 7:17).This water, which produces “a spring of water welling up toeternal life” (John 4:14), is the work of the Holy Spirit inthe believer (John 7:38–39).
Wateris also described in the Bible as an agent of cleansing. It isextensively employed in purification rituals in the OT. In the NT,the ritual of water baptism signifies the purity and new life of thebeliever (Matt. 3:11, 16; Mark 1:8–10; Luke 3:16; John 1:26,31–33; 3:23; Acts 1:5; 8:36–39; 10:47; 11:16; 1Pet.3:20–21; cf. Eph. 5:26; Heb. 10:22).
Finally,the NT also reveals Jesus as the Lord of water. He walks on water(Matt. 14:28–29; John 6:19), turns water into wine (John 2:7–9;4:46), and controls water creatures (Matt. 17:27; John 21:6). Mostimportant, Jesus commands “the winds and the water, and theyobey him” (Luke 8:25; cf. Ps. 29:3).
Scripture describes wind as a powerful force that is underGod’s command. The Hebrew word ruakhsometimes is translated as “wind” but other times canmean “breath,” as well as “spirit” (Gen.1:2). The Greek word for “spirit,” pneuma,hints of a similar range of meaning, although another word is mostoften used in the NT to denote wind.
OldTestament. Throughoutthe OT wind is used by God to fulfill his purposes. Psalm 148:8declares that winds do God’s bidding. Yahweh keeps the wind instorehouses until they are needed (Ps. 135:7; Jer. 10:13). God useswind to protect and provide for his people. For instance, God sends awind over the earth to cause the floodwaters surrounding the ark torecede (Gen. 8:1), a strong east wind to drive back the sea duringthe exodus from Egypt (Exod. 14:21), and a wind that drives quail infrom the sea to serve as food for the Israelites in the wilderness(Num. 11:31).
Windcan also be an agent of God’s destruction. God sends a plagueupon Egypt by making an east wind blow locusts all across the land;afterward, God uses a west wind to blow the locusts into the sea(Exod. 10:13–19). In the book of Job a mighty wind from thedesert causes the house of Job’s eldest son to collapse,killing Job’s seven sons and three daughters (Job 1:19). In thebook of Jonah a great wind sent by God threatens to destroy Jonah’sship, and a scorching east wind later causes Jonah to grow faint anddesire death (Jon. 1:4; 4:8). The prophetic books use the subject ofwind in communicating God’s judgment (e.g., Isa. 28:2; 64:6;Ezek. 5:2; 13:11).
Whilea single wind is able to blow in several directions (Eccles. 1:6),many passages specify four winds from the four quarters of theheavens. The north wind brings rain (Prov. 25:23), while the southwind brings heat (Job 37:17), both of which are useful for growing agarden (Song 4:16). Only one verse refers to the west windspecifically (Exod. 10:19), but numerous verses refer to the eastwind as an agent of destruction, often appearing along with militaryterms. When let loose by God (Ps. 78:26), the east wind may shatterships (Ps. 48:7), and those in its path will scatter (Jer. 18:17) orshrivel (Ezek. 19:12). In Hos. 12:1 God accuses Israel of pursuingthe east wind along with multiplying lies and violence. Together, thefour winds can be sent to bring destruction (Jer. 49:36) or to bringlife (Ezek. 37:9). They also appear in the visions of Daniel (Dan.7:2; 8:8; 11:4; cf. Rev. 7:1).
Godrides on the wings of the wind on cherubim (Ps. 18:10; 2Sam.22:11), with the clouds as his chariot (Ps. 104:3). In Ps. 104:4 thewinds are called God’s “messengers.” This imageryis strikingly similar to ancient descriptions of the Canaanite godBaal, although Scripture adds that it is Yahweh who created the wind(Job 28:25; Amos 4:13). Yahweh’s power is not contingent uponwind, as Elijah learns when he experiences the presence of Yahweh inthe whisper and not the wind (or the earthquake) after his successfulcontest against the prophets of Baal (1Kings 19:11–12).
Thewisdom literature focuses upon other characteristics of wind besidesits power. The transient nature of wind is significant, as wind isthe inheritance of those who bring trouble upon their family (Prov.11:29). Ecclesiastes continually refers to all things done under thesun as “a chasing after the wind” (e.g., 1:14, 17). Emptytalk is spoken of as wind (Job 8:2). The function of wind to blowaway chaff is also used to declare the fate of the wicked (e.g., Ps.1:4; cf. Job 21:18). The unpredictability of wind serves as ametaphor for the mystery of God’s actions (Eccles. 11:5).
NewTestament.In the NT, the Gospels reveal the divine nature of Jesus byemphasizing his ability to command the wind (Matt. 8:26–27).Jesus declares that the Son of Man will gather his elect from thefour winds (Matt. 24:31; Mark 13:27). Wind is a metaphor in John 3:8for the mystery and unpredictability of those born of the Spirit.Jesus uses the image of empty talk as wind when he refers to John theBaptist as a prophet rather than a reed swayed by the wind (Matt.11:7; Luke 7:24). In Eph. 4:14 false teaching is referred to as wind.It is wind that easily sways the one who doubts (James 1:6). Finally,a correlation between wind and the Holy Spirit occurs when a soundlike a violent wind occurs at the time when the Holy Spirit fills allthose in the house at Pentecost (Acts 2:2).
In biblical times, windows usually were small and few, forthe purpose of admitting light or air. Windows helped regulatetemperatures inside a house. Some, however, were large enough topermit an intruder (Joel 2:9; cf. Jer. 9:21) or a fugitive (Josh.2:15; 1Sam. 19:12; 2Cor. 11:33) to go through.
Windowsof “recessed frames” in Solomon’s temple (1Kings6:4 NRSV), the numerous windows in Ezekiel’s eschatologicaltemple (Ezek. 40:16, 22, 25, 29; 41:16), and the elaborately paneledwindows in Jehoiakim’s house (Jer. 22:14) contrast thesimplicity of general window design.
Symbolically,“windows of/in heaven” depict wide openings through whichblessings or judgment flow to earth (Gen. 7:11; 8:2; 2Kings7:2, 19; Isa. 24:18 KJV [NIV: “floodgates of the heavens”];cf. Mal. 3:10).
In classical Greek, “world” (kosmos)communicated the idea that the external universe is a well-orderedsystem. In early Greek usage, the term was used with reference tospecific types of social orderings, such as the seating order ofrowers (Homer, Od. 13.77), the order of soldiers (Homer, Il. 12.225),and well-ordered political states such as Sparta (Herodotus, Hist.1.65).
CreatedWorld
Inthe OT, the notion of the created “world” departed fromthe Greek understanding specifically in that creation is never seenas an independent entity controlled by an impersonal, all-embracingorder. Rather, the universe, usually described with the phrase “theheavens and the earth” (Gen. 1:1; 2:1, 4; Ps. 113:6; Jer.10:11) or at times the “all” or “all things”(Ps. 103:19; Jer. 10:16), is always understood in its relationship toits creator: “He who created the heavens, he is God; he whofashioned and made the earth, he founded it; he did not create it tobe empty, but formed it to be inhabited—he says: ‘I amthe Lord, and there is no other’ ” (Isa. 45:18).Here, the “world” (“earth”) refers to thematerial elements that make up the planet (see also Jer. 32:17; Zech.12:1) and the sum total of the entire universe (cf. Acts 17:24). Evenin the account of creation in Gen. 1:1–2:4, where many of theelements of the physical world are mentioned (waters, firmament,stars, etc.), the primary intent of the account is to convey that Godis Lord over everything because he is the Creator. Often thesecreated elements that make up the world are praised not for their owninherent beauty, but as a testimony to the majesty, supremacy, andomnipotence of the Creator (Pss. 8; 19:1–6; 33:6–9). InPs. 148:3–6 the elements within the natural order (kosmos) areinstructed to praise God: “Praise him, sun and moon; praisehim, all you shining stars. Praise him, you highest heavens and youwaters above the skies. Let them praise the name of the Lord, for athis command they were created, and he established them for ever andever—he issued a decree that will never pass away.”
Thoughnot providing a comprehensive description, the OT does at times referto how the world is constructed as a whole. The “vault”(Gen. 1:6–20 [RSV: “firmament”]) of heavenseparates the waters above from the waters below (which arerestrained by God’s sovereign care [Gen. 1:7; 7:11; 49:25]),and this area or chamber rests on “pillars” (Job 26:11).At times the earth is described as a disc with the sanctuary as itscenter point (Judg. 9:37; Ezek. 38:12), which rests on pillars (Job9:6). There is an underworld, from which there is no return (Job10:21); however, the OT does not engage in the kind of speculationregarding the underworld as is evident in the Greco-Roman tradition.
Earthand Its Inhabitants
Theterm “world” conveys other nuances in the Bible. It oftenrefers to the inhabitants of the earth or the place of human life:“He rules the world in righteousness and judges the peopleswith equity” (Ps. 9:8 [cf. Pss. 96:13; 98:9]); or, “Comenear, you nations, and listen; pay attention, you peoples! Let theearth hear, and all that is in it, the world, and all that comes outof it!” (Isa. 34:1). Also, in the Gospels “world”is used in this way: “What good is it for someone to gain thewhole world, yet forfeit their soul?” (Mark 8:36). Matthew 4:8refers to all the kingdoms of the world. Also the expressions “cominginto the world” (John 1:9; 3:19), “in the world”(John 1:10; 2Cor. 1:12), and “leave this world”(1Cor. 5:10) can be understood as referring to the sphere ofhuman life.
UngodlyCulture and Worldview
“World”can also refer to something more than the material world or humanityin general; it can refer to the entire cultural value system or worldorder that is hostile toward God. The “world” is a commonbiblical way of referring to the ungodly worldview and lifestyle thatcharacterize human life in its rebellion against the Creator. Thecourse of the world is profoundly affected by fallen humans, throughwhom death came into the world and rules over it (Rom. 5:12).Therefore, Paul can claim that “the whole world” hasbecome guilty before God (Rom. 3:19), and even the created world isaffected by such rebellion (8:20–22). Paul especially links“this world” with “this age” (1Cor.3:19; 5:10; Eph. 2:2 NET), which God has judged (Rom. 3:6). Johndeclares that Satan is the “prince of this world” (John12:31; 14:30; 16:11). Paul refers to Satan as the “god of thisworld” (2Cor. 4:4 ESV, NRSV, NASB), who is able to blindindividuals to the truth and who animates human rebellion (Eph. 2:2).In this sense, God and the world are strictly separate: “Don’tyou know that friendship with the world means enmity against God?Therefore, anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes anenemy of God” (James 4:4). Because of this call to an exclusiverelationship with God, believers are mandated to resist and evenconfront the world. Followers of Christ must not be taken captive byphilosophy or the “elemental spiritual forces of this world”(Col. 2:8, 20), since, as Paul says, “the worldhas beencrucified to me, and I to the world” (Gal. 6:14).
Butit is the world that designates the location and object of God’ssaving activity. Indeed, God sent his Son into this world in order toreconcile it to himself (2Cor. 5:19). Jesus, the sacrificialLamb of God, “takes away the sins of the world” (John1:29). Out of love for this world, God sent his Son (John 3:1), notto judge it but to save it: “God did not send his Son into theworld to condemn the world, but to save the world through him”(John 3:17).
Althoughbelievers live in the world (1Cor. 5:10; Phil. 2:15) and musthave dealings with the world, ultimately they are not of the world(John 17:14). Remaining in Christ, believers are able to demonstratein the world the belief and practice of the new commandment to love(John 13:34; 15:9). Therefore, Christians must maintain a criticaldistance from the world’s system: “Do not love the worldor anythingin the world. If anyone loves the world, love forthe Father is not in them. For everything inthe world—thelust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—comesnot from the Father but from the world” (1John 2:15–16[cf. James 1:27; 4:4]). Believers are to avoid the seductive power ofthe world and not abandon themselves to it; they are to follow theirLord in proclaiming God’s project of reconciling the world tohimself through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (2Cor.5:18).
Because calendars are culturally constructed systems, thereare several important differences between the modern calendar and thecalendars used in biblical times. When dealing with ancient Jewishand early Christian sources, we can reconstruct complete calendarsystems. However, the Bible itself, written over many centuries,employs several calendar systems and systems of dating. No singlenormative calendar system emerges from biblical materials.Nevertheless, many aspects of life in biblical Israel depended on theuse of calendars, which regulated religious festivals, agriculturalactivity, various aspects of the legal system, and the recording ofhistorical events.
Measurementof Time in Antiquity
Therewere several methods of reckoning time in antiquity. Some units oftime corresponded to the observation of celestial phenomena (see Gen.1:14), such as the rising and setting of the sun (defining the day),the waxing and waning of the moon (the lunar month), the ascension ofthe sun in the sky at noon (the solar year). Other measurements oftime were defined by the agricultural cycle, including planting andthe beginning and end of the harvest (see Exod. 23:16; Ruth 1:22). Anagricultural scheme serves as the basis of the Gezer Calendar, animportant archaeological object of the tenth century BC unearthedabout thirty miles northwest of Jerusalem. The Gezer Calendar dividesthe year into eight periods of one or two months, each of whichcorresponds to the planting, tending, and harvest of various crops.Still other units of time, such as the seven-day week and thelunisolar year (see below), were derived by counting or calculationand did not correspond to any observable celestial or terrestrialphenomena.
Thedivision of days into hours and minutes is possible in modern timesbecause of mechanical and electronic timepieces. Without thesedevices, divisions of time shorter than the day would have beenapproximations at best. Biblical texts refer to dawn, morning, noon,evening, night, and midnight. In NT times, the twelve daylight hourswere numbered (Matt. 27:45; John 11:9). There was also a system ofdividing the night into “watches,” attested in both theNT and the OT.
TheMonth and the Year in the Bible
TheHebrew words for “month” are related to the words for“moon” and “new” (i.e., the “newmoon”), which suggests that the ancient Israelite month was alunar month corresponding to the waxing and waning of the moon over aperiod of twenty-nine or thirty days. The Bible refers to numbereddays in each month, as high as the twenty-seventh day.
Thereare several systems of naming the months in the Bible. Four“Canaanite” month names appear in the OT: Aviv (the firstmonth), Ziv (the second), Ethanim (the seventh), and Bul (theeighth). Because of the infrequent use of these names, some scholarshave questioned whether this system was in widespread use in ancientIsrael. The names probably are derived from agricultural terms.
Inmany cases the months are simply numbered. In this system, the firstmonth began in the spring season. According to biblical narrative,this way of reckoning the beginning of the year was commanded toMoses at the time of the exodus (Exod. 12:1). However, the Bibleapplies this scheme to events much earlier, as in the story of theflood of Noah, which began in the second month (Gen. 7:11), andscholars have associated the numerical system of months with latebiblical sources, around the time of the exile. The system may havecome into use around that time and replaced an older system.
Insome late biblical texts Babylonian month names are adopted,including Nisan (the first month), Sivan (the third), Elul (thesixth), Chislev (the ninth), Tebet (the tenth), Shebat (theeleventh), and Adar (the twelfth). Following biblical usage, theBabylonian month names were adopted in the ancient Jewish calendar,which is still in use today.
Basedon references to the “twelfth month,” the Israelite yearapparently consisted of twelve lunar months. Accordingly, the lunaryear consisted of approximately 354 days, which means that it wouldnot have corresponded to the solar year of approximately 365¼days. The beginning of the year would have drifted between eleven andtwelve days each year. Presumably, this would have been anunacceptable situation, given the fact that many of the biblicalfestivals were both assigned to lunar dates and were correlated toagricultural events. The problem probably was solved through theintercalation of “leap months,” as was the practice inmaintaining the later Jewish calendar. The result is a lunisolarcalendar, in which the year is composed of twelve lunar months and iscorrected relative to the solar year by the periodic addition of asecond Adar (Adar II) seven times in every nineteen-year period.The Bible does not mention this procedure or identify who wasresponsible for maintaining the calendar in ancient Israel.
BiblicalDates
Modernsystems of absolute dating, in which all years are numbered relativeto a single historical reference point—for example, the birthof Jesus (Anno Domini), the journey of Muhammad in AD 622 (AnnoHegira 1) from Mecca to Medina in Islamic culture, and thecreation of the world (Anno Mundi) in Jewish tradition—wereunparalleled in biblical times. Instead, events were usually datedrelative to the reigns of kings, Israelite or otherwise. For example,the accession of Abijah is dated to the eighteenth year of Jeroboam’sreign (1 Kings 15:1), and the proclamation of Cyrus is dated tohis first regnal year (Ezra 1:1). In other cases, events were datedrelative to important historical events. The beginning of Amos’scareer as prophet is dated to “two years before the earthquake”(Amos 1:1), and Exod. 12:41 dates the departure from Egypt to the430th year of the captivity. In other instances, the fixed points onwhich relative dates are based cannot be determined. The beginning ofEzekiel’s career as a prophet is dated to the otherwiseunspecified “thirtieth year” (Ezek. 1:1). The verse maysimply refer to Ezekiel’s age.
Thesame practices of dating events are followed in the NT. The birth ofJohn the Baptist is dated to “the time of Herod king of Judea”(Luke 1:5). The census of Caesar Augustus is identified as “thefirst census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria”(Luke 2:2). As in the OT, such formulas presuppose that the readerhas a basic awareness of the succession and reigns of kings andemperors—an advantage lost to modern interpreters, who continueto debate the absolute dating of these events. Perhaps analogously toEzek. 1:1, the beginning of Jesus’ ministry is dated to histhirtieth year of age (Luke 3:23). Other events and persons reportedin the NT can be correlated to extrabiblical historical records toestablish absolute dates for biblical events (e.g., the death ofHerod Agrippa I in AD 44 [Acts 12:23]). These are distinct frominstances in which biblical authors are making a conscious effort toprovide dates intelligible to their readers. In contrast to OThistorical narrative, for the most part, the NT shows little interestin dating events in its narrative, even according to ancientconventions of relative dating.
Secondary Matches
The following suggestions occured because
Genesis 6:1-8:22
is mentioned in the definition.
The descendants of Anak, the Anakites (NRSV: “Anakim”),known for their height (Deut. 2:10, 21; 9:2), inhabited the Judeanhill country when Israelite spies entered the land (Num. 13:21–33;Deut. 1:28). The spies viewed them as Nephilim (Num. 13:33; cf. Gen.6:4). Arba, a hero among the Anakites, gave his name to Kiriath Arba(Josh. 14:15), later Hebron (Josh. 15:13–14; Judg. 1:20). TheAnakites were related to the Rephaites, originally from the regionsof Moab and Ammon but destroyed by the time of the conquest (Deut.2:10–11, 20–21). After Joshua completely destroyedAnakite habitations in the hill country, remnants moved westward andlived in the Philistine cities of Gaza, Gath, and Ashdod (Josh.11:21–22).
>
These were the people who lived before the worldwide flood inNoah’s time. They were divided between two ancestral lines,those of Cain (Gen. 4:17–24) and Seth (Gen. 5). Although it iscommon to speak of the Cainites and Sethites, the second line isdepicted as starting with Adam, not Seth (5:3). To label one line asungodly and the other as godly is overly schematic. The generation ofthe flood was wholly wicked (Noah excepted), including the offspringof both Cain and Seth (6:5, 11), and was decimated by the flood as ajudgment upon universal sin. The line of Seth survived only becauseof God’s grace shown to Noah (6:8).
Thenames in the genealogy of Seth bear a striking resemblance to Cain’sdescendants (Cain/Kenan, Enoch/Enoch, Mehujael/Mahalalel, Irad/Jared,Methushael/Methuselah, Lamech/Lamech), again implying that the twolines were quite similar. Genesis 6:1–4, admittedly an obscurepassage, may depict intermarriage between the lines, reinforcing theguilt of the entire human race.
Theincrease in population in Gen. 6:1 fits with the procreation theme ofGen. 5. The 120-year limit decreed by God in Gen. 6:3 cannot lay downthe limit of a normal life span, for many people in Genesis livedwell beyond this supposed limit, and so it is best understood as anannouncement that 120 years remain until the flood.
Thefirst ancestral line climaxed with boastful, violent, and vengefulLamech, who tried to outdo his forefather Cain (Gen. 4:24). Thoughmorally corrupt, Cain’s descendants are credited withsignificant cultural and technological achievements.
Thegenealogy of Seth in Gen. 5 is given a fuller treatment than Cain’s,for his line survived the flood. It focuses on the first (Adam’s[vv. 1–5]), seventh (Enoch’s [vv. 21–24]), andninth generations (Lamech’s [vv. 5:28–31]), climaxingwith another Lamech, Noah’s father.
Thelongevity of the antediluvians is a notable feature (life spans of930 years, 912 years, etc.), but so too is the reign of death (notethe mournful refrain “and then he died” throughout Gen.5). The sole exception is godly Enoch (5:24). Sumerian lists show abelief that antediluvian kings reigned for thousands of years each.Figures for age and life span are not supplied so that we cancalculate the date of creation, nor are birth notices of “othersons and daughters” (e.g., 5:4, 6) inserted to explain whereCain got his wife. Despite the baneful effect of death, in theprovidence of God life continued.
The study of human beings, their nature and origins. TheChristian understanding of anthropology stems from a biblical view ofhumankind’s relationship to God.
TheOrigin of Humankind
Accordingto Genesis, the creation of humankind took place on the sixth day ofthe creation week. The amount of narrative space allotted to this day(Gen. 1:24–31) testifies to the special importance of whathappened. Human beings were made on the same day as the animals.Human beings were not given a day of their own, showing that theyhave a certain kinship with the animals, although they are far morethan highly successful and adaptive mammals. This has implicationsfor the care of animals and of the environment generally. The valueof human beings and their special place in the created order is clearin passages such as Pss. 8:5–6; 104:14–15.
Createdin the image of God.Whenit came to the making of human beings, God deliberated over thiscrucial step (Gen. 1:26). The plural of exhortation in “Let usmake man in our image” signals that the decision to makehumankind was the most important one that God had made so far.Genesis 1 says that human beings are like God in some way.
Variousopinions have been canvassed as to what the “image” is.We cannot totally exclude the physical form of humans, given God’shumanoid form in OT appearances (theophanies; e.g., Isa. 6:1; Ezek.1:26; Amos 9:1). The image has sometimes been interpreted as a task,the exercising of dominion (Gen. 1:28), with humanity appointed ascreation’s king, ruling under God. But the image is betterunderstood as the precondition for rule rather than rule itself. Theimage shows human worth (Gen. 9:6) and differentiates humans from allother creatures. It is proper for the Bible to use anthropomorphiclanguage for God, for humans are remarkably like God. Both male andfemale are in the image of God (“in the image of God he createdthem; male and female he created them” [1:27]), so that thedivine image is not maleness, nor is sexual differentiation theimage. Commonly, the image of God is thought to be some peculiarquality of human beings—for example, rationality, speech, moralsense, personality, humans as relational beings.
Everycentury has its own view of what is the essence of humanity. However,nothing in the passage allows a choice among such alternatives. Thepoint of the passage is simply the fact of the likeness, with noexact definition being provided. The fact of the image is the basisof the divine prohibition of murder and of the strict penalty appliedto the transgressor (9:4–6). The fall into sin affected everyaspect of the human constitution, and the Bible does not minimize thefact of human sinfulness (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Rom. 3:10–18);nevertheless, humans are still in the image of God (Gen. 5:1–3;9:6; 1 Cor. 11:7). God’s plan of salvation is aimed atridding creation (and especially humanity) of the baneful effects ofsin, and this will be achieved through the work of Christ, who is theimage of God (2 Cor. 4:4; Col. 1:15–20; Heb. 1:1–3;2:5–18). The outcome will be the conformity of believers inChrist to his glorious image (Rom. 8:29–30; 2 Cor. 3.18).
Placein the created order.God’s purpose in giving human beings the divine image is “sothey may rule” (NET [Gen. 1:26b translated as a purposeclause]). The syntax suggests that the image is a presupposition ofdominion. It is plain that such a delegated authority makes humansstewards. The vegetarian diet of Gen.1:29 (there was no eating ofmeat at first) represents a limitation to the human right ofdominion. Adam’s naming of the animals was (in part) expressiveof his sovereignty over them (2:19). Later, Noah was charged to bringpairs of animals into the ark to preserve them alive (6:19–20),showing care for other creatures. The patriarchs tended flocks(13:2–9; 26:12–14), and Joseph’s relief measuressaved the lives of people and animals (47:15–18). The wantondestruction of the Promised Land was expressly forbidden (Deut.20:19–20). Humanity is accountable to God for the stewardshipof the earth. The divine command “be fruitful and multiply”(Gen. 1:28 NRSV) shows that God’s purpose is that the humanrace populate the whole earth.
AtGen. 2:7 the biblical narrative becomes thoroughly anthropocentric,picturing the little world that God establishes around the first man,so this account is quite different from the cosmic presentation ofGen. 1. In Gen. 1 humankind is the apex of a pyramid, the last andhighest of a series of creatures; in Gen. 2 the man is the center ofa circle, everything else made to fit around him, and his connectionto the physical earth is emphasized. In either view, a very specialplace is given to human beings in the created order. The two picturesare complementary, not contradictory.
The“man” (’adam) is formed from the “ground”(’adamah), with the related Hebrew words making a pun. Man’sname reminds him of his earthy origins. He is made from the “dust,”which hints at his coming death. He will return to the dust (Gen.3:19; cf. Job 10:8–9; Ps. 103:14; Isa. 29:16). The reference to“the breath of life” (Gen. 2:7) is due to the fact thatthis leaves a person at death (Job 34:14–15; Ps. 104:29–30),so man’s (potential) mortality is implied. Ironically, themaking of man is described using the language of death. What isdescribed in Gen. 2 is the making of the first man, from whom therest of the human race has descended, not the making of humankind,though the word ’adam can mean that in other contexts.
TheNature of Humankind
Body,soul, and spirit.Arguments over whether human nature is bipartite (body and soul) ortripartite (body, soul, spirit) are not to be decided by arbitraryappeal to isolated verses. Verses can be found in apparent supportfor both the first view (e.g., Matt. 10:28) and the second (e.g.,1 Thess. 5:23), but certainly the first scheme is much moreprevalent in the Bible. “Soul” and “spirit”can be used interchangeably (Eccles. 3:21; 12:7; Ezek. 18:31). Deathis marked by the parting of soul/spirit and body, but it would be amistake to think that human beings are made up of separate componentparts, or that the physical body is only a dispensable shell and notessential to true humanity. The physicality of human existence in the“body” is owned and celebrated in Scripture, part of thatbeing the positive attitude to sexuality when properly expressed(Song of Songs; 1 Cor. 7) and the nonascetic nature of biblicalethics (1 Cor. 10:31; Col. 2:23). The doctrine of theresurrection of the body is the fullest expression of this (1 Cor.15), in contrast to ancient Greek thought that viewed the body asinherently evil and understood salvation as the immortality of theliberated, disembodied soul.
Thedifferent words used in relation to persons are only intended torefer to and at times focus on different aspects of unified humannature. References to the “soul” may stress individualresponsibility (e.g., Ezek. 18:4 NASB: “The soul who sins willdie”). In Ps. 103:1–2, “O my soul” expressesemphatic self-encouragement to praise God and is in parallel with“all my inmost being”—that is, “my wholebeing” (an example of synecdoche: a part standing for the whole[cf. Ps. 35:10]). These are ways of referring to oneself as a personwho expresses will and intention (cf. Ps. 42:5–6, 11). The“flesh” is used to stress the weakness of mortal humanity(e.g., Isa. 40:6 RSV: “All flesh is grass”). The “heart”is the volitional center of a human being (Prov. 4:23; cf. Mark7:17–23). The emotional and empathetic reactions of humans aredescribed by reference to the organs: “liver,” “kidneys,”“bowels.”
Moralsand responsibility.In Gen. 2 the complexities of the man’s moral relation to Godand his relations with the soil, with the animals, and with the womanare explored. God deposited the man in the garden “to work itand take care of it” (2:15). The words chosen to designate theman’s work prior to the fall have an aura of worship aboutthem, for they are later used in the OT for the cultic actions ofserving and guarding within the sanctuary. The priests served byoffering sacrifices, and the Levites guarded the gates of the sacredprecinct. A theology of work as a religious vocation is presented.The man was a kind of king-priest in the garden of God.
Themoral responsibility of humanity is signaled from the beginning.God’s command gives permission for the man to eat from “anytree” except one (Gen. 2:16–17) and as such indicatesman’s freedom, so that this command is no great restriction.The wording “you are free to eat” reinforces the pointabout God’s generous provision. The prohibition is embedded inthe description of God’s fatherly care for the man and graciousact in placing him in the garden. The divine restriction is slightand not at all overbearing, though the serpent will seek to make itappear mean-spirited (3:1). The command and prohibition are the veryfirst words of God to the man, marking them out as of fundamentalimportance for the relationship between them. The prohibition (“youmust not eat . . .”) is an absolute one in thestyle of the Decalogue (Exod. 20:1–17; Deut. 5:6–21).What is placed before the man is a test that gives him theopportunity to express his loyalty to God. A relationship ofobedience and trust requires the possibility of choice and theopportunity to disobey (if that is what he wants to do). The moralnature and responsibility of individuals is not a late discovery bythe prophet Ezekiel (Ezek. 18); rather, it is the presuppositionbehind the Mosaic law, for the commands of the Decalogue (“youshall not . . .”) are phrased as commands toindividuals (as the Hebrew makes clear). On the other hand, theconcept of corporate responsibility is also present (e.g., Achan’spunishment in Josh. 7).
Relationships.Human beings are relational by nature, as the creation of the womanas a helper and partner for the first man makes plain (Gen. 2:18–25).Later in Scripture this is put in more general terms, so thatfriendship and mutual cooperation are shown to be essential to life(Eccles. 4:7–12). The body life of the church reflects the samefact and need (1 Cor. 12). In Psalms, human needs andvulnerability find their answer and fulfillment in God, with thepsalmist acknowledging his frailty and his creaturely dependence onGod (e.g., Ps. 90). This also shows the folly of sinful human pride,against which the prophets so often inveighed (e.g., Isa. 2:9,11–17, 22).
A chief or first angel. The word “archangel”refers to a particular class of angels; it also refers to a rank inthe angelic hierarchy. In the OT, no particular angel is identifiedas the highest in the angelic hierarchy. Michael and Gabriel are thetwo named angels in the OT. In the book of Daniel, Michael isidentified as “one of the chief princes,” which is takento mean archangels (10:13). The distinction between Michael andGabriel in the book of Daniel is that of function, not hierarchy.Michael functions as a warrior (10:13, 21; 12:1), whereas Gabrielfunctions as a revealer of mysteries (8:16; 9:21). In the NT,Michael is specifically called “the archangel” and is thedivine warrior who contends with the devil over the body of Moses(Jude 9); and Michael and his angels engage in a heavenly battleagainst Satan and his angels (Rev. 12:7). In 1 Thess. 4:16 theimagery used is of God as a divine warrior par excellence who comesdown from heaven with a shout, with the voice of his archangel, andwith a trumpet declaring his victory as he comes to gather hispeople.
Angelologyis more developed in Second Temple period (intertestamental)literature, wherein the identities and functions of angels areclarified. The archangels comprise one class of angels within theangelic hierarchy. Scripture refers to other classes of angels, suchas cherubim (e.g., Gen. 3:24; Exod. 25:18–22; Pss. 18:10;80:10; 99:1), seraphim (Isa. 6:2, 6), watchers (Dan. 4:13, 17, 23),Satan and fallen angels (Matt. 9:34; 25:41; Eph. 2:2; 2 Pet.2:4; Jude 6; Rev. 10:12). For example, 1 En. 6 gives the namesof the twenty fallen watchers (cf. Gen. 6:1–4), and 1 En.20 has the earliest reference to the seven archangels: Uriel,Raphael, Raguel, Michael, Zerachiel, Gabriel, and Remiel. There are,however, other lists that give alternate names to the sevenarchangels. In 3 En. 17:1–3 the archangels are Michael,Gabriel, Shatqiel, Baradiel, Shachaqiel, Baraqiel, and Sidriel. Inthe Testament of Solomon four of the seven archangels are mentioned:Michael, Ouriel, Raphael, and Gabriel (1:6; 2:4; 5:9; 18:6). In thebook of Tobit, the angel Raphael disguises himself in human form andfinally reveals his identity thus: “I am Raphael, one of theseven angels, who stand ready and enter before the glory of the Lord”(12:15; cf. Rev. 8:2).
Thearchangels also perform various other functions. In Tobit, Raphaelfunctions as a protective guide and healer. In 3 En. 17:1–3the seven archangels are in charge of the seven heavens, and each isaccompanied by 496,000 ministering angels. In Rev. 12:7–9Michael commands the angel army that battles the dragon and its army.In T. Levi 3:3–6 the archangels are regarded as templepersonnel; they serve and offer proprietary sacrifices on behalf ofall the sins of ignorance of the righteous ones in uppermost heaven,the holy of holies (cf. Jub. 2:2; 1 En. 14:23). In a similarfashion, in Rev. 8:1–10:11 the seven angels appear before Godand also serve at the altar to offer incense and to take the prayersof the saints before the throne. See also Angel.
A deck covering on ships (Ezek. 27:7) used to shieldpassengers from the sun. A different vocalization of the Hebrewelsewhere also refers to the covering on Noah’s ark (Gen. 8:13)and the tabernacle (Exod. 26:14).
Common and valuable for food, beans were cooked while green in the pods or after being dried. Dry beans were threshed and winnowed like cereals and other grains. Beans are mentioned twice in the NIV (2Sam. 17:28; Ezek. 4:9).
The blessings and curses of Scripture are grounded in aworldview that understands the sovereign God to be the ultimatedispenser of each. Blessings and curses are not the outcomes ofmagicians who attempt to manipulate the gods for personal gain orretribution. Rather, God is the giver of blessing and ultimately thefinal judge who determines withdrawal or ban. He is the source ofevery good gift (James 1:17) and the one who gives power and strengthto prosper (Deut. 8:17).
Someview the nature of blessing and curse as simply a gift from God,while others see it as an act in which one party transmits power forlife to another party. Perhaps the common thread between views is theidea of relationship.
Terminology.In the OT, the key Hebrew terms for blessing are the verb barak andthe noun berakah. When the context of their use identifies a personor a living creature as the object of blessing, the basic idea is toprovide someone with special power that will ultimately enhance hisor her life. The blessing theme is also illuminated by means of wordssuch as “grace,” “favor,” “loyalty,”and “happiness.”
Inthe NT, the Greek term eulogeō and its cognates are bestunderstood in terms of the impartation of favor, power, and benefits.The makarios word group describes a state or status of beingfortunate, happy, or privileged.
TheOT curse vocabulary includes the ideas of disgracing, makingcontemptible, and imprecation. The NT curse terminology comprises theideas of curse, slander, or consecrated to destruction.
OldTestament.Thesovereign God sometimes employs agents of blessing in his creation.The blessing extends to the nations through Abraham (Gen. 12:3), toJacob through Isaac (Gen. 26–27), and to the people through thepriests (Num. 6:24–26).
Thetheme of blessing/curse is used to structure Deut. 27–28 andLev. 26 (cf. Josh. 8:34) in the overall covenant format of thesebooks. Scholars have observed that the object of this format is notsymmetry or logical unity but fullness. From this perspective, theblessing/curse structure functions to enforce obedience for thepurpose of ensuring a relationship. The blessing of Deuteronomy alsoincludes the benefits of prosperity, power, and fertility. The curse,on the other hand, is the lack or withdrawal of benefits associatedwith the relationship.
Thecreation narratives are marked with the theme and terminology ofblessing (Gen. 1:22, 28; 2:3; cf. 5:2; 9:1). The objects of blessingin Gen. 1:22, 28 (cf. 5:2; 9:1) are the living creatures and humanbeings created in the image of God. As the revelation progresses, theblessing of God is particularized in the lives of Noah (Gen. 6–8),Abraham (Gen. 12–25) and his descendants, and the nation ofIsrael and its leadership (Gen. 26–50). In these contexts, theblessing is intended to engender offspring and to prosper recipientsin material and physical ways (compare a similar NT emphasis in Acts17:25; cf. Matt. 5:45; 6:25–33; Acts 14:17).
Theblessing of God is also extended to inanimate objects that enhanceand prosper one’s quality of life. The seventh day of creationis the object of blessing (Gen. 2:7; Exod. 20:11), perhaps giving ita sense of well-being and health. Objects and activities of life suchas baskets and kneading troughs (Deut. 28:5), barns (Deut. 28:8), andwork (Job 1:10; Ps. 90:17) are blessed.
Godpromises to bless those who fear him (Ps. 128:1). Blessing isdesigned for those who, out of a deep sense of awe of God’scharacter, love and trust him. The God-fearer confidently embracesGod’s promises, obediently serves, and takes seriously God’swarnings. The blessings itemized in Ps. 128 are comparable to thosedetailed in Deut. 28 relating to productivity and fruitfulness (cf.Ps. 128:2 with Deut. 28:12; Ps. 128:3 with Deut. 28:4, 11). TheDeuteronomic concept of blessing and curse is questioned whenGod-fearers undergo a period of suffering or experience God’sapparent absence (e.g., Joseph, Job; cf. Jesus).
NewTestament.Inthe NT, blessings are not exclusively spiritual. God gives both foodand joy (Acts 14:17) and provides the necessities of life (Matt.6:25–33). The NT does connect blessing with Christ, and itfocuses attention on the spiritual quality of the gift thatoriginates from Christ himself and its intended benefit for spiritualindividuals.
Regardingcurse, the NT explains that Christ bore the curse of the law to freeus from its deadening effect (Gal. 3:10–13). Revelation 22:3anticipates a time when the curse associated with sin will becompletely removed and the blessing associated with creation willprevail.
OldTestament
Phoeniciansand Philistines. Asa people whose ancestral territory lay in the landlocked andtimber-poor highlands of Ephraim and Judah, the Israelites ofbiblical times never achieved prominence in seafaring orshipbuilding. Instead, they relied for their maritime enterprises onalliances with their coastal neighbors, particularly the Phoenicianstates to the north of Israel, who excelled in seafaring and hadaccess to the abundant timber forests of Lebanon. The Phoenicians(the Punics of classical antiquity) were famous in antiquity fortheir seafaring. In biblical times, they traded heavily betweenSyria-Palestine and Egypt and also sailed throughout theMediterranean, establishing colonies as far away as Tunisia(Carthage) and Spain (Cadiz).
Anotherseagoing people prominent in the OT were the Philistines, whose baseof power was to the west of Judah, along the Mediterranean coast. TheBible associates the Philistines with the five cities of Ashdod,Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza. The Philistines were among the SeaPeoples, who came to the Levant from the Aegean beginning in thetwelfth century BC (Amos 9:7; Jer. 47:4).
Theperennial enmity between the Philistines and the Israelites precludedjoint maritime ventures of the sort shared by Israel and thePhoenicians, and the Bible does not describe Philistine maritimeactivities in any depth. Nevertheless, the seagoing nature of thePhilistines is reflected by the fact that their settlements remainedconfined to the coastal region. They never made a systematic attemptto take over the traditionally Israelite and Judahite highlands. Whenthey did venture into the Judean mountains, it was to assert amilitary and political presence among the agrarian Israelites andJudahites rather than to establish permanent settlements andPhilistine population centers. Twelfth-century BC reliefs at MedinetHabu (in the mortuary temple of RamessesIII) depict a navalbattle between the Sea Peoples and the Egyptians. The reliefs includepictures of Philistine ships and sailors.
Israeliteseafaring.One of the rare references to Israelite seafaring describes theDanites and the Asherites in connection with ships and harbors (Judg.5:17; see also Ezek. 27:19). Traditional Danite territory overlappedwith the area of Philistine settlement. Asherite territory overlappedsubstantially with Phoenician territory. It is possible that Judg.5:17 refers to the fact that the Danites and the Asherites worked inthe port cities serving Philistine and Phoenician shipping. Inanother passage, Zebulun is associated with ports (Gen. 49:13). It isnoteworthy that the Israelite coast between Jaffa and Dor (roughlybetween Philistia and Phoenicia) does not have an abundance ofnatural harbors. Later, Herod the Great would build the artificialharbor at Caesarea in the first century BC. The great expense of sucha project—including the construction of over 2,500 feet ofbreakwaters made of underwater concrete, mostly imported fromItaly—suggests the extent of the need for secure harbors inthis region.
Solomon’sfleet.The zenith of Israelite seafaring occurred during the reign ofSolomon. Solomon built a fleet of ships at “Ezion Geber, whichis near Elath in Edom, on the shore of the Red Sea” (1Kings9:26). The purpose of these ships was to bring back gold from Ophir(1Kings 9:28), possibly a location in the Arabian Peninsula, towhich a port on the Red Sea would have offered ready access. Thestory confirms the aforementioned dependence on the Phoenicians inthe area of seafaring: although the ships belonged to Solomon, “Hiram[the Phoenician king of Tyre] sent his men—sailors who knew thesea—to serve in the fleet with Solomon’s men”(1Kings 9:27). The timber for the ships would also have beenimported by Israel from Phoenicia (see 1Kings 9:11). Even atthe height of its power, Israel lacked the human resources to embarkon sea voyages independently of the Phoenicians.
Thesuccess of Solomon’s project, of course, depended not only onwarm relations with the Phoenicians but also on territorial controlof the historically Edomite lands between Judah and the Red Sea. Thisfavorable combination of conditions would come and go throughout thebiblical period, and with it, Israel’s modest presence on theseas. From the Phoenician point of view, cooperation with Israel wasan essential component of gaining access to a Red Sea port, and withit to the products of Arabia, the Horn of Africa, and India. ThePhoenicians, as expansive as their travel was in the Mediterranean,could never independently control the long overland route fromPhoenicia to the Red Sea, since it ran through the territory ofIsrael and Edom. Their best hope was a friendly and powerfulIsraelite ally. This explains the cordial relationship and why Hiramsent not only his sailors to serve Solomon but also craftsmen andsupplies for the construction of the temple (1Kings 5:10–12).Solomon and Hiram jointly operated “a fleet of trading ships”that would return to port every three years bringing “gold,silver, and ivory, and apes and baboons” (1Kings 10:22).
Jehoshaphat.In the mid-ninth century BC, King Jehoshaphat of Judah attempted torepeat Solomon’s feat of launching a fleet from Ezion Geber(1Kings 22:48–49; 2Chron. 20:35–37).According to both accounts, the ships were wrecked before they couldset sail. On several other points, however, the two versions of thestory disagree in ways that bear on questions of the political andeconomic conditions of Israelite seafaring.
Bythis time, Israel and Judah had split into separate kingdoms, withthe northern kingdom of Israel being geographically and politicallycloser to the Phoenicians. The powerful King Ahab of Israel,Jehoshaphat’s contemporary through much of his reign, marriedJezebel, the daughter of the Sidonian (Phoenician) king Ethbaal(1Kings 16:31). According to 1Kings, King Ahaziah ofIsrael (Ahab’s son) proposed to cooperate with Jehoshaphat bysending his own men on the voyage, much as Hiram had assisted Solomonin the previous century. Jehoshaphat rejected the suggestion,possibly indicating a bid for Judean autonomy in an era of northerndominance. According to 2Chronicles, however, Jehoshaphat didcooperate willingly with Ahaziah, and this was the reason that theships foundered in port: God punished the righteous Jehoshaphat fortoo close a relationship with his wicked northern counterpart. In1Kings 22:47 it is mentioned that at the time of Jehoshaphat’sventure there was no king in Edom. As noted, control of the overlandroute between Judah and the Red Sea was necessary for the success ofany voyage originating from Ezion Geber.
Howeverthe contradiction between 1Kings and 2Chroniclesregarding the involvement of Ahaziah is resolved, both versions ofthe story highlight the fact that the port at Ezion Geber commandedthe interest of the Judeans, the Israelites, and the Phoenicians, andits successful operation probably depended on the cooperation of allthree.
Shipsof Tarshish.Several biblical texts, including the stories of Solomon andJehoshaphat, mention “ships of Tarshish” (1Kings10:22 NIV mg.). In a number of contexts, such ships are associatedwith the transportation of metals and metal ores, including iron,lead, tin, gold, and silver (1Kings 10:22; Ezek. 27:12; Jer.10:9). The exact derivation of the term “ships of Tarshish”is uncertain, though it is clear from the descriptions of theircargoes that such ships could travel over long distances. As Ezekielobserves, “The ships of Tarshish serve as carriers for yourwares. You are filled with heavy cargo as you sail the sea. Youroarsmen take you out to the high seas” (Ezek. 27:25–26).
Inthe Table of Nations, Tarshish is listed as a descendant of Javan(Gen. 10:4), along with a number of other seafaring peoples of theeastern Mediterranean (“Javan” indicates the peoples ofthe Aegean and is linguistically equivalent to “Ionia”[see also Ezek. 27:12–22]). Some have suggested, then, that theships of Tarshish should be associated with Tarsus in southeasternTurkey, an area containing silver mines (also the birthplace of Paul[Acts 9:11]). Others have suggested the Phoenician colony ofTartessus in Spain, another metal-producing area. This locationfigures in the interpretation of the identification of thedestination of Jonah as Tarshish (Jon. 1:3): presumably, if he wereavoiding Nineveh and departing from Joppa, he would head towardSpain, in the exact opposite direction, rather than toward Tarsus inCilicia.
Inaddition to these two geographical options, some have attempted toexplain the expression “ships of Tarshish” as derivingfrom the Akkadian term for smelting or refining: perhaps the manyreferences to cargoes of metals indicate that the ships were used totransport metal ore to refining centers. Finally, one scholar hasproposed that the term is related to the Greek word tarsos,meaning “oar.”
Descriptionsof ships and seafaring.Ezekiel, in his lament concerning the Phoenician city of Tyre (Ezek.27), relates a number of details related to Phoenician seafaring. Thepicture largely confirms the descriptions of how Solomon built andmanned his fleet with the assistance of his Tyrian ally. Timber forthe construction of the ship came from Lebanon and Cyprus, amongother places (vv. 5–6). Sails were made from Egyptian linen(v.7), and as noted above, the oarsmen and sailors were fromthe Phoenician city-states (vv. 8–9). Ezekiel goes on to list alarge number of ports of call as well as a dazzling variety ofcargoes (vv. 12–24). Notably, Ezekiel has the Judahites and theIsraelites offering the products of their agrarian economy—“wheatfrom Minnith and confections, honey, olive oil and balm”(v.17)—thus filling out the picture of what theIsraelites gave in exchange for the precious metals and luxury itemsimported by their country from elsewhere.
In1999 archaeologists explored two eighth-century BC Phoenician shipsthat had sunk thirty miles west of Ashkelon. The ships, eachmeasuring about fifty feet in length, contained large cargoes of wineand were headed either for Egypt or for the Phoenician colonies inthe western Mediterranean.
Shipsand sailing figure prominently in the story of Jonah, who boarded aship bound for Tarshish (see discussion above) at Joppa on theMediterranean coast. In the story we see a number of features ofancient sea travel. Jonah paid a fare for his voyage (Jon. 1:3). Notonly the biblical author (see 1:4), but also the presumablynon-Israelite sailors, believed that the great storm was the doing ofa god, and that it could be calmed by appealing to that god(1:6)—although cargo was thrown overboard for good measure.When Paul was caught in a storm in the first century AD, the samestrategies were still in use (Acts 27:38). The religious habits ofancient sailors, particularly their reverence for the gods whocontrolled the stormy seas and thus held their lives in the balance,are illuminated by the discovery of stone anchors in several temples(presumably left by sailors as offerings), including at the portcities of Ugarit, Kition, and Byblos.
Psalm107:23–32 speaks of God’s care of sailors from anIsraelite perspective. In the psalm, those who “went out on thesea in ships,” the “merchants on the mighty waters”(i.e., the deep, open sea), witness firsthand the works of the God ofIsrael, which include both the raising and the quieting of the storm.This passage vividly expresses the terror of being caught in a stormand the great relief and gratitude felt by sailors who reached safehaven.
Noah’sArk
Accordingto the biblical account, Noah’s ark was 450 feet long, 75 feetwide, and 45 feet high (300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits [Gen.6:15]). It had three decks, a roof, and a window. By comparison, theship of Uta-napishti in the Epic of Gilgamesh is described as havingsix decks (and thus seven stories), edges of 180 feet (ten dozencubits) in each dimension, and occupying the space of an acre (arough approximation of the dimensions given). Both ships aredescribed as providing space for the builder’s family and everyliving creature. In the Atrahasis Epic, the boat is roofed, but itsdimensions are not given.
Becauseof the character of Gen. 6–8, it is inappropriate to drawconclusions from the story regarding shipbuilding in historicalantiquity. According to the specifications given in the biblicaltext, Noah’s ark would have been the largest wooden ship inhistory, equaled only by the United States schooner Wyoming,completed in 1909. While the overall length of the Wyoming was also450 feet, nearly 100 feet of length was accounted for in the fore andaft booms, so that the hull length was only 350 feet. Even with earlytwentieth-century shipbuilding technology, its extravagant lengthrendered the Wyoming unseaworthy, and the ship foundered in 1924. Thelargest documented wooden ships of antiquity include the GreekSyracusia(third century BC; 180 feet), described by Athenaeus; the Roman Isis(second century AD; 180 feet), described by Lucian; Caligula’s“Giant Ship” (first century AD; 341 feet), recovered inmodern times and possibly corresponding to a ship described by Plinythe Elder; and PtolemyIV’s Tessarakonteres (third centuryBC), reported by Plutarch to have been about 425 feet long. This lastship was not designed for cruising in open water.
NewTestament
Fishingin the Sea of Galilee. Severalof Jesus’ disciples worked as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee,and the Gospels document their use of small boats for fishing andtraveling across the sea. Fishing was done with nets thrown both fromboats and from the shore (Mark 1:16, 19). The boats used by fishermenon the Sea of Galilee may have been small enough to pull up onto thebeach (Luke 5:2), or to be nearly capsized by a large catch of fish(Luke 5:7) or by a violent storm (Mark 4:37). They were large enoughto transport several men and even to sleep in (Mark 4:38). Such boatscould be rowed or sailed; in Mark 6:48 the disciples had to resort torowing because of an unfavorable headwind. On one occasion, Jesusstood in a boat to preach to a crowd gathered on the shore (Mark4:1). The Sea of Galilee is about eight miles wide and thirteen mileslong. On several occasions, Jesus traveled by boat across the sea toavoid having to walk long distances around its circumference (e.g.,Matt. 9:1; 14:22; 15:39).
In1986 archaeologists recovered a fishing boat dating to the mid-firstcentury AD on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. The boat had beenscuttled near the shore and was preserved under mud. The “JesusBoat,” as it was dubbed, measures twenty-seven feet in lengthand has a beam seven and a half feet long. Numerous species of woodwere used in its construction and repairs throughout its useful life.While there is no evidence to link the boat to Jesus or hisdisciples, radiometric dating places it in the correct period, and itprovides a likely model of the type of boat portrayed in the Gospels.
Asecond source of information regarding ships and sailing in the NT isthe account in Acts of Paul’s many sea voyages. As in the caseof Jehoshaphat, the Tyrians, Jonah, and Jesus’ disciples, Paullearned firsthand the perils of seafaring in small wooden boats:among his many traumas, along with beatings and stonings, herecalled, “Three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and aday in the open sea” (2Cor. 11:25).
Paul’sjourneys.A survey of Paul’s sea travels on his four journeys gives someidea of the routes that could be taken by a paying traveler in theeastern Mediterranean and Aegean.
1.Paul’s first missionary journey included voyages from Seleuciain Syria to the port of Salamis in Cyprus (Acts 13:4) and from Cyprus(Paphos) to Perga on the southern coast of Asia Minor (13:13). Afterjourneying through the interior, Paul returned to Attalia, where heembarked for the return trip to Syria, presumably passing againthrough the port at Salamis (14:26).
2.The second missionary journey began not with a sea voyage but ratherwith a trek through the interior of Syria and Cilicia, illustratingthat although sea travel was by far a more rapid means of travel, theoverland routes were by no means impossible (Acts 15:39). Paul wouldrepeat this land route during his third journey (19:1). Sea travelwas fast, but when one had plenty of friends along the alternativeland route, a sea journey was considerably less enjoyable. It isduring the second journey that we have the first recorded accounts ofPaul sailing in the Aegean. From Troas in Asia Minor, he sailed theshort distance to Macedonia (16:11), putting in midway at the islandof Samothrace. Apparently, Paul traveled by sea down the coast fromBerea to Athens (17:14). At the conclusion of his second journey,Paul sailed from Corinth to Caesarea, with a stop at Ephesus(18:18–22). Not counting any intervening ports of call notmentioned in the text, this would be the longest single leg of seatravel so far mentioned.
3.The third missionary journey once more began with a long overlandtrip from Syria through Asia Minor; by this time, Paul had manyassociates along the way to visit. Again, he sailed in the Aegean,from Ephesus to Macedonia (Acts 20:1) and back (20:6). At one point,Paul opted to travel overland, from Troas to Assos, while hiscompanions sailed down the coast (20:13). Meeting up with them, hesailed on, hugging the coast of Asia Minor, then sailing south ofCyprus along an open-water route to Tyre. From Tyre, the ship againhugged the Palestinian coast, stopping in several ports before Pauldisembarked at Caesarea (21:7). Paul’s journeys illustrate thevariety of itineraries taken by ships. They were capable of sailingin deep water, but they would also hug the coast when there werereasons to make frequent stops.
4.Paul’s fourth journey, which he made in custody on his way to atrial before the emperor at Rome, was to be the most dangerous. Fromthe account in Acts we can glean a number of details of life at seain the first century AD. The ship bound for Italy was large, and itcarried 276 passengers and crew (Acts 27:6, 37), including soldiersand prisoners, at least one companion of a prisoner (Paul’sfriend Aristarchus [27:2]), a ship’s pilot, and the ship’sowner (27:11). Sailors used celestial navigation (27:20) and tooksoundings in shallow water (27:28). We see also that the ship’scourse could be determined by the direction of the prevailing winds:twice during the journey Paul’s ship was forced to sail to thelee of large islands (Cyprus and Crete)—a longer journey, butthe only option for a ship that was not rigged to sail close-hauled.
Whenextended periods of unfavorable weather were forecast, one option wassimply to put in at a port until conditions improved, preferably in aharbor that was in the lee of an island (Acts 27:12). We learnsomething of the measures that were taken in heavy weather, many ofwhich are still used in modern times: ropes were tied around the hullof the ship to prevent it from breaking up in rough seas (27:17), thelifeboat was brought onto the deck and made fast (27:17), sea anchorswere deployed to keep the bow of the ship oriented into the oncomingwaves (27:7), the rudder was lashed amidships (27:40), valuable cargoand gear were jettisoned (27:19, 38), and, as in the days of Jonah,sailors and passengers prayed for divine deliverance (27:29; see alsothe protective emblems in 28:11).
Whenall other means had been exhausted, a ship could be run aground on asandy beach (Acts 27:39), a measure that would have risked damage tothe boat but saved lives. In the case of Paul’s ship, thedecision to run aground ultimately resulted in the destruction of theship (27:41).
Metaphorsand illustrations.Several NT authors draw illustrations from the nautical world. Jameslikens the harmful power of evil speech to the rudder of a ship:although it is a small device, by it the pilot can control a greatship (James 3:4–5). Elsewhere, he compares the doubting of theunwise person to being lost at sea in a storm (James 1:6; cf. Eph.4:14). In 1Tim. 1:19 the loss of faith and good conscience islikened to a shipwreck. Hebrews 6:19 describes the assurance of God’sfaithfulness as an anchor for the soul.
The book of Exodus (the second book of the OT and of thePentateuch) continues the story begun in Gen. 12 of the election ofAbraham as God’s choice for the beginning of a new people.Abraham’s great-grandson Joseph was taken to Egypt as a slavebut rose to power there. Eventually, his father, Jacob, along withhis brothers and their families, made the trek to Egypt and settledthere. Both Jacob and Joseph died in Egypt, and it is here that thebook of Exodus picks up. In Egypt the Israelites at first found asafe haven, only to be enslaved later by a “new king”(Exod. 1:8). The book of Exodus tells the story of the Israelites’struggles in Egypt, their deliverance through Moses (perhaps thecentral human figure in the OT), their trek to Mount Sinai, and theircontinued movement to Canaan, the promised land.
Authorship,Date, and Historical Issues
Authorshipand date.The authorship of Exodus must be considered together with the largerissue of the authorship of the Pentateuch (see Pentateuch). This isone of the more central issues in the history of modern OTscholarship. Generally, Moses was considered the sole or essentialauthor throughout much of the history of Jewish and Christianinterpretation. This is not to say that careful readers of thePentateuch did not raise thoughtful questions concerning passagesthat were problematic for Mosaic authorship. For example, thefifth-century translator Jerome raised the question of whether Mosescould have recorded the story of his own death (Deut. 34). Seriousquestions concerning Mosaic authorship, however, did not become thedominant trend among scholars until the seventeenth century. Thepresence of numerous post-Mosaic elements as well as repetition insome key stories (e.g., the two creation stories in Gen. 1–2and the repetition in the flood narrative in Gen. 6–9)suggested that the authorship question might be more complicated thantraditionally understood. Some of these earlier discussions were notnecessarily hostile to divine inspiration or to the notion of “basic”or “essential” Mosaic authorship. Nevertheless, thescholarly debates were synthesized in the latter half of thenineteenth century by Julius Wellhausen and his well-knownDocumentary Hypothesis. His theory presented considerable challengesto traditional views of pentateuchal authorship, and the DocumentaryHypothesis soon became widely accepted throughout the scholarlyworld.
Wellhausen’sviews have undergone continual revision and refinement, as well asessential rejection. In contemporary academic dialogue, it is fair tosay that precisely who wrote the Pentateuch that we have and when itwas finalized remain open questions. A commonly accepted position,also among evangelicals, is that the Pentateuch we have today (i.e.,its final form) is not the work of someone living in the middle ofthe second millennium BC (the traditional date for the life ofMoses). The question is not of Moses’ genius and specialpreparation for the task before him, or of his having received thelaw on Mount Sinai and having recorded certain events; rather, thequestion specifically concerns the historical period in which thePentateuch as we know it came to be. And with respect to thisspecific question, contemporary biblical scholars commonly attributethe final form of the Pentateuch to later scribes (in the exilic andpostexilic eras), using older material, both written and oral, atleast some of it going back to Moses himself. Hence, terms such as“essential Mosaic authorship,” although not preciselydefined, have become common designations. References to thePentateuch as the “Law of Moses” or similar phrases donot function as authorial statements in the modern sense of the word(i.e., refer to the one sitting down and doing the writing), butrather reflect the close association between the text and the eventsthat lie behind it. We are perhaps not unwise to allow the questionof the human authorship of the Pentateuch to remain open while alsoconfessing that God is free to bring his word into existence in anyway he sees fit.
Historicity.One reason why Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch has been such afocal point, however, concerns the question of the historicity ofExodus and of the Pentateuch in general. If Moses is not the authorin the usual sense of the word, and if the Pentateuch as we know itwas written by hands much removed from the events themselves, how canwe be assured of its historical reliability? This is a fair question,although it assumes that eyewitnesses (or near eyewitnesses) wouldbetter guarantee historical accuracy than those more removed from theevents. But one could just as easily argue that having somehistorical distance could make one more perceptive about thesignificance of past events. More important, however, such a viewcould appear to be limiting God’s ability to allow thePentateuch to develop through a historical process over a certainlength of time. Since God is the ultimate author, non-Mosaicauthorship does not imply an inability to produce a historicallyreliable text.
Withrespect to Exodus specifically, more serious questions concerninghistoricity have come from archaeological evidence—or better,lack of evidence. First, there are two reigning possibilities for thedate of the exodus. The traditional date is around 1446/1447 BC andis based essentially on a literal reading of 1Kings 6:1, whichputs the exodus 480 years before the fourth year of Solomon’sreign, around 966/967 BC. The alternate date is around 1270/1260 BCand is based on a symbolic reading of 1Kings 6:1 and indirectarchaeological evidence concerning “Pithom and Rameses”(Exod. 1:11) and some conquest sites. Concerning the latter, there isevidence for the destruction of some Canaanite towns, beginningaround 1230–1220 BC, which, according to the biblical record,were destroyed right after Israel’s entrance into Canaan.Hence, if the evidence for the destruction of these towns points toabout 1230–1220 BC, a rough date of 1270/1260 BC for the exodusaccounts for the intervening forty years of wilderness wandering.
However,biblical archaeologists have persistently maintained that there is nopositive archaeological evidence for the existence of Israeliteslaves in Egypt during the time when the exodus would have takenplace. This absence of evidence has been understood in very differentways by people of different camps. For some, the absence of any sortof Israelite material remains in Egypt, not to mention the lack ofany written Egyptian record of Israelite presence, is a fairly clearindication that such events never took place; modern scholarship isreplete with theories to account for the biblical record, fromcomplete fabrication to later legendizing of sparse, ancient records.Others consider the absence of written evidence to indicate Egyptianembarrassment at having been bested by a group of slaves (why wouldthey want to keep a record of that?). The absence of evidence ofspecifically Israelite material culture in Egypt is attributed eitherto Israelite assimilation into Egyptian culture or to similaritieswith other Semitic peoples in Egypt during the second millenniumBC.
Althoughthe question of the historicity of the exodus is very much an opensubject, recent work, particularly by evangelical scholars, has begunmounting arguments for the presence of Semitic peoples insecond-millennium Egypt and therefore for the historical plausibilityof Israelite presence, enslavement, and release from Egyptiancaptivity. From a scholarly point of view, this issue will not besettled in the near future, and much of the debate includes questionsof a more philosophical nature, such as “What does it mean to‘record’ history?” “What did it mean torecord history in the ancient world as opposed to our modern world?”“What type of historical account should we expect from ancientIsraelites?” These and other similar questions broaden thediscussion considerably and ensure that it will be ongoing.
Outline
Inits simplest outline, Exodus may be roughly divided into two parts,which highlight the Israelites’ departure from Egypt and theirsojourn at the foot of Mount Sinai:
I.Departure from Egypt (1–15)
II.Journey to and Arrival at Mount Sinai (16–40)
Asubdivision of sectionII can easily be justified, since twobasic events at Mount Sinai are recounted in chapters 16–40,the giving of the law and the building of the tabernacle:
I.Departure from Egypt (1–15)
II.Mount Sinai: Law (16–24)
III.Mount Sinai: Tabernacle (25–40)
‘
Thisthree-point outline gives the broad contours of Exodus, but a bitmore detail will perhaps provide a more useful presentation of thebook’s contents:
I.Departure from Egypt (1–15)
A.Prelude and call of Moses (1–6)
B.Plagues (7–12)
C.Departure (13–15)
II.Mount Sinai: Law (16–24)
A.Journey to Sinai (16–18)
B.Ten Commandments (19–20)
C.The Book of the Covenant (21–24)
III.Mount Sinai: Tabernacle (25–40)
A.Instructions for the tabernacle (25–31)
B.Rebellion and forgiveness (32–34)
C.Building the tabernacle (35–40)
Whatis immediately striking, even through such a sparse outline, is howmuch space is devoted to the events on Mount Sinai. Exodus is muchmore than a record of historical events, as one might find in amodern textbook of American history. It is, rather, a profoundtheological statement, both in its own right as well as part of thePentateuch as a whole, whose focus is not simply on the Israelites’release from Egypt but also on their arrival at Mount Sinai. Thestructure of the book, in other words, leads us to understandsomething of the book’s theology.
Theology
Creation.Already in the first chapter we see connections to Genesis, whichtell us that we cannot read Exodus in isolation. For example, Exod.1:1 closely parallels Gen. 46:8. The latter speaks of the Israelitesgoing down into Egypt, and the former picks up on this theme, thusreminding us that Israel’s presence in Egypt was not anaccident and that Exodus is a continuation of the story begun inGenesis. Likewise, the use of creation language in Exod. 1:7 (theIsraelites were fruitful, multiplying, becoming numerous, filling theearth; compare to Gen. 1:21, 28; 8:17; 9:1) signals that Israel’simpending drama is somehow connected to creation. That point is madeclearer in the chapters that follow. Perhaps most central is thecrossing of the Red Sea. As in Gen. 1:9, where the dry land appearswhere once there was water, here the dry land (Exod. 14:21) appearsto make a path through the sea.
Thereis, in fact, a fair amount of Exodus that plays on this theologicaltheme of creation and the reversal of creation. In ancient NearEastern conceptions of creation, water represented chaos. The gods’role was to tame the chaos so that the earth could be inhabited.Separating the land from the primordial sea was an important part ofthat, and this is reflected in the biblical account in Gen. 1. Theflood in Gen. 6–9 is a reversal of that creative act, where Godallows the waters of chaos to come crashing down on his creation,thus making it uninhabitable again. Exodus continues this theme, buthere creation is called upon to aid the Israelites in their escape,whereas it is used against the Egyptians. The ten plagues, forexample, are declarations that Israel’s God controls thecosmos, whereas Egypt’s gods stand by helplessly. The plague ofdarkness in particular is a graphic reversal of what God had done inGenesis, the creation of light and the separation of light fromdarkness. Israel’s deliverance from Egypt is, in other words,another act of creation: the same God who brought order to cosmicchaos in Gen. 1 is now unleashing the forces of creation to save hispeople and punish their enemies. And whereas Pharaoh’sEgyptians are able to reproduce the first sign and the first twoplagues, it is only Israel’s God who can end the plagues andrestore order to chaos.
Israelhas been delivered from Egypt for a purpose, and that purpose beginsto become clear in the chapters that follow their departure. Thenewly created people of Israel are not delivered from Egypt so thatthey can be “free” from bondage. The key struggle in theopening chapters of Exodus, indeed, the whole reason for the tenplagues, is to determine to whom Israel belongs, whether to Pharaohor to Yahweh, Israel’s God. The Hebrew word ’abad canmean both “serve” (in the sense of servitude) and“worship.” In a wonderful play on words, the questionbeing asked in the opening chapters is “Whom will Israel ’abad,Pharaoh or Yahweh?” But Yahweh claims his people, not so thatthey can be liberated to go where they please, but rather so thatthey are free to move from serving/worshiping Pharaoh toserving/worshiping Yahweh on Mount Sinai.
Thisis why so much of Exodus concerns the journey to Mount Sinai and whathappens there. Much of the “action” may end by chapter19, but the reason for the action is to get the Israelites to MountSinai so that they can begin their proper life of service to Yahwehand Yahweh alone. And this service involves two things: properbehavior (law) and proper worship (tabernacle). These are the maintopics of the remainder of the book of Exodus. And the fact that somuch text is dedicated to these two topics, which may be ofrelatively little interest to Christian readers, is an indication oftheir central importance to the theology of theOT.
Law.It is important to understand that the law was given to theIsraelites after they had been redeemed from Egypt, not before. Thelaw is a gift to those who have been saved. It is not something to befollowed in order to become saved. Israel is, as we read in Exod.4:22–23, God’s son. This is why Israel was delivered fromEgypt, and this is why Israel was given the gift of the law.
Thepurpose of the law, therefore, was not to prove to God that hispeople were somehow worthy of his covenant with them. The law wasgiven so that Israel would be molded into a new people, one whosehearts were wholly devoted to God and so could be the instrumentthrough which not only Israel but also the nations themselves wouldbe blessed (see Gen. 12:1–3). As Exod. 19:6 puts it, Israel isto become a “kingdom of priests”—that is, the “holynation” that would perform the mediatorial role of blessing thenations. The law, therefore, was not a burden but a delight, a giftfrom God to a redeemed people.
Also,the laws that God gives in Exodus are not necessarily new, as if noone had ever heard of these sorts of things before. Murder andadultery were considered to be wrong long before the Ten Commandmentswere given. Likewise, the laws of Exod. 21–23 (often referredto as the Book of the Covenant) are not new but rather reflect otherancient law codes much older than Israel’s (regardless of whenone dates the exodus). What makes these laws different, however, isthat these are the laws that Yahweh, the true God, gives to hispeople; these are the laws that reflect his character and, if theIsraelites follow them, will ensure that they reflect God’scharacter to one another and the surrounding nations. In other words,the law performs not so much an exclusionary role as a missionalrole. Or perhaps better, the Israelites are being trained to beseparate, and different, from surrounding peoples in order toproperly fulfill their holy, mediating, priestly function.
Tabernacle.The section on the tabernacle begins in chapter 25 and extends to theend of the book, chapter 40. In between is an important episode, therebellion involving the making of the golden calf. Just as the lawrepresents much more than “rules to live by,” thetabernacle is more than just a building for sacrificing animals. Theimportance of the tabernacle can be seen by focusing on some keyelements.
Chapters25–31 provide the list of instructions for the tabernacle. Forcenturies, rabbis and biblical scholars have noticed a pattern inthese chapters. Seven times the phrase is repeated “The Lordsaid to Moses,” and the seventh time is in 31:12 to introducethe topic of Sabbath observance. Just like the creation of the cosmosin Gen. 1, the tabernacle is a product of a six-stage creative act(“And the Lord said”) followed by rest. Some havesuggested that the tabernacle is a microcosm of creation: forexample, cherubim are worked into the curtains, so to look up is tolook at the heavens; the lampstand is a sort of tree of life, as inthe garden of Eden. To be in the tabernacle is to be in touch withcreation as it was meant to be, in the garden apart from the chaos oflife outside.
Chapters35–40 relay how the instructions are carried out. This sectionbegins with reference to the Sabbath (35:1–3), which is how thefirst section ends. In between, we find the episode of the goldencalf (chaps. 32–34), which is about false worship. TheIsraelites nearly succeed in undoing all that God had planned inbringing his people out of Egypt. Still, through Moses’intervention, God’s plan is not thwarted, and so chapter 35does not miss a beat, picking up where chapter 31 leaves off, withthe Sabbath. Some scholars see here a pattern of creation (chaps.25–31), fall (chaps. 32–34), and redemption (chaps.35–40).
Thetabernacle is an important theological entity in Exodus: it is heavenon earth. It is a truly holy space where God communes with his holy(law-keeping) people. This is the ultimate purpose of the exodus: tocreate a people who embody God’s character and who worship himin purity. Then God would be with his people wherever they go(40:36–38).
The book of Genesis (“Origins”) is well namedbecause it provides the foundation for the rest of the Bible andspeaks of the beginnings of the world, humanity, sin, redemption, thepeople of God, covenant, marriage, Sabbath, work, and much more.Genesis is the first chapter of the Pentateuch, a five-part story ofthe origins of the nation of Israel. Genesis is the preamble to thataccount, leading up to the pivotal moment of the exodus and the movetoward the promised land.
Authorship
Asnoted above, Genesis is the opening to the Pentateuch as a whole, sothe question of the authorship of Genesis is connected to thequestion of the authorship of the Pentateuch as a whole. Genesis (andthe entire Pentateuch) is anonymous, though Moses is said to havewritten down certain traditions that were included in the Pentateuch(Exod. 17:14; 24:4; 34:27; Num. 33:2; Deut. 31:22).
Latertradition speaks of the “law of Moses” (Josh. 1:7–8)or the “Book of Moses” (2Chron. 25:4; Ezra 6:18;Neh. 13:1), though it is not certain whether these refer to theentire Pentateuch or merely to portions of it that were associatedwith Moses. The NT writers, as well as Jesus himself, speak of thePentateuch in connection with Moses (e.g., Matt. 19:7; 22:24; Mark7:10; 12:26; John 1:17; 5:46; 7:23).
Thequestion of Moses’ role in writing the Pentateuch is morecomplicated, however. For instance, there are indications thatGenesis was updated well after the death of Moses. Traditionally,these passages are called “post-Mosaica,” because theycontain information that could be available only after the death ofMoses. For example, Deut. 34 speaks of Moses’ death and burial.Apparently so much time has elapsed since his death that the writercan say, “to this day no one knows where his grave is”(v. 6). The writer then states, “since then, no prophet hasrisen in Israel like Moses” (v. 10), which also presumes aconsiderable length of time has passed. Other examples include Gen.11:31, which refers to Abraham’s hometown as “Ur of theChaldeans.” Although Ur was a very ancient city, the Chaldeanswere an Aramaic-speaking tribe that only occupied Ur long after thetime of Moses. Similarly, in Gen. 14:14 a city by the name of “Dan”is mentioned, but we know from Judg. 18 that this city only receivedthis name during the period of the judges.
Despitethese considerations, some scholars are still comfortable ascribingsome “essential” authorship role to Moses. (For the mainalternative theory for the authorship and date of the writing ofGenesis, see Documentary Hypothesis; Pentateuch.)
Structureand Outline
Genesismay be outlined in more than one way. One method is to follow thetoledot formulas that serve as an organizing structure for the book.The phrase “these are the toledot of X” (where X is thepersonal name of the character whose sons are the subject of thenarrative that follows) is repeated ten times: 2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1;11:10, 27; 25:12, 19; 36:1 (cf. 36:9); 37:2 (see also 10:32; 25:13).For instance, Gen. 11:27 begins, “These are the toledot ofTerah” (NIV: “This is the account of Terah’s familyline”), while the account that follows is the story of Terah’sson Abraham. Toledot is best translated as “family history”or “account.” Hence, one can take Genesis as having aprologue (1:1–2:3) followed by ten episodes.
Interms of content and style, the book falls into three main units asfollows:
I.The Primeval History (Gen. 1:1–11:26)
II.The Patriarchal Narrative (Gen. 11:27–36:43)
III.The Joseph Story (Gen. 37–50)
I.The primeval history (Gen. 1:1–11:26).The book opens with an account of creation given in two parts.Genesis 1:1–2:4a provides a creation account that describes thesix days in which God created the heavens and the earth, followed bya seventh day of rest. Genesis 2:4b–25 then provides a secondaccount of creation, this time with a focus on the creation of Adamand Eve. Genesis 3 then narrates the first sin of humanity, whichintroduces sin and death into the world. Genesis 4–11 providesfour additional stories (the murder of Abel by Cain, theintermarrying of the “sons of God” with the “daughtersof men,” the flood, and the tower of Babel). These stories showa creation gone wrong, God’s move to start over again with Noahand his family, and the persistence of sin thereafter. All of thisleads to the story of the patriarchs, where God’s plan to setthings right takes a decisive turn. These stories are connected bygenealogies that mark the march of time as well as providesignificant theological commentary.
II.The patriarchal narrative (Gen. 11:27–36:43).The middle section of the book of Genesis turns its attention to thepatriarchs, so called because they are the fathers of the nation ofIsrael. The style of the book changes at this point, so that ratherthan following the story of all the world and moving at a fast pace,the narrative slows down and focuses on God creating a people to obeyhim and to bring those blessings to the whole world (12:1–3).God now determines to restore the blessing lost at Eden by reachingthe world through the descendants of one individual, Abraham.
Abraham’sfather, Terah, took Abram (as Abraham was then known), Abram’swife Sarai (Sarah), and Terah’s grandson Lot and left Ur tosettle in Harran in northern Mesopotamia. No explanation is givenwhy. While they are settled in Harran, God commands Abraham to leaveUr in Mesopotamia and travel to Canaan. God promises that he willmake him a great nation (implying land and many descendants), andthat he will be blessed and will be a blessing to the nations (Gen.12:1–3). That blessing requires Abraham and Sarah to havechildren, and this sets up much of the drama of his story. OftenAbraham reacts in fear and not faith, but at the end of his story hehas a solid confidence in God’s ability to take care of him andbring all the promises to fulfillment (Gen. 22).
Isaac,not Ishmael (Abraham’s son through Sarah’s maidservantHagar; see Gen. 16), is the conduit of the promises to futuregenerations. Even so, Isaac is not a highly developed character inthe book of Genesis, although his near sacrifice in Gen. 22 iscertainly a matter of great interest. The episode in his life thatreceives the lengthiest attention is the courtship with Rebekah (Gen.24), and there the focus is primarily on her.
Theaccount of Isaac’s life gives way to an account of his sonJacob. Jacob is a complex character. The first episodes of his storyare about how he, the younger, inherits the blessing and becomes theconduit for the promise rather than his older brother, Esau. Jacobbecomes an example of how God uses the foolish things of the world toaccomplish his purposes. That the story of the patriarchs is apreamble to the story of the founding of Israel becomes obvious whenJacob’s name is changed to “Israel” after he fightswith God (Gen. 32:22–32) and his wives give birth to twelvesons, who give their names to the twelve tribes of Israel.
III.The Joseph story (Gen. 37–50).The third section of Genesis focuses on the twelve sons of Jacob, inparticular Joseph. A main theme seems to be God’s providentialpreservation of the family of the promise, in the context of adevastating famine. Joseph himself expresses the theme of thissection at the end of the narrative, after his father dies and hisbrothers now wonder whether he will seek revenge against them. Hereassures them by his statement that although they had meant theiractions to harm him, he knows that God has used these very actionsfor good, for the salvation of the family of God (Gen. 50:19–20).Yes, they had just wanted to get rid of him, but God has used theirjealousy to bring Joseph to Egypt. The wife of his owner had wantedto frame him for rape, but God has used this false accusation inorder to have him thrown into jail, where he meets two of Pharaoh’schief advisers. He had demonstrated to them his ability to interpretdreams, so when the chief cupbearer is restored to a position ofinfluence, he can advise Pharaoh himself to turn to Joseph tointerpret his disturbing dreams. These dreams have allowed Pharaoh,with Joseph’s help, to prepare for the famine. Joseph has risento great prominence in Egypt, so when the famine comes, he is in aposition to help his family, and the promise can continue to the nextgenerations.
Amongother secondary, yet important, themes of the Joseph narrative arethe rising prominence of Judah and the lessening significance ofReuben. Judah at first is pictured as self-serving (Gen. 38), but bythe end of the story he is willing to sacrifice himself for the goodof his father and family (Gen. 44:18–34). This story thusdemonstrates why the descendants of Judah have dominance over thedescendants of the firstborn, Reuben, in later Israelite history.Also, the Joseph story recounts how Israel came to Egypt. This setsup the events of the book of Exodus.
Styleand Genre
Style.Genesis is written in Hebrew prose of a high literary style. Wordsare carefully chosen not only to communicate the message of the bookbut also to attract the reader’s interest and attention.
Genre.Genesis is an account of the origins of the cosmos, humanity, and thepeople of God. Thus, it is proper to refer to the book as a work ofhistory. Of course, there is more than one type of history. Somehistories focus on wars, others on economics or politics. Moreover,Genesis is not history in the modern sense but follows ancientconventions, which do not call for scrupulous accuracy. The centralconcern of Genesis, as with the majority of biblical histories, isthe relationship between God and his people. So, it is appropriate toidentify Genesis as a theological history.
Somereaders misunderstand the nature of the historical information thatthe book provides. For example, Gen. 1–2 communicates to thereader that it is the true God, not a god such as the BabylonianMarduk or the Canaanite Baal, who created the cosmos. The way some ofthe stories are told provides a challenge to rival stories from otherancient religions. One example is how the Bible describes thecreation of Adam from the dust of the ground and the breath of God.This contrasts with the Mesopotamian creation account Enuma Elish, inwhich the god Marduk creates the first humans from the clay of theearth and the blood of a demon god. The biblical flood story also maybe compared to other ancient flood stories, especially the account ofthe flood found in the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh. Genesis clearlyinteracts with such mythological stories to communicate importanttruths about the primeval period.
Message
Therich and complex book of Genesis pre-sents a profound messageconcerning God and his relationship with human beings. This shortarticle cannot do justice to the book’s depth and importance,but it can point to what is perhaps its most important theme: God’sblessing.
Genesis1–2 teaches that God created Adam and Eve and blessed them.They had everything they needed in the garden of Eden. They enjoyed aperfectly harmonious relationship with God and with each other. Theywanted for nothing.
Genesis3 explains how this blessed existence was disrupted. By choosing torebel against God, Adam and Eve ruptured their relationship with Godand, in consequence, with each other as well. They were expelled fromthe garden of Eden.
Evenin the midst of his judgment, however, God began the work ofrestoring the blessing to his human creatures (Gen. 3:15). Thusbegins the relentless work of God to bring restoration to his people.
NewTestament Connections
Genesisis the foundation not just of the Pentateuch, and not just of the OT,but of the entire Bible. The story that begins with creation and fallis followed by the history of redemption, which continues into the NTand which understands Jesus Christ as the one whose death andresurrection serve to restore God’s blessing to his people. Thefull restoration of relationship awaits the consummation of historyand the new Jerusalem, which is described in language telling us thatheaven is a restoration (and more) of the conditions enjoyed by Adamand Eve in the garden of Eden (Rev. 21–22, esp. Rev. 22:2).
Ofthe many allusions to and quotations of Genesis found in the NT, onlya few representative examples may be described here.
Paulpoints to the Abrahamic promise of the seed in Gen. 12:1–3 andproclaims that Jesus is that seed (Gal. 3:15–16). This claim issurprising in light of the OT’s clear understanding that it wasthe multiple descendants of Abraham constituting Israel who fulfilledthis promise (Gen. 15:15). Paul would have known this, but herecognizes that Jesus is the ultimate descendant of Abraham, and thatanyone who belongs to Jesus, Jew or Gentile, is also a participant inthe Abrahamic promise (Gal. 3:29).
Asecond example comes from the way in which the author of Hebrewscites the Melchizedek tradition of Gen. 14:17–20. In Genesis,Melchizedek is a mysterious figure who is introduced as thepriest-king of Salem (Jerusalem), whom Abraham acknowledges as afellow worshiper of the true God. In order to make his argument thatJesus is the ultimate priest, the author of Hebrews connects Jesuswith Melchizedek rather than with Aaron and asserts the superiorityof Melchizedek because Abraham (and thus also Levi, Aaron’sancestor) paid respects to this man (Heb. 7:1–10).
Afinal example comes from the Joseph narrative. Earlier, we observedthat the narrative shows how God used the evil actions of people inorder to save many people. In this, the Joseph narrative anticipatesthe death of Christ, who was nailed to the cross by the hands ofwicked people, but God used this very action to accomplish a muchgreater salvation than he did through Joseph (see Acts 2:22–24).
The biblical corpus known as the Pentateuch consists of thefirst five books of the OT: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, andDeuteronomy. The word “Pentateuch” comes from two Greekwords (penta [“five”] and teuchos [“scroll case,book”]) and is a designation attested in the early churchfathers. The collection is also commonly known as the “FiveBooks of Moses,” “the Law of Moses,” or simply the“Law,” reflecting the traditional Jewish name “Torah,”meaning “law” or “instruction.” The Torah isthe first of three major sections that comprise the Hebrew Bible(Torah, Nebiim, Ketubim [Law, Prophets, Writings]); thus for bothJewish and Christian traditions it represents the introduction to theBible as a whole as well as its interpretive foundation.
TheEnglish names for the books of the Pentateuch came from the LatinVulgate, based on the Greek Septuagint. These appellations are mainlydescriptive of their content. Genesis derives from “generations”or “origin,” Exodus means “going out,”Leviticus represents priestly (Levitical) service, Numbers refers tothe censuses taken in the book, and Deuteronomy indicates “secondlaw” because of Moses’ rehearsal of God’s commands(see Deut. 17:18). The Hebrew designations derive from opening wordsin each book. Beresh*t (Genesis) means “in the beginning”;Shemot (Exodus), “[these are] the names”; Wayyiqra’(Leviticus), “and he called”; Bemidbar (Numbers), “inthe desert”; and Debarim (Deuteronomy), “[these are] thewords.”
Referringto the Pentateuch as “Torah” or the “Law”reflects the climactic reception of God’s commands at MountSinai, which were to govern Israel’s life and worship in thepromised land, including their journey to get there. However, callingthe Pentateuch the “Law” can be a bit misleading becausethere are relatively few passages that simply list a set of commands,and all law passages are set within a broad narrative. The Pentateuchis a grand story that begins on a universal scale with the creationof the cosmos and ends on the plains of Moab as the readeranticipates the fulfillment of God’s plan to redeem a fallenworld through his chosen people. The books offer distinct qualitiesand content, but they are also inherently dependent upon one another,as the narrative remains unbroken through the five volumes. Genesisends with Jacob’s family in Egypt, and, though many years havepassed, this is where Exodus begins. Leviticus outlines cultic lifeat the tabernacle (constructed at the end of Exodus) and even beginswithout a clear subject (“And he called...”),which requires the reader to supply “the Lord” from thelast verse of Exodus. Numbers begins with an account of Israel’sfighting men as the nation prepares to leave Sinai, and Deuteronomyis Moses’ farewell address to the nation on the cusp of thepromised land.
Authorshipand Composition
Althoughthe Pentateuch is technically an anonymous work, Jewish and Christiantradition attributes its authorship to Moses, the main figure of thestory from Exodus to Deuteronomy. The arguments for attributing theauthorship of the Pentateuch to Moses come from internal evidencewithin both Testaments. That Moses is responsible for at leastportions of the Pentateuch is suggested by references to his explicitliterary activity reflected within the narrative itself (Exod. 17:14;24:4; 34:28; Num. 33:2; Deut. 31:9, 22, 24), if not implied invarious literary formulas such as “the Lord said to Moses”(e.g., Exod. 39:1, 7, 21; Lev. 4:1; 11:1; 13:1; Num. 1:1; 2:1).Mosaic authorship receives support from the historical books, whichuse terms such as “the Book of the Law of Moses” invarious forms and references in the preexilic history (Josh. 8:30–35;23:6; 2Kings 14:6) as well as the postexilic history (e.g.,2Chron. 25:4; Ezra 6:18; Neh. 13:1). The same titles are usedby NT authors (e.g., Mark 12:26; Luke 24:44; John 1:45), evenreferring to the Pentateuch simply by the name “Moses” atvarious points (e.g., Luke 16:29; 24:27; 2Cor. 3:15).
Evenwith these examples, nowhere does the text explicitly state thatMoses is responsible for the entire compilation of the Pentateuch orthat he penned it with his own hand. Rather, a number of factorspoint to a later hand at work: Moses’ death and burial arereferenced (Deut. 34), the conquest of Canaan is referred to as past(Deut. 2:12), and there is evidence that the names of people andplaces were updated and explained for later generations (e.g., “Dan”in Gen. 14:14; cf. Josh. 19:47; Judg. 18:28b–29). Based onthese factors, it is reasonable to believe that the Pentateuchunderwent editorial alteration as it was preserved within Jewish lifeand took its final shape after Moses’ lifetime.
Overthe last century, the Documentary Hypothesis has dominated academicdiscussion of the Pentateuch’s composition. This theory wascrystallized by Julius Wellhausen in his Prolegomena to the Historyof Israel in the late nineteenth century and posits that thePentateuch originated from a variety of ancient sources derived fromdistinct authors and time periods that have been transmitted andjoined through a long and complex process. Traditionally thesedocuments are identified as J, E, D, and P. The J source is adocument authored by the “Yahwist” (German, Jahwist) inJudah around 840 BC and is so called because the name “Yahweh”is used frequently in its text. The E source stands for “Elohist”because of its preference for the divine title “Elohim”and was composed in Israel around 700 BC. The D source stands for“Deuteronomy” because it reflects material found in thatbook; it was composed sometime around Josiah’s reform in 621BC. The P document reflects material that priests would be concernedwith in the postexilic time period, approximately 500 BC. This theoryand its related forms stem from the scholarly concern over variousliterary characteristics such as the use of divine names; doubletsand duplications in the text; observable patterns of style,terminology, and themes; and alleged discrepancies in facts,descriptions, and geographic or historical perspective.
Variousdocumentary theories of composition have flourished over the lastcentury of pentateuchal scholarship and still have many adherents.However, lack of scholarly agreement about the dating and characterof the sources and the rise of other literary approaches to the texthave many conservative and liberal scholars calling into question theaccuracy and even interpretive benefit of the source theories.Moreover, if the literary observations used to create sourcedistinctions can be explained in other ways, then the DocumentaryHypothesis is significantly undermined.
Inits canonical form, the pentateuchal narrative combines artisticprose, poetry, and law to tell a dramatic history spanning thousandsof years. One could divide the story into six major sections:primeval history (Gen. 1–11), the patriarchs (Gen. 12–50),liberation from Egypt (Exod. 1–18), Sinai (Exod. 19:1–Num.10:10), wilderness journey (Num. 10:11–36:13), and Moses’farewell (Deuteronomy).
PrimevalHistory (Gen. 1–11)
Itis possible to divide Genesis into two parts based upon subjectmatter: the origin of creation and humankind’s call, fall, andpunishment (chaps 1–11), and the origin of a family that wouldbecome God’s conduit of salvation and blessing for the world(chaps. 12–50).
Theprimeval history comprises essentially the first eleven chapters ofGenesis, ending with the genealogy of Abraham in 11:26. Strictlyspeaking, 11:27 begins the patriarchal section with the sixthinstance of the toledot formula found in Genesis, referencingAbraham’s father, Terah. The Hebrew phrase ’elleh toledot(“these are the generations of”) occurs in eleven placesin Genesis and reflects a deliberate structural marker that one mayuse to divide the book into distinct episodes (2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1;11:10; 11:27; 25:12; 25:19; 36:1; 36:9; 37:2).
Genesisas we know it exhibits two distinct creation accounts in its firsttwo chapters. Although critical scholars contend that the differingaccounts reflect contradictory stories and different authors, it isjust as convenient to recognize that the two stories vary in styleand some content because they attempt to accomplish different aims.The first account, 1:1–2:3, is an artistic, poetic,symmetrical, and “heavenly” view of creation by atranscendent God, who spoke creation into being. In the secondaccount, 2:4–25, God is immanently involved with creation as heis present in a garden, breathes life into Adam’s nostrils,dialogues and problem-solves, fashions Eve from Adam’s side,and bestows warnings and commands. Both perspectives are foundationalfor providing an accurate view of God’s interaction withcreation in the rest of Scripture.
Asone progresses through chapters 1–11, the story quickly changesfrom what God has established as “very good” to discord,sin, and shame. Chapter 3 reflects the “fall” of humanityas Adam and Eve sin in eating from the forbidden tree in directdisobedience to God. The serpent shrewdly deceives the first couple,and thus all three incur God’s curses, which extend tounlimited generations. Sin that breaks the vertical relationshipbetween God and humanity intrinsically leads to horizontal strifebetween humans. Sin and disunity on the earth only intensify as onemoves from the murder story of Cain and Abel in chapter 4 to theflood in chapters 5–9. Violence, evil, and disorder have sopervaded the earth that God sends a deluge to wipe out all livingthings, save one righteous man and his family, along with an ark fullof animals. God makes the first covenant recorded in the biblicalnarrative with Noah (6:18), promising to save him from the flood ashe commands Noah to build an ark and gather food for survival. Noahfulfills all that God has commanded (6:22; 7:5), and God remembershis promise (8:1). This is the prototypical salvation story for therest of Scripture.
Chapter9 reflects a new start for humanity and all living things as thecreation mandate to “be fruitful and increase in number; fillthe earth and subdue it,” first introduced in 1:28, is restatedalong with the reminder that humankind is made in God’s image(1:27). Bearing the image involves new responsibilities andstipulations in the postdiluvian era (9:2–6). There will beenmity between humans and animals, animals are now appropriate food,and yet lifeblood will be specially revered. God still requiresaccountability for just and discriminate shedding of blood andorderly relationships, as he has proved in the deluge, but now herelinquishes this responsibility to humankind. In return, Godpromises never to destroy all flesh again, and he will set therainbow in the sky as a personal reminder. Like the covenant withNoah in 6:18, the postdiluvian covenant involves humankind fulfillingcommands (9:1–7) and God remembering his covenant (9:8–17),specially termed “everlasting” (9:16).
Theprimeval commentary on humankind’s unabating sinful condition(e.g., 6:5; 8:21) proves true as Noah becomes drunk and naked and hisson Ham (father of Canaan) shames him by failing to conceal hisfather’s negligence. Instead of multiplying, filling, andsubduing the earth as God has intended, humankind collaborates tomake a name for itself by building a sort of stairway to heavenwithin a special city (11:4). God foils such haughty plans byscattering the people across the earth and confusing their language.Expressed in an orderly chiastic structure, the story of the tower ofBabel demonstrates that God condescends (11:5) to set things straightwith humanity.
Patriarchs(Gen. 12–50)
Althoughthe primeval history is foundational for understanding the rest ofthe Bible, more space in Genesis is devoted to the patriarchalfigures Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph. In general, the Abrahamicnarrative spans chapters 12–25, the story of Isaac serves as atransition to the Jacob cycle of chapters 25–37, and the Josephnarrative finishes the book of Genesis in chapters 37–50.
Thetransition from the primeval history to the patriarchs (11:27–32)reveals how Abraham, the father of Israel, moves from the east andsettles in Harran as the family ventures to settle in Canaan. InHarran, Abraham receives the call of God’s redemptive plan,which reverberates through Scripture. God will bless him with land,make him a great nation, grant him special favor, and use him as aconduit of blessings to the world (12:1–3). In 11:30 is theindication that the barrenness of Abraham’s wife (Sarah)relates to the essence of God’s magnificent promises. How onebecomes great in name and number, secures enemy territory, and is tobless all peoples without a descendant becomes the compellingquestion of the Abrahamic narrative. The interchange betweenAbraham’s faith in God and his attempts to contrive covenantfulfillment colors the entire narrative leading up to chapter 22. Itis there that Abraham’s faith is ultimately put to the test asGod asks him to sacrifice the promised son, Isaac. Abraham passesGod’s faith test, and a ram is provided to take Isaac’splace. This everlasting covenant that was previously sealed by thesign of circumcision is climactically procured for future generationsthrough Abraham’s exemplary obedience (22:16–18; cf.15:1–21; 17:1–27).
Thepatriarchal stories that follow show that the Abrahamic promises arerenewed with subsequent generations (see 26:3–4; 28:13–14)and survive various threats to fulfillment. The story of Isaac servesmainly as a bridge to the Jacob cycle, as he exists primarily as apassive character in relation to Abraham and Jacob.
Deception,struggle, rivalry, and favoritism characterize the Jacob narrative,as first exemplified in the jostling of twin boys in Rebekah’swomb (25:22). Jacob supplants his twin brother, Esau, for thefirstborn’s blessing and birthright. He flees to Paddan Aram(northern Mesopotamia), marries two sisters, takes their maidservantsas concubines, and has eleven children, followed by a falling-outwith his father-in-law. Jacob’s struggle for God’sblessing that began with Esau comes to a head in his wrestlingencounter with God at Peniel. Ultimately, Jacob emerges victoriousand receives God’s blessing and a name change, “Israel”(“one who struggles with God”). Throughout the Jacobstory, God demonstrates his faithfulness to the Abrahamic covenantand reiterates the promises to Jacob, most notably at Bethel (chaps.28; 35). The interpersonal strife of Jacob’s life is thusenveloped within a message of reconciliation not just with Esau(chap. 33) but ultimately with God. The reader learns from theepisodes in Jacob’s life that although God works through thelives of weak and failing people, his promises for Israel remainsecure.
AlthoughJacob and his family are already living in Canaan, God intends forthem to move to Egypt and grow into a powerful nation beforefulfilling their conquest of the promised land (see 15:13–16).The story of Joseph explains how the family ends up in Egypt at theclose of Genesis. Joseph is specially loved by his father, whichelicits significant jealousy from his brothers, who sell him off tosome nomads and fabricate the alibi that he has been killed by a wildbeast. Joseph winds up in Pharaoh’s household and eventuallybecomes his top official. When famine strikes Canaan years later,Joseph’s brothers go to Egypt to purchase food from the royalcourt, and Joseph reveals his identity to them in an emotionalreunion. Jacob’s entire family moves to Egypt to live for atime in prosperity under Joseph’s care. The Joseph storyillustrates the mysterious relationship of human decision and divinesovereignty (50:20).
Liberationfrom Egypt (Exod. 1–18)
Genesisshows how Abraham develops into a large family. Exodus shows how thisfamily becomes a nation—enslaved, freed, and then taught theways of God. Although it appears that Exodus continues a rivetingstory of God’s chosen people, it is actually the identity andpower of God that take center stage.
Manyyears have passed since Joseph’s family arrived in Egypt. TheHebrews’ good standing in Egypt has also diminished as theirmultiplication and fruitfulness during the intervening period—justas God had promised Abraham (Gen. 17:4–8)—became anational threat to the Egyptians. Abraham’s family will spendtime in Egyptian slavery before being liberated with many possessionsin hand (cf. Gen. 15:13–14).
Inthe book of Exodus the drama of suffering and salvation serves as thevehicle for God’s self-disclosure to a single man, Moses. Mosesis an Israelite of destiny even from birth, as he providentiallyavoids infant death and rises to power and influence in Pharaoh’shousehold. Moses never loses his passion for his own people, and hekills an Egyptian who was beating a fellow Hebrew. Moses flees toobscurity in the desert, where he meets God and his call to lead hispeople out of Egypt and to the promised land (3:7–8; 6:8). Likethe days of Noah’s salvation, God has remembered his covenantwith the patriarchs and responded to the groans of his people inEgypt (2:24; 6:4–5; cf. Gen. 8:1). God reveals himself, and hispersonal name “Yahweh” (“I am”), to Moses inthe great theophany of the burning bush at Mount Horeb (Sinai), thesame place where later he will receive God’s law. Moses doubtshis own ability to carry out the task of confronting Pharaoh andleading the exodus, but God foretells that many amazing signs andwonders not only will make the escape possible but also willultimately reveal the mighty nature of God to the Hebrews, Egypt, andpresumably the world (6:7; 7:5).
Thispromise of creating a nation of his people through deliverance issuccinctly conveyed in the classic covenant formula that findssignificance in the rest of the OT: “I will take you as my ownpeople, and I will be your God” (6:7). Wielding great powerover nature and at times even human decision, God “hardens”Pharaoh’s heart and sends ten plagues to demonstrate his favorfor his own people and wrath against their enemy nation. The tenthplague on the firstborn of all in Egypt provides the context for thePassover as God spares the firstborn of Israel in response to theplacement of sacrificial blood on the doorposts of their homes.Pharaoh persists in the attempt to overtake the Israelites in thedesert, where the power of God climaxes in parting the Red Sea (orSea of Reeds). The Israelites successfully pass through, buttheEgyptian army drowns in pursuit. This is the great salvationevent of the OT.
Thesong of praise for God’s deliverance (15:1–21) quicklyturns to cries of groaning in the seventy days following the exodusas the people of the nation, grumbling about their circ*mstances inthe desert, quickly demonstrate their fleeting trust in the one whohas saved them (Exod. 15:22–18:27). When a shortage of waterand food confronts the people, their faith in God’s care provesshallow, and they turn on Moses. Even though the special marks ofGod’s protection have been evident in the wilderness throughthe pillars of cloud and fire, the angel of God, the provision ofmanna and quail, water from the rock, and the leadership of Moses,the nation continually fails God’s tests of trust and obedience(16:4; cf. 17:2; 20:20). Yet God continues to endure with his peoplethrough the leadership of Moses.
Sinai(Exod. 19:1–Num. 10:10)
Mostof the pentateuchal narrative takes place at Mount Sinai. It is therethat Israel receives national legislation and prescriptions for thetabernacle, the priesthood, feasts and festivals, and othercovenantal demands for living as God’s chosen people. Theeleven-month stay at Sinai takes the biblical reader through thecenter of the Pentateuch, covering approximately the last half ofExodus, all of Leviticus, and the first third of Numbers, before thenation leaves this sacred site and sojourns in the wilderness.Several key sections of the Pentateuch fall withinthe Sinaistory: the Decalogue (Exod. 20:1–17), the Book of the Covenant(Exod. 20:22–23:33), the tabernacle prescriptions (Exod.25–31), the tabernacle construction (Exod. 35–40), themanual on ritual worship (Lev. 1–7), and the Holiness Code(Lev. 17–27).
Theevents and instruction at Sinai are central to the Israelitereligious experience and reflect the third eternal covenant that Godestablishes in the Pentateuch—this time with Israel, wherebythe Sabbath is the sign (Exod. 31:16; cf. Noahic/rainbow covenant[Gen. 9:16] and the Abrahamic/circumcision covenant [Gen. 17:7, 13,19]). The offices of prophet and priest develop into clear view inthis portion of the Pentateuch. Moses exemplifies the dual propheticfunction of representing the people when speaking with God and, inturn, God when speaking to the people. The priesthood is bestowedupon Aaron and his descendants in Exodus and inaugurated within oneof the few narrative sections of Leviticus (Lev. 8–10). Thegiving of the law, the ark, the tabernacle, the priesthood, and theSabbath are all a part of God’s making himself “known”to Israel and the world, which is a constant theme in Exodus (see,e.g., 25:22; 29:43, 46; 31:13).
TheIsraelites’ stay at Sinai opens with one of the greatesttheophanies of the Bible: God speaks aloud to the people (Exod.19–20) and then is envisioned as a consuming fire (Exod. 24).After communicating the Ten Commandments (“ten words”)directly to the people (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 4:13; 10:4), Mosesmediates the rest of the detailed obligations that will govern thefuture life of the nation. The covenant is ratified in ceremonialfashion (Exod. 24), and the Israelites vow to fulfill all that hasbeen spoken. God expects Israel to be a holy nation (Exod. 19:6) withwhom he may dwell, but Moses descends Sinai only to find that theIsraelites have already violated the essence of the Decalogue byfashioning a golden calf to worship as that which delivered them fromEgypt (Exod. 32). This places Israel’s future and calling injeopardy, but Moses intercedes for his people, and God graciouslypromises to preserve the nation and abide with it in his mercy, evenwhile punishing the guilty. This becomes prototypical of God’srelationship with his people in the future (Exod. 34:6–7).
Exodusends with the consecration of the tabernacle and the descent of God’spresence there. With the tent of worship in order, the priesthood andits rituals can be officially established. Leviticus reflects divineinstructions for how a sinful people may live safely in closeproximity to God. Holy living involves dealing with sin andminimizing the need for atonement, purification, and restitution. Thesacrificial and worship system established in Leviticus is based on aworldview of order, perfection, and purity, which should characterizea people who are commanded, “Be holy because I, the Lord yourGod, am holy’ (Lev. 19:2; cf. 11:44–45; 20:26). Withthese rules in place, the Israelites can make final preparations todepart Sinai and move forward on their journey. Numbers 1–10spans a nineteen-day period of such activities as the Israelitesbegin to focus on dispossessing their enemies. These chapters reflecta census of fighting men, the priority of purity, the dedication ofthe tabernacle, and the observance of the Passover before commencingthe quest to Canaan.
WildernessJourney (Num. 10:11–36:13)
Therest of the book of Numbers covers the remainder of a forty-yearstretch of great peaks and valleys in the faith and future of thenation. Chapters 11–25 recount the various events that show theexodus generation’s lack of trust in God. Chapters 26–36reveal a more positive section whereby a new generation prepares forthe conquest. With the third section of Numbers framed by episodesinvolving the inheritance rights of Zelophehad’s daughters(27:1–11; 36:1–13), it is clear that the story has turnedtothe future possession of the land.
Afterthe departure from Sinai, the narrative consists of a number ofIsraelite complaints in the desert. The Israelites have grown tiredof manna and ironically crave the food of Egypt, which they recall asfree fish, fruits, and vegetables. Having forgotten the hardship oflife in slavery, about which they had cried out to God, now thenation is crying out for a lifestyle of old. Moses becomes sooverwhelmed with the complaints of the people that God providesseventy elders, who, to help shoulder the leadership burden, willreceive the same prophetic spirit given to Moses.
Inchapters 13–14 twelve spies are sent out from Kadesh Barnea toperuse Canaan, but the people’s lack of faith to procure theland from the mighty people there proves costly. This final exampleof distrust moves God to punish and purify the nation. Theunbelieving generation will die in the wilderness during a forty-yearperiod of wandering.
Thediscontent in the desert involves not only food and water but alsoleadership status. Moses’ own brother and sister resent hisspecial relationship with God and challenge his exclusive authority.Later, Aaron’s special high priesthood is threatened as anotherLevitical family (Korah) vies for preeminence. Through a sequence ofsigns and wonders, God makes it clear that Moses and Aaron haveexclusive roles in God’s economy. Due to the deaths related toKorah’s rebellion and the fruitless staffs that represent thetribes of Israel, the nation’s concern about sudden extinctionin the presence of a holy God is appeased through the eternalcovenant of priesthood granted to Aaron’s family (chap. 18). Heand the Levites, at the potential expense of their own lives and aspart of their priestly service, will be held accountable for keepingthe tabernacle pure of encroachers.
Evenafter the people’s significant rebellion and punishment, Godcontinues to prove his faithfulness to his word. Hope is restored forthe nation as the Abrahamic promises of blessing are rehearsed fromthe mouth of Balaam, a Mesopotamian seer. The Israelites will indeedone day be numerous (23:10), enjoy the presence of God (23:21), beblessed and protected (24:9), and have a kingly leader (24:17). Thiswonderful mountaintop experience of hope for the exodus generation istragically countered by an even greater event of apostasy in thesubsequent scene. Reminiscent of the incident of the golden calf,when pagan revelry in the camp had foiled Moses’ interactionwith God on Sinai, apostasy at the tabernacle undermines Balaam’soracles of covenant fulfillment. Fornication with Moabite women notonly joins the nation to a foreign god but also betrays God’sholiness at his place of dwelling. If not for the zeal of Aaron’sgrandson Phinehas, who puts an end to the sin, the ensuing plaguecould have finished the nation. For his righteous action, Phinehas isawarded an eternal priesthood and ensures a future for the nation andAaron’s priestly lineage.
Inchapter 26 a second census of fighting men indicates that the old,unbelieving exodus generation has officially died off (except forJoshua and Caleb), and God is proceeding with a new people. Goddispossesses the enemies of the new generation; reinstates the tribalboundaries of the land; reinstates rules concerning worship, service,and bloodshed; and places Joshua at the helm of leadership. Chapters26–36 mention no deaths or rebellions as the nationoptimistically ends its journey in Moab, just east of the promisedland.
Moses’Farewell (Deuteronomy)
Althoughone could reasonably move into the historical books at the end ofNumbers, much would be lost in overstepping Deuteronomy. Deuteronomypresents Moses’ farewell speeches as his final words to anation on the verge of Caanan. Moses’ speeches are best viewedas sermons motivating his people to embrace the Sinai covenant, lovetheir God, and choose life over death and blessings over cursings(30:19). Moses reviews the desert experience since Mount Horeb/Sinai(chaps. 1–4) and recapitulates God’s expectations forlawful living in the land (chaps. 5–26). The covenant code isrecorded on a scroll, is designated the “Book of the Law”(31:24–26), and is to be read and revered by the future king.Finally, Moses leads the nation in covenant renewal (chaps. 29–32)before the book finishes with an account of his death (chaps. 33–34),including tributes such as “since then, no prophet has risen inIsrael like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face” (34:10).
Deuteronomyreflects that true covenant faithfulness is achieved from a rightheart for God. If there were any previous doubts about the essence ofcovenant keeping, Moses eliminates such in Deuteronomy with thefrequent use of emotive terms. Loving God involves committing to himalone and spurning idols and foreign gods. The Ten Commandments(chap. 5) are not a list of stale requirements; they reflect thegreat Shema with the words “Love the Lord your God with allyour heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. Thesecommandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts”(6:5–6). God desires an unrivaled love from the nation, notcold and superficial religiosity.
Obedienceby the Israelites will incur material and spiritual blessing, whereasdisobedience ends in the loss of both. Although Moses stronglycommends covenant obedience, and the nation participates in acovenant-renewal ceremony (chap. 27), it is clear that in the futurethe Israelites will fail to uphold their covenant obligations andwill suffer the consequences (29:23; 30:1–4; 31:16–17).Yet Moses looks to a day when the command for circumcised hearts(10:16) will be fulfilled by the power of God himself (30:6). In thefuture a new king will arise from the nation (17:14–20) as wellas a prophet like Moses (18:15–22). Deuteronomy thusunderscores the extent of God’s own devotion to his patriarchalpromises despite the sinful nature of his people.
Formuch of the middle and end of the twentieth century, Deuteronomy hasreceived a significant amount of attention for its apparentresemblance in structure and content to ancient Hittite and Assyriantreaties. Scholars debate the extent of similarity, but it ispossible that Deuteronomy reflects a suzerain-vassal treaty formbetween Israel and God much like the common format between nations inthe ancient Near East. Although comparative investigation of thistype can be profitable for interpretation, it is prudent to beconservative when outlining direct parallels, since Deuteronomy isnot a legal document but rather a dramatic narrative of God’sredemptive interaction with the world.
It is difficult to imagine a world without consistentmetrological systems. Society’s basic structures, from economyto law, require a uniform and accurate method for measuring time,distances, weights, volumes, and so on. In today’s world,technological advancements allow people to measure various aspects ofthe universe with incredible accuracy—from nanometers tolight-years, milligrams to kilograms.
Themetrological systems employed in biblical times span the sameconcepts as our own modern-day systems: weight, linear distance, andvolume or capacity. However, the systems of weights and measurementsemployed during the span of biblical times were not nearly asaccurate or uniform as the modern units employed today. Preexistingweight and measurement systems existed in the contextual surroundingsof both the OT and the NT authors and thus heavily influenced thesystems employed by the Israelite nation as well as the NT writers.There was great variance between the different standards usedmerchant to merchant (Gen. 23:16), city to city, region to region,time period to time period, even despite the commands to use honestscales and honest weights (Lev. 19:35–36; Deut. 25:13–15;Prov. 11:1; 16:11; 20:23; Ezek. 45:10).
Furthermore,inconsistencies and contradictions exist within the written recordsas well as between archaeological specimens. In addition, significantdifferences are found between preexilic and postexilic measurementsin the biblical texts, and an attempt at merging dry capacity andliquid volume measurements further complicated the issue. This is tobe expected, especially when we consider modern-dayinconsistencies—for example, 1 US liquid pint= 0.473liters, while 1 US dry pint= 0.550 liters. Thus, all modernequivalents given below are approximations, and even the bestestimates have a margin of error of + 5percent or more.
Weights
Weightsin biblical times were carried in a bag or a satchel (Deut. 25:13;Prov. 16:11; Mic. 6:11) and were stones, usually carved into variousanimal shapes for easy identification. Their side or flat bottom wasinscribed with the associated weight and unit of measurement.Thousands of historical artifacts, which differ by significantamounts, have been discovered by archaeologists and thus have greatlycomplicated the work of determining accurate modern-day equivalents.
Beka.Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahsor ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measuremetals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).
Gerah.1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).
Litra.Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight.Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to themodern British pound.
Mina.Approximately 1¼ pounds, or 0.56 kilograms. Equivalent to 50shekels. Used to weigh gold (1Kings 10:17; Ezra 2:69), silver(Neh. 7:71–72), and other goods. The prophet Ezekiel redefinedthe proper weight: “Theshekel is to consist of twentygerahs. Twenty shekels plus twenty-five shekels plus fifteen shekelsequal one mina” (Ezek. 45:12). Before this redefinition, therewere arguably 50 shekels per mina. In Jesus’ parable of theservants, he describes the master entrusting to his three servantsvarying amounts—10 minas, 5 minas, 1 mina—implying amonetary value (Luke 19:11–24), probably of either silver orgold. One mina was equivalent to approximately three months’wages for a laborer.
Pim.Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1Sam. 13:21).
Shekel.Approximately 2⁄5 ounce, or 11 grams. Equivalent toapproximately 2 bekas. The shekel is the basic unit of weightmeasurement in Israelite history, though its actual weight variedsignificantly at different historical points. Examples include the“royal shekel” (2Sam. 14:26), the “commonshekel” (2Kings 7:1), and the “sanctuary shekel,”which was equivalent to 20 gerahs (e.g., Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25;Num. 3:47). Because it was used to weigh out silver or gold, theshekel also functioned as a common monetary unit in the NT world.
Talent.Approximately 75 pounds, or 34 kilograms. Equivalent to approximately60 minas. Various metals were weighed using talents: gold (Exod.25:39; 37:24; 1Chron. 20:2), silver (Exod. 38:27; 1Kings20:39; 2Kings 5:22), and bronze (Exod. 38:29). This probably isderived from the weight of a load that a man could carry.
Table12. Biblical Weights and Measures and Their Modern Equivalents:
Weights
Beka– 10 geraahs; ½ shekel = 1/5 ounce = 5.6 grams
Gerah– 1/10 beka; 1/20 shekel = 1/50 ounce = 0.56 grams
Litra– 12 ounces = 340 grams
Mina– 50 shekels = 1 ¼ pounds = 0.56 kilograms
Pim– 2/3 shekel = 1/3 ounce = 9.3 grams
Shekel– 2 bekas; 20 gerahs = 2/5 ounce = 11 grams
Talent– 60 minas = 75 pounds = 34 kilograms
Linearmeasurements
Cubit– 6 handbreadths = 18 inches = 45.7 centimeters
Day’sjourney = 20-25 miles = 32-40 kilometerse
Fingerbreadth– ¼ handbreadth = ¾ inch = 1.9 centimeterse
Handbreadth– 1/6 cubit = 3 inches = 7.6 centimeters
Milion– 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers
Orguia– 1/100 stadion = 5 feet 11 inches = 1.8 meters
Reed/rod– 108 inches = 274 centimeters
Sabbathday’s journey – 2,000 cubits = ¾ mile = 1.2kilometers
Span– 3 handbreadths = 9 inches = 22.8 centimeters
Stadion– 100 orguiai = 607 feet = 185 meters
Capacity
Cab– 1 omer = ½ gallon = 1.9 liters
Choinix– ¼ gallon = 0.9 liters
Cor– 1 homer; 10 ephahs = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Ephah– 10 omers; 1/10 homer = 3/5 bushel; 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Homer– 10 ephahs; 1 cor = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Koros– 10 bushels; 95 gallons – 360 liters
Omer– 1/10 ephah; 1/100 homer = 2 quarts = 1.9 liters
Saton– 1 seah = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
Seah– 1/3 ephah; 1 saton = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
LiquidVolume
Bath– 1 ephah = 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Batos– 8 gallons = 30.3 liters
Hin– 1/6 bath; 12 logs = 1 gallon; 4 quarts = 3.8 liters
Log– 1/72 bath; 1/12 hin = 1/3 quart = 0.3 liters
Metretes– 10 gallons = 37.8 literes
LinearMeasurements
Linearmeasurements were based upon readily available natural measurementssuch as the distance between the elbow and the hand or between thethumb and the little finger. While convenient, this method ofmeasurement gave rise to significant inconsistencies.
Cubit.Approximately 18 inches, or 45.7 centimeters. Equivalent to 6handbreadths. The standard biblical measure of linear distance, asthe shekel is the standard measurement of weight. The distance fromthe elbow to the outstretched fingertip. Used to describe height,width, length (Exod. 25:10), distance (John 21:8), and depth (Gen.7:20). Use of the cubit is ancient. For simple and approximateconversion into modern units, divide the number of cubits in half formeters, then multiply the number of meters by 3 to arrive at feet.
1cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths
Day’sjourney.An approximate measure of distance equivalent to about 20–25miles, or 32–40 kilometers. Several passages reference a singleor multiple days’ journey as a description of the distancetraveled or the distance between two points: “a day’sjourney” (Num. 11:31; 1Kings 19:4), “a three-dayjourney” (Gen. 30:36; Exod. 3:18; 8:27; Jon. 3:3), “sevendays” (Gen. 31:23), and “eleven days” (Deut. 1:2).After visiting Jerusalem for Passover, Jesus’ parents journeyedfor a day (Luke 2:44) before realizing that he was not with them.
Fingerbreadth.The width of the finger, or ¼ of a handbreadth, approximately¾ inch, or 1.9 centimeters. The fingerbreadth was thebeginning building block of the biblical metrological system forlinear measurements. Used only once in the Scriptures, to describethe bronze pillars (Jer. 52:21).
Handbreadth.Approximately 3 inches, or 7.6 centimeters. Equivalent to 1/6 cubit,or four fingerbreadths. Probably the width at the base of the fourfingers. A short measure of length, thus compared to a human’sbrief life (Ps. 39:5). Also the width of the rim on the bread table(Exod. 25:25) and the thickness of the bronze Sea (1Kings7:26).
Milion.Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration ofRoman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”
Orguia.Approximately 5 feet 11 inches, or 1.8 meters. Also translated as“fathom.” A Greek unit of measurement. Probably thedistance between outstretched fingertip to fingertip. Used to measurethe depth of water (Acts 27:28).
Reed/rod.Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a generalterm for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance(Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).
Sabbathday’s journey.Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About2,000 cubits.
Span.Approximately 9 inches, or 22.8 centimeters. Equivalent to threehandbreadths, and ½ cubit. The distance from outstretchedthumb tip to little-finger tip. The length and width of the priest’sbreastpiece (Exod. 28:16).
Stadion.Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai.Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13;John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).
LandArea
Seed.The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis ofhow much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1Kings18:32).
Yoke.Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. Inbiblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animalscould plow in one day (1Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).
Capacity
Cab.Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer.Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria(2Kings 6:25).
Choinix.Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement,mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).
Cor.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equal to thehomer, and to 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularlyof flour and grains (1Kings 4:22; 1Kings 5:11; 2Chron.2:10; 27:5; Ezra 7:22). In the LXX, cor is also a measure of liquidvolume, particularly oil (1Kings 5:11; 2Chron. 2:10; Ezra45:14).
Ephah.Approximately 3⁄5 bushel (6 gallons, or 22.7 liters).Equivalent to 10 omers, or 1⁄10 homer. Used for measuring flourand grains (e.g., Exod. 29:40; Lev. 6:20). Isaiah prophesied a day ofreduced agricultural yield, when a homer of seed would produce onlyan ephah of grain (Isa. 5:10). The ephah was equal in size to thebath (Ezek. 45:11), which typically was used for liquid measurements.
Homer.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equivalent to1 cor, or 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularly ofvarious grains (Lev. 27:16; Isa. 5:10; Ezek. 45:11, 13–14; Hos.3:2). This is probably a natural measure of the load that a donkeycan carry, in the range of 90 kilograms. There may have existed adirect link between capacity and monetary value, given Lev. 27:16:“fifty shekels of silver to a homer of barley seed.” Alogical deduction of capacity and cost based on known equivalencesmight look something like this:
1homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1 omer = 1 beka
Koros.Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measureof grain (Luke 16:7).
Omer.Approximately 2 quarts, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄10ephah, 1⁄100 homer (Ezek. 45:11). Used by Israel in themeasurement and collection of manna in the wilderness (Exod.16:16–36) and thus roughly equivalent to a person’s dailyfood ration.
Saton.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. Themeasurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven(Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).
Seah.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah,or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various drygoods (e.g., 2Kings 7:1; 1Sam. 25:18).
LiquidVolume
Bath.Approximately 6 gallons, or 22.7 liters. Equivalent to 1 ephah, whichtypically was used for measurements of dry capacity. Used in themeasurement of water (1Kings 7:26), oil (1Kings 5:11),and wine (2Chron. 2:10; Isa. 5:10).
Batos.Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration ofthe Hebrew word bath(see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).
Hin.Approximately 4 quarts (1gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek.4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).
Log.Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture,specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).
Metretes.Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement ofwater at the wedding feast (John 2:6).
Because calendars are culturally constructed systems, thereare several important differences between the modern calendar and thecalendars used in biblical times. When dealing with ancient Jewishand early Christian sources, we can reconstruct complete calendarsystems. However, the Bible itself, written over many centuries,employs several calendar systems and systems of dating. No singlenormative calendar system emerges from biblical materials.Nevertheless, many aspects of life in biblical Israel depended on theuse of calendars, which regulated religious festivals, agriculturalactivity, various aspects of the legal system, and the recording ofhistorical events.
Measurementof Time in Antiquity
Therewere several methods of reckoning time in antiquity. Some units oftime corresponded to the observation of celestial phenomena (see Gen.1:14), such as the rising and setting of the sun (defining the day),the waxing and waning of the moon (the lunar month), the ascension ofthe sun in the sky at noon (the solar year). Other measurements oftime were defined by the agricultural cycle, including planting andthe beginning and end of the harvest (see Exod. 23:16; Ruth 1:22). Anagricultural scheme serves as the basis of the Gezer Calendar, animportant archaeological object of the tenth century BC unearthedabout thirty miles northwest of Jerusalem. The Gezer Calendar dividesthe year into eight periods of one or two months, each of whichcorresponds to the planting, tending, and harvest of various crops.Still other units of time, such as the seven-day week and thelunisolar year (see below), were derived by counting or calculationand did not correspond to any observable celestial or terrestrialphenomena.
Thedivision of days into hours and minutes is possible in modern timesbecause of mechanical and electronic timepieces. Without thesedevices, divisions of time shorter than the day would have beenapproximations at best. Biblical texts refer to dawn, morning, noon,evening, night, and midnight. In NT times, the twelve daylight hourswere numbered (Matt. 27:45; John 11:9). There was also a system ofdividing the night into “watches,” attested in both theNT and the OT.
TheMonth and the Year in the Bible
TheHebrew words for “month” are related to the words for“moon” and “new” (i.e., the “newmoon”), which suggests that the ancient Israelite month was alunar month corresponding to the waxing and waning of the moon over aperiod of twenty-nine or thirty days. The Bible refers to numbereddays in each month, as high as the twenty-seventh day.
Thereare several systems of naming the months in the Bible. Four“Canaanite” month names appear in the OT: Aviv (the firstmonth), Ziv (the second), Ethanim (the seventh), and Bul (theeighth). Because of the infrequent use of these names, some scholarshave questioned whether this system was in widespread use in ancientIsrael. The names probably are derived from agricultural terms.
Inmany cases the months are simply numbered. In this system, the firstmonth began in the spring season. According to biblical narrative,this way of reckoning the beginning of the year was commanded toMoses at the time of the exodus (Exod. 12:1). However, the Bibleapplies this scheme to events much earlier, as in the story of theflood of Noah, which began in the second month (Gen. 7:11), andscholars have associated the numerical system of months with latebiblical sources, around the time of the exile. The system may havecome into use around that time and replaced an older system.
Insome late biblical texts Babylonian month names are adopted,including Nisan (the first month), Sivan (the third), Elul (thesixth), Chislev (the ninth), Tebet (the tenth), Shebat (theeleventh), and Adar (the twelfth). Following biblical usage, theBabylonian month names were adopted in the ancient Jewish calendar,which is still in use today.
Basedon references to the “twelfth month,” the Israelite yearapparently consisted of twelve lunar months. Accordingly, the lunaryear consisted of approximately 354 days, which means that it wouldnot have corresponded to the solar year of approximately 365¼days. The beginning of the year would have drifted between eleven andtwelve days each year. Presumably, this would have been anunacceptable situation, given the fact that many of the biblicalfestivals were both assigned to lunar dates and were correlated toagricultural events. The problem probably was solved through theintercalation of “leap months,” as was the practice inmaintaining the later Jewish calendar. The result is a lunisolarcalendar, in which the year is composed of twelve lunar months and iscorrected relative to the solar year by the periodic addition of asecond Adar (Adar II) seven times in every nineteen-year period.The Bible does not mention this procedure or identify who wasresponsible for maintaining the calendar in ancient Israel.
BiblicalDates
Modernsystems of absolute dating, in which all years are numbered relativeto a single historical reference point—for example, the birthof Jesus (Anno Domini), the journey of Muhammad in AD 622 (AnnoHegira 1) from Mecca to Medina in Islamic culture, and thecreation of the world (Anno Mundi) in Jewish tradition—wereunparalleled in biblical times. Instead, events were usually datedrelative to the reigns of kings, Israelite or otherwise. For example,the accession of Abijah is dated to the eighteenth year of Jeroboam’sreign (1 Kings 15:1), and the proclamation of Cyrus is dated tohis first regnal year (Ezra 1:1). In other cases, events were datedrelative to important historical events. The beginning of Amos’scareer as prophet is dated to “two years before the earthquake”(Amos 1:1), and Exod. 12:41 dates the departure from Egypt to the430th year of the captivity. In other instances, the fixed points onwhich relative dates are based cannot be determined. The beginning ofEzekiel’s career as a prophet is dated to the otherwiseunspecified “thirtieth year” (Ezek. 1:1). The verse maysimply refer to Ezekiel’s age.
Thesame practices of dating events are followed in the NT. The birth ofJohn the Baptist is dated to “the time of Herod king of Judea”(Luke 1:5). The census of Caesar Augustus is identified as “thefirst census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria”(Luke 2:2). As in the OT, such formulas presuppose that the readerhas a basic awareness of the succession and reigns of kings andemperors—an advantage lost to modern interpreters, who continueto debate the absolute dating of these events. Perhaps analogously toEzek. 1:1, the beginning of Jesus’ ministry is dated to histhirtieth year of age (Luke 3:23). Other events and persons reportedin the NT can be correlated to extrabiblical historical records toestablish absolute dates for biblical events (e.g., the death ofHerod Agrippa I in AD 44 [Acts 12:23]). These are distinct frominstances in which biblical authors are making a conscious effort toprovide dates intelligible to their readers. In contrast to OThistorical narrative, for the most part, the NT shows little interestin dating events in its narrative, even according to ancientconventions of relative dating.
There are several censuses in Scripture, and their concern is not simply to account for the number of people or the number of men available for military service; they also have a literary and theological function.
In the creation narrative in Gen. 1–11 the fulfillment of the creation mandate is accounted for through the genealogy of Adam (Gen. 5) and the genealogy of the sons of Noah (Gen. 9:18–19; 10:1–32), which serve as a type of census. The creation narrative has a universal scope; it attempts to account for the total human population on earth.
Census lists are given for the Abrahamic family (Abraham-Isaac-Jacob line) as it grows to become a nation in accordance with God’s promise to Abraham of a great nation and innumerable offspring (Gen. 12:1–3; 15:5). The total number of Jacob’s descendants who went to Egypt was seventy (Gen. 46:8–27; Exod. 1:1–4). This old generation of Israel passed, and a new generation was born that was fruitful, multiplied, and became exceedingly numerous (Exod. 1:6–7). The total number of men of at least twenty years of age who came out of Egypt was 603,550 (Num. 1:1–46; cf. Exod. 12:37–38), and of the new generation that stood on the verge of entering the Promised Land, 601,730 (Num. 26:1–51).
In the book of Numbers there are two census accounts (actually, military registrations). These are important to the structure and theme of the book. The theme of Numbers has to do with the judgment on the first generation (the object of the census in Num. 1) and the hope for the second generation, which will enter the Promised Land (the object of the second census).
David conducted a census to measure his military power, but this is condemned by God and regarded as satanic (2 Sam. 24:1–17; 1 Chron. 21:1–30). For the Chronicler, any attempt to account for the total number of Israelite men twenty years and older, similar to the census in the book of Numbers, is regarded as challenging God’s promise to make Israel as numerous as the stars (1 Chron. 29:23–26).
Ezra and Nehemiah contain census lists of the returnees from exile: under Zerubbabel, 42,360 men returned (Ezra 2:1–66; Neh. 7:4–73), and under Ezra, 1,496 men (Ezra 8:1–14).
In the NT, Jesus participates in the universal census that encompasses not only Israel but other nations as well—a census of the entire Roman world (Luke 2:1–7). The census motif reaches its fulfillment when a great multitude from every nation, tribe, people, and language will stand before the throne and in front of the Lamb, symbolized by the 144,000 from the twelve tribes of Israel, 12,000 from each tribe (Rev. 7:4–10).
In the Bible chaos primarily refers to an opposite conditionto the orderliness of the creation or a mythical force oftenrepresented by the sea or the sea monster(s) (translated as “dragon,”“Leviathan,” or “Rahab”). The two relatedideas are based on the creation accounts recorded in Gen. 1–2and other places.
OldTestament.In Gen. 1:2 chaos is the state of darkness and desolation (note thephrase “formless and empty” [Heb. tohu wabohu], whichprobably refers to the state of desolation of water with nothing init; cf. Isa. 34:11; 45:18). The rest of the chapter describes how Godin his absolute sovereignty and power—only with hiswords—creates order in place of the chaos. God brings light tothe darkness, separates the land from the sea, and provides the landwith abundance. The portrayal of the garden of Eden (2:4–14)further describes God’s provision of orderliness, fertility,eternal life, and harmony in the original creation.
Althoughthe Genesis account does not directly mention any mythical elements(i.e., the primordial combat between the sea and the prime god),other passages describe creation as the event in which God calmed theraging sea and killed the sea monsters (Pss. 74:12–17; 89:9–12;Job 26:7–14). Still, nowhere are the chaotic forces presentedas an independent power that constantly challenges God’ssovereignty. Rather, God always does whatever he pleases with them,lifting up the waves of the sea (Ps. 107:25; Jer. 31:35; cf. Ps.146:6) and uncovering Death and Destruction (Job 26:6). Isaiahalludes to God’s slaying of the chaotic sea creature not onlyas the past event (51:9), but also as the promise to be realized inthe day of the Lord (27:1).
InGenesis, God’s judgment is frequently described by means of thechaos motif, as a precreation condition reversed—forexample, loss of harmony, fruitfulness, and eternal life (Gen.3:15–24), return of the waters over the land (Gen. 7–8),loss of communication (11:7–9), and desolation of the fruitfulland (19:23–28; cf. 13:10).
Thechaos motif also plays an important role in the propheticdescriptions of God’s judgment against his people and againstthe foreign nations. Noteworthy is Jer. 4:23–26, which depictsGod’s judgment upon his people in terms of chaos’sreturn—that is, the condition of “formless and empty,”without light, creatures, or fruitful land (cf. Hos. 4:3). In Isa.34:11 God’s judgment upon Edom is expressed with thecharacteristic phrase in Gen. 1:2: “God will stretch out overEdom the measuring line of chaos [tohu, ‘formless’] andthe plumb line of desolation [bohu, ‘empty’].” Inother places Isaiah frequently employs the imageries of desolation(5:6; 7:23–25; 13:19–22; 24:1–13; 34:8–17),darkness (5:30; 8:22; 13:10), and flood (8:7–8).
NewTestament.The concept of chaos developed in the OT provides an importantbackground for understanding the NT. The Gospel writers use the chaosmotif in describing Jesus’ person and work—for example,as light in the darkness (John 1:4–9; 3:19), as provider ofabundance and eternal life (John 3:16; 4:14; 5:51; 6:1–15), andas the sovereign ruler of the chaotic sea, who walks on the water(Matt. 14:22–36; Mark 6:47–55; John 6:16–21) andcalms the stormy sea with his words (Matt. 8:23–27; Mark4:35–41; Luke 8:22–25). Jesus’ resurrection is hisultimate demonstration of his reign over death (cf. 1 Cor. 15).
Paulfurther uses the chaos motif to describe the life of sinners or thesinful world. The identity of believers is changed from “darkness”to “light” or “children of light,” who nowmust shine the light in the world (Eph. 5:8; cf. Matt. 5:15–16;Phil. 2:15).
Inthe book of Revelation the ultimate restoration of the perfectcreation order is presented, making allusions to the OT mythicaldescriptions of the chaotic forces (e.g., Satan as the dragon[12:15–16], Death and Hades as the underground forces[20:13–14]). Particularly, the new Jerusalem is the place of nosea or darkness or death (21:1, 4, 23–25) but of fruitfulnessand eternal life (22:1–2).
The Bible is full of teeming creatures and swarming things.These creatures, insects, often play significant roles in the storiesand the events described in them. From the first chapter of the Bibleto the very last book, these flying, creeping, hopping, and crawlingthings are prominent.
Termsfor Insects
Insectsare described in the Bible with both general and specific terms. Inthe OT, there are three general terms for insects and twenty termsused to refer to specific types of insects. In the NT, two differenttypes of insects are referenced: gnats and locusts.
Thetwo most common general terms for insects are variously translated.Terms and phrases used to describe them include “livingcreatures” (Gen. 1:20), “creatures that move along theground” (Gen. 1:24–26; 6:7, 20; 7:8, 14, 23; 8:17, 19;Lev. 5:2; Ezek. 38:20; Hos. 2:18), that which “moves”(Gen. 9:3), “swarming things” (Lev. 11:10), “flyinginsects” (Lev. 11:20–21, 23; Deut. 14:19), “creatures”(Lev. 11:43), “crawling things” (Lev. 22:5; Ezek. 8:10),“reptiles” (1Kings 4:33), “teeming creatures”(Ps. 104:25), “small creatures” (Ps. 148:10), and “seacreatures” (Hab. 1:14). The other general term for insects isused with reference to swarms of insects, typically flies (Exod.8:21–22, 24, 29; Pss. 78:45; 105:31). Specific insects named inScripture are listed below.
Ants.Ants are used in Proverbs as an example of and encouragement towardwisdom. In 6:6 ants serve as an example for sluggards to reform theirslothful ways. Also, in 30:25 ants serve as an example of creaturesthat, despite their diminutive size, are wise enough to make advancepreparations for the long winter.
Bees.Beesare used both literally and figuratively in Scripture. Judges 14:8refers to honeybees, the product of which becomes the object ofSamson’s riddle. The other three uses of bees in the OT arefigurative of swarms of enemies against God’s people (Deut.1:44; Ps. 118:12; Isa. 7:18).
Fleas.Fleasare referenced in the OT only by David to indicate his insignificancein comparison with King Saul (1Sam. 24:14; 26:20). The irony ofthe comparison becomes clear with David’s later ascendancy.
Flies.The plague of flies follows that of gnats on Egypt (Exod. 8:20–31).Although the gnats are never said to have left Egypt, the flies areremoved upon Moses’ prayer. In Eccles. 10:1 the stench of deadflies is compared to the impact that folly can have on the wise. InIsa. 7:18 flies represent Egypt being summoned by God as his avengingagents on Judah’s sin. In addition, one of the gods in Ekronwas named “Baal-Zebub,” which means “lord of theflies” (2Kings 1:2–3, 6, 16). The reference toSatan in the NT using a similar name is likely an adaptation of theOT god of Ekron (Matt. 10:25; 12:24, 27; Mark 3:22; Luke 11:15,18–19).
Gnats.Gnats are distinguished from flies in the OT, though the distinctionis not always apparent. Gnats are employed by God in the third plagueon Egypt (Exod. 8:16–19), while flies form the means ofpunishment in the fourth plague. The two are listed together in Ps.105:31 and appear parallel, though the former may be a reference to aswarm. Gnats were also used by Jesus to illustrate the hypocrisy ofthe Pharisees and the scribes (Matt. 23:24).
Hornets.TheBible uses hornets in Scripture as an agent of God’sdestruction. The term occurs three times in the OT. In eachoccurrence these stinging insects refer to God’s expulsion ofthe Canaanites from the land that God promised to his people. Thefirst two times, Exod. 23:28 and Deut. 7:20, hornets are used inreference to a promise of what God will do; the third time, Josh.24:12, they illustrate what God did.
Locusts.Of particular interest is the use of locusts in the Bible. The termor a similar nomenclature occurs close to fifty times in the NIV.Locusts demonstrate a number of characteristics in Scripture. First,they are under God’s control (Exod. 10:13–19). As such,they have no king (Prov. 30:27). They serve God’s purposes.Second, locusts often occur in very large numbers or swarms (Judg.6:5; Jer. 46:23; Nah. 3:15). At times, their numbers can be so largeas to cause darkness in the land (Exod. 10:15). Third, in largenumbers these insects have been known to ravage homes, devour theland, devastate fields, and debark trees (Exod. 10:12–15; Deut.28:38; 1Kings 8:37; 2Chron. 7:13; Pss. 78:46; 105:34;Isa. 33:4; Joel 1:4–7). Due to their fierceness, they werecompared to horses (Rev. 9:7). Fourth, locusts hide at night (Nah.3:17). Finally, certain types of locusts were used as food.
Moths.Mothsare referred to seven times in the OT and four times in the NT. Jobuses moths to illustrate the fragility of the unrighteous before God(4:19) and the impermanence of their labors (27:18). The otherreferences to moths in Scripture present them as the consumers of thewealth (garments) and pride of humankind as a means of God’sjudgment (Job 13:28; Ps. 39:11; Isa. 50:9; 51:8; Hos. 5:12; Matt.6:19–20; Luke 12:33; James 5:2).
Functionsof Insects in Scripture
Asagents in God’s judgment.Insects serve a variety of functions in Scripture. Most notably,insects serve as agents of judgment from God. The OT indicates howinsects were used as judgment on both Israel and their enemies.
Moseswarned of God’s judgment for Israel’s violation of thecovenant. He advised Israel that as a consequence of their sin, theywould expend much labor in the field but harvest little, because thelocusts would consume them (Deut. 28:38).
Solomon,in his prayer of dedication at the temple, beseeched God regardingjudgment that he might send in the form of grasshoppers to besiegethe land. He asked that when the people of God repent and pray, Godwould hear and forgive (2Chron. 6:26–30). God similarlyresponded by promising that when he “command[s] locusts todevour the land” as judgment for sin, and his people humblethemselves and pray, he will heal and forgive (2Chron. 7:13–14;cf. 1Kings 8:37).
Thepsalmist reminded Israel of God’s wonderful works in theirpast, one of which was his use of insects as a means of his judgment(Ps. 78:45–46; cf. 105:34).
Joel1:4 and 2:25 describe God’s judgment on Israel for theirunfaithfulness in successive waves of intensity (cf. Deut. 28:38, 42;2Chron. 6:28; Amos 4:9–10; 7:1–3). The devastationled to crop failure, famine, destruction of vines and fig trees, andgreat mourning. The severity of the judgment is described as beingunlike anything anyone in the community had ever experienced (Joel1:2–3).
Locustsare the subject of one of the visions of the prophet Amos. In thevision, God showed him the destructive power of these insects as ameans of judgment. Upon seeing the vision, the prophet interceded forthe people, and God relented (Amos 7:1–3).
Insectswere also used as judgments on Israel’s enemies. In the plagueson Egypt, insects were the agents of the third, fourth, and eighthplagues. The third plague (Exod. 8:16–19) was gnats.Interestingly, this was the first of Moses’ signs that themagicians of Pharaoh could not reproduce. Their response to theEgyptian king was that this must be the “finger of God.”There is no record of the gnats ever leaving Egypt, unlike the otherplagues.
Thefourth plague was flies (Exod. 8:20–32). Here the Biblespecifically indicates a distinction between the land of Goshen,where the Israelites dwelled, and the rest of the land of Egypt. Theflies covered all of Egypt except Goshen. This plague led toPharaoh’s first offer of compromise. Once Moses prayed and theflies left Egypt, Pharaoh hardened his heart.
Theeighth plague was in the form of locusts (Exod. 10:1–20). Inresponse to this plague, Pharaoh’s own officials complained tohim, beseeching him to let Israel leave their country lest it beentirely destroyed. The threat of this plague led to Pharaoh’ssecond offer of compromise. Once the locusts began to devastate theland of Egypt, Pharaoh confessed his sin before God, but as soon asthe locusts were removed, his heart again became hardened. Thus,three of the ten plagues on Egypt were in the form of insects.
Atthe end of a series of “woe” passages, the prophet Isaiahproclaimed God’s judgment against the enemies of his peoplebecause of their oppression. In the end, those who plundered willthemselves be plundered, as if by a “swarm of locusts”(Isa. 33:1–4; cf. Jer. 51:14, 27).
Insectswere also used as judgment on people who dwelled in the land ofIsrael prior to Israel’s occupation. Both before and after theevent took place, the Bible describes how God sent hornets to helpdrive out the occupants of the land of Canaan in preparation forIsrael’s arrival. This is described as part of God’sjudgment on these nations for their sins against him (Exod. 23:28;Deut. 7:20; Josh. 24:12).
Asfood.Insects also are mentioned in Scripture as food. Certain types oflocusts are listed as clean and eligible for consumption. The NTdescribes the diet of John the Baptist, which consisted of locustsand wild honey—a diet entirely dependent on insects (Matt. 3:4;Mark 1:6). The OT also notes Samson enjoying the labor of bees asfood (Judg. 14:8–9).
Usedfiguratively.Most often, insects are used figuratively in Scripture. They are usedin the proverbs of Scripture to illustrate wisdom. The sages wroteabout ants (Prov. 6:6; 30:25), locusts (Prov. 30:27), and even deadflies (Eccles. 10:1) both to extol wisdom and to encourage itsdevelopment in humankind.
Anotherfigurative use of insects is in the riddle about bees and honey posedby Samson to the Philistines (Judg. 14:12–18). As noted above,Samson ate honey (Judg. 14:8–9; cf. 1Sam. 14:25–29,43). Also, Scripture describes the promised land as a place of “milkand honey.”
Insectsalso are used to symbolize pursuing enemies (Deut. 1:44; Ps. 118:12;Isa. 7:18), innumerable forces (Judg. 6:5; 7:12; Ps. 105:34; Jer.46:23; Joel 2:25), insignificance (Num. 13:33; 1Sam. 24:14;26:20; Job 4:19; 27:18; Ps. 109:23; Eccles. 12:5; Isa. 40:22),vulnerability (Job 4:19), God’s incomparable nature (Job39:20), the brevity of life (Ps. 109:23), wisdom and organization(Prov. 30:27), and an invading army (Isa. 7:18; Jer. 51:14, 27), andthey are employed in a taunt against Israel’s enemies (Nah.3:15–17), a lesson on hypocrisy (Matt. 23:24), and an image ofeschatological judgment (Rev. 9:4–11).
ScripturalTruths about Insects
1.Insectsare part of God’s creation.Inview of all the uses of insects in Scripture, several key truthsemerge. First, insects are a part of the totality of God’screation. The very first chapter of the Bible uses one of the generalterms for insects as part of God’s creative activity on thesixth day of creation (Gen. 1:24). After God reviewed the creation onthat day, his assessment of it, including the insects, was that itwas “good” (1:25).
2.Insectsare under God’s control.Asecond scriptural truth related to insects in the Bible is that theyare under God’s control. In Deut. 7:20 God promised to sendhornets ahead of the children of Israel to prepare the promised landfor their arrival. Also, in Joel 2:25, when God promised to repairthe damage to the land caused by the locusts, he described them as“my great army that I sent.” Thus, the picture emergesthat what God has created, he alone reserves the authority tocontrol.
3.Insectsare cared for by God. A final truth regarding insects in Scripture isthat God takes care of them. Just as Jesus explained God’s carefor the birds of the air (Matt. 7:26), the psalmist explained thatall of God’s creation, specifically insects, “look to youto give them their food at the proper time” (Ps. 104:25–27).The conclusion of the psalmist is appropriate for all of God’screation: “When you hide your face, they are terrified; whenyou take away their breath, they die and return to the dust. When yousend your Spirit, they are created, and you renew the face of theground” (104:29–30). Thus, in the end, God creates, Godcontrols, and God cares—a lesson that all of God’screation shares.
The foundational story in all of the OT is the story ofcreation, found in Gen. 1–2. Throughout the history ofinterpretation there have been many approaches to understanding thesechapters. In the modern world, discoveries from both science andarchaeology have challenged some traditional convictions, and debatescontinue to rage. Still, what Gen. 1–2 communicates isgenerally clear: (1) it establishes Yahweh, the God of Israel,as the God by whose word all exists; (2) it presents for ancientreaders a compelling argument for why they should worship Israel’sGod and not other gods of the ancient world. On this second point, itmust be remembered that Israel’s belief in one God flew in theface of contemporary religious notions, where each nation had a highgod along with lesser gods. Hence, when reading Gen. 1–2, wemust keep in mind its ancient polemical dimension rather thanapproaching it with modern expectations.
Thediffering perspectives of Genesis 1 and 2. Evena quick reading of Gen. 1–2 shows that the perspectives oncreation in the two chapters are somewhat different. Genesis 1 isordered famously as a seven-day process, whereby humanity is createdas the pinnacle of God’s work on day six. On the seventh day,as is well known, God rested. Much has been made among someChristians about the need to read this chapter literally, but that nolonger seems to be the dominant view. Much less is a scientificexplanation winning the day (where the details of the text correspondto certain scientific models, which are themselves disputed). Acommonly accepted understanding of these chapters among Christiansgoes by various names, and it attempts to account for the poeticstructure of Gen. 1. In Gen. 1:2 we read that the earth was “formlessand empty.” What follows is a description of God providing“form” in days one through three and then a correspondingfilling of the “emptiness” in days four through six.Hence, in day one God separates light from darkness, and in day fourhe fills the void with the sun, the moon, and the stars. Day twoyields the expanses between the waters and the sky, and day fivefills the voids with water creatures and sky creatures. Day threeyields the land and vegetation, and day six fills the void with landcreatures, the crowning achievement being humanity.
Genesis2 provides a different perspective on the events. It seems thathumanity is created before there were any shrubs or plants. Apartfrom this difference in order, more important is the focus on Adamand Eve and their role in creation, as those called to work the landtogether. These two perspectives are not contradictory, since one caneasily understand Gen. 2 as explicating Gen. 1:26–30. Modernscholarship has largely assigned these two versions to two differentliterary sources (see Documentary Hypothesis), a theory based notonly on the different perspectives of the two stories but also onother differences, such as language and style. Regardless of thealleged origins of these stories, however, they are presented to ustogether in the OT. As a unit, along with what follows in Gen. 3–11,these early chapters in Genesis in some ways stand in stark contrastto creation stories of the ancient Mesopotamian world, while at thesame time adopting many of the concepts and much of the language ofthose stories.
Modernand ancient questions.To enter into this discussion is to ask, “What are theseopening chapters of Genesis trying to say? How did the Israeliteshear the creation story in Genesis?” It sometimes is temptingto read the creation story and ask modern questions. For example,“How does the Genesis creation narrative conform to scientificknowledge?” Modern questions such as these are not, in and ofthemselves, out of bounds. In fact, they may be unavoidable to acertain degree. But we must remember that ancient Israelites did notask such questions. In the ancient Near East described in Genesis,which is thousands of years old, there was no science in any senseclose to the way we think of it today.
Thecreation story was written not to answer modern questions but ratherto address Israel’s questions. Beginning about the middle ofthe nineteenth century and into the early twentieth century,archaeologists discovered a number of creation stories from differentpeoples of the ancient Near East that help put the biblical accountin context. These accounts tell stories of creation in which a numberof gods are responsible. In one prominent example from ancientBabylon, creation was a result of a bloody conflict among the gods.Genesis 1 shares some of the descriptions of one or more of theseother accounts (e.g., light exists before the creation of the sun,the moon, and the stars).
Thetheology of creation.Where Gen. 1 stands out is in its insistence that Israel’s Godalone created the world through his spoken word. The purpose of sucha declaration is not to satisfy contemporary intellectual curiositiesabout the nature of matter or the first moments of the universe’sexistence. Its purpose is to declare to the Israelites that theirGod, not the gods of the ancient world, is responsible for everythingthere is, and that he alone is the one, therefore, who is worthy oftheir worship. The creation story is not an intellectual exercise butrather a deeply religious one. The Israelites lived in a world whereevery surrounding nation had a plurality of gods (pantheon). TheIsraelites were different. They had one God, and this is the messagethat rings loud and clear from Gen. 1.
ThatYahweh, Israel’s God, is alone the creator is not an abstracttheological statement. It is a call to worship. This is why, forexample, numerous passages in the OT burst out in praise of Yahwehthe creator. One example is Ps. 19. God’s glory is so great andso apparent that even creation itself is said to speak of it. Thepsalm uses specific Genesis language: the “heavens” andthe “firmament” proclaim what God has done (these wordsoccur in Gen. 1:1, 6–8, and the Hebrew words in Gen. 1 and Ps.19 are the same). Even though the heavens and the firmament have nopowers of speech, as the psalm tells us (19:3–4), neverthelessthey are “heard” throughout the world because of theawesomeness of the sun’s circuit (19:5–6). The message isthis: if you want to see how great God is, look up.
Butthe psalm does not end there. David is not simply interested in acontemplative posture for his people. Six verses about creation arefollowed, somewhat abruptly, by eight verses about the law. Clearly,a connection between them is being established, and that connectionseems to be fairly straightforward: knowing God as creator shouldhave an effect on how you behave. The God who created the heavens isalso the God who gave you the law, David seems to be saying. And asworthy as God is of praise for the creation (even the heavens and thefirmament join in), so too is the law. It is to be desired more thangold or sweet honey (v. 10). Knowing God as creator has verypractical implications.
Creationand re-creation. Anotherimportant recurrence of creation in the OT, which also has practicalimplications, concerns God’s saving activity. In brief,according to the OT (and the NT as well), when God saves his people,it is an act of “re-creation.” One can see this themedeveloped in numerous places. For example, God is Israel’s“maker” in texts such as Ps. 95:6; Hos. 8:14. These twotexts are found in the context of God having delivered the Israelitesfrom Egypt; their deliverance corresponds to their “creation”as God’s people. Similarly, Isa. 43:14–17 concernsIsrael’s captivity in Babylon and what God will do to deliverhis people. The prophecy describes their deliverance by using“exodus” language and in doing so refers to Yahweh asIsrael’s “Creator” (v. 15).
Thisconnection between creation and redemption (re-creation) is also wellarticulated in the NT. For example, the opening words of John’sGospel echo the very first verses of the Bible: “in thebeginning.” With the coming of Christ, there is a newbeginning. His act of redemption is described as the act of a secondor new Adam (Rom. 5:12–21; 1 Cor. 15:22). When oneconfesses faith in Christ, one is “born again” or “fromabove” (John 3:3, 7; see also John 1:13; 1 Pet. 1:3, 23).To be a Christian is to start over, to begin anew, or as Paul put it,“If anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old hasgone, the new is here!” (2 Cor. 5:17). And in Rev. 22:2paradise is described as containing a “tree of life,” towhich God’s people once again have access. At the end, in otherwords, it will be as it was in the beginning. In the coming of Christwe see a new creation. That new creation is inaugurated in his firstcoming, where the church, his redeemed people, by the power of theSpirit, live as newly created beings in a fallen world. At his secondcoming, this new creation will be complete, and all creation will beredeemed.
Recounted in Gen. 6:5–9:19, the flood is the event whereby God destroys all creatures except for Noah, his family, and a gathering of animals. The account is highly literary and God-centered. It opens and closes with Noah’s three sons (6:10; 9:18–19). Noah’s obedience is highlighted (7:5, 9, 16). God is the protagonist, and Noah remains silent.
Terminology. The Hebrew word for “flood” is mabbul, and the Greek word is kataklysmos. Outside of the Gen. 6–9 narrative and references to the flood in Gen. 10:1, 32; 11:10, mabbul occurs only in Ps. 29:10, probably a reference to the primordial water stored above the firmament in jars (cf. Gen. 1:7; 7:11). The LXX translates mabbul with kataklysmos in Sir. 40:10; 44:17–18; 4 Macc. 15:31. Hebrew Sirach and the Aramaic Genesis Apocryphon also use mabbul for the flood (Sir. 44:17; 1QapGenar 12:9–10). All four uses of kataklysmos in the NT refer to the flood (Matt. 24:38–39; Luke 17:27; 2Pet. 2:5).
The flood narrative. In Gen. 6:5–22, God observes the grand scale of human wickedness, determines to destroy all life, and selects righteous Noah to build an ark. God’s “seeing” is judicial investigation (6:5, 13) that counters the sons of God who “saw” (6:2), just as his pained heart counters humankind’s wicked heart (6:5–6). God’s second statement, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race” (6:7), is his judicial sentence (cf. 3:15–19), affecting all life in the domain of human care (1:28; cf. Job 38:41; Ps. 36:6; Hos. 4:3; Joel 1:20).
The earth’s corruption and violence (Gen. 6:12–13) reflect a spectrum of evil that has despoiled a creation that was once “very good” (1:31; cf. 6:17; 7:21; 8:17; 9:11). God’s destruction responds to the moral corruption of the earth. The ark is a rectangular vessel designed for floating rather than sailing (6:14–15). Noah builds a microcosm of the earth to save its life. The boat’s windowlike openings and three decks reflect the cosmology of Gen. 1 (heavens, water, earth [cf. 6:16]). God makes a promise that Noah will survive and receive a covenant from God (6:18), fulfilled in the Noahic covenant following the flood (9:9, 11, 14–17).
Genesis 7:1–24 recounts the boarding of the ark and then the rising waters. Two numbering systems are used by the narrator in the flood narrative: one for dates of Noah’s age (day, month, year) and one for periods between flood stages. Both systems number between 365 and 370 days. The flood is portrayed as a reversal of the second and third days of creation. Watery boundaries that God once separated collapse (cf. 1:6–10). The rising flood is described in three phases: rising and lifting the ark (7:17), increasing greatly and floating the ark on the surface (7:18), and covering all the high mountains (7:19). Total destruction is amplified by reversing the order of creation—people, animals, birds (7:23)—with “all/every” occurring repeatedly in 7:21–23.
Genesis 8:1–22 recounts the disembarking and Noah’s sacrifice. Genesis 8:1 is the structural and theological center, with God fulfilling (=“remember”) his covenant promise for Noah’s safety. The ark rests on one mountain within the range in eastern Turkey (Kurdistan). The earth’s drying occurs as a process (8:3, 5, 9, 11, 13, 14), and echoes of creation reappear (e.g., “wind” [8:1; cf. 1:2]). Although the old curse is not lifted (cf. 5:29), God promises not to add to it (8:21). The flood has not reformed the human heart; it has only stopped the violence. God’s oath of restoration reaffirms the seamless rhythm of seasons that comprise a full year (8:22).
Genesis 9:1–19 recounts the restoration of world order. Since murder was part of the antediluvian violence (6:11, 13), God’s law recalibrates earthly morality (9:5). God’s second postdiluvian speech encodes his plan for the broader preservation of creation (9:8–17). “My rainbow” is God’s confirming sign (9:13). The meteorological phenomenon of the storm is now harnessed as an image of peace. The cosmic warrior “hangs up” his bow in divine disarmament. Humankind now shares the responsibility of justice with God, illustrated in Noah’s first speech of cursing and blessing (9:20–27).
Ancient Near Eastern parallels. Without literary dependence on the biblical story, parallels to the biblical account exist in the Akkadian Atrahasis Epic, Gilgamesh TabletXI, and the Sumerian King List. The exact relationship between the biblical account and these Near Eastern accounts is a debated subject. Perhaps they are variants of a similar story based on the same historical event.
In Gen. 3 the serpent entices humankind to sin. Not untilRev. 12:9 are we told explicitly that the serpent is Satan. InEnglish, “Satan” is a name, whereas in the Bible thisentity does not have a name. Rather, he is identified through asystem of descriptive name-calling labels. In Hebrew, satan means“opponent”—in war, an enemy; in court, an accuser.The verb satan means “to be an adversary, to oppose”someone or something. Most commonly, satan refers to human enemies,and so 1Chron. 21:1 simply refers to “an enemy”(not “Satan,” as the NIV reads) who “rose upagainst Israel” (cf. 1Kings 11:14). It is only as “thesatan” (Job 1–2; Zech. 3:1–2; NIV: “Satan”)that we meet the one we know from the NT as “the devil.”
Thewidely held myth of Satan having been an angel who rebelled is notfound in the Bible. Origen (AD 185–254) was the first toallegorize Isa. 14:3–23 and Ezek. 28:1–10 in this way,and Jerome (AD 345–420) the first to translate “theMorning Star” as the name “Lucifer” (cf. Isa.14:12; Rev. 22:16). The Bible tells us nothing of Satan’sorigins.
Inthe OT, “evil spirit” may be a heavenly being sent by God(1Sam. 16:14–23; 18:10; 19:9; cf. 1Kings 22:22–23).The OT engages in extensive rebuke of the superstitions of thesurrounding nations that included belief in demons (Deut. 32:17; Ps.106:37; perhaps Isa. 13:21; cf. Rev. 18:2).
Around200 BC, works falsely attributed to Enoch began to appear, presentingevil and mortality as essential aspects of all physical creatures.Understanding “sons of God” (Gen. 6:1–4) as angels,these books tell of angels marrying women and producing murderousgiants. In response, God imprisoned the fallen angels, caused thegiants to slaughter one another, and cleansed the earth with theflood. The spirits of the giants then reappear as demons havingcontrol of the Gentile nations, appearing to them as gods, worshipedas idols. The book Jubilees (c. 160 BC) introduced a leader of thesedemons and labeled him “Mastema” (“hatred,enmity”).
Pickingup on these ideas, the Qumran literature speaks of many satans andexpands the number of abusive labels used to refer to the ruler ofthe demons—for example, “Belial” (“worthlessone”). In the same way, the LXX uses “slanderer”(diabolos) as a translation of satan. The word satan also was takenover into LXX Greek as a loanword to mean “enemy” or“adversary” (1Kings 11:14). Both satanas anddiabolos are used in the NT.
Jesus’encounter with the devil in the wilderness recalls Adam and Eve’sencounter with the serpent in Eden. The setting, significantly, isnow a wasteland. The second man to walk the earth with no sin claimsthe right to take back the dominion that Adam passed to the serpent.Jesus can have the whole world (without the cross) if only he willsubmit to the devil’s rule (Luke 4:5–7). Jesus rejectsthe offer. Later, he sees Satan’s fall from heaven to earth(Luke 10:18; cf. Rev. 12:5–12). Whereas once the devil hadaccess to God’s courtroom, now his case is lost. His onlyrecourse is murderous persecution. Between the ascension of the Sonof Man (Acts 1:9) and the final judgment, this is understood to bethe experience of Christ’s people (Dan. 7:25; Rev. 12:17; cf.1Pet.5:8).
Whereasthe OT provides sparse information about Satan and his angels/demons,the NT opens with an intensity of activity. Demons are also called“evil spirits,” and they are associated with physicalillness, madness, and fortune-telling. In Acts 17:22 Paul describeshis pagan Athenian listeners as “demon-fearers” (NIV:“religious”). Jesus’ miracles demonstrate hislordship over Satan’s regime as the demons flee in terrorbefore him (Mark 1:23–26; 5:1–15). According to Paul,Christians are temples of the Holy Spirit (1Cor. 6:19), andJohn urges believers to “test the spirits to see whether theyare from God” (1John 4:1), assuring them that they neednot fear Satan or his forces, “because the one who is in you isgreater than the one who is in the world” (1John 4:4). Onjudgment day Satan will be cast into the lake of fire (Rev. 20:14–15)along with all of God’s enemies.
In Gen. 3 the serpent entices humankind to sin. Not untilRev. 12:9 are we told explicitly that the serpent is Satan. InEnglish, “Satan” is a name, whereas in the Bible thisentity does not have a name. Rather, he is identified through asystem of descriptive name-calling labels. In Hebrew, satan means“opponent”—in war, an enemy; in court, an accuser.The verb satan means “to be an adversary, to oppose”someone or something. Most commonly, satan refers to human enemies,and so 1Chron. 21:1 simply refers to “an enemy”(not “Satan,” as the NIV reads) who “rose upagainst Israel” (cf. 1Kings 11:14). It is only as “thesatan” (Job 1–2; Zech. 3:1–2; NIV: “Satan”)that we meet the one we know from the NT as “the devil.”
Thewidely held myth of Satan having been an angel who rebelled is notfound in the Bible. Origen (AD 185–254) was the first toallegorize Isa. 14:3–23 and Ezek. 28:1–10 in this way,and Jerome (AD 345–420) the first to translate “theMorning Star” as the name “Lucifer” (cf. Isa.14:12; Rev. 22:16). The Bible tells us nothing of Satan’sorigins.
Inthe OT, “evil spirit” may be a heavenly being sent by God(1Sam. 16:14–23; 18:10; 19:9; cf. 1Kings 22:22–23).The OT engages in extensive rebuke of the superstitions of thesurrounding nations that included belief in demons (Deut. 32:17; Ps.106:37; perhaps Isa. 13:21; cf. Rev. 18:2).
Around200 BC, works falsely attributed to Enoch began to appear, presentingevil and mortality as essential aspects of all physical creatures.Understanding “sons of God” (Gen. 6:1–4) as angels,these books tell of angels marrying women and producing murderousgiants. In response, God imprisoned the fallen angels, caused thegiants to slaughter one another, and cleansed the earth with theflood. The spirits of the giants then reappear as demons havingcontrol of the Gentile nations, appearing to them as gods, worshipedas idols. The book Jubilees (c. 160 BC) introduced a leader of thesedemons and labeled him “Mastema” (“hatred,enmity”).
Pickingup on these ideas, the Qumran literature speaks of many satans andexpands the number of abusive labels used to refer to the ruler ofthe demons—for example, “Belial” (“worthlessone”). In the same way, the LXX uses “slanderer”(diabolos) as a translation of satan. The word satan also was takenover into LXX Greek as a loanword to mean “enemy” or“adversary” (1Kings 11:14). Both satanas anddiabolos are used in the NT.
Jesus’encounter with the devil in the wilderness recalls Adam and Eve’sencounter with the serpent in Eden. The setting, significantly, isnow a wasteland. The second man to walk the earth with no sin claimsthe right to take back the dominion that Adam passed to the serpent.Jesus can have the whole world (without the cross) if only he willsubmit to the devil’s rule (Luke 4:5–7). Jesus rejectsthe offer. Later, he sees Satan’s fall from heaven to earth(Luke 10:18; cf. Rev. 12:5–12). Whereas once the devil hadaccess to God’s courtroom, now his case is lost. His onlyrecourse is murderous persecution. Between the ascension of the Sonof Man (Acts 1:9) and the final judgment, this is understood to bethe experience of Christ’s people (Dan. 7:25; Rev. 12:17; cf.1Pet.5:8).
Whereasthe OT provides sparse information about Satan and his angels/demons,the NT opens with an intensity of activity. Demons are also called“evil spirits,” and they are associated with physicalillness, madness, and fortune-telling. In Acts 17:22 Paul describeshis pagan Athenian listeners as “demon-fearers” (NIV:“religious”). Jesus’ miracles demonstrate hislordship over Satan’s regime as the demons flee in terrorbefore him (Mark 1:23–26; 5:1–15). According to Paul,Christians are temples of the Holy Spirit (1Cor. 6:19), andJohn urges believers to “test the spirits to see whether theyare from God” (1John 4:1), assuring them that they neednot fear Satan or his forces, “because the one who is in you isgreater than the one who is in the world” (1John 4:4). Onjudgment day Satan will be cast into the lake of fire (Rev. 20:14–15)along with all of God’s enemies.
The Apostles’ Creed announces that following his deathand burial, Jesus “descended into hell.” Is there abiblical basis for such a statement?
Thisdoctrine is drawn from various NT passages, but especially 1Pet.3:18–20, which says that Jesus “was put to death in thebody but made alive in the Spirit. After being made alive, he wentand made proclamation to the imprisoned spirits--—to those whowere disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days ofNoah while the ark was being built.” And 1Pet. 4:6 says,“For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to thosewho are now dead” (cf. Acts 2:25–31; Eph. 4:8–10).
Thereare various interpretations of these passages. First, some claim thatChrist preached to the people of Noah’s day, either throughNoah or in a preincarnate state. Second, some assert that Christdescended to Hades after his death and preached to Noah’scontemporaries who had died in the flood. The “spirits”would be the spirits of dead people. A third view is that Christdescended to Hades (or hell) after his death and there proclaimed hisvictory to the fallen angels (“spirits”). These may havebeen the “sons of God” of Gen. 6:1–4 (see 2Pet.2:4; Jude 6). The intertestamental Jewish book 1Enoch (secondcentury BC) develops an interpretation of this puzzling Genesis text,telling of angels who had brought evil to the world by marrying womenand fathering demons. Before the flood they had been put in prisonunder the earth. A fourth view is similar to the third but claimsthat Jesus’ proclamation to these fallen angels took place notduring a descent into hell, but at his resurrection and ascension.
Thislast interpretation is the most likely one. Jesus’ descent to“Hades” (meaning the place of the dead) refers generallyto his death, not to an entrance into hell. Jesus’ proclamationwas his announcement of victory over sin, Satan, and death at hisresurrection and ascension. Peter here is reassuring his readers thatJesus rules, and that his death and resurrection have sealed the fateof all powers, real or not, that evoke fear. Paul says simply thatJesus triumphed over all such powers by the cross (Col. 2:15). Jesusdid not go to hell; rather, like every believer, when he died, hisspirit went to be with the Father in heaven (Luke 23:43), to remainthere until reunited with his body at his resurrection.
In Gen. 3 the serpent entices humankind to sin. Not untilRev. 12:9 are we told explicitly that the serpent is Satan. InEnglish, “Satan” is a name, whereas in the Bible thisentity does not have a name. Rather, he is identified through asystem of descriptive name-calling labels. In Hebrew, satan means“opponent”—in war, an enemy; in court, an accuser.The verb satan means “to be an adversary, to oppose”someone or something. Most commonly, satan refers to human enemies,and so 1Chron. 21:1 simply refers to “an enemy”(not “Satan,” as the NIV reads) who “rose upagainst Israel” (cf. 1Kings 11:14). It is only as “thesatan” (Job 1–2; Zech. 3:1–2; NIV: “Satan”)that we meet the one we know from the NT as “the devil.”
Thewidely held myth of Satan having been an angel who rebelled is notfound in the Bible. Origen (AD 185–254) was the first toallegorize Isa. 14:3–23 and Ezek. 28:1–10 in this way,and Jerome (AD 345–420) the first to translate “theMorning Star” as the name “Lucifer” (cf. Isa.14:12; Rev. 22:16). The Bible tells us nothing of Satan’sorigins.
Inthe OT, “evil spirit” may be a heavenly being sent by God(1Sam. 16:14–23; 18:10; 19:9; cf. 1Kings 22:22–23).The OT engages in extensive rebuke of the superstitions of thesurrounding nations that included belief in demons (Deut. 32:17; Ps.106:37; perhaps Isa. 13:21; cf. Rev. 18:2).
Around200 BC, works falsely attributed to Enoch began to appear, presentingevil and mortality as essential aspects of all physical creatures.Understanding “sons of God” (Gen. 6:1–4) as angels,these books tell of angels marrying women and producing murderousgiants. In response, God imprisoned the fallen angels, caused thegiants to slaughter one another, and cleansed the earth with theflood. The spirits of the giants then reappear as demons havingcontrol of the Gentile nations, appearing to them as gods, worshipedas idols. The book Jubilees (c. 160 BC) introduced a leader of thesedemons and labeled him “Mastema” (“hatred,enmity”).
Pickingup on these ideas, the Qumran literature speaks of many satans andexpands the number of abusive labels used to refer to the ruler ofthe demons—for example, “Belial” (“worthlessone”). In the same way, the LXX uses “slanderer”(diabolos) as a translation of satan. The word satan also was takenover into LXX Greek as a loanword to mean “enemy” or“adversary” (1Kings 11:14). Both satanas anddiabolos are used in the NT.
Jesus’encounter with the devil in the wilderness recalls Adam and Eve’sencounter with the serpent in Eden. The setting, significantly, isnow a wasteland. The second man to walk the earth with no sin claimsthe right to take back the dominion that Adam passed to the serpent.Jesus can have the whole world (without the cross) if only he willsubmit to the devil’s rule (Luke 4:5–7). Jesus rejectsthe offer. Later, he sees Satan’s fall from heaven to earth(Luke 10:18; cf. Rev. 12:5–12). Whereas once the devil hadaccess to God’s courtroom, now his case is lost. His onlyrecourse is murderous persecution. Between the ascension of the Sonof Man (Acts 1:9) and the final judgment, this is understood to bethe experience of Christ’s people (Dan. 7:25; Rev. 12:17; cf.1Pet.5:8).
Whereasthe OT provides sparse information about Satan and his angels/demons,the NT opens with an intensity of activity. Demons are also called“evil spirits,” and they are associated with physicalillness, madness, and fortune-telling. In Acts 17:22 Paul describeshis pagan Athenian listeners as “demon-fearers” (NIV:“religious”). Jesus’ miracles demonstrate hislordship over Satan’s regime as the demons flee in terrorbefore him (Mark 1:23–26; 5:1–15). According to Paul,Christians are temples of the Holy Spirit (1Cor. 6:19), andJohn urges believers to “test the spirits to see whether theyare from God” (1John 4:1), assuring them that they neednot fear Satan or his forces, “because the one who is in you isgreater than the one who is in the world” (1John 4:4). Onjudgment day Satan will be cast into the lake of fire (Rev. 20:14–15)along with all of God’s enemies.
Diversity, in the sense of the modern valuation of ethnic,gender, biological, and cultural heterogeneity, is anachronistic tobiblical times. Some manifestations of diversity in the modern sense,such as religious toleration and intermarriage, are stronglycondemned in some biblical passages (e.g., Deut. 7:3; 12:30). At thesame time, several biblical texts are aligned to at least some degreewith the modern value of diversity. In 1Cor. 12:4–31 Paulemphasizes that a diversity of spiritual gifts in the church is agreat blessing (see also 1Pet. 4:10). The book of Acts portraysthe early church as drawing converts from the fullest variety ofethnicities (2:5–13), and Revelation describes the church asconsisting of the redeemed of “every tribe and language andpeople and nation” (5:9 [cf. 7:9]). Indeed, this positiveevaluation of ethnic diversity is anticipated in the OT (Gen. 12:3;Mic. 4:2). The Bible anticipates the modern notion of biodiversity byemphasizing the goodness of God’s creation of distinct “kinds”and the intrinsic value of such variety (Gen. 1:21; 7:3).
Retribution refers to “giving what is due,”usually in response to evil. Retribution is an important theologicaldoctrine whose significance is belied by scant use of the term inEnglish translations (ESV 2×; NIV 6×; NRSV 9×).Retribution is driven by the theological conviction that moral orderis built into the fabric of the world (Ps. 7:14–16; Prov.26:27). This moral compass is guaranteed by God’s oversight,meting out justice in judgment and rewards to the righteous, not onlyon the human-human level, but also on the divine-human level (2Cor.9:6; Gal. 6:7). This biblical equation assures that (1)life isnot overwhelmed by moral chaos, (2)human actions affect thefuture, (3)the world is morally uniform, and (4)humanrevenge is to be avoided (Lev. 19:17–18; Matt. 16:27; Rom.12:19). With the human community in view, God’s commands areintended to instruct and guide. Not surprisingly, address ofretribution is found throughout biblical literature: legal (Deut.28), narrative (Num. 16), poetic (Pss. 18:20; 94:15), sapiential(Prov. 11:24–25), and prophetic (Hab. 2:2–20).
Thispoetic justice pervades the OT in the judgment and exile of Adam andEve (Gen. 3:8–24), Cain’s sentence and blood revenge(Gen. 4:15, 24), and the worldwide flood and annihilation (Gen. 6–9)(cf. Exod. 21:20–21; Deut. 30:15–20; Josh. 7; Amos3:14–15; Mic. 2:1–3). Such stories reveal a sovereign Godacting as an external agent who exacts punishment in light of hisintentions for creation. For Israel, retribution is the exercise ofYahweh’s legal rights in an attempt to restore covenantfellowship (Lev. 26:40–45). Although serious tensionsexist—sometimes the wicked prosper and the innocent suffer—thisdoes not alter the grand scheme of Scripture (Job 33; Jer. 12:1–4).In some scenarios, only the next lifetime will fully bring justiceand reward (Ps. 49:5–15; Dan. 12:2; Matt. 25:31–46; Rev.22:1–5). Deep wisdom, however, embraces mystery and understandsthe limits of human agency (Gen. 50:19–20; James 1:5).
Whilethe notion of consequence may be too strong, the concept ofcorrespondence is helpful for understanding the concept ofretribution. God’s judgments reveal (1)a correspondencebetween act and effect, (2)accountability to known law, (3)adebt requiring resolve/restitution, and (4)punishment thatreenacts elements of the sin itself. God’s roles as divinewarrior, judge, and king proclaim his universal rule and preserve itfrom all who would mock or defy his royal authority (Gen. 3:14–19;Deut. 7:10; 1Sam. 24:19; 2Sam. 12:11–12; Ps. 149;Prov. 15:25; Mic. 5:15; 1Cor. 16:22; Gal. 1:8–9; 2Thess.1:5–10).
God’sreasons for retribution center on disobedience and injustice, whilehis purposes are essentially restorative and developmental.Retribution is an application of God’s holiness that purifiesthe world for his kingdom of peace. In this way, vengeance anddeliverance work together (Nah. 1:2, 7). Paradoxically, retributiongives hope to fallen humanity for sin acknowledged andunacknowledged, anticipating the triumph of righteousness (Ps.58:11). Retribution grants rationality and stability to humanity,promotes closure in crisis, and fosters hope—a forerunner ofthe ultimate judgment before the throne of God the King.
In an agrarian society with an unpredictable climate, such asIsrael, rainfall was of the utmost importance. Two rainy periodscould be hoped for each year, in February/March and inOctober/November, and these seasons were critical in producing a goodcrop. Regular rainfall thus formed a significant part of God’spromise of a good and fruitful land for his people (Lev. 26:4).Solomon’s prayer acknowledges the conditional nature of thispromise: rain would be withheld from a sinful nation but would begiven to a forgiven and obedient people (1Kings 8:35–36).
Raincould also be sent in judgment, most notably in the flood narratives,where God sent rain in order to destroy all living things on the faceof the earth (Gen. 7:4), and in the exodus narrative, where rainaccompanied hail and thunder in the seventh plague (Exod. 9:23).
Sincerain is completely beyond human control, it naturally became a symbolof God’s sovereignty in both blessing and curse. A strikingexample of this is in 1Kings 17–18, when for three yearsthe rains were withheld, until finally Elijah’s trust in Godwas vindicated above the prophets of Baal, and the rain followed. Theeffectiveness of Elijah’s prayers, first for drought and laterfor rain, is held up in the NT as an example for all believers (James5:17–18).
Geography
Whereasthe principal direction in the modern world is north, in the ancientworld different cultures used a variety of orientations as theysought to describe their relationship to their geographicalenvironment. In Israel the primary direction was determined by thesunrise: east. This is reflected in Hebrew, where the main word usedto refer to east as a direction was qedem, which could also be usedto simply refer to that which was directly ahead or in front of thespeaker (e.g., Ps. 139:5). Elsewhere, east is designated by the termsmizrakh (“rising” [Josh. 11:3]) or mizrakh hashamesh(“rising of the sun” [Num. 21:11]), both of which derivefrom the direction of sunrise. By way of contrast, in Egypt theprimary direction was south, in alignment with the source of the NileRiver.
Theancient world employed the same notion of four cardinal directions,which persists to the present, and the terminology related to thesewas influenced by the choice of primary direction. Thus, in Israelnorth is often designated by “left”; south could bedesignated by “right,” and west by “behind.”In addition, directions could be specified by reference togeographical features found in those directions. North could bespecified by the word tsapon, which was derived from the name of anorthern Syrian mountain (Zaphon); south by negeb, a name for theregion south of Israel (Negev); and west by yam (“sea”),since the Mediterranean Sea lay to the west.
Symbolism
Asidefrom their purely geographical significance, the directions also cameto bear figurative significance. Some caution is warranted inassigning symbolic significance to language, for there is danger ofreading invalid meanings into texts. Furthermore, given the ambiguityinherent in the use of terms to refer to directions, which also havealternate significances, there is danger of assigning a symbolicmeaning to the direction that actually resides in the alternate. So,for example, while yam (“sea”) carries significantsymbolic overtones in the Bible, this association does not appear tohave been extended to encompass the term when used to designate awesterly direction.
Eastand west.Nonetheless, there is, for example, probably some significance in theexpulsion from Eden and progressive movement eastward to the tower ofBabel through Gen. 1–11, followed by a return to the promisedland, which was approached by reversing the easterly migration andreturning toward Eden. Eden itself was said to lie “in theeast” (Heb. miqqedem; Gen. 2:8), although the same Hebrewexpression in Pss. 74:12; 77:5, 11; 78:2; 143:5 means “inancient times,” and there is perhaps a deliberate ambiguity inthe use of the expression in Gen. 2:8. In Isa. 2:6 the east is thesource of influences on the people that lead them astray. Followingthe exile, Ezekiel sees the glory of God returning to the temple fromthe east (Ezek. 43:1–2). Thus, when used symbolically, “east”is often viewed negatively or else may be used to mark a connectionwith distant antiquity (Gen. 2:8; Job 1:3). Any symbolic significanceassigned to west appears primarily to be associated with it being theantithesis of east. The distance between east and west was usedpoetically to express vast distance (Ps. 103:12).
Northand south.North is significant for two primary reasons. First, it is thedirection from which invading armies most often descended upon Israel(Jer. 1:13) as well as from which Babylon’s destruction is saidto come (Jer. 50:3). In light of this, Ezekiel’s vision of Godapproaching from the north strikes an ominous tone of impendingjudgment (Ezek. 1:1–4). Second, in Canaanite mythology theabode of the gods, and specifically Baal, lay to the north, on MountZaphon. Thus, the king of Babylon’s plans in Isa. 14:13 amountto a claim to establish himself as one of the gods. In contrast tothis, Ps. 48:2 pre-sents Mount Zion as supplanting Mount Zaphon andthus implicitly presents Israel’s one God as supplanting theCanaanite pantheon.
Aswith west, there is little symbolic significance associated with thedirection south in the Bible, aside from its use in combination withother directions.
Thefour directions.The four directions (or sometimes just pairs of directions) are usedtogether to describe both the scattering of the Israelites as well astheir being gathered by God back to the promised land (Ps. 107:3;Isa. 43:5–6; Luke 13:29). They are also used together toexpress the extent of the promised land (Gen. 13:14) or else todescribe something that is all-encompassing (1Chron. 9:24).
Scripture describes wind as a powerful force that is underGod’s command. The Hebrew word ruakhsometimes is translated as “wind” but other times canmean “breath,” as well as “spirit” (Gen.1:2). The Greek word for “spirit,” pneuma,hints of a similar range of meaning, although another word is mostoften used in the NT to denote wind.
OldTestament. Throughoutthe OT wind is used by God to fulfill his purposes. Psalm 148:8declares that winds do God’s bidding. Yahweh keeps the wind instorehouses until they are needed (Ps. 135:7; Jer. 10:13). God useswind to protect and provide for his people. For instance, God sends awind over the earth to cause the floodwaters surrounding the ark torecede (Gen. 8:1), a strong east wind to drive back the sea duringthe exodus from Egypt (Exod. 14:21), and a wind that drives quail infrom the sea to serve as food for the Israelites in the wilderness(Num. 11:31).
Windcan also be an agent of God’s destruction. God sends a plagueupon Egypt by making an east wind blow locusts all across the land;afterward, God uses a west wind to blow the locusts into the sea(Exod. 10:13–19). In the book of Job a mighty wind from thedesert causes the house of Job’s eldest son to collapse,killing Job’s seven sons and three daughters (Job 1:19). In thebook of Jonah a great wind sent by God threatens to destroy Jonah’sship, and a scorching east wind later causes Jonah to grow faint anddesire death (Jon. 1:4; 4:8). The prophetic books use the subject ofwind in communicating God’s judgment (e.g., Isa. 28:2; 64:6;Ezek. 5:2; 13:11).
Whilea single wind is able to blow in several directions (Eccles. 1:6),many passages specify four winds from the four quarters of theheavens. The north wind brings rain (Prov. 25:23), while the southwind brings heat (Job 37:17), both of which are useful for growing agarden (Song 4:16). Only one verse refers to the west windspecifically (Exod. 10:19), but numerous verses refer to the eastwind as an agent of destruction, often appearing along with militaryterms. When let loose by God (Ps. 78:26), the east wind may shatterships (Ps. 48:7), and those in its path will scatter (Jer. 18:17) orshrivel (Ezek. 19:12). In Hos. 12:1 God accuses Israel of pursuingthe east wind along with multiplying lies and violence. Together, thefour winds can be sent to bring destruction (Jer. 49:36) or to bringlife (Ezek. 37:9). They also appear in the visions of Daniel (Dan.7:2; 8:8; 11:4; cf. Rev. 7:1).
Godrides on the wings of the wind on cherubim (Ps. 18:10; 2Sam.22:11), with the clouds as his chariot (Ps. 104:3). In Ps. 104:4 thewinds are called God’s “messengers.” This imageryis strikingly similar to ancient descriptions of the Canaanite godBaal, although Scripture adds that it is Yahweh who created the wind(Job 28:25; Amos 4:13). Yahweh’s power is not contingent uponwind, as Elijah learns when he experiences the presence of Yahweh inthe whisper and not the wind (or the earthquake) after his successfulcontest against the prophets of Baal (1Kings 19:11–12).
Thewisdom literature focuses upon other characteristics of wind besidesits power. The transient nature of wind is significant, as wind isthe inheritance of those who bring trouble upon their family (Prov.11:29). Ecclesiastes continually refers to all things done under thesun as “a chasing after the wind” (e.g., 1:14, 17). Emptytalk is spoken of as wind (Job 8:2). The function of wind to blowaway chaff is also used to declare the fate of the wicked (e.g., Ps.1:4; cf. Job 21:18). The unpredictability of wind serves as ametaphor for the mystery of God’s actions (Eccles. 11:5).
NewTestament.In the NT, the Gospels reveal the divine nature of Jesus byemphasizing his ability to command the wind (Matt. 8:26–27).Jesus declares that the Son of Man will gather his elect from thefour winds (Matt. 24:31; Mark 13:27). Wind is a metaphor in John 3:8for the mystery and unpredictability of those born of the Spirit.Jesus uses the image of empty talk as wind when he refers to John theBaptist as a prophet rather than a reed swayed by the wind (Matt.11:7; Luke 7:24). In Eph. 4:14 false teaching is referred to as wind.It is wind that easily sways the one who doubts (James 1:6). Finally,a correlation between wind and the Holy Spirit occurs when a soundlike a violent wind occurs at the time when the Holy Spirit fills allthose in the house at Pentecost (Acts 2:2).
The ancient world knew nothing of terms like “global warming” or “going green.” However, the Bible does contain many ideas that can support environmental awareness today. God created a world that is good (Gen. 1:31), and he enlists those whom he made in his image to rule over it (1:27–28).
Although some have understood the words “dominion” and “subdue” in Gen. 1:28 (KJV, ESV, NRSV) to support excessive exploitation of the earth’s resources, the context rules out such a notion. On the contrary, God creates an orderly world from emptiness and disorder (1:2) and intends the bearers of his image to “work and take care of” the garden that he has given them (2:15). It seems necessary, then, that “dominion” and “subdue” endorse not tyranny, but rather a benevolent rule that mimics what the Creator began and continues to do (Gen. 8:21, 22; Ps.65).
Another instructive biblical theme is Israel’s duty to care for the land that God gives them (Deut. 11:11–15). This means that the Israelites are to observe certain limitations regarding the land and its crops (Exod. 23:10; Lev. 19:23–25; 25:1–22). Moreover, there is the theme of neighborly love (Matt. 22:37–39; Phil. 2:3).
Some believe that environmentalism is not supported by Scripture because Scripture does not indicate that an ecological crisis will end the world. Nevertheless, it remains true that present and future generations may suffer greatly due to excesses perpetrated in the present. Creation care is neighborly love.
Famine was the most devastating catastrophe to an agrariansociety. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (Ruth 1:1–2;2Kings 25), it often was accompanied by disease or war, whichin turn brought adversity to many levels of society (Jer. 14:12;Matt. 24:7), including that of the animals (Job 38:41; Joel 1:20).
Dependenceon rainfall caused some people to stockpile in anticipation ofpossible famine. In Egypt, Joseph implemented a grain ration thatsaved the people, supplied seed, and filled Pharaoh’s royalstorehouses (Gen. 41:33–36; 47:23–24). Israel’s owntemple contained storerooms (1Chron. 26:15; Neh. 10:38–39).God used famine to encourage obedience from the Israelites (Deut.11:17; 28:33) and as divine judgment upon them (Lev. 26:14–20;Jer. 29:17–18).
Famineshad far-reaching results: price inflation, robbery, socialexploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism(Gen. 12:10; 26:1; Ruth 1; 2Kings 6:24–29; Neh. 5:1–3;Lam. 2:20–21; 4:8–10). Therefore, faithfulness to God wasa particularly vivid reality (Pss. 33:18–19; 37:19), and God’sblessings on the nation included its being free from famine (Ezek.34:29; 36:29–30).
Josephunderstood that God sent him ahead to Egypt to save his family froman international famine (Gen. 45:5–7). For forty years Godtested the Israelites with hunger to rid them of self-reliance (Exod.16:2–8; Deut. 8:2, 16). Moreover, God sent afflictions onIsrael such as famine, drought, mildew, blight, and insects in orderto arouse national repentance (Amos 4:6–12). This meant thatsin and human suffering were tied to the land in interdependence(Lam. 4:3–4). Elijah’s contest with the Canaaniteprophets of Baal vividly shows the theological implications of faithand food: Yahweh would prove that he was in control of nature’sforces (1Kings 18:23–39; cf. Gen. 8:22). Even Elijah,however, required special divine care through this famine (1Kings17:1–6). For Amos, literal hunger funded his description ofdesperate spiritual hunger, “a famine ... ofhearing the words of the Lord” (Amos 8:11).
Jesusrelived Israel’s experience in his own wilderness testing andrejected the bread that he could make for himself (Matt. 4:3–4;Deut. 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger are intendedto develop humility and trust in God, the divine provider (Matt.4:2), something that Israel did not learn very well. Jesus fed asecond manna to five thousand people to draw them to the bread oflife (John 6:35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the foodthan for him (6:26–27). Famines are mentioned in the NT (Luke4:25; Acts 7:11 [historical]; 11:27–30 [contemporary]).
Jesustaught that famines would be a sign of his coming. Yet, withoutignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted the spiritual hunger andthirst of people (Matt. 5:6; John 4:14, 34; 7:37–38). Becauseeating is a powerful part of fellowship, heaven will merely removethe desperation of hunger, not the use of food (Gen. 43:34; Luke22:15–16; Rev. 19:9; cf. 1Cor. 4:11; Rev. 7:16; 21:4).
Human Uses and Metaphors
Fire is a basic necessity for various human activities such as cooking (Exod. 12:8; Isa. 44:15–16, 19; John 21:9), warming (Isa. 44:16; Jer. 36:22; John 18:18), lighting (Isa. 50:11), manufacturing (Exod. 32:24), and refining metals (Num. 31:22–23). Fire is also an important means of maintaining the purity of God’s people, used to punish sinners (the sexually immoral [Lev. 20:14; 21:9; cf. Gen. 38:24] and the disobedient [Josh. 7:25; cf. 2Kings 23:16]) and to destroy idols (Exod. 32:20; Deut. 7:5, 25; 2Kings 10:26), chariots (Josh. 11:6, 9), and the cities of Canaan (Josh. 6:24; 8:19; 11:11; Judg. 18:27). As an essential means of worship, fire is used to burn sacrificial animals (Gen. 8:20; Exod. 29:18; Lev. 1:9; 3:3; 9:10, 13–14, 20) and grain offerings (Lev. 2:2, 9; 9:17).
The Mosaic law has several regulations concerning fire. Regarded as work, starting a fire is forbidden on the Sabbath (Exod. 35:3). It is the responsibility of the priests to keep the fire burning on the altar (Lev. 6:9, 12–13). The use of an “unauthorized fire” for sacrifice is forbidden (note Nadab and Abihu’s death [Lev. 10:1–2; cf. Num. 3:4; 26:61; 1Chron. 24:2]). Also, contrary to the Canaanite religious custom, burning children is forbidden (Deut. 18:10), though the Israelites failed to keep this command and elicited God’s judgment (2Kings 16:3; 17:17; 21:6; Jer. 7:31; 32:35; note Josiah’s ban in 2Kings 23:10).
As a metaphor, fire also signifies human anger (Ps. 39:3), wickedness (Isa. 9:18), self-reliance (Isa. 50:11), evil planning (Hos. 7:6–7), lust (Prov. 6:27–28), evil speech or tongue (Prov. 16:27; James 3:5–6), and, paradoxically, kindness to an enemy (Prov. 25:22; Rom. 12:20).
Divine Uses and Metaphors
In the Bible, God is described as the ruler of fire (Ps. 104:4; cf. 1Kings 18). Positively, God sends fire to signify his acceptance of worship (Lev. 9:24; Judg. 13:19–20; 1Kings 18:38; 2Chron. 7:1–3; cf. Luke 9:54). God also purifies his people by fire in order to provide them with abundance (Ps. 66:12), to cleanse them of their sins (Isa. 6:6–7), to refine them into the true remnant (Zech. 13:9), to restore true worship (Mal. 3:2–3), to bring forth genuine faith (1Cor. 3:13, 15; 1Pet. 1:7), and to give Christians a true joy of participating in Christ’s suffering (1Pet. 4:12). God also promises to make his people like a firepot and a flaming torch that will burn the surrounding enemies (Zech. 12:6). Negatively, God uses fire to punish the wicked and disobedient (Gen. 19:24; Exod. 9:23; Num. 11:1; 16:35; 2Kings 1:10, 12; Isa. 29:6; 34:9–10; 66:24; Ezek. 38:22; 39:6; Rev. 20:9). God is a farmer burning unfruitful trees (John 15:2, 6; cf. Matt. 3:10; 7:19; 13:40) and “thorns and briers” (Isa. 10:17). The eternal fire of hell is the place where God’s final judgment will be executed (Matt. 5:22; 25:41; Mark 9:45–49; Jude 1:7; note the “lake of fire” in Rev. 20:14–15; cf. 14:10; 21:8).
Fire is also a symbol used to image the indescribable God. It symbolizes God’s presence: a smoking firepot with a flaming torch (Gen. 15:17), the burning bush (Exod. 3:2; cf. Elijah’s expectation [1Kings 19:12]), the pillars of fire and smoke (Exod. 13:21–22; Num. 14:14), the smoke on Mount Sinai and in the tabernacle and the temple (Exod. 19:19; Num. 9:15–16; Deut. 4:11–12; Isa. 6:4). Fire marks God’s protection: the “horses and chariots of fire” (2Kings 6:17; cf. 2:11), the “wall of fire” (Zech. 2:5). Fire also represents God’s glory: God’s throne (Dan. 7:9; cf. Ezek. 1:4, 13; 10:2, 6–7), God’s form (Ezek. 1:27), the seven spirits of God before the throne (Rev. 4:5). God in his holy wrath is also likened to a burning fire (Pss. 79:5; 89:46; Isa. 5:24; 33:14; Jer. 15:14; Ezek. 21:31; 22:21; Hos. 8:5; note the expression “consuming fire” [Deut. 4:24; Isa. 33:14; Heb. 12:29]) and even to a fiery monster (Ps. 18:8; Isa. 30:33; 65:5; cf. Job 41:19–21). Fire is an important element in the description of the day of the Lord (Joel 2:3; cf. 2Pet. 3:12). God’s words in the prophet’s mouth are likened to a fire (Jer. 5:14; 20:9; 23:29).
Fire is also used to speak of Jesus. John the Baptist refers to Jesus’ baptism as one with the Holy Spirit and fire (Matt. 3:11). Jesus identifies the purpose of his coming as casting fire on earth (Luke 12:49). The returning Jesus is portrayed as coming in “blazing fire” (2Thess. 1:7), and the eyes of the glorified Christ are likened to “blazing fire” (Rev. 1:14; 2:18; cf. “flaming torches” in Dan. 10:6). In Acts 2:3 the Holy Spirit is portrayed as the “tongues of fire.”
In the understanding of the ancient Hebrew people, thefirmament was a great vaulted ceiling that covered the earth. It wasthought that the universe consisted of a great expanse of waterbeneath the earth, which sat like a disk on top of it. Above, therewas another great expanse of heavenly waters, which was held backfrom the earth by a large dome, the substance of which was likestretched and beaten metal (Job 37:18). The prohibition of idols inExod. 20:4 reflects this worldview. Holes in this dome allowed waterto fall on the earth (Gen. 7:11; Ps. 78:23–24), and celestialbodies such as the sun and the stars were set within the dome andmoved along it (Gen. 1:14–18). In Ezekiel’s vision of thefour creatures, the firmament was “sparkling like ice”(Ezek. 1:22). Modern translations sometimes rework this concept into“sky,” which retains the meaning of the relevant passagesbut does not reflect the precise content intended by the biblicalwriters in their prescientific context. The presence of unscientificpictures of the universe such as the “firmament” shouldnot trouble believers, as the intention of scriptural texts such asPs. 19:1 is not to advance a particular view of the structure of theuniverse but rather to proclaim God’s glory in light of hiscraftsmanship in fashioning the complex and beautiful world.
In systematic theology, “foreknowledge” usuallyrefers to the doctrine that God knows all things, events, and personsbefore they exist or occur and that this knowledge has been his fromall eternity. No single Hebrew term in the OT corresponds to theEnglish term; the concept is expressed rather on the phrase orsentence level. In the NT, the Greek verb proginōskō andnoun prognōsis are translated “foreknow” and“foreknowledge,” respectively. Recently in evangelicalcircles there has been intense debate as to whether foreknowledge andomniscience are in fact taught in the biblical texts.
OldTestament
Inthe OT narratives, especially in the Pentateuch, there are numerousinstances that indicate some limitations to God’s knowledge ingeneral and his foreknowledge in particular. God appears to besomewhat surprised by how wicked humanity has become before hedecides to send the flood (Gen. 6:5). God comes down and discoversthat the inhabitants of Babel have started to build a tower andconsiders how to stop the activity (11:5–7). God comes down toascertain whether the outcry that has come to his ears about the sinof Sodom and Gomorrah is actually as bad as the reports wouldindicate (18:20–21). God tests Abraham by commanding him tooffer Isaac as a sacrifice, and when Abraham begins to do so, hedeclares that now he knows that Abraham really fears him (22:1–18).
Often,narratives such as these are regarded by theologians as cases ofanthropomorphism, statements made about God that speak of him as ifhe had human characteristics—in this case, limited knowledge.And certainly there are many other narratives in the Pentateuch thatappear to give the opposite picture. God asks Cain where his brotherAbel is, though he apparently already knows the answer (Gen. 4:9–10).God relates to Abraham the course that Israelite history will takefor the next several hundred years (15:13–16). God seems to bein a real-time chess match with Pharaoh, but in actuality God knowsall the moves that both he and Pharaoh will make before the game everbegins (Exod. 3:19–22; 4:21–23; 7:1–5).
Giventhis data, perhaps the better explanation for what is happening inthese texts is not that the biblical narrator is employinganthropomorphism but rather that God is accommodating himself both tothe characters in the narrative and to the narrator of the stories.That is, at this stage of revelatory history God is not yet revealinghimself as fully omniscient and prescient of the future in itsentirety. In the conceptual world of the ancient Near East, deitieswere regularly portrayed as being interactive—deliberating,investigating, discovering, making decisions, and so forth. Godtherefore may well have accommodated himself to the larger milieu inrevealing himself to the patriarchs and earliest biblical narrators.
Whateverthe case may be, later biblical revelation certainly seems to presentGod as fully omniscient and prescient. “Death and Destructionlie open before the Lord—how much more do human hearts!”(Prov. 15:11). Before words reach our tongues, God knows themcompletely (Ps. 139:4). No one has ever had to keep God informed orprovide him with counsel (Isa. 40:13–14). There are no limitsto his understanding (Ps. 147:5). The God of Israel challenges allidols and all other gods to a foreknowledge contest: if they areable, let them tell what is going to happen, as Yahweh does (Isa.42:9; 44:6–8; 48:3–8). God alone makes the end known fromthe beginning (Isa. 46:10), and he has been doing so from ancienttimes (Acts 15:17–18). God knew Jeremiah long before he wasever a fetus (Jer. 1:5). Our prayers do not make God finally aware ofour situation; he already knows what our needs are (Matt. 6:8).Indeed, God answers our prayers before they are even prayed (Isa.65:24). “Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’ssight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare” before his eyes(Heb. 4:13).
NewTestament
Oneespecially important exegetical question for the NT involves theprecise meaning of the aforementioned Greek words, proginōskō(“foreknow”) and prognōsis (“foreknowledge”).The question concerns whether these words, in their contexts, aremerely cognitive terms, indicating simply that God knows thingsbefore they happen, or whether the terms are volitional terms and/oraffective terms. That is, do they indicate foreordaining and/orforeloving? Are they terms that have basically the same meaning as“election” and “predestination”?
Givingcredence to this position is the fact that in some of the passageswhere these words occur there are other words that definitely referto God willing things to happen. In Acts 2:23, Peter declares thatJesus was handed over to his crucifiers by “God’sdeliberate plan and foreknowledge.” The verse can hardly meanthat God decided to do this because he already knew it was going tohappen. Rather, the terms “deliberate plan” and“foreknowledge” act together to convey the single idea ofGod’s complete control, planning, and sovereignty in the deathof Jesus. Likewise, in 1Pet. 1:20 the word does not mean thatthe Son was simply “foreknown” before the foundation ofthe world, but rather that he was “chosen” (NIV),“destined” (NRSV), “foreordained” (KJV).
InRom. 11:2, Paul states that God has not rejected “his people,whom he foreknew.” Again, it is hard to read this as being onlycognitive. Rather, the use of the term appears to imply some kind of“affective” foreknowing, a “setting his love upon”(cf. Deut. 7:7–8), a choosing. It is important to note that thetext says God foreknew not things but people. On the one hand, Godforeknew all people who would ever exist, but in this passage theforeknowing refers to a particular people. And the foreknowing mostlikely takes its sense from the use of the word “know” inthe OT, which on numerous occasions refers to the relationship ofacknowledgment and love between God and his people.
Inthe same way, in Rom. 8:29 “those God foreknew he alsopredestined,” “foreknew” again appears to be avolitional, affective term—that is, “those whom God sethis love upon.” That it means that God knew how these peoplewould respond to the gospel and then chose them seems to be excludedby passages such as Rom. 9:11–12, where God’s purposes inelection are not determined by people’s actions. Finally, in1Pet. 1:1–2 the “elect” to whom Peter iswriting are elect according to “foreknowledge of God”;not that God foreknew things about them, but that God foreknew them.This understanding of the terms in context seems preferable.
In systematic theology, “foreknowledge” usuallyrefers to the doctrine that God knows all things, events, and personsbefore they exist or occur and that this knowledge has been his fromall eternity. No single Hebrew term in the OT corresponds to theEnglish term; the concept is expressed rather on the phrase orsentence level. In the NT, the Greek verb proginōskō andnoun prognōsis are translated “foreknow” and“foreknowledge,” respectively. Recently in evangelicalcircles there has been intense debate as to whether foreknowledge andomniscience are in fact taught in the biblical texts.
OldTestament
Inthe OT narratives, especially in the Pentateuch, there are numerousinstances that indicate some limitations to God’s knowledge ingeneral and his foreknowledge in particular. God appears to besomewhat surprised by how wicked humanity has become before hedecides to send the flood (Gen. 6:5). God comes down and discoversthat the inhabitants of Babel have started to build a tower andconsiders how to stop the activity (11:5–7). God comes down toascertain whether the outcry that has come to his ears about the sinof Sodom and Gomorrah is actually as bad as the reports wouldindicate (18:20–21). God tests Abraham by commanding him tooffer Isaac as a sacrifice, and when Abraham begins to do so, hedeclares that now he knows that Abraham really fears him (22:1–18).
Often,narratives such as these are regarded by theologians as cases ofanthropomorphism, statements made about God that speak of him as ifhe had human characteristics—in this case, limited knowledge.And certainly there are many other narratives in the Pentateuch thatappear to give the opposite picture. God asks Cain where his brotherAbel is, though he apparently already knows the answer (Gen. 4:9–10).God relates to Abraham the course that Israelite history will takefor the next several hundred years (15:13–16). God seems to bein a real-time chess match with Pharaoh, but in actuality God knowsall the moves that both he and Pharaoh will make before the game everbegins (Exod. 3:19–22; 4:21–23; 7:1–5).
Giventhis data, perhaps the better explanation for what is happening inthese texts is not that the biblical narrator is employinganthropomorphism but rather that God is accommodating himself both tothe characters in the narrative and to the narrator of the stories.That is, at this stage of revelatory history God is not yet revealinghimself as fully omniscient and prescient of the future in itsentirety. In the conceptual world of the ancient Near East, deitieswere regularly portrayed as being interactive—deliberating,investigating, discovering, making decisions, and so forth. Godtherefore may well have accommodated himself to the larger milieu inrevealing himself to the patriarchs and earliest biblical narrators.
Whateverthe case may be, later biblical revelation certainly seems to presentGod as fully omniscient and prescient. “Death and Destructionlie open before the Lord—how much more do human hearts!”(Prov. 15:11). Before words reach our tongues, God knows themcompletely (Ps. 139:4). No one has ever had to keep God informed orprovide him with counsel (Isa. 40:13–14). There are no limitsto his understanding (Ps. 147:5). The God of Israel challenges allidols and all other gods to a foreknowledge contest: if they areable, let them tell what is going to happen, as Yahweh does (Isa.42:9; 44:6–8; 48:3–8). God alone makes the end known fromthe beginning (Isa. 46:10), and he has been doing so from ancienttimes (Acts 15:17–18). God knew Jeremiah long before he wasever a fetus (Jer. 1:5). Our prayers do not make God finally aware ofour situation; he already knows what our needs are (Matt. 6:8).Indeed, God answers our prayers before they are even prayed (Isa.65:24). “Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’ssight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare” before his eyes(Heb. 4:13).
NewTestament
Oneespecially important exegetical question for the NT involves theprecise meaning of the aforementioned Greek words, proginōskō(“foreknow”) and prognōsis (“foreknowledge”).The question concerns whether these words, in their contexts, aremerely cognitive terms, indicating simply that God knows thingsbefore they happen, or whether the terms are volitional terms and/oraffective terms. That is, do they indicate foreordaining and/orforeloving? Are they terms that have basically the same meaning as“election” and “predestination”?
Givingcredence to this position is the fact that in some of the passageswhere these words occur there are other words that definitely referto God willing things to happen. In Acts 2:23, Peter declares thatJesus was handed over to his crucifiers by “God’sdeliberate plan and foreknowledge.” The verse can hardly meanthat God decided to do this because he already knew it was going tohappen. Rather, the terms “deliberate plan” and“foreknowledge” act together to convey the single idea ofGod’s complete control, planning, and sovereignty in the deathof Jesus. Likewise, in 1Pet. 1:20 the word does not mean thatthe Son was simply “foreknown” before the foundation ofthe world, but rather that he was “chosen” (NIV),“destined” (NRSV), “foreordained” (KJV).
InRom. 11:2, Paul states that God has not rejected “his people,whom he foreknew.” Again, it is hard to read this as being onlycognitive. Rather, the use of the term appears to imply some kind of“affective” foreknowing, a “setting his love upon”(cf. Deut. 7:7–8), a choosing. It is important to note that thetext says God foreknew not things but people. On the one hand, Godforeknew all people who would ever exist, but in this passage theforeknowing refers to a particular people. And the foreknowing mostlikely takes its sense from the use of the word “know” inthe OT, which on numerous occasions refers to the relationship ofacknowledgment and love between God and his people.
Inthe same way, in Rom. 8:29 “those God foreknew he alsopredestined,” “foreknew” again appears to be avolitional, affective term—that is, “those whom God sethis love upon.” That it means that God knew how these peoplewould respond to the gospel and then chose them seems to be excludedby passages such as Rom. 9:11–12, where God’s purposes inelection are not determined by people’s actions. Finally, in1Pet. 1:1–2 the “elect” to whom Peter iswriting are elect according to “foreknowledge of God”;not that God foreknew things about them, but that God foreknew them.This understanding of the terms in context seems preferable.
In an agrarian society with an unpredictable climate, such asIsrael, rainfall was of the utmost importance. Two rainy periodscould be hoped for each year, in February/March and inOctober/November, and these seasons were critical in producing a goodcrop. Regular rainfall thus formed a significant part of God’spromise of a good and fruitful land for his people (Lev. 26:4).Solomon’s prayer acknowledges the conditional nature of thispromise: rain would be withheld from a sinful nation but would begiven to a forgiven and obedient people (1Kings 8:35–36).
Raincould also be sent in judgment, most notably in the flood narratives,where God sent rain in order to destroy all living things on the faceof the earth (Gen. 7:4), and in the exodus narrative, where rainaccompanied hail and thunder in the seventh plague (Exod. 9:23).
Sincerain is completely beyond human control, it naturally became a symbolof God’s sovereignty in both blessing and curse. A strikingexample of this is in 1Kings 17–18, when for three yearsthe rains were withheld, until finally Elijah’s trust in Godwas vindicated above the prophets of Baal, and the rain followed. Theeffectiveness of Elijah’s prayers, first for drought and laterfor rain, is held up in the NT as an example for all believers (James5:17–18).
God’s “repenting” (KJV) or “relenting”(NIV) may seem to be in tension with his sovereignty, but it makessense on several assumptions. God wills to accomplish certain overallends, but he retains freedom to modify the path that he takes toachieve them, as needed. This in turn assumes that God’sinteraction with humanity involves genuine give-and-take. Therefore,God’s way in history may be recounted as a story with surprisetwists and turns that are integral to the plot. We may affirm allthis and also uphold divine sovereignty if we understand both humanprayer and God’s response as divinely ordained means for God toachieve his purposes.
Textsthat speak of God relenting indicate that God is adopting a newcourse of action, a change of mind. In a sense, divine judgmentit*elf represents a kind of “change of mind” from God’sbasic, original intent to bless. Whereas judgment is “hisstrange work ... his alien task” (Isa. 28:21),undertaken when necessary, God’s character is to be graciousand compassionate, to relent from sending calamity (Isa. 48:9; Joel2:13), and to bring restoration after judgment (Gen. 9:11; Isa.54:7–8; Hos.2).
Terminology.To portray God relenting, the OT often uses the Hebrew word nakham,which carries a strong emotional content and an element of regret. Oncertain occasions, it refers to profound grief that God feels inreaction to human sin and calamity (Gen. 6:6–7; Judg. 2:18;1Sam. 15:35; 2Sam. 24:16). This is not to suggest thatGod is making amends for wrongs or has the same kinds of regret formistakes that humans have. But we should recognize that when nakhamis used to speak of God “relenting,” it means somethingmore than a change in the direction of the wind: it involves theheart of God, engaged deeply with his people’s welfare (cf.Hos. 11:8–9). Conversely, the human cry for God to relent iswrung from experiences of deep crisis (Job 6:29; Pss. 90:13;106:44–45).
Exodusand Jonah.Two classic OT narratives about divine relenting may be contrasted.In Exod. 32 the Israelites’ idolatry with the golden calf isfollowed by God’s indictment and intention to destroy them. Adramatic turning point comes with Moses’ intercession, inresponse to which God relents. The book of Jonah turns this sequenceon its head. Here the prophet resists his mission of announcingNineveh’s doom because he fears that its people may repent,which they do (Jon. 3:5–9), and that God may then relent frombringing on them the judgment that he had sent Jonah to announce,which he does (4:2). The book of Jonah portrays the prophet as anantihero, out of step with the compassion and larger purposes of God,unhappy with the freedom of God. But it preserves the link betweenhuman repentance for sin and divine relenting from previouslyannounced judgment, as seen in Exod. 32.
Theprophets.Through the OT prophets, God wrestles with Israel, announcing onecourse of action, judgment, while often holding open the possibilityof an alternate ending: if Israel repents (Jer. 18:8; 26:3, 13) or ifa prophet (Amos 7:1–6) or a king (Jer. 26:19) intercedes, thenGod may relent. At the end of the day, relenting remains a move thatGod chooses to make or not to make (Isa. 57:6; Jer. 7:16–20;Ezek. 24:14), in faithfulness to his own purpose (Ps. 7:10–12;Jer. 23:20; 30:24; Zech. 8:14–15).
Inthe book of Amos, God does both. Amos 1–2 comprises a cycle ofseven judgment speeches against Israel’s neighbors, culminatingin the eighth, lengthiest judgment speech against Israel. Each speechopens with the formula “For three sins of X, and for four, Iwill not turn back [my wrath].” Here God declares that he hascommitted himself to carrying out judgment. With the use of the verbshub (“to turn, turn back”), any implied question ofreprieve is answered immediately: the nation’s condemnation isirrevocable. But in 7:1–6 God is twice said to “relent”(nakham) from sending the locusts and fire that he has just shownAmos in visions. Granting stays from specific forms of punishment isnot the same as forgiving Israel’s sin, however, and thesetemporary measures are followed by a reassertion of God’sdetermination to spare Israel no longer (7:7–9). Moreover, eventhough Israel’s doom is sealed, Amos can still urge his hearersto repent and turn to God, on the grounds that God may relent—thatis, freely respond with mercy and allow some to survive the nation’sfall (5:4–6, 14–15).
Salvationand judgment.This divine freedom, compassion, and judgment that dovetail in OTaccounts of God relenting are embodied in Jesus’ announcementof the kingdom, which signals both salvation and its corollary,judgment. Hence come his summons to “Repent and believe thegood news” (Mark 1:15) and the apostolic call for hearers toescape their generation’s doom by repentance and faith in Jesus(Acts 2:40).
The words “sacrifice” and “offering”often are used interchangeably, but “offering” refers toa gift more generally, while “sacrifice” indicates a giftconsecrated for a divine being. In biblical Hebrew “sacrifice”is more narrowly equated with the peace offering. All other“sacrifices” are referred to as gifts. Sacrifices wereoffered to honor God, thanking him for his goodness. More important,they enabled persons to be made right with God by atoning for theirsins. Whereas sin upset the fellowship God desired to have withpeople and kindled his wrath, sacrifice restored the relationship.
OldTestament
OTofferings included cereals (whether the grain was whole, ground intoflour, or mixed with other elements), liquids (wine, oil, or water),and animals (or parts thereof, such as the blood and fat). Althoughthe Bible acknowledges that other ancient Near Eastern people hadtheir own sacrificial rites, it rejects them as unworthy of the Godof Israel. The people of God therefore were instructed how tosacrifice properly while at Sinai. Even so, offerings and sacrificesare recorded as taking place before the law was given.
Priorto the law.Cain and Abel brought the earliest offerings. Contrary to a commoninterpretation, Cain’s offering was not rejected because it didnot include blood; the Hebrew word for the brothers’ gifts,minkhah,usually denotes grain offerings. A better conclusion is that Cainonly brought some of his produce (no mention of firstfruits), whileAbel brought the best of the best (the fat portions from thefirstborn of the flock).
Immediatelyafter the flood, Noah built an altar and presented the first burntoffering mentioned in the Bible (Gen. 8:20). That this (and othersacrifices) was received as a “pleasing aroma” indicatesthat God approved of and accepted it. It is significant thatimmediately after the offering, God made a covenant with Noah, hisdescendants, and every living creature. Sacrifices are closelyrelated to covenant relationships, as can be seen in the story ofAbraham enacting a covenant ceremony in Gen. 15 and in Israelreceiving many instructions about sacrifice while at Sinai (cf. Gen.31:43–54).
Sacrificiallaws in Leviticus.Sacrificial laws are found throughout the Pentateuch, the most beingin Lev. 1–7. As Leviticus makes clear, Israel understoodsacrifice to have a number of different purposes. It was a means tobring a gift to God, to express communion with him and others in thecommunity, to consecrate something or someone for God’s use,and to deal with personal uncleanness or sin. These ideas aredeveloped in the descriptions of the different sacrifices that Israelwas required to bring to God. In general, the sacrifices were made ofclean animals raised by the one making the offering or of grain orwine produced by the person. In some cases, the offering wasconnected with the person’s economic ability, a poorer personbeing allowed to present doves or even cereal if a lamb or goat wasunaffordable for a sin offering (Lev. 5:6–13). In all cases,only the best—what was “without defect”—wasto be offered.
Priestas mediator.Three parties were involved in the sacrifices: the worshiper, thepriest, and God. The worshiper—the person who had sinned orbecome unclean in some way—brought an animal to God, laid ahand upon it, and then killed it. Whether the animal’s deathrepresents the death that the worshiper deserves due to sin orwhether the sin is transferred to the animal that bears it instead isunclear. The priest served as a mediator who offered the blood of thesacrifice to God and, in many instances, burned all or part of theoffering. In response to the offering, God, who had graciously giventhe sacrificial system so that those who had sinned could be restoredto fellowship with him, forgave the person. Uniquely in the ancientworld, Israelite sacrifices were not considered magical acts thatcould manipulate God to act on behalf of the worshiper. Presenting animproper sacrifice while exhibiting an improper attitude or motiveresulted in rejection.
Typesof sacrifices.Leviticus introduced five main sacrifices: the ’olah (1:1–17;6:8–18), the minkhah (2:1–16; 6:14–23), theshelamim (3:1–17; 7:11–36), the khatta’t(4:1–5:13), and the ’asham (5:14–6:7). Most ofthese focused on uncleanness or sin. The worshiper who brought suchan offering was not allowed to eat any of it, as it was wholly givento God. Even when priests were allowed to eat part of a sacrifice,their portion was “waved” before God, indicating that itbelonged to him.
1.The ’olah, or burnt offering, is the basic OT sacrificeconnected with atonement for sin (Lev. 1:4). When rightly offered, itwas accepted as “an aroma pleasing to the Lord.” Theworshiper brought a male animal (young bull, sheep, goat, dove, oryoung pigeon) without blemish, laid a hand upon it, and then killedit. After the priest sprinkled some of the blood on the altar, therest was burned up.
2.The minkhah is simply a gift or offering. The Hebrew word is oftenused for a present given to another person or tribute to a ruler.When used of sacrifice, it is usually rendered as “grainoffering” or “meal offering.” A minkhah can, onoccasion, include flesh or fat (Gen. 4:4; Judg. 6:18–21).Considered “an aroma pleasing to the Lord,” it consistedof unground grain or fine flour mixed with oil and incense and waspresented either cooked or uncooked. Part of the offering was burnedas a “memorial portion,” the rest being given to thepriests (Lev. 2:1–3). It usually was accompanied by a drinkoffering—wine poured out on the altar. Grain offeringsfrequently complemented burnt offerings or fellowship offerings. Theshowbread may have been considered a grain offering.
3.The shelamim (NIV: “fellowship offering”) hastraditionally been called the “peace offering,” as theterm is related to shalom. This offering most likely indicated thatthe worshiper was at peace with God and others; all the worshiper’srelationships were whole. Classified into three types, it could beused to express thanksgiving, to signify the fulfillment of a vow, orsimply to denote one’s desire to bring an offering to God outof free will. Only those who made a vow were required to offer ashelamim; the other forms were wholly optional. The worshiper broughta male or female animal (ox, sheep, or goat) without blemish, laid ahand on its head, and slaughtered it. The priest sprinkled its bloodon the sides of the altar and burned the fat surrounding the majororgans. It is described as “an aroma pleasing to the Lord.”
Thisoffering significantly recognized the covenant relationship existingbetween those who shared in it. God received the fatty portions, theofficiating priest received the right thigh, the other priests thebreast, and the remainder was shared among members of a family, clan,tribe, or some other group. According to Leviticus, a thanksgivingoffering was to be eaten on the day it was offered, and a vow orfreewill offering could be eaten within two days. Anything not eatenin the prescribed time period was to be burned.
4.The khatta’t, or sin offering, atoned for the sin of anindividual or of the nation and cleansed the sacred items in thetabernacle that had been corrupted by sin. Since a sin offering couldpurify ceremonial as well as moral uncleanness, people who wereunclean due to childbirth, skin diseases, bodily discharges, and soforth also brought them (Lev. 12–15).
Thekind of animal sacrificed and the sacrificial ritual varied with theoffender and the offense. If a priest or the entire congregationsinned, a bull was sacrificed and its blood was sprinkled before theveil of the tabernacle and on the incense altar in the holy place.The rest was burned, leaving nothing to be eaten. Leaders who sinnedsacrificed a male goat. Its blood was sprinkled on the bronze altar,and the remainder was given to the priest. A commoner brought andslaughtered a she-goat or lamb, the priest sprinkled its blood on thehorns of the altar, and the fat was burned for God and the rest givento the priests. A poor person could bring two doves or pigeons, andthe very poor could bring a grain offering. This differentiationapparently indicated that the sins of some members of the communityhad more serious consequences than others. Those in closest contactwith the tabernacle contaminated it at a deeper level, requiring amore costly sacrifice. The poor were not required to bring more thanthey could afford.
5.The ’asham, or guilt offering, provided compensation for sins.A ram without blemish was sacrificed, its blood was sprinkled on thealtar, and its fatty portions, kidneys, and liver were burned. Therest was given to the priest. In addition, the value of what wasmisappropriated plus one-fifth of its value was given to the personwronged or to the priests.
Altars.According to Leviticus, only the Aa-ron-ic priests could handle theblood or other parts of a sacrifice brought to the altar at thetabernacle. Even so, throughout Israel’s history othersacrificial altars were built. While some of these were illicitlyused for syncretistic practices, others were constructed at God’sinstruction (Josh. 8:30–35; Judg. 6:25–26). Some of thesewere used by priests making rounds so that people from differentareas could sacrifice to God (1Sam. 7:17). Others were used byindividuals who were not priests yet desired to call upon the name ofthe Lord or sacrifice for communal meals. The solitary altars weremainly used for burnt offerings and peace offerings, although grainand drink offerings also were known. Sin and guilt offerings wereoffered only at the tabernacle or temple.
Timesand purposes.The OT regulates a number of different occasions upon which regularsacrifices were to be made. Burnt offerings were presented everymorning and evening (Exod. 29:38–41; Num. 28:1–8).Additional offerings were sacrificed on the Sabbath and the new moon(Num. 28:9–15). Special sacrifices were brought to celebratethe major festivals of the year (Num. 28:16–29:39),particularly the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16). Sacrifices might alsoaccompany requests for safety or deliverance or in response to God’sdeliverance. Thus, burnt and fellowship offerings could be broughtalong with prayers that God would put an end to a plague (2Sam.24:18–25). King David brought burnt offerings and fellowshipofferings when the ark of the covenant was returned after having beencaptured by the Philistines (2Sam. 6:1–19).
Sacrificescould also be made to consecrate people or things for a special task.When the tabernacle was consecrated, special offerings were broughtfor twelve continuous days (Num. 7). Later, fellowship, burnt, andgrain offerings were sacrificed when the temple was dedicated(1Kings 8:62–64). Sin offerings were presented when apriest was ordained (Lev. 8–9). Those who completed a vowdedicating themselves as Naz-i-rites brought sacrifices to God sothat they could again become a normal member of the congregation(Num. 6:9–21). Fellowship offerings often accompanied theannouncement of or installation of a king (1Sam. 11:14–15;1Kings 1:9,25).
Althoughthe sacrificial system was intended to bring the Israelites back intofellowship with God, at times their misuse of it separated them fromhim. When his people showed more interest in sacrificial ritual thanin obeying God’s instructions, they were chastened (1Sam.15:13–22; Jer. 7:21–28). When the people of Israel wereguilty of confusing the worship of Yahweh with Canaanite fertilitycults, God sent prophets to warn them (Isa. 1:11–16; Amos4:4–5). Prophetic statements denouncing sacrificial rites wereaimed at the misuse of sacrifices rather than their existence.Jeremiah and Ezekiel were so positive about sacrificial worship thatthey looked forward to a time when it would be reestablished in itspure form (Jer. 17:26; Ezek. 43:18–27; 46:1–24).
NewTestament
TheNT indicates that the OT sacrificial system was still in place in theearly first century AD. Following directions given in Leviticus, Marybrought a sacrifice to the temple in Jerusalem so that she could bepurified after giving birth to Jesus (Luke 2:21–24; cf. Lev.12:3, 8). Mary and Joseph would have sacrificed and eaten a Passoverlamb during their annual pilgrimage to Jerusalem to celebrate theFeast of Passover. It is not recorded whether Jesus always went withthem, but he did join them at the Passover celebration when he wastwelve years old. It is safe to assume that at this time and after hegrew up, Jesus took part in the sacrifices when he visited Jerusalemto celebrate the feasts.
Jesus’disciples attend several feasts with him. In addition, after hisresurrection they frequently went to the temple to pray at the timewhen sacrifices were made. Encouraged by the Jerusalem churchleaders, Paul went to the temple to join in and pay for thepurification rites of some men who had taken a vow, perhaps to serveas Nazirites (Acts 21:23–26). He later testified before Felixthat he had returned to Jerusalem in order to bring gifts to the poorand present offerings in the temple (24:17). Although Gentilebelievers were exempt from these practices (15:1–29), earlyJewish believers clearly saw no contradiction between believing thegospel of Jesus Christ and engaging in sacrificial rituals. Theylikely followed Jewish piety until the destruction of the temple inAD 70, when all sacrifices at the temple ceased.
Evenso, Christians quickly came to understand Christ’s death as thefinal sacrifice that completed the OT system. Various NT authorsconsider the nature of Christ’s death and metaphorically relateit to OT sacrifices, but the writer of Hebrews develops this in themost detail. According to Hebrews, the sacrificial system was merelythe shadow that pointed to Jesus. Although the blood of animals couldnot adequately deal with sins, Jesus’ sacrifice could (Heb.10:1–10). Jesus is regularly identified as the sacrificial lambwhose blood purifies humanity from sin (John 1:29, 36; Rom. 8:3;1Cor. 5:7; Eph. 5:2; 1Pet. 1:19; 1John 1:7; Rev.5:6, 12; 7:14; 12:11; 13:8). His sacrifice is considered apropitiation that turns away God’s wrath (Rom. 3:25; 1John2:2).
Theend of the OT sacrificial system does not mean that those who come toGod through Jesus Christ no longer bring sacrifices. Instead ofanimal and grain offerings, spiritual sacrifices are to be made(1Pet. 2:5). Emulating their Savior, Christ’s followersshould offer themselves as living sacrifices, devoted to God (Rom.12:1). This implies that everything done in this life could beconsidered a sacrifice. Simply believing the gospel makes one anacceptable offering to God (Rom. 15:16). Labor for the sake of thegospel, or perhaps martyrdom, can be viewed as a drink offering(Phil. 2:17). The author of Hebrews identifies three types ofsacrifices that believers should offer: praise, good deeds, andsharing with those in need (13:15–16). In line with the last ofthese points, Paul counts the gift sent by the Philippian church as afragrant offering that pleases God (Phil. 4:18).
The biblical writers assure us that God does not change. Thepsalmist contrasts the perishable cosmos with the Creator himself:“But you remain the same, and your years will never end”(Ps. 102:27). In Mal. 3:6, God says that Jacob’s sons will notbe consumed, because “I the Lord do not change.” Jameshas the same objective: to reassure his people that God will remainthe source of good things, since God “does not change likeshifting shadows” (James 1:17). This doctrine of God’sunchangeableness, or immutability, should comfort his people becauseit implies that he is ever willing and able to keep his promises. Achangeable God might decide not to honor his commitments or becomepowerless to do so. In the first case, he loses his moral perfection;in the second, he ceases to be omnipotent.
God’sstatus as a perfect being makes this doctrine difficult to formulate,based on the worry that perfect things cannot change without becomingimperfect. Thus, Aristotle’s God, the “Unmoved Mover,”could do nothing but contemplate his own excellence, since all othertopics would be lesser. Similarly, such a “god” could noteven monitor the goings-on of human existence, since this activitywould change the content of his own mind. Aristotle’s God is“self-actualized” in every imaginable sense. But whilethe Bible says that God does not change, it also tells us that herelates to human beings and their lives in all sorts of ways. Heenjoys fellowship with Adam before the fall and gets angry when hispeople sin. God loves us, and he has worked in history to show us whohe is and to redeem us. The incarnation of Christ, the Son, is theprime example of God’s apparent mutability or changeableness onsome level, however one describes it. At the very least, he changeswith respect to his temporal relationships every time a sinnerrepents: the latter was lost, and now is found.
Thedoctrine of the immutability of God must come to grips with passageslike Gen. 6:5–7; Exod. 32:14; Jer. 18:7–10; 26:19; Amos7:3; and Jon. 3:10, which suggest that God sometimes regrets pastdecisions, changes his mind, and reverses himself in response tohuman actions, whether positive or negative. Some Christians respondto these passages by asserting that God is semidependent on creation(“process theology”) or mutable in his knowledge andpurposes (“open theism”). A better solution is todistinguish between (1)God’s essential nature and eternalpurposes, which cannot change, and (2)his contingentrelationships. God never retreats and never improvises, nor can hebecome “ungodlike.” Nevertheless, he is a real person,fully able to experience anger, joy, love, and longing—not lessbecause he is God, but rather far moreso.
A compound of aromatic spices closely related to the dailylife of Israel. It became synonymous with “frankincense”at a later time. Aromatic spices were used in Israel for cosmetics(Prov. 7:17; Song 5:5) and for medical (Jer. 8:22; 46:11; 51:8)purposes but occupied a special place in Israelite worship when usedas incense. Incense was professionally compounded (Exod. 30:34–35)and was offered on the golden altar by the high priest twice a day(Exod. 30:7–8; cf. Luke 1:8–11) and on the Day ofAtonement (Lev. 16:12–13; cf. 10:1–2). As the incenseburned, its sweet fragrance filled the sanctuary, forming anatmospheric curtain to protect the sanctuary and to characterize itas God’s private domain (Isa. 6:4). Prayers offered with thesmoke of the incense guaranteed acceptance by God (Deut. 33:10; cf.Gen. 8:21; Exod. 29:18; Ezek. 20:41). In Ps. 141:2, prayers are saidto ascend to God like incense, providing a background to the book ofRevelation, where incense represents the prayers of the saints (Rev.5:8; 8:3–4).
Altars were places of sacrifice and worship constructed ofvarious materials. They could be either temporary or permanent. Somealtars were in the open air; others were set apart in a holy place.They could symbolize either God’s presense and protection orfalse worship that would lead to God’s judgment.
OldTestament
Noahand the patriarchs. Thefirst reference in the Bible is to an altar built by Noah after theflood (Gen. 8:20). This action suggests the sanctuary character ofthe mountain on which the ark landed, so that theologically the ark’sresting place was a (partial) return to Eden. The purpose of theextra clean animals loaded onto the ark was revealed (cf. 7:2–3).They were offered up as “burnt offerings,” symbolizingself-dedication to God at this point of new beginning for the humanrace.
Abrambuilt altars “to the Lord” at places where God appearedand spoke to him (Gen. 12:7) and where he encamped (12:8; 13:3–4,18). No sacrifice is explicitly mentioned in association with thesealtars. Thus, they may have had the character of monuments ormemorials of significant events. In association with Abram’saltars, he is said to have “called on the name of the Lord”(12:8)—that is, to pray. The elaborate cultic proceduresassociated with later Israelite altars (e.g., the mediation ofpriests) were absent in the patriarchal period. Succeedinggenerations followed the same practices: Isaac (26:25) and Jacob(33:20; 34:1, 3, 7). God’s test of Abraham involved the demandthat he sacrifice his son Isaac as a burnt offering. In obedience,Abraham built an altar for this purpose, but through God’sintervention a reprieve was granted, and a ram was substituted (22:9,13). Moses erected an altar after the defeat of Amalek at Rephidim,to commemorate this God-given victory (Exod. 17:15–16).
Mosesand the tabernacle.In the context of making the covenant with Israel at Sinai, God gaveMoses instructions on how to construct an altar (Exod. 20:24–26;cf. Josh. 8:31). It could be “an altar of earth” (ofsun-dried mud-brick construction?) or else made of loose naturalstones. The Israelites were expressly forbidden to use hewn stones,perhaps for fear of an idolatrous image being carved (making thisprohibition an application of Exod. 20:4; cf. Deut. 27:5–6).Even if the altar was large, it was not to be supplied with steps forthe priest to ascend, lest his nakedness be shown to God. Therequirement that priests wear undergarments reflects the same concern(Exod. 28:42–43). An altar made of twelve stones, the numberrepresenting the number of the tribes of Israel, was built by Mosesfor the covenant-making ceremony (Exod. 24:4), in which half theblood of the sacrifice was sprinkled on the altar (representing God?)and the other half on the people, the action symbolizing the covenantbond created (24:6–8).
Forthe tabernacle, a portable “altar of burnt offering” wasmade (Exod. 27:1–8; 38:1–7). It had wooden framessheathed in bronze and featured a horn at each corner. There was aledge around the altar halfway up its sides, from which was hungbronze grating, and it had four bronze rings into which poles wereslipped for transport. As part of the cultic ritual, blood wassmeared on the horns (29:12). This altar stood in the open air in thecourtyard of the tabernacle, near the entrance to the tabernacle.Included among the tabernacle furnishings was a smaller “altarof incense,” with molding around the top rim (30:1–10;37:25–28). This altar was, however, overlaid with gold, for itstood closer to God’s ritual presence, inside the tabernacle,“in front of the curtain that shields the Ark of the Covenantlaw,” the curtain that separated the most holy place from theholy place. The high priest placed fragrant incense on this altarevery morning and evening. The fact that this was a daily procedureand the description of the positioning of the tabernacle furnishingsin Exod. 40:26–28 (mentioning the altar of incense afterspeaking about the lampstand) might be taken as implying that theincense altar was in the holy place, but 1 Kings 6:22 and Heb.9:4 suggest that it was actually in the most holy place, near theark.
God,through Moses, instructed the people that on entering the PromisedLand they were to destroy all Canaanite altars along with the otherparaphernalia of their pagan worship (Deut. 7:5; 12:3). Bronze Agealtars discovered at Megiddo include horned limestone incense altarsand a large circular altar mounted by a flight of steps. In Josh. 22the crisis caused by the building of “an imposing altar”by the Transjordanian tribes was averted when these tribes explainedto the rest of the Israelites that it was intended as a replica ofthe altar outside the tabernacle and not for the offering ofsacrifices. The worship of all Israel at the one sanctuary bothexpressed and protected the religious unity and purity of the nationat this vital early stage of occupation of the land. In laternarratives, however, Gideon (Judg. 6), Samuel (1 Sam. 7:17),Saul (1 Sam. 14:35), and David (2 Sam. 24) are said tobuild altars for sacrifice and to have done so with impunity, and infact with the apparent approval of the biblical author. Theestablished custom of seeking sanctuary from threat of death in thenation’s shrine is reflected in 1 Kings 1:50–53;2:28–35, where Adonijah and Joab are described as “clingingto the horns of the altar.”
Solomon’stemple and rival worship centers.In the temple built by Solomon, the altar of incense that belonged tothe “inner sanctuary” was overlaid with gold (1 Kings6:20, 22). Solomon’s prayer at the dedication of the temple wasmade before the bronze altar in the courtyard (1 Kings 8:22,54). The altar for sacrifices was much larger than the one that hadbeen in the tabernacle (1 Chron. 4:1 gives its dimensions).
Althoughmany of the psalms may originally have been used in worship in thefirst temple, there are surprisingly few references to the altar inthe Psalter (only Pss. 26:6; 43:4; 51:19; 84:3; 118:27). They expressthe psalmist’s devotion to God and the temple as the placewhere God’s presence is enjoyed as the highest blessing.
Afterthe division of the kingdom, Jeroboam offered sacrifices at the rivalaltar that he set up in Bethel (1 Kings 12:32–33). Anunnamed “man of God” (= prophet) predicted Josiah’sdesecration of this altar, which lay many years in the future(1 Kings 13:1–5). Amos and Hosea, who prophesied in thenorthern kingdom of the eighth century BC, condemned this and theother altars in that kingdom (e.g., Amos 3:14; Hos. 8:11–13).Ahab set up an altar to Baal in Samaria (1 Kings 16:32), and thesuppression of Yahwism by Jezebel included the throwing down of theLord’s altars in Israel (19:10, 14). The competition on MountCarmel between Elijah and the prophets of Baal involved rival altars(1 Kings 18), and Elijah’s twelve-stone altar recalls thatof Exod. 24, for he was calling the nation back to the exclusivemonotheism preached by Moses (1 Kings 18:30–32).
Withregard to the southern kingdom, the spiritual declension in the timeof Ahaz manifested itself in this king making an altar modeled on theAssyrian prototype that he had seen on a visit to Damascus (2 Kings16:10–14). He shifted the Lord’s altar from in front ofthe temple, where it had previously stood. Godly Hezekiah’sreligious reform included the removal of the altars at the highplaces that up to that time had been centers of deviant worship(2 Kings 18:4, 22). The apostasy of King Manasseh showed itselfin his rebuilding the high places that Hezekiah his father haddestroyed and in erecting altars to Baal (2 Kings 21), thusrepeating the sin of Ahab (cf. 1 Kings 16:32). Josiah’sreform included the destruction of all altars outside Jerusalem(2 Kings 23) and the centralizing of worship in the Jerusalemtemple.
InEzekiel’s vision of the new temple of the future, thesacrificial altar is its centerpiece (Ezek. 43:13–17). Thealtar was to be a large structure, with three-stepped stages and ahorn on each corner, and it was to be fitted with steps on itseastern side for the use of the priests.
Thesecond temple.The Israelites’ return from Babylonian exile was with theexpress aim of rebuilding the temple. The first thing that thepriests did was to build “the altar on its foundation”(i.e., its original base; Ezra 3:2–3). The returnees placed thealtar on the precise spot that it had occupied before the Babyloniansdestroyed it along with the temple. They took such care because theywanted to ensure that God would accept their sacrifices and so grantthem protection. At the very end of the OT period, the prophetMalachi condemned the insincerity of Israel’s worship that wasmanifested in substandard sacrifices being offered on God’saltar (Mal. 1:7, 10; 2:13).
NewTestament
Inthe NT, the altar is mentioned in a number of Jesus’ sayings(e.g., Matt. 5:23–24; 23:18–20). In the theology of thebook of Hebrews, which teaches about the priesthood of Jesus Christ(in the order of Melchizedek), the role of the priest is defined asone who “serve[s] at the altar” (7:13), and Christ’saltar (and that of Christ’s followers) is the cross on which heoffered himself as a sacrifice for sin (13:10). Another argument ofHebrews is that since on the most important day in the Jewish ritualcalendar (the Day of Atonement), the flesh of the sacrifice was noteaten (see Lev. 16:27), the eating of Jewish ceremonial foods is notrequired, nor is it of any spiritual value. The altar in the heavenlysanctuary is mentioned a number of times in the book of Revelation(6:9; 8:3, 5; 9:13; 11:1; 14:18; 16:7). It is most likely the altarof incense and is related to the prayers of God’s persecutedpeople, which are answered by the judgments of God upon the people ofthe earth.
There are few subjects more prominent in the Bible than sin;hardly a page can be found where sin is not mentioned, described, orportrayed. As the survey that follows demonstrates, sin is one of thedriving forces of the entire Bible.
Sinin the Bible
OldTestament.Sin enters the biblical story in Gen. 3. Despite God’scommandment to the contrary (2:16–17), Eve ate from the tree ofthe knowledge of good and evil at the prompting of the serpent. WhenAdam joined Eve in eating the fruit, their rebellion was complete.They attempted to cover their guilt and shame, but the fig leaveswere inadequate. God confronted them and was unimpressed with theirattempts to shift the blame. Judgment fell heavily on the serpent,Eve, and Adam; even creation itself was affected (3:17–18).
Inthe midst of judgment, God made it clear in two specific ways thatsin did not have the last word. First, God cryptically promised toput hostility between the offspring of the serpent and that of thewoman (Gen. 3:15). Although the serpent would inflict a severe blowupon the offspring of the woman, the offspring ofthe womanwould defeat the serpent. Second, God replaced the inadequatecovering of the fig leaves with animal skins (3:21). The implicationis that the death of the animal functioned as a substitute for Adamand Eve, covering their sin.
InGen. 4–11 the disastrous effects of sin and death are on fulldisplay. Not even the cataclysmic judgment of the flood was able toeradicate the wickedness of the human heart (6:5; 8:21). Humansgathered in rebellion at the tower of Babel in an effort to make aname for themselves and thwart God’s intention for them toscatter across the earth (11:1–9).
Inone sense, the rest of the OT hangs on this question: How will a holyGod satisfy his wrath against human sin and restore his relationshipwith human beings without compromising his justice? The short answeris: through Abraham and his offspring (Gen. 12:1–3), whoeventually multiplied into the nation of Israel. After God redeemedthem from their slavery in Egypt (Exod. 1–15), he brought themto Sinai to make a covenant with them that was predicated onobedience (19:5–6). A central component of this covenant wasthe sacrificial system (e.g., Lev. 1–7), which God provided asa means of dealing with sin. In addition to the regular sacrificesmade for sin throughout the year, God set apart one day a year toatone for Israel’s sins (Lev. 16). On this Day of Atonement thehigh priest took the blood of a goat into the holy of holies andsprinkled it on the mercy seat as a sin offering. Afterward he took asecond goat and confessed “all the iniquities of the people ofIsrael, and all their transgressions, all their sins, putting them onthe head of the goat, and sending it away into the wilderness....The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to a barrenregion; and the goat shall be set free in the wilderness” (Lev.16:21–22 NRSV). In order for the holy God to dwell with sinfulpeople, extensive provisions had to be made to enable fellowship.
Despitethese provisions, Israel repeatedly and persistently broke itscovenant with God. Even at the highest points of prosperity under thereign of David and his son Solomon, sin plagued God’s people,including the kings themselves. David committed adultery and murder(2Sam. 11:1–27). Solomon had hundreds of foreign wivesand concubines, who turned his heart away from Yahweh to other gods(1Kings 11:1–8). Once the nation split into two (Israeland Judah), sin and its consequences accelerated. Idolatry becamerampant. The result was exile from the land (Israel in 722 BC, Judahin 586 BC). But God refused to give up on his people. He promised toraise up a servant who would suffer for the sins of his people as aguilt offering (Isa. 52:13–53:12).
AfterGod’s people returned from exile, hopes remained high that thegreat prophetic promises, including the final remission of sins, wereat hand. But disillusionment quickly set in as the returnees remainedunder foreign oppression, the rebuilt temple was but a shell ofSolomon’s, and a Davidic king was nowhere to be found. Beforelong, God’s people were back to their old ways, turning awayfrom him. Even the priests, who were charged with the administrationof the sacrificial system dealing with the sin of the people, failedto properly carry out their duties (Mal. 1:6–2:9).
NewTestament.During the next four hundred years of prophetic silence, the longingfor God to finally put away the sins of his people grew. At last,when the conception and birth of Jesus were announced, it wasrevealed that he would “save his people from their sins”(Matt. 1:21). In the days before the public ministry of Jesus, Johnthe Baptist prepared the way for him by “preaching a baptism ofrepentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Luke 3:3). Whereasboth Adam and Israel were disobedient sons of God, Jesus proved to bethe obedient Son by his faithfulness to God in the face of temptation(Matt. 2:13–15; 4:1–11; 26:36–46; Luke 3:23–4:13;Rom. 5:12–21; Phil. 2:8; Heb. 5:8–10). He was also theSuffering Servant who gave his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45;cf. Isa. 52:13–53:12). On the cross Jesus experienced the wrathof God that God’s people rightly deserved for their sin. Withhis justice fully satisfied, God was free to forgive and justify allwho are identified with Christ by faith (Rom. 3:21–26). Whatneither the law nor the blood of bulls and goats could do, JesusChrist did with his own blood (Rom. 8:3–4; Heb. 9:1–10:18).
Afterhis resurrection and ascension, Jesus’ followers beganproclaiming the “good news” (gospel) of what Jesus didand calling to people, “Repent and be baptized, every one ofyou, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins”(Acts 2:38). As people began to experience God’s forgiveness,they were so transformed that they forgave those who sinned againstthem (Matt. 6:12; 18:15–20; Col. 3:13). Although believerscontinue to struggle with sin in this life (Rom. 8:12–13; Gal.5:16–25), sin is no longer master over them (Rom. 6:1–23).The Holy Spirit empowers them to fight sin as they long for the newheaven and earth, where there will be no sin, no death, and no curse(Rom. 8:12–30; Rev. 21–22).
Aseven this very brief survey of the biblical story line from Genesisto Revelation shows, sin is a fundamental aspect of the Bible’splot. Sin generates the conflict that drives the biblical narrative;it is the fundamental “problem” that must be solved inorder for God’s purposes in creation to be completed.
Definitionand Terminology
Definitionof sin. Althoughno definition can capture completely the breadth and depth of theconcept of sin, it seems best to regard sin as a failure to conformto God’s law in thought, feeling, attitude, word, action,orientation, or nature. In this definition it must be remembered thatGod’s law is an expression of his perfect and holy character,so sin is not merely the violation of an impersonal law but rather isa personal offense against the Creator. Sin cannot be limited toactions. Desires (Exod. 20:17; Matt. 5:27–30), emotions (Gen.4:6–7; Matt. 5:21–26), and even our fallen nature ashuman beings (Ps. 51:5; Eph. 2:1–3) can be sinful as well.
Terminology.TheBible uses dozens of terms to speak of sin. Neatly classifying themis not easy, as there is significant overlap in the meaning and useof the various terms. Nonetheless, many of the terms fit in one ofthe following four categories.
1.Personal. Sin is an act of rebellion against God as the creator andruler of the universe. Rather than recognizing God’sself-revelation in nature and expressing gratitude, humankindfoolishly worships the creation rather than the Creator (Rom.1:19–23). The abundant love, grace, and mercy that God shows tohumans make their rebellion all the more stunning (Isa. 1:2–31).Another way of expressing the personal nature of sin is ungodlinessor impiety, which refers to lack of devotion to God (Ps. 35:16; Isa.9:17; 1Pet. 4:18).
2.Legal. A variety of words portray sin in terms drawn from thelawcourts. Words such as “transgression” and “trespass”picture sin as the violation of a specific command of God or thecrossing of a boundary that God has established (Num. 14:41–42;Rom. 4:7, 15). When individuals do things that are contrary to God’slaw, they are deemed unrighteous or unjust (Isa. 10:1; Matt. 5:45;Rom. 3:5). Breaking the covenant with God is described as violatinghis statutes and disobeying his laws (Isa. 24:5). The result isguilt, an objective legal status that is present whenever God’slaw is violated regardless of whether the individual subjectivelyfeels guilt.
3.Moral. In the most basic sense, sin is evil, the opposite of what isgood. Therefore, God’s people are to hate evil and love what isgood (Amos 5:14–15; Rom. 12:9). Similarly, Scripture contraststhe upright and the wicked (Prov. 11:11; 12:6; 14:11). One could alsoinclude here the term “iniquity,” which is used to speakof perversity or crookedness (Pss. 51:2; 78:38; Isa. 59:2). Frequentmention is also made of sexual immorality as an especially grievousdeparture from God’s ways (Num. 25:1; Rom. 1:26–27;1Cor. 5:1–11).
4.Cultic. In order for a person to approach a holy God, that individualhad to be in a state of purity before him. While a person couldbecome impure without necessarily sinning (e.g., a menstruating womanwas impure but not sinful), in some cases the term “impurity”clearly refers to a sinful state (Lev. 20:21; Isa. 1:25; Ezek.24:13). The same is true of the term “unclean.” Althoughit is frequently used in Leviticus to speak of ritual purity, inother places it clearly refers to sinful actions or states (Ps. 51:7;Prov. 20:9; Isa. 6:5; 64:6).
Metaphors
Inaddition to specific terms used for “sin,” the Bible usesseveral metaphors or images to describe it. The following four areamong the more prominent.
Missingthe mark.In both Hebrew and Greek, two of the most common words for “sin”have the sense of missing the mark. But this does not mean that sinis reduced to a mistake or an oversight. The point is not that aperson simply misses the mark of what God requires; instead, it isthat he or she is aiming for the wrong target altogether (Exod. 34:9;Deut. 9:18). Regardless of whether missing the mark is intentional ornot, the individual is still responsible (Lev. 4:2–31; Num.15:30).
Departingfrom the way.Sin as departing from God’s way is especially prominent in thewisdom literature. Contrasts are drawn between the way of therighteous and the way of the wicked (Ps. 1:1, 6; Prov. 4:11–19).Wisdom is pictured as a woman who summons people to walk in her ways,but fools ignore her and depart from her ways (Prov. 9:1–18).Those who do not walk in God’s ways are eventually destroyed bytheir own wickedness (Prov. 11:5; 12:26; 13:15).
Adultery.Since God’s relationship with his people is described as amarriage (Isa. 62:4–5; Ezek. 16:8–14; Eph. 5:25–32),it is not surprising that the Bible describes their unfaithfulness asadultery. The prophet Hosea’s marriage to an adulterous womanvividly portrays Israel’s unfaithfulness to Yahweh (Hos. 1–3).When the Israelites chase after other gods, Yahweh accuses them ofspiritual adultery in extremely graphic terms (Ezek. 16:15–52).When Christians join themselves to a prostitute or participate inidolatry, they too are engaged in spiritual adultery (1Cor.6:12–20; 10:1–22).
Slavery.Sin is portrayed as a power that enslaves. The prophets make it clearthat Israel’s bondage to foreign powers is in fact a picture ofits far greater enslavement to sin (Isa. 42:8; 43:4–7;49:1–12). Paul makes a similar point when he refers to thosewho do not know Christ as slaves to sin, unable to do anything thatpleases God (Rom. 6:1–23; 8:5–8). Sin is a cosmic powerthat is capable of using even the law to entrap people in its snare(Rom. 7:7–25).
Scopeand Consequences
Sindoes not travel alone; it brings a large collection of baggage alongwith it. Here we briefly examine its scope and consequences.
Scope.The stain of sin extends to every part of the created order. As aresult of Adam’s sin, the ground was cursed to resist humanefforts to cultivate it, producing thorns and thistles (Gen.3:17–18). The promised land is described as groaning under theweight of Israel’s sin and in need of Sabbath rest (2Chron.36:21; Jer. 12:4); Paul applies the same language to all creation aswell (Rom. 8:19–22).
Sinaffects every aspect of the individual: mind, heart, will, emotions,motives, actions, and nature (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Jer. 17:9; Rom.3:9–18). Sometimes this reality is referred to as “totaldepravity.” This phrase means not that people are as sinful asthey could be but rather that every aspect of their lives is taintedby sin. As a descendant of Adam, every person enters the world as asinner who then sins (Rom. 5:12–21). Sin also pollutes societalstructures, corrupting culture, governments, nations, and economicmarkets, to name but a few.
Consequences.Since the two greatest commandments are to love God and to love one’sneighbor as oneself (Matt. 22:34–40), it makes sense that sinhas consequences on both the vertical and the horizontal level.Vertically, sin results in both physical and spiritual death (Gen.2:16–17; Rom. 5:12–14). It renders humanity guilty inGod’s court of law, turns us into God’s enemies, andsubjects us to God’s righteous wrath (Rom. 1:18; 3:19–20;5:6–11). On the horizontal level, sin causes conflict betweenindividuals and harms relationships of every kind. It breedsmistrust, jealousy, and selfishness that infect even the closestrelationships.
Conclusion
Nosubject is more unpleasant than sin. But a proper understanding ofsin is essential for understanding the gospel of Jesus Christ. As thePuritan Thomas Watson put it, “Until sin be bitter, Christ willnot be sweet.”
The Bible is full of teeming creatures and swarming things.These creatures, insects, often play significant roles in the storiesand the events described in them. From the first chapter of the Bibleto the very last book, these flying, creeping, hopping, and crawlingthings are prominent.
Termsfor Insects
Insectsare described in the Bible with both general and specific terms. Inthe OT, there are three general terms for insects and twenty termsused to refer to specific types of insects. In the NT, two differenttypes of insects are referenced: gnats and locusts.
Thetwo most common general terms for insects are variously translated.Terms and phrases used to describe them include “livingcreatures” (Gen. 1:20), “creatures that move along theground” (Gen. 1:24–26; 6:7, 20; 7:8, 14, 23; 8:17, 19;Lev. 5:2; Ezek. 38:20; Hos. 2:18), that which “moves”(Gen. 9:3), “swarming things” (Lev. 11:10), “flyinginsects” (Lev. 11:20–21, 23; Deut. 14:19), “creatures”(Lev. 11:43), “crawling things” (Lev. 22:5; Ezek. 8:10),“reptiles” (1Kings 4:33), “teeming creatures”(Ps. 104:25), “small creatures” (Ps. 148:10), and “seacreatures” (Hab. 1:14). The other general term for insects isused with reference to swarms of insects, typically flies (Exod.8:21–22, 24, 29; Pss. 78:45; 105:31). Specific insects named inScripture are listed below.
Ants.Ants are used in Proverbs as an example of and encouragement towardwisdom. In 6:6 ants serve as an example for sluggards to reform theirslothful ways. Also, in 30:25 ants serve as an example of creaturesthat, despite their diminutive size, are wise enough to make advancepreparations for the long winter.
Bees.Beesare used both literally and figuratively in Scripture. Judges 14:8refers to honeybees, the product of which becomes the object ofSamson’s riddle. The other three uses of bees in the OT arefigurative of swarms of enemies against God’s people (Deut.1:44; Ps. 118:12; Isa. 7:18).
Fleas.Fleasare referenced in the OT only by David to indicate his insignificancein comparison with King Saul (1Sam. 24:14; 26:20). The irony ofthe comparison becomes clear with David’s later ascendancy.
Flies.The plague of flies follows that of gnats on Egypt (Exod. 8:20–31).Although the gnats are never said to have left Egypt, the flies areremoved upon Moses’ prayer. In Eccles. 10:1 the stench of deadflies is compared to the impact that folly can have on the wise. InIsa. 7:18 flies represent Egypt being summoned by God as his avengingagents on Judah’s sin. In addition, one of the gods in Ekronwas named “Baal-Zebub,” which means “lord of theflies” (2Kings 1:2–3, 6, 16). The reference toSatan in the NT using a similar name is likely an adaptation of theOT god of Ekron (Matt. 10:25; 12:24, 27; Mark 3:22; Luke 11:15,18–19).
Gnats.Gnats are distinguished from flies in the OT, though the distinctionis not always apparent. Gnats are employed by God in the third plagueon Egypt (Exod. 8:16–19), while flies form the means ofpunishment in the fourth plague. The two are listed together in Ps.105:31 and appear parallel, though the former may be a reference to aswarm. Gnats were also used by Jesus to illustrate the hypocrisy ofthe Pharisees and the scribes (Matt. 23:24).
Hornets.TheBible uses hornets in Scripture as an agent of God’sdestruction. The term occurs three times in the OT. In eachoccurrence these stinging insects refer to God’s expulsion ofthe Canaanites from the land that God promised to his people. Thefirst two times, Exod. 23:28 and Deut. 7:20, hornets are used inreference to a promise of what God will do; the third time, Josh.24:12, they illustrate what God did.
Locusts.Of particular interest is the use of locusts in the Bible. The termor a similar nomenclature occurs close to fifty times in the NIV.Locusts demonstrate a number of characteristics in Scripture. First,they are under God’s control (Exod. 10:13–19). As such,they have no king (Prov. 30:27). They serve God’s purposes.Second, locusts often occur in very large numbers or swarms (Judg.6:5; Jer. 46:23; Nah. 3:15). At times, their numbers can be so largeas to cause darkness in the land (Exod. 10:15). Third, in largenumbers these insects have been known to ravage homes, devour theland, devastate fields, and debark trees (Exod. 10:12–15; Deut.28:38; 1Kings 8:37; 2Chron. 7:13; Pss. 78:46; 105:34;Isa. 33:4; Joel 1:4–7). Due to their fierceness, they werecompared to horses (Rev. 9:7). Fourth, locusts hide at night (Nah.3:17). Finally, certain types of locusts were used as food.
Moths.Mothsare referred to seven times in the OT and four times in the NT. Jobuses moths to illustrate the fragility of the unrighteous before God(4:19) and the impermanence of their labors (27:18). The otherreferences to moths in Scripture present them as the consumers of thewealth (garments) and pride of humankind as a means of God’sjudgment (Job 13:28; Ps. 39:11; Isa. 50:9; 51:8; Hos. 5:12; Matt.6:19–20; Luke 12:33; James 5:2).
Functionsof Insects in Scripture
Asagents in God’s judgment.Insects serve a variety of functions in Scripture. Most notably,insects serve as agents of judgment from God. The OT indicates howinsects were used as judgment on both Israel and their enemies.
Moseswarned of God’s judgment for Israel’s violation of thecovenant. He advised Israel that as a consequence of their sin, theywould expend much labor in the field but harvest little, because thelocusts would consume them (Deut. 28:38).
Solomon,in his prayer of dedication at the temple, beseeched God regardingjudgment that he might send in the form of grasshoppers to besiegethe land. He asked that when the people of God repent and pray, Godwould hear and forgive (2Chron. 6:26–30). God similarlyresponded by promising that when he “command[s] locusts todevour the land” as judgment for sin, and his people humblethemselves and pray, he will heal and forgive (2Chron. 7:13–14;cf. 1Kings 8:37).
Thepsalmist reminded Israel of God’s wonderful works in theirpast, one of which was his use of insects as a means of his judgment(Ps. 78:45–46; cf. 105:34).
Joel1:4 and 2:25 describe God’s judgment on Israel for theirunfaithfulness in successive waves of intensity (cf. Deut. 28:38, 42;2Chron. 6:28; Amos 4:9–10; 7:1–3). The devastationled to crop failure, famine, destruction of vines and fig trees, andgreat mourning. The severity of the judgment is described as beingunlike anything anyone in the community had ever experienced (Joel1:2–3).
Locustsare the subject of one of the visions of the prophet Amos. In thevision, God showed him the destructive power of these insects as ameans of judgment. Upon seeing the vision, the prophet interceded forthe people, and God relented (Amos 7:1–3).
Insectswere also used as judgments on Israel’s enemies. In the plagueson Egypt, insects were the agents of the third, fourth, and eighthplagues. The third plague (Exod. 8:16–19) was gnats.Interestingly, this was the first of Moses’ signs that themagicians of Pharaoh could not reproduce. Their response to theEgyptian king was that this must be the “finger of God.”There is no record of the gnats ever leaving Egypt, unlike the otherplagues.
Thefourth plague was flies (Exod. 8:20–32). Here the Biblespecifically indicates a distinction between the land of Goshen,where the Israelites dwelled, and the rest of the land of Egypt. Theflies covered all of Egypt except Goshen. This plague led toPharaoh’s first offer of compromise. Once Moses prayed and theflies left Egypt, Pharaoh hardened his heart.
Theeighth plague was in the form of locusts (Exod. 10:1–20). Inresponse to this plague, Pharaoh’s own officials complained tohim, beseeching him to let Israel leave their country lest it beentirely destroyed. The threat of this plague led to Pharaoh’ssecond offer of compromise. Once the locusts began to devastate theland of Egypt, Pharaoh confessed his sin before God, but as soon asthe locusts were removed, his heart again became hardened. Thus,three of the ten plagues on Egypt were in the form of insects.
Atthe end of a series of “woe” passages, the prophet Isaiahproclaimed God’s judgment against the enemies of his peoplebecause of their oppression. In the end, those who plundered willthemselves be plundered, as if by a “swarm of locusts”(Isa. 33:1–4; cf. Jer. 51:14, 27).
Insectswere also used as judgment on people who dwelled in the land ofIsrael prior to Israel’s occupation. Both before and after theevent took place, the Bible describes how God sent hornets to helpdrive out the occupants of the land of Canaan in preparation forIsrael’s arrival. This is described as part of God’sjudgment on these nations for their sins against him (Exod. 23:28;Deut. 7:20; Josh. 24:12).
Asfood.Insects also are mentioned in Scripture as food. Certain types oflocusts are listed as clean and eligible for consumption. The NTdescribes the diet of John the Baptist, which consisted of locustsand wild honey—a diet entirely dependent on insects (Matt. 3:4;Mark 1:6). The OT also notes Samson enjoying the labor of bees asfood (Judg. 14:8–9).
Usedfiguratively.Most often, insects are used figuratively in Scripture. They are usedin the proverbs of Scripture to illustrate wisdom. The sages wroteabout ants (Prov. 6:6; 30:25), locusts (Prov. 30:27), and even deadflies (Eccles. 10:1) both to extol wisdom and to encourage itsdevelopment in humankind.
Anotherfigurative use of insects is in the riddle about bees and honey posedby Samson to the Philistines (Judg. 14:12–18). As noted above,Samson ate honey (Judg. 14:8–9; cf. 1Sam. 14:25–29,43). Also, Scripture describes the promised land as a place of “milkand honey.”
Insectsalso are used to symbolize pursuing enemies (Deut. 1:44; Ps. 118:12;Isa. 7:18), innumerable forces (Judg. 6:5; 7:12; Ps. 105:34; Jer.46:23; Joel 2:25), insignificance (Num. 13:33; 1Sam. 24:14;26:20; Job 4:19; 27:18; Ps. 109:23; Eccles. 12:5; Isa. 40:22),vulnerability (Job 4:19), God’s incomparable nature (Job39:20), the brevity of life (Ps. 109:23), wisdom and organization(Prov. 30:27), and an invading army (Isa. 7:18; Jer. 51:14, 27), andthey are employed in a taunt against Israel’s enemies (Nah.3:15–17), a lesson on hypocrisy (Matt. 23:24), and an image ofeschatological judgment (Rev. 9:4–11).
ScripturalTruths about Insects
1.Insectsare part of God’s creation.Inview of all the uses of insects in Scripture, several key truthsemerge. First, insects are a part of the totality of God’screation. The very first chapter of the Bible uses one of the generalterms for insects as part of God’s creative activity on thesixth day of creation (Gen. 1:24). After God reviewed the creation onthat day, his assessment of it, including the insects, was that itwas “good” (1:25).
2.Insectsare under God’s control.Asecond scriptural truth related to insects in the Bible is that theyare under God’s control. In Deut. 7:20 God promised to sendhornets ahead of the children of Israel to prepare the promised landfor their arrival. Also, in Joel 2:25, when God promised to repairthe damage to the land caused by the locusts, he described them as“my great army that I sent.” Thus, the picture emergesthat what God has created, he alone reserves the authority tocontrol.
3.Insectsare cared for by God. A final truth regarding insects in Scripture isthat God takes care of them. Just as Jesus explained God’s carefor the birds of the air (Matt. 7:26), the psalmist explained thatall of God’s creation, specifically insects, “look to youto give them their food at the proper time” (Ps. 104:25–27).The conclusion of the psalmist is appropriate for all of God’screation: “When you hide your face, they are terrified; whenyou take away their breath, they die and return to the dust. When yousend your Spirit, they are created, and you renew the face of theground” (104:29–30). Thus, in the end, God creates, Godcontrols, and God cares—a lesson that all of God’screation shares.
A quality of completeness or uprightness; often it isexpressed in terms of someone being “blameless.” Howeverit does not, as the English word implies, suggest sinlessness. Inbiblical thought, integrity is grounded not in a list of charactertraits but rather in one’s relationship to God. Single-mindeddevotion to God is the environment in which integrity flourishes(1Kings 9:4–5).
Scripturedescribes certain individuals as displaying integrity. Noah is “arighteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walkedfaithfully with God” (Gen. 6:9). The narrator describes Job as“blameless and upright,” someone who “feared Godand shunned evil” (Job 1:1, 8). Jesus is identified as a “manof integrity” (NIV) or “truthful” (NASB) by somePharisaic questioners (Matt. 22:16; Mark 12:14).
Paulrepeatedly defends his own integrity to his churches when he is underattack by his opponents (2Cor. 1:12; 1Thess. 2:1–12)and encourages Titus to teach with integrity (Titus 2:7). Heinstructs both Timothy and Titus that church leaders must be “abovereproach,” “sincere,” and “blameless”—thatis, people of integrity (1Tim. 3:2–10; Titus 1:6–8).
Retribution refers to “giving what is due,”usually in response to evil. Retribution is an important theologicaldoctrine whose significance is belied by scant use of the term inEnglish translations (ESV 2×; NIV 6×; NRSV 9×).Retribution is driven by the theological conviction that moral orderis built into the fabric of the world (Ps. 7:14–16; Prov.26:27). This moral compass is guaranteed by God’s oversight,meting out justice in judgment and rewards to the righteous, not onlyon the human-human level, but also on the divine-human level (2Cor.9:6; Gal. 6:7). This biblical equation assures that (1)life isnot overwhelmed by moral chaos, (2)human actions affect thefuture, (3)the world is morally uniform, and (4)humanrevenge is to be avoided (Lev. 19:17–18; Matt. 16:27; Rom.12:19). With the human community in view, God’s commands areintended to instruct and guide. Not surprisingly, address ofretribution is found throughout biblical literature: legal (Deut.28), narrative (Num. 16), poetic (Pss. 18:20; 94:15), sapiential(Prov. 11:24–25), and prophetic (Hab. 2:2–20).
Thispoetic justice pervades the OT in the judgment and exile of Adam andEve (Gen. 3:8–24), Cain’s sentence and blood revenge(Gen. 4:15, 24), and the worldwide flood and annihilation (Gen. 6–9)(cf. Exod. 21:20–21; Deut. 30:15–20; Josh. 7; Amos3:14–15; Mic. 2:1–3). Such stories reveal a sovereign Godacting as an external agent who exacts punishment in light of hisintentions for creation. For Israel, retribution is the exercise ofYahweh’s legal rights in an attempt to restore covenantfellowship (Lev. 26:40–45). Although serious tensionsexist—sometimes the wicked prosper and the innocent suffer—thisdoes not alter the grand scheme of Scripture (Job 33; Jer. 12:1–4).In some scenarios, only the next lifetime will fully bring justiceand reward (Ps. 49:5–15; Dan. 12:2; Matt. 25:31–46; Rev.22:1–5). Deep wisdom, however, embraces mystery and understandsthe limits of human agency (Gen. 50:19–20; James 1:5).
Whilethe notion of consequence may be too strong, the concept ofcorrespondence is helpful for understanding the concept ofretribution. God’s judgments reveal (1)a correspondencebetween act and effect, (2)accountability to known law, (3)adebt requiring resolve/restitution, and (4)punishment thatreenacts elements of the sin itself. God’s roles as divinewarrior, judge, and king proclaim his universal rule and preserve itfrom all who would mock or defy his royal authority (Gen. 3:14–19;Deut. 7:10; 1Sam. 24:19; 2Sam. 12:11–12; Ps. 149;Prov. 15:25; Mic. 5:15; 1Cor. 16:22; Gal. 1:8–9; 2Thess.1:5–10).
God’sreasons for retribution center on disobedience and injustice, whilehis purposes are essentially restorative and developmental.Retribution is an application of God’s holiness that purifiesthe world for his kingdom of peace. In this way, vengeance anddeliverance work together (Nah. 1:2, 7). Paradoxically, retributiongives hope to fallen humanity for sin acknowledged andunacknowledged, anticipating the triumph of righteousness (Ps.58:11). Retribution grants rationality and stability to humanity,promotes closure in crisis, and fosters hope—a forerunner ofthe ultimate judgment before the throne of God the King.
A window through which air could pass but was protected by astructure of criss-crossed wood or metal strips. As elsewhere in theancient Near East, window scenes in biblical literature oftenforebode ill fate. The motif of the woman at the window is commonlyattested in the ancient Near East, and there are several biblicalexamples of such women and their perils (Josh. 2:15–21; Judg.5:28; 1Sam. 19:12; 2Sam. 6:16–23; 2Kings9:32). The window portends danger for men also, though not in formsas tragic as those that women faced (Gen. 8:6; 26:8; 2Kings1:2; 13:17; Prov. 7:6; Acts 20:9).
Outgrowth(s), usually green, of the stem of a plant. In Gen.8:8–11, an olive leaf in the beak of a dove signals to Noahthat the waters of the flood are receding. Many OT passages containreferences to leaves as a metaphor for prosperity (Ps. 1:3; Prov.11:28) as well as for destitution (Job 13:25; Isa. 1:30; 34:4; 64:6).A key difference between the two metaphors depends on whether theleaf is withered. The righteous will thrive like a green leaf (Prov.11:28), whereas Job, discussing his suffering, refers to himself as awindblown leaf (Job 13:25). In the NT, Jesus curses a fig tree thathas leaves but no fruit, immediately causing it to wither (Matt.21:18–22; Mark 11:13–14, 20–25). Leaves are alsoused as an illustration by which Jesus teaches about expectations forthe Son of Man to return (Mark 13:26–28). In Revelation, theleaves of the tree of life are for the healing of the nations (22:2).
OldTestament
Phoeniciansand Philistines. Asa people whose ancestral territory lay in the landlocked andtimber-poor highlands of Ephraim and Judah, the Israelites ofbiblical times never achieved prominence in seafaring orshipbuilding. Instead, they relied for their maritime enterprises onalliances with their coastal neighbors, particularly the Phoenicianstates to the north of Israel, who excelled in seafaring and hadaccess to the abundant timber forests of Lebanon. The Phoenicians(the Punics of classical antiquity) were famous in antiquity fortheir seafaring. In biblical times, they traded heavily betweenSyria-Palestine and Egypt and also sailed throughout theMediterranean, establishing colonies as far away as Tunisia(Carthage) and Spain (Cadiz).
Anotherseagoing people prominent in the OT were the Philistines, whose baseof power was to the west of Judah, along the Mediterranean coast. TheBible associates the Philistines with the five cities of Ashdod,Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza. The Philistines were among the SeaPeoples, who came to the Levant from the Aegean beginning in thetwelfth century BC (Amos 9:7; Jer. 47:4).
Theperennial enmity between the Philistines and the Israelites precludedjoint maritime ventures of the sort shared by Israel and thePhoenicians, and the Bible does not describe Philistine maritimeactivities in any depth. Nevertheless, the seagoing nature of thePhilistines is reflected by the fact that their settlements remainedconfined to the coastal region. They never made a systematic attemptto take over the traditionally Israelite and Judahite highlands. Whenthey did venture into the Judean mountains, it was to assert amilitary and political presence among the agrarian Israelites andJudahites rather than to establish permanent settlements andPhilistine population centers. Twelfth-century BC reliefs at MedinetHabu (in the mortuary temple of RamessesIII) depict a navalbattle between the Sea Peoples and the Egyptians. The reliefs includepictures of Philistine ships and sailors.
Israeliteseafaring.One of the rare references to Israelite seafaring describes theDanites and the Asherites in connection with ships and harbors (Judg.5:17; see also Ezek. 27:19). Traditional Danite territory overlappedwith the area of Philistine settlement. Asherite territory overlappedsubstantially with Phoenician territory. It is possible that Judg.5:17 refers to the fact that the Danites and the Asherites worked inthe port cities serving Philistine and Phoenician shipping. Inanother passage, Zebulun is associated with ports (Gen. 49:13). It isnoteworthy that the Israelite coast between Jaffa and Dor (roughlybetween Philistia and Phoenicia) does not have an abundance ofnatural harbors. Later, Herod the Great would build the artificialharbor at Caesarea in the first century BC. The great expense of sucha project—including the construction of over 2,500 feet ofbreakwaters made of underwater concrete, mostly imported fromItaly—suggests the extent of the need for secure harbors inthis region.
Solomon’sfleet.The zenith of Israelite seafaring occurred during the reign ofSolomon. Solomon built a fleet of ships at “Ezion Geber, whichis near Elath in Edom, on the shore of the Red Sea” (1Kings9:26). The purpose of these ships was to bring back gold from Ophir(1Kings 9:28), possibly a location in the Arabian Peninsula, towhich a port on the Red Sea would have offered ready access. Thestory confirms the aforementioned dependence on the Phoenicians inthe area of seafaring: although the ships belonged to Solomon, “Hiram[the Phoenician king of Tyre] sent his men—sailors who knew thesea—to serve in the fleet with Solomon’s men”(1Kings 9:27). The timber for the ships would also have beenimported by Israel from Phoenicia (see 1Kings 9:11). Even atthe height of its power, Israel lacked the human resources to embarkon sea voyages independently of the Phoenicians.
Thesuccess of Solomon’s project, of course, depended not only onwarm relations with the Phoenicians but also on territorial controlof the historically Edomite lands between Judah and the Red Sea. Thisfavorable combination of conditions would come and go throughout thebiblical period, and with it, Israel’s modest presence on theseas. From the Phoenician point of view, cooperation with Israel wasan essential component of gaining access to a Red Sea port, and withit to the products of Arabia, the Horn of Africa, and India. ThePhoenicians, as expansive as their travel was in the Mediterranean,could never independently control the long overland route fromPhoenicia to the Red Sea, since it ran through the territory ofIsrael and Edom. Their best hope was a friendly and powerfulIsraelite ally. This explains the cordial relationship and why Hiramsent not only his sailors to serve Solomon but also craftsmen andsupplies for the construction of the temple (1Kings 5:10–12).Solomon and Hiram jointly operated “a fleet of trading ships”that would return to port every three years bringing “gold,silver, and ivory, and apes and baboons” (1Kings 10:22).
Jehoshaphat.In the mid-ninth century BC, King Jehoshaphat of Judah attempted torepeat Solomon’s feat of launching a fleet from Ezion Geber(1Kings 22:48–49; 2Chron. 20:35–37).According to both accounts, the ships were wrecked before they couldset sail. On several other points, however, the two versions of thestory disagree in ways that bear on questions of the political andeconomic conditions of Israelite seafaring.
Bythis time, Israel and Judah had split into separate kingdoms, withthe northern kingdom of Israel being geographically and politicallycloser to the Phoenicians. The powerful King Ahab of Israel,Jehoshaphat’s contemporary through much of his reign, marriedJezebel, the daughter of the Sidonian (Phoenician) king Ethbaal(1Kings 16:31). According to 1Kings, King Ahaziah ofIsrael (Ahab’s son) proposed to cooperate with Jehoshaphat bysending his own men on the voyage, much as Hiram had assisted Solomonin the previous century. Jehoshaphat rejected the suggestion,possibly indicating a bid for Judean autonomy in an era of northerndominance. According to 2Chronicles, however, Jehoshaphat didcooperate willingly with Ahaziah, and this was the reason that theships foundered in port: God punished the righteous Jehoshaphat fortoo close a relationship with his wicked northern counterpart. In1Kings 22:47 it is mentioned that at the time of Jehoshaphat’sventure there was no king in Edom. As noted, control of the overlandroute between Judah and the Red Sea was necessary for the success ofany voyage originating from Ezion Geber.
Howeverthe contradiction between 1Kings and 2Chroniclesregarding the involvement of Ahaziah is resolved, both versions ofthe story highlight the fact that the port at Ezion Geber commandedthe interest of the Judeans, the Israelites, and the Phoenicians, andits successful operation probably depended on the cooperation of allthree.
Shipsof Tarshish.Several biblical texts, including the stories of Solomon andJehoshaphat, mention “ships of Tarshish” (1Kings10:22 NIV mg.). In a number of contexts, such ships are associatedwith the transportation of metals and metal ores, including iron,lead, tin, gold, and silver (1Kings 10:22; Ezek. 27:12; Jer.10:9). The exact derivation of the term “ships of Tarshish”is uncertain, though it is clear from the descriptions of theircargoes that such ships could travel over long distances. As Ezekielobserves, “The ships of Tarshish serve as carriers for yourwares. You are filled with heavy cargo as you sail the sea. Youroarsmen take you out to the high seas” (Ezek. 27:25–26).
Inthe Table of Nations, Tarshish is listed as a descendant of Javan(Gen. 10:4), along with a number of other seafaring peoples of theeastern Mediterranean (“Javan” indicates the peoples ofthe Aegean and is linguistically equivalent to “Ionia”[see also Ezek. 27:12–22]). Some have suggested, then, that theships of Tarshish should be associated with Tarsus in southeasternTurkey, an area containing silver mines (also the birthplace of Paul[Acts 9:11]). Others have suggested the Phoenician colony ofTartessus in Spain, another metal-producing area. This locationfigures in the interpretation of the identification of thedestination of Jonah as Tarshish (Jon. 1:3): presumably, if he wereavoiding Nineveh and departing from Joppa, he would head towardSpain, in the exact opposite direction, rather than toward Tarsus inCilicia.
Inaddition to these two geographical options, some have attempted toexplain the expression “ships of Tarshish” as derivingfrom the Akkadian term for smelting or refining: perhaps the manyreferences to cargoes of metals indicate that the ships were used totransport metal ore to refining centers. Finally, one scholar hasproposed that the term is related to the Greek word tarsos,meaning “oar.”
Descriptionsof ships and seafaring.Ezekiel, in his lament concerning the Phoenician city of Tyre (Ezek.27), relates a number of details related to Phoenician seafaring. Thepicture largely confirms the descriptions of how Solomon built andmanned his fleet with the assistance of his Tyrian ally. Timber forthe construction of the ship came from Lebanon and Cyprus, amongother places (vv. 5–6). Sails were made from Egyptian linen(v.7), and as noted above, the oarsmen and sailors were fromthe Phoenician city-states (vv. 8–9). Ezekiel goes on to list alarge number of ports of call as well as a dazzling variety ofcargoes (vv. 12–24). Notably, Ezekiel has the Judahites and theIsraelites offering the products of their agrarian economy—“wheatfrom Minnith and confections, honey, olive oil and balm”(v.17)—thus filling out the picture of what theIsraelites gave in exchange for the precious metals and luxury itemsimported by their country from elsewhere.
In1999 archaeologists explored two eighth-century BC Phoenician shipsthat had sunk thirty miles west of Ashkelon. The ships, eachmeasuring about fifty feet in length, contained large cargoes of wineand were headed either for Egypt or for the Phoenician colonies inthe western Mediterranean.
Shipsand sailing figure prominently in the story of Jonah, who boarded aship bound for Tarshish (see discussion above) at Joppa on theMediterranean coast. In the story we see a number of features ofancient sea travel. Jonah paid a fare for his voyage (Jon. 1:3). Notonly the biblical author (see 1:4), but also the presumablynon-Israelite sailors, believed that the great storm was the doing ofa god, and that it could be calmed by appealing to that god(1:6)—although cargo was thrown overboard for good measure.When Paul was caught in a storm in the first century AD, the samestrategies were still in use (Acts 27:38). The religious habits ofancient sailors, particularly their reverence for the gods whocontrolled the stormy seas and thus held their lives in the balance,are illuminated by the discovery of stone anchors in several temples(presumably left by sailors as offerings), including at the portcities of Ugarit, Kition, and Byblos.
Psalm107:23–32 speaks of God’s care of sailors from anIsraelite perspective. In the psalm, those who “went out on thesea in ships,” the “merchants on the mighty waters”(i.e., the deep, open sea), witness firsthand the works of the God ofIsrael, which include both the raising and the quieting of the storm.This passage vividly expresses the terror of being caught in a stormand the great relief and gratitude felt by sailors who reached safehaven.
Noah’sArk
Accordingto the biblical account, Noah’s ark was 450 feet long, 75 feetwide, and 45 feet high (300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits [Gen.6:15]). It had three decks, a roof, and a window. By comparison, theship of Uta-napishti in the Epic of Gilgamesh is described as havingsix decks (and thus seven stories), edges of 180 feet (ten dozencubits) in each dimension, and occupying the space of an acre (arough approximation of the dimensions given). Both ships aredescribed as providing space for the builder’s family and everyliving creature. In the Atrahasis Epic, the boat is roofed, but itsdimensions are not given.
Becauseof the character of Gen. 6–8, it is inappropriate to drawconclusions from the story regarding shipbuilding in historicalantiquity. According to the specifications given in the biblicaltext, Noah’s ark would have been the largest wooden ship inhistory, equaled only by the United States schooner Wyoming,completed in 1909. While the overall length of the Wyoming was also450 feet, nearly 100 feet of length was accounted for in the fore andaft booms, so that the hull length was only 350 feet. Even with earlytwentieth-century shipbuilding technology, its extravagant lengthrendered the Wyoming unseaworthy, and the ship foundered in 1924. Thelargest documented wooden ships of antiquity include the GreekSyracusia(third century BC; 180 feet), described by Athenaeus; the Roman Isis(second century AD; 180 feet), described by Lucian; Caligula’s“Giant Ship” (first century AD; 341 feet), recovered inmodern times and possibly corresponding to a ship described by Plinythe Elder; and PtolemyIV’s Tessarakonteres (third centuryBC), reported by Plutarch to have been about 425 feet long. This lastship was not designed for cruising in open water.
NewTestament
Fishingin the Sea of Galilee. Severalof Jesus’ disciples worked as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee,and the Gospels document their use of small boats for fishing andtraveling across the sea. Fishing was done with nets thrown both fromboats and from the shore (Mark 1:16, 19). The boats used by fishermenon the Sea of Galilee may have been small enough to pull up onto thebeach (Luke 5:2), or to be nearly capsized by a large catch of fish(Luke 5:7) or by a violent storm (Mark 4:37). They were large enoughto transport several men and even to sleep in (Mark 4:38). Such boatscould be rowed or sailed; in Mark 6:48 the disciples had to resort torowing because of an unfavorable headwind. On one occasion, Jesusstood in a boat to preach to a crowd gathered on the shore (Mark4:1). The Sea of Galilee is about eight miles wide and thirteen mileslong. On several occasions, Jesus traveled by boat across the sea toavoid having to walk long distances around its circumference (e.g.,Matt. 9:1; 14:22; 15:39).
In1986 archaeologists recovered a fishing boat dating to the mid-firstcentury AD on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. The boat had beenscuttled near the shore and was preserved under mud. The “JesusBoat,” as it was dubbed, measures twenty-seven feet in lengthand has a beam seven and a half feet long. Numerous species of woodwere used in its construction and repairs throughout its useful life.While there is no evidence to link the boat to Jesus or hisdisciples, radiometric dating places it in the correct period, and itprovides a likely model of the type of boat portrayed in the Gospels.
Asecond source of information regarding ships and sailing in the NT isthe account in Acts of Paul’s many sea voyages. As in the caseof Jehoshaphat, the Tyrians, Jonah, and Jesus’ disciples, Paullearned firsthand the perils of seafaring in small wooden boats:among his many traumas, along with beatings and stonings, herecalled, “Three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and aday in the open sea” (2Cor. 11:25).
Paul’sjourneys.A survey of Paul’s sea travels on his four journeys gives someidea of the routes that could be taken by a paying traveler in theeastern Mediterranean and Aegean.
1.Paul’s first missionary journey included voyages from Seleuciain Syria to the port of Salamis in Cyprus (Acts 13:4) and from Cyprus(Paphos) to Perga on the southern coast of Asia Minor (13:13). Afterjourneying through the interior, Paul returned to Attalia, where heembarked for the return trip to Syria, presumably passing againthrough the port at Salamis (14:26).
2.The second missionary journey began not with a sea voyage but ratherwith a trek through the interior of Syria and Cilicia, illustratingthat although sea travel was by far a more rapid means of travel, theoverland routes were by no means impossible (Acts 15:39). Paul wouldrepeat this land route during his third journey (19:1). Sea travelwas fast, but when one had plenty of friends along the alternativeland route, a sea journey was considerably less enjoyable. It isduring the second journey that we have the first recorded accounts ofPaul sailing in the Aegean. From Troas in Asia Minor, he sailed theshort distance to Macedonia (16:11), putting in midway at the islandof Samothrace. Apparently, Paul traveled by sea down the coast fromBerea to Athens (17:14). At the conclusion of his second journey,Paul sailed from Corinth to Caesarea, with a stop at Ephesus(18:18–22). Not counting any intervening ports of call notmentioned in the text, this would be the longest single leg of seatravel so far mentioned.
3.The third missionary journey once more began with a long overlandtrip from Syria through Asia Minor; by this time, Paul had manyassociates along the way to visit. Again, he sailed in the Aegean,from Ephesus to Macedonia (Acts 20:1) and back (20:6). At one point,Paul opted to travel overland, from Troas to Assos, while hiscompanions sailed down the coast (20:13). Meeting up with them, hesailed on, hugging the coast of Asia Minor, then sailing south ofCyprus along an open-water route to Tyre. From Tyre, the ship againhugged the Palestinian coast, stopping in several ports before Pauldisembarked at Caesarea (21:7). Paul’s journeys illustrate thevariety of itineraries taken by ships. They were capable of sailingin deep water, but they would also hug the coast when there werereasons to make frequent stops.
4.Paul’s fourth journey, which he made in custody on his way to atrial before the emperor at Rome, was to be the most dangerous. Fromthe account in Acts we can glean a number of details of life at seain the first century AD. The ship bound for Italy was large, and itcarried 276 passengers and crew (Acts 27:6, 37), including soldiersand prisoners, at least one companion of a prisoner (Paul’sfriend Aristarchus [27:2]), a ship’s pilot, and the ship’sowner (27:11). Sailors used celestial navigation (27:20) and tooksoundings in shallow water (27:28). We see also that the ship’scourse could be determined by the direction of the prevailing winds:twice during the journey Paul’s ship was forced to sail to thelee of large islands (Cyprus and Crete)—a longer journey, butthe only option for a ship that was not rigged to sail close-hauled.
Whenextended periods of unfavorable weather were forecast, one option wassimply to put in at a port until conditions improved, preferably in aharbor that was in the lee of an island (Acts 27:12). We learnsomething of the measures that were taken in heavy weather, many ofwhich are still used in modern times: ropes were tied around the hullof the ship to prevent it from breaking up in rough seas (27:17), thelifeboat was brought onto the deck and made fast (27:17), sea anchorswere deployed to keep the bow of the ship oriented into the oncomingwaves (27:7), the rudder was lashed amidships (27:40), valuable cargoand gear were jettisoned (27:19, 38), and, as in the days of Jonah,sailors and passengers prayed for divine deliverance (27:29; see alsothe protective emblems in 28:11).
Whenall other means had been exhausted, a ship could be run aground on asandy beach (Acts 27:39), a measure that would have risked damage tothe boat but saved lives. In the case of Paul’s ship, thedecision to run aground ultimately resulted in the destruction of theship (27:41).
Metaphorsand illustrations.Several NT authors draw illustrations from the nautical world. Jameslikens the harmful power of evil speech to the rudder of a ship:although it is a small device, by it the pilot can control a greatship (James 3:4–5). Elsewhere, he compares the doubting of theunwise person to being lost at sea in a storm (James 1:6; cf. Eph.4:14). In 1Tim. 1:19 the loss of faith and good conscience islikened to a shipwreck. Hebrews 6:19 describes the assurance of God’sfaithfulness as an anchor for the soul.
It is difficult to imagine a world without consistentmetrological systems. Society’s basic structures, from economyto law, require a uniform and accurate method for measuring time,distances, weights, volumes, and so on. In today’s world,technological advancements allow people to measure various aspects ofthe universe with incredible accuracy—from nanometers tolight-years, milligrams to kilograms.
Themetrological systems employed in biblical times span the sameconcepts as our own modern-day systems: weight, linear distance, andvolume or capacity. However, the systems of weights and measurementsemployed during the span of biblical times were not nearly asaccurate or uniform as the modern units employed today. Preexistingweight and measurement systems existed in the contextual surroundingsof both the OT and the NT authors and thus heavily influenced thesystems employed by the Israelite nation as well as the NT writers.There was great variance between the different standards usedmerchant to merchant (Gen. 23:16), city to city, region to region,time period to time period, even despite the commands to use honestscales and honest weights (Lev. 19:35–36; Deut. 25:13–15;Prov. 11:1; 16:11; 20:23; Ezek. 45:10).
Furthermore,inconsistencies and contradictions exist within the written recordsas well as between archaeological specimens. In addition, significantdifferences are found between preexilic and postexilic measurementsin the biblical texts, and an attempt at merging dry capacity andliquid volume measurements further complicated the issue. This is tobe expected, especially when we consider modern-dayinconsistencies—for example, 1 US liquid pint= 0.473liters, while 1 US dry pint= 0.550 liters. Thus, all modernequivalents given below are approximations, and even the bestestimates have a margin of error of + 5percent or more.
Weights
Weightsin biblical times were carried in a bag or a satchel (Deut. 25:13;Prov. 16:11; Mic. 6:11) and were stones, usually carved into variousanimal shapes for easy identification. Their side or flat bottom wasinscribed with the associated weight and unit of measurement.Thousands of historical artifacts, which differ by significantamounts, have been discovered by archaeologists and thus have greatlycomplicated the work of determining accurate modern-day equivalents.
Beka.Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahsor ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measuremetals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).
Gerah.1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).
Litra.Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight.Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to themodern British pound.
Mina.Approximately 1¼ pounds, or 0.56 kilograms. Equivalent to 50shekels. Used to weigh gold (1Kings 10:17; Ezra 2:69), silver(Neh. 7:71–72), and other goods. The prophet Ezekiel redefinedthe proper weight: “Theshekel is to consist of twentygerahs. Twenty shekels plus twenty-five shekels plus fifteen shekelsequal one mina” (Ezek. 45:12). Before this redefinition, therewere arguably 50 shekels per mina. In Jesus’ parable of theservants, he describes the master entrusting to his three servantsvarying amounts—10 minas, 5 minas, 1 mina—implying amonetary value (Luke 19:11–24), probably of either silver orgold. One mina was equivalent to approximately three months’wages for a laborer.
Pim.Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1Sam. 13:21).
Shekel.Approximately 2⁄5 ounce, or 11 grams. Equivalent toapproximately 2 bekas. The shekel is the basic unit of weightmeasurement in Israelite history, though its actual weight variedsignificantly at different historical points. Examples include the“royal shekel” (2Sam. 14:26), the “commonshekel” (2Kings 7:1), and the “sanctuary shekel,”which was equivalent to 20 gerahs (e.g., Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25;Num. 3:47). Because it was used to weigh out silver or gold, theshekel also functioned as a common monetary unit in the NT world.
Talent.Approximately 75 pounds, or 34 kilograms. Equivalent to approximately60 minas. Various metals were weighed using talents: gold (Exod.25:39; 37:24; 1Chron. 20:2), silver (Exod. 38:27; 1Kings20:39; 2Kings 5:22), and bronze (Exod. 38:29). This probably isderived from the weight of a load that a man could carry.
Table12. Biblical Weights and Measures and Their Modern Equivalents:
Weights
Beka– 10 geraahs; ½ shekel = 1/5 ounce = 5.6 grams
Gerah– 1/10 beka; 1/20 shekel = 1/50 ounce = 0.56 grams
Litra– 12 ounces = 340 grams
Mina– 50 shekels = 1 ¼ pounds = 0.56 kilograms
Pim– 2/3 shekel = 1/3 ounce = 9.3 grams
Shekel– 2 bekas; 20 gerahs = 2/5 ounce = 11 grams
Talent– 60 minas = 75 pounds = 34 kilograms
Linearmeasurements
Cubit– 6 handbreadths = 18 inches = 45.7 centimeters
Day’sjourney = 20-25 miles = 32-40 kilometerse
Fingerbreadth– ¼ handbreadth = ¾ inch = 1.9 centimeterse
Handbreadth– 1/6 cubit = 3 inches = 7.6 centimeters
Milion– 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers
Orguia– 1/100 stadion = 5 feet 11 inches = 1.8 meters
Reed/rod– 108 inches = 274 centimeters
Sabbathday’s journey – 2,000 cubits = ¾ mile = 1.2kilometers
Span– 3 handbreadths = 9 inches = 22.8 centimeters
Stadion– 100 orguiai = 607 feet = 185 meters
Capacity
Cab– 1 omer = ½ gallon = 1.9 liters
Choinix– ¼ gallon = 0.9 liters
Cor– 1 homer; 10 ephahs = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Ephah– 10 omers; 1/10 homer = 3/5 bushel; 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Homer– 10 ephahs; 1 cor = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Koros– 10 bushels; 95 gallons – 360 liters
Omer– 1/10 ephah; 1/100 homer = 2 quarts = 1.9 liters
Saton– 1 seah = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
Seah– 1/3 ephah; 1 saton = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
LiquidVolume
Bath– 1 ephah = 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Batos– 8 gallons = 30.3 liters
Hin– 1/6 bath; 12 logs = 1 gallon; 4 quarts = 3.8 liters
Log– 1/72 bath; 1/12 hin = 1/3 quart = 0.3 liters
Metretes– 10 gallons = 37.8 literes
LinearMeasurements
Linearmeasurements were based upon readily available natural measurementssuch as the distance between the elbow and the hand or between thethumb and the little finger. While convenient, this method ofmeasurement gave rise to significant inconsistencies.
Cubit.Approximately 18 inches, or 45.7 centimeters. Equivalent to 6handbreadths. The standard biblical measure of linear distance, asthe shekel is the standard measurement of weight. The distance fromthe elbow to the outstretched fingertip. Used to describe height,width, length (Exod. 25:10), distance (John 21:8), and depth (Gen.7:20). Use of the cubit is ancient. For simple and approximateconversion into modern units, divide the number of cubits in half formeters, then multiply the number of meters by 3 to arrive at feet.
1cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths
Day’sjourney.An approximate measure of distance equivalent to about 20–25miles, or 32–40 kilometers. Several passages reference a singleor multiple days’ journey as a description of the distancetraveled or the distance between two points: “a day’sjourney” (Num. 11:31; 1Kings 19:4), “a three-dayjourney” (Gen. 30:36; Exod. 3:18; 8:27; Jon. 3:3), “sevendays” (Gen. 31:23), and “eleven days” (Deut. 1:2).After visiting Jerusalem for Passover, Jesus’ parents journeyedfor a day (Luke 2:44) before realizing that he was not with them.
Fingerbreadth.The width of the finger, or ¼ of a handbreadth, approximately¾ inch, or 1.9 centimeters. The fingerbreadth was thebeginning building block of the biblical metrological system forlinear measurements. Used only once in the Scriptures, to describethe bronze pillars (Jer. 52:21).
Handbreadth.Approximately 3 inches, or 7.6 centimeters. Equivalent to 1/6 cubit,or four fingerbreadths. Probably the width at the base of the fourfingers. A short measure of length, thus compared to a human’sbrief life (Ps. 39:5). Also the width of the rim on the bread table(Exod. 25:25) and the thickness of the bronze Sea (1Kings7:26).
Milion.Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration ofRoman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”
Orguia.Approximately 5 feet 11 inches, or 1.8 meters. Also translated as“fathom.” A Greek unit of measurement. Probably thedistance between outstretched fingertip to fingertip. Used to measurethe depth of water (Acts 27:28).
Reed/rod.Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a generalterm for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance(Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).
Sabbathday’s journey.Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About2,000 cubits.
Span.Approximately 9 inches, or 22.8 centimeters. Equivalent to threehandbreadths, and ½ cubit. The distance from outstretchedthumb tip to little-finger tip. The length and width of the priest’sbreastpiece (Exod. 28:16).
Stadion.Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai.Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13;John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).
LandArea
Seed.The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis ofhow much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1Kings18:32).
Yoke.Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. Inbiblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animalscould plow in one day (1Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).
Capacity
Cab.Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer.Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria(2Kings 6:25).
Choinix.Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement,mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).
Cor.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equal to thehomer, and to 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularlyof flour and grains (1Kings 4:22; 1Kings 5:11; 2Chron.2:10; 27:5; Ezra 7:22). In the LXX, cor is also a measure of liquidvolume, particularly oil (1Kings 5:11; 2Chron. 2:10; Ezra45:14).
Ephah.Approximately 3⁄5 bushel (6 gallons, or 22.7 liters).Equivalent to 10 omers, or 1⁄10 homer. Used for measuring flourand grains (e.g., Exod. 29:40; Lev. 6:20). Isaiah prophesied a day ofreduced agricultural yield, when a homer of seed would produce onlyan ephah of grain (Isa. 5:10). The ephah was equal in size to thebath (Ezek. 45:11), which typically was used for liquid measurements.
Homer.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equivalent to1 cor, or 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularly ofvarious grains (Lev. 27:16; Isa. 5:10; Ezek. 45:11, 13–14; Hos.3:2). This is probably a natural measure of the load that a donkeycan carry, in the range of 90 kilograms. There may have existed adirect link between capacity and monetary value, given Lev. 27:16:“fifty shekels of silver to a homer of barley seed.” Alogical deduction of capacity and cost based on known equivalencesmight look something like this:
1homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1 omer = 1 beka
Koros.Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measureof grain (Luke 16:7).
Omer.Approximately 2 quarts, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄10ephah, 1⁄100 homer (Ezek. 45:11). Used by Israel in themeasurement and collection of manna in the wilderness (Exod.16:16–36) and thus roughly equivalent to a person’s dailyfood ration.
Saton.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. Themeasurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven(Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).
Seah.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah,or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various drygoods (e.g., 2Kings 7:1; 1Sam. 25:18).
LiquidVolume
Bath.Approximately 6 gallons, or 22.7 liters. Equivalent to 1 ephah, whichtypically was used for measurements of dry capacity. Used in themeasurement of water (1Kings 7:26), oil (1Kings 5:11),and wine (2Chron. 2:10; Isa. 5:10).
Batos.Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration ofthe Hebrew word bath(see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).
Hin.Approximately 4 quarts (1gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek.4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).
Log.Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture,specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).
Metretes.Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement ofwater at the wedding feast (John 2:6).
It is difficult to imagine a world without consistentmetrological systems. Society’s basic structures, from economyto law, require a uniform and accurate method for measuring time,distances, weights, volumes, and so on. In today’s world,technological advancements allow people to measure various aspects ofthe universe with incredible accuracy—from nanometers tolight-years, milligrams to kilograms.
Themetrological systems employed in biblical times span the sameconcepts as our own modern-day systems: weight, linear distance, andvolume or capacity. However, the systems of weights and measurementsemployed during the span of biblical times were not nearly asaccurate or uniform as the modern units employed today. Preexistingweight and measurement systems existed in the contextual surroundingsof both the OT and the NT authors and thus heavily influenced thesystems employed by the Israelite nation as well as the NT writers.There was great variance between the different standards usedmerchant to merchant (Gen. 23:16), city to city, region to region,time period to time period, even despite the commands to use honestscales and honest weights (Lev. 19:35–36; Deut. 25:13–15;Prov. 11:1; 16:11; 20:23; Ezek. 45:10).
Furthermore,inconsistencies and contradictions exist within the written recordsas well as between archaeological specimens. In addition, significantdifferences are found between preexilic and postexilic measurementsin the biblical texts, and an attempt at merging dry capacity andliquid volume measurements further complicated the issue. This is tobe expected, especially when we consider modern-dayinconsistencies—for example, 1 US liquid pint= 0.473liters, while 1 US dry pint= 0.550 liters. Thus, all modernequivalents given below are approximations, and even the bestestimates have a margin of error of + 5percent or more.
Weights
Weightsin biblical times were carried in a bag or a satchel (Deut. 25:13;Prov. 16:11; Mic. 6:11) and were stones, usually carved into variousanimal shapes for easy identification. Their side or flat bottom wasinscribed with the associated weight and unit of measurement.Thousands of historical artifacts, which differ by significantamounts, have been discovered by archaeologists and thus have greatlycomplicated the work of determining accurate modern-day equivalents.
Beka.Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahsor ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measuremetals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).
Gerah.1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).
Litra.Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight.Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to themodern British pound.
Mina.Approximately 1¼ pounds, or 0.56 kilograms. Equivalent to 50shekels. Used to weigh gold (1Kings 10:17; Ezra 2:69), silver(Neh. 7:71–72), and other goods. The prophet Ezekiel redefinedthe proper weight: “Theshekel is to consist of twentygerahs. Twenty shekels plus twenty-five shekels plus fifteen shekelsequal one mina” (Ezek. 45:12). Before this redefinition, therewere arguably 50 shekels per mina. In Jesus’ parable of theservants, he describes the master entrusting to his three servantsvarying amounts—10 minas, 5 minas, 1 mina—implying amonetary value (Luke 19:11–24), probably of either silver orgold. One mina was equivalent to approximately three months’wages for a laborer.
Pim.Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1Sam. 13:21).
Shekel.Approximately 2⁄5 ounce, or 11 grams. Equivalent toapproximately 2 bekas. The shekel is the basic unit of weightmeasurement in Israelite history, though its actual weight variedsignificantly at different historical points. Examples include the“royal shekel” (2Sam. 14:26), the “commonshekel” (2Kings 7:1), and the “sanctuary shekel,”which was equivalent to 20 gerahs (e.g., Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25;Num. 3:47). Because it was used to weigh out silver or gold, theshekel also functioned as a common monetary unit in the NT world.
Talent.Approximately 75 pounds, or 34 kilograms. Equivalent to approximately60 minas. Various metals were weighed using talents: gold (Exod.25:39; 37:24; 1Chron. 20:2), silver (Exod. 38:27; 1Kings20:39; 2Kings 5:22), and bronze (Exod. 38:29). This probably isderived from the weight of a load that a man could carry.
Table12. Biblical Weights and Measures and Their Modern Equivalents:
Weights
Beka– 10 geraahs; ½ shekel = 1/5 ounce = 5.6 grams
Gerah– 1/10 beka; 1/20 shekel = 1/50 ounce = 0.56 grams
Litra– 12 ounces = 340 grams
Mina– 50 shekels = 1 ¼ pounds = 0.56 kilograms
Pim– 2/3 shekel = 1/3 ounce = 9.3 grams
Shekel– 2 bekas; 20 gerahs = 2/5 ounce = 11 grams
Talent– 60 minas = 75 pounds = 34 kilograms
Linearmeasurements
Cubit– 6 handbreadths = 18 inches = 45.7 centimeters
Day’sjourney = 20-25 miles = 32-40 kilometerse
Fingerbreadth– ¼ handbreadth = ¾ inch = 1.9 centimeterse
Handbreadth– 1/6 cubit = 3 inches = 7.6 centimeters
Milion– 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers
Orguia– 1/100 stadion = 5 feet 11 inches = 1.8 meters
Reed/rod– 108 inches = 274 centimeters
Sabbathday’s journey – 2,000 cubits = ¾ mile = 1.2kilometers
Span– 3 handbreadths = 9 inches = 22.8 centimeters
Stadion– 100 orguiai = 607 feet = 185 meters
Capacity
Cab– 1 omer = ½ gallon = 1.9 liters
Choinix– ¼ gallon = 0.9 liters
Cor– 1 homer; 10 ephahs = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Ephah– 10 omers; 1/10 homer = 3/5 bushel; 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Homer– 10 ephahs; 1 cor = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Koros– 10 bushels; 95 gallons – 360 liters
Omer– 1/10 ephah; 1/100 homer = 2 quarts = 1.9 liters
Saton– 1 seah = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
Seah– 1/3 ephah; 1 saton = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
LiquidVolume
Bath– 1 ephah = 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Batos– 8 gallons = 30.3 liters
Hin– 1/6 bath; 12 logs = 1 gallon; 4 quarts = 3.8 liters
Log– 1/72 bath; 1/12 hin = 1/3 quart = 0.3 liters
Metretes– 10 gallons = 37.8 literes
LinearMeasurements
Linearmeasurements were based upon readily available natural measurementssuch as the distance between the elbow and the hand or between thethumb and the little finger. While convenient, this method ofmeasurement gave rise to significant inconsistencies.
Cubit.Approximately 18 inches, or 45.7 centimeters. Equivalent to 6handbreadths. The standard biblical measure of linear distance, asthe shekel is the standard measurement of weight. The distance fromthe elbow to the outstretched fingertip. Used to describe height,width, length (Exod. 25:10), distance (John 21:8), and depth (Gen.7:20). Use of the cubit is ancient. For simple and approximateconversion into modern units, divide the number of cubits in half formeters, then multiply the number of meters by 3 to arrive at feet.
1cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths
Day’sjourney.An approximate measure of distance equivalent to about 20–25miles, or 32–40 kilometers. Several passages reference a singleor multiple days’ journey as a description of the distancetraveled or the distance between two points: “a day’sjourney” (Num. 11:31; 1Kings 19:4), “a three-dayjourney” (Gen. 30:36; Exod. 3:18; 8:27; Jon. 3:3), “sevendays” (Gen. 31:23), and “eleven days” (Deut. 1:2).After visiting Jerusalem for Passover, Jesus’ parents journeyedfor a day (Luke 2:44) before realizing that he was not with them.
Fingerbreadth.The width of the finger, or ¼ of a handbreadth, approximately¾ inch, or 1.9 centimeters. The fingerbreadth was thebeginning building block of the biblical metrological system forlinear measurements. Used only once in the Scriptures, to describethe bronze pillars (Jer. 52:21).
Handbreadth.Approximately 3 inches, or 7.6 centimeters. Equivalent to 1/6 cubit,or four fingerbreadths. Probably the width at the base of the fourfingers. A short measure of length, thus compared to a human’sbrief life (Ps. 39:5). Also the width of the rim on the bread table(Exod. 25:25) and the thickness of the bronze Sea (1Kings7:26).
Milion.Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration ofRoman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”
Orguia.Approximately 5 feet 11 inches, or 1.8 meters. Also translated as“fathom.” A Greek unit of measurement. Probably thedistance between outstretched fingertip to fingertip. Used to measurethe depth of water (Acts 27:28).
Reed/rod.Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a generalterm for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance(Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).
Sabbathday’s journey.Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About2,000 cubits.
Span.Approximately 9 inches, or 22.8 centimeters. Equivalent to threehandbreadths, and ½ cubit. The distance from outstretchedthumb tip to little-finger tip. The length and width of the priest’sbreastpiece (Exod. 28:16).
Stadion.Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai.Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13;John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).
LandArea
Seed.The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis ofhow much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1Kings18:32).
Yoke.Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. Inbiblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animalscould plow in one day (1Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).
Capacity
Cab.Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer.Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria(2Kings 6:25).
Choinix.Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement,mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).
Cor.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equal to thehomer, and to 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularlyof flour and grains (1Kings 4:22; 1Kings 5:11; 2Chron.2:10; 27:5; Ezra 7:22). In the LXX, cor is also a measure of liquidvolume, particularly oil (1Kings 5:11; 2Chron. 2:10; Ezra45:14).
Ephah.Approximately 3⁄5 bushel (6 gallons, or 22.7 liters).Equivalent to 10 omers, or 1⁄10 homer. Used for measuring flourand grains (e.g., Exod. 29:40; Lev. 6:20). Isaiah prophesied a day ofreduced agricultural yield, when a homer of seed would produce onlyan ephah of grain (Isa. 5:10). The ephah was equal in size to thebath (Ezek. 45:11), which typically was used for liquid measurements.
Homer.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equivalent to1 cor, or 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularly ofvarious grains (Lev. 27:16; Isa. 5:10; Ezek. 45:11, 13–14; Hos.3:2). This is probably a natural measure of the load that a donkeycan carry, in the range of 90 kilograms. There may have existed adirect link between capacity and monetary value, given Lev. 27:16:“fifty shekels of silver to a homer of barley seed.” Alogical deduction of capacity and cost based on known equivalencesmight look something like this:
1homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1 omer = 1 beka
Koros.Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measureof grain (Luke 16:7).
Omer.Approximately 2 quarts, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄10ephah, 1⁄100 homer (Ezek. 45:11). Used by Israel in themeasurement and collection of manna in the wilderness (Exod.16:16–36) and thus roughly equivalent to a person’s dailyfood ration.
Saton.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. Themeasurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven(Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).
Seah.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah,or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various drygoods (e.g., 2Kings 7:1; 1Sam. 25:18).
LiquidVolume
Bath.Approximately 6 gallons, or 22.7 liters. Equivalent to 1 ephah, whichtypically was used for measurements of dry capacity. Used in themeasurement of water (1Kings 7:26), oil (1Kings 5:11),and wine (2Chron. 2:10; Isa. 5:10).
Batos.Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration ofthe Hebrew word bath(see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).
Hin.Approximately 4 quarts (1gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek.4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).
Log.Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture,specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).
Metretes.Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement ofwater at the wedding feast (John 2:6).
Behind the English translation “mercy” liediverse biblical words in Hebrew (khesed, khanan, rakham) and inGreek (charis, eleos, oiktirmos, splanchnon). These words are alsotranslated as “love,” “compassion,” “grace,”“favor,” “kindness,” “loving-kindness,”and so on, depending on context. Hence, a conceptual approach to themeaning of “mercy” is best.
God’sMercy
Mercyas part of God’s character.Mercy is a distinguishing characteristic of the nature of God. God iscalled “the Father of mercies” (2Cor. 1:3 NRSV[NIV: “Father of compassion”]). God is “rich inmercy” (Eph. 2:4; cf. 2Sam. 24:14; Dan. 9:9). God’smercy was demonstrated in his covenantal faithfulness to his people(1Kings 8:23–24; Mic. 7:18–20). God redeemed theoppressed Israelites from slavery under Pharaoh because of his mercy,which was stirred when he heard their groaning and cry for help.Here, the rekindling of God’s mercy toward the Israelites wasdepicted in terms of remembering his covenant with Abraham, Isaac,and Jacob (Exod. 2:23–25). Mercy is a manifestation of God’sfaithfulness to his covenant. Hence, God’s mercy to hiscovenant people never ceases (Pss. 119:132; 103:17).
Godhas absolute sovereignty in electing the people to whom he wills toshow mercy. A classic expression appears in Exod. 33:19: “Iwill have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassionon whom I will have compassion.” Paul quoted this to explainGod’s sovereignty in electing Jacob as the recipient of God’smercy (Rom. 9:13–15). God’s mercy cannot be acquired byhuman effort or desire (Rom. 9:16). God even ordered the Israelitesto show no mercy to the Canaanites because of their corruption andidolatry (Deut. 7:2).
Diverseimages are used to describe God’s mercy. God is compared to aloving father who has compassion on his children (Jer. 31:20; Mal.3:17). “As a father has compassion on his children, so the Lordhas compassion on those who fear him; for he knows how we are formed,he remembers that we are dust” (Ps. 103:13–14). God’scompassion is also compared to that of a nursing mother who feeds herbaby at her breast (Isa. 49:15). The images of the loving father andthe loving mother reflect closely the heart of God’s mercytoward his chosen people. God is especially merciful to the needy,the weak, the afflicted, and the oppressed (Exod. 2:23–24; Ps.123:2–3; Isa. 49:13; Heb. 4:16). God is called “a fatherto the fatherless” and “a defender of widows” (Ps.68:5). Sinners appeal for God’s mercy when they requestforgiveness (Ps. 51:1). “Have mercy on me” is a commonform of expression when the psalmist entreats God for his forgiveness(Pss. 41:4, 10; 51:1). God’s mercy is also shown in his act ofsalvation and blessing (Exod. 15:13; Deut. 13:17–18; Judg.2:18; Eph. 2:4–5).
God’smercy in redemptive history.Redemptive history is a successive demonstration of God’s mercytoward his chosen people. It was because of God’s mercy that hetook the initiative to save fallen human beings (Gen. 3:15). Deathwas the due penalty for Adam and Eve (Gen. 2:17), but God preachedthe good news of mercy that the descendant of the woman would somedaycrush the head of the serpent. In Rev. 20:2 that ancient serpent inthe garden of Eden is identified as “the devil, or Satan,”whose head was crushed by Jesus Christ on the cross and is bound bythe coming Messiah “for a thousand years” and will be“thrown into the lake of burning sulfur” (Rev. 20:2, 10).In spite of God’s judgment on Cain, the first murderer, Godshowed mercy by putting a mark on him so that no one would kill him(Gen. 4:15). As the psalmist later confesses, God proves himself asthe merciful God who “does not treat us as our sins deserve orrepay us according to our iniquities” (Ps. 103:10).
Noahand his family were saved from the judgment of the flood because ofGod’s special mercy toward them (Gen. 6:8). Immediately afterGod confused the languages of human beings because of their challengeto him (Gen. 11:1–9), God showed mercy on Abram, “awandering Aramean” (Deut. 26:5), and designated him to be thefather of his chosen people (Gen. 12:1–3). Jacob’selection originated solely from God’s mercy, as Paul pointedout by quoting Scripture: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated”(Rom. 9:13). The exodus is also the clearest evidence of God’sdemonstration of mercy toward his chosen people (Exod. 2:23–25).They were saved not by their own righteousness but rather by God’smercy on the covenant people, who suffered under the bondage ofPharaoh’s slavery. God’s mercy reached its climax when hesent his only Son, Jesus Christ, to save sinners (Rom. 5:8). It isbecause of God’s mercy that we are saved, not because of ourrighteousness (Titus 3:5).
Christ’sMercy
JesusChrist lived a life full of mercy. He is, in a sense, the bodilymanifestation of God’s mercy. Jesus expressed deep mercywhenever he saw the sick and the lost. The writers of the Gospelsdescribe Jesus’ demonstrations of mercy when he healed theblind, the lame, the deaf, the leprous, the demon-possessed, and thedead (Matt. 9:36; 14:14; 20:34; Mark 1:41; 5:19; 6:34; 8:2; Luke7:13; John 11:33). Jesus especially had compassion on the crowds, whodid not have a spiritual leader, and he compared them to “sheepwithout a shepherd” (Matt. 9:36).
Jesus’ministry of healing and evangelism was motivated by his deep mercyand compassion toward people in physical and spiritual need (Luke4:16–21; cf. Isa. 61:1–2). Whenever the sick appealed tohis mercy, Jesus never refused to dispense it to them (Matt. 15:22;17:14–18). For example, he healed the two blind men whoentreated his mercy (Matt. 20:30–34). When a leper, kneelingbefore him, entreated his mercy, Jesus touched him (risking his ownuncleanness according to the law) and healed him (Matt. 8:2–3).When a centurion asked for Jesus’ mercy on his sick servant, hewas willing to go and heal the sick man (Matt. 8:5–13). Jesus’mercy was aroused especially when he saw people crying for the dead,and even he shed tears (John 11:33–35). When Jesus saw a widowcrying for her dead son during a funeral procession, he comforted andhad compassion on her and made her son alive (Luke 7:12–15).
Accordingto Heb. 2:17–18, Jesus became “a merciful and faithfulhigh priest” to make atonement for the sins of his people. Heis also compared to the high priest who is able to sympathize withour weaknesses because he “has been tempted in every way, justas we are” (Heb. 4:15). His high priestly work on earth washighlighted in terms of his ministry of mercy toward his people. LikeGod’s mercy, Jesus’ mercy was shown in his actions ofsalvation (Luke 19:10; Eph. 5:2; 1Tim. 1:14–16; Titus3:4–7), of blessing (Mark 10:13–16), and of forgiveness(Mark 2:10; Luke 23:34). Paul’s personal experience led him toconfess, “He saved us, not because of righteous things we haddone, but because of his mercy” (Titus 3:5). Jesus’character of mercy was most vividly manifested on the cross when heprayed for the forgiveness of the crucifying soldiers and the cursingcrowds (Luke 23:33–37).
HumanResponse to God’s Mercy
Whatis the proper response to God’s mercy and compassion? Godexpects believers to show the same kind of mercy toward other people.One of the best examples is the parable of the unmerciful servant(Matt. 18:23–35). The central focus of this parable is on theunmerciful servant, to whom a tremendous mercy is shown by the king,but who refuses to show a little mercy to his fellow servant. Theparable concludes with the king’s statement that no mercy willbe shown to those who do not show mercy and forgiveness to others.Hence, a forgiving attitude is a must for believers, who havereceived immeasurable mercy from God when he forgave their sins atthe time of repentance. The Lord’s Prayer also includes thebeliever’s forgiveness of others as being inseparably linked tothe request for forgiveness from God (Matt. 6:12). Jesus affirms thisidea in a subsequent statement: “For if you forgive otherpeople when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will alsoforgive you. But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Fatherwill not forgive your sins” (6:14–15).
Mercyis one of the eight blessings in the Beatitudes: “Blessed arethe merciful, for they will be shown mercy” (Matt. 5:7). Jesus’response to the critical Pharisees reveals that our merciful lifeshould precede our religious life (9:13). According to the parable ofthe good Samaritan (Luke 10:25–37), the true neighbor is theone who shows mercy to the afflicted. Its conclusion, “Go anddo likewise” (10:37), requires believers to show mercy to theirsuffering neighbors. At the last judgment the righteous arecharacterized by their lives of showing mercy to the hungry, thethirsty, the stranger, the unclothed, the sick, and the imprisoned(Matt. 25:37–40). In Luke 6:36, Jesus summarizes the law ofmercy: “Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.”According to James, “judgment without mercy will be shown toanyone who has not been merciful”; however, “mercytriumphs over judgment” (James 2:12–13). And according tothe prophets, a merciless life is characteristic of godless people(Isa. 13:18; Jer. 6:23; 21:7; 50:42; Amos 1:11–12).
Itis by God’s mercy that believers can persevere during the timeof suffering (2Cor. 4:1). Their prayer is the channel throughwhich they draw God’s mercy. Hence, the writer of Hebrewsexhorts believers to “approach God’s throne of grace withconfidence, so that we may receive mercy” (Heb. 4:16).
It is difficult to imagine a world without consistentmetrological systems. Society’s basic structures, from economyto law, require a uniform and accurate method for measuring time,distances, weights, volumes, and so on. In today’s world,technological advancements allow people to measure various aspects ofthe universe with incredible accuracy—from nanometers tolight-years, milligrams to kilograms.
Themetrological systems employed in biblical times span the sameconcepts as our own modern-day systems: weight, linear distance, andvolume or capacity. However, the systems of weights and measurementsemployed during the span of biblical times were not nearly asaccurate or uniform as the modern units employed today. Preexistingweight and measurement systems existed in the contextual surroundingsof both the OT and the NT authors and thus heavily influenced thesystems employed by the Israelite nation as well as the NT writers.There was great variance between the different standards usedmerchant to merchant (Gen. 23:16), city to city, region to region,time period to time period, even despite the commands to use honestscales and honest weights (Lev. 19:35–36; Deut. 25:13–15;Prov. 11:1; 16:11; 20:23; Ezek. 45:10).
Furthermore,inconsistencies and contradictions exist within the written recordsas well as between archaeological specimens. In addition, significantdifferences are found between preexilic and postexilic measurementsin the biblical texts, and an attempt at merging dry capacity andliquid volume measurements further complicated the issue. This is tobe expected, especially when we consider modern-dayinconsistencies—for example, 1 US liquid pint= 0.473liters, while 1 US dry pint= 0.550 liters. Thus, all modernequivalents given below are approximations, and even the bestestimates have a margin of error of + 5percent or more.
Weights
Weightsin biblical times were carried in a bag or a satchel (Deut. 25:13;Prov. 16:11; Mic. 6:11) and were stones, usually carved into variousanimal shapes for easy identification. Their side or flat bottom wasinscribed with the associated weight and unit of measurement.Thousands of historical artifacts, which differ by significantamounts, have been discovered by archaeologists and thus have greatlycomplicated the work of determining accurate modern-day equivalents.
Beka.Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahsor ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measuremetals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).
Gerah.1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).
Litra.Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight.Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to themodern British pound.
Mina.Approximately 1¼ pounds, or 0.56 kilograms. Equivalent to 50shekels. Used to weigh gold (1Kings 10:17; Ezra 2:69), silver(Neh. 7:71–72), and other goods. The prophet Ezekiel redefinedthe proper weight: “Theshekel is to consist of twentygerahs. Twenty shekels plus twenty-five shekels plus fifteen shekelsequal one mina” (Ezek. 45:12). Before this redefinition, therewere arguably 50 shekels per mina. In Jesus’ parable of theservants, he describes the master entrusting to his three servantsvarying amounts—10 minas, 5 minas, 1 mina—implying amonetary value (Luke 19:11–24), probably of either silver orgold. One mina was equivalent to approximately three months’wages for a laborer.
Pim.Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1Sam. 13:21).
Shekel.Approximately 2⁄5 ounce, or 11 grams. Equivalent toapproximately 2 bekas. The shekel is the basic unit of weightmeasurement in Israelite history, though its actual weight variedsignificantly at different historical points. Examples include the“royal shekel” (2Sam. 14:26), the “commonshekel” (2Kings 7:1), and the “sanctuary shekel,”which was equivalent to 20 gerahs (e.g., Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25;Num. 3:47). Because it was used to weigh out silver or gold, theshekel also functioned as a common monetary unit in the NT world.
Talent.Approximately 75 pounds, or 34 kilograms. Equivalent to approximately60 minas. Various metals were weighed using talents: gold (Exod.25:39; 37:24; 1Chron. 20:2), silver (Exod. 38:27; 1Kings20:39; 2Kings 5:22), and bronze (Exod. 38:29). This probably isderived from the weight of a load that a man could carry.
Table12. Biblical Weights and Measures and Their Modern Equivalents:
Weights
Beka– 10 geraahs; ½ shekel = 1/5 ounce = 5.6 grams
Gerah– 1/10 beka; 1/20 shekel = 1/50 ounce = 0.56 grams
Litra– 12 ounces = 340 grams
Mina– 50 shekels = 1 ¼ pounds = 0.56 kilograms
Pim– 2/3 shekel = 1/3 ounce = 9.3 grams
Shekel– 2 bekas; 20 gerahs = 2/5 ounce = 11 grams
Talent– 60 minas = 75 pounds = 34 kilograms
Linearmeasurements
Cubit– 6 handbreadths = 18 inches = 45.7 centimeters
Day’sjourney = 20-25 miles = 32-40 kilometerse
Fingerbreadth– ¼ handbreadth = ¾ inch = 1.9 centimeterse
Handbreadth– 1/6 cubit = 3 inches = 7.6 centimeters
Milion– 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers
Orguia– 1/100 stadion = 5 feet 11 inches = 1.8 meters
Reed/rod– 108 inches = 274 centimeters
Sabbathday’s journey – 2,000 cubits = ¾ mile = 1.2kilometers
Span– 3 handbreadths = 9 inches = 22.8 centimeters
Stadion– 100 orguiai = 607 feet = 185 meters
Capacity
Cab– 1 omer = ½ gallon = 1.9 liters
Choinix– ¼ gallon = 0.9 liters
Cor– 1 homer; 10 ephahs = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Ephah– 10 omers; 1/10 homer = 3/5 bushel; 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Homer– 10 ephahs; 1 cor = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Koros– 10 bushels; 95 gallons – 360 liters
Omer– 1/10 ephah; 1/100 homer = 2 quarts = 1.9 liters
Saton– 1 seah = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
Seah– 1/3 ephah; 1 saton = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
LiquidVolume
Bath– 1 ephah = 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Batos– 8 gallons = 30.3 liters
Hin– 1/6 bath; 12 logs = 1 gallon; 4 quarts = 3.8 liters
Log– 1/72 bath; 1/12 hin = 1/3 quart = 0.3 liters
Metretes– 10 gallons = 37.8 literes
LinearMeasurements
Linearmeasurements were based upon readily available natural measurementssuch as the distance between the elbow and the hand or between thethumb and the little finger. While convenient, this method ofmeasurement gave rise to significant inconsistencies.
Cubit.Approximately 18 inches, or 45.7 centimeters. Equivalent to 6handbreadths. The standard biblical measure of linear distance, asthe shekel is the standard measurement of weight. The distance fromthe elbow to the outstretched fingertip. Used to describe height,width, length (Exod. 25:10), distance (John 21:8), and depth (Gen.7:20). Use of the cubit is ancient. For simple and approximateconversion into modern units, divide the number of cubits in half formeters, then multiply the number of meters by 3 to arrive at feet.
1cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths
Day’sjourney.An approximate measure of distance equivalent to about 20–25miles, or 32–40 kilometers. Several passages reference a singleor multiple days’ journey as a description of the distancetraveled or the distance between two points: “a day’sjourney” (Num. 11:31; 1Kings 19:4), “a three-dayjourney” (Gen. 30:36; Exod. 3:18; 8:27; Jon. 3:3), “sevendays” (Gen. 31:23), and “eleven days” (Deut. 1:2).After visiting Jerusalem for Passover, Jesus’ parents journeyedfor a day (Luke 2:44) before realizing that he was not with them.
Fingerbreadth.The width of the finger, or ¼ of a handbreadth, approximately¾ inch, or 1.9 centimeters. The fingerbreadth was thebeginning building block of the biblical metrological system forlinear measurements. Used only once in the Scriptures, to describethe bronze pillars (Jer. 52:21).
Handbreadth.Approximately 3 inches, or 7.6 centimeters. Equivalent to 1/6 cubit,or four fingerbreadths. Probably the width at the base of the fourfingers. A short measure of length, thus compared to a human’sbrief life (Ps. 39:5). Also the width of the rim on the bread table(Exod. 25:25) and the thickness of the bronze Sea (1Kings7:26).
Milion.Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration ofRoman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”
Orguia.Approximately 5 feet 11 inches, or 1.8 meters. Also translated as“fathom.” A Greek unit of measurement. Probably thedistance between outstretched fingertip to fingertip. Used to measurethe depth of water (Acts 27:28).
Reed/rod.Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a generalterm for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance(Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).
Sabbathday’s journey.Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About2,000 cubits.
Span.Approximately 9 inches, or 22.8 centimeters. Equivalent to threehandbreadths, and ½ cubit. The distance from outstretchedthumb tip to little-finger tip. The length and width of the priest’sbreastpiece (Exod. 28:16).
Stadion.Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai.Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13;John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).
LandArea
Seed.The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis ofhow much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1Kings18:32).
Yoke.Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. Inbiblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animalscould plow in one day (1Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).
Capacity
Cab.Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer.Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria(2Kings 6:25).
Choinix.Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement,mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).
Cor.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equal to thehomer, and to 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularlyof flour and grains (1Kings 4:22; 1Kings 5:11; 2Chron.2:10; 27:5; Ezra 7:22). In the LXX, cor is also a measure of liquidvolume, particularly oil (1Kings 5:11; 2Chron. 2:10; Ezra45:14).
Ephah.Approximately 3⁄5 bushel (6 gallons, or 22.7 liters).Equivalent to 10 omers, or 1⁄10 homer. Used for measuring flourand grains (e.g., Exod. 29:40; Lev. 6:20). Isaiah prophesied a day ofreduced agricultural yield, when a homer of seed would produce onlyan ephah of grain (Isa. 5:10). The ephah was equal in size to thebath (Ezek. 45:11), which typically was used for liquid measurements.
Homer.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equivalent to1 cor, or 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularly ofvarious grains (Lev. 27:16; Isa. 5:10; Ezek. 45:11, 13–14; Hos.3:2). This is probably a natural measure of the load that a donkeycan carry, in the range of 90 kilograms. There may have existed adirect link between capacity and monetary value, given Lev. 27:16:“fifty shekels of silver to a homer of barley seed.” Alogical deduction of capacity and cost based on known equivalencesmight look something like this:
1homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1 omer = 1 beka
Koros.Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measureof grain (Luke 16:7).
Omer.Approximately 2 quarts, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄10ephah, 1⁄100 homer (Ezek. 45:11). Used by Israel in themeasurement and collection of manna in the wilderness (Exod.16:16–36) and thus roughly equivalent to a person’s dailyfood ration.
Saton.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. Themeasurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven(Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).
Seah.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah,or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various drygoods (e.g., 2Kings 7:1; 1Sam. 25:18).
LiquidVolume
Bath.Approximately 6 gallons, or 22.7 liters. Equivalent to 1 ephah, whichtypically was used for measurements of dry capacity. Used in themeasurement of water (1Kings 7:26), oil (1Kings 5:11),and wine (2Chron. 2:10; Isa. 5:10).
Batos.Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration ofthe Hebrew word bath(see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).
Hin.Approximately 4 quarts (1gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek.4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).
Log.Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture,specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).
Metretes.Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement ofwater at the wedding feast (John 2:6).
The moral course of the world is simultaneously moving in twodirections. The morally innocent state in which God created humankindwas lost at the fall (Gen.3), and since then, sin, death, andcorruption have reigned over all humanity (Rom. 5:12). In Noah’stime the world so declined morally that God had to wipe out nearlythe entire human race (Gen. 6–8), and the Bible predicts thatsin will come to a similar crescendo before Christ’s return(1Tim. 4:1; 2Pet. 3).
Despitethis moral degeneration, the kingdom that Christ inaugurated in hisfirst coming (Mark 1:15) will make continual progress in renewingcreation until the consummation (Matt. 13:31–33). The newheavens and earth have already broken into the present age at theresurrection of Christ, who is now ruling at the right hand of theFather (Acts 2:33). Therefore, the age subject to death is passingaway, but those in Christ are being renewed daily (1Cor. 7:31;2Cor. 4:16). The Holy Spirit represents their down payment onthe riches that await them at the final redemption (Eph. 1:14).
Common and valuable for food, beans were cooked while green in the pods or after being dried. Dry beans were threshed and winnowed like cereals and other grains. Beans are mentioned twice in the NIV (2Sam. 17:28; Ezek. 4:9).
OldTestament
Phoeniciansand Philistines. Asa people whose ancestral territory lay in the landlocked andtimber-poor highlands of Ephraim and Judah, the Israelites ofbiblical times never achieved prominence in seafaring orshipbuilding. Instead, they relied for their maritime enterprises onalliances with their coastal neighbors, particularly the Phoenicianstates to the north of Israel, who excelled in seafaring and hadaccess to the abundant timber forests of Lebanon. The Phoenicians(the Punics of classical antiquity) were famous in antiquity fortheir seafaring. In biblical times, they traded heavily betweenSyria-Palestine and Egypt and also sailed throughout theMediterranean, establishing colonies as far away as Tunisia(Carthage) and Spain (Cadiz).
Anotherseagoing people prominent in the OT were the Philistines, whose baseof power was to the west of Judah, along the Mediterranean coast. TheBible associates the Philistines with the five cities of Ashdod,Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza. The Philistines were among the SeaPeoples, who came to the Levant from the Aegean beginning in thetwelfth century BC (Amos 9:7; Jer. 47:4).
Theperennial enmity between the Philistines and the Israelites precludedjoint maritime ventures of the sort shared by Israel and thePhoenicians, and the Bible does not describe Philistine maritimeactivities in any depth. Nevertheless, the seagoing nature of thePhilistines is reflected by the fact that their settlements remainedconfined to the coastal region. They never made a systematic attemptto take over the traditionally Israelite and Judahite highlands. Whenthey did venture into the Judean mountains, it was to assert amilitary and political presence among the agrarian Israelites andJudahites rather than to establish permanent settlements andPhilistine population centers. Twelfth-century BC reliefs at MedinetHabu (in the mortuary temple of RamessesIII) depict a navalbattle between the Sea Peoples and the Egyptians. The reliefs includepictures of Philistine ships and sailors.
Israeliteseafaring.One of the rare references to Israelite seafaring describes theDanites and the Asherites in connection with ships and harbors (Judg.5:17; see also Ezek. 27:19). Traditional Danite territory overlappedwith the area of Philistine settlement. Asherite territory overlappedsubstantially with Phoenician territory. It is possible that Judg.5:17 refers to the fact that the Danites and the Asherites worked inthe port cities serving Philistine and Phoenician shipping. Inanother passage, Zebulun is associated with ports (Gen. 49:13). It isnoteworthy that the Israelite coast between Jaffa and Dor (roughlybetween Philistia and Phoenicia) does not have an abundance ofnatural harbors. Later, Herod the Great would build the artificialharbor at Caesarea in the first century BC. The great expense of sucha project—including the construction of over 2,500 feet ofbreakwaters made of underwater concrete, mostly imported fromItaly—suggests the extent of the need for secure harbors inthis region.
Solomon’sfleet.The zenith of Israelite seafaring occurred during the reign ofSolomon. Solomon built a fleet of ships at “Ezion Geber, whichis near Elath in Edom, on the shore of the Red Sea” (1Kings9:26). The purpose of these ships was to bring back gold from Ophir(1Kings 9:28), possibly a location in the Arabian Peninsula, towhich a port on the Red Sea would have offered ready access. Thestory confirms the aforementioned dependence on the Phoenicians inthe area of seafaring: although the ships belonged to Solomon, “Hiram[the Phoenician king of Tyre] sent his men—sailors who knew thesea—to serve in the fleet with Solomon’s men”(1Kings 9:27). The timber for the ships would also have beenimported by Israel from Phoenicia (see 1Kings 9:11). Even atthe height of its power, Israel lacked the human resources to embarkon sea voyages independently of the Phoenicians.
Thesuccess of Solomon’s project, of course, depended not only onwarm relations with the Phoenicians but also on territorial controlof the historically Edomite lands between Judah and the Red Sea. Thisfavorable combination of conditions would come and go throughout thebiblical period, and with it, Israel’s modest presence on theseas. From the Phoenician point of view, cooperation with Israel wasan essential component of gaining access to a Red Sea port, and withit to the products of Arabia, the Horn of Africa, and India. ThePhoenicians, as expansive as their travel was in the Mediterranean,could never independently control the long overland route fromPhoenicia to the Red Sea, since it ran through the territory ofIsrael and Edom. Their best hope was a friendly and powerfulIsraelite ally. This explains the cordial relationship and why Hiramsent not only his sailors to serve Solomon but also craftsmen andsupplies for the construction of the temple (1Kings 5:10–12).Solomon and Hiram jointly operated “a fleet of trading ships”that would return to port every three years bringing “gold,silver, and ivory, and apes and baboons” (1Kings 10:22).
Jehoshaphat.In the mid-ninth century BC, King Jehoshaphat of Judah attempted torepeat Solomon’s feat of launching a fleet from Ezion Geber(1Kings 22:48–49; 2Chron. 20:35–37).According to both accounts, the ships were wrecked before they couldset sail. On several other points, however, the two versions of thestory disagree in ways that bear on questions of the political andeconomic conditions of Israelite seafaring.
Bythis time, Israel and Judah had split into separate kingdoms, withthe northern kingdom of Israel being geographically and politicallycloser to the Phoenicians. The powerful King Ahab of Israel,Jehoshaphat’s contemporary through much of his reign, marriedJezebel, the daughter of the Sidonian (Phoenician) king Ethbaal(1Kings 16:31). According to 1Kings, King Ahaziah ofIsrael (Ahab’s son) proposed to cooperate with Jehoshaphat bysending his own men on the voyage, much as Hiram had assisted Solomonin the previous century. Jehoshaphat rejected the suggestion,possibly indicating a bid for Judean autonomy in an era of northerndominance. According to 2Chronicles, however, Jehoshaphat didcooperate willingly with Ahaziah, and this was the reason that theships foundered in port: God punished the righteous Jehoshaphat fortoo close a relationship with his wicked northern counterpart. In1Kings 22:47 it is mentioned that at the time of Jehoshaphat’sventure there was no king in Edom. As noted, control of the overlandroute between Judah and the Red Sea was necessary for the success ofany voyage originating from Ezion Geber.
Howeverthe contradiction between 1Kings and 2Chroniclesregarding the involvement of Ahaziah is resolved, both versions ofthe story highlight the fact that the port at Ezion Geber commandedthe interest of the Judeans, the Israelites, and the Phoenicians, andits successful operation probably depended on the cooperation of allthree.
Shipsof Tarshish.Several biblical texts, including the stories of Solomon andJehoshaphat, mention “ships of Tarshish” (1Kings10:22 NIV mg.). In a number of contexts, such ships are associatedwith the transportation of metals and metal ores, including iron,lead, tin, gold, and silver (1Kings 10:22; Ezek. 27:12; Jer.10:9). The exact derivation of the term “ships of Tarshish”is uncertain, though it is clear from the descriptions of theircargoes that such ships could travel over long distances. As Ezekielobserves, “The ships of Tarshish serve as carriers for yourwares. You are filled with heavy cargo as you sail the sea. Youroarsmen take you out to the high seas” (Ezek. 27:25–26).
Inthe Table of Nations, Tarshish is listed as a descendant of Javan(Gen. 10:4), along with a number of other seafaring peoples of theeastern Mediterranean (“Javan” indicates the peoples ofthe Aegean and is linguistically equivalent to “Ionia”[see also Ezek. 27:12–22]). Some have suggested, then, that theships of Tarshish should be associated with Tarsus in southeasternTurkey, an area containing silver mines (also the birthplace of Paul[Acts 9:11]). Others have suggested the Phoenician colony ofTartessus in Spain, another metal-producing area. This locationfigures in the interpretation of the identification of thedestination of Jonah as Tarshish (Jon. 1:3): presumably, if he wereavoiding Nineveh and departing from Joppa, he would head towardSpain, in the exact opposite direction, rather than toward Tarsus inCilicia.
Inaddition to these two geographical options, some have attempted toexplain the expression “ships of Tarshish” as derivingfrom the Akkadian term for smelting or refining: perhaps the manyreferences to cargoes of metals indicate that the ships were used totransport metal ore to refining centers. Finally, one scholar hasproposed that the term is related to the Greek word tarsos,meaning “oar.”
Descriptionsof ships and seafaring.Ezekiel, in his lament concerning the Phoenician city of Tyre (Ezek.27), relates a number of details related to Phoenician seafaring. Thepicture largely confirms the descriptions of how Solomon built andmanned his fleet with the assistance of his Tyrian ally. Timber forthe construction of the ship came from Lebanon and Cyprus, amongother places (vv. 5–6). Sails were made from Egyptian linen(v.7), and as noted above, the oarsmen and sailors were fromthe Phoenician city-states (vv. 8–9). Ezekiel goes on to list alarge number of ports of call as well as a dazzling variety ofcargoes (vv. 12–24). Notably, Ezekiel has the Judahites and theIsraelites offering the products of their agrarian economy—“wheatfrom Minnith and confections, honey, olive oil and balm”(v.17)—thus filling out the picture of what theIsraelites gave in exchange for the precious metals and luxury itemsimported by their country from elsewhere.
In1999 archaeologists explored two eighth-century BC Phoenician shipsthat had sunk thirty miles west of Ashkelon. The ships, eachmeasuring about fifty feet in length, contained large cargoes of wineand were headed either for Egypt or for the Phoenician colonies inthe western Mediterranean.
Shipsand sailing figure prominently in the story of Jonah, who boarded aship bound for Tarshish (see discussion above) at Joppa on theMediterranean coast. In the story we see a number of features ofancient sea travel. Jonah paid a fare for his voyage (Jon. 1:3). Notonly the biblical author (see 1:4), but also the presumablynon-Israelite sailors, believed that the great storm was the doing ofa god, and that it could be calmed by appealing to that god(1:6)—although cargo was thrown overboard for good measure.When Paul was caught in a storm in the first century AD, the samestrategies were still in use (Acts 27:38). The religious habits ofancient sailors, particularly their reverence for the gods whocontrolled the stormy seas and thus held their lives in the balance,are illuminated by the discovery of stone anchors in several temples(presumably left by sailors as offerings), including at the portcities of Ugarit, Kition, and Byblos.
Psalm107:23–32 speaks of God’s care of sailors from anIsraelite perspective. In the psalm, those who “went out on thesea in ships,” the “merchants on the mighty waters”(i.e., the deep, open sea), witness firsthand the works of the God ofIsrael, which include both the raising and the quieting of the storm.This passage vividly expresses the terror of being caught in a stormand the great relief and gratitude felt by sailors who reached safehaven.
Noah’sArk
Accordingto the biblical account, Noah’s ark was 450 feet long, 75 feetwide, and 45 feet high (300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits [Gen.6:15]). It had three decks, a roof, and a window. By comparison, theship of Uta-napishti in the Epic of Gilgamesh is described as havingsix decks (and thus seven stories), edges of 180 feet (ten dozencubits) in each dimension, and occupying the space of an acre (arough approximation of the dimensions given). Both ships aredescribed as providing space for the builder’s family and everyliving creature. In the Atrahasis Epic, the boat is roofed, but itsdimensions are not given.
Becauseof the character of Gen. 6–8, it is inappropriate to drawconclusions from the story regarding shipbuilding in historicalantiquity. According to the specifications given in the biblicaltext, Noah’s ark would have been the largest wooden ship inhistory, equaled only by the United States schooner Wyoming,completed in 1909. While the overall length of the Wyoming was also450 feet, nearly 100 feet of length was accounted for in the fore andaft booms, so that the hull length was only 350 feet. Even with earlytwentieth-century shipbuilding technology, its extravagant lengthrendered the Wyoming unseaworthy, and the ship foundered in 1924. Thelargest documented wooden ships of antiquity include the GreekSyracusia(third century BC; 180 feet), described by Athenaeus; the Roman Isis(second century AD; 180 feet), described by Lucian; Caligula’s“Giant Ship” (first century AD; 341 feet), recovered inmodern times and possibly corresponding to a ship described by Plinythe Elder; and PtolemyIV’s Tessarakonteres (third centuryBC), reported by Plutarch to have been about 425 feet long. This lastship was not designed for cruising in open water.
NewTestament
Fishingin the Sea of Galilee. Severalof Jesus’ disciples worked as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee,and the Gospels document their use of small boats for fishing andtraveling across the sea. Fishing was done with nets thrown both fromboats and from the shore (Mark 1:16, 19). The boats used by fishermenon the Sea of Galilee may have been small enough to pull up onto thebeach (Luke 5:2), or to be nearly capsized by a large catch of fish(Luke 5:7) or by a violent storm (Mark 4:37). They were large enoughto transport several men and even to sleep in (Mark 4:38). Such boatscould be rowed or sailed; in Mark 6:48 the disciples had to resort torowing because of an unfavorable headwind. On one occasion, Jesusstood in a boat to preach to a crowd gathered on the shore (Mark4:1). The Sea of Galilee is about eight miles wide and thirteen mileslong. On several occasions, Jesus traveled by boat across the sea toavoid having to walk long distances around its circumference (e.g.,Matt. 9:1; 14:22; 15:39).
In1986 archaeologists recovered a fishing boat dating to the mid-firstcentury AD on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. The boat had beenscuttled near the shore and was preserved under mud. The “JesusBoat,” as it was dubbed, measures twenty-seven feet in lengthand has a beam seven and a half feet long. Numerous species of woodwere used in its construction and repairs throughout its useful life.While there is no evidence to link the boat to Jesus or hisdisciples, radiometric dating places it in the correct period, and itprovides a likely model of the type of boat portrayed in the Gospels.
Asecond source of information regarding ships and sailing in the NT isthe account in Acts of Paul’s many sea voyages. As in the caseof Jehoshaphat, the Tyrians, Jonah, and Jesus’ disciples, Paullearned firsthand the perils of seafaring in small wooden boats:among his many traumas, along with beatings and stonings, herecalled, “Three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and aday in the open sea” (2Cor. 11:25).
Paul’sjourneys.A survey of Paul’s sea travels on his four journeys gives someidea of the routes that could be taken by a paying traveler in theeastern Mediterranean and Aegean.
1.Paul’s first missionary journey included voyages from Seleuciain Syria to the port of Salamis in Cyprus (Acts 13:4) and from Cyprus(Paphos) to Perga on the southern coast of Asia Minor (13:13). Afterjourneying through the interior, Paul returned to Attalia, where heembarked for the return trip to Syria, presumably passing againthrough the port at Salamis (14:26).
2.The second missionary journey began not with a sea voyage but ratherwith a trek through the interior of Syria and Cilicia, illustratingthat although sea travel was by far a more rapid means of travel, theoverland routes were by no means impossible (Acts 15:39). Paul wouldrepeat this land route during his third journey (19:1). Sea travelwas fast, but when one had plenty of friends along the alternativeland route, a sea journey was considerably less enjoyable. It isduring the second journey that we have the first recorded accounts ofPaul sailing in the Aegean. From Troas in Asia Minor, he sailed theshort distance to Macedonia (16:11), putting in midway at the islandof Samothrace. Apparently, Paul traveled by sea down the coast fromBerea to Athens (17:14). At the conclusion of his second journey,Paul sailed from Corinth to Caesarea, with a stop at Ephesus(18:18–22). Not counting any intervening ports of call notmentioned in the text, this would be the longest single leg of seatravel so far mentioned.
3.The third missionary journey once more began with a long overlandtrip from Syria through Asia Minor; by this time, Paul had manyassociates along the way to visit. Again, he sailed in the Aegean,from Ephesus to Macedonia (Acts 20:1) and back (20:6). At one point,Paul opted to travel overland, from Troas to Assos, while hiscompanions sailed down the coast (20:13). Meeting up with them, hesailed on, hugging the coast of Asia Minor, then sailing south ofCyprus along an open-water route to Tyre. From Tyre, the ship againhugged the Palestinian coast, stopping in several ports before Pauldisembarked at Caesarea (21:7). Paul’s journeys illustrate thevariety of itineraries taken by ships. They were capable of sailingin deep water, but they would also hug the coast when there werereasons to make frequent stops.
4.Paul’s fourth journey, which he made in custody on his way to atrial before the emperor at Rome, was to be the most dangerous. Fromthe account in Acts we can glean a number of details of life at seain the first century AD. The ship bound for Italy was large, and itcarried 276 passengers and crew (Acts 27:6, 37), including soldiersand prisoners, at least one companion of a prisoner (Paul’sfriend Aristarchus [27:2]), a ship’s pilot, and the ship’sowner (27:11). Sailors used celestial navigation (27:20) and tooksoundings in shallow water (27:28). We see also that the ship’scourse could be determined by the direction of the prevailing winds:twice during the journey Paul’s ship was forced to sail to thelee of large islands (Cyprus and Crete)—a longer journey, butthe only option for a ship that was not rigged to sail close-hauled.
Whenextended periods of unfavorable weather were forecast, one option wassimply to put in at a port until conditions improved, preferably in aharbor that was in the lee of an island (Acts 27:12). We learnsomething of the measures that were taken in heavy weather, many ofwhich are still used in modern times: ropes were tied around the hullof the ship to prevent it from breaking up in rough seas (27:17), thelifeboat was brought onto the deck and made fast (27:17), sea anchorswere deployed to keep the bow of the ship oriented into the oncomingwaves (27:7), the rudder was lashed amidships (27:40), valuable cargoand gear were jettisoned (27:19, 38), and, as in the days of Jonah,sailors and passengers prayed for divine deliverance (27:29; see alsothe protective emblems in 28:11).
Whenall other means had been exhausted, a ship could be run aground on asandy beach (Acts 27:39), a measure that would have risked damage tothe boat but saved lives. In the case of Paul’s ship, thedecision to run aground ultimately resulted in the destruction of theship (27:41).
Metaphorsand illustrations.Several NT authors draw illustrations from the nautical world. Jameslikens the harmful power of evil speech to the rudder of a ship:although it is a small device, by it the pilot can control a greatship (James 3:4–5). Elsewhere, he compares the doubting of theunwise person to being lost at sea in a storm (James 1:6; cf. Eph.4:14). In 1Tim. 1:19 the loss of faith and good conscience islikened to a shipwreck. Hebrews 6:19 describes the assurance of God’sfaithfulness as an anchor for the soul.
Covenant is one of the most significant concepts in thebiblical material that affects our understanding of God, hisrelationship with his people (past, present, and future), and thestructure and message of his word. Since the covenant concept is nota unique biblical idea, comparative literature from the world of theScriptures has enriched our understanding of the nature and thefunction of covenant. This article highlights the covenant conceptand the genre of covenant and provides a brief overview of the majorbiblical covenants.
Terminology
Defining“covenant.”What is a covenant (Heb. berit)? Most dictionaries refer to it as apact/compact or an agreement. Although there is some uncertaintyregarding the etymology of berit, the two most commonly suggestedetymological derivations are from the Akkadian burru, which refers tothe establishment of a legal situation by a testimony with an oath,or the Akkadian bittu, often translated as “to bind, fetter.”The NT counterpart word is diathēkē, defined as a “legaldisposition of personal goods.” Interestingly, this NT term isused in reference to the initiative of one person who establishes theterms and provisions of the relationship, which is in keeping withunilateral OT covenants. Some OT dictionaries list the “covenant”root with the root for the word “to eat,” perhapsassociating the covenant with a covenant meal.
Ifthe concept of binding best represents the covenant terminology, thenthe covenant is something that binds parties together or obligatesone party to the other. Although there are legal implicationsassociated with covenant, the relational aspect of covenant shouldnot be overlooked. A covenant is best understood as a relationshipwith related legalities. Marriage, for example, is a covenant thatestablishes and defines a relationship. This perhaps explains why Godchose from the realm of relationships among humans the covenantmetaphor to establish and communicate his intent in divine-humanrelationships. The concept of a covenant relationship between God andpeople is uniquely developed in the biblical material.
Somecovenants are between persons of equal status (parity treaties);others are between a master and a servant (suzerainty treaties),between nations, between clans, and between a husband and a wife(Mal. 2:14). To “cut a covenant” at any level of societyimplies a solemn commitment to a relationship. Hittite treatiesillustrate reports of covenant commitments that include a record ofnegotiations, formulations of terms, a statement that the act ofcovenant making actually happened, and a closure of negotiations withsolemn ratification of the terms.
Themost significant covenant relationship in the biblical material isthe one between God and humankind. The uniqueness of Israel’scovenant relationship with Yahweh in contrast to all surroundingnations is established on the basis of Deut. 32:8–9. AlthoughYahweh gave the nations their inheritance, he selected Israel for hisown personal care; he established a relationship with the nationindependent of and prior to the nation’s association with hisland. This was a unique application of the covenant that ran counterto the prevailing Semitic mind-set, which connected deities tospecific geographic territories first and was concerned with theinhabitants of those areas only in a secondary sense. Individual OTbelievers celebrated their relationship with Yahweh and proclaimedhim as the unrivaled universal God (Exod. 15; 1 Sam. 2; Isa.40).
Otherkey terms.In addition to the “covenant” terminology word group,several other key terms fill out our understanding of this importantconcept.
“Oath”is a term used synonymously with “covenant” and functionsat times to describe the making of a covenant. The oath emphasizesthe liability and obligation associated in the relationship (Deut.29:19). The oath can be taken by both parties (Gen. 26:28) or by justone party (Ezek. 17:13).
Theword “testimony” refers to the contents of the twotablets of stone (Exod. 31:18) received by Moses from God at MountSinai. The Ark of the Covenant is also identified by the phrase “arkof the testimony” (Exod. 26:34; 30:6; 31:7 KJV, ESV). Testimonyin the context of the covenant refers to the obligations placed uponthe nation in covenant with Yahweh.
Theterm “word” can be understood in connection with covenantcommunication. The conquest of the land (a covenant promise) isviewed as a performance of the word of God (Deut. 9:5 KJV). Thephrases “establish his covenant” (Deut. 8:18 KJV) and“perform his word” (Deut. 9:5 KJV) are parallel ideaswithin the overall concept of covenant. The sure “word of theLord” to David in 2 Sam. 7:4 can be contrasted withworthless words of the nation used in making a covenant with God(Hos. 10:4).
Torahis a Hebrew term related to covenant. The terms berit and torah arefound in parallel structure in Ps. 78:10. The binding arrangementbetween God and his people is ultimately based upon and regulated bythe instructions of his word. The phrase “Book of the Law”(2 Kings 22:8) has the same covenant implications as the phrase“tablets of the Testimony” (Exod. 31:18 ESV, NASB). Godindicted the priesthood for misguiding the people and causing them tostumble at the law (Mal. 2:5–8) and ultimately to be misguidedin their relationship with him.
Khesedis another Hebrew term that is frequently used with relation to acovenant. Defined as “steadfast covenant loyalty,” it isalso understood as grace, mercy, kindness, loving-kindness. Khesed isthat characteristic of God which causes him to act consistently andfaithfully regarding self-imposed obligations in covenantrelationships despite the failure or success of the other party. Thekhesed of God will never cease (Lam. 3:19–21) because he keepscovenant and mercy (Deut. 7:9, 12). The loyalty of God to David isstated in 2 Sam. 7:14–15 and celebrated in Ps. 89:14, 24,28, 33–34, 49. In contrast, the people are indicted for theirlack of loyalty (Hos. 4:1).
Commonphrases. Themost common covenant-making phrase is “to cut a covenant.”Two possible practices lie behind this phrase. The first reflects apractice in Mesopotamia and Syria, cutting a covenant into a tabletwith a stylus. This may be somewhat similar to what is found in Exod.31:18, where it is said that the two tablets of stone were “inscribedby the finger of God.” The second practice behind this phraseis the cutting of sacrificial animals. The halving of animals waspart of the covenant made with Abraham in Gen. 15:9–18. In asituation of covenant violation God tells Israel that he will treatthem like the calf they cut in covenant making (Jer. 34:17–19).Covenant making is also described as establishing a covenant (2 Sam.23:5), giving a covenant (Gen. 9:12), and erecting a covenant (Exod.6:4).
Faithfulnessand loyalty to a covenant are expressed by several phrases. “Keepa covenant” exhorts the covenant parties to watch, guard,exercise faithfulness to the terms of the relationship established(Exod. 34:7). “Observe a covenant” implies thedemonstration of covenant fidelity in observing and doing (Gen.17:9–10; Exod. 19:5; NIV: “keep my covenant”). Godis obviously faithful in observing the covenant (Deut. 7:9–12).“Remember a covenant” conveys more than just a mentalexercise, especially when God is the subject of the verbal action ofremembering. When God remembers a covenant, he acts with resolve andintervention (Gen. 8:1; 19:29; 30:22; Exod. 2:24).
Covenantinfidelity is expressed by the phrases “break the covenant”(Lev. 26:14–16; Jer. 11:10; 31:32; 33:20–21), “notfaithful” (Ps. 78:37), “violate the covenant”(Deut. 17:2; Josh. 7:11, 15; 23:16), and “forsake the covenant”(Jer. 22:9; cf. Deut. 29:25; 1 Kings 19:10, 14).
TheCovenant Genre
Wenow turn to the form, content, and function of a covenant, or thecovenant genre. There is evidence of a common treaty form used byancient Near Eastern peoples to govern relationships between nationsand tribes. This evidence dates back to the third millennium BC andis derived from literary texts discovered in the ancient Near East.The most helpful contributions to this discussion come from theHittites (1400–1200 BC), the Assyrians (800–600 BC), andthe Babylonians. From this evidence, we are able to identify fourancient Near Eastern arrangements.
1. Theintertribal treaty was a legal arrangement between tribes and clansfor various purposes such as the purchase of land, trading, orpeaceful coexistence. The arrangements made in this format wereequally binding on both parties. A possible biblical example is thearrangement between Abraham and Abimelek in Gen. 21:22–34 orthe arrangement between Abimelek and Isaac in Gen. 26:28.
2.The parity treaty was an arrangement made between kings and princeswho were equal in each other’s eyes. This arrangement involvedmutual participation, as illustrated in the economic relationshipestablished between King Solomon and King Hiram of Tyre in 1 Kings5:1–12.
3.The suzerainty treaty was established between two parties, oneinferior and one superior. The distinctive emphasis of the treaty wason the superior party, the suzerain. In this arrangement the suzerainagrees to make certain provisions for the vassal. He agrees to defendthe vassal in the case of attack, along with permitting the existenceof the vassal nation. In addition, the suzerain has the right to taketribute from the vassal at any time. The vassal, for his part, agreesto a position of servanthood but not slavery. Vassals honor thesuzerain with tribute and material goods.
Thereare six basic parts to the format of this treaty. Many scholarsbelieve that the suzerainty treaty form has influenced the structureof the book of Deuteronomy.
(a) Thetreaty begins with the preamble that identifies the treaty’sauthor/originator (cf. Deut. 1:1–6a; 5:6a, 23–27).
(b) Thesecond part is the prologue, which contains a review of the pastrelationship between the vassal and the suzerain constructed in an“I-Thou” format (cf. Deut. 1:6b–3:29; 2:7;4:32–38). The purpose of this section is to review the previousacts of benevolence demonstrated by the suzerain toward the vassal.The faithfulness of the suzerain to the vassal would perhaps instillsome measure of confidence for entrance into this relationship. InHittite treaties there was often a grace ethic ideology thatcharacterized the prologue and served as a basis of appeal forobedience. The Hittites demonstrated a measure of appreciation forconquered vassals and treated them with dignity by allowing themlimited sovereignty. The Assyrians operated with a power ethic thatmotivated obedience by threatening dismemberment, torture, and evendeath. Yahweh appealed to Israel on the basis of the grace ofredemption (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15) and theprivilege of revelation (Deut. 4:12; cf. Rom. 3:2).
(c) Thestipulations are the third part of the treaty form. These are theexpectations of the suzerain for the vassal (cf. Deut. 4:1–23;6:4–7:2; 10:12–22; 12–26). The stipulations callfor the vassal to be loyal in war, to loyally return politicalrefugees, and to not murmur against the suzerain and his kingdom. Theheart of the stipulation in Deuteronomy is the appeal to “lovethe Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and withall your strength” (6:5), one of the most important verses ofthe OT.
(d) Thedeposit and public reading of the treaty is the next division. Thissection instructs the vassal to place the treaty in his sanctuary anddirects the vassal to publicly read the document from one to fourtimes per year (cf. Deut. 10:1–5; 31:9–13). A regularreading was designed to keep the stipulations before the vassal inorder to nurture respect for the suzerain.
(e) Inthe next part, a list of witnesses, usually gods, are called upon toobserve the covenant and to punish any breach of it (cf. Deut.30:19–20).
(f) Thefinal part of the treaty is a section of blessing and curse. Thissection contains a list of potential rewards for faithfulness andterrifying possibilities of retribution for covenant violations (cf.Deut. 28–29).
4.The royal grant treaty, used in both biblical and secular literature,is somewhat similar to the suzerainty treaty. The distinctivedifference is that the obligation of the grant is not on the vassalbut rather on the suzerain to protect the rights of the vassal. Inthis format the curse is directed against any third party that wouldoppose the vassal or against the suzerain who would act unfaithfullyagainst the vassal.
Covenantsin the Bible
Typesof covenants. Thematerial on covenant form, content, and structure comes into playwhen attempts are made to interpret the major covenants recorded inthe Bible (Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, and new). Initialdiscussions usually revolve around whether these covenants areconditional or unconditional. Although there is merit to thisdiscussion, covenants should also be understood in light of whichparty is bearing the treaty obligation. As described above, theobligation of the suzerainty treaty is upon the vassal to fulfill theexpectations of the suzerain. In the grant treaty the obligation isplaced upon the suzerain to fulfill the treaty promises made to thevassal. There is a sense of conditionality and unconditionality inboth treaty forms.
Onthis basis, the Mosaic covenant is most fittingly understood in lightof the suzerainty treaty. This covenant made at Mount Sinaiestablished Israel as a covenant nation. Yahweh never intended tocreate a relationship with Israel on the basis of this covenant.Rather, he chose this covenant form as the means to regulate hisrelationship with Israel, the nation that he had just graciouslyredeemed. The Mosaic covenant addressed every aspect of Israelitelife. so that the prophetic charges against the nation’stransgressions were considered covenant violations.
TheAbrahamic and Davidic covenants are more like a grant. In theAbrahamic covenant Yahweh is obligating himself to gift Israel withland, seed, and blessing (Gen. 12–17). The halving of animalsin Gen. 15:9–20 resembles a covenant-cutting ceremony in whichYahweh, in the form of a smoking firepot, walks between the animals,obligating himself to the terms of the covenant. In the Davidiccovenant (2 Sam. 7; Ps. 89), Yahweh obligates himself to provideDavid and his descendants a king and a kingdom. The new covenant isfirst referenced by Moses in Deut. 30:6 and then developed moreextensively in Jer. 31:31–33 and Ezek. 36. Scholars debate thenature of this covenant and the promises associated with it. Somedefine it as a grant and speak of it in unconditional terms, whileothers view it as an administrative covenant. The new covenantanticipates a change in the heart of the vassal that ultimatelyfacilitates keeping of the law. The OT Scriptures see this happeningin connection with Israel’s occupation of the land at a futuretime.
Covenantleadership positions. Inaddition to the very specific covenant arrangements made by God inthe OT defining and regulating the life and future of Israel, Godestablished three key covenant leadership positions for the nation:prophet, priest, and king (Deut. 17–18). Their connection withthe covenant is evident from the fact that their origin and functionare detailed in the covenant book of Deuteronomy.
Godprovided a prophet (Deut. 18:9–22) for the nation so that itwould not learn the abominations of the Canaanites and surroundingnations. God desired spiritual integrity for his people andestablished the prophet as his mouthpiece to speak what he commanded(Deut. 18:18–20). The prophet was to be an Israelite who fit aMoses-like pattern (Deut. 18:18–19). The writing and nonwritingprophets often called Israel back to covenant fidelity. They did thisby using legal terminology to illustrate covenant violations, thusestablishing covenant lawsuits against them. Isaiah 1 is a case madeby God against the nation. In this lawsuit God functions as judge,jury, and lawyer.
Thepriest (Deut. 17:8–13; 18:1–8; 33:8–11) had athreefold function within the covenant community. He was a mediatorof people before God and of God before people. This particularfunction of the priesthood was broad and encompassed much of itswork. The priest was a teacher who sought from the Torah resolutionto disagreements between parties (cf. Jer. 18:18). It is also worthnoting that the teaching of the priest preceded sacrifice. Finally,he was a minister of sacrifice. The priest led Israel in worship andsacrifice, giving instruction concerning what was clean and unclean(Lev. 13–15).
Theking was also a provision of the covenant (Deut. 17). Kingship wasnot a divine accommodation to the desire of Israel (1 Sam. 8)but rather a part of the overall covenant plan of God revealed toAbraham (Gen. 17:16). The promise of kingship was reiterated in Gen.35:11; 49:10. The duty of the king involved administration of thekingdom on the basis of the word of God (Deut. 17:18–20; cf.Prov. 29:4, 14).
Covenantin the Old Testament.Covenant is a dominant theme that gives cohesiveness to the structureof the OT and distinguishes the history of Israel. The phrase“covenant history” can be used to describe the biblicalliterature that recounts the events and episodes of Israelite life.It is a macrogenre that characterizes the historical narratives ofthe OT. Although this large literary corpus of historical narrativeshares a covenant perspective, the individual books within thenarrative corpus are noted for the attention they give to variousaspects of the covenant relationship. For example, Gen. 12–50develops the covenant promises of seed and blessing through a numberof subgenres such as genealogies and family stories. Joshua, on theother hand, engages several military subgenres to recount the tensionbetween the promise of land occupation and the responsibility ofIsrael to occupy the land. Covenant history is a realisticpresentation of the tensions associated with the covenantrelationship between Yahweh and the nation of Israel.
Finally,the psalms have a direct covenant connection emphasizing covenantworship. Psalm 119 (esp. vv. 57–64) is filled with covenantterms that relate to God’s word (testimonies, laws, oath,judgments). Marching to the place of worship designated by thecovenant is reflected in the Psalms of Ascent.
Covenantin the New Testament. Althoughthe covenant theme is less pervasive in the NT, its christologicalsignificance is profound. The NT highlights the significant messianicrole of Christ in relation to the covenants. Paul references the newcovenant in both books of Corinthians (1 Cor. 11:25; 2 Cor.3:6). Each celebration of the Lord’s Supper reminds us that theshed blood of Christ is the blood of the new covenant. The newcovenant is cut in connection with or on the basis of his death,burial, and resurrection (1 Cor. 11:25). The writer of the bookof Hebrews gives detailed attention to how the new covenant functionsin contrast to the old Mosaic covenant. The writer explains thatJesus is the guarantor of a better covenant (7:22; 8:6–7).Finally, Paul indicates that we are now considered ministers of thenew covenant ministry (2 Cor. 3:6).
(1)Theeighth descendant listed in the line of Seth and the grandson ofMethuselah, Noah was used by God to preserve the human race throughthe flood. His name means “rest,” chosen because hisfather, Lamech, believed that God would use his son to bring restfrom the toil of life resulting from the fall (Gen. 5:29). Enoch washis great-grandfather, and like him, Noah is described as one who“walked faithfully with God” (Gen. 6:9; cf. 5:22, 24). Hewas the father of Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
Hisstory is told mainly in Gen. 6–9. Because of its greatwickedness, God resolved to destroy the human race. But Noah foundgrace in God’s sight, so God instructed him to build a largeboat as directed and to take aboard provisions for his family as wellas selected representatives of animal life. Noah dutifully obeyed,and his family thus was preserved through the ensuing catastrophe.From them the earth was repopulated (Gen. 10), and Noah was therecipient of various directives for the governance of thepostdiluvian world, often referred to as the Noahic covenant (Gen.9:1–17). Noah’s personal story ends with the curiousepisode of him getting drunk and subsequently cursing a son of Hamfor some offense that Ham committed, the nature of which is describedonly as seeing “the nakedness of his father” (Gen. 9:22ESV, NRSV, NASB). His age at the time of his death is given as 950.
Noahis mentioned two other times in the OT. God cites his promise thatthe “waters of Noah” never again would destroy the earthto affirm his covenant faithfulness to Israel (Isa. 54:9), and inanother text groups Noah together with Job and Daniel as those whocould deliver themselves by their righteousness, but not disobedientIsrael (Ezek. 14:14, 20). In the NT, Jesus cites the conditions inNoah’s day as being representative of conditions at the time ofhis coming (Matt. 24:37–38; Luke 17:26–27). Petermentions Noah twice, once to refer to the spirits of those whoperished in the flood (1Pet. 3:20) and once to use Noah as anexample of God’s ability to deliver his people (2Pet.2:5). Hebrews 11:7 lists Noah as a hero of faith.
(2)Oneof the five daughters of Zelophehad. Their petition for a portion oftheir deceased father’s property helped set a precedent forinheritance law in ancient Israel (Num. 27:1–11; cf. Josh.17:1–6). When it came time for the daughters of Zelophehad tomarry, a further decree was issued that inherited land must not passfrom tribe to tribe (Num. 36).
Geography
Whereasthe principal direction in the modern world is north, in the ancientworld different cultures used a variety of orientations as theysought to describe their relationship to their geographicalenvironment. In Israel the primary direction was determined by thesunrise: east. This is reflected in Hebrew, where the main word usedto refer to east as a direction was qedem, which could also be usedto simply refer to that which was directly ahead or in front of thespeaker (e.g., Ps. 139:5). Elsewhere, east is designated by the termsmizrakh (“rising” [Josh. 11:3]) or mizrakh hashamesh(“rising of the sun” [Num. 21:11]), both of which derivefrom the direction of sunrise. By way of contrast, in Egypt theprimary direction was south, in alignment with the source of the NileRiver.
Theancient world employed the same notion of four cardinal directions,which persists to the present, and the terminology related to thesewas influenced by the choice of primary direction. Thus, in Israelnorth is often designated by “left”; south could bedesignated by “right,” and west by “behind.”In addition, directions could be specified by reference togeographical features found in those directions. North could bespecified by the word tsapon, which was derived from the name of anorthern Syrian mountain (Zaphon); south by negeb, a name for theregion south of Israel (Negev); and west by yam (“sea”),since the Mediterranean Sea lay to the west.
Symbolism
Asidefrom their purely geographical significance, the directions also cameto bear figurative significance. Some caution is warranted inassigning symbolic significance to language, for there is danger ofreading invalid meanings into texts. Furthermore, given the ambiguityinherent in the use of terms to refer to directions, which also havealternate significances, there is danger of assigning a symbolicmeaning to the direction that actually resides in the alternate. So,for example, while yam (“sea”) carries significantsymbolic overtones in the Bible, this association does not appear tohave been extended to encompass the term when used to designate awesterly direction.
Eastand west.Nonetheless, there is, for example, probably some significance in theexpulsion from Eden and progressive movement eastward to the tower ofBabel through Gen. 1–11, followed by a return to the promisedland, which was approached by reversing the easterly migration andreturning toward Eden. Eden itself was said to lie “in theeast” (Heb. miqqedem; Gen. 2:8), although the same Hebrewexpression in Pss. 74:12; 77:5, 11; 78:2; 143:5 means “inancient times,” and there is perhaps a deliberate ambiguity inthe use of the expression in Gen. 2:8. In Isa. 2:6 the east is thesource of influences on the people that lead them astray. Followingthe exile, Ezekiel sees the glory of God returning to the temple fromthe east (Ezek. 43:1–2). Thus, when used symbolically, “east”is often viewed negatively or else may be used to mark a connectionwith distant antiquity (Gen. 2:8; Job 1:3). Any symbolic significanceassigned to west appears primarily to be associated with it being theantithesis of east. The distance between east and west was usedpoetically to express vast distance (Ps. 103:12).
Northand south.North is significant for two primary reasons. First, it is thedirection from which invading armies most often descended upon Israel(Jer. 1:13) as well as from which Babylon’s destruction is saidto come (Jer. 50:3). In light of this, Ezekiel’s vision of Godapproaching from the north strikes an ominous tone of impendingjudgment (Ezek. 1:1–4). Second, in Canaanite mythology theabode of the gods, and specifically Baal, lay to the north, on MountZaphon. Thus, the king of Babylon’s plans in Isa. 14:13 amountto a claim to establish himself as one of the gods. In contrast tothis, Ps. 48:2 pre-sents Mount Zion as supplanting Mount Zaphon andthus implicitly presents Israel’s one God as supplanting theCanaanite pantheon.
Aswith west, there is little symbolic significance associated with thedirection south in the Bible, aside from its use in combination withother directions.
Thefour directions.The four directions (or sometimes just pairs of directions) are usedtogether to describe both the scattering of the Israelites as well astheir being gathered by God back to the promised land (Ps. 107:3;Isa. 43:5–6; Luke 13:29). They are also used together toexpress the extent of the promised land (Gen. 13:14) or else todescribe something that is all-encompassing (1Chron. 9:24).
Mentioned only in the OT in most Bible versions (MSG uses“nose” in the NT as part of English idioms; e.g., Matt.13:57; 21:32), the nose often is referred to in the context ofjewelry, as nose rings for women were a fine adornment in ancientHebrew culture (Gen. 24:47; Ezek. 16:12), in some cases indicative ofextravagance (Isa. 3:16–24). Other times, a stronger partywould direct a weaker party by means of a hook or a cord in theirnose (2Kings 19:28; 2Chron. 33:11; Job 40:24).
TheHebrew word for nose, ’ap, could be used metaphorically foranger, much as English speakers might say that an angry person “hassteam coming out of his nose.” Thus, the NIV’s “[he]became angry” can translate the Hebrew phrase “[his] noseburned” (Gen. 30:2; Judg. 10:7). The same Hebrew term can alsorefer to nostrils. The NIV uses the translation “nostrils”several times in the OT, often in poetry, usually in connection withbreath (Gen. 2:7; 7:22; 2Sam. 22:16 [cf. Ps. 18:15]; Job 27:3)or as a source of smoke (2Sam. 22:9 [cf. Ps. 18:8]; Job 41:20).
TheHebrews also used ’ap to refer to the entire face, normallywhen a person was bowing facedown. In such instances, “boweddown with his face to the ground” translates the Hebrew phrase“bowed down with nostrils [’appayim] toward the ground”(Gen. 19:1; 1Sam. 25:41).
John and the author of Hebrews call Jesus Christ the “onlybegotten,” as traditionally translated (John 1:14, 18; 3:16,18; 1John 4:9; Heb. 11:17 KJV). The epithet, which is a singleword in Greek (monogenēs),signifies being the only one of its kind within a specificrelationship, and therefore, as we find in more recent translations,it may also be translated “one and only Son” (NIV) or“only son” (NRSV). Although the Bible claims that God hasmany humansons and daughters, in various senses he has but one “onlybegotten” Son, who must also be distinguished from the angels,who arealso identified as sons of God (Heb. 1:1–14; seealso Gen. 6:2,4).
Theauthor of Hebrews and Josephus, a first-century Jewish historian,present Isaac as Abraham’s “only begotten son”(Heb. 11:17 KJV; Josephus, Ant. 1.222). But Abraham has two sons, theother one being Ishmael, as the biblical narrative and Paul makeclear (Gen. 16:11–16; Gal. 4:22). The difference is that Isaacwas the only begotten between Abraham and his wife, Sarah, and theone for whom God decided to perpetuate the covenant that heoriginally made with Abraham (Gen. 12:1–3; 15:1–6;17:19). Isaac is presented by early Christians as a type of Christ,and for Paul, he is a type of all the children of the new covenant(Gal. 4:21–31). Nevertheless, through Jesus’ fulfillmentof God’s covenant obligations, many, including the descendantsof Ishmael, will be called “sons of God” (Gen. 17:20;Hos. 1:10, cited in Rom. 9:26; Matt. 5:9; Rom. 8:14, 19; Gal. 3:26;4:6).
Withoutcompromising the uniqueness of his position, the “one and only”Son is happy to share his status before God the Father through faith,by grace, which brings the believer into union with his body, thechurch (Gal. 2:19–20; Eph. 2:1–10; Heb. 2:10). Theconviction that Christ cannot be compared to human children orangels, parts of God’s creation, contributed to the belief ofcomparing Christ only with God, the uncreated.
Before the Enlightenment, the idea that all forms of lifewere created by God went largely unquestioned. That the God of Israelcreated by his word all plants and animals (Gen. 1:11–12,20–25), “breathed ... the breath of life”into the first human (2:7), and created male and female ancestors ofall humankind (1:25–27) was taken as clear expression of thefact that God is the sole source and author of all life (Pss. 36:9;139:13–16; Jer. 17:13). The whole of life—physical,emotional, and intellectual—originates from God himself ascreator of all things. Not only does he create life, but also if Godwithdraws his breath of life, humans return to dust (Gen. 6:17; 7:23;1Sam. 2:6; Job 34:13–15; Ps. 104:29). Since theEnlightenment, questions regarding the origin of life have been takenup by the natural sciences. Philosophical rationalism insists thatall life on earth must have originated from inanimate matter and notfrom a supernatural source.
The words “sacrifice” and “offering”often are used interchangeably, but “offering” refers toa gift more generally, while “sacrifice” indicates a giftconsecrated for a divine being. In biblical Hebrew “sacrifice”is more narrowly equated with the peace offering. All other“sacrifices” are referred to as gifts. Sacrifices wereoffered to honor God, thanking him for his goodness. More important,they enabled persons to be made right with God by atoning for theirsins. Whereas sin upset the fellowship God desired to have withpeople and kindled his wrath, sacrifice restored the relationship.
OldTestament
OTofferings included cereals (whether the grain was whole, ground intoflour, or mixed with other elements), liquids (wine, oil, or water),and animals (or parts thereof, such as the blood and fat). Althoughthe Bible acknowledges that other ancient Near Eastern people hadtheir own sacrificial rites, it rejects them as unworthy of the Godof Israel. The people of God therefore were instructed how tosacrifice properly while at Sinai. Even so, offerings and sacrificesare recorded as taking place before the law was given.
Priorto the law.Cain and Abel brought the earliest offerings. Contrary to a commoninterpretation, Cain’s offering was not rejected because it didnot include blood; the Hebrew word for the brothers’ gifts,minkhah,usually denotes grain offerings. A better conclusion is that Cainonly brought some of his produce (no mention of firstfruits), whileAbel brought the best of the best (the fat portions from thefirstborn of the flock).
Immediatelyafter the flood, Noah built an altar and presented the first burntoffering mentioned in the Bible (Gen. 8:20). That this (and othersacrifices) was received as a “pleasing aroma” indicatesthat God approved of and accepted it. It is significant thatimmediately after the offering, God made a covenant with Noah, hisdescendants, and every living creature. Sacrifices are closelyrelated to covenant relationships, as can be seen in the story ofAbraham enacting a covenant ceremony in Gen. 15 and in Israelreceiving many instructions about sacrifice while at Sinai (cf. Gen.31:43–54).
Sacrificiallaws in Leviticus.Sacrificial laws are found throughout the Pentateuch, the most beingin Lev. 1–7. As Leviticus makes clear, Israel understoodsacrifice to have a number of different purposes. It was a means tobring a gift to God, to express communion with him and others in thecommunity, to consecrate something or someone for God’s use,and to deal with personal uncleanness or sin. These ideas aredeveloped in the descriptions of the different sacrifices that Israelwas required to bring to God. In general, the sacrifices were made ofclean animals raised by the one making the offering or of grain orwine produced by the person. In some cases, the offering wasconnected with the person’s economic ability, a poorer personbeing allowed to present doves or even cereal if a lamb or goat wasunaffordable for a sin offering (Lev. 5:6–13). In all cases,only the best—what was “without defect”—wasto be offered.
Priestas mediator.Three parties were involved in the sacrifices: the worshiper, thepriest, and God. The worshiper—the person who had sinned orbecome unclean in some way—brought an animal to God, laid ahand upon it, and then killed it. Whether the animal’s deathrepresents the death that the worshiper deserves due to sin orwhether the sin is transferred to the animal that bears it instead isunclear. The priest served as a mediator who offered the blood of thesacrifice to God and, in many instances, burned all or part of theoffering. In response to the offering, God, who had graciously giventhe sacrificial system so that those who had sinned could be restoredto fellowship with him, forgave the person. Uniquely in the ancientworld, Israelite sacrifices were not considered magical acts thatcould manipulate God to act on behalf of the worshiper. Presenting animproper sacrifice while exhibiting an improper attitude or motiveresulted in rejection.
Typesof sacrifices.Leviticus introduced five main sacrifices: the ’olah (1:1–17;6:8–18), the minkhah (2:1–16; 6:14–23), theshelamim (3:1–17; 7:11–36), the khatta’t(4:1–5:13), and the ’asham (5:14–6:7). Most ofthese focused on uncleanness or sin. The worshiper who brought suchan offering was not allowed to eat any of it, as it was wholly givento God. Even when priests were allowed to eat part of a sacrifice,their portion was “waved” before God, indicating that itbelonged to him.
1.The ’olah, or burnt offering, is the basic OT sacrificeconnected with atonement for sin (Lev. 1:4). When rightly offered, itwas accepted as “an aroma pleasing to the Lord.” Theworshiper brought a male animal (young bull, sheep, goat, dove, oryoung pigeon) without blemish, laid a hand upon it, and then killedit. After the priest sprinkled some of the blood on the altar, therest was burned up.
2.The minkhah is simply a gift or offering. The Hebrew word is oftenused for a present given to another person or tribute to a ruler.When used of sacrifice, it is usually rendered as “grainoffering” or “meal offering.” A minkhah can, onoccasion, include flesh or fat (Gen. 4:4; Judg. 6:18–21).Considered “an aroma pleasing to the Lord,” it consistedof unground grain or fine flour mixed with oil and incense and waspresented either cooked or uncooked. Part of the offering was burnedas a “memorial portion,” the rest being given to thepriests (Lev. 2:1–3). It usually was accompanied by a drinkoffering—wine poured out on the altar. Grain offeringsfrequently complemented burnt offerings or fellowship offerings. Theshowbread may have been considered a grain offering.
3.The shelamim (NIV: “fellowship offering”) hastraditionally been called the “peace offering,” as theterm is related to shalom. This offering most likely indicated thatthe worshiper was at peace with God and others; all the worshiper’srelationships were whole. Classified into three types, it could beused to express thanksgiving, to signify the fulfillment of a vow, orsimply to denote one’s desire to bring an offering to God outof free will. Only those who made a vow were required to offer ashelamim; the other forms were wholly optional. The worshiper broughta male or female animal (ox, sheep, or goat) without blemish, laid ahand on its head, and slaughtered it. The priest sprinkled its bloodon the sides of the altar and burned the fat surrounding the majororgans. It is described as “an aroma pleasing to the Lord.”
Thisoffering significantly recognized the covenant relationship existingbetween those who shared in it. God received the fatty portions, theofficiating priest received the right thigh, the other priests thebreast, and the remainder was shared among members of a family, clan,tribe, or some other group. According to Leviticus, a thanksgivingoffering was to be eaten on the day it was offered, and a vow orfreewill offering could be eaten within two days. Anything not eatenin the prescribed time period was to be burned.
4.The khatta’t, or sin offering, atoned for the sin of anindividual or of the nation and cleansed the sacred items in thetabernacle that had been corrupted by sin. Since a sin offering couldpurify ceremonial as well as moral uncleanness, people who wereunclean due to childbirth, skin diseases, bodily discharges, and soforth also brought them (Lev. 12–15).
Thekind of animal sacrificed and the sacrificial ritual varied with theoffender and the offense. If a priest or the entire congregationsinned, a bull was sacrificed and its blood was sprinkled before theveil of the tabernacle and on the incense altar in the holy place.The rest was burned, leaving nothing to be eaten. Leaders who sinnedsacrificed a male goat. Its blood was sprinkled on the bronze altar,and the remainder was given to the priest. A commoner brought andslaughtered a she-goat or lamb, the priest sprinkled its blood on thehorns of the altar, and the fat was burned for God and the rest givento the priests. A poor person could bring two doves or pigeons, andthe very poor could bring a grain offering. This differentiationapparently indicated that the sins of some members of the communityhad more serious consequences than others. Those in closest contactwith the tabernacle contaminated it at a deeper level, requiring amore costly sacrifice. The poor were not required to bring more thanthey could afford.
5.The ’asham, or guilt offering, provided compensation for sins.A ram without blemish was sacrificed, its blood was sprinkled on thealtar, and its fatty portions, kidneys, and liver were burned. Therest was given to the priest. In addition, the value of what wasmisappropriated plus one-fifth of its value was given to the personwronged or to the priests.
Altars.According to Leviticus, only the Aa-ron-ic priests could handle theblood or other parts of a sacrifice brought to the altar at thetabernacle. Even so, throughout Israel’s history othersacrificial altars were built. While some of these were illicitlyused for syncretistic practices, others were constructed at God’sinstruction (Josh. 8:30–35; Judg. 6:25–26). Some of thesewere used by priests making rounds so that people from differentareas could sacrifice to God (1Sam. 7:17). Others were used byindividuals who were not priests yet desired to call upon the name ofthe Lord or sacrifice for communal meals. The solitary altars weremainly used for burnt offerings and peace offerings, although grainand drink offerings also were known. Sin and guilt offerings wereoffered only at the tabernacle or temple.
Timesand purposes.The OT regulates a number of different occasions upon which regularsacrifices were to be made. Burnt offerings were presented everymorning and evening (Exod. 29:38–41; Num. 28:1–8).Additional offerings were sacrificed on the Sabbath and the new moon(Num. 28:9–15). Special sacrifices were brought to celebratethe major festivals of the year (Num. 28:16–29:39),particularly the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16). Sacrifices might alsoaccompany requests for safety or deliverance or in response to God’sdeliverance. Thus, burnt and fellowship offerings could be broughtalong with prayers that God would put an end to a plague (2Sam.24:18–25). King David brought burnt offerings and fellowshipofferings when the ark of the covenant was returned after having beencaptured by the Philistines (2Sam. 6:1–19).
Sacrificescould also be made to consecrate people or things for a special task.When the tabernacle was consecrated, special offerings were broughtfor twelve continuous days (Num. 7). Later, fellowship, burnt, andgrain offerings were sacrificed when the temple was dedicated(1Kings 8:62–64). Sin offerings were presented when apriest was ordained (Lev. 8–9). Those who completed a vowdedicating themselves as Naz-i-rites brought sacrifices to God sothat they could again become a normal member of the congregation(Num. 6:9–21). Fellowship offerings often accompanied theannouncement of or installation of a king (1Sam. 11:14–15;1Kings 1:9,25).
Althoughthe sacrificial system was intended to bring the Israelites back intofellowship with God, at times their misuse of it separated them fromhim. When his people showed more interest in sacrificial ritual thanin obeying God’s instructions, they were chastened (1Sam.15:13–22; Jer. 7:21–28). When the people of Israel wereguilty of confusing the worship of Yahweh with Canaanite fertilitycults, God sent prophets to warn them (Isa. 1:11–16; Amos4:4–5). Prophetic statements denouncing sacrificial rites wereaimed at the misuse of sacrifices rather than their existence.Jeremiah and Ezekiel were so positive about sacrificial worship thatthey looked forward to a time when it would be reestablished in itspure form (Jer. 17:26; Ezek. 43:18–27; 46:1–24).
NewTestament
TheNT indicates that the OT sacrificial system was still in place in theearly first century AD. Following directions given in Leviticus, Marybrought a sacrifice to the temple in Jerusalem so that she could bepurified after giving birth to Jesus (Luke 2:21–24; cf. Lev.12:3, 8). Mary and Joseph would have sacrificed and eaten a Passoverlamb during their annual pilgrimage to Jerusalem to celebrate theFeast of Passover. It is not recorded whether Jesus always went withthem, but he did join them at the Passover celebration when he wastwelve years old. It is safe to assume that at this time and after hegrew up, Jesus took part in the sacrifices when he visited Jerusalemto celebrate the feasts.
Jesus’disciples attend several feasts with him. In addition, after hisresurrection they frequently went to the temple to pray at the timewhen sacrifices were made. Encouraged by the Jerusalem churchleaders, Paul went to the temple to join in and pay for thepurification rites of some men who had taken a vow, perhaps to serveas Nazirites (Acts 21:23–26). He later testified before Felixthat he had returned to Jerusalem in order to bring gifts to the poorand present offerings in the temple (24:17). Although Gentilebelievers were exempt from these practices (15:1–29), earlyJewish believers clearly saw no contradiction between believing thegospel of Jesus Christ and engaging in sacrificial rituals. Theylikely followed Jewish piety until the destruction of the temple inAD 70, when all sacrifices at the temple ceased.
Evenso, Christians quickly came to understand Christ’s death as thefinal sacrifice that completed the OT system. Various NT authorsconsider the nature of Christ’s death and metaphorically relateit to OT sacrifices, but the writer of Hebrews develops this in themost detail. According to Hebrews, the sacrificial system was merelythe shadow that pointed to Jesus. Although the blood of animals couldnot adequately deal with sins, Jesus’ sacrifice could (Heb.10:1–10). Jesus is regularly identified as the sacrificial lambwhose blood purifies humanity from sin (John 1:29, 36; Rom. 8:3;1Cor. 5:7; Eph. 5:2; 1Pet. 1:19; 1John 1:7; Rev.5:6, 12; 7:14; 12:11; 13:8). His sacrifice is considered apropitiation that turns away God’s wrath (Rom. 3:25; 1John2:2).
Theend of the OT sacrificial system does not mean that those who come toGod through Jesus Christ no longer bring sacrifices. Instead ofanimal and grain offerings, spiritual sacrifices are to be made(1Pet. 2:5). Emulating their Savior, Christ’s followersshould offer themselves as living sacrifices, devoted to God (Rom.12:1). This implies that everything done in this life could beconsidered a sacrifice. Simply believing the gospel makes one anacceptable offering to God (Rom. 15:16). Labor for the sake of thegospel, or perhaps martyrdom, can be viewed as a drink offering(Phil. 2:17). The author of Hebrews identifies three types ofsacrifices that believers should offer: praise, good deeds, andsharing with those in need (13:15–16). In line with the last ofthese points, Paul counts the gift sent by the Philippian church as afragrant offering that pleases God (Phil. 4:18).
The biblical corpus known as the Pentateuch consists of thefirst five books of the OT: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, andDeuteronomy. The word “Pentateuch” comes from two Greekwords (penta [“five”] and teuchos [“scroll case,book”]) and is a designation attested in the early churchfathers. The collection is also commonly known as the “FiveBooks of Moses,” “the Law of Moses,” or simply the“Law,” reflecting the traditional Jewish name “Torah,”meaning “law” or “instruction.” The Torah isthe first of three major sections that comprise the Hebrew Bible(Torah, Nebiim, Ketubim [Law, Prophets, Writings]); thus for bothJewish and Christian traditions it represents the introduction to theBible as a whole as well as its interpretive foundation.
TheEnglish names for the books of the Pentateuch came from the LatinVulgate, based on the Greek Septuagint. These appellations are mainlydescriptive of their content. Genesis derives from “generations”or “origin,” Exodus means “going out,”Leviticus represents priestly (Levitical) service, Numbers refers tothe censuses taken in the book, and Deuteronomy indicates “secondlaw” because of Moses’ rehearsal of God’s commands(see Deut. 17:18). The Hebrew designations derive from opening wordsin each book. Beresh*t (Genesis) means “in the beginning”;Shemot (Exodus), “[these are] the names”; Wayyiqra’(Leviticus), “and he called”; Bemidbar (Numbers), “inthe desert”; and Debarim (Deuteronomy), “[these are] thewords.”
Referringto the Pentateuch as “Torah” or the “Law”reflects the climactic reception of God’s commands at MountSinai, which were to govern Israel’s life and worship in thepromised land, including their journey to get there. However, callingthe Pentateuch the “Law” can be a bit misleading becausethere are relatively few passages that simply list a set of commands,and all law passages are set within a broad narrative. The Pentateuchis a grand story that begins on a universal scale with the creationof the cosmos and ends on the plains of Moab as the readeranticipates the fulfillment of God’s plan to redeem a fallenworld through his chosen people. The books offer distinct qualitiesand content, but they are also inherently dependent upon one another,as the narrative remains unbroken through the five volumes. Genesisends with Jacob’s family in Egypt, and, though many years havepassed, this is where Exodus begins. Leviticus outlines cultic lifeat the tabernacle (constructed at the end of Exodus) and even beginswithout a clear subject (“And he called...”),which requires the reader to supply “the Lord” from thelast verse of Exodus. Numbers begins with an account of Israel’sfighting men as the nation prepares to leave Sinai, and Deuteronomyis Moses’ farewell address to the nation on the cusp of thepromised land.
Authorshipand Composition
Althoughthe Pentateuch is technically an anonymous work, Jewish and Christiantradition attributes its authorship to Moses, the main figure of thestory from Exodus to Deuteronomy. The arguments for attributing theauthorship of the Pentateuch to Moses come from internal evidencewithin both Testaments. That Moses is responsible for at leastportions of the Pentateuch is suggested by references to his explicitliterary activity reflected within the narrative itself (Exod. 17:14;24:4; 34:28; Num. 33:2; Deut. 31:9, 22, 24), if not implied invarious literary formulas such as “the Lord said to Moses”(e.g., Exod. 39:1, 7, 21; Lev. 4:1; 11:1; 13:1; Num. 1:1; 2:1).Mosaic authorship receives support from the historical books, whichuse terms such as “the Book of the Law of Moses” invarious forms and references in the preexilic history (Josh. 8:30–35;23:6; 2Kings 14:6) as well as the postexilic history (e.g.,2Chron. 25:4; Ezra 6:18; Neh. 13:1). The same titles are usedby NT authors (e.g., Mark 12:26; Luke 24:44; John 1:45), evenreferring to the Pentateuch simply by the name “Moses” atvarious points (e.g., Luke 16:29; 24:27; 2Cor. 3:15).
Evenwith these examples, nowhere does the text explicitly state thatMoses is responsible for the entire compilation of the Pentateuch orthat he penned it with his own hand. Rather, a number of factorspoint to a later hand at work: Moses’ death and burial arereferenced (Deut. 34), the conquest of Canaan is referred to as past(Deut. 2:12), and there is evidence that the names of people andplaces were updated and explained for later generations (e.g., “Dan”in Gen. 14:14; cf. Josh. 19:47; Judg. 18:28b–29). Based onthese factors, it is reasonable to believe that the Pentateuchunderwent editorial alteration as it was preserved within Jewish lifeand took its final shape after Moses’ lifetime.
Overthe last century, the Documentary Hypothesis has dominated academicdiscussion of the Pentateuch’s composition. This theory wascrystallized by Julius Wellhausen in his Prolegomena to the Historyof Israel in the late nineteenth century and posits that thePentateuch originated from a variety of ancient sources derived fromdistinct authors and time periods that have been transmitted andjoined through a long and complex process. Traditionally thesedocuments are identified as J, E, D, and P. The J source is adocument authored by the “Yahwist” (German, Jahwist) inJudah around 840 BC and is so called because the name “Yahweh”is used frequently in its text. The E source stands for “Elohist”because of its preference for the divine title “Elohim”and was composed in Israel around 700 BC. The D source stands for“Deuteronomy” because it reflects material found in thatbook; it was composed sometime around Josiah’s reform in 621BC. The P document reflects material that priests would be concernedwith in the postexilic time period, approximately 500 BC. This theoryand its related forms stem from the scholarly concern over variousliterary characteristics such as the use of divine names; doubletsand duplications in the text; observable patterns of style,terminology, and themes; and alleged discrepancies in facts,descriptions, and geographic or historical perspective.
Variousdocumentary theories of composition have flourished over the lastcentury of pentateuchal scholarship and still have many adherents.However, lack of scholarly agreement about the dating and characterof the sources and the rise of other literary approaches to the texthave many conservative and liberal scholars calling into question theaccuracy and even interpretive benefit of the source theories.Moreover, if the literary observations used to create sourcedistinctions can be explained in other ways, then the DocumentaryHypothesis is significantly undermined.
Inits canonical form, the pentateuchal narrative combines artisticprose, poetry, and law to tell a dramatic history spanning thousandsof years. One could divide the story into six major sections:primeval history (Gen. 1–11), the patriarchs (Gen. 12–50),liberation from Egypt (Exod. 1–18), Sinai (Exod. 19:1–Num.10:10), wilderness journey (Num. 10:11–36:13), and Moses’farewell (Deuteronomy).
PrimevalHistory (Gen. 1–11)
Itis possible to divide Genesis into two parts based upon subjectmatter: the origin of creation and humankind’s call, fall, andpunishment (chaps 1–11), and the origin of a family that wouldbecome God’s conduit of salvation and blessing for the world(chaps. 12–50).
Theprimeval history comprises essentially the first eleven chapters ofGenesis, ending with the genealogy of Abraham in 11:26. Strictlyspeaking, 11:27 begins the patriarchal section with the sixthinstance of the toledot formula found in Genesis, referencingAbraham’s father, Terah. The Hebrew phrase ’elleh toledot(“these are the generations of”) occurs in eleven placesin Genesis and reflects a deliberate structural marker that one mayuse to divide the book into distinct episodes (2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1;11:10; 11:27; 25:12; 25:19; 36:1; 36:9; 37:2).
Genesisas we know it exhibits two distinct creation accounts in its firsttwo chapters. Although critical scholars contend that the differingaccounts reflect contradictory stories and different authors, it isjust as convenient to recognize that the two stories vary in styleand some content because they attempt to accomplish different aims.The first account, 1:1–2:3, is an artistic, poetic,symmetrical, and “heavenly” view of creation by atranscendent God, who spoke creation into being. In the secondaccount, 2:4–25, God is immanently involved with creation as heis present in a garden, breathes life into Adam’s nostrils,dialogues and problem-solves, fashions Eve from Adam’s side,and bestows warnings and commands. Both perspectives are foundationalfor providing an accurate view of God’s interaction withcreation in the rest of Scripture.
Asone progresses through chapters 1–11, the story quickly changesfrom what God has established as “very good” to discord,sin, and shame. Chapter 3 reflects the “fall” of humanityas Adam and Eve sin in eating from the forbidden tree in directdisobedience to God. The serpent shrewdly deceives the first couple,and thus all three incur God’s curses, which extend tounlimited generations. Sin that breaks the vertical relationshipbetween God and humanity intrinsically leads to horizontal strifebetween humans. Sin and disunity on the earth only intensify as onemoves from the murder story of Cain and Abel in chapter 4 to theflood in chapters 5–9. Violence, evil, and disorder have sopervaded the earth that God sends a deluge to wipe out all livingthings, save one righteous man and his family, along with an ark fullof animals. God makes the first covenant recorded in the biblicalnarrative with Noah (6:18), promising to save him from the flood ashe commands Noah to build an ark and gather food for survival. Noahfulfills all that God has commanded (6:22; 7:5), and God remembershis promise (8:1). This is the prototypical salvation story for therest of Scripture.
Chapter9 reflects a new start for humanity and all living things as thecreation mandate to “be fruitful and increase in number; fillthe earth and subdue it,” first introduced in 1:28, is restatedalong with the reminder that humankind is made in God’s image(1:27). Bearing the image involves new responsibilities andstipulations in the postdiluvian era (9:2–6). There will beenmity between humans and animals, animals are now appropriate food,and yet lifeblood will be specially revered. God still requiresaccountability for just and discriminate shedding of blood andorderly relationships, as he has proved in the deluge, but now herelinquishes this responsibility to humankind. In return, Godpromises never to destroy all flesh again, and he will set therainbow in the sky as a personal reminder. Like the covenant withNoah in 6:18, the postdiluvian covenant involves humankind fulfillingcommands (9:1–7) and God remembering his covenant (9:8–17),specially termed “everlasting” (9:16).
Theprimeval commentary on humankind’s unabating sinful condition(e.g., 6:5; 8:21) proves true as Noah becomes drunk and naked and hisson Ham (father of Canaan) shames him by failing to conceal hisfather’s negligence. Instead of multiplying, filling, andsubduing the earth as God has intended, humankind collaborates tomake a name for itself by building a sort of stairway to heavenwithin a special city (11:4). God foils such haughty plans byscattering the people across the earth and confusing their language.Expressed in an orderly chiastic structure, the story of the tower ofBabel demonstrates that God condescends (11:5) to set things straightwith humanity.
Patriarchs(Gen. 12–50)
Althoughthe primeval history is foundational for understanding the rest ofthe Bible, more space in Genesis is devoted to the patriarchalfigures Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph. In general, the Abrahamicnarrative spans chapters 12–25, the story of Isaac serves as atransition to the Jacob cycle of chapters 25–37, and the Josephnarrative finishes the book of Genesis in chapters 37–50.
Thetransition from the primeval history to the patriarchs (11:27–32)reveals how Abraham, the father of Israel, moves from the east andsettles in Harran as the family ventures to settle in Canaan. InHarran, Abraham receives the call of God’s redemptive plan,which reverberates through Scripture. God will bless him with land,make him a great nation, grant him special favor, and use him as aconduit of blessings to the world (12:1–3). In 11:30 is theindication that the barrenness of Abraham’s wife (Sarah)relates to the essence of God’s magnificent promises. How onebecomes great in name and number, secures enemy territory, and is tobless all peoples without a descendant becomes the compellingquestion of the Abrahamic narrative. The interchange betweenAbraham’s faith in God and his attempts to contrive covenantfulfillment colors the entire narrative leading up to chapter 22. Itis there that Abraham’s faith is ultimately put to the test asGod asks him to sacrifice the promised son, Isaac. Abraham passesGod’s faith test, and a ram is provided to take Isaac’splace. This everlasting covenant that was previously sealed by thesign of circumcision is climactically procured for future generationsthrough Abraham’s exemplary obedience (22:16–18; cf.15:1–21; 17:1–27).
Thepatriarchal stories that follow show that the Abrahamic promises arerenewed with subsequent generations (see 26:3–4; 28:13–14)and survive various threats to fulfillment. The story of Isaac servesmainly as a bridge to the Jacob cycle, as he exists primarily as apassive character in relation to Abraham and Jacob.
Deception,struggle, rivalry, and favoritism characterize the Jacob narrative,as first exemplified in the jostling of twin boys in Rebekah’swomb (25:22). Jacob supplants his twin brother, Esau, for thefirstborn’s blessing and birthright. He flees to Paddan Aram(northern Mesopotamia), marries two sisters, takes their maidservantsas concubines, and has eleven children, followed by a falling-outwith his father-in-law. Jacob’s struggle for God’sblessing that began with Esau comes to a head in his wrestlingencounter with God at Peniel. Ultimately, Jacob emerges victoriousand receives God’s blessing and a name change, “Israel”(“one who struggles with God”). Throughout the Jacobstory, God demonstrates his faithfulness to the Abrahamic covenantand reiterates the promises to Jacob, most notably at Bethel (chaps.28; 35). The interpersonal strife of Jacob’s life is thusenveloped within a message of reconciliation not just with Esau(chap. 33) but ultimately with God. The reader learns from theepisodes in Jacob’s life that although God works through thelives of weak and failing people, his promises for Israel remainsecure.
AlthoughJacob and his family are already living in Canaan, God intends forthem to move to Egypt and grow into a powerful nation beforefulfilling their conquest of the promised land (see 15:13–16).The story of Joseph explains how the family ends up in Egypt at theclose of Genesis. Joseph is specially loved by his father, whichelicits significant jealousy from his brothers, who sell him off tosome nomads and fabricate the alibi that he has been killed by a wildbeast. Joseph winds up in Pharaoh’s household and eventuallybecomes his top official. When famine strikes Canaan years later,Joseph’s brothers go to Egypt to purchase food from the royalcourt, and Joseph reveals his identity to them in an emotionalreunion. Jacob’s entire family moves to Egypt to live for atime in prosperity under Joseph’s care. The Joseph storyillustrates the mysterious relationship of human decision and divinesovereignty (50:20).
Liberationfrom Egypt (Exod. 1–18)
Genesisshows how Abraham develops into a large family. Exodus shows how thisfamily becomes a nation—enslaved, freed, and then taught theways of God. Although it appears that Exodus continues a rivetingstory of God’s chosen people, it is actually the identity andpower of God that take center stage.
Manyyears have passed since Joseph’s family arrived in Egypt. TheHebrews’ good standing in Egypt has also diminished as theirmultiplication and fruitfulness during the intervening period—justas God had promised Abraham (Gen. 17:4–8)—became anational threat to the Egyptians. Abraham’s family will spendtime in Egyptian slavery before being liberated with many possessionsin hand (cf. Gen. 15:13–14).
Inthe book of Exodus the drama of suffering and salvation serves as thevehicle for God’s self-disclosure to a single man, Moses. Mosesis an Israelite of destiny even from birth, as he providentiallyavoids infant death and rises to power and influence in Pharaoh’shousehold. Moses never loses his passion for his own people, and hekills an Egyptian who was beating a fellow Hebrew. Moses flees toobscurity in the desert, where he meets God and his call to lead hispeople out of Egypt and to the promised land (3:7–8; 6:8). Likethe days of Noah’s salvation, God has remembered his covenantwith the patriarchs and responded to the groans of his people inEgypt (2:24; 6:4–5; cf. Gen. 8:1). God reveals himself, and hispersonal name “Yahweh” (“I am”), to Moses inthe great theophany of the burning bush at Mount Horeb (Sinai), thesame place where later he will receive God’s law. Moses doubtshis own ability to carry out the task of confronting Pharaoh andleading the exodus, but God foretells that many amazing signs andwonders not only will make the escape possible but also willultimately reveal the mighty nature of God to the Hebrews, Egypt, andpresumably the world (6:7; 7:5).
Thispromise of creating a nation of his people through deliverance issuccinctly conveyed in the classic covenant formula that findssignificance in the rest of the OT: “I will take you as my ownpeople, and I will be your God” (6:7). Wielding great powerover nature and at times even human decision, God “hardens”Pharaoh’s heart and sends ten plagues to demonstrate his favorfor his own people and wrath against their enemy nation. The tenthplague on the firstborn of all in Egypt provides the context for thePassover as God spares the firstborn of Israel in response to theplacement of sacrificial blood on the doorposts of their homes.Pharaoh persists in the attempt to overtake the Israelites in thedesert, where the power of God climaxes in parting the Red Sea (orSea of Reeds). The Israelites successfully pass through, buttheEgyptian army drowns in pursuit. This is the great salvationevent of the OT.
Thesong of praise for God’s deliverance (15:1–21) quicklyturns to cries of groaning in the seventy days following the exodusas the people of the nation, grumbling about their circ*mstances inthe desert, quickly demonstrate their fleeting trust in the one whohas saved them (Exod. 15:22–18:27). When a shortage of waterand food confronts the people, their faith in God’s care provesshallow, and they turn on Moses. Even though the special marks ofGod’s protection have been evident in the wilderness throughthe pillars of cloud and fire, the angel of God, the provision ofmanna and quail, water from the rock, and the leadership of Moses,the nation continually fails God’s tests of trust and obedience(16:4; cf. 17:2; 20:20). Yet God continues to endure with his peoplethrough the leadership of Moses.
Sinai(Exod. 19:1–Num. 10:10)
Mostof the pentateuchal narrative takes place at Mount Sinai. It is therethat Israel receives national legislation and prescriptions for thetabernacle, the priesthood, feasts and festivals, and othercovenantal demands for living as God’s chosen people. Theeleven-month stay at Sinai takes the biblical reader through thecenter of the Pentateuch, covering approximately the last half ofExodus, all of Leviticus, and the first third of Numbers, before thenation leaves this sacred site and sojourns in the wilderness.Several key sections of the Pentateuch fall withinthe Sinaistory: the Decalogue (Exod. 20:1–17), the Book of the Covenant(Exod. 20:22–23:33), the tabernacle prescriptions (Exod.25–31), the tabernacle construction (Exod. 35–40), themanual on ritual worship (Lev. 1–7), and the Holiness Code(Lev. 17–27).
Theevents and instruction at Sinai are central to the Israelitereligious experience and reflect the third eternal covenant that Godestablishes in the Pentateuch—this time with Israel, wherebythe Sabbath is the sign (Exod. 31:16; cf. Noahic/rainbow covenant[Gen. 9:16] and the Abrahamic/circumcision covenant [Gen. 17:7, 13,19]). The offices of prophet and priest develop into clear view inthis portion of the Pentateuch. Moses exemplifies the dual propheticfunction of representing the people when speaking with God and, inturn, God when speaking to the people. The priesthood is bestowedupon Aaron and his descendants in Exodus and inaugurated within oneof the few narrative sections of Leviticus (Lev. 8–10). Thegiving of the law, the ark, the tabernacle, the priesthood, and theSabbath are all a part of God’s making himself “known”to Israel and the world, which is a constant theme in Exodus (see,e.g., 25:22; 29:43, 46; 31:13).
TheIsraelites’ stay at Sinai opens with one of the greatesttheophanies of the Bible: God speaks aloud to the people (Exod.19–20) and then is envisioned as a consuming fire (Exod. 24).After communicating the Ten Commandments (“ten words”)directly to the people (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 4:13; 10:4), Mosesmediates the rest of the detailed obligations that will govern thefuture life of the nation. The covenant is ratified in ceremonialfashion (Exod. 24), and the Israelites vow to fulfill all that hasbeen spoken. God expects Israel to be a holy nation (Exod. 19:6) withwhom he may dwell, but Moses descends Sinai only to find that theIsraelites have already violated the essence of the Decalogue byfashioning a golden calf to worship as that which delivered them fromEgypt (Exod. 32). This places Israel’s future and calling injeopardy, but Moses intercedes for his people, and God graciouslypromises to preserve the nation and abide with it in his mercy, evenwhile punishing the guilty. This becomes prototypical of God’srelationship with his people in the future (Exod. 34:6–7).
Exodusends with the consecration of the tabernacle and the descent of God’spresence there. With the tent of worship in order, the priesthood andits rituals can be officially established. Leviticus reflects divineinstructions for how a sinful people may live safely in closeproximity to God. Holy living involves dealing with sin andminimizing the need for atonement, purification, and restitution. Thesacrificial and worship system established in Leviticus is based on aworldview of order, perfection, and purity, which should characterizea people who are commanded, “Be holy because I, the Lord yourGod, am holy’ (Lev. 19:2; cf. 11:44–45; 20:26). Withthese rules in place, the Israelites can make final preparations todepart Sinai and move forward on their journey. Numbers 1–10spans a nineteen-day period of such activities as the Israelitesbegin to focus on dispossessing their enemies. These chapters reflecta census of fighting men, the priority of purity, the dedication ofthe tabernacle, and the observance of the Passover before commencingthe quest to Canaan.
WildernessJourney (Num. 10:11–36:13)
Therest of the book of Numbers covers the remainder of a forty-yearstretch of great peaks and valleys in the faith and future of thenation. Chapters 11–25 recount the various events that show theexodus generation’s lack of trust in God. Chapters 26–36reveal a more positive section whereby a new generation prepares forthe conquest. With the third section of Numbers framed by episodesinvolving the inheritance rights of Zelophehad’s daughters(27:1–11; 36:1–13), it is clear that the story has turnedtothe future possession of the land.
Afterthe departure from Sinai, the narrative consists of a number ofIsraelite complaints in the desert. The Israelites have grown tiredof manna and ironically crave the food of Egypt, which they recall asfree fish, fruits, and vegetables. Having forgotten the hardship oflife in slavery, about which they had cried out to God, now thenation is crying out for a lifestyle of old. Moses becomes sooverwhelmed with the complaints of the people that God providesseventy elders, who, to help shoulder the leadership burden, willreceive the same prophetic spirit given to Moses.
Inchapters 13–14 twelve spies are sent out from Kadesh Barnea toperuse Canaan, but the people’s lack of faith to procure theland from the mighty people there proves costly. This final exampleof distrust moves God to punish and purify the nation. Theunbelieving generation will die in the wilderness during a forty-yearperiod of wandering.
Thediscontent in the desert involves not only food and water but alsoleadership status. Moses’ own brother and sister resent hisspecial relationship with God and challenge his exclusive authority.Later, Aaron’s special high priesthood is threatened as anotherLevitical family (Korah) vies for preeminence. Through a sequence ofsigns and wonders, God makes it clear that Moses and Aaron haveexclusive roles in God’s economy. Due to the deaths related toKorah’s rebellion and the fruitless staffs that represent thetribes of Israel, the nation’s concern about sudden extinctionin the presence of a holy God is appeased through the eternalcovenant of priesthood granted to Aaron’s family (chap. 18). Heand the Levites, at the potential expense of their own lives and aspart of their priestly service, will be held accountable for keepingthe tabernacle pure of encroachers.
Evenafter the people’s significant rebellion and punishment, Godcontinues to prove his faithfulness to his word. Hope is restored forthe nation as the Abrahamic promises of blessing are rehearsed fromthe mouth of Balaam, a Mesopotamian seer. The Israelites will indeedone day be numerous (23:10), enjoy the presence of God (23:21), beblessed and protected (24:9), and have a kingly leader (24:17). Thiswonderful mountaintop experience of hope for the exodus generation istragically countered by an even greater event of apostasy in thesubsequent scene. Reminiscent of the incident of the golden calf,when pagan revelry in the camp had foiled Moses’ interactionwith God on Sinai, apostasy at the tabernacle undermines Balaam’soracles of covenant fulfillment. Fornication with Moabite women notonly joins the nation to a foreign god but also betrays God’sholiness at his place of dwelling. If not for the zeal of Aaron’sgrandson Phinehas, who puts an end to the sin, the ensuing plaguecould have finished the nation. For his righteous action, Phinehas isawarded an eternal priesthood and ensures a future for the nation andAaron’s priestly lineage.
Inchapter 26 a second census of fighting men indicates that the old,unbelieving exodus generation has officially died off (except forJoshua and Caleb), and God is proceeding with a new people. Goddispossesses the enemies of the new generation; reinstates the tribalboundaries of the land; reinstates rules concerning worship, service,and bloodshed; and places Joshua at the helm of leadership. Chapters26–36 mention no deaths or rebellions as the nationoptimistically ends its journey in Moab, just east of the promisedland.
Moses’Farewell (Deuteronomy)
Althoughone could reasonably move into the historical books at the end ofNumbers, much would be lost in overstepping Deuteronomy. Deuteronomypresents Moses’ farewell speeches as his final words to anation on the verge of Caanan. Moses’ speeches are best viewedas sermons motivating his people to embrace the Sinai covenant, lovetheir God, and choose life over death and blessings over cursings(30:19). Moses reviews the desert experience since Mount Horeb/Sinai(chaps. 1–4) and recapitulates God’s expectations forlawful living in the land (chaps. 5–26). The covenant code isrecorded on a scroll, is designated the “Book of the Law”(31:24–26), and is to be read and revered by the future king.Finally, Moses leads the nation in covenant renewal (chaps. 29–32)before the book finishes with an account of his death (chaps. 33–34),including tributes such as “since then, no prophet has risen inIsrael like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face” (34:10).
Deuteronomyreflects that true covenant faithfulness is achieved from a rightheart for God. If there were any previous doubts about the essence ofcovenant keeping, Moses eliminates such in Deuteronomy with thefrequent use of emotive terms. Loving God involves committing to himalone and spurning idols and foreign gods. The Ten Commandments(chap. 5) are not a list of stale requirements; they reflect thegreat Shema with the words “Love the Lord your God with allyour heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. Thesecommandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts”(6:5–6). God desires an unrivaled love from the nation, notcold and superficial religiosity.
Obedienceby the Israelites will incur material and spiritual blessing, whereasdisobedience ends in the loss of both. Although Moses stronglycommends covenant obedience, and the nation participates in acovenant-renewal ceremony (chap. 27), it is clear that in the futurethe Israelites will fail to uphold their covenant obligations andwill suffer the consequences (29:23; 30:1–4; 31:16–17).Yet Moses looks to a day when the command for circumcised hearts(10:16) will be fulfilled by the power of God himself (30:6). In thefuture a new king will arise from the nation (17:14–20) as wellas a prophet like Moses (18:15–22). Deuteronomy thusunderscores the extent of God’s own devotion to his patriarchalpromises despite the sinful nature of his people.
Formuch of the middle and end of the twentieth century, Deuteronomy hasreceived a significant amount of attention for its apparentresemblance in structure and content to ancient Hittite and Assyriantreaties. Scholars debate the extent of similarity, but it ispossible that Deuteronomy reflects a suzerain-vassal treaty formbetween Israel and God much like the common format between nations inthe ancient Near East. Although comparative investigation of thistype can be profitable for interpretation, it is prudent to beconservative when outlining direct parallels, since Deuteronomy isnot a legal document but rather a dramatic narrative of God’sredemptive interaction with the world.
The study of human beings, their nature and origins. TheChristian understanding of anthropology stems from a biblical view ofhumankind’s relationship to God.
TheOrigin of Humankind
Accordingto Genesis, the creation of humankind took place on the sixth day ofthe creation week. The amount of narrative space allotted to this day(Gen. 1:24–31) testifies to the special importance of whathappened. Human beings were made on the same day as the animals.Human beings were not given a day of their own, showing that theyhave a certain kinship with the animals, although they are far morethan highly successful and adaptive mammals. This has implicationsfor the care of animals and of the environment generally. The valueof human beings and their special place in the created order is clearin passages such as Pss. 8:5–6; 104:14–15.
Createdin the image of God.Whenit came to the making of human beings, God deliberated over thiscrucial step (Gen. 1:26). The plural of exhortation in “Let usmake man in our image” signals that the decision to makehumankind was the most important one that God had made so far.Genesis 1 says that human beings are like God in some way.
Variousopinions have been canvassed as to what the “image” is.We cannot totally exclude the physical form of humans, given God’shumanoid form in OT appearances (theophanies; e.g., Isa. 6:1; Ezek.1:26; Amos 9:1). The image has sometimes been interpreted as a task,the exercising of dominion (Gen. 1:28), with humanity appointed ascreation’s king, ruling under God. But the image is betterunderstood as the precondition for rule rather than rule itself. Theimage shows human worth (Gen. 9:6) and differentiates humans from allother creatures. It is proper for the Bible to use anthropomorphiclanguage for God, for humans are remarkably like God. Both male andfemale are in the image of God (“in the image of God he createdthem; male and female he created them” [1:27]), so that thedivine image is not maleness, nor is sexual differentiation theimage. Commonly, the image of God is thought to be some peculiarquality of human beings—for example, rationality, speech, moralsense, personality, humans as relational beings.
Everycentury has its own view of what is the essence of humanity. However,nothing in the passage allows a choice among such alternatives. Thepoint of the passage is simply the fact of the likeness, with noexact definition being provided. The fact of the image is the basisof the divine prohibition of murder and of the strict penalty appliedto the transgressor (9:4–6). The fall into sin affected everyaspect of the human constitution, and the Bible does not minimize thefact of human sinfulness (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Rom. 3:10–18);nevertheless, humans are still in the image of God (Gen. 5:1–3;9:6; 1 Cor. 11:7). God’s plan of salvation is aimed atridding creation (and especially humanity) of the baneful effects ofsin, and this will be achieved through the work of Christ, who is theimage of God (2 Cor. 4:4; Col. 1:15–20; Heb. 1:1–3;2:5–18). The outcome will be the conformity of believers inChrist to his glorious image (Rom. 8:29–30; 2 Cor. 3.18).
Placein the created order.God’s purpose in giving human beings the divine image is “sothey may rule” (NET [Gen. 1:26b translated as a purposeclause]). The syntax suggests that the image is a presupposition ofdominion. It is plain that such a delegated authority makes humansstewards. The vegetarian diet of Gen.1:29 (there was no eating ofmeat at first) represents a limitation to the human right ofdominion. Adam’s naming of the animals was (in part) expressiveof his sovereignty over them (2:19). Later, Noah was charged to bringpairs of animals into the ark to preserve them alive (6:19–20),showing care for other creatures. The patriarchs tended flocks(13:2–9; 26:12–14), and Joseph’s relief measuressaved the lives of people and animals (47:15–18). The wantondestruction of the Promised Land was expressly forbidden (Deut.20:19–20). Humanity is accountable to God for the stewardshipof the earth. The divine command “be fruitful and multiply”(Gen. 1:28 NRSV) shows that God’s purpose is that the humanrace populate the whole earth.
AtGen. 2:7 the biblical narrative becomes thoroughly anthropocentric,picturing the little world that God establishes around the first man,so this account is quite different from the cosmic presentation ofGen. 1. In Gen. 1 humankind is the apex of a pyramid, the last andhighest of a series of creatures; in Gen. 2 the man is the center ofa circle, everything else made to fit around him, and his connectionto the physical earth is emphasized. In either view, a very specialplace is given to human beings in the created order. The two picturesare complementary, not contradictory.
The“man” (’adam) is formed from the “ground”(’adamah), with the related Hebrew words making a pun. Man’sname reminds him of his earthy origins. He is made from the “dust,”which hints at his coming death. He will return to the dust (Gen.3:19; cf. Job 10:8–9; Ps. 103:14; Isa. 29:16). The reference to“the breath of life” (Gen. 2:7) is due to the fact thatthis leaves a person at death (Job 34:14–15; Ps. 104:29–30),so man’s (potential) mortality is implied. Ironically, themaking of man is described using the language of death. What isdescribed in Gen. 2 is the making of the first man, from whom therest of the human race has descended, not the making of humankind,though the word ’adam can mean that in other contexts.
TheNature of Humankind
Body,soul, and spirit.Arguments over whether human nature is bipartite (body and soul) ortripartite (body, soul, spirit) are not to be decided by arbitraryappeal to isolated verses. Verses can be found in apparent supportfor both the first view (e.g., Matt. 10:28) and the second (e.g.,1 Thess. 5:23), but certainly the first scheme is much moreprevalent in the Bible. “Soul” and “spirit”can be used interchangeably (Eccles. 3:21; 12:7; Ezek. 18:31). Deathis marked by the parting of soul/spirit and body, but it would be amistake to think that human beings are made up of separate componentparts, or that the physical body is only a dispensable shell and notessential to true humanity. The physicality of human existence in the“body” is owned and celebrated in Scripture, part of thatbeing the positive attitude to sexuality when properly expressed(Song of Songs; 1 Cor. 7) and the nonascetic nature of biblicalethics (1 Cor. 10:31; Col. 2:23). The doctrine of theresurrection of the body is the fullest expression of this (1 Cor.15), in contrast to ancient Greek thought that viewed the body asinherently evil and understood salvation as the immortality of theliberated, disembodied soul.
Thedifferent words used in relation to persons are only intended torefer to and at times focus on different aspects of unified humannature. References to the “soul” may stress individualresponsibility (e.g., Ezek. 18:4 NASB: “The soul who sins willdie”). In Ps. 103:1–2, “O my soul” expressesemphatic self-encouragement to praise God and is in parallel with“all my inmost being”—that is, “my wholebeing” (an example of synecdoche: a part standing for the whole[cf. Ps. 35:10]). These are ways of referring to oneself as a personwho expresses will and intention (cf. Ps. 42:5–6, 11). The“flesh” is used to stress the weakness of mortal humanity(e.g., Isa. 40:6 RSV: “All flesh is grass”). The “heart”is the volitional center of a human being (Prov. 4:23; cf. Mark7:17–23). The emotional and empathetic reactions of humans aredescribed by reference to the organs: “liver,” “kidneys,”“bowels.”
Moralsand responsibility.In Gen. 2 the complexities of the man’s moral relation to Godand his relations with the soil, with the animals, and with the womanare explored. God deposited the man in the garden “to work itand take care of it” (2:15). The words chosen to designate theman’s work prior to the fall have an aura of worship aboutthem, for they are later used in the OT for the cultic actions ofserving and guarding within the sanctuary. The priests served byoffering sacrifices, and the Levites guarded the gates of the sacredprecinct. A theology of work as a religious vocation is presented.The man was a kind of king-priest in the garden of God.
Themoral responsibility of humanity is signaled from the beginning.God’s command gives permission for the man to eat from “anytree” except one (Gen. 2:16–17) and as such indicatesman’s freedom, so that this command is no great restriction.The wording “you are free to eat” reinforces the pointabout God’s generous provision. The prohibition is embedded inthe description of God’s fatherly care for the man and graciousact in placing him in the garden. The divine restriction is slightand not at all overbearing, though the serpent will seek to make itappear mean-spirited (3:1). The command and prohibition are the veryfirst words of God to the man, marking them out as of fundamentalimportance for the relationship between them. The prohibition (“youmust not eat . . .”) is an absolute one in thestyle of the Decalogue (Exod. 20:1–17; Deut. 5:6–21).What is placed before the man is a test that gives him theopportunity to express his loyalty to God. A relationship ofobedience and trust requires the possibility of choice and theopportunity to disobey (if that is what he wants to do). The moralnature and responsibility of individuals is not a late discovery bythe prophet Ezekiel (Ezek. 18); rather, it is the presuppositionbehind the Mosaic law, for the commands of the Decalogue (“youshall not . . .”) are phrased as commands toindividuals (as the Hebrew makes clear). On the other hand, theconcept of corporate responsibility is also present (e.g., Achan’spunishment in Josh. 7).
Relationships.Human beings are relational by nature, as the creation of the womanas a helper and partner for the first man makes plain (Gen. 2:18–25).Later in Scripture this is put in more general terms, so thatfriendship and mutual cooperation are shown to be essential to life(Eccles. 4:7–12). The body life of the church reflects the samefact and need (1 Cor. 12). In Psalms, human needs andvulnerability find their answer and fulfillment in God, with thepsalmist acknowledging his frailty and his creaturely dependence onGod (e.g., Ps. 90). This also shows the folly of sinful human pride,against which the prophets so often inveighed (e.g., Isa. 2:9,11–17, 22).
It is difficult to imagine a world without consistentmetrological systems. Society’s basic structures, from economyto law, require a uniform and accurate method for measuring time,distances, weights, volumes, and so on. In today’s world,technological advancements allow people to measure various aspects ofthe universe with incredible accuracy—from nanometers tolight-years, milligrams to kilograms.
Themetrological systems employed in biblical times span the sameconcepts as our own modern-day systems: weight, linear distance, andvolume or capacity. However, the systems of weights and measurementsemployed during the span of biblical times were not nearly asaccurate or uniform as the modern units employed today. Preexistingweight and measurement systems existed in the contextual surroundingsof both the OT and the NT authors and thus heavily influenced thesystems employed by the Israelite nation as well as the NT writers.There was great variance between the different standards usedmerchant to merchant (Gen. 23:16), city to city, region to region,time period to time period, even despite the commands to use honestscales and honest weights (Lev. 19:35–36; Deut. 25:13–15;Prov. 11:1; 16:11; 20:23; Ezek. 45:10).
Furthermore,inconsistencies and contradictions exist within the written recordsas well as between archaeological specimens. In addition, significantdifferences are found between preexilic and postexilic measurementsin the biblical texts, and an attempt at merging dry capacity andliquid volume measurements further complicated the issue. This is tobe expected, especially when we consider modern-dayinconsistencies—for example, 1 US liquid pint= 0.473liters, while 1 US dry pint= 0.550 liters. Thus, all modernequivalents given below are approximations, and even the bestestimates have a margin of error of + 5percent or more.
Weights
Weightsin biblical times were carried in a bag or a satchel (Deut. 25:13;Prov. 16:11; Mic. 6:11) and were stones, usually carved into variousanimal shapes for easy identification. Their side or flat bottom wasinscribed with the associated weight and unit of measurement.Thousands of historical artifacts, which differ by significantamounts, have been discovered by archaeologists and thus have greatlycomplicated the work of determining accurate modern-day equivalents.
Beka.Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahsor ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measuremetals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).
Gerah.1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).
Litra.Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight.Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to themodern British pound.
Mina.Approximately 1¼ pounds, or 0.56 kilograms. Equivalent to 50shekels. Used to weigh gold (1Kings 10:17; Ezra 2:69), silver(Neh. 7:71–72), and other goods. The prophet Ezekiel redefinedthe proper weight: “Theshekel is to consist of twentygerahs. Twenty shekels plus twenty-five shekels plus fifteen shekelsequal one mina” (Ezek. 45:12). Before this redefinition, therewere arguably 50 shekels per mina. In Jesus’ parable of theservants, he describes the master entrusting to his three servantsvarying amounts—10 minas, 5 minas, 1 mina—implying amonetary value (Luke 19:11–24), probably of either silver orgold. One mina was equivalent to approximately three months’wages for a laborer.
Pim.Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1Sam. 13:21).
Shekel.Approximately 2⁄5 ounce, or 11 grams. Equivalent toapproximately 2 bekas. The shekel is the basic unit of weightmeasurement in Israelite history, though its actual weight variedsignificantly at different historical points. Examples include the“royal shekel” (2Sam. 14:26), the “commonshekel” (2Kings 7:1), and the “sanctuary shekel,”which was equivalent to 20 gerahs (e.g., Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25;Num. 3:47). Because it was used to weigh out silver or gold, theshekel also functioned as a common monetary unit in the NT world.
Talent.Approximately 75 pounds, or 34 kilograms. Equivalent to approximately60 minas. Various metals were weighed using talents: gold (Exod.25:39; 37:24; 1Chron. 20:2), silver (Exod. 38:27; 1Kings20:39; 2Kings 5:22), and bronze (Exod. 38:29). This probably isderived from the weight of a load that a man could carry.
Table12. Biblical Weights and Measures and Their Modern Equivalents:
Weights
Beka– 10 geraahs; ½ shekel = 1/5 ounce = 5.6 grams
Gerah– 1/10 beka; 1/20 shekel = 1/50 ounce = 0.56 grams
Litra– 12 ounces = 340 grams
Mina– 50 shekels = 1 ¼ pounds = 0.56 kilograms
Pim– 2/3 shekel = 1/3 ounce = 9.3 grams
Shekel– 2 bekas; 20 gerahs = 2/5 ounce = 11 grams
Talent– 60 minas = 75 pounds = 34 kilograms
Linearmeasurements
Cubit– 6 handbreadths = 18 inches = 45.7 centimeters
Day’sjourney = 20-25 miles = 32-40 kilometerse
Fingerbreadth– ¼ handbreadth = ¾ inch = 1.9 centimeterse
Handbreadth– 1/6 cubit = 3 inches = 7.6 centimeters
Milion– 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers
Orguia– 1/100 stadion = 5 feet 11 inches = 1.8 meters
Reed/rod– 108 inches = 274 centimeters
Sabbathday’s journey – 2,000 cubits = ¾ mile = 1.2kilometers
Span– 3 handbreadths = 9 inches = 22.8 centimeters
Stadion– 100 orguiai = 607 feet = 185 meters
Capacity
Cab– 1 omer = ½ gallon = 1.9 liters
Choinix– ¼ gallon = 0.9 liters
Cor– 1 homer; 10 ephahs = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Ephah– 10 omers; 1/10 homer = 3/5 bushel; 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Homer– 10 ephahs; 1 cor = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Koros– 10 bushels; 95 gallons – 360 liters
Omer– 1/10 ephah; 1/100 homer = 2 quarts = 1.9 liters
Saton– 1 seah = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
Seah– 1/3 ephah; 1 saton = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
LiquidVolume
Bath– 1 ephah = 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Batos– 8 gallons = 30.3 liters
Hin– 1/6 bath; 12 logs = 1 gallon; 4 quarts = 3.8 liters
Log– 1/72 bath; 1/12 hin = 1/3 quart = 0.3 liters
Metretes– 10 gallons = 37.8 literes
LinearMeasurements
Linearmeasurements were based upon readily available natural measurementssuch as the distance between the elbow and the hand or between thethumb and the little finger. While convenient, this method ofmeasurement gave rise to significant inconsistencies.
Cubit.Approximately 18 inches, or 45.7 centimeters. Equivalent to 6handbreadths. The standard biblical measure of linear distance, asthe shekel is the standard measurement of weight. The distance fromthe elbow to the outstretched fingertip. Used to describe height,width, length (Exod. 25:10), distance (John 21:8), and depth (Gen.7:20). Use of the cubit is ancient. For simple and approximateconversion into modern units, divide the number of cubits in half formeters, then multiply the number of meters by 3 to arrive at feet.
1cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths
Day’sjourney.An approximate measure of distance equivalent to about 20–25miles, or 32–40 kilometers. Several passages reference a singleor multiple days’ journey as a description of the distancetraveled or the distance between two points: “a day’sjourney” (Num. 11:31; 1Kings 19:4), “a three-dayjourney” (Gen. 30:36; Exod. 3:18; 8:27; Jon. 3:3), “sevendays” (Gen. 31:23), and “eleven days” (Deut. 1:2).After visiting Jerusalem for Passover, Jesus’ parents journeyedfor a day (Luke 2:44) before realizing that he was not with them.
Fingerbreadth.The width of the finger, or ¼ of a handbreadth, approximately¾ inch, or 1.9 centimeters. The fingerbreadth was thebeginning building block of the biblical metrological system forlinear measurements. Used only once in the Scriptures, to describethe bronze pillars (Jer. 52:21).
Handbreadth.Approximately 3 inches, or 7.6 centimeters. Equivalent to 1/6 cubit,or four fingerbreadths. Probably the width at the base of the fourfingers. A short measure of length, thus compared to a human’sbrief life (Ps. 39:5). Also the width of the rim on the bread table(Exod. 25:25) and the thickness of the bronze Sea (1Kings7:26).
Milion.Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration ofRoman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”
Orguia.Approximately 5 feet 11 inches, or 1.8 meters. Also translated as“fathom.” A Greek unit of measurement. Probably thedistance between outstretched fingertip to fingertip. Used to measurethe depth of water (Acts 27:28).
Reed/rod.Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a generalterm for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance(Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).
Sabbathday’s journey.Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About2,000 cubits.
Span.Approximately 9 inches, or 22.8 centimeters. Equivalent to threehandbreadths, and ½ cubit. The distance from outstretchedthumb tip to little-finger tip. The length and width of the priest’sbreastpiece (Exod. 28:16).
Stadion.Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai.Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13;John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).
LandArea
Seed.The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis ofhow much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1Kings18:32).
Yoke.Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. Inbiblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animalscould plow in one day (1Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).
Capacity
Cab.Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer.Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria(2Kings 6:25).
Choinix.Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement,mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).
Cor.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equal to thehomer, and to 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularlyof flour and grains (1Kings 4:22; 1Kings 5:11; 2Chron.2:10; 27:5; Ezra 7:22). In the LXX, cor is also a measure of liquidvolume, particularly oil (1Kings 5:11; 2Chron. 2:10; Ezra45:14).
Ephah.Approximately 3⁄5 bushel (6 gallons, or 22.7 liters).Equivalent to 10 omers, or 1⁄10 homer. Used for measuring flourand grains (e.g., Exod. 29:40; Lev. 6:20). Isaiah prophesied a day ofreduced agricultural yield, when a homer of seed would produce onlyan ephah of grain (Isa. 5:10). The ephah was equal in size to thebath (Ezek. 45:11), which typically was used for liquid measurements.
Homer.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equivalent to1 cor, or 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularly ofvarious grains (Lev. 27:16; Isa. 5:10; Ezek. 45:11, 13–14; Hos.3:2). This is probably a natural measure of the load that a donkeycan carry, in the range of 90 kilograms. There may have existed adirect link between capacity and monetary value, given Lev. 27:16:“fifty shekels of silver to a homer of barley seed.” Alogical deduction of capacity and cost based on known equivalencesmight look something like this:
1homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1 omer = 1 beka
Koros.Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measureof grain (Luke 16:7).
Omer.Approximately 2 quarts, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄10ephah, 1⁄100 homer (Ezek. 45:11). Used by Israel in themeasurement and collection of manna in the wilderness (Exod.16:16–36) and thus roughly equivalent to a person’s dailyfood ration.
Saton.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. Themeasurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven(Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).
Seah.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah,or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various drygoods (e.g., 2Kings 7:1; 1Sam. 25:18).
LiquidVolume
Bath.Approximately 6 gallons, or 22.7 liters. Equivalent to 1 ephah, whichtypically was used for measurements of dry capacity. Used in themeasurement of water (1Kings 7:26), oil (1Kings 5:11),and wine (2Chron. 2:10; Isa. 5:10).
Batos.Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration ofthe Hebrew word bath(see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).
Hin.Approximately 4 quarts (1gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek.4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).
Log.Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture,specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).
Metretes.Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement ofwater at the wedding feast (John 2:6).
Common and valuable for food, beans were cooked while green in the pods or after being dried. Dry beans were threshed and winnowed like cereals and other grains. Beans are mentioned twice in the NIV (2Sam. 17:28; Ezek. 4:9).
Common and valuable for food, beans were cooked while green in the pods or after being dried. Dry beans were threshed and winnowed like cereals and other grains. Beans are mentioned twice in the NIV (2Sam. 17:28; Ezek. 4:9).
The concept of a remnant or a “remnant theology”runs throughout Scripture. Although appearing in a wide variety oftexts and contexts, the central idea of the remnant concept orremnant theology is that in the midst of seemingly total apostasy andthe consequential terrible judgment and/or destruction, God alwayshas a small, faithful group that he delivers and works through tobring blessing.
OldTestament
Earlyallusions to the idea of a remnant are introduced in the book ofGenesis. Noah and his family (Gen. 6–9) are the remnant that issaved during the flood, when all other people are destroyed injudgment. Likewise, in Gen. 45:6–7 Joseph declares to hisbrothers, “For two years now there has been famine in the land,and for the next five years there will be no plowing and reaping. ButGod sent me ahead of you to preserve for you a remnant on earth andto save your lives by a great deliverance.”
Theremnant theme surfaces in several other places in the OT. Forexample, when Elijah complains to God that he is the only faithfulone left, God corrects him by pointing out that he has maintained aremnant of seven thousand faithful ones in the midst of nationalapostasy (1Kings 19:10–18).
However,it is in the OT prophets that the remnant theme flowers into fullblossom. The Hebrew words for “remnant” (she’ar,she’erit)occur over one hundred times in the prophetic books. The prophetsproclaim that since Israel/Judah has broken the covenant and refusesto repent and turn back to God, judgment is coming. This judgmenttakes the form of terrible foreign invasions and destruction,followed by exile from the land. Thus, the northern kingdom, Israel,is destroyed and exiled by the Assyrians in 722 BC, and the southernkingdom, Judah, is destroyed and exiled by the Babylonians in 587/586BC. Yet the prophets also prophesy hope and restoration beyond thejudgment. They declare that many will be destroyed in the judgment,but not all. They prophesy that a remnant will survive, and that Godwill work through the remnant to bring blessings and restoration.Usually the remnant is identified as those who go into exile but wholikewise hope to return to the land. The reestablishment of theremnant is often connected with the inauguration of the messianicage.
NewTestament
Theremnant theme continues into the NT, but it is not nearly asprominent in the NT as it is in the OT prophets. The term “remnant”does not occur in the Gospels, although the idea is implied inseveral texts. Thus, in Matt. 7:13–14 Jesus states, “Forwide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, andmany enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road thatleads to life, and only a few find it.” Likewise, in Matt.22:14 Jesus summarizes his preceding parable by stating, “Manyare invited, but few are chosen.”
InRom. 11 Paul is much more explicit. Not only does he use the term“remnant,” but also in Rom. 11:2–5 he connects hisargument specifically to the remnant idea in 1Kings 19:18 (“Ihave reserved for myself seven thousand”). Paul is pointing outthe similarities between the apostasy in Israel in 1Kings 19and the parallel rejection of the Messiah by Israel during Paul’sday. In both cases the nation had rejected God’s word and hissalvation plan. But in both situations, even though the nation as awhole has rejected God, God maintains a faithful remnant. Paul alsounderscores that the remnant is established by God’s grace.Thus, in Rom. 11:5 Paul explains, “So too, at the present timethere is a remnant chosen by grace.” In the early church, thatremnant consisted of Jewish Christians like Paul himself. And to thedegree that the church as a whole inherited the promises to Israel,it too could be included in the category of remnant (see again Rom.11:11–24; cf. 1Pet. 2:5–10; Rev. 7; 14). Indeed,Paul hopes that the conversion of Gentiles to Christ might make hisJewish compatriots jealous so that they may “take back”their Messiah (in Rom. 11, cf. vv. 11–12 with vv. 25–36).In that case, national Israel would become the spiritual remnant forthe very first time in Israel’s history, because “allIsrael” would be saved. That is, national Israel and spiritualIsrael would be one.
Anotherway to grasp the idea of the remnant as it unfolds throughout theBible is to use an hourglass illustration (i.e., wide, narrow, wide).Thus, God had created the world to have fellowship with him, only tohave his creation spurn that offer. To rectify this problem, Godcalls Abraham out from paganism in order that he might make of him anew people, Israel, to worship God and declare him to the nations.Alas, however, Israel in time disobeys God’s law just as thenations of the world had disobeyed God by worshiping other gods. Butthe purpose of God is not thereby thwarted, for he raises up aremnant, a faithful few who remain true to Yahweh (e.g., Elijah andthe later returnees to Israel). However, by the end of the OT thehopes of Israel now rest upon one individual, the Messiah, who willturn the hearts of Jews back to God and who will convert the nationsof the earth to the one true God. As it turns out, then, Israel’srejection of God throughout the OT actually carries along the plan ofGod as it narrows its focus, culminating in the expectation of theone Messiah. But with the advent of Jesus Christ, the focus of Godnow widens, beginning with the apostles (the beginnings of theremnant in the NT), expanding to include the church (the replacementof Israel, however temporary that may be), and one day encompassingthe world (which will bring the revelation of God full circle).
A people group also called the “Anakites” (Deut.2:11 [NRSV: “Anakim”]). They are described as giants(Deut. 3:11) who made Moses’ spies feel like grasshoppers incomparison, and they are associated with the antediluvian Nephilim(Gen. 6:4; Num. 13:33). Thus, the KJV often translates the term as“giants” (e.g., Deut. 2:11; Josh. 12:4).
A people group also called the “Anakites” (Deut.2:11 [NRSV: “Anakim”]). They are described as giants(Deut. 3:11) who made Moses’ spies feel like grasshoppers incomparison, and they are associated with the antediluvian Nephilim(Gen. 6:4; Num. 13:33). Thus, the KJV often translates the term as“giants” (e.g., Deut. 2:11; Josh. 12:4).
Terminology.Themodern scientific category of reptiles (air-breathing, cold-bloodedvertebrates) has no precise equivalent in the biblical vocabulary.The Hebrews described creatures by the way they moved, as “crawlingthings” (zakhal[Deut.32:24; Mic. 7:17]), “creeping things” (remes[Gen. 1:25–26]), and “swarming things” (sherets[Gen. 7:21]). All these terms, which probably overlapped, includedboth reptiles and small mammals.
Nakhash(e.g., Gen. 3) is the commonest general term for snakes and otherreptiles. Rarer terms are tannin(translated “snake” in Exod. 7:9, but more usuallymeaning a mythical “dragon”) and sarap(used, on its own or qualifying nakhash, of the fiery serpents inNum. 21:6, 8; Isa. 14:29; 30:6). In Greek, herpeton(Acts 10:12; 11:6; Rom. 1:23; James 3:7) includes snakes and lizards,while the generic word for snake is ophis(e.g., Matt. 7:10).
Besidesthese general terms, Scripture mentions the following: (1)thecrocodile (liwyatan)found in Egypt and Israel and sometimes portrayed in poetry as amythical monster (Job 3:8; 41:1; Pss. 74:14; 104:26; Isa. 27:1);(2)a variety of lizards, probably including geckos, skinks, andchameleons (Lev. 11:29, 30; Prov. 30:28); (3)a variety ofpoisonous snakes, including the cobra, or asp (Deut. 32:33; Rom.3:13), and the viper, or adder (Isa. 59:5; Acts 28:3).
Althoughtortoises are common in the Middle East, the KJV translation of theHebrew word tsabas “tortoise” in Lev. 11:29 almost certainly is wrong.However, since at least eighty kinds of reptile are found in Israel,precise identifications beyond this are difficult.
Reptilesin the Bible. Thesnake is an important image in Scripture. It is a snake that temptsAdam and Eve (Gen. 3:1; 2Cor. 11:3), and in the first promiseof salvation God says that the seed of woman will crush the snake’shead (Gen. 3:15). From that moment, the snake is condemned to crawlon its belly and eat dust (Gen. 3:14; Isa. 65:25).
Allsuch crawling creatures were unclean in OT law (Lev. 11:29–31).Although some Middle Eastern snakes are nonpoisonous, the OT alwaysportrays snakes as harmful as well as unclean (Deut. 8:15; 32:24, 33;Job 20:14, 16; Eccles. 10:8, 11; Isa. 30:6; Amos 5:19; Matt. 7:10;Luke 11:11). Because the venom was associated with the snake’stongue, the snake was a symbol of treacherous, lying speech as wellas of physical danger (Gen. 49:17; Pss. 58:4; 140:3; Prov. 23:32;Isa. 14:29; Jer. 8:17; 51:34; Matt. 23:33; Rev. 9:19), shrewdness(Matt. 10:16), and degradation (Mic. 7:17). For snakes to be renderedharmless was a sign of divine intervention (Ps. 91:13) and of themessianic age (Isa. 11:8; Luke 10:19; Mark 16:18). Paul and Johnidentify the snake in Eden with Satan and look forward to his totaldestruction in the last days (Rom. 16:20; Rev. 12:9–17;20:2–3).
Snakesfeature three times in biblical miracles. First, Aaron’s rodwas transformed into a serpent that, when Pharaoh’s magiciansreplicated the feat, devoured the magicians’ serpents (Exod.7:10–15; cf. 4:3–4). This would have impressed Pharaohall the more because the snake was a symbol of the pharaoh’spower. Second, when God sent poisonous snakes to punish theIsraelites, who repented, God told Moses to set up a bronze snake ona pole; anyone who looked at the bronze snake (which only much laterbecame an object of idolatry) was saved (Num. 21:6–9; 2Kings18:4). This prefigured the cross, on which Christ became a curse forus (John 3:14; 1Cor. 10:9; Gal. 3:10). Third, Paul was bittenby a snake and suffered no harm (Acts 28:3–6).
Retribution refers to “giving what is due,”usually in response to evil. Retribution is an important theologicaldoctrine whose significance is belied by scant use of the term inEnglish translations (ESV 2×; NIV 6×; NRSV 9×).Retribution is driven by the theological conviction that moral orderis built into the fabric of the world (Ps. 7:14–16; Prov.26:27). This moral compass is guaranteed by God’s oversight,meting out justice in judgment and rewards to the righteous, not onlyon the human-human level, but also on the divine-human level (2Cor.9:6; Gal. 6:7). This biblical equation assures that (1)life isnot overwhelmed by moral chaos, (2)human actions affect thefuture, (3)the world is morally uniform, and (4)humanrevenge is to be avoided (Lev. 19:17–18; Matt. 16:27; Rom.12:19). With the human community in view, God’s commands areintended to instruct and guide. Not surprisingly, address ofretribution is found throughout biblical literature: legal (Deut.28), narrative (Num. 16), poetic (Pss. 18:20; 94:15), sapiential(Prov. 11:24–25), and prophetic (Hab. 2:2–20).
Thispoetic justice pervades the OT in the judgment and exile of Adam andEve (Gen. 3:8–24), Cain’s sentence and blood revenge(Gen. 4:15, 24), and the worldwide flood and annihilation (Gen. 6–9)(cf. Exod. 21:20–21; Deut. 30:15–20; Josh. 7; Amos3:14–15; Mic. 2:1–3). Such stories reveal a sovereign Godacting as an external agent who exacts punishment in light of hisintentions for creation. For Israel, retribution is the exercise ofYahweh’s legal rights in an attempt to restore covenantfellowship (Lev. 26:40–45). Although serious tensionsexist—sometimes the wicked prosper and the innocent suffer—thisdoes not alter the grand scheme of Scripture (Job 33; Jer. 12:1–4).In some scenarios, only the next lifetime will fully bring justiceand reward (Ps. 49:5–15; Dan. 12:2; Matt. 25:31–46; Rev.22:1–5). Deep wisdom, however, embraces mystery and understandsthe limits of human agency (Gen. 50:19–20; James 1:5).
Whilethe notion of consequence may be too strong, the concept ofcorrespondence is helpful for understanding the concept ofretribution. God’s judgments reveal (1)a correspondencebetween act and effect, (2)accountability to known law, (3)adebt requiring resolve/restitution, and (4)punishment thatreenacts elements of the sin itself. God’s roles as divinewarrior, judge, and king proclaim his universal rule and preserve itfrom all who would mock or defy his royal authority (Gen. 3:14–19;Deut. 7:10; 1Sam. 24:19; 2Sam. 12:11–12; Ps. 149;Prov. 15:25; Mic. 5:15; 1Cor. 16:22; Gal. 1:8–9; 2Thess.1:5–10).
God’sreasons for retribution center on disobedience and injustice, whilehis purposes are essentially restorative and developmental.Retribution is an application of God’s holiness that purifiesthe world for his kingdom of peace. In this way, vengeance anddeliverance work together (Nah. 1:2, 7). Paradoxically, retributiongives hope to fallen humanity for sin acknowledged andunacknowledged, anticipating the triumph of righteousness (Ps.58:11). Retribution grants rationality and stability to humanity,promotes closure in crisis, and fosters hope—a forerunner ofthe ultimate judgment before the throne of God the King.
The words “sacrifice” and “offering”often are used interchangeably, but “offering” refers toa gift more generally, while “sacrifice” indicates a giftconsecrated for a divine being. In biblical Hebrew “sacrifice”is more narrowly equated with the peace offering. All other“sacrifices” are referred to as gifts. Sacrifices wereoffered to honor God, thanking him for his goodness. More important,they enabled persons to be made right with God by atoning for theirsins. Whereas sin upset the fellowship God desired to have withpeople and kindled his wrath, sacrifice restored the relationship.
OldTestament
OTofferings included cereals (whether the grain was whole, ground intoflour, or mixed with other elements), liquids (wine, oil, or water),and animals (or parts thereof, such as the blood and fat). Althoughthe Bible acknowledges that other ancient Near Eastern people hadtheir own sacrificial rites, it rejects them as unworthy of the Godof Israel. The people of God therefore were instructed how tosacrifice properly while at Sinai. Even so, offerings and sacrificesare recorded as taking place before the law was given.
Priorto the law.Cain and Abel brought the earliest offerings. Contrary to a commoninterpretation, Cain’s offering was not rejected because it didnot include blood; the Hebrew word for the brothers’ gifts,minkhah,usually denotes grain offerings. A better conclusion is that Cainonly brought some of his produce (no mention of firstfruits), whileAbel brought the best of the best (the fat portions from thefirstborn of the flock).
Immediatelyafter the flood, Noah built an altar and presented the first burntoffering mentioned in the Bible (Gen. 8:20). That this (and othersacrifices) was received as a “pleasing aroma” indicatesthat God approved of and accepted it. It is significant thatimmediately after the offering, God made a covenant with Noah, hisdescendants, and every living creature. Sacrifices are closelyrelated to covenant relationships, as can be seen in the story ofAbraham enacting a covenant ceremony in Gen. 15 and in Israelreceiving many instructions about sacrifice while at Sinai (cf. Gen.31:43–54).
Sacrificiallaws in Leviticus.Sacrificial laws are found throughout the Pentateuch, the most beingin Lev. 1–7. As Leviticus makes clear, Israel understoodsacrifice to have a number of different purposes. It was a means tobring a gift to God, to express communion with him and others in thecommunity, to consecrate something or someone for God’s use,and to deal with personal uncleanness or sin. These ideas aredeveloped in the descriptions of the different sacrifices that Israelwas required to bring to God. In general, the sacrifices were made ofclean animals raised by the one making the offering or of grain orwine produced by the person. In some cases, the offering wasconnected with the person’s economic ability, a poorer personbeing allowed to present doves or even cereal if a lamb or goat wasunaffordable for a sin offering (Lev. 5:6–13). In all cases,only the best—what was “without defect”—wasto be offered.
Priestas mediator.Three parties were involved in the sacrifices: the worshiper, thepriest, and God. The worshiper—the person who had sinned orbecome unclean in some way—brought an animal to God, laid ahand upon it, and then killed it. Whether the animal’s deathrepresents the death that the worshiper deserves due to sin orwhether the sin is transferred to the animal that bears it instead isunclear. The priest served as a mediator who offered the blood of thesacrifice to God and, in many instances, burned all or part of theoffering. In response to the offering, God, who had graciously giventhe sacrificial system so that those who had sinned could be restoredto fellowship with him, forgave the person. Uniquely in the ancientworld, Israelite sacrifices were not considered magical acts thatcould manipulate God to act on behalf of the worshiper. Presenting animproper sacrifice while exhibiting an improper attitude or motiveresulted in rejection.
Typesof sacrifices.Leviticus introduced five main sacrifices: the ’olah (1:1–17;6:8–18), the minkhah (2:1–16; 6:14–23), theshelamim (3:1–17; 7:11–36), the khatta’t(4:1–5:13), and the ’asham (5:14–6:7). Most ofthese focused on uncleanness or sin. The worshiper who brought suchan offering was not allowed to eat any of it, as it was wholly givento God. Even when priests were allowed to eat part of a sacrifice,their portion was “waved” before God, indicating that itbelonged to him.
1.The ’olah, or burnt offering, is the basic OT sacrificeconnected with atonement for sin (Lev. 1:4). When rightly offered, itwas accepted as “an aroma pleasing to the Lord.” Theworshiper brought a male animal (young bull, sheep, goat, dove, oryoung pigeon) without blemish, laid a hand upon it, and then killedit. After the priest sprinkled some of the blood on the altar, therest was burned up.
2.The minkhah is simply a gift or offering. The Hebrew word is oftenused for a present given to another person or tribute to a ruler.When used of sacrifice, it is usually rendered as “grainoffering” or “meal offering.” A minkhah can, onoccasion, include flesh or fat (Gen. 4:4; Judg. 6:18–21).Considered “an aroma pleasing to the Lord,” it consistedof unground grain or fine flour mixed with oil and incense and waspresented either cooked or uncooked. Part of the offering was burnedas a “memorial portion,” the rest being given to thepriests (Lev. 2:1–3). It usually was accompanied by a drinkoffering—wine poured out on the altar. Grain offeringsfrequently complemented burnt offerings or fellowship offerings. Theshowbread may have been considered a grain offering.
3.The shelamim (NIV: “fellowship offering”) hastraditionally been called the “peace offering,” as theterm is related to shalom. This offering most likely indicated thatthe worshiper was at peace with God and others; all the worshiper’srelationships were whole. Classified into three types, it could beused to express thanksgiving, to signify the fulfillment of a vow, orsimply to denote one’s desire to bring an offering to God outof free will. Only those who made a vow were required to offer ashelamim; the other forms were wholly optional. The worshiper broughta male or female animal (ox, sheep, or goat) without blemish, laid ahand on its head, and slaughtered it. The priest sprinkled its bloodon the sides of the altar and burned the fat surrounding the majororgans. It is described as “an aroma pleasing to the Lord.”
Thisoffering significantly recognized the covenant relationship existingbetween those who shared in it. God received the fatty portions, theofficiating priest received the right thigh, the other priests thebreast, and the remainder was shared among members of a family, clan,tribe, or some other group. According to Leviticus, a thanksgivingoffering was to be eaten on the day it was offered, and a vow orfreewill offering could be eaten within two days. Anything not eatenin the prescribed time period was to be burned.
4.The khatta’t, or sin offering, atoned for the sin of anindividual or of the nation and cleansed the sacred items in thetabernacle that had been corrupted by sin. Since a sin offering couldpurify ceremonial as well as moral uncleanness, people who wereunclean due to childbirth, skin diseases, bodily discharges, and soforth also brought them (Lev. 12–15).
Thekind of animal sacrificed and the sacrificial ritual varied with theoffender and the offense. If a priest or the entire congregationsinned, a bull was sacrificed and its blood was sprinkled before theveil of the tabernacle and on the incense altar in the holy place.The rest was burned, leaving nothing to be eaten. Leaders who sinnedsacrificed a male goat. Its blood was sprinkled on the bronze altar,and the remainder was given to the priest. A commoner brought andslaughtered a she-goat or lamb, the priest sprinkled its blood on thehorns of the altar, and the fat was burned for God and the rest givento the priests. A poor person could bring two doves or pigeons, andthe very poor could bring a grain offering. This differentiationapparently indicated that the sins of some members of the communityhad more serious consequences than others. Those in closest contactwith the tabernacle contaminated it at a deeper level, requiring amore costly sacrifice. The poor were not required to bring more thanthey could afford.
5.The ’asham, or guilt offering, provided compensation for sins.A ram without blemish was sacrificed, its blood was sprinkled on thealtar, and its fatty portions, kidneys, and liver were burned. Therest was given to the priest. In addition, the value of what wasmisappropriated plus one-fifth of its value was given to the personwronged or to the priests.
Altars.According to Leviticus, only the Aa-ron-ic priests could handle theblood or other parts of a sacrifice brought to the altar at thetabernacle. Even so, throughout Israel’s history othersacrificial altars were built. While some of these were illicitlyused for syncretistic practices, others were constructed at God’sinstruction (Josh. 8:30–35; Judg. 6:25–26). Some of thesewere used by priests making rounds so that people from differentareas could sacrifice to God (1Sam. 7:17). Others were used byindividuals who were not priests yet desired to call upon the name ofthe Lord or sacrifice for communal meals. The solitary altars weremainly used for burnt offerings and peace offerings, although grainand drink offerings also were known. Sin and guilt offerings wereoffered only at the tabernacle or temple.
Timesand purposes.The OT regulates a number of different occasions upon which regularsacrifices were to be made. Burnt offerings were presented everymorning and evening (Exod. 29:38–41; Num. 28:1–8).Additional offerings were sacrificed on the Sabbath and the new moon(Num. 28:9–15). Special sacrifices were brought to celebratethe major festivals of the year (Num. 28:16–29:39),particularly the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16). Sacrifices might alsoaccompany requests for safety or deliverance or in response to God’sdeliverance. Thus, burnt and fellowship offerings could be broughtalong with prayers that God would put an end to a plague (2Sam.24:18–25). King David brought burnt offerings and fellowshipofferings when the ark of the covenant was returned after having beencaptured by the Philistines (2Sam. 6:1–19).
Sacrificescould also be made to consecrate people or things for a special task.When the tabernacle was consecrated, special offerings were broughtfor twelve continuous days (Num. 7). Later, fellowship, burnt, andgrain offerings were sacrificed when the temple was dedicated(1Kings 8:62–64). Sin offerings were presented when apriest was ordained (Lev. 8–9). Those who completed a vowdedicating themselves as Naz-i-rites brought sacrifices to God sothat they could again become a normal member of the congregation(Num. 6:9–21). Fellowship offerings often accompanied theannouncement of or installation of a king (1Sam. 11:14–15;1Kings 1:9,25).
Althoughthe sacrificial system was intended to bring the Israelites back intofellowship with God, at times their misuse of it separated them fromhim. When his people showed more interest in sacrificial ritual thanin obeying God’s instructions, they were chastened (1Sam.15:13–22; Jer. 7:21–28). When the people of Israel wereguilty of confusing the worship of Yahweh with Canaanite fertilitycults, God sent prophets to warn them (Isa. 1:11–16; Amos4:4–5). Prophetic statements denouncing sacrificial rites wereaimed at the misuse of sacrifices rather than their existence.Jeremiah and Ezekiel were so positive about sacrificial worship thatthey looked forward to a time when it would be reestablished in itspure form (Jer. 17:26; Ezek. 43:18–27; 46:1–24).
NewTestament
TheNT indicates that the OT sacrificial system was still in place in theearly first century AD. Following directions given in Leviticus, Marybrought a sacrifice to the temple in Jerusalem so that she could bepurified after giving birth to Jesus (Luke 2:21–24; cf. Lev.12:3, 8). Mary and Joseph would have sacrificed and eaten a Passoverlamb during their annual pilgrimage to Jerusalem to celebrate theFeast of Passover. It is not recorded whether Jesus always went withthem, but he did join them at the Passover celebration when he wastwelve years old. It is safe to assume that at this time and after hegrew up, Jesus took part in the sacrifices when he visited Jerusalemto celebrate the feasts.
Jesus’disciples attend several feasts with him. In addition, after hisresurrection they frequently went to the temple to pray at the timewhen sacrifices were made. Encouraged by the Jerusalem churchleaders, Paul went to the temple to join in and pay for thepurification rites of some men who had taken a vow, perhaps to serveas Nazirites (Acts 21:23–26). He later testified before Felixthat he had returned to Jerusalem in order to bring gifts to the poorand present offerings in the temple (24:17). Although Gentilebelievers were exempt from these practices (15:1–29), earlyJewish believers clearly saw no contradiction between believing thegospel of Jesus Christ and engaging in sacrificial rituals. Theylikely followed Jewish piety until the destruction of the temple inAD 70, when all sacrifices at the temple ceased.
Evenso, Christians quickly came to understand Christ’s death as thefinal sacrifice that completed the OT system. Various NT authorsconsider the nature of Christ’s death and metaphorically relateit to OT sacrifices, but the writer of Hebrews develops this in themost detail. According to Hebrews, the sacrificial system was merelythe shadow that pointed to Jesus. Although the blood of animals couldnot adequately deal with sins, Jesus’ sacrifice could (Heb.10:1–10). Jesus is regularly identified as the sacrificial lambwhose blood purifies humanity from sin (John 1:29, 36; Rom. 8:3;1Cor. 5:7; Eph. 5:2; 1Pet. 1:19; 1John 1:7; Rev.5:6, 12; 7:14; 12:11; 13:8). His sacrifice is considered apropitiation that turns away God’s wrath (Rom. 3:25; 1John2:2).
Theend of the OT sacrificial system does not mean that those who come toGod through Jesus Christ no longer bring sacrifices. Instead ofanimal and grain offerings, spiritual sacrifices are to be made(1Pet. 2:5). Emulating their Savior, Christ’s followersshould offer themselves as living sacrifices, devoted to God (Rom.12:1). This implies that everything done in this life could beconsidered a sacrifice. Simply believing the gospel makes one anacceptable offering to God (Rom. 15:16). Labor for the sake of thegospel, or perhaps martyrdom, can be viewed as a drink offering(Phil. 2:17). The author of Hebrews identifies three types ofsacrifices that believers should offer: praise, good deeds, andsharing with those in need (13:15–16). In line with the last ofthese points, Paul counts the gift sent by the Philippian church as afragrant offering that pleases God (Phil. 4:18).
OldTestament
Phoeniciansand Philistines. Asa people whose ancestral territory lay in the landlocked andtimber-poor highlands of Ephraim and Judah, the Israelites ofbiblical times never achieved prominence in seafaring orshipbuilding. Instead, they relied for their maritime enterprises onalliances with their coastal neighbors, particularly the Phoenicianstates to the north of Israel, who excelled in seafaring and hadaccess to the abundant timber forests of Lebanon. The Phoenicians(the Punics of classical antiquity) were famous in antiquity fortheir seafaring. In biblical times, they traded heavily betweenSyria-Palestine and Egypt and also sailed throughout theMediterranean, establishing colonies as far away as Tunisia(Carthage) and Spain (Cadiz).
Anotherseagoing people prominent in the OT were the Philistines, whose baseof power was to the west of Judah, along the Mediterranean coast. TheBible associates the Philistines with the five cities of Ashdod,Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza. The Philistines were among the SeaPeoples, who came to the Levant from the Aegean beginning in thetwelfth century BC (Amos 9:7; Jer. 47:4).
Theperennial enmity between the Philistines and the Israelites precludedjoint maritime ventures of the sort shared by Israel and thePhoenicians, and the Bible does not describe Philistine maritimeactivities in any depth. Nevertheless, the seagoing nature of thePhilistines is reflected by the fact that their settlements remainedconfined to the coastal region. They never made a systematic attemptto take over the traditionally Israelite and Judahite highlands. Whenthey did venture into the Judean mountains, it was to assert amilitary and political presence among the agrarian Israelites andJudahites rather than to establish permanent settlements andPhilistine population centers. Twelfth-century BC reliefs at MedinetHabu (in the mortuary temple of RamessesIII) depict a navalbattle between the Sea Peoples and the Egyptians. The reliefs includepictures of Philistine ships and sailors.
Israeliteseafaring.One of the rare references to Israelite seafaring describes theDanites and the Asherites in connection with ships and harbors (Judg.5:17; see also Ezek. 27:19). Traditional Danite territory overlappedwith the area of Philistine settlement. Asherite territory overlappedsubstantially with Phoenician territory. It is possible that Judg.5:17 refers to the fact that the Danites and the Asherites worked inthe port cities serving Philistine and Phoenician shipping. Inanother passage, Zebulun is associated with ports (Gen. 49:13). It isnoteworthy that the Israelite coast between Jaffa and Dor (roughlybetween Philistia and Phoenicia) does not have an abundance ofnatural harbors. Later, Herod the Great would build the artificialharbor at Caesarea in the first century BC. The great expense of sucha project—including the construction of over 2,500 feet ofbreakwaters made of underwater concrete, mostly imported fromItaly—suggests the extent of the need for secure harbors inthis region.
Solomon’sfleet.The zenith of Israelite seafaring occurred during the reign ofSolomon. Solomon built a fleet of ships at “Ezion Geber, whichis near Elath in Edom, on the shore of the Red Sea” (1Kings9:26). The purpose of these ships was to bring back gold from Ophir(1Kings 9:28), possibly a location in the Arabian Peninsula, towhich a port on the Red Sea would have offered ready access. Thestory confirms the aforementioned dependence on the Phoenicians inthe area of seafaring: although the ships belonged to Solomon, “Hiram[the Phoenician king of Tyre] sent his men—sailors who knew thesea—to serve in the fleet with Solomon’s men”(1Kings 9:27). The timber for the ships would also have beenimported by Israel from Phoenicia (see 1Kings 9:11). Even atthe height of its power, Israel lacked the human resources to embarkon sea voyages independently of the Phoenicians.
Thesuccess of Solomon’s project, of course, depended not only onwarm relations with the Phoenicians but also on territorial controlof the historically Edomite lands between Judah and the Red Sea. Thisfavorable combination of conditions would come and go throughout thebiblical period, and with it, Israel’s modest presence on theseas. From the Phoenician point of view, cooperation with Israel wasan essential component of gaining access to a Red Sea port, and withit to the products of Arabia, the Horn of Africa, and India. ThePhoenicians, as expansive as their travel was in the Mediterranean,could never independently control the long overland route fromPhoenicia to the Red Sea, since it ran through the territory ofIsrael and Edom. Their best hope was a friendly and powerfulIsraelite ally. This explains the cordial relationship and why Hiramsent not only his sailors to serve Solomon but also craftsmen andsupplies for the construction of the temple (1Kings 5:10–12).Solomon and Hiram jointly operated “a fleet of trading ships”that would return to port every three years bringing “gold,silver, and ivory, and apes and baboons” (1Kings 10:22).
Jehoshaphat.In the mid-ninth century BC, King Jehoshaphat of Judah attempted torepeat Solomon’s feat of launching a fleet from Ezion Geber(1Kings 22:48–49; 2Chron. 20:35–37).According to both accounts, the ships were wrecked before they couldset sail. On several other points, however, the two versions of thestory disagree in ways that bear on questions of the political andeconomic conditions of Israelite seafaring.
Bythis time, Israel and Judah had split into separate kingdoms, withthe northern kingdom of Israel being geographically and politicallycloser to the Phoenicians. The powerful King Ahab of Israel,Jehoshaphat’s contemporary through much of his reign, marriedJezebel, the daughter of the Sidonian (Phoenician) king Ethbaal(1Kings 16:31). According to 1Kings, King Ahaziah ofIsrael (Ahab’s son) proposed to cooperate with Jehoshaphat bysending his own men on the voyage, much as Hiram had assisted Solomonin the previous century. Jehoshaphat rejected the suggestion,possibly indicating a bid for Judean autonomy in an era of northerndominance. According to 2Chronicles, however, Jehoshaphat didcooperate willingly with Ahaziah, and this was the reason that theships foundered in port: God punished the righteous Jehoshaphat fortoo close a relationship with his wicked northern counterpart. In1Kings 22:47 it is mentioned that at the time of Jehoshaphat’sventure there was no king in Edom. As noted, control of the overlandroute between Judah and the Red Sea was necessary for the success ofany voyage originating from Ezion Geber.
Howeverthe contradiction between 1Kings and 2Chroniclesregarding the involvement of Ahaziah is resolved, both versions ofthe story highlight the fact that the port at Ezion Geber commandedthe interest of the Judeans, the Israelites, and the Phoenicians, andits successful operation probably depended on the cooperation of allthree.
Shipsof Tarshish.Several biblical texts, including the stories of Solomon andJehoshaphat, mention “ships of Tarshish” (1Kings10:22 NIV mg.). In a number of contexts, such ships are associatedwith the transportation of metals and metal ores, including iron,lead, tin, gold, and silver (1Kings 10:22; Ezek. 27:12; Jer.10:9). The exact derivation of the term “ships of Tarshish”is uncertain, though it is clear from the descriptions of theircargoes that such ships could travel over long distances. As Ezekielobserves, “The ships of Tarshish serve as carriers for yourwares. You are filled with heavy cargo as you sail the sea. Youroarsmen take you out to the high seas” (Ezek. 27:25–26).
Inthe Table of Nations, Tarshish is listed as a descendant of Javan(Gen. 10:4), along with a number of other seafaring peoples of theeastern Mediterranean (“Javan” indicates the peoples ofthe Aegean and is linguistically equivalent to “Ionia”[see also Ezek. 27:12–22]). Some have suggested, then, that theships of Tarshish should be associated with Tarsus in southeasternTurkey, an area containing silver mines (also the birthplace of Paul[Acts 9:11]). Others have suggested the Phoenician colony ofTartessus in Spain, another metal-producing area. This locationfigures in the interpretation of the identification of thedestination of Jonah as Tarshish (Jon. 1:3): presumably, if he wereavoiding Nineveh and departing from Joppa, he would head towardSpain, in the exact opposite direction, rather than toward Tarsus inCilicia.
Inaddition to these two geographical options, some have attempted toexplain the expression “ships of Tarshish” as derivingfrom the Akkadian term for smelting or refining: perhaps the manyreferences to cargoes of metals indicate that the ships were used totransport metal ore to refining centers. Finally, one scholar hasproposed that the term is related to the Greek word tarsos,meaning “oar.”
Descriptionsof ships and seafaring.Ezekiel, in his lament concerning the Phoenician city of Tyre (Ezek.27), relates a number of details related to Phoenician seafaring. Thepicture largely confirms the descriptions of how Solomon built andmanned his fleet with the assistance of his Tyrian ally. Timber forthe construction of the ship came from Lebanon and Cyprus, amongother places (vv. 5–6). Sails were made from Egyptian linen(v.7), and as noted above, the oarsmen and sailors were fromthe Phoenician city-states (vv. 8–9). Ezekiel goes on to list alarge number of ports of call as well as a dazzling variety ofcargoes (vv. 12–24). Notably, Ezekiel has the Judahites and theIsraelites offering the products of their agrarian economy—“wheatfrom Minnith and confections, honey, olive oil and balm”(v.17)—thus filling out the picture of what theIsraelites gave in exchange for the precious metals and luxury itemsimported by their country from elsewhere.
In1999 archaeologists explored two eighth-century BC Phoenician shipsthat had sunk thirty miles west of Ashkelon. The ships, eachmeasuring about fifty feet in length, contained large cargoes of wineand were headed either for Egypt or for the Phoenician colonies inthe western Mediterranean.
Shipsand sailing figure prominently in the story of Jonah, who boarded aship bound for Tarshish (see discussion above) at Joppa on theMediterranean coast. In the story we see a number of features ofancient sea travel. Jonah paid a fare for his voyage (Jon. 1:3). Notonly the biblical author (see 1:4), but also the presumablynon-Israelite sailors, believed that the great storm was the doing ofa god, and that it could be calmed by appealing to that god(1:6)—although cargo was thrown overboard for good measure.When Paul was caught in a storm in the first century AD, the samestrategies were still in use (Acts 27:38). The religious habits ofancient sailors, particularly their reverence for the gods whocontrolled the stormy seas and thus held their lives in the balance,are illuminated by the discovery of stone anchors in several temples(presumably left by sailors as offerings), including at the portcities of Ugarit, Kition, and Byblos.
Psalm107:23–32 speaks of God’s care of sailors from anIsraelite perspective. In the psalm, those who “went out on thesea in ships,” the “merchants on the mighty waters”(i.e., the deep, open sea), witness firsthand the works of the God ofIsrael, which include both the raising and the quieting of the storm.This passage vividly expresses the terror of being caught in a stormand the great relief and gratitude felt by sailors who reached safehaven.
Noah’sArk
Accordingto the biblical account, Noah’s ark was 450 feet long, 75 feetwide, and 45 feet high (300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits [Gen.6:15]). It had three decks, a roof, and a window. By comparison, theship of Uta-napishti in the Epic of Gilgamesh is described as havingsix decks (and thus seven stories), edges of 180 feet (ten dozencubits) in each dimension, and occupying the space of an acre (arough approximation of the dimensions given). Both ships aredescribed as providing space for the builder’s family and everyliving creature. In the Atrahasis Epic, the boat is roofed, but itsdimensions are not given.
Becauseof the character of Gen. 6–8, it is inappropriate to drawconclusions from the story regarding shipbuilding in historicalantiquity. According to the specifications given in the biblicaltext, Noah’s ark would have been the largest wooden ship inhistory, equaled only by the United States schooner Wyoming,completed in 1909. While the overall length of the Wyoming was also450 feet, nearly 100 feet of length was accounted for in the fore andaft booms, so that the hull length was only 350 feet. Even with earlytwentieth-century shipbuilding technology, its extravagant lengthrendered the Wyoming unseaworthy, and the ship foundered in 1924. Thelargest documented wooden ships of antiquity include the GreekSyracusia(third century BC; 180 feet), described by Athenaeus; the Roman Isis(second century AD; 180 feet), described by Lucian; Caligula’s“Giant Ship” (first century AD; 341 feet), recovered inmodern times and possibly corresponding to a ship described by Plinythe Elder; and PtolemyIV’s Tessarakonteres (third centuryBC), reported by Plutarch to have been about 425 feet long. This lastship was not designed for cruising in open water.
NewTestament
Fishingin the Sea of Galilee. Severalof Jesus’ disciples worked as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee,and the Gospels document their use of small boats for fishing andtraveling across the sea. Fishing was done with nets thrown both fromboats and from the shore (Mark 1:16, 19). The boats used by fishermenon the Sea of Galilee may have been small enough to pull up onto thebeach (Luke 5:2), or to be nearly capsized by a large catch of fish(Luke 5:7) or by a violent storm (Mark 4:37). They were large enoughto transport several men and even to sleep in (Mark 4:38). Such boatscould be rowed or sailed; in Mark 6:48 the disciples had to resort torowing because of an unfavorable headwind. On one occasion, Jesusstood in a boat to preach to a crowd gathered on the shore (Mark4:1). The Sea of Galilee is about eight miles wide and thirteen mileslong. On several occasions, Jesus traveled by boat across the sea toavoid having to walk long distances around its circumference (e.g.,Matt. 9:1; 14:22; 15:39).
In1986 archaeologists recovered a fishing boat dating to the mid-firstcentury AD on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. The boat had beenscuttled near the shore and was preserved under mud. The “JesusBoat,” as it was dubbed, measures twenty-seven feet in lengthand has a beam seven and a half feet long. Numerous species of woodwere used in its construction and repairs throughout its useful life.While there is no evidence to link the boat to Jesus or hisdisciples, radiometric dating places it in the correct period, and itprovides a likely model of the type of boat portrayed in the Gospels.
Asecond source of information regarding ships and sailing in the NT isthe account in Acts of Paul’s many sea voyages. As in the caseof Jehoshaphat, the Tyrians, Jonah, and Jesus’ disciples, Paullearned firsthand the perils of seafaring in small wooden boats:among his many traumas, along with beatings and stonings, herecalled, “Three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and aday in the open sea” (2Cor. 11:25).
Paul’sjourneys.A survey of Paul’s sea travels on his four journeys gives someidea of the routes that could be taken by a paying traveler in theeastern Mediterranean and Aegean.
1.Paul’s first missionary journey included voyages from Seleuciain Syria to the port of Salamis in Cyprus (Acts 13:4) and from Cyprus(Paphos) to Perga on the southern coast of Asia Minor (13:13). Afterjourneying through the interior, Paul returned to Attalia, where heembarked for the return trip to Syria, presumably passing againthrough the port at Salamis (14:26).
2.The second missionary journey began not with a sea voyage but ratherwith a trek through the interior of Syria and Cilicia, illustratingthat although sea travel was by far a more rapid means of travel, theoverland routes were by no means impossible (Acts 15:39). Paul wouldrepeat this land route during his third journey (19:1). Sea travelwas fast, but when one had plenty of friends along the alternativeland route, a sea journey was considerably less enjoyable. It isduring the second journey that we have the first recorded accounts ofPaul sailing in the Aegean. From Troas in Asia Minor, he sailed theshort distance to Macedonia (16:11), putting in midway at the islandof Samothrace. Apparently, Paul traveled by sea down the coast fromBerea to Athens (17:14). At the conclusion of his second journey,Paul sailed from Corinth to Caesarea, with a stop at Ephesus(18:18–22). Not counting any intervening ports of call notmentioned in the text, this would be the longest single leg of seatravel so far mentioned.
3.The third missionary journey once more began with a long overlandtrip from Syria through Asia Minor; by this time, Paul had manyassociates along the way to visit. Again, he sailed in the Aegean,from Ephesus to Macedonia (Acts 20:1) and back (20:6). At one point,Paul opted to travel overland, from Troas to Assos, while hiscompanions sailed down the coast (20:13). Meeting up with them, hesailed on, hugging the coast of Asia Minor, then sailing south ofCyprus along an open-water route to Tyre. From Tyre, the ship againhugged the Palestinian coast, stopping in several ports before Pauldisembarked at Caesarea (21:7). Paul’s journeys illustrate thevariety of itineraries taken by ships. They were capable of sailingin deep water, but they would also hug the coast when there werereasons to make frequent stops.
4.Paul’s fourth journey, which he made in custody on his way to atrial before the emperor at Rome, was to be the most dangerous. Fromthe account in Acts we can glean a number of details of life at seain the first century AD. The ship bound for Italy was large, and itcarried 276 passengers and crew (Acts 27:6, 37), including soldiersand prisoners, at least one companion of a prisoner (Paul’sfriend Aristarchus [27:2]), a ship’s pilot, and the ship’sowner (27:11). Sailors used celestial navigation (27:20) and tooksoundings in shallow water (27:28). We see also that the ship’scourse could be determined by the direction of the prevailing winds:twice during the journey Paul’s ship was forced to sail to thelee of large islands (Cyprus and Crete)—a longer journey, butthe only option for a ship that was not rigged to sail close-hauled.
Whenextended periods of unfavorable weather were forecast, one option wassimply to put in at a port until conditions improved, preferably in aharbor that was in the lee of an island (Acts 27:12). We learnsomething of the measures that were taken in heavy weather, many ofwhich are still used in modern times: ropes were tied around the hullof the ship to prevent it from breaking up in rough seas (27:17), thelifeboat was brought onto the deck and made fast (27:17), sea anchorswere deployed to keep the bow of the ship oriented into the oncomingwaves (27:7), the rudder was lashed amidships (27:40), valuable cargoand gear were jettisoned (27:19, 38), and, as in the days of Jonah,sailors and passengers prayed for divine deliverance (27:29; see alsothe protective emblems in 28:11).
Whenall other means had been exhausted, a ship could be run aground on asandy beach (Acts 27:39), a measure that would have risked damage tothe boat but saved lives. In the case of Paul’s ship, thedecision to run aground ultimately resulted in the destruction of theship (27:41).
Metaphorsand illustrations.Several NT authors draw illustrations from the nautical world. Jameslikens the harmful power of evil speech to the rudder of a ship:although it is a small device, by it the pilot can control a greatship (James 3:4–5). Elsewhere, he compares the doubting of theunwise person to being lost at sea in a storm (James 1:6; cf. Eph.4:14). In 1Tim. 1:19 the loss of faith and good conscience islikened to a shipwreck. Hebrews 6:19 describes the assurance of God’sfaithfulness as an anchor for the soul.
OldTestament
Phoeniciansand Philistines. Asa people whose ancestral territory lay in the landlocked andtimber-poor highlands of Ephraim and Judah, the Israelites ofbiblical times never achieved prominence in seafaring orshipbuilding. Instead, they relied for their maritime enterprises onalliances with their coastal neighbors, particularly the Phoenicianstates to the north of Israel, who excelled in seafaring and hadaccess to the abundant timber forests of Lebanon. The Phoenicians(the Punics of classical antiquity) were famous in antiquity fortheir seafaring. In biblical times, they traded heavily betweenSyria-Palestine and Egypt and also sailed throughout theMediterranean, establishing colonies as far away as Tunisia(Carthage) and Spain (Cadiz).
Anotherseagoing people prominent in the OT were the Philistines, whose baseof power was to the west of Judah, along the Mediterranean coast. TheBible associates the Philistines with the five cities of Ashdod,Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza. The Philistines were among the SeaPeoples, who came to the Levant from the Aegean beginning in thetwelfth century BC (Amos 9:7; Jer. 47:4).
Theperennial enmity between the Philistines and the Israelites precludedjoint maritime ventures of the sort shared by Israel and thePhoenicians, and the Bible does not describe Philistine maritimeactivities in any depth. Nevertheless, the seagoing nature of thePhilistines is reflected by the fact that their settlements remainedconfined to the coastal region. They never made a systematic attemptto take over the traditionally Israelite and Judahite highlands. Whenthey did venture into the Judean mountains, it was to assert amilitary and political presence among the agrarian Israelites andJudahites rather than to establish permanent settlements andPhilistine population centers. Twelfth-century BC reliefs at MedinetHabu (in the mortuary temple of RamessesIII) depict a navalbattle between the Sea Peoples and the Egyptians. The reliefs includepictures of Philistine ships and sailors.
Israeliteseafaring.One of the rare references to Israelite seafaring describes theDanites and the Asherites in connection with ships and harbors (Judg.5:17; see also Ezek. 27:19). Traditional Danite territory overlappedwith the area of Philistine settlement. Asherite territory overlappedsubstantially with Phoenician territory. It is possible that Judg.5:17 refers to the fact that the Danites and the Asherites worked inthe port cities serving Philistine and Phoenician shipping. Inanother passage, Zebulun is associated with ports (Gen. 49:13). It isnoteworthy that the Israelite coast between Jaffa and Dor (roughlybetween Philistia and Phoenicia) does not have an abundance ofnatural harbors. Later, Herod the Great would build the artificialharbor at Caesarea in the first century BC. The great expense of sucha project—including the construction of over 2,500 feet ofbreakwaters made of underwater concrete, mostly imported fromItaly—suggests the extent of the need for secure harbors inthis region.
Solomon’sfleet.The zenith of Israelite seafaring occurred during the reign ofSolomon. Solomon built a fleet of ships at “Ezion Geber, whichis near Elath in Edom, on the shore of the Red Sea” (1Kings9:26). The purpose of these ships was to bring back gold from Ophir(1Kings 9:28), possibly a location in the Arabian Peninsula, towhich a port on the Red Sea would have offered ready access. Thestory confirms the aforementioned dependence on the Phoenicians inthe area of seafaring: although the ships belonged to Solomon, “Hiram[the Phoenician king of Tyre] sent his men—sailors who knew thesea—to serve in the fleet with Solomon’s men”(1Kings 9:27). The timber for the ships would also have beenimported by Israel from Phoenicia (see 1Kings 9:11). Even atthe height of its power, Israel lacked the human resources to embarkon sea voyages independently of the Phoenicians.
Thesuccess of Solomon’s project, of course, depended not only onwarm relations with the Phoenicians but also on territorial controlof the historically Edomite lands between Judah and the Red Sea. Thisfavorable combination of conditions would come and go throughout thebiblical period, and with it, Israel’s modest presence on theseas. From the Phoenician point of view, cooperation with Israel wasan essential component of gaining access to a Red Sea port, and withit to the products of Arabia, the Horn of Africa, and India. ThePhoenicians, as expansive as their travel was in the Mediterranean,could never independently control the long overland route fromPhoenicia to the Red Sea, since it ran through the territory ofIsrael and Edom. Their best hope was a friendly and powerfulIsraelite ally. This explains the cordial relationship and why Hiramsent not only his sailors to serve Solomon but also craftsmen andsupplies for the construction of the temple (1Kings 5:10–12).Solomon and Hiram jointly operated “a fleet of trading ships”that would return to port every three years bringing “gold,silver, and ivory, and apes and baboons” (1Kings 10:22).
Jehoshaphat.In the mid-ninth century BC, King Jehoshaphat of Judah attempted torepeat Solomon’s feat of launching a fleet from Ezion Geber(1Kings 22:48–49; 2Chron. 20:35–37).According to both accounts, the ships were wrecked before they couldset sail. On several other points, however, the two versions of thestory disagree in ways that bear on questions of the political andeconomic conditions of Israelite seafaring.
Bythis time, Israel and Judah had split into separate kingdoms, withthe northern kingdom of Israel being geographically and politicallycloser to the Phoenicians. The powerful King Ahab of Israel,Jehoshaphat’s contemporary through much of his reign, marriedJezebel, the daughter of the Sidonian (Phoenician) king Ethbaal(1Kings 16:31). According to 1Kings, King Ahaziah ofIsrael (Ahab’s son) proposed to cooperate with Jehoshaphat bysending his own men on the voyage, much as Hiram had assisted Solomonin the previous century. Jehoshaphat rejected the suggestion,possibly indicating a bid for Judean autonomy in an era of northerndominance. According to 2Chronicles, however, Jehoshaphat didcooperate willingly with Ahaziah, and this was the reason that theships foundered in port: God punished the righteous Jehoshaphat fortoo close a relationship with his wicked northern counterpart. In1Kings 22:47 it is mentioned that at the time of Jehoshaphat’sventure there was no king in Edom. As noted, control of the overlandroute between Judah and the Red Sea was necessary for the success ofany voyage originating from Ezion Geber.
Howeverthe contradiction between 1Kings and 2Chroniclesregarding the involvement of Ahaziah is resolved, both versions ofthe story highlight the fact that the port at Ezion Geber commandedthe interest of the Judeans, the Israelites, and the Phoenicians, andits successful operation probably depended on the cooperation of allthree.
Shipsof Tarshish.Several biblical texts, including the stories of Solomon andJehoshaphat, mention “ships of Tarshish” (1Kings10:22 NIV mg.). In a number of contexts, such ships are associatedwith the transportation of metals and metal ores, including iron,lead, tin, gold, and silver (1Kings 10:22; Ezek. 27:12; Jer.10:9). The exact derivation of the term “ships of Tarshish”is uncertain, though it is clear from the descriptions of theircargoes that such ships could travel over long distances. As Ezekielobserves, “The ships of Tarshish serve as carriers for yourwares. You are filled with heavy cargo as you sail the sea. Youroarsmen take you out to the high seas” (Ezek. 27:25–26).
Inthe Table of Nations, Tarshish is listed as a descendant of Javan(Gen. 10:4), along with a number of other seafaring peoples of theeastern Mediterranean (“Javan” indicates the peoples ofthe Aegean and is linguistically equivalent to “Ionia”[see also Ezek. 27:12–22]). Some have suggested, then, that theships of Tarshish should be associated with Tarsus in southeasternTurkey, an area containing silver mines (also the birthplace of Paul[Acts 9:11]). Others have suggested the Phoenician colony ofTartessus in Spain, another metal-producing area. This locationfigures in the interpretation of the identification of thedestination of Jonah as Tarshish (Jon. 1:3): presumably, if he wereavoiding Nineveh and departing from Joppa, he would head towardSpain, in the exact opposite direction, rather than toward Tarsus inCilicia.
Inaddition to these two geographical options, some have attempted toexplain the expression “ships of Tarshish” as derivingfrom the Akkadian term for smelting or refining: perhaps the manyreferences to cargoes of metals indicate that the ships were used totransport metal ore to refining centers. Finally, one scholar hasproposed that the term is related to the Greek word tarsos,meaning “oar.”
Descriptionsof ships and seafaring.Ezekiel, in his lament concerning the Phoenician city of Tyre (Ezek.27), relates a number of details related to Phoenician seafaring. Thepicture largely confirms the descriptions of how Solomon built andmanned his fleet with the assistance of his Tyrian ally. Timber forthe construction of the ship came from Lebanon and Cyprus, amongother places (vv. 5–6). Sails were made from Egyptian linen(v.7), and as noted above, the oarsmen and sailors were fromthe Phoenician city-states (vv. 8–9). Ezekiel goes on to list alarge number of ports of call as well as a dazzling variety ofcargoes (vv. 12–24). Notably, Ezekiel has the Judahites and theIsraelites offering the products of their agrarian economy—“wheatfrom Minnith and confections, honey, olive oil and balm”(v.17)—thus filling out the picture of what theIsraelites gave in exchange for the precious metals and luxury itemsimported by their country from elsewhere.
In1999 archaeologists explored two eighth-century BC Phoenician shipsthat had sunk thirty miles west of Ashkelon. The ships, eachmeasuring about fifty feet in length, contained large cargoes of wineand were headed either for Egypt or for the Phoenician colonies inthe western Mediterranean.
Shipsand sailing figure prominently in the story of Jonah, who boarded aship bound for Tarshish (see discussion above) at Joppa on theMediterranean coast. In the story we see a number of features ofancient sea travel. Jonah paid a fare for his voyage (Jon. 1:3). Notonly the biblical author (see 1:4), but also the presumablynon-Israelite sailors, believed that the great storm was the doing ofa god, and that it could be calmed by appealing to that god(1:6)—although cargo was thrown overboard for good measure.When Paul was caught in a storm in the first century AD, the samestrategies were still in use (Acts 27:38). The religious habits ofancient sailors, particularly their reverence for the gods whocontrolled the stormy seas and thus held their lives in the balance,are illuminated by the discovery of stone anchors in several temples(presumably left by sailors as offerings), including at the portcities of Ugarit, Kition, and Byblos.
Psalm107:23–32 speaks of God’s care of sailors from anIsraelite perspective. In the psalm, those who “went out on thesea in ships,” the “merchants on the mighty waters”(i.e., the deep, open sea), witness firsthand the works of the God ofIsrael, which include both the raising and the quieting of the storm.This passage vividly expresses the terror of being caught in a stormand the great relief and gratitude felt by sailors who reached safehaven.
Noah’sArk
Accordingto the biblical account, Noah’s ark was 450 feet long, 75 feetwide, and 45 feet high (300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits [Gen.6:15]). It had three decks, a roof, and a window. By comparison, theship of Uta-napishti in the Epic of Gilgamesh is described as havingsix decks (and thus seven stories), edges of 180 feet (ten dozencubits) in each dimension, and occupying the space of an acre (arough approximation of the dimensions given). Both ships aredescribed as providing space for the builder’s family and everyliving creature. In the Atrahasis Epic, the boat is roofed, but itsdimensions are not given.
Becauseof the character of Gen. 6–8, it is inappropriate to drawconclusions from the story regarding shipbuilding in historicalantiquity. According to the specifications given in the biblicaltext, Noah’s ark would have been the largest wooden ship inhistory, equaled only by the United States schooner Wyoming,completed in 1909. While the overall length of the Wyoming was also450 feet, nearly 100 feet of length was accounted for in the fore andaft booms, so that the hull length was only 350 feet. Even with earlytwentieth-century shipbuilding technology, its extravagant lengthrendered the Wyoming unseaworthy, and the ship foundered in 1924. Thelargest documented wooden ships of antiquity include the GreekSyracusia(third century BC; 180 feet), described by Athenaeus; the Roman Isis(second century AD; 180 feet), described by Lucian; Caligula’s“Giant Ship” (first century AD; 341 feet), recovered inmodern times and possibly corresponding to a ship described by Plinythe Elder; and PtolemyIV’s Tessarakonteres (third centuryBC), reported by Plutarch to have been about 425 feet long. This lastship was not designed for cruising in open water.
NewTestament
Fishingin the Sea of Galilee. Severalof Jesus’ disciples worked as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee,and the Gospels document their use of small boats for fishing andtraveling across the sea. Fishing was done with nets thrown both fromboats and from the shore (Mark 1:16, 19). The boats used by fishermenon the Sea of Galilee may have been small enough to pull up onto thebeach (Luke 5:2), or to be nearly capsized by a large catch of fish(Luke 5:7) or by a violent storm (Mark 4:37). They were large enoughto transport several men and even to sleep in (Mark 4:38). Such boatscould be rowed or sailed; in Mark 6:48 the disciples had to resort torowing because of an unfavorable headwind. On one occasion, Jesusstood in a boat to preach to a crowd gathered on the shore (Mark4:1). The Sea of Galilee is about eight miles wide and thirteen mileslong. On several occasions, Jesus traveled by boat across the sea toavoid having to walk long distances around its circumference (e.g.,Matt. 9:1; 14:22; 15:39).
In1986 archaeologists recovered a fishing boat dating to the mid-firstcentury AD on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. The boat had beenscuttled near the shore and was preserved under mud. The “JesusBoat,” as it was dubbed, measures twenty-seven feet in lengthand has a beam seven and a half feet long. Numerous species of woodwere used in its construction and repairs throughout its useful life.While there is no evidence to link the boat to Jesus or hisdisciples, radiometric dating places it in the correct period, and itprovides a likely model of the type of boat portrayed in the Gospels.
Asecond source of information regarding ships and sailing in the NT isthe account in Acts of Paul’s many sea voyages. As in the caseof Jehoshaphat, the Tyrians, Jonah, and Jesus’ disciples, Paullearned firsthand the perils of seafaring in small wooden boats:among his many traumas, along with beatings and stonings, herecalled, “Three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and aday in the open sea” (2Cor. 11:25).
Paul’sjourneys.A survey of Paul’s sea travels on his four journeys gives someidea of the routes that could be taken by a paying traveler in theeastern Mediterranean and Aegean.
1.Paul’s first missionary journey included voyages from Seleuciain Syria to the port of Salamis in Cyprus (Acts 13:4) and from Cyprus(Paphos) to Perga on the southern coast of Asia Minor (13:13). Afterjourneying through the interior, Paul returned to Attalia, where heembarked for the return trip to Syria, presumably passing againthrough the port at Salamis (14:26).
2.The second missionary journey began not with a sea voyage but ratherwith a trek through the interior of Syria and Cilicia, illustratingthat although sea travel was by far a more rapid means of travel, theoverland routes were by no means impossible (Acts 15:39). Paul wouldrepeat this land route during his third journey (19:1). Sea travelwas fast, but when one had plenty of friends along the alternativeland route, a sea journey was considerably less enjoyable. It isduring the second journey that we have the first recorded accounts ofPaul sailing in the Aegean. From Troas in Asia Minor, he sailed theshort distance to Macedonia (16:11), putting in midway at the islandof Samothrace. Apparently, Paul traveled by sea down the coast fromBerea to Athens (17:14). At the conclusion of his second journey,Paul sailed from Corinth to Caesarea, with a stop at Ephesus(18:18–22). Not counting any intervening ports of call notmentioned in the text, this would be the longest single leg of seatravel so far mentioned.
3.The third missionary journey once more began with a long overlandtrip from Syria through Asia Minor; by this time, Paul had manyassociates along the way to visit. Again, he sailed in the Aegean,from Ephesus to Macedonia (Acts 20:1) and back (20:6). At one point,Paul opted to travel overland, from Troas to Assos, while hiscompanions sailed down the coast (20:13). Meeting up with them, hesailed on, hugging the coast of Asia Minor, then sailing south ofCyprus along an open-water route to Tyre. From Tyre, the ship againhugged the Palestinian coast, stopping in several ports before Pauldisembarked at Caesarea (21:7). Paul’s journeys illustrate thevariety of itineraries taken by ships. They were capable of sailingin deep water, but they would also hug the coast when there werereasons to make frequent stops.
4.Paul’s fourth journey, which he made in custody on his way to atrial before the emperor at Rome, was to be the most dangerous. Fromthe account in Acts we can glean a number of details of life at seain the first century AD. The ship bound for Italy was large, and itcarried 276 passengers and crew (Acts 27:6, 37), including soldiersand prisoners, at least one companion of a prisoner (Paul’sfriend Aristarchus [27:2]), a ship’s pilot, and the ship’sowner (27:11). Sailors used celestial navigation (27:20) and tooksoundings in shallow water (27:28). We see also that the ship’scourse could be determined by the direction of the prevailing winds:twice during the journey Paul’s ship was forced to sail to thelee of large islands (Cyprus and Crete)—a longer journey, butthe only option for a ship that was not rigged to sail close-hauled.
Whenextended periods of unfavorable weather were forecast, one option wassimply to put in at a port until conditions improved, preferably in aharbor that was in the lee of an island (Acts 27:12). We learnsomething of the measures that were taken in heavy weather, many ofwhich are still used in modern times: ropes were tied around the hullof the ship to prevent it from breaking up in rough seas (27:17), thelifeboat was brought onto the deck and made fast (27:17), sea anchorswere deployed to keep the bow of the ship oriented into the oncomingwaves (27:7), the rudder was lashed amidships (27:40), valuable cargoand gear were jettisoned (27:19, 38), and, as in the days of Jonah,sailors and passengers prayed for divine deliverance (27:29; see alsothe protective emblems in 28:11).
Whenall other means had been exhausted, a ship could be run aground on asandy beach (Acts 27:39), a measure that would have risked damage tothe boat but saved lives. In the case of Paul’s ship, thedecision to run aground ultimately resulted in the destruction of theship (27:41).
Metaphorsand illustrations.Several NT authors draw illustrations from the nautical world. Jameslikens the harmful power of evil speech to the rudder of a ship:although it is a small device, by it the pilot can control a greatship (James 3:4–5). Elsewhere, he compares the doubting of theunwise person to being lost at sea in a storm (James 1:6; cf. Eph.4:14). In 1Tim. 1:19 the loss of faith and good conscience islikened to a shipwreck. Hebrews 6:19 describes the assurance of God’sfaithfulness as an anchor for the soul.
OldTestament
Phoeniciansand Philistines. Asa people whose ancestral territory lay in the landlocked andtimber-poor highlands of Ephraim and Judah, the Israelites ofbiblical times never achieved prominence in seafaring orshipbuilding. Instead, they relied for their maritime enterprises onalliances with their coastal neighbors, particularly the Phoenicianstates to the north of Israel, who excelled in seafaring and hadaccess to the abundant timber forests of Lebanon. The Phoenicians(the Punics of classical antiquity) were famous in antiquity fortheir seafaring. In biblical times, they traded heavily betweenSyria-Palestine and Egypt and also sailed throughout theMediterranean, establishing colonies as far away as Tunisia(Carthage) and Spain (Cadiz).
Anotherseagoing people prominent in the OT were the Philistines, whose baseof power was to the west of Judah, along the Mediterranean coast. TheBible associates the Philistines with the five cities of Ashdod,Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza. The Philistines were among the SeaPeoples, who came to the Levant from the Aegean beginning in thetwelfth century BC (Amos 9:7; Jer. 47:4).
Theperennial enmity between the Philistines and the Israelites precludedjoint maritime ventures of the sort shared by Israel and thePhoenicians, and the Bible does not describe Philistine maritimeactivities in any depth. Nevertheless, the seagoing nature of thePhilistines is reflected by the fact that their settlements remainedconfined to the coastal region. They never made a systematic attemptto take over the traditionally Israelite and Judahite highlands. Whenthey did venture into the Judean mountains, it was to assert amilitary and political presence among the agrarian Israelites andJudahites rather than to establish permanent settlements andPhilistine population centers. Twelfth-century BC reliefs at MedinetHabu (in the mortuary temple of RamessesIII) depict a navalbattle between the Sea Peoples and the Egyptians. The reliefs includepictures of Philistine ships and sailors.
Israeliteseafaring.One of the rare references to Israelite seafaring describes theDanites and the Asherites in connection with ships and harbors (Judg.5:17; see also Ezek. 27:19). Traditional Danite territory overlappedwith the area of Philistine settlement. Asherite territory overlappedsubstantially with Phoenician territory. It is possible that Judg.5:17 refers to the fact that the Danites and the Asherites worked inthe port cities serving Philistine and Phoenician shipping. Inanother passage, Zebulun is associated with ports (Gen. 49:13). It isnoteworthy that the Israelite coast between Jaffa and Dor (roughlybetween Philistia and Phoenicia) does not have an abundance ofnatural harbors. Later, Herod the Great would build the artificialharbor at Caesarea in the first century BC. The great expense of sucha project—including the construction of over 2,500 feet ofbreakwaters made of underwater concrete, mostly imported fromItaly—suggests the extent of the need for secure harbors inthis region.
Solomon’sfleet.The zenith of Israelite seafaring occurred during the reign ofSolomon. Solomon built a fleet of ships at “Ezion Geber, whichis near Elath in Edom, on the shore of the Red Sea” (1Kings9:26). The purpose of these ships was to bring back gold from Ophir(1Kings 9:28), possibly a location in the Arabian Peninsula, towhich a port on the Red Sea would have offered ready access. Thestory confirms the aforementioned dependence on the Phoenicians inthe area of seafaring: although the ships belonged to Solomon, “Hiram[the Phoenician king of Tyre] sent his men—sailors who knew thesea—to serve in the fleet with Solomon’s men”(1Kings 9:27). The timber for the ships would also have beenimported by Israel from Phoenicia (see 1Kings 9:11). Even atthe height of its power, Israel lacked the human resources to embarkon sea voyages independently of the Phoenicians.
Thesuccess of Solomon’s project, of course, depended not only onwarm relations with the Phoenicians but also on territorial controlof the historically Edomite lands between Judah and the Red Sea. Thisfavorable combination of conditions would come and go throughout thebiblical period, and with it, Israel’s modest presence on theseas. From the Phoenician point of view, cooperation with Israel wasan essential component of gaining access to a Red Sea port, and withit to the products of Arabia, the Horn of Africa, and India. ThePhoenicians, as expansive as their travel was in the Mediterranean,could never independently control the long overland route fromPhoenicia to the Red Sea, since it ran through the territory ofIsrael and Edom. Their best hope was a friendly and powerfulIsraelite ally. This explains the cordial relationship and why Hiramsent not only his sailors to serve Solomon but also craftsmen andsupplies for the construction of the temple (1Kings 5:10–12).Solomon and Hiram jointly operated “a fleet of trading ships”that would return to port every three years bringing “gold,silver, and ivory, and apes and baboons” (1Kings 10:22).
Jehoshaphat.In the mid-ninth century BC, King Jehoshaphat of Judah attempted torepeat Solomon’s feat of launching a fleet from Ezion Geber(1Kings 22:48–49; 2Chron. 20:35–37).According to both accounts, the ships were wrecked before they couldset sail. On several other points, however, the two versions of thestory disagree in ways that bear on questions of the political andeconomic conditions of Israelite seafaring.
Bythis time, Israel and Judah had split into separate kingdoms, withthe northern kingdom of Israel being geographically and politicallycloser to the Phoenicians. The powerful King Ahab of Israel,Jehoshaphat’s contemporary through much of his reign, marriedJezebel, the daughter of the Sidonian (Phoenician) king Ethbaal(1Kings 16:31). According to 1Kings, King Ahaziah ofIsrael (Ahab’s son) proposed to cooperate with Jehoshaphat bysending his own men on the voyage, much as Hiram had assisted Solomonin the previous century. Jehoshaphat rejected the suggestion,possibly indicating a bid for Judean autonomy in an era of northerndominance. According to 2Chronicles, however, Jehoshaphat didcooperate willingly with Ahaziah, and this was the reason that theships foundered in port: God punished the righteous Jehoshaphat fortoo close a relationship with his wicked northern counterpart. In1Kings 22:47 it is mentioned that at the time of Jehoshaphat’sventure there was no king in Edom. As noted, control of the overlandroute between Judah and the Red Sea was necessary for the success ofany voyage originating from Ezion Geber.
Howeverthe contradiction between 1Kings and 2Chroniclesregarding the involvement of Ahaziah is resolved, both versions ofthe story highlight the fact that the port at Ezion Geber commandedthe interest of the Judeans, the Israelites, and the Phoenicians, andits successful operation probably depended on the cooperation of allthree.
Shipsof Tarshish.Several biblical texts, including the stories of Solomon andJehoshaphat, mention “ships of Tarshish” (1Kings10:22 NIV mg.). In a number of contexts, such ships are associatedwith the transportation of metals and metal ores, including iron,lead, tin, gold, and silver (1Kings 10:22; Ezek. 27:12; Jer.10:9). The exact derivation of the term “ships of Tarshish”is uncertain, though it is clear from the descriptions of theircargoes that such ships could travel over long distances. As Ezekielobserves, “The ships of Tarshish serve as carriers for yourwares. You are filled with heavy cargo as you sail the sea. Youroarsmen take you out to the high seas” (Ezek. 27:25–26).
Inthe Table of Nations, Tarshish is listed as a descendant of Javan(Gen. 10:4), along with a number of other seafaring peoples of theeastern Mediterranean (“Javan” indicates the peoples ofthe Aegean and is linguistically equivalent to “Ionia”[see also Ezek. 27:12–22]). Some have suggested, then, that theships of Tarshish should be associated with Tarsus in southeasternTurkey, an area containing silver mines (also the birthplace of Paul[Acts 9:11]). Others have suggested the Phoenician colony ofTartessus in Spain, another metal-producing area. This locationfigures in the interpretation of the identification of thedestination of Jonah as Tarshish (Jon. 1:3): presumably, if he wereavoiding Nineveh and departing from Joppa, he would head towardSpain, in the exact opposite direction, rather than toward Tarsus inCilicia.
Inaddition to these two geographical options, some have attempted toexplain the expression “ships of Tarshish” as derivingfrom the Akkadian term for smelting or refining: perhaps the manyreferences to cargoes of metals indicate that the ships were used totransport metal ore to refining centers. Finally, one scholar hasproposed that the term is related to the Greek word tarsos,meaning “oar.”
Descriptionsof ships and seafaring.Ezekiel, in his lament concerning the Phoenician city of Tyre (Ezek.27), relates a number of details related to Phoenician seafaring. Thepicture largely confirms the descriptions of how Solomon built andmanned his fleet with the assistance of his Tyrian ally. Timber forthe construction of the ship came from Lebanon and Cyprus, amongother places (vv. 5–6). Sails were made from Egyptian linen(v.7), and as noted above, the oarsmen and sailors were fromthe Phoenician city-states (vv. 8–9). Ezekiel goes on to list alarge number of ports of call as well as a dazzling variety ofcargoes (vv. 12–24). Notably, Ezekiel has the Judahites and theIsraelites offering the products of their agrarian economy—“wheatfrom Minnith and confections, honey, olive oil and balm”(v.17)—thus filling out the picture of what theIsraelites gave in exchange for the precious metals and luxury itemsimported by their country from elsewhere.
In1999 archaeologists explored two eighth-century BC Phoenician shipsthat had sunk thirty miles west of Ashkelon. The ships, eachmeasuring about fifty feet in length, contained large cargoes of wineand were headed either for Egypt or for the Phoenician colonies inthe western Mediterranean.
Shipsand sailing figure prominently in the story of Jonah, who boarded aship bound for Tarshish (see discussion above) at Joppa on theMediterranean coast. In the story we see a number of features ofancient sea travel. Jonah paid a fare for his voyage (Jon. 1:3). Notonly the biblical author (see 1:4), but also the presumablynon-Israelite sailors, believed that the great storm was the doing ofa god, and that it could be calmed by appealing to that god(1:6)—although cargo was thrown overboard for good measure.When Paul was caught in a storm in the first century AD, the samestrategies were still in use (Acts 27:38). The religious habits ofancient sailors, particularly their reverence for the gods whocontrolled the stormy seas and thus held their lives in the balance,are illuminated by the discovery of stone anchors in several temples(presumably left by sailors as offerings), including at the portcities of Ugarit, Kition, and Byblos.
Psalm107:23–32 speaks of God’s care of sailors from anIsraelite perspective. In the psalm, those who “went out on thesea in ships,” the “merchants on the mighty waters”(i.e., the deep, open sea), witness firsthand the works of the God ofIsrael, which include both the raising and the quieting of the storm.This passage vividly expresses the terror of being caught in a stormand the great relief and gratitude felt by sailors who reached safehaven.
Noah’sArk
Accordingto the biblical account, Noah’s ark was 450 feet long, 75 feetwide, and 45 feet high (300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits [Gen.6:15]). It had three decks, a roof, and a window. By comparison, theship of Uta-napishti in the Epic of Gilgamesh is described as havingsix decks (and thus seven stories), edges of 180 feet (ten dozencubits) in each dimension, and occupying the space of an acre (arough approximation of the dimensions given). Both ships aredescribed as providing space for the builder’s family and everyliving creature. In the Atrahasis Epic, the boat is roofed, but itsdimensions are not given.
Becauseof the character of Gen. 6–8, it is inappropriate to drawconclusions from the story regarding shipbuilding in historicalantiquity. According to the specifications given in the biblicaltext, Noah’s ark would have been the largest wooden ship inhistory, equaled only by the United States schooner Wyoming,completed in 1909. While the overall length of the Wyoming was also450 feet, nearly 100 feet of length was accounted for in the fore andaft booms, so that the hull length was only 350 feet. Even with earlytwentieth-century shipbuilding technology, its extravagant lengthrendered the Wyoming unseaworthy, and the ship foundered in 1924. Thelargest documented wooden ships of antiquity include the GreekSyracusia(third century BC; 180 feet), described by Athenaeus; the Roman Isis(second century AD; 180 feet), described by Lucian; Caligula’s“Giant Ship” (first century AD; 341 feet), recovered inmodern times and possibly corresponding to a ship described by Plinythe Elder; and PtolemyIV’s Tessarakonteres (third centuryBC), reported by Plutarch to have been about 425 feet long. This lastship was not designed for cruising in open water.
NewTestament
Fishingin the Sea of Galilee. Severalof Jesus’ disciples worked as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee,and the Gospels document their use of small boats for fishing andtraveling across the sea. Fishing was done with nets thrown both fromboats and from the shore (Mark 1:16, 19). The boats used by fishermenon the Sea of Galilee may have been small enough to pull up onto thebeach (Luke 5:2), or to be nearly capsized by a large catch of fish(Luke 5:7) or by a violent storm (Mark 4:37). They were large enoughto transport several men and even to sleep in (Mark 4:38). Such boatscould be rowed or sailed; in Mark 6:48 the disciples had to resort torowing because of an unfavorable headwind. On one occasion, Jesusstood in a boat to preach to a crowd gathered on the shore (Mark4:1). The Sea of Galilee is about eight miles wide and thirteen mileslong. On several occasions, Jesus traveled by boat across the sea toavoid having to walk long distances around its circumference (e.g.,Matt. 9:1; 14:22; 15:39).
In1986 archaeologists recovered a fishing boat dating to the mid-firstcentury AD on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. The boat had beenscuttled near the shore and was preserved under mud. The “JesusBoat,” as it was dubbed, measures twenty-seven feet in lengthand has a beam seven and a half feet long. Numerous species of woodwere used in its construction and repairs throughout its useful life.While there is no evidence to link the boat to Jesus or hisdisciples, radiometric dating places it in the correct period, and itprovides a likely model of the type of boat portrayed in the Gospels.
Asecond source of information regarding ships and sailing in the NT isthe account in Acts of Paul’s many sea voyages. As in the caseof Jehoshaphat, the Tyrians, Jonah, and Jesus’ disciples, Paullearned firsthand the perils of seafaring in small wooden boats:among his many traumas, along with beatings and stonings, herecalled, “Three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and aday in the open sea” (2Cor. 11:25).
Paul’sjourneys.A survey of Paul’s sea travels on his four journeys gives someidea of the routes that could be taken by a paying traveler in theeastern Mediterranean and Aegean.
1.Paul’s first missionary journey included voyages from Seleuciain Syria to the port of Salamis in Cyprus (Acts 13:4) and from Cyprus(Paphos) to Perga on the southern coast of Asia Minor (13:13). Afterjourneying through the interior, Paul returned to Attalia, where heembarked for the return trip to Syria, presumably passing againthrough the port at Salamis (14:26).
2.The second missionary journey began not with a sea voyage but ratherwith a trek through the interior of Syria and Cilicia, illustratingthat although sea travel was by far a more rapid means of travel, theoverland routes were by no means impossible (Acts 15:39). Paul wouldrepeat this land route during his third journey (19:1). Sea travelwas fast, but when one had plenty of friends along the alternativeland route, a sea journey was considerably less enjoyable. It isduring the second journey that we have the first recorded accounts ofPaul sailing in the Aegean. From Troas in Asia Minor, he sailed theshort distance to Macedonia (16:11), putting in midway at the islandof Samothrace. Apparently, Paul traveled by sea down the coast fromBerea to Athens (17:14). At the conclusion of his second journey,Paul sailed from Corinth to Caesarea, with a stop at Ephesus(18:18–22). Not counting any intervening ports of call notmentioned in the text, this would be the longest single leg of seatravel so far mentioned.
3.The third missionary journey once more began with a long overlandtrip from Syria through Asia Minor; by this time, Paul had manyassociates along the way to visit. Again, he sailed in the Aegean,from Ephesus to Macedonia (Acts 20:1) and back (20:6). At one point,Paul opted to travel overland, from Troas to Assos, while hiscompanions sailed down the coast (20:13). Meeting up with them, hesailed on, hugging the coast of Asia Minor, then sailing south ofCyprus along an open-water route to Tyre. From Tyre, the ship againhugged the Palestinian coast, stopping in several ports before Pauldisembarked at Caesarea (21:7). Paul’s journeys illustrate thevariety of itineraries taken by ships. They were capable of sailingin deep water, but they would also hug the coast when there werereasons to make frequent stops.
4.Paul’s fourth journey, which he made in custody on his way to atrial before the emperor at Rome, was to be the most dangerous. Fromthe account in Acts we can glean a number of details of life at seain the first century AD. The ship bound for Italy was large, and itcarried 276 passengers and crew (Acts 27:6, 37), including soldiersand prisoners, at least one companion of a prisoner (Paul’sfriend Aristarchus [27:2]), a ship’s pilot, and the ship’sowner (27:11). Sailors used celestial navigation (27:20) and tooksoundings in shallow water (27:28). We see also that the ship’scourse could be determined by the direction of the prevailing winds:twice during the journey Paul’s ship was forced to sail to thelee of large islands (Cyprus and Crete)—a longer journey, butthe only option for a ship that was not rigged to sail close-hauled.
Whenextended periods of unfavorable weather were forecast, one option wassimply to put in at a port until conditions improved, preferably in aharbor that was in the lee of an island (Acts 27:12). We learnsomething of the measures that were taken in heavy weather, many ofwhich are still used in modern times: ropes were tied around the hullof the ship to prevent it from breaking up in rough seas (27:17), thelifeboat was brought onto the deck and made fast (27:17), sea anchorswere deployed to keep the bow of the ship oriented into the oncomingwaves (27:7), the rudder was lashed amidships (27:40), valuable cargoand gear were jettisoned (27:19, 38), and, as in the days of Jonah,sailors and passengers prayed for divine deliverance (27:29; see alsothe protective emblems in 28:11).
Whenall other means had been exhausted, a ship could be run aground on asandy beach (Acts 27:39), a measure that would have risked damage tothe boat but saved lives. In the case of Paul’s ship, thedecision to run aground ultimately resulted in the destruction of theship (27:41).
Metaphorsand illustrations.Several NT authors draw illustrations from the nautical world. Jameslikens the harmful power of evil speech to the rudder of a ship:although it is a small device, by it the pilot can control a greatship (James 3:4–5). Elsewhere, he compares the doubting of theunwise person to being lost at sea in a storm (James 1:6; cf. Eph.4:14). In 1Tim. 1:19 the loss of faith and good conscience islikened to a shipwreck. Hebrews 6:19 describes the assurance of God’sfaithfulness as an anchor for the soul.
The words “sacrifice” and “offering”often are used interchangeably, but “offering” refers toa gift more generally, while “sacrifice” indicates a giftconsecrated for a divine being. In biblical Hebrew “sacrifice”is more narrowly equated with the peace offering. All other“sacrifices” are referred to as gifts. Sacrifices wereoffered to honor God, thanking him for his goodness. More important,they enabled persons to be made right with God by atoning for theirsins. Whereas sin upset the fellowship God desired to have withpeople and kindled his wrath, sacrifice restored the relationship.
OldTestament
OTofferings included cereals (whether the grain was whole, ground intoflour, or mixed with other elements), liquids (wine, oil, or water),and animals (or parts thereof, such as the blood and fat). Althoughthe Bible acknowledges that other ancient Near Eastern people hadtheir own sacrificial rites, it rejects them as unworthy of the Godof Israel. The people of God therefore were instructed how tosacrifice properly while at Sinai. Even so, offerings and sacrificesare recorded as taking place before the law was given.
Priorto the law.Cain and Abel brought the earliest offerings. Contrary to a commoninterpretation, Cain’s offering was not rejected because it didnot include blood; the Hebrew word for the brothers’ gifts,minkhah,usually denotes grain offerings. A better conclusion is that Cainonly brought some of his produce (no mention of firstfruits), whileAbel brought the best of the best (the fat portions from thefirstborn of the flock).
Immediatelyafter the flood, Noah built an altar and presented the first burntoffering mentioned in the Bible (Gen. 8:20). That this (and othersacrifices) was received as a “pleasing aroma” indicatesthat God approved of and accepted it. It is significant thatimmediately after the offering, God made a covenant with Noah, hisdescendants, and every living creature. Sacrifices are closelyrelated to covenant relationships, as can be seen in the story ofAbraham enacting a covenant ceremony in Gen. 15 and in Israelreceiving many instructions about sacrifice while at Sinai (cf. Gen.31:43–54).
Sacrificiallaws in Leviticus.Sacrificial laws are found throughout the Pentateuch, the most beingin Lev. 1–7. As Leviticus makes clear, Israel understoodsacrifice to have a number of different purposes. It was a means tobring a gift to God, to express communion with him and others in thecommunity, to consecrate something or someone for God’s use,and to deal with personal uncleanness or sin. These ideas aredeveloped in the descriptions of the different sacrifices that Israelwas required to bring to God. In general, the sacrifices were made ofclean animals raised by the one making the offering or of grain orwine produced by the person. In some cases, the offering wasconnected with the person’s economic ability, a poorer personbeing allowed to present doves or even cereal if a lamb or goat wasunaffordable for a sin offering (Lev. 5:6–13). In all cases,only the best—what was “without defect”—wasto be offered.
Priestas mediator.Three parties were involved in the sacrifices: the worshiper, thepriest, and God. The worshiper—the person who had sinned orbecome unclean in some way—brought an animal to God, laid ahand upon it, and then killed it. Whether the animal’s deathrepresents the death that the worshiper deserves due to sin orwhether the sin is transferred to the animal that bears it instead isunclear. The priest served as a mediator who offered the blood of thesacrifice to God and, in many instances, burned all or part of theoffering. In response to the offering, God, who had graciously giventhe sacrificial system so that those who had sinned could be restoredto fellowship with him, forgave the person. Uniquely in the ancientworld, Israelite sacrifices were not considered magical acts thatcould manipulate God to act on behalf of the worshiper. Presenting animproper sacrifice while exhibiting an improper attitude or motiveresulted in rejection.
Typesof sacrifices.Leviticus introduced five main sacrifices: the ’olah (1:1–17;6:8–18), the minkhah (2:1–16; 6:14–23), theshelamim (3:1–17; 7:11–36), the khatta’t(4:1–5:13), and the ’asham (5:14–6:7). Most ofthese focused on uncleanness or sin. The worshiper who brought suchan offering was not allowed to eat any of it, as it was wholly givento God. Even when priests were allowed to eat part of a sacrifice,their portion was “waved” before God, indicating that itbelonged to him.
1.The ’olah, or burnt offering, is the basic OT sacrificeconnected with atonement for sin (Lev. 1:4). When rightly offered, itwas accepted as “an aroma pleasing to the Lord.” Theworshiper brought a male animal (young bull, sheep, goat, dove, oryoung pigeon) without blemish, laid a hand upon it, and then killedit. After the priest sprinkled some of the blood on the altar, therest was burned up.
2.The minkhah is simply a gift or offering. The Hebrew word is oftenused for a present given to another person or tribute to a ruler.When used of sacrifice, it is usually rendered as “grainoffering” or “meal offering.” A minkhah can, onoccasion, include flesh or fat (Gen. 4:4; Judg. 6:18–21).Considered “an aroma pleasing to the Lord,” it consistedof unground grain or fine flour mixed with oil and incense and waspresented either cooked or uncooked. Part of the offering was burnedas a “memorial portion,” the rest being given to thepriests (Lev. 2:1–3). It usually was accompanied by a drinkoffering—wine poured out on the altar. Grain offeringsfrequently complemented burnt offerings or fellowship offerings. Theshowbread may have been considered a grain offering.
3.The shelamim (NIV: “fellowship offering”) hastraditionally been called the “peace offering,” as theterm is related to shalom. This offering most likely indicated thatthe worshiper was at peace with God and others; all the worshiper’srelationships were whole. Classified into three types, it could beused to express thanksgiving, to signify the fulfillment of a vow, orsimply to denote one’s desire to bring an offering to God outof free will. Only those who made a vow were required to offer ashelamim; the other forms were wholly optional. The worshiper broughta male or female animal (ox, sheep, or goat) without blemish, laid ahand on its head, and slaughtered it. The priest sprinkled its bloodon the sides of the altar and burned the fat surrounding the majororgans. It is described as “an aroma pleasing to the Lord.”
Thisoffering significantly recognized the covenant relationship existingbetween those who shared in it. God received the fatty portions, theofficiating priest received the right thigh, the other priests thebreast, and the remainder was shared among members of a family, clan,tribe, or some other group. According to Leviticus, a thanksgivingoffering was to be eaten on the day it was offered, and a vow orfreewill offering could be eaten within two days. Anything not eatenin the prescribed time period was to be burned.
4.The khatta’t, or sin offering, atoned for the sin of anindividual or of the nation and cleansed the sacred items in thetabernacle that had been corrupted by sin. Since a sin offering couldpurify ceremonial as well as moral uncleanness, people who wereunclean due to childbirth, skin diseases, bodily discharges, and soforth also brought them (Lev. 12–15).
Thekind of animal sacrificed and the sacrificial ritual varied with theoffender and the offense. If a priest or the entire congregationsinned, a bull was sacrificed and its blood was sprinkled before theveil of the tabernacle and on the incense altar in the holy place.The rest was burned, leaving nothing to be eaten. Leaders who sinnedsacrificed a male goat. Its blood was sprinkled on the bronze altar,and the remainder was given to the priest. A commoner brought andslaughtered a she-goat or lamb, the priest sprinkled its blood on thehorns of the altar, and the fat was burned for God and the rest givento the priests. A poor person could bring two doves or pigeons, andthe very poor could bring a grain offering. This differentiationapparently indicated that the sins of some members of the communityhad more serious consequences than others. Those in closest contactwith the tabernacle contaminated it at a deeper level, requiring amore costly sacrifice. The poor were not required to bring more thanthey could afford.
5.The ’asham, or guilt offering, provided compensation for sins.A ram without blemish was sacrificed, its blood was sprinkled on thealtar, and its fatty portions, kidneys, and liver were burned. Therest was given to the priest. In addition, the value of what wasmisappropriated plus one-fifth of its value was given to the personwronged or to the priests.
Altars.According to Leviticus, only the Aa-ron-ic priests could handle theblood or other parts of a sacrifice brought to the altar at thetabernacle. Even so, throughout Israel’s history othersacrificial altars were built. While some of these were illicitlyused for syncretistic practices, others were constructed at God’sinstruction (Josh. 8:30–35; Judg. 6:25–26). Some of thesewere used by priests making rounds so that people from differentareas could sacrifice to God (1Sam. 7:17). Others were used byindividuals who were not priests yet desired to call upon the name ofthe Lord or sacrifice for communal meals. The solitary altars weremainly used for burnt offerings and peace offerings, although grainand drink offerings also were known. Sin and guilt offerings wereoffered only at the tabernacle or temple.
Timesand purposes.The OT regulates a number of different occasions upon which regularsacrifices were to be made. Burnt offerings were presented everymorning and evening (Exod. 29:38–41; Num. 28:1–8).Additional offerings were sacrificed on the Sabbath and the new moon(Num. 28:9–15). Special sacrifices were brought to celebratethe major festivals of the year (Num. 28:16–29:39),particularly the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16). Sacrifices might alsoaccompany requests for safety or deliverance or in response to God’sdeliverance. Thus, burnt and fellowship offerings could be broughtalong with prayers that God would put an end to a plague (2Sam.24:18–25). King David brought burnt offerings and fellowshipofferings when the ark of the covenant was returned after having beencaptured by the Philistines (2Sam. 6:1–19).
Sacrificescould also be made to consecrate people or things for a special task.When the tabernacle was consecrated, special offerings were broughtfor twelve continuous days (Num. 7). Later, fellowship, burnt, andgrain offerings were sacrificed when the temple was dedicated(1Kings 8:62–64). Sin offerings were presented when apriest was ordained (Lev. 8–9). Those who completed a vowdedicating themselves as Naz-i-rites brought sacrifices to God sothat they could again become a normal member of the congregation(Num. 6:9–21). Fellowship offerings often accompanied theannouncement of or installation of a king (1Sam. 11:14–15;1Kings 1:9,25).
Althoughthe sacrificial system was intended to bring the Israelites back intofellowship with God, at times their misuse of it separated them fromhim. When his people showed more interest in sacrificial ritual thanin obeying God’s instructions, they were chastened (1Sam.15:13–22; Jer. 7:21–28). When the people of Israel wereguilty of confusing the worship of Yahweh with Canaanite fertilitycults, God sent prophets to warn them (Isa. 1:11–16; Amos4:4–5). Prophetic statements denouncing sacrificial rites wereaimed at the misuse of sacrifices rather than their existence.Jeremiah and Ezekiel were so positive about sacrificial worship thatthey looked forward to a time when it would be reestablished in itspure form (Jer. 17:26; Ezek. 43:18–27; 46:1–24).
NewTestament
TheNT indicates that the OT sacrificial system was still in place in theearly first century AD. Following directions given in Leviticus, Marybrought a sacrifice to the temple in Jerusalem so that she could bepurified after giving birth to Jesus (Luke 2:21–24; cf. Lev.12:3, 8). Mary and Joseph would have sacrificed and eaten a Passoverlamb during their annual pilgrimage to Jerusalem to celebrate theFeast of Passover. It is not recorded whether Jesus always went withthem, but he did join them at the Passover celebration when he wastwelve years old. It is safe to assume that at this time and after hegrew up, Jesus took part in the sacrifices when he visited Jerusalemto celebrate the feasts.
Jesus’disciples attend several feasts with him. In addition, after hisresurrection they frequently went to the temple to pray at the timewhen sacrifices were made. Encouraged by the Jerusalem churchleaders, Paul went to the temple to join in and pay for thepurification rites of some men who had taken a vow, perhaps to serveas Nazirites (Acts 21:23–26). He later testified before Felixthat he had returned to Jerusalem in order to bring gifts to the poorand present offerings in the temple (24:17). Although Gentilebelievers were exempt from these practices (15:1–29), earlyJewish believers clearly saw no contradiction between believing thegospel of Jesus Christ and engaging in sacrificial rituals. Theylikely followed Jewish piety until the destruction of the temple inAD 70, when all sacrifices at the temple ceased.
Evenso, Christians quickly came to understand Christ’s death as thefinal sacrifice that completed the OT system. Various NT authorsconsider the nature of Christ’s death and metaphorically relateit to OT sacrifices, but the writer of Hebrews develops this in themost detail. According to Hebrews, the sacrificial system was merelythe shadow that pointed to Jesus. Although the blood of animals couldnot adequately deal with sins, Jesus’ sacrifice could (Heb.10:1–10). Jesus is regularly identified as the sacrificial lambwhose blood purifies humanity from sin (John 1:29, 36; Rom. 8:3;1Cor. 5:7; Eph. 5:2; 1Pet. 1:19; 1John 1:7; Rev.5:6, 12; 7:14; 12:11; 13:8). His sacrifice is considered apropitiation that turns away God’s wrath (Rom. 3:25; 1John2:2).
Theend of the OT sacrificial system does not mean that those who come toGod through Jesus Christ no longer bring sacrifices. Instead ofanimal and grain offerings, spiritual sacrifices are to be made(1Pet. 2:5). Emulating their Savior, Christ’s followersshould offer themselves as living sacrifices, devoted to God (Rom.12:1). This implies that everything done in this life could beconsidered a sacrifice. Simply believing the gospel makes one anacceptable offering to God (Rom. 15:16). Labor for the sake of thegospel, or perhaps martyrdom, can be viewed as a drink offering(Phil. 2:17). The author of Hebrews identifies three types ofsacrifices that believers should offer: praise, good deeds, andsharing with those in need (13:15–16). In line with the last ofthese points, Paul counts the gift sent by the Philippian church as afragrant offering that pleases God (Phil. 4:18).
OldTestament
Phoeniciansand Philistines. Asa people whose ancestral territory lay in the landlocked andtimber-poor highlands of Ephraim and Judah, the Israelites ofbiblical times never achieved prominence in seafaring orshipbuilding. Instead, they relied for their maritime enterprises onalliances with their coastal neighbors, particularly the Phoenicianstates to the north of Israel, who excelled in seafaring and hadaccess to the abundant timber forests of Lebanon. The Phoenicians(the Punics of classical antiquity) were famous in antiquity fortheir seafaring. In biblical times, they traded heavily betweenSyria-Palestine and Egypt and also sailed throughout theMediterranean, establishing colonies as far away as Tunisia(Carthage) and Spain (Cadiz).
Anotherseagoing people prominent in the OT were the Philistines, whose baseof power was to the west of Judah, along the Mediterranean coast. TheBible associates the Philistines with the five cities of Ashdod,Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza. The Philistines were among the SeaPeoples, who came to the Levant from the Aegean beginning in thetwelfth century BC (Amos 9:7; Jer. 47:4).
Theperennial enmity between the Philistines and the Israelites precludedjoint maritime ventures of the sort shared by Israel and thePhoenicians, and the Bible does not describe Philistine maritimeactivities in any depth. Nevertheless, the seagoing nature of thePhilistines is reflected by the fact that their settlements remainedconfined to the coastal region. They never made a systematic attemptto take over the traditionally Israelite and Judahite highlands. Whenthey did venture into the Judean mountains, it was to assert amilitary and political presence among the agrarian Israelites andJudahites rather than to establish permanent settlements andPhilistine population centers. Twelfth-century BC reliefs at MedinetHabu (in the mortuary temple of RamessesIII) depict a navalbattle between the Sea Peoples and the Egyptians. The reliefs includepictures of Philistine ships and sailors.
Israeliteseafaring.One of the rare references to Israelite seafaring describes theDanites and the Asherites in connection with ships and harbors (Judg.5:17; see also Ezek. 27:19). Traditional Danite territory overlappedwith the area of Philistine settlement. Asherite territory overlappedsubstantially with Phoenician territory. It is possible that Judg.5:17 refers to the fact that the Danites and the Asherites worked inthe port cities serving Philistine and Phoenician shipping. Inanother passage, Zebulun is associated with ports (Gen. 49:13). It isnoteworthy that the Israelite coast between Jaffa and Dor (roughlybetween Philistia and Phoenicia) does not have an abundance ofnatural harbors. Later, Herod the Great would build the artificialharbor at Caesarea in the first century BC. The great expense of sucha project—including the construction of over 2,500 feet ofbreakwaters made of underwater concrete, mostly imported fromItaly—suggests the extent of the need for secure harbors inthis region.
Solomon’sfleet.The zenith of Israelite seafaring occurred during the reign ofSolomon. Solomon built a fleet of ships at “Ezion Geber, whichis near Elath in Edom, on the shore of the Red Sea” (1Kings9:26). The purpose of these ships was to bring back gold from Ophir(1Kings 9:28), possibly a location in the Arabian Peninsula, towhich a port on the Red Sea would have offered ready access. Thestory confirms the aforementioned dependence on the Phoenicians inthe area of seafaring: although the ships belonged to Solomon, “Hiram[the Phoenician king of Tyre] sent his men—sailors who knew thesea—to serve in the fleet with Solomon’s men”(1Kings 9:27). The timber for the ships would also have beenimported by Israel from Phoenicia (see 1Kings 9:11). Even atthe height of its power, Israel lacked the human resources to embarkon sea voyages independently of the Phoenicians.
Thesuccess of Solomon’s project, of course, depended not only onwarm relations with the Phoenicians but also on territorial controlof the historically Edomite lands between Judah and the Red Sea. Thisfavorable combination of conditions would come and go throughout thebiblical period, and with it, Israel’s modest presence on theseas. From the Phoenician point of view, cooperation with Israel wasan essential component of gaining access to a Red Sea port, and withit to the products of Arabia, the Horn of Africa, and India. ThePhoenicians, as expansive as their travel was in the Mediterranean,could never independently control the long overland route fromPhoenicia to the Red Sea, since it ran through the territory ofIsrael and Edom. Their best hope was a friendly and powerfulIsraelite ally. This explains the cordial relationship and why Hiramsent not only his sailors to serve Solomon but also craftsmen andsupplies for the construction of the temple (1Kings 5:10–12).Solomon and Hiram jointly operated “a fleet of trading ships”that would return to port every three years bringing “gold,silver, and ivory, and apes and baboons” (1Kings 10:22).
Jehoshaphat.In the mid-ninth century BC, King Jehoshaphat of Judah attempted torepeat Solomon’s feat of launching a fleet from Ezion Geber(1Kings 22:48–49; 2Chron. 20:35–37).According to both accounts, the ships were wrecked before they couldset sail. On several other points, however, the two versions of thestory disagree in ways that bear on questions of the political andeconomic conditions of Israelite seafaring.
Bythis time, Israel and Judah had split into separate kingdoms, withthe northern kingdom of Israel being geographically and politicallycloser to the Phoenicians. The powerful King Ahab of Israel,Jehoshaphat’s contemporary through much of his reign, marriedJezebel, the daughter of the Sidonian (Phoenician) king Ethbaal(1Kings 16:31). According to 1Kings, King Ahaziah ofIsrael (Ahab’s son) proposed to cooperate with Jehoshaphat bysending his own men on the voyage, much as Hiram had assisted Solomonin the previous century. Jehoshaphat rejected the suggestion,possibly indicating a bid for Judean autonomy in an era of northerndominance. According to 2Chronicles, however, Jehoshaphat didcooperate willingly with Ahaziah, and this was the reason that theships foundered in port: God punished the righteous Jehoshaphat fortoo close a relationship with his wicked northern counterpart. In1Kings 22:47 it is mentioned that at the time of Jehoshaphat’sventure there was no king in Edom. As noted, control of the overlandroute between Judah and the Red Sea was necessary for the success ofany voyage originating from Ezion Geber.
Howeverthe contradiction between 1Kings and 2Chroniclesregarding the involvement of Ahaziah is resolved, both versions ofthe story highlight the fact that the port at Ezion Geber commandedthe interest of the Judeans, the Israelites, and the Phoenicians, andits successful operation probably depended on the cooperation of allthree.
Shipsof Tarshish.Several biblical texts, including the stories of Solomon andJehoshaphat, mention “ships of Tarshish” (1Kings10:22 NIV mg.). In a number of contexts, such ships are associatedwith the transportation of metals and metal ores, including iron,lead, tin, gold, and silver (1Kings 10:22; Ezek. 27:12; Jer.10:9). The exact derivation of the term “ships of Tarshish”is uncertain, though it is clear from the descriptions of theircargoes that such ships could travel over long distances. As Ezekielobserves, “The ships of Tarshish serve as carriers for yourwares. You are filled with heavy cargo as you sail the sea. Youroarsmen take you out to the high seas” (Ezek. 27:25–26).
Inthe Table of Nations, Tarshish is listed as a descendant of Javan(Gen. 10:4), along with a number of other seafaring peoples of theeastern Mediterranean (“Javan” indicates the peoples ofthe Aegean and is linguistically equivalent to “Ionia”[see also Ezek. 27:12–22]). Some have suggested, then, that theships of Tarshish should be associated with Tarsus in southeasternTurkey, an area containing silver mines (also the birthplace of Paul[Acts 9:11]). Others have suggested the Phoenician colony ofTartessus in Spain, another metal-producing area. This locationfigures in the interpretation of the identification of thedestination of Jonah as Tarshish (Jon. 1:3): presumably, if he wereavoiding Nineveh and departing from Joppa, he would head towardSpain, in the exact opposite direction, rather than toward Tarsus inCilicia.
Inaddition to these two geographical options, some have attempted toexplain the expression “ships of Tarshish” as derivingfrom the Akkadian term for smelting or refining: perhaps the manyreferences to cargoes of metals indicate that the ships were used totransport metal ore to refining centers. Finally, one scholar hasproposed that the term is related to the Greek word tarsos,meaning “oar.”
Descriptionsof ships and seafaring.Ezekiel, in his lament concerning the Phoenician city of Tyre (Ezek.27), relates a number of details related to Phoenician seafaring. Thepicture largely confirms the descriptions of how Solomon built andmanned his fleet with the assistance of his Tyrian ally. Timber forthe construction of the ship came from Lebanon and Cyprus, amongother places (vv. 5–6). Sails were made from Egyptian linen(v.7), and as noted above, the oarsmen and sailors were fromthe Phoenician city-states (vv. 8–9). Ezekiel goes on to list alarge number of ports of call as well as a dazzling variety ofcargoes (vv. 12–24). Notably, Ezekiel has the Judahites and theIsraelites offering the products of their agrarian economy—“wheatfrom Minnith and confections, honey, olive oil and balm”(v.17)—thus filling out the picture of what theIsraelites gave in exchange for the precious metals and luxury itemsimported by their country from elsewhere.
In1999 archaeologists explored two eighth-century BC Phoenician shipsthat had sunk thirty miles west of Ashkelon. The ships, eachmeasuring about fifty feet in length, contained large cargoes of wineand were headed either for Egypt or for the Phoenician colonies inthe western Mediterranean.
Shipsand sailing figure prominently in the story of Jonah, who boarded aship bound for Tarshish (see discussion above) at Joppa on theMediterranean coast. In the story we see a number of features ofancient sea travel. Jonah paid a fare for his voyage (Jon. 1:3). Notonly the biblical author (see 1:4), but also the presumablynon-Israelite sailors, believed that the great storm was the doing ofa god, and that it could be calmed by appealing to that god(1:6)—although cargo was thrown overboard for good measure.When Paul was caught in a storm in the first century AD, the samestrategies were still in use (Acts 27:38). The religious habits ofancient sailors, particularly their reverence for the gods whocontrolled the stormy seas and thus held their lives in the balance,are illuminated by the discovery of stone anchors in several temples(presumably left by sailors as offerings), including at the portcities of Ugarit, Kition, and Byblos.
Psalm107:23–32 speaks of God’s care of sailors from anIsraelite perspective. In the psalm, those who “went out on thesea in ships,” the “merchants on the mighty waters”(i.e., the deep, open sea), witness firsthand the works of the God ofIsrael, which include both the raising and the quieting of the storm.This passage vividly expresses the terror of being caught in a stormand the great relief and gratitude felt by sailors who reached safehaven.
Noah’sArk
Accordingto the biblical account, Noah’s ark was 450 feet long, 75 feetwide, and 45 feet high (300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits [Gen.6:15]). It had three decks, a roof, and a window. By comparison, theship of Uta-napishti in the Epic of Gilgamesh is described as havingsix decks (and thus seven stories), edges of 180 feet (ten dozencubits) in each dimension, and occupying the space of an acre (arough approximation of the dimensions given). Both ships aredescribed as providing space for the builder’s family and everyliving creature. In the Atrahasis Epic, the boat is roofed, but itsdimensions are not given.
Becauseof the character of Gen. 6–8, it is inappropriate to drawconclusions from the story regarding shipbuilding in historicalantiquity. According to the specifications given in the biblicaltext, Noah’s ark would have been the largest wooden ship inhistory, equaled only by the United States schooner Wyoming,completed in 1909. While the overall length of the Wyoming was also450 feet, nearly 100 feet of length was accounted for in the fore andaft booms, so that the hull length was only 350 feet. Even with earlytwentieth-century shipbuilding technology, its extravagant lengthrendered the Wyoming unseaworthy, and the ship foundered in 1924. Thelargest documented wooden ships of antiquity include the GreekSyracusia(third century BC; 180 feet), described by Athenaeus; the Roman Isis(second century AD; 180 feet), described by Lucian; Caligula’s“Giant Ship” (first century AD; 341 feet), recovered inmodern times and possibly corresponding to a ship described by Plinythe Elder; and PtolemyIV’s Tessarakonteres (third centuryBC), reported by Plutarch to have been about 425 feet long. This lastship was not designed for cruising in open water.
NewTestament
Fishingin the Sea of Galilee. Severalof Jesus’ disciples worked as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee,and the Gospels document their use of small boats for fishing andtraveling across the sea. Fishing was done with nets thrown both fromboats and from the shore (Mark 1:16, 19). The boats used by fishermenon the Sea of Galilee may have been small enough to pull up onto thebeach (Luke 5:2), or to be nearly capsized by a large catch of fish(Luke 5:7) or by a violent storm (Mark 4:37). They were large enoughto transport several men and even to sleep in (Mark 4:38). Such boatscould be rowed or sailed; in Mark 6:48 the disciples had to resort torowing because of an unfavorable headwind. On one occasion, Jesusstood in a boat to preach to a crowd gathered on the shore (Mark4:1). The Sea of Galilee is about eight miles wide and thirteen mileslong. On several occasions, Jesus traveled by boat across the sea toavoid having to walk long distances around its circumference (e.g.,Matt. 9:1; 14:22; 15:39).
In1986 archaeologists recovered a fishing boat dating to the mid-firstcentury AD on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. The boat had beenscuttled near the shore and was preserved under mud. The “JesusBoat,” as it was dubbed, measures twenty-seven feet in lengthand has a beam seven and a half feet long. Numerous species of woodwere used in its construction and repairs throughout its useful life.While there is no evidence to link the boat to Jesus or hisdisciples, radiometric dating places it in the correct period, and itprovides a likely model of the type of boat portrayed in the Gospels.
Asecond source of information regarding ships and sailing in the NT isthe account in Acts of Paul’s many sea voyages. As in the caseof Jehoshaphat, the Tyrians, Jonah, and Jesus’ disciples, Paullearned firsthand the perils of seafaring in small wooden boats:among his many traumas, along with beatings and stonings, herecalled, “Three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and aday in the open sea” (2Cor. 11:25).
Paul’sjourneys.A survey of Paul’s sea travels on his four journeys gives someidea of the routes that could be taken by a paying traveler in theeastern Mediterranean and Aegean.
1.Paul’s first missionary journey included voyages from Seleuciain Syria to the port of Salamis in Cyprus (Acts 13:4) and from Cyprus(Paphos) to Perga on the southern coast of Asia Minor (13:13). Afterjourneying through the interior, Paul returned to Attalia, where heembarked for the return trip to Syria, presumably passing againthrough the port at Salamis (14:26).
2.The second missionary journey began not with a sea voyage but ratherwith a trek through the interior of Syria and Cilicia, illustratingthat although sea travel was by far a more rapid means of travel, theoverland routes were by no means impossible (Acts 15:39). Paul wouldrepeat this land route during his third journey (19:1). Sea travelwas fast, but when one had plenty of friends along the alternativeland route, a sea journey was considerably less enjoyable. It isduring the second journey that we have the first recorded accounts ofPaul sailing in the Aegean. From Troas in Asia Minor, he sailed theshort distance to Macedonia (16:11), putting in midway at the islandof Samothrace. Apparently, Paul traveled by sea down the coast fromBerea to Athens (17:14). At the conclusion of his second journey,Paul sailed from Corinth to Caesarea, with a stop at Ephesus(18:18–22). Not counting any intervening ports of call notmentioned in the text, this would be the longest single leg of seatravel so far mentioned.
3.The third missionary journey once more began with a long overlandtrip from Syria through Asia Minor; by this time, Paul had manyassociates along the way to visit. Again, he sailed in the Aegean,from Ephesus to Macedonia (Acts 20:1) and back (20:6). At one point,Paul opted to travel overland, from Troas to Assos, while hiscompanions sailed down the coast (20:13). Meeting up with them, hesailed on, hugging the coast of Asia Minor, then sailing south ofCyprus along an open-water route to Tyre. From Tyre, the ship againhugged the Palestinian coast, stopping in several ports before Pauldisembarked at Caesarea (21:7). Paul’s journeys illustrate thevariety of itineraries taken by ships. They were capable of sailingin deep water, but they would also hug the coast when there werereasons to make frequent stops.
4.Paul’s fourth journey, which he made in custody on his way to atrial before the emperor at Rome, was to be the most dangerous. Fromthe account in Acts we can glean a number of details of life at seain the first century AD. The ship bound for Italy was large, and itcarried 276 passengers and crew (Acts 27:6, 37), including soldiersand prisoners, at least one companion of a prisoner (Paul’sfriend Aristarchus [27:2]), a ship’s pilot, and the ship’sowner (27:11). Sailors used celestial navigation (27:20) and tooksoundings in shallow water (27:28). We see also that the ship’scourse could be determined by the direction of the prevailing winds:twice during the journey Paul’s ship was forced to sail to thelee of large islands (Cyprus and Crete)—a longer journey, butthe only option for a ship that was not rigged to sail close-hauled.
Whenextended periods of unfavorable weather were forecast, one option wassimply to put in at a port until conditions improved, preferably in aharbor that was in the lee of an island (Acts 27:12). We learnsomething of the measures that were taken in heavy weather, many ofwhich are still used in modern times: ropes were tied around the hullof the ship to prevent it from breaking up in rough seas (27:17), thelifeboat was brought onto the deck and made fast (27:17), sea anchorswere deployed to keep the bow of the ship oriented into the oncomingwaves (27:7), the rudder was lashed amidships (27:40), valuable cargoand gear were jettisoned (27:19, 38), and, as in the days of Jonah,sailors and passengers prayed for divine deliverance (27:29; see alsothe protective emblems in 28:11).
Whenall other means had been exhausted, a ship could be run aground on asandy beach (Acts 27:39), a measure that would have risked damage tothe boat but saved lives. In the case of Paul’s ship, thedecision to run aground ultimately resulted in the destruction of theship (27:41).
Metaphorsand illustrations.Several NT authors draw illustrations from the nautical world. Jameslikens the harmful power of evil speech to the rudder of a ship:although it is a small device, by it the pilot can control a greatship (James 3:4–5). Elsewhere, he compares the doubting of theunwise person to being lost at sea in a storm (James 1:6; cf. Eph.4:14). In 1Tim. 1:19 the loss of faith and good conscience islikened to a shipwreck. Hebrews 6:19 describes the assurance of God’sfaithfulness as an anchor for the soul.
OldTestament
Phoeniciansand Philistines. Asa people whose ancestral territory lay in the landlocked andtimber-poor highlands of Ephraim and Judah, the Israelites ofbiblical times never achieved prominence in seafaring orshipbuilding. Instead, they relied for their maritime enterprises onalliances with their coastal neighbors, particularly the Phoenicianstates to the north of Israel, who excelled in seafaring and hadaccess to the abundant timber forests of Lebanon. The Phoenicians(the Punics of classical antiquity) were famous in antiquity fortheir seafaring. In biblical times, they traded heavily betweenSyria-Palestine and Egypt and also sailed throughout theMediterranean, establishing colonies as far away as Tunisia(Carthage) and Spain (Cadiz).
Anotherseagoing people prominent in the OT were the Philistines, whose baseof power was to the west of Judah, along the Mediterranean coast. TheBible associates the Philistines with the five cities of Ashdod,Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza. The Philistines were among the SeaPeoples, who came to the Levant from the Aegean beginning in thetwelfth century BC (Amos 9:7; Jer. 47:4).
Theperennial enmity between the Philistines and the Israelites precludedjoint maritime ventures of the sort shared by Israel and thePhoenicians, and the Bible does not describe Philistine maritimeactivities in any depth. Nevertheless, the seagoing nature of thePhilistines is reflected by the fact that their settlements remainedconfined to the coastal region. They never made a systematic attemptto take over the traditionally Israelite and Judahite highlands. Whenthey did venture into the Judean mountains, it was to assert amilitary and political presence among the agrarian Israelites andJudahites rather than to establish permanent settlements andPhilistine population centers. Twelfth-century BC reliefs at MedinetHabu (in the mortuary temple of RamessesIII) depict a navalbattle between the Sea Peoples and the Egyptians. The reliefs includepictures of Philistine ships and sailors.
Israeliteseafaring.One of the rare references to Israelite seafaring describes theDanites and the Asherites in connection with ships and harbors (Judg.5:17; see also Ezek. 27:19). Traditional Danite territory overlappedwith the area of Philistine settlement. Asherite territory overlappedsubstantially with Phoenician territory. It is possible that Judg.5:17 refers to the fact that the Danites and the Asherites worked inthe port cities serving Philistine and Phoenician shipping. Inanother passage, Zebulun is associated with ports (Gen. 49:13). It isnoteworthy that the Israelite coast between Jaffa and Dor (roughlybetween Philistia and Phoenicia) does not have an abundance ofnatural harbors. Later, Herod the Great would build the artificialharbor at Caesarea in the first century BC. The great expense of sucha project—including the construction of over 2,500 feet ofbreakwaters made of underwater concrete, mostly imported fromItaly—suggests the extent of the need for secure harbors inthis region.
Solomon’sfleet.The zenith of Israelite seafaring occurred during the reign ofSolomon. Solomon built a fleet of ships at “Ezion Geber, whichis near Elath in Edom, on the shore of the Red Sea” (1Kings9:26). The purpose of these ships was to bring back gold from Ophir(1Kings 9:28), possibly a location in the Arabian Peninsula, towhich a port on the Red Sea would have offered ready access. Thestory confirms the aforementioned dependence on the Phoenicians inthe area of seafaring: although the ships belonged to Solomon, “Hiram[the Phoenician king of Tyre] sent his men—sailors who knew thesea—to serve in the fleet with Solomon’s men”(1Kings 9:27). The timber for the ships would also have beenimported by Israel from Phoenicia (see 1Kings 9:11). Even atthe height of its power, Israel lacked the human resources to embarkon sea voyages independently of the Phoenicians.
Thesuccess of Solomon’s project, of course, depended not only onwarm relations with the Phoenicians but also on territorial controlof the historically Edomite lands between Judah and the Red Sea. Thisfavorable combination of conditions would come and go throughout thebiblical period, and with it, Israel’s modest presence on theseas. From the Phoenician point of view, cooperation with Israel wasan essential component of gaining access to a Red Sea port, and withit to the products of Arabia, the Horn of Africa, and India. ThePhoenicians, as expansive as their travel was in the Mediterranean,could never independently control the long overland route fromPhoenicia to the Red Sea, since it ran through the territory ofIsrael and Edom. Their best hope was a friendly and powerfulIsraelite ally. This explains the cordial relationship and why Hiramsent not only his sailors to serve Solomon but also craftsmen andsupplies for the construction of the temple (1Kings 5:10–12).Solomon and Hiram jointly operated “a fleet of trading ships”that would return to port every three years bringing “gold,silver, and ivory, and apes and baboons” (1Kings 10:22).
Jehoshaphat.In the mid-ninth century BC, King Jehoshaphat of Judah attempted torepeat Solomon’s feat of launching a fleet from Ezion Geber(1Kings 22:48–49; 2Chron. 20:35–37).According to both accounts, the ships were wrecked before they couldset sail. On several other points, however, the two versions of thestory disagree in ways that bear on questions of the political andeconomic conditions of Israelite seafaring.
Bythis time, Israel and Judah had split into separate kingdoms, withthe northern kingdom of Israel being geographically and politicallycloser to the Phoenicians. The powerful King Ahab of Israel,Jehoshaphat’s contemporary through much of his reign, marriedJezebel, the daughter of the Sidonian (Phoenician) king Ethbaal(1Kings 16:31). According to 1Kings, King Ahaziah ofIsrael (Ahab’s son) proposed to cooperate with Jehoshaphat bysending his own men on the voyage, much as Hiram had assisted Solomonin the previous century. Jehoshaphat rejected the suggestion,possibly indicating a bid for Judean autonomy in an era of northerndominance. According to 2Chronicles, however, Jehoshaphat didcooperate willingly with Ahaziah, and this was the reason that theships foundered in port: God punished the righteous Jehoshaphat fortoo close a relationship with his wicked northern counterpart. In1Kings 22:47 it is mentioned that at the time of Jehoshaphat’sventure there was no king in Edom. As noted, control of the overlandroute between Judah and the Red Sea was necessary for the success ofany voyage originating from Ezion Geber.
Howeverthe contradiction between 1Kings and 2Chroniclesregarding the involvement of Ahaziah is resolved, both versions ofthe story highlight the fact that the port at Ezion Geber commandedthe interest of the Judeans, the Israelites, and the Phoenicians, andits successful operation probably depended on the cooperation of allthree.
Shipsof Tarshish.Several biblical texts, including the stories of Solomon andJehoshaphat, mention “ships of Tarshish” (1Kings10:22 NIV mg.). In a number of contexts, such ships are associatedwith the transportation of metals and metal ores, including iron,lead, tin, gold, and silver (1Kings 10:22; Ezek. 27:12; Jer.10:9). The exact derivation of the term “ships of Tarshish”is uncertain, though it is clear from the descriptions of theircargoes that such ships could travel over long distances. As Ezekielobserves, “The ships of Tarshish serve as carriers for yourwares. You are filled with heavy cargo as you sail the sea. Youroarsmen take you out to the high seas” (Ezek. 27:25–26).
Inthe Table of Nations, Tarshish is listed as a descendant of Javan(Gen. 10:4), along with a number of other seafaring peoples of theeastern Mediterranean (“Javan” indicates the peoples ofthe Aegean and is linguistically equivalent to “Ionia”[see also Ezek. 27:12–22]). Some have suggested, then, that theships of Tarshish should be associated with Tarsus in southeasternTurkey, an area containing silver mines (also the birthplace of Paul[Acts 9:11]). Others have suggested the Phoenician colony ofTartessus in Spain, another metal-producing area. This locationfigures in the interpretation of the identification of thedestination of Jonah as Tarshish (Jon. 1:3): presumably, if he wereavoiding Nineveh and departing from Joppa, he would head towardSpain, in the exact opposite direction, rather than toward Tarsus inCilicia.
Inaddition to these two geographical options, some have attempted toexplain the expression “ships of Tarshish” as derivingfrom the Akkadian term for smelting or refining: perhaps the manyreferences to cargoes of metals indicate that the ships were used totransport metal ore to refining centers. Finally, one scholar hasproposed that the term is related to the Greek word tarsos,meaning “oar.”
Descriptionsof ships and seafaring.Ezekiel, in his lament concerning the Phoenician city of Tyre (Ezek.27), relates a number of details related to Phoenician seafaring. Thepicture largely confirms the descriptions of how Solomon built andmanned his fleet with the assistance of his Tyrian ally. Timber forthe construction of the ship came from Lebanon and Cyprus, amongother places (vv. 5–6). Sails were made from Egyptian linen(v.7), and as noted above, the oarsmen and sailors were fromthe Phoenician city-states (vv. 8–9). Ezekiel goes on to list alarge number of ports of call as well as a dazzling variety ofcargoes (vv. 12–24). Notably, Ezekiel has the Judahites and theIsraelites offering the products of their agrarian economy—“wheatfrom Minnith and confections, honey, olive oil and balm”(v.17)—thus filling out the picture of what theIsraelites gave in exchange for the precious metals and luxury itemsimported by their country from elsewhere.
In1999 archaeologists explored two eighth-century BC Phoenician shipsthat had sunk thirty miles west of Ashkelon. The ships, eachmeasuring about fifty feet in length, contained large cargoes of wineand were headed either for Egypt or for the Phoenician colonies inthe western Mediterranean.
Shipsand sailing figure prominently in the story of Jonah, who boarded aship bound for Tarshish (see discussion above) at Joppa on theMediterranean coast. In the story we see a number of features ofancient sea travel. Jonah paid a fare for his voyage (Jon. 1:3). Notonly the biblical author (see 1:4), but also the presumablynon-Israelite sailors, believed that the great storm was the doing ofa god, and that it could be calmed by appealing to that god(1:6)—although cargo was thrown overboard for good measure.When Paul was caught in a storm in the first century AD, the samestrategies were still in use (Acts 27:38). The religious habits ofancient sailors, particularly their reverence for the gods whocontrolled the stormy seas and thus held their lives in the balance,are illuminated by the discovery of stone anchors in several temples(presumably left by sailors as offerings), including at the portcities of Ugarit, Kition, and Byblos.
Psalm107:23–32 speaks of God’s care of sailors from anIsraelite perspective. In the psalm, those who “went out on thesea in ships,” the “merchants on the mighty waters”(i.e., the deep, open sea), witness firsthand the works of the God ofIsrael, which include both the raising and the quieting of the storm.This passage vividly expresses the terror of being caught in a stormand the great relief and gratitude felt by sailors who reached safehaven.
Noah’sArk
Accordingto the biblical account, Noah’s ark was 450 feet long, 75 feetwide, and 45 feet high (300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits [Gen.6:15]). It had three decks, a roof, and a window. By comparison, theship of Uta-napishti in the Epic of Gilgamesh is described as havingsix decks (and thus seven stories), edges of 180 feet (ten dozencubits) in each dimension, and occupying the space of an acre (arough approximation of the dimensions given). Both ships aredescribed as providing space for the builder’s family and everyliving creature. In the Atrahasis Epic, the boat is roofed, but itsdimensions are not given.
Becauseof the character of Gen. 6–8, it is inappropriate to drawconclusions from the story regarding shipbuilding in historicalantiquity. According to the specifications given in the biblicaltext, Noah’s ark would have been the largest wooden ship inhistory, equaled only by the United States schooner Wyoming,completed in 1909. While the overall length of the Wyoming was also450 feet, nearly 100 feet of length was accounted for in the fore andaft booms, so that the hull length was only 350 feet. Even with earlytwentieth-century shipbuilding technology, its extravagant lengthrendered the Wyoming unseaworthy, and the ship foundered in 1924. Thelargest documented wooden ships of antiquity include the GreekSyracusia(third century BC; 180 feet), described by Athenaeus; the Roman Isis(second century AD; 180 feet), described by Lucian; Caligula’s“Giant Ship” (first century AD; 341 feet), recovered inmodern times and possibly corresponding to a ship described by Plinythe Elder; and PtolemyIV’s Tessarakonteres (third centuryBC), reported by Plutarch to have been about 425 feet long. This lastship was not designed for cruising in open water.
NewTestament
Fishingin the Sea of Galilee. Severalof Jesus’ disciples worked as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee,and the Gospels document their use of small boats for fishing andtraveling across the sea. Fishing was done with nets thrown both fromboats and from the shore (Mark 1:16, 19). The boats used by fishermenon the Sea of Galilee may have been small enough to pull up onto thebeach (Luke 5:2), or to be nearly capsized by a large catch of fish(Luke 5:7) or by a violent storm (Mark 4:37). They were large enoughto transport several men and even to sleep in (Mark 4:38). Such boatscould be rowed or sailed; in Mark 6:48 the disciples had to resort torowing because of an unfavorable headwind. On one occasion, Jesusstood in a boat to preach to a crowd gathered on the shore (Mark4:1). The Sea of Galilee is about eight miles wide and thirteen mileslong. On several occasions, Jesus traveled by boat across the sea toavoid having to walk long distances around its circumference (e.g.,Matt. 9:1; 14:22; 15:39).
In1986 archaeologists recovered a fishing boat dating to the mid-firstcentury AD on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. The boat had beenscuttled near the shore and was preserved under mud. The “JesusBoat,” as it was dubbed, measures twenty-seven feet in lengthand has a beam seven and a half feet long. Numerous species of woodwere used in its construction and repairs throughout its useful life.While there is no evidence to link the boat to Jesus or hisdisciples, radiometric dating places it in the correct period, and itprovides a likely model of the type of boat portrayed in the Gospels.
Asecond source of information regarding ships and sailing in the NT isthe account in Acts of Paul’s many sea voyages. As in the caseof Jehoshaphat, the Tyrians, Jonah, and Jesus’ disciples, Paullearned firsthand the perils of seafaring in small wooden boats:among his many traumas, along with beatings and stonings, herecalled, “Three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and aday in the open sea” (2Cor. 11:25).
Paul’sjourneys.A survey of Paul’s sea travels on his four journeys gives someidea of the routes that could be taken by a paying traveler in theeastern Mediterranean and Aegean.
1.Paul’s first missionary journey included voyages from Seleuciain Syria to the port of Salamis in Cyprus (Acts 13:4) and from Cyprus(Paphos) to Perga on the southern coast of Asia Minor (13:13). Afterjourneying through the interior, Paul returned to Attalia, where heembarked for the return trip to Syria, presumably passing againthrough the port at Salamis (14:26).
2.The second missionary journey began not with a sea voyage but ratherwith a trek through the interior of Syria and Cilicia, illustratingthat although sea travel was by far a more rapid means of travel, theoverland routes were by no means impossible (Acts 15:39). Paul wouldrepeat this land route during his third journey (19:1). Sea travelwas fast, but when one had plenty of friends along the alternativeland route, a sea journey was considerably less enjoyable. It isduring the second journey that we have the first recorded accounts ofPaul sailing in the Aegean. From Troas in Asia Minor, he sailed theshort distance to Macedonia (16:11), putting in midway at the islandof Samothrace. Apparently, Paul traveled by sea down the coast fromBerea to Athens (17:14). At the conclusion of his second journey,Paul sailed from Corinth to Caesarea, with a stop at Ephesus(18:18–22). Not counting any intervening ports of call notmentioned in the text, this would be the longest single leg of seatravel so far mentioned.
3.The third missionary journey once more began with a long overlandtrip from Syria through Asia Minor; by this time, Paul had manyassociates along the way to visit. Again, he sailed in the Aegean,from Ephesus to Macedonia (Acts 20:1) and back (20:6). At one point,Paul opted to travel overland, from Troas to Assos, while hiscompanions sailed down the coast (20:13). Meeting up with them, hesailed on, hugging the coast of Asia Minor, then sailing south ofCyprus along an open-water route to Tyre. From Tyre, the ship againhugged the Palestinian coast, stopping in several ports before Pauldisembarked at Caesarea (21:7). Paul’s journeys illustrate thevariety of itineraries taken by ships. They were capable of sailingin deep water, but they would also hug the coast when there werereasons to make frequent stops.
4.Paul’s fourth journey, which he made in custody on his way to atrial before the emperor at Rome, was to be the most dangerous. Fromthe account in Acts we can glean a number of details of life at seain the first century AD. The ship bound for Italy was large, and itcarried 276 passengers and crew (Acts 27:6, 37), including soldiersand prisoners, at least one companion of a prisoner (Paul’sfriend Aristarchus [27:2]), a ship’s pilot, and the ship’sowner (27:11). Sailors used celestial navigation (27:20) and tooksoundings in shallow water (27:28). We see also that the ship’scourse could be determined by the direction of the prevailing winds:twice during the journey Paul’s ship was forced to sail to thelee of large islands (Cyprus and Crete)—a longer journey, butthe only option for a ship that was not rigged to sail close-hauled.
Whenextended periods of unfavorable weather were forecast, one option wassimply to put in at a port until conditions improved, preferably in aharbor that was in the lee of an island (Acts 27:12). We learnsomething of the measures that were taken in heavy weather, many ofwhich are still used in modern times: ropes were tied around the hullof the ship to prevent it from breaking up in rough seas (27:17), thelifeboat was brought onto the deck and made fast (27:17), sea anchorswere deployed to keep the bow of the ship oriented into the oncomingwaves (27:7), the rudder was lashed amidships (27:40), valuable cargoand gear were jettisoned (27:19, 38), and, as in the days of Jonah,sailors and passengers prayed for divine deliverance (27:29; see alsothe protective emblems in 28:11).
Whenall other means had been exhausted, a ship could be run aground on asandy beach (Acts 27:39), a measure that would have risked damage tothe boat but saved lives. In the case of Paul’s ship, thedecision to run aground ultimately resulted in the destruction of theship (27:41).
Metaphorsand illustrations.Several NT authors draw illustrations from the nautical world. Jameslikens the harmful power of evil speech to the rudder of a ship:although it is a small device, by it the pilot can control a greatship (James 3:4–5). Elsewhere, he compares the doubting of theunwise person to being lost at sea in a storm (James 1:6; cf. Eph.4:14). In 1Tim. 1:19 the loss of faith and good conscience islikened to a shipwreck. Hebrews 6:19 describes the assurance of God’sfaithfulness as an anchor for the soul.
Self-control involves the willingness to submit to theboundaries of nature, society, and family that God places in theworld to bring about order and harmony in relationships. Theself-restraint of an individual’s thoughts, words, and actionsreflects the ordered discipline of God’s creation (Gen. 1–3;8:22; Prov. 6:6–8). Discipline of the self is essential to livea productive life in community (Prov. 25:28).
“Self-control”is one of the terms that Luke uses to summarize Paul’s messageto Felix (Acts 24:25). God’s people must exercise self-control(1Thess. 5:6; 2Tim. 1:7; 2Pet. 1:6). Ultimately,self-control is a gift, a fruit that comes from being in submissionto God’s Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23).
OldTestament
Phoeniciansand Philistines. Asa people whose ancestral territory lay in the landlocked andtimber-poor highlands of Ephraim and Judah, the Israelites ofbiblical times never achieved prominence in seafaring orshipbuilding. Instead, they relied for their maritime enterprises onalliances with their coastal neighbors, particularly the Phoenicianstates to the north of Israel, who excelled in seafaring and hadaccess to the abundant timber forests of Lebanon. The Phoenicians(the Punics of classical antiquity) were famous in antiquity fortheir seafaring. In biblical times, they traded heavily betweenSyria-Palestine and Egypt and also sailed throughout theMediterranean, establishing colonies as far away as Tunisia(Carthage) and Spain (Cadiz).
Anotherseagoing people prominent in the OT were the Philistines, whose baseof power was to the west of Judah, along the Mediterranean coast. TheBible associates the Philistines with the five cities of Ashdod,Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza. The Philistines were among the SeaPeoples, who came to the Levant from the Aegean beginning in thetwelfth century BC (Amos 9:7; Jer. 47:4).
Theperennial enmity between the Philistines and the Israelites precludedjoint maritime ventures of the sort shared by Israel and thePhoenicians, and the Bible does not describe Philistine maritimeactivities in any depth. Nevertheless, the seagoing nature of thePhilistines is reflected by the fact that their settlements remainedconfined to the coastal region. They never made a systematic attemptto take over the traditionally Israelite and Judahite highlands. Whenthey did venture into the Judean mountains, it was to assert amilitary and political presence among the agrarian Israelites andJudahites rather than to establish permanent settlements andPhilistine population centers. Twelfth-century BC reliefs at MedinetHabu (in the mortuary temple of RamessesIII) depict a navalbattle between the Sea Peoples and the Egyptians. The reliefs includepictures of Philistine ships and sailors.
Israeliteseafaring.One of the rare references to Israelite seafaring describes theDanites and the Asherites in connection with ships and harbors (Judg.5:17; see also Ezek. 27:19). Traditional Danite territory overlappedwith the area of Philistine settlement. Asherite territory overlappedsubstantially with Phoenician territory. It is possible that Judg.5:17 refers to the fact that the Danites and the Asherites worked inthe port cities serving Philistine and Phoenician shipping. Inanother passage, Zebulun is associated with ports (Gen. 49:13). It isnoteworthy that the Israelite coast between Jaffa and Dor (roughlybetween Philistia and Phoenicia) does not have an abundance ofnatural harbors. Later, Herod the Great would build the artificialharbor at Caesarea in the first century BC. The great expense of sucha project—including the construction of over 2,500 feet ofbreakwaters made of underwater concrete, mostly imported fromItaly—suggests the extent of the need for secure harbors inthis region.
Solomon’sfleet.The zenith of Israelite seafaring occurred during the reign ofSolomon. Solomon built a fleet of ships at “Ezion Geber, whichis near Elath in Edom, on the shore of the Red Sea” (1Kings9:26). The purpose of these ships was to bring back gold from Ophir(1Kings 9:28), possibly a location in the Arabian Peninsula, towhich a port on the Red Sea would have offered ready access. Thestory confirms the aforementioned dependence on the Phoenicians inthe area of seafaring: although the ships belonged to Solomon, “Hiram[the Phoenician king of Tyre] sent his men—sailors who knew thesea—to serve in the fleet with Solomon’s men”(1Kings 9:27). The timber for the ships would also have beenimported by Israel from Phoenicia (see 1Kings 9:11). Even atthe height of its power, Israel lacked the human resources to embarkon sea voyages independently of the Phoenicians.
Thesuccess of Solomon’s project, of course, depended not only onwarm relations with the Phoenicians but also on territorial controlof the historically Edomite lands between Judah and the Red Sea. Thisfavorable combination of conditions would come and go throughout thebiblical period, and with it, Israel’s modest presence on theseas. From the Phoenician point of view, cooperation with Israel wasan essential component of gaining access to a Red Sea port, and withit to the products of Arabia, the Horn of Africa, and India. ThePhoenicians, as expansive as their travel was in the Mediterranean,could never independently control the long overland route fromPhoenicia to the Red Sea, since it ran through the territory ofIsrael and Edom. Their best hope was a friendly and powerfulIsraelite ally. This explains the cordial relationship and why Hiramsent not only his sailors to serve Solomon but also craftsmen andsupplies for the construction of the temple (1Kings 5:10–12).Solomon and Hiram jointly operated “a fleet of trading ships”that would return to port every three years bringing “gold,silver, and ivory, and apes and baboons” (1Kings 10:22).
Jehoshaphat.In the mid-ninth century BC, King Jehoshaphat of Judah attempted torepeat Solomon’s feat of launching a fleet from Ezion Geber(1Kings 22:48–49; 2Chron. 20:35–37).According to both accounts, the ships were wrecked before they couldset sail. On several other points, however, the two versions of thestory disagree in ways that bear on questions of the political andeconomic conditions of Israelite seafaring.
Bythis time, Israel and Judah had split into separate kingdoms, withthe northern kingdom of Israel being geographically and politicallycloser to the Phoenicians. The powerful King Ahab of Israel,Jehoshaphat’s contemporary through much of his reign, marriedJezebel, the daughter of the Sidonian (Phoenician) king Ethbaal(1Kings 16:31). According to 1Kings, King Ahaziah ofIsrael (Ahab’s son) proposed to cooperate with Jehoshaphat bysending his own men on the voyage, much as Hiram had assisted Solomonin the previous century. Jehoshaphat rejected the suggestion,possibly indicating a bid for Judean autonomy in an era of northerndominance. According to 2Chronicles, however, Jehoshaphat didcooperate willingly with Ahaziah, and this was the reason that theships foundered in port: God punished the righteous Jehoshaphat fortoo close a relationship with his wicked northern counterpart. In1Kings 22:47 it is mentioned that at the time of Jehoshaphat’sventure there was no king in Edom. As noted, control of the overlandroute between Judah and the Red Sea was necessary for the success ofany voyage originating from Ezion Geber.
Howeverthe contradiction between 1Kings and 2Chroniclesregarding the involvement of Ahaziah is resolved, both versions ofthe story highlight the fact that the port at Ezion Geber commandedthe interest of the Judeans, the Israelites, and the Phoenicians, andits successful operation probably depended on the cooperation of allthree.
Shipsof Tarshish.Several biblical texts, including the stories of Solomon andJehoshaphat, mention “ships of Tarshish” (1Kings10:22 NIV mg.). In a number of contexts, such ships are associatedwith the transportation of metals and metal ores, including iron,lead, tin, gold, and silver (1Kings 10:22; Ezek. 27:12; Jer.10:9). The exact derivation of the term “ships of Tarshish”is uncertain, though it is clear from the descriptions of theircargoes that such ships could travel over long distances. As Ezekielobserves, “The ships of Tarshish serve as carriers for yourwares. You are filled with heavy cargo as you sail the sea. Youroarsmen take you out to the high seas” (Ezek. 27:25–26).
Inthe Table of Nations, Tarshish is listed as a descendant of Javan(Gen. 10:4), along with a number of other seafaring peoples of theeastern Mediterranean (“Javan” indicates the peoples ofthe Aegean and is linguistically equivalent to “Ionia”[see also Ezek. 27:12–22]). Some have suggested, then, that theships of Tarshish should be associated with Tarsus in southeasternTurkey, an area containing silver mines (also the birthplace of Paul[Acts 9:11]). Others have suggested the Phoenician colony ofTartessus in Spain, another metal-producing area. This locationfigures in the interpretation of the identification of thedestination of Jonah as Tarshish (Jon. 1:3): presumably, if he wereavoiding Nineveh and departing from Joppa, he would head towardSpain, in the exact opposite direction, rather than toward Tarsus inCilicia.
Inaddition to these two geographical options, some have attempted toexplain the expression “ships of Tarshish” as derivingfrom the Akkadian term for smelting or refining: perhaps the manyreferences to cargoes of metals indicate that the ships were used totransport metal ore to refining centers. Finally, one scholar hasproposed that the term is related to the Greek word tarsos,meaning “oar.”
Descriptionsof ships and seafaring.Ezekiel, in his lament concerning the Phoenician city of Tyre (Ezek.27), relates a number of details related to Phoenician seafaring. Thepicture largely confirms the descriptions of how Solomon built andmanned his fleet with the assistance of his Tyrian ally. Timber forthe construction of the ship came from Lebanon and Cyprus, amongother places (vv. 5–6). Sails were made from Egyptian linen(v.7), and as noted above, the oarsmen and sailors were fromthe Phoenician city-states (vv. 8–9). Ezekiel goes on to list alarge number of ports of call as well as a dazzling variety ofcargoes (vv. 12–24). Notably, Ezekiel has the Judahites and theIsraelites offering the products of their agrarian economy—“wheatfrom Minnith and confections, honey, olive oil and balm”(v.17)—thus filling out the picture of what theIsraelites gave in exchange for the precious metals and luxury itemsimported by their country from elsewhere.
In1999 archaeologists explored two eighth-century BC Phoenician shipsthat had sunk thirty miles west of Ashkelon. The ships, eachmeasuring about fifty feet in length, contained large cargoes of wineand were headed either for Egypt or for the Phoenician colonies inthe western Mediterranean.
Shipsand sailing figure prominently in the story of Jonah, who boarded aship bound for Tarshish (see discussion above) at Joppa on theMediterranean coast. In the story we see a number of features ofancient sea travel. Jonah paid a fare for his voyage (Jon. 1:3). Notonly the biblical author (see 1:4), but also the presumablynon-Israelite sailors, believed that the great storm was the doing ofa god, and that it could be calmed by appealing to that god(1:6)—although cargo was thrown overboard for good measure.When Paul was caught in a storm in the first century AD, the samestrategies were still in use (Acts 27:38). The religious habits ofancient sailors, particularly their reverence for the gods whocontrolled the stormy seas and thus held their lives in the balance,are illuminated by the discovery of stone anchors in several temples(presumably left by sailors as offerings), including at the portcities of Ugarit, Kition, and Byblos.
Psalm107:23–32 speaks of God’s care of sailors from anIsraelite perspective. In the psalm, those who “went out on thesea in ships,” the “merchants on the mighty waters”(i.e., the deep, open sea), witness firsthand the works of the God ofIsrael, which include both the raising and the quieting of the storm.This passage vividly expresses the terror of being caught in a stormand the great relief and gratitude felt by sailors who reached safehaven.
Noah’sArk
Accordingto the biblical account, Noah’s ark was 450 feet long, 75 feetwide, and 45 feet high (300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits [Gen.6:15]). It had three decks, a roof, and a window. By comparison, theship of Uta-napishti in the Epic of Gilgamesh is described as havingsix decks (and thus seven stories), edges of 180 feet (ten dozencubits) in each dimension, and occupying the space of an acre (arough approximation of the dimensions given). Both ships aredescribed as providing space for the builder’s family and everyliving creature. In the Atrahasis Epic, the boat is roofed, but itsdimensions are not given.
Becauseof the character of Gen. 6–8, it is inappropriate to drawconclusions from the story regarding shipbuilding in historicalantiquity. According to the specifications given in the biblicaltext, Noah’s ark would have been the largest wooden ship inhistory, equaled only by the United States schooner Wyoming,completed in 1909. While the overall length of the Wyoming was also450 feet, nearly 100 feet of length was accounted for in the fore andaft booms, so that the hull length was only 350 feet. Even with earlytwentieth-century shipbuilding technology, its extravagant lengthrendered the Wyoming unseaworthy, and the ship foundered in 1924. Thelargest documented wooden ships of antiquity include the GreekSyracusia(third century BC; 180 feet), described by Athenaeus; the Roman Isis(second century AD; 180 feet), described by Lucian; Caligula’s“Giant Ship” (first century AD; 341 feet), recovered inmodern times and possibly corresponding to a ship described by Plinythe Elder; and PtolemyIV’s Tessarakonteres (third centuryBC), reported by Plutarch to have been about 425 feet long. This lastship was not designed for cruising in open water.
NewTestament
Fishingin the Sea of Galilee. Severalof Jesus’ disciples worked as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee,and the Gospels document their use of small boats for fishing andtraveling across the sea. Fishing was done with nets thrown both fromboats and from the shore (Mark 1:16, 19). The boats used by fishermenon the Sea of Galilee may have been small enough to pull up onto thebeach (Luke 5:2), or to be nearly capsized by a large catch of fish(Luke 5:7) or by a violent storm (Mark 4:37). They were large enoughto transport several men and even to sleep in (Mark 4:38). Such boatscould be rowed or sailed; in Mark 6:48 the disciples had to resort torowing because of an unfavorable headwind. On one occasion, Jesusstood in a boat to preach to a crowd gathered on the shore (Mark4:1). The Sea of Galilee is about eight miles wide and thirteen mileslong. On several occasions, Jesus traveled by boat across the sea toavoid having to walk long distances around its circumference (e.g.,Matt. 9:1; 14:22; 15:39).
In1986 archaeologists recovered a fishing boat dating to the mid-firstcentury AD on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. The boat had beenscuttled near the shore and was preserved under mud. The “JesusBoat,” as it was dubbed, measures twenty-seven feet in lengthand has a beam seven and a half feet long. Numerous species of woodwere used in its construction and repairs throughout its useful life.While there is no evidence to link the boat to Jesus or hisdisciples, radiometric dating places it in the correct period, and itprovides a likely model of the type of boat portrayed in the Gospels.
Asecond source of information regarding ships and sailing in the NT isthe account in Acts of Paul’s many sea voyages. As in the caseof Jehoshaphat, the Tyrians, Jonah, and Jesus’ disciples, Paullearned firsthand the perils of seafaring in small wooden boats:among his many traumas, along with beatings and stonings, herecalled, “Three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and aday in the open sea” (2Cor. 11:25).
Paul’sjourneys.A survey of Paul’s sea travels on his four journeys gives someidea of the routes that could be taken by a paying traveler in theeastern Mediterranean and Aegean.
1.Paul’s first missionary journey included voyages from Seleuciain Syria to the port of Salamis in Cyprus (Acts 13:4) and from Cyprus(Paphos) to Perga on the southern coast of Asia Minor (13:13). Afterjourneying through the interior, Paul returned to Attalia, where heembarked for the return trip to Syria, presumably passing againthrough the port at Salamis (14:26).
2.The second missionary journey began not with a sea voyage but ratherwith a trek through the interior of Syria and Cilicia, illustratingthat although sea travel was by far a more rapid means of travel, theoverland routes were by no means impossible (Acts 15:39). Paul wouldrepeat this land route during his third journey (19:1). Sea travelwas fast, but when one had plenty of friends along the alternativeland route, a sea journey was considerably less enjoyable. It isduring the second journey that we have the first recorded accounts ofPaul sailing in the Aegean. From Troas in Asia Minor, he sailed theshort distance to Macedonia (16:11), putting in midway at the islandof Samothrace. Apparently, Paul traveled by sea down the coast fromBerea to Athens (17:14). At the conclusion of his second journey,Paul sailed from Corinth to Caesarea, with a stop at Ephesus(18:18–22). Not counting any intervening ports of call notmentioned in the text, this would be the longest single leg of seatravel so far mentioned.
3.The third missionary journey once more began with a long overlandtrip from Syria through Asia Minor; by this time, Paul had manyassociates along the way to visit. Again, he sailed in the Aegean,from Ephesus to Macedonia (Acts 20:1) and back (20:6). At one point,Paul opted to travel overland, from Troas to Assos, while hiscompanions sailed down the coast (20:13). Meeting up with them, hesailed on, hugging the coast of Asia Minor, then sailing south ofCyprus along an open-water route to Tyre. From Tyre, the ship againhugged the Palestinian coast, stopping in several ports before Pauldisembarked at Caesarea (21:7). Paul’s journeys illustrate thevariety of itineraries taken by ships. They were capable of sailingin deep water, but they would also hug the coast when there werereasons to make frequent stops.
4.Paul’s fourth journey, which he made in custody on his way to atrial before the emperor at Rome, was to be the most dangerous. Fromthe account in Acts we can glean a number of details of life at seain the first century AD. The ship bound for Italy was large, and itcarried 276 passengers and crew (Acts 27:6, 37), including soldiersand prisoners, at least one companion of a prisoner (Paul’sfriend Aristarchus [27:2]), a ship’s pilot, and the ship’sowner (27:11). Sailors used celestial navigation (27:20) and tooksoundings in shallow water (27:28). We see also that the ship’scourse could be determined by the direction of the prevailing winds:twice during the journey Paul’s ship was forced to sail to thelee of large islands (Cyprus and Crete)—a longer journey, butthe only option for a ship that was not rigged to sail close-hauled.
Whenextended periods of unfavorable weather were forecast, one option wassimply to put in at a port until conditions improved, preferably in aharbor that was in the lee of an island (Acts 27:12). We learnsomething of the measures that were taken in heavy weather, many ofwhich are still used in modern times: ropes were tied around the hullof the ship to prevent it from breaking up in rough seas (27:17), thelifeboat was brought onto the deck and made fast (27:17), sea anchorswere deployed to keep the bow of the ship oriented into the oncomingwaves (27:7), the rudder was lashed amidships (27:40), valuable cargoand gear were jettisoned (27:19, 38), and, as in the days of Jonah,sailors and passengers prayed for divine deliverance (27:29; see alsothe protective emblems in 28:11).
Whenall other means had been exhausted, a ship could be run aground on asandy beach (Acts 27:39), a measure that would have risked damage tothe boat but saved lives. In the case of Paul’s ship, thedecision to run aground ultimately resulted in the destruction of theship (27:41).
Metaphorsand illustrations.Several NT authors draw illustrations from the nautical world. Jameslikens the harmful power of evil speech to the rudder of a ship:although it is a small device, by it the pilot can control a greatship (James 3:4–5). Elsewhere, he compares the doubting of theunwise person to being lost at sea in a storm (James 1:6; cf. Eph.4:14). In 1Tim. 1:19 the loss of faith and good conscience islikened to a shipwreck. Hebrews 6:19 describes the assurance of God’sfaithfulness as an anchor for the soul.
OldTestament
Phoeniciansand Philistines. Asa people whose ancestral territory lay in the landlocked andtimber-poor highlands of Ephraim and Judah, the Israelites ofbiblical times never achieved prominence in seafaring orshipbuilding. Instead, they relied for their maritime enterprises onalliances with their coastal neighbors, particularly the Phoenicianstates to the north of Israel, who excelled in seafaring and hadaccess to the abundant timber forests of Lebanon. The Phoenicians(the Punics of classical antiquity) were famous in antiquity fortheir seafaring. In biblical times, they traded heavily betweenSyria-Palestine and Egypt and also sailed throughout theMediterranean, establishing colonies as far away as Tunisia(Carthage) and Spain (Cadiz).
Anotherseagoing people prominent in the OT were the Philistines, whose baseof power was to the west of Judah, along the Mediterranean coast. TheBible associates the Philistines with the five cities of Ashdod,Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza. The Philistines were among the SeaPeoples, who came to the Levant from the Aegean beginning in thetwelfth century BC (Amos 9:7; Jer. 47:4).
Theperennial enmity between the Philistines and the Israelites precludedjoint maritime ventures of the sort shared by Israel and thePhoenicians, and the Bible does not describe Philistine maritimeactivities in any depth. Nevertheless, the seagoing nature of thePhilistines is reflected by the fact that their settlements remainedconfined to the coastal region. They never made a systematic attemptto take over the traditionally Israelite and Judahite highlands. Whenthey did venture into the Judean mountains, it was to assert amilitary and political presence among the agrarian Israelites andJudahites rather than to establish permanent settlements andPhilistine population centers. Twelfth-century BC reliefs at MedinetHabu (in the mortuary temple of RamessesIII) depict a navalbattle between the Sea Peoples and the Egyptians. The reliefs includepictures of Philistine ships and sailors.
Israeliteseafaring.One of the rare references to Israelite seafaring describes theDanites and the Asherites in connection with ships and harbors (Judg.5:17; see also Ezek. 27:19). Traditional Danite territory overlappedwith the area of Philistine settlement. Asherite territory overlappedsubstantially with Phoenician territory. It is possible that Judg.5:17 refers to the fact that the Danites and the Asherites worked inthe port cities serving Philistine and Phoenician shipping. Inanother passage, Zebulun is associated with ports (Gen. 49:13). It isnoteworthy that the Israelite coast between Jaffa and Dor (roughlybetween Philistia and Phoenicia) does not have an abundance ofnatural harbors. Later, Herod the Great would build the artificialharbor at Caesarea in the first century BC. The great expense of sucha project—including the construction of over 2,500 feet ofbreakwaters made of underwater concrete, mostly imported fromItaly—suggests the extent of the need for secure harbors inthis region.
Solomon’sfleet.The zenith of Israelite seafaring occurred during the reign ofSolomon. Solomon built a fleet of ships at “Ezion Geber, whichis near Elath in Edom, on the shore of the Red Sea” (1Kings9:26). The purpose of these ships was to bring back gold from Ophir(1Kings 9:28), possibly a location in the Arabian Peninsula, towhich a port on the Red Sea would have offered ready access. Thestory confirms the aforementioned dependence on the Phoenicians inthe area of seafaring: although the ships belonged to Solomon, “Hiram[the Phoenician king of Tyre] sent his men—sailors who knew thesea—to serve in the fleet with Solomon’s men”(1Kings 9:27). The timber for the ships would also have beenimported by Israel from Phoenicia (see 1Kings 9:11). Even atthe height of its power, Israel lacked the human resources to embarkon sea voyages independently of the Phoenicians.
Thesuccess of Solomon’s project, of course, depended not only onwarm relations with the Phoenicians but also on territorial controlof the historically Edomite lands between Judah and the Red Sea. Thisfavorable combination of conditions would come and go throughout thebiblical period, and with it, Israel’s modest presence on theseas. From the Phoenician point of view, cooperation with Israel wasan essential component of gaining access to a Red Sea port, and withit to the products of Arabia, the Horn of Africa, and India. ThePhoenicians, as expansive as their travel was in the Mediterranean,could never independently control the long overland route fromPhoenicia to the Red Sea, since it ran through the territory ofIsrael and Edom. Their best hope was a friendly and powerfulIsraelite ally. This explains the cordial relationship and why Hiramsent not only his sailors to serve Solomon but also craftsmen andsupplies for the construction of the temple (1Kings 5:10–12).Solomon and Hiram jointly operated “a fleet of trading ships”that would return to port every three years bringing “gold,silver, and ivory, and apes and baboons” (1Kings 10:22).
Jehoshaphat.In the mid-ninth century BC, King Jehoshaphat of Judah attempted torepeat Solomon’s feat of launching a fleet from Ezion Geber(1Kings 22:48–49; 2Chron. 20:35–37).According to both accounts, the ships were wrecked before they couldset sail. On several other points, however, the two versions of thestory disagree in ways that bear on questions of the political andeconomic conditions of Israelite seafaring.
Bythis time, Israel and Judah had split into separate kingdoms, withthe northern kingdom of Israel being geographically and politicallycloser to the Phoenicians. The powerful King Ahab of Israel,Jehoshaphat’s contemporary through much of his reign, marriedJezebel, the daughter of the Sidonian (Phoenician) king Ethbaal(1Kings 16:31). According to 1Kings, King Ahaziah ofIsrael (Ahab’s son) proposed to cooperate with Jehoshaphat bysending his own men on the voyage, much as Hiram had assisted Solomonin the previous century. Jehoshaphat rejected the suggestion,possibly indicating a bid for Judean autonomy in an era of northerndominance. According to 2Chronicles, however, Jehoshaphat didcooperate willingly with Ahaziah, and this was the reason that theships foundered in port: God punished the righteous Jehoshaphat fortoo close a relationship with his wicked northern counterpart. In1Kings 22:47 it is mentioned that at the time of Jehoshaphat’sventure there was no king in Edom. As noted, control of the overlandroute between Judah and the Red Sea was necessary for the success ofany voyage originating from Ezion Geber.
Howeverthe contradiction between 1Kings and 2Chroniclesregarding the involvement of Ahaziah is resolved, both versions ofthe story highlight the fact that the port at Ezion Geber commandedthe interest of the Judeans, the Israelites, and the Phoenicians, andits successful operation probably depended on the cooperation of allthree.
Shipsof Tarshish.Several biblical texts, including the stories of Solomon andJehoshaphat, mention “ships of Tarshish” (1Kings10:22 NIV mg.). In a number of contexts, such ships are associatedwith the transportation of metals and metal ores, including iron,lead, tin, gold, and silver (1Kings 10:22; Ezek. 27:12; Jer.10:9). The exact derivation of the term “ships of Tarshish”is uncertain, though it is clear from the descriptions of theircargoes that such ships could travel over long distances. As Ezekielobserves, “The ships of Tarshish serve as carriers for yourwares. You are filled with heavy cargo as you sail the sea. Youroarsmen take you out to the high seas” (Ezek. 27:25–26).
Inthe Table of Nations, Tarshish is listed as a descendant of Javan(Gen. 10:4), along with a number of other seafaring peoples of theeastern Mediterranean (“Javan” indicates the peoples ofthe Aegean and is linguistically equivalent to “Ionia”[see also Ezek. 27:12–22]). Some have suggested, then, that theships of Tarshish should be associated with Tarsus in southeasternTurkey, an area containing silver mines (also the birthplace of Paul[Acts 9:11]). Others have suggested the Phoenician colony ofTartessus in Spain, another metal-producing area. This locationfigures in the interpretation of the identification of thedestination of Jonah as Tarshish (Jon. 1:3): presumably, if he wereavoiding Nineveh and departing from Joppa, he would head towardSpain, in the exact opposite direction, rather than toward Tarsus inCilicia.
Inaddition to these two geographical options, some have attempted toexplain the expression “ships of Tarshish” as derivingfrom the Akkadian term for smelting or refining: perhaps the manyreferences to cargoes of metals indicate that the ships were used totransport metal ore to refining centers. Finally, one scholar hasproposed that the term is related to the Greek word tarsos,meaning “oar.”
Descriptionsof ships and seafaring.Ezekiel, in his lament concerning the Phoenician city of Tyre (Ezek.27), relates a number of details related to Phoenician seafaring. Thepicture largely confirms the descriptions of how Solomon built andmanned his fleet with the assistance of his Tyrian ally. Timber forthe construction of the ship came from Lebanon and Cyprus, amongother places (vv. 5–6). Sails were made from Egyptian linen(v.7), and as noted above, the oarsmen and sailors were fromthe Phoenician city-states (vv. 8–9). Ezekiel goes on to list alarge number of ports of call as well as a dazzling variety ofcargoes (vv. 12–24). Notably, Ezekiel has the Judahites and theIsraelites offering the products of their agrarian economy—“wheatfrom Minnith and confections, honey, olive oil and balm”(v.17)—thus filling out the picture of what theIsraelites gave in exchange for the precious metals and luxury itemsimported by their country from elsewhere.
In1999 archaeologists explored two eighth-century BC Phoenician shipsthat had sunk thirty miles west of Ashkelon. The ships, eachmeasuring about fifty feet in length, contained large cargoes of wineand were headed either for Egypt or for the Phoenician colonies inthe western Mediterranean.
Shipsand sailing figure prominently in the story of Jonah, who boarded aship bound for Tarshish (see discussion above) at Joppa on theMediterranean coast. In the story we see a number of features ofancient sea travel. Jonah paid a fare for his voyage (Jon. 1:3). Notonly the biblical author (see 1:4), but also the presumablynon-Israelite sailors, believed that the great storm was the doing ofa god, and that it could be calmed by appealing to that god(1:6)—although cargo was thrown overboard for good measure.When Paul was caught in a storm in the first century AD, the samestrategies were still in use (Acts 27:38). The religious habits ofancient sailors, particularly their reverence for the gods whocontrolled the stormy seas and thus held their lives in the balance,are illuminated by the discovery of stone anchors in several temples(presumably left by sailors as offerings), including at the portcities of Ugarit, Kition, and Byblos.
Psalm107:23–32 speaks of God’s care of sailors from anIsraelite perspective. In the psalm, those who “went out on thesea in ships,” the “merchants on the mighty waters”(i.e., the deep, open sea), witness firsthand the works of the God ofIsrael, which include both the raising and the quieting of the storm.This passage vividly expresses the terror of being caught in a stormand the great relief and gratitude felt by sailors who reached safehaven.
Noah’sArk
Accordingto the biblical account, Noah’s ark was 450 feet long, 75 feetwide, and 45 feet high (300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits [Gen.6:15]). It had three decks, a roof, and a window. By comparison, theship of Uta-napishti in the Epic of Gilgamesh is described as havingsix decks (and thus seven stories), edges of 180 feet (ten dozencubits) in each dimension, and occupying the space of an acre (arough approximation of the dimensions given). Both ships aredescribed as providing space for the builder’s family and everyliving creature. In the Atrahasis Epic, the boat is roofed, but itsdimensions are not given.
Becauseof the character of Gen. 6–8, it is inappropriate to drawconclusions from the story regarding shipbuilding in historicalantiquity. According to the specifications given in the biblicaltext, Noah’s ark would have been the largest wooden ship inhistory, equaled only by the United States schooner Wyoming,completed in 1909. While the overall length of the Wyoming was also450 feet, nearly 100 feet of length was accounted for in the fore andaft booms, so that the hull length was only 350 feet. Even with earlytwentieth-century shipbuilding technology, its extravagant lengthrendered the Wyoming unseaworthy, and the ship foundered in 1924. Thelargest documented wooden ships of antiquity include the GreekSyracusia(third century BC; 180 feet), described by Athenaeus; the Roman Isis(second century AD; 180 feet), described by Lucian; Caligula’s“Giant Ship” (first century AD; 341 feet), recovered inmodern times and possibly corresponding to a ship described by Plinythe Elder; and PtolemyIV’s Tessarakonteres (third centuryBC), reported by Plutarch to have been about 425 feet long. This lastship was not designed for cruising in open water.
NewTestament
Fishingin the Sea of Galilee. Severalof Jesus’ disciples worked as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee,and the Gospels document their use of small boats for fishing andtraveling across the sea. Fishing was done with nets thrown both fromboats and from the shore (Mark 1:16, 19). The boats used by fishermenon the Sea of Galilee may have been small enough to pull up onto thebeach (Luke 5:2), or to be nearly capsized by a large catch of fish(Luke 5:7) or by a violent storm (Mark 4:37). They were large enoughto transport several men and even to sleep in (Mark 4:38). Such boatscould be rowed or sailed; in Mark 6:48 the disciples had to resort torowing because of an unfavorable headwind. On one occasion, Jesusstood in a boat to preach to a crowd gathered on the shore (Mark4:1). The Sea of Galilee is about eight miles wide and thirteen mileslong. On several occasions, Jesus traveled by boat across the sea toavoid having to walk long distances around its circumference (e.g.,Matt. 9:1; 14:22; 15:39).
In1986 archaeologists recovered a fishing boat dating to the mid-firstcentury AD on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. The boat had beenscuttled near the shore and was preserved under mud. The “JesusBoat,” as it was dubbed, measures twenty-seven feet in lengthand has a beam seven and a half feet long. Numerous species of woodwere used in its construction and repairs throughout its useful life.While there is no evidence to link the boat to Jesus or hisdisciples, radiometric dating places it in the correct period, and itprovides a likely model of the type of boat portrayed in the Gospels.
Asecond source of information regarding ships and sailing in the NT isthe account in Acts of Paul’s many sea voyages. As in the caseof Jehoshaphat, the Tyrians, Jonah, and Jesus’ disciples, Paullearned firsthand the perils of seafaring in small wooden boats:among his many traumas, along with beatings and stonings, herecalled, “Three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and aday in the open sea” (2Cor. 11:25).
Paul’sjourneys.A survey of Paul’s sea travels on his four journeys gives someidea of the routes that could be taken by a paying traveler in theeastern Mediterranean and Aegean.
1.Paul’s first missionary journey included voyages from Seleuciain Syria to the port of Salamis in Cyprus (Acts 13:4) and from Cyprus(Paphos) to Perga on the southern coast of Asia Minor (13:13). Afterjourneying through the interior, Paul returned to Attalia, where heembarked for the return trip to Syria, presumably passing againthrough the port at Salamis (14:26).
2.The second missionary journey began not with a sea voyage but ratherwith a trek through the interior of Syria and Cilicia, illustratingthat although sea travel was by far a more rapid means of travel, theoverland routes were by no means impossible (Acts 15:39). Paul wouldrepeat this land route during his third journey (19:1). Sea travelwas fast, but when one had plenty of friends along the alternativeland route, a sea journey was considerably less enjoyable. It isduring the second journey that we have the first recorded accounts ofPaul sailing in the Aegean. From Troas in Asia Minor, he sailed theshort distance to Macedonia (16:11), putting in midway at the islandof Samothrace. Apparently, Paul traveled by sea down the coast fromBerea to Athens (17:14). At the conclusion of his second journey,Paul sailed from Corinth to Caesarea, with a stop at Ephesus(18:18–22). Not counting any intervening ports of call notmentioned in the text, this would be the longest single leg of seatravel so far mentioned.
3.The third missionary journey once more began with a long overlandtrip from Syria through Asia Minor; by this time, Paul had manyassociates along the way to visit. Again, he sailed in the Aegean,from Ephesus to Macedonia (Acts 20:1) and back (20:6). At one point,Paul opted to travel overland, from Troas to Assos, while hiscompanions sailed down the coast (20:13). Meeting up with them, hesailed on, hugging the coast of Asia Minor, then sailing south ofCyprus along an open-water route to Tyre. From Tyre, the ship againhugged the Palestinian coast, stopping in several ports before Pauldisembarked at Caesarea (21:7). Paul’s journeys illustrate thevariety of itineraries taken by ships. They were capable of sailingin deep water, but they would also hug the coast when there werereasons to make frequent stops.
4.Paul’s fourth journey, which he made in custody on his way to atrial before the emperor at Rome, was to be the most dangerous. Fromthe account in Acts we can glean a number of details of life at seain the first century AD. The ship bound for Italy was large, and itcarried 276 passengers and crew (Acts 27:6, 37), including soldiersand prisoners, at least one companion of a prisoner (Paul’sfriend Aristarchus [27:2]), a ship’s pilot, and the ship’sowner (27:11). Sailors used celestial navigation (27:20) and tooksoundings in shallow water (27:28). We see also that the ship’scourse could be determined by the direction of the prevailing winds:twice during the journey Paul’s ship was forced to sail to thelee of large islands (Cyprus and Crete)—a longer journey, butthe only option for a ship that was not rigged to sail close-hauled.
Whenextended periods of unfavorable weather were forecast, one option wassimply to put in at a port until conditions improved, preferably in aharbor that was in the lee of an island (Acts 27:12). We learnsomething of the measures that were taken in heavy weather, many ofwhich are still used in modern times: ropes were tied around the hullof the ship to prevent it from breaking up in rough seas (27:17), thelifeboat was brought onto the deck and made fast (27:17), sea anchorswere deployed to keep the bow of the ship oriented into the oncomingwaves (27:7), the rudder was lashed amidships (27:40), valuable cargoand gear were jettisoned (27:19, 38), and, as in the days of Jonah,sailors and passengers prayed for divine deliverance (27:29; see alsothe protective emblems in 28:11).
Whenall other means had been exhausted, a ship could be run aground on asandy beach (Acts 27:39), a measure that would have risked damage tothe boat but saved lives. In the case of Paul’s ship, thedecision to run aground ultimately resulted in the destruction of theship (27:41).
Metaphorsand illustrations.Several NT authors draw illustrations from the nautical world. Jameslikens the harmful power of evil speech to the rudder of a ship:although it is a small device, by it the pilot can control a greatship (James 3:4–5). Elsewhere, he compares the doubting of theunwise person to being lost at sea in a storm (James 1:6; cf. Eph.4:14). In 1Tim. 1:19 the loss of faith and good conscience islikened to a shipwreck. Hebrews 6:19 describes the assurance of God’sfaithfulness as an anchor for the soul.
There are few subjects more prominent in the Bible than sin;hardly a page can be found where sin is not mentioned, described, orportrayed. As the survey that follows demonstrates, sin is one of thedriving forces of the entire Bible.
Sinin the Bible
OldTestament.Sin enters the biblical story in Gen. 3. Despite God’scommandment to the contrary (2:16–17), Eve ate from the tree ofthe knowledge of good and evil at the prompting of the serpent. WhenAdam joined Eve in eating the fruit, their rebellion was complete.They attempted to cover their guilt and shame, but the fig leaveswere inadequate. God confronted them and was unimpressed with theirattempts to shift the blame. Judgment fell heavily on the serpent,Eve, and Adam; even creation itself was affected (3:17–18).
Inthe midst of judgment, God made it clear in two specific ways thatsin did not have the last word. First, God cryptically promised toput hostility between the offspring of the serpent and that of thewoman (Gen. 3:15). Although the serpent would inflict a severe blowupon the offspring of the woman, the offspring ofthe womanwould defeat the serpent. Second, God replaced the inadequatecovering of the fig leaves with animal skins (3:21). The implicationis that the death of the animal functioned as a substitute for Adamand Eve, covering their sin.
InGen. 4–11 the disastrous effects of sin and death are on fulldisplay. Not even the cataclysmic judgment of the flood was able toeradicate the wickedness of the human heart (6:5; 8:21). Humansgathered in rebellion at the tower of Babel in an effort to make aname for themselves and thwart God’s intention for them toscatter across the earth (11:1–9).
Inone sense, the rest of the OT hangs on this question: How will a holyGod satisfy his wrath against human sin and restore his relationshipwith human beings without compromising his justice? The short answeris: through Abraham and his offspring (Gen. 12:1–3), whoeventually multiplied into the nation of Israel. After God redeemedthem from their slavery in Egypt (Exod. 1–15), he brought themto Sinai to make a covenant with them that was predicated onobedience (19:5–6). A central component of this covenant wasthe sacrificial system (e.g., Lev. 1–7), which God provided asa means of dealing with sin. In addition to the regular sacrificesmade for sin throughout the year, God set apart one day a year toatone for Israel’s sins (Lev. 16). On this Day of Atonement thehigh priest took the blood of a goat into the holy of holies andsprinkled it on the mercy seat as a sin offering. Afterward he took asecond goat and confessed “all the iniquities of the people ofIsrael, and all their transgressions, all their sins, putting them onthe head of the goat, and sending it away into the wilderness....The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to a barrenregion; and the goat shall be set free in the wilderness” (Lev.16:21–22 NRSV). In order for the holy God to dwell with sinfulpeople, extensive provisions had to be made to enable fellowship.
Despitethese provisions, Israel repeatedly and persistently broke itscovenant with God. Even at the highest points of prosperity under thereign of David and his son Solomon, sin plagued God’s people,including the kings themselves. David committed adultery and murder(2Sam. 11:1–27). Solomon had hundreds of foreign wivesand concubines, who turned his heart away from Yahweh to other gods(1Kings 11:1–8). Once the nation split into two (Israeland Judah), sin and its consequences accelerated. Idolatry becamerampant. The result was exile from the land (Israel in 722 BC, Judahin 586 BC). But God refused to give up on his people. He promised toraise up a servant who would suffer for the sins of his people as aguilt offering (Isa. 52:13–53:12).
AfterGod’s people returned from exile, hopes remained high that thegreat prophetic promises, including the final remission of sins, wereat hand. But disillusionment quickly set in as the returnees remainedunder foreign oppression, the rebuilt temple was but a shell ofSolomon’s, and a Davidic king was nowhere to be found. Beforelong, God’s people were back to their old ways, turning awayfrom him. Even the priests, who were charged with the administrationof the sacrificial system dealing with the sin of the people, failedto properly carry out their duties (Mal. 1:6–2:9).
NewTestament.During the next four hundred years of prophetic silence, the longingfor God to finally put away the sins of his people grew. At last,when the conception and birth of Jesus were announced, it wasrevealed that he would “save his people from their sins”(Matt. 1:21). In the days before the public ministry of Jesus, Johnthe Baptist prepared the way for him by “preaching a baptism ofrepentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Luke 3:3). Whereasboth Adam and Israel were disobedient sons of God, Jesus proved to bethe obedient Son by his faithfulness to God in the face of temptation(Matt. 2:13–15; 4:1–11; 26:36–46; Luke 3:23–4:13;Rom. 5:12–21; Phil. 2:8; Heb. 5:8–10). He was also theSuffering Servant who gave his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45;cf. Isa. 52:13–53:12). On the cross Jesus experienced the wrathof God that God’s people rightly deserved for their sin. Withhis justice fully satisfied, God was free to forgive and justify allwho are identified with Christ by faith (Rom. 3:21–26). Whatneither the law nor the blood of bulls and goats could do, JesusChrist did with his own blood (Rom. 8:3–4; Heb. 9:1–10:18).
Afterhis resurrection and ascension, Jesus’ followers beganproclaiming the “good news” (gospel) of what Jesus didand calling to people, “Repent and be baptized, every one ofyou, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins”(Acts 2:38). As people began to experience God’s forgiveness,they were so transformed that they forgave those who sinned againstthem (Matt. 6:12; 18:15–20; Col. 3:13). Although believerscontinue to struggle with sin in this life (Rom. 8:12–13; Gal.5:16–25), sin is no longer master over them (Rom. 6:1–23).The Holy Spirit empowers them to fight sin as they long for the newheaven and earth, where there will be no sin, no death, and no curse(Rom. 8:12–30; Rev. 21–22).
Aseven this very brief survey of the biblical story line from Genesisto Revelation shows, sin is a fundamental aspect of the Bible’splot. Sin generates the conflict that drives the biblical narrative;it is the fundamental “problem” that must be solved inorder for God’s purposes in creation to be completed.
Definitionand Terminology
Definitionof sin. Althoughno definition can capture completely the breadth and depth of theconcept of sin, it seems best to regard sin as a failure to conformto God’s law in thought, feeling, attitude, word, action,orientation, or nature. In this definition it must be remembered thatGod’s law is an expression of his perfect and holy character,so sin is not merely the violation of an impersonal law but rather isa personal offense against the Creator. Sin cannot be limited toactions. Desires (Exod. 20:17; Matt. 5:27–30), emotions (Gen.4:6–7; Matt. 5:21–26), and even our fallen nature ashuman beings (Ps. 51:5; Eph. 2:1–3) can be sinful as well.
Terminology.TheBible uses dozens of terms to speak of sin. Neatly classifying themis not easy, as there is significant overlap in the meaning and useof the various terms. Nonetheless, many of the terms fit in one ofthe following four categories.
1.Personal. Sin is an act of rebellion against God as the creator andruler of the universe. Rather than recognizing God’sself-revelation in nature and expressing gratitude, humankindfoolishly worships the creation rather than the Creator (Rom.1:19–23). The abundant love, grace, and mercy that God shows tohumans make their rebellion all the more stunning (Isa. 1:2–31).Another way of expressing the personal nature of sin is ungodlinessor impiety, which refers to lack of devotion to God (Ps. 35:16; Isa.9:17; 1Pet. 4:18).
2.Legal. A variety of words portray sin in terms drawn from thelawcourts. Words such as “transgression” and “trespass”picture sin as the violation of a specific command of God or thecrossing of a boundary that God has established (Num. 14:41–42;Rom. 4:7, 15). When individuals do things that are contrary to God’slaw, they are deemed unrighteous or unjust (Isa. 10:1; Matt. 5:45;Rom. 3:5). Breaking the covenant with God is described as violatinghis statutes and disobeying his laws (Isa. 24:5). The result isguilt, an objective legal status that is present whenever God’slaw is violated regardless of whether the individual subjectivelyfeels guilt.
3.Moral. In the most basic sense, sin is evil, the opposite of what isgood. Therefore, God’s people are to hate evil and love what isgood (Amos 5:14–15; Rom. 12:9). Similarly, Scripture contraststhe upright and the wicked (Prov. 11:11; 12:6; 14:11). One could alsoinclude here the term “iniquity,” which is used to speakof perversity or crookedness (Pss. 51:2; 78:38; Isa. 59:2). Frequentmention is also made of sexual immorality as an especially grievousdeparture from God’s ways (Num. 25:1; Rom. 1:26–27;1Cor. 5:1–11).
4.Cultic. In order for a person to approach a holy God, that individualhad to be in a state of purity before him. While a person couldbecome impure without necessarily sinning (e.g., a menstruating womanwas impure but not sinful), in some cases the term “impurity”clearly refers to a sinful state (Lev. 20:21; Isa. 1:25; Ezek.24:13). The same is true of the term “unclean.” Althoughit is frequently used in Leviticus to speak of ritual purity, inother places it clearly refers to sinful actions or states (Ps. 51:7;Prov. 20:9; Isa. 6:5; 64:6).
Metaphors
Inaddition to specific terms used for “sin,” the Bible usesseveral metaphors or images to describe it. The following four areamong the more prominent.
Missingthe mark.In both Hebrew and Greek, two of the most common words for “sin”have the sense of missing the mark. But this does not mean that sinis reduced to a mistake or an oversight. The point is not that aperson simply misses the mark of what God requires; instead, it isthat he or she is aiming for the wrong target altogether (Exod. 34:9;Deut. 9:18). Regardless of whether missing the mark is intentional ornot, the individual is still responsible (Lev. 4:2–31; Num.15:30).
Departingfrom the way.Sin as departing from God’s way is especially prominent in thewisdom literature. Contrasts are drawn between the way of therighteous and the way of the wicked (Ps. 1:1, 6; Prov. 4:11–19).Wisdom is pictured as a woman who summons people to walk in her ways,but fools ignore her and depart from her ways (Prov. 9:1–18).Those who do not walk in God’s ways are eventually destroyed bytheir own wickedness (Prov. 11:5; 12:26; 13:15).
Adultery.Since God’s relationship with his people is described as amarriage (Isa. 62:4–5; Ezek. 16:8–14; Eph. 5:25–32),it is not surprising that the Bible describes their unfaithfulness asadultery. The prophet Hosea’s marriage to an adulterous womanvividly portrays Israel’s unfaithfulness to Yahweh (Hos. 1–3).When the Israelites chase after other gods, Yahweh accuses them ofspiritual adultery in extremely graphic terms (Ezek. 16:15–52).When Christians join themselves to a prostitute or participate inidolatry, they too are engaged in spiritual adultery (1Cor.6:12–20; 10:1–22).
Slavery.Sin is portrayed as a power that enslaves. The prophets make it clearthat Israel’s bondage to foreign powers is in fact a picture ofits far greater enslavement to sin (Isa. 42:8; 43:4–7;49:1–12). Paul makes a similar point when he refers to thosewho do not know Christ as slaves to sin, unable to do anything thatpleases God (Rom. 6:1–23; 8:5–8). Sin is a cosmic powerthat is capable of using even the law to entrap people in its snare(Rom. 7:7–25).
Scopeand Consequences
Sindoes not travel alone; it brings a large collection of baggage alongwith it. Here we briefly examine its scope and consequences.
Scope.The stain of sin extends to every part of the created order. As aresult of Adam’s sin, the ground was cursed to resist humanefforts to cultivate it, producing thorns and thistles (Gen.3:17–18). The promised land is described as groaning under theweight of Israel’s sin and in need of Sabbath rest (2Chron.36:21; Jer. 12:4); Paul applies the same language to all creation aswell (Rom. 8:19–22).
Sinaffects every aspect of the individual: mind, heart, will, emotions,motives, actions, and nature (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Jer. 17:9; Rom.3:9–18). Sometimes this reality is referred to as “totaldepravity.” This phrase means not that people are as sinful asthey could be but rather that every aspect of their lives is taintedby sin. As a descendant of Adam, every person enters the world as asinner who then sins (Rom. 5:12–21). Sin also pollutes societalstructures, corrupting culture, governments, nations, and economicmarkets, to name but a few.
Consequences.Since the two greatest commandments are to love God and to love one’sneighbor as oneself (Matt. 22:34–40), it makes sense that sinhas consequences on both the vertical and the horizontal level.Vertically, sin results in both physical and spiritual death (Gen.2:16–17; Rom. 5:12–14). It renders humanity guilty inGod’s court of law, turns us into God’s enemies, andsubjects us to God’s righteous wrath (Rom. 1:18; 3:19–20;5:6–11). On the horizontal level, sin causes conflict betweenindividuals and harms relationships of every kind. It breedsmistrust, jealousy, and selfishness that infect even the closestrelationships.
Conclusion
Nosubject is more unpleasant than sin. But a proper understanding ofsin is essential for understanding the gospel of Jesus Christ. As thePuritan Thomas Watson put it, “Until sin be bitter, Christ willnot be sweet.”
Geography
Whereasthe principal direction in the modern world is north, in the ancientworld different cultures used a variety of orientations as theysought to describe their relationship to their geographicalenvironment. In Israel the primary direction was determined by thesunrise: east. This is reflected in Hebrew, where the main word usedto refer to east as a direction was qedem, which could also be usedto simply refer to that which was directly ahead or in front of thespeaker (e.g., Ps. 139:5). Elsewhere, east is designated by the termsmizrakh (“rising” [Josh. 11:3]) or mizrakh hashamesh(“rising of the sun” [Num. 21:11]), both of which derivefrom the direction of sunrise. By way of contrast, in Egypt theprimary direction was south, in alignment with the source of the NileRiver.
Theancient world employed the same notion of four cardinal directions,which persists to the present, and the terminology related to thesewas influenced by the choice of primary direction. Thus, in Israelnorth is often designated by “left”; south could bedesignated by “right,” and west by “behind.”In addition, directions could be specified by reference togeographical features found in those directions. North could bespecified by the word tsapon, which was derived from the name of anorthern Syrian mountain (Zaphon); south by negeb, a name for theregion south of Israel (Negev); and west by yam (“sea”),since the Mediterranean Sea lay to the west.
Symbolism
Asidefrom their purely geographical significance, the directions also cameto bear figurative significance. Some caution is warranted inassigning symbolic significance to language, for there is danger ofreading invalid meanings into texts. Furthermore, given the ambiguityinherent in the use of terms to refer to directions, which also havealternate significances, there is danger of assigning a symbolicmeaning to the direction that actually resides in the alternate. So,for example, while yam (“sea”) carries significantsymbolic overtones in the Bible, this association does not appear tohave been extended to encompass the term when used to designate awesterly direction.
Eastand west.Nonetheless, there is, for example, probably some significance in theexpulsion from Eden and progressive movement eastward to the tower ofBabel through Gen. 1–11, followed by a return to the promisedland, which was approached by reversing the easterly migration andreturning toward Eden. Eden itself was said to lie “in theeast” (Heb. miqqedem; Gen. 2:8), although the same Hebrewexpression in Pss. 74:12; 77:5, 11; 78:2; 143:5 means “inancient times,” and there is perhaps a deliberate ambiguity inthe use of the expression in Gen. 2:8. In Isa. 2:6 the east is thesource of influences on the people that lead them astray. Followingthe exile, Ezekiel sees the glory of God returning to the temple fromthe east (Ezek. 43:1–2). Thus, when used symbolically, “east”is often viewed negatively or else may be used to mark a connectionwith distant antiquity (Gen. 2:8; Job 1:3). Any symbolic significanceassigned to west appears primarily to be associated with it being theantithesis of east. The distance between east and west was usedpoetically to express vast distance (Ps. 103:12).
Northand south.North is significant for two primary reasons. First, it is thedirection from which invading armies most often descended upon Israel(Jer. 1:13) as well as from which Babylon’s destruction is saidto come (Jer. 50:3). In light of this, Ezekiel’s vision of Godapproaching from the north strikes an ominous tone of impendingjudgment (Ezek. 1:1–4). Second, in Canaanite mythology theabode of the gods, and specifically Baal, lay to the north, on MountZaphon. Thus, the king of Babylon’s plans in Isa. 14:13 amountto a claim to establish himself as one of the gods. In contrast tothis, Ps. 48:2 pre-sents Mount Zion as supplanting Mount Zaphon andthus implicitly presents Israel’s one God as supplanting theCanaanite pantheon.
Aswith west, there is little symbolic significance associated with thedirection south in the Bible, aside from its use in combination withother directions.
Thefour directions.The four directions (or sometimes just pairs of directions) are usedtogether to describe both the scattering of the Israelites as well astheir being gathered by God back to the promised land (Ps. 107:3;Isa. 43:5–6; Luke 13:29). They are also used together toexpress the extent of the promised land (Gen. 13:14) or else todescribe something that is all-encompassing (1Chron. 9:24).
A small, predominantly brown, seed-eating bird that adaptswell to towns. Species found in Israel include the house sparrow, theSpanish sparrow, and the Dead Sea sparrow. The Greek word strouthionmay refer specifically to sparrows (Matt. 10:29, 31; Luke 12:6; Tob.2:10), but the Hebrew word tsippor(translated as “sparrow” by the NIV in Ps. 84:3; Prov.26:2) simply means “bird” and covers a wide range ofspecies (see Gen. 7:14; Ezek. 39:4).
Rituallyclean small birds were snared or taken from the nest to be used forsacrifice and food, especially by the poor (e.g., Lev. 14:4–7;Deut. 14:11; 22:6–7; Neh. 5:18; Eccles. 9:12). In poetry, theyare mentioned in connection with their nests (e.g., Pss. 84:3;104:17; Prov. 27:8), flight (Prov. 26:2), and song (Eccles. 12:4).Since many are normally gregarious and stay close to the nest, asolitary or straying small bird is a striking image (Ps. 102:7; Prov.27:8).
Inthe first century AD a sparrow cost 1⁄32 or even 1⁄40 ofa day’s wage. Jesus contrasts the low market price of sparrowswith God’s providential care for each one of them, therebyassuring us that we are of far greater value to our Father (Matt.10:29–31; Luke 12:6–7).
According to 1Pet. 3:18–20 (NIV 1984), Christ“made proclamation to the imprisoned spirits—to those whowere disobedient long ago ... in the days of Noah whilethe ark was being built.” The identity of the “imprisonedspirits,” or “spirits in prison,” has long puzzledinterpreters and is bound up with the larger issue of the nature ofChrist’s preaching. Historically, several explanationspresuppose that the “spirits in prison” are the souls ofdead humans. Theologians have disagreed regarding several issues. DidChrist preach to them while they were still living (in the days ofNoah) or after they had died and were in “prison”? If thelatter, was this preaching between Christ’s death andresurrection, during the crucifixion, or after the ascension? DidChrist preach to the spirits of all who died prior to the incarnationof Christ, only to the righteous, only to the unrighteous, or evenonly to the generation that was alive at the time of Noah? Each ofthese possibilities has its proponents.
Anotherapproach to the problem proceeds from the insight that the word“spirits” (Gk. pneumata) doesnot usually describe dead humans in the NT, nor does “prison”(Gk. phylakē) describe the abode of the dead. Based on theseobservations, it has been proposed that the “spirits in prison”are malevolent supernatural beings (nonhuman). This theory findssupport,not explicitly in the NT, but in well-attested contemporary Jewishtraditions, according to which the flood itself was caused by themalfeasance of such beings (see Gen. 6:1–6; cf. Luke 10:17–20).See also Descent into Hades.
The Bible has much to say about suffering. While in the OTsuffering is regularly an indication of divine displeasure (Lev.26:16–36; Deut. 28:20–68; Ps. 44:10–12; Isa. 1:25;cf. Heb. 10:26–31), in the NT it becomes the means by whichblessing comes to humanity.
TheBible often shows that sinfulness results in suffering (Gen. 2:17;6:5–7; Exod. 32:33; 2Sam. 12:13–18; Rom. 1:18;1Cor. 11:27–30). Job’s friends mistakenly assumethat he has suffered because of disobedience (Job 4:7–9; 8:3–4,20; 11:6). Job passionately defends himself (12:4; 23:10), and in thefinal chapter of the book God commends Job and condemns his friendsfor their accusations (42:7–8; cf. 1:1, 22; 2:10). The writermakes clear that suffering is not necessarily evidence of sinfulness.Like Job’s friends, Jesus’ disciples assume thatblindness is an indication of sinfulness (John 9:1–2). Jesusrejects this simplistic notion of retributive suffering (John 9:3,6–7; cf. Luke 13:1–5).
Theprayers of suffering people are expressed in the sixteen communal andthirty-seven individual laments in the book of Psalms. Within thelaments the writers describe their problems, express feelings, makerequests, ask questions (“How long, Lord?” [13:1]; “Whyhave you forsaken me?” [22:1]), and lodge complaints againstGod (“My eyes fail, looking for my God [69:3]), enemies (“Youhave made us an object of derision to our neighbors, and our enemiesmock us” [80:6]), and even themselves (“I am a worm andnot a man” [22:6]).
TheNT writers reveal that Jesus’ suffering was prophesied in theOT (Mark 9:12; 14:21; Luke 18:31–32; 24:46; Acts 3:18; 17:3;26:22–23; 1Pet. 1:11; referring to OT texts such as Ps.22; Isa. 52:13–53:12; Zech. 13:7). The Lord Jesus is presentedas the answer to human suffering: (1)Through the incarnation,God’s Son personally experienced human suffering (Phil. 2:6–8;Heb. 2:9; 5:8). (2)Through his suffering, Christ paid the pricefor sin (Rom. 4:25; 3:25–26), so that believers are set freefrom sin (Rom. 6:6, 18, 22) and helped in temptation (Heb. 2:18).(3)Christ Jesus intercedes for his suffering followers (Rom.8:34–35). (4)Christ is the example in suffering (1Pet.2:21; 4:1; cf. Phil. 3:10; 2Cor. 1:5; 4:10; 1Pet. 4:13),and though he died once for sins (Heb. 10:12), he continues to sufferas his church suffers (Acts 9:4–5). (5)Christ provideshope of resurrection (Rom. 6:5; 1Cor. 15:20–26; Phil.3:10–11) and a future life without suffering or death (Rev.21:4).
Thereare many NT examples of suffering believers (John 15:20–21;Acts 4:3; 5:18; 7:57–60; 8:1–3; 12:1–5; 14:19;16:22–24; 18:17; 2Cor. 6:4–5, 8–10; Heb.10:32; 1Pet. 5:9; Rev. 2:10). Suffering is part of God’splan for his people (Acts 9:16; 1Thess. 3:2–4) and ispart of what it means to be a follower of Christ Jesus (Acts 14:22;Rom. 8:17; Phil. 1:29; 1Pet. 2:21; 4:12).
TheNT writers repeatedly mention the benefits of suffering, for it hasbecome part of God’s work of redemption. The suffering ofbelievers accompanies the proclamation and advancement of the gospel(Acts 5:41–42; 9:15–16; 2Cor. 4:10–11;6:2–10; Phil. 1:12, 27–29; 1Thess. 2:14–16;2Tim. 1:8; 4:5) and results in salvation (Matt. 10:22; 2Cor.1:6; 1Thess. 2:16; 2Tim. 2:10; Heb. 10:39), faith (Heb.10:32–34, 38–39; 1Pet. 1:7), the kingdom of God(Acts 14:22), resurrection from the dead (Phil. 3:10–11), andthe crown of life (Rev. 2:10). It is an essential part of thedevelopment toward Christian maturity (Rom. 5:3–4; 2Cor.4:11; Heb. 12:4; James 1:3–4; 1Pet. 1:7; 4:1).
Sufferingis associated with knowing Christ (Phil. 3:10); daily inward renewal(2Cor. 4:16); purity, understanding, patience, kindness,sincere love, truthful speech, the power of God (2Cor. 4:4–10);comfort and endurance (2Cor. 1:6); obedience (Heb. 5:8);blessing (1Pet. 3:14; 4:14); glory (Rom. 8:17; 2Cor.4:17); and joy (Matt. 5:12; Acts 5:41; 2Cor. 6:10; 12:10; James1:2; 1Pet. 1:6; 4:13). Other positive results of Christiansuffering include perseverance (Rom. 5:3; James 1:3), character andhope (Rom. 5:4), strength (2Cor. 12:10), and maturity andcompleteness (James 1:4). Present suffering is light and momentarywhen compared to future glory (Matt. 5:10–12; Acts 14:22; Rom.8:18; 2Cor. 4:17; Heb. 10:34–36; 1Pet. 1:5–7;4:12–13).
Throughoutthe Bible, believers are instructed to help those who suffer. The OTlaw provides principles for assisting the poor, the disadvantaged,and the oppressed (Exod. 20:10; 21:2; 23:11; Lev. 19:13, 34; 25:10,35; Deut. 14:28–29; 15:1–2; 24:19–21). Jesusregularly taught his followers to help the poor (Matt. 5:42; 6:3;19:21; 25:34–36; Luke 4:18; 12:33; 14:13, 21). It is believers’responsibility to show mercy (Matt. 5:7; 9:13), be generous (Rom.12:8; 2Cor. 8:7; 1Tim. 6:18), mourn with mourners (Rom.12:15), carry other’s burdens (Gal. 6:1–2), and visitprisoners (Matt. 25:36, 43). See also Servant of the Lord.
Covenant is one of the most significant concepts in thebiblical material that affects our understanding of God, hisrelationship with his people (past, present, and future), and thestructure and message of his word. Since the covenant concept is nota unique biblical idea, comparative literature from the world of theScriptures has enriched our understanding of the nature and thefunction of covenant. This article highlights the covenant conceptand the genre of covenant and provides a brief overview of the majorbiblical covenants.
Terminology
Defining“covenant.”What is a covenant (Heb. berit)? Most dictionaries refer to it as apact/compact or an agreement. Although there is some uncertaintyregarding the etymology of berit, the two most commonly suggestedetymological derivations are from the Akkadian burru, which refers tothe establishment of a legal situation by a testimony with an oath,or the Akkadian bittu, often translated as “to bind, fetter.”The NT counterpart word is diathēkē, defined as a “legaldisposition of personal goods.” Interestingly, this NT term isused in reference to the initiative of one person who establishes theterms and provisions of the relationship, which is in keeping withunilateral OT covenants. Some OT dictionaries list the “covenant”root with the root for the word “to eat,” perhapsassociating the covenant with a covenant meal.
Ifthe concept of binding best represents the covenant terminology, thenthe covenant is something that binds parties together or obligatesone party to the other. Although there are legal implicationsassociated with covenant, the relational aspect of covenant shouldnot be overlooked. A covenant is best understood as a relationshipwith related legalities. Marriage, for example, is a covenant thatestablishes and defines a relationship. This perhaps explains why Godchose from the realm of relationships among humans the covenantmetaphor to establish and communicate his intent in divine-humanrelationships. The concept of a covenant relationship between God andpeople is uniquely developed in the biblical material.
Somecovenants are between persons of equal status (parity treaties);others are between a master and a servant (suzerainty treaties),between nations, between clans, and between a husband and a wife(Mal. 2:14). To “cut a covenant” at any level of societyimplies a solemn commitment to a relationship. Hittite treatiesillustrate reports of covenant commitments that include a record ofnegotiations, formulations of terms, a statement that the act ofcovenant making actually happened, and a closure of negotiations withsolemn ratification of the terms.
Themost significant covenant relationship in the biblical material isthe one between God and humankind. The uniqueness of Israel’scovenant relationship with Yahweh in contrast to all surroundingnations is established on the basis of Deut. 32:8–9. AlthoughYahweh gave the nations their inheritance, he selected Israel for hisown personal care; he established a relationship with the nationindependent of and prior to the nation’s association with hisland. This was a unique application of the covenant that ran counterto the prevailing Semitic mind-set, which connected deities tospecific geographic territories first and was concerned with theinhabitants of those areas only in a secondary sense. Individual OTbelievers celebrated their relationship with Yahweh and proclaimedhim as the unrivaled universal God (Exod. 15; 1 Sam. 2; Isa.40).
Otherkey terms.In addition to the “covenant” terminology word group,several other key terms fill out our understanding of this importantconcept.
“Oath”is a term used synonymously with “covenant” and functionsat times to describe the making of a covenant. The oath emphasizesthe liability and obligation associated in the relationship (Deut.29:19). The oath can be taken by both parties (Gen. 26:28) or by justone party (Ezek. 17:13).
Theword “testimony” refers to the contents of the twotablets of stone (Exod. 31:18) received by Moses from God at MountSinai. The Ark of the Covenant is also identified by the phrase “arkof the testimony” (Exod. 26:34; 30:6; 31:7 KJV, ESV). Testimonyin the context of the covenant refers to the obligations placed uponthe nation in covenant with Yahweh.
Theterm “word” can be understood in connection with covenantcommunication. The conquest of the land (a covenant promise) isviewed as a performance of the word of God (Deut. 9:5 KJV). Thephrases “establish his covenant” (Deut. 8:18 KJV) and“perform his word” (Deut. 9:5 KJV) are parallel ideaswithin the overall concept of covenant. The sure “word of theLord” to David in 2 Sam. 7:4 can be contrasted withworthless words of the nation used in making a covenant with God(Hos. 10:4).
Torahis a Hebrew term related to covenant. The terms berit and torah arefound in parallel structure in Ps. 78:10. The binding arrangementbetween God and his people is ultimately based upon and regulated bythe instructions of his word. The phrase “Book of the Law”(2 Kings 22:8) has the same covenant implications as the phrase“tablets of the Testimony” (Exod. 31:18 ESV, NASB). Godindicted the priesthood for misguiding the people and causing them tostumble at the law (Mal. 2:5–8) and ultimately to be misguidedin their relationship with him.
Khesedis another Hebrew term that is frequently used with relation to acovenant. Defined as “steadfast covenant loyalty,” it isalso understood as grace, mercy, kindness, loving-kindness. Khesed isthat characteristic of God which causes him to act consistently andfaithfully regarding self-imposed obligations in covenantrelationships despite the failure or success of the other party. Thekhesed of God will never cease (Lam. 3:19–21) because he keepscovenant and mercy (Deut. 7:9, 12). The loyalty of God to David isstated in 2 Sam. 7:14–15 and celebrated in Ps. 89:14, 24,28, 33–34, 49. In contrast, the people are indicted for theirlack of loyalty (Hos. 4:1).
Commonphrases. Themost common covenant-making phrase is “to cut a covenant.”Two possible practices lie behind this phrase. The first reflects apractice in Mesopotamia and Syria, cutting a covenant into a tabletwith a stylus. This may be somewhat similar to what is found in Exod.31:18, where it is said that the two tablets of stone were “inscribedby the finger of God.” The second practice behind this phraseis the cutting of sacrificial animals. The halving of animals waspart of the covenant made with Abraham in Gen. 15:9–18. In asituation of covenant violation God tells Israel that he will treatthem like the calf they cut in covenant making (Jer. 34:17–19).Covenant making is also described as establishing a covenant (2 Sam.23:5), giving a covenant (Gen. 9:12), and erecting a covenant (Exod.6:4).
Faithfulnessand loyalty to a covenant are expressed by several phrases. “Keepa covenant” exhorts the covenant parties to watch, guard,exercise faithfulness to the terms of the relationship established(Exod. 34:7). “Observe a covenant” implies thedemonstration of covenant fidelity in observing and doing (Gen.17:9–10; Exod. 19:5; NIV: “keep my covenant”). Godis obviously faithful in observing the covenant (Deut. 7:9–12).“Remember a covenant” conveys more than just a mentalexercise, especially when God is the subject of the verbal action ofremembering. When God remembers a covenant, he acts with resolve andintervention (Gen. 8:1; 19:29; 30:22; Exod. 2:24).
Covenantinfidelity is expressed by the phrases “break the covenant”(Lev. 26:14–16; Jer. 11:10; 31:32; 33:20–21), “notfaithful” (Ps. 78:37), “violate the covenant”(Deut. 17:2; Josh. 7:11, 15; 23:16), and “forsake the covenant”(Jer. 22:9; cf. Deut. 29:25; 1 Kings 19:10, 14).
TheCovenant Genre
Wenow turn to the form, content, and function of a covenant, or thecovenant genre. There is evidence of a common treaty form used byancient Near Eastern peoples to govern relationships between nationsand tribes. This evidence dates back to the third millennium BC andis derived from literary texts discovered in the ancient Near East.The most helpful contributions to this discussion come from theHittites (1400–1200 BC), the Assyrians (800–600 BC), andthe Babylonians. From this evidence, we are able to identify fourancient Near Eastern arrangements.
1. Theintertribal treaty was a legal arrangement between tribes and clansfor various purposes such as the purchase of land, trading, orpeaceful coexistence. The arrangements made in this format wereequally binding on both parties. A possible biblical example is thearrangement between Abraham and Abimelek in Gen. 21:22–34 orthe arrangement between Abimelek and Isaac in Gen. 26:28.
2.The parity treaty was an arrangement made between kings and princeswho were equal in each other’s eyes. This arrangement involvedmutual participation, as illustrated in the economic relationshipestablished between King Solomon and King Hiram of Tyre in 1 Kings5:1–12.
3.The suzerainty treaty was established between two parties, oneinferior and one superior. The distinctive emphasis of the treaty wason the superior party, the suzerain. In this arrangement the suzerainagrees to make certain provisions for the vassal. He agrees to defendthe vassal in the case of attack, along with permitting the existenceof the vassal nation. In addition, the suzerain has the right to taketribute from the vassal at any time. The vassal, for his part, agreesto a position of servanthood but not slavery. Vassals honor thesuzerain with tribute and material goods.
Thereare six basic parts to the format of this treaty. Many scholarsbelieve that the suzerainty treaty form has influenced the structureof the book of Deuteronomy.
(a) Thetreaty begins with the preamble that identifies the treaty’sauthor/originator (cf. Deut. 1:1–6a; 5:6a, 23–27).
(b) Thesecond part is the prologue, which contains a review of the pastrelationship between the vassal and the suzerain constructed in an“I-Thou” format (cf. Deut. 1:6b–3:29; 2:7;4:32–38). The purpose of this section is to review the previousacts of benevolence demonstrated by the suzerain toward the vassal.The faithfulness of the suzerain to the vassal would perhaps instillsome measure of confidence for entrance into this relationship. InHittite treaties there was often a grace ethic ideology thatcharacterized the prologue and served as a basis of appeal forobedience. The Hittites demonstrated a measure of appreciation forconquered vassals and treated them with dignity by allowing themlimited sovereignty. The Assyrians operated with a power ethic thatmotivated obedience by threatening dismemberment, torture, and evendeath. Yahweh appealed to Israel on the basis of the grace ofredemption (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15) and theprivilege of revelation (Deut. 4:12; cf. Rom. 3:2).
(c) Thestipulations are the third part of the treaty form. These are theexpectations of the suzerain for the vassal (cf. Deut. 4:1–23;6:4–7:2; 10:12–22; 12–26). The stipulations callfor the vassal to be loyal in war, to loyally return politicalrefugees, and to not murmur against the suzerain and his kingdom. Theheart of the stipulation in Deuteronomy is the appeal to “lovethe Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and withall your strength” (6:5), one of the most important verses ofthe OT.
(d) Thedeposit and public reading of the treaty is the next division. Thissection instructs the vassal to place the treaty in his sanctuary anddirects the vassal to publicly read the document from one to fourtimes per year (cf. Deut. 10:1–5; 31:9–13). A regularreading was designed to keep the stipulations before the vassal inorder to nurture respect for the suzerain.
(e) Inthe next part, a list of witnesses, usually gods, are called upon toobserve the covenant and to punish any breach of it (cf. Deut.30:19–20).
(f) Thefinal part of the treaty is a section of blessing and curse. Thissection contains a list of potential rewards for faithfulness andterrifying possibilities of retribution for covenant violations (cf.Deut. 28–29).
4.The royal grant treaty, used in both biblical and secular literature,is somewhat similar to the suzerainty treaty. The distinctivedifference is that the obligation of the grant is not on the vassalbut rather on the suzerain to protect the rights of the vassal. Inthis format the curse is directed against any third party that wouldoppose the vassal or against the suzerain who would act unfaithfullyagainst the vassal.
Covenantsin the Bible
Typesof covenants. Thematerial on covenant form, content, and structure comes into playwhen attempts are made to interpret the major covenants recorded inthe Bible (Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, and new). Initialdiscussions usually revolve around whether these covenants areconditional or unconditional. Although there is merit to thisdiscussion, covenants should also be understood in light of whichparty is bearing the treaty obligation. As described above, theobligation of the suzerainty treaty is upon the vassal to fulfill theexpectations of the suzerain. In the grant treaty the obligation isplaced upon the suzerain to fulfill the treaty promises made to thevassal. There is a sense of conditionality and unconditionality inboth treaty forms.
Onthis basis, the Mosaic covenant is most fittingly understood in lightof the suzerainty treaty. This covenant made at Mount Sinaiestablished Israel as a covenant nation. Yahweh never intended tocreate a relationship with Israel on the basis of this covenant.Rather, he chose this covenant form as the means to regulate hisrelationship with Israel, the nation that he had just graciouslyredeemed. The Mosaic covenant addressed every aspect of Israelitelife. so that the prophetic charges against the nation’stransgressions were considered covenant violations.
TheAbrahamic and Davidic covenants are more like a grant. In theAbrahamic covenant Yahweh is obligating himself to gift Israel withland, seed, and blessing (Gen. 12–17). The halving of animalsin Gen. 15:9–20 resembles a covenant-cutting ceremony in whichYahweh, in the form of a smoking firepot, walks between the animals,obligating himself to the terms of the covenant. In the Davidiccovenant (2 Sam. 7; Ps. 89), Yahweh obligates himself to provideDavid and his descendants a king and a kingdom. The new covenant isfirst referenced by Moses in Deut. 30:6 and then developed moreextensively in Jer. 31:31–33 and Ezek. 36. Scholars debate thenature of this covenant and the promises associated with it. Somedefine it as a grant and speak of it in unconditional terms, whileothers view it as an administrative covenant. The new covenantanticipates a change in the heart of the vassal that ultimatelyfacilitates keeping of the law. The OT Scriptures see this happeningin connection with Israel’s occupation of the land at a futuretime.
Covenantleadership positions. Inaddition to the very specific covenant arrangements made by God inthe OT defining and regulating the life and future of Israel, Godestablished three key covenant leadership positions for the nation:prophet, priest, and king (Deut. 17–18). Their connection withthe covenant is evident from the fact that their origin and functionare detailed in the covenant book of Deuteronomy.
Godprovided a prophet (Deut. 18:9–22) for the nation so that itwould not learn the abominations of the Canaanites and surroundingnations. God desired spiritual integrity for his people andestablished the prophet as his mouthpiece to speak what he commanded(Deut. 18:18–20). The prophet was to be an Israelite who fit aMoses-like pattern (Deut. 18:18–19). The writing and nonwritingprophets often called Israel back to covenant fidelity. They did thisby using legal terminology to illustrate covenant violations, thusestablishing covenant lawsuits against them. Isaiah 1 is a case madeby God against the nation. In this lawsuit God functions as judge,jury, and lawyer.
Thepriest (Deut. 17:8–13; 18:1–8; 33:8–11) had athreefold function within the covenant community. He was a mediatorof people before God and of God before people. This particularfunction of the priesthood was broad and encompassed much of itswork. The priest was a teacher who sought from the Torah resolutionto disagreements between parties (cf. Jer. 18:18). It is also worthnoting that the teaching of the priest preceded sacrifice. Finally,he was a minister of sacrifice. The priest led Israel in worship andsacrifice, giving instruction concerning what was clean and unclean(Lev. 13–15).
Theking was also a provision of the covenant (Deut. 17). Kingship wasnot a divine accommodation to the desire of Israel (1 Sam. 8)but rather a part of the overall covenant plan of God revealed toAbraham (Gen. 17:16). The promise of kingship was reiterated in Gen.35:11; 49:10. The duty of the king involved administration of thekingdom on the basis of the word of God (Deut. 17:18–20; cf.Prov. 29:4, 14).
Covenantin the Old Testament.Covenant is a dominant theme that gives cohesiveness to the structureof the OT and distinguishes the history of Israel. The phrase“covenant history” can be used to describe the biblicalliterature that recounts the events and episodes of Israelite life.It is a macrogenre that characterizes the historical narratives ofthe OT. Although this large literary corpus of historical narrativeshares a covenant perspective, the individual books within thenarrative corpus are noted for the attention they give to variousaspects of the covenant relationship. For example, Gen. 12–50develops the covenant promises of seed and blessing through a numberof subgenres such as genealogies and family stories. Joshua, on theother hand, engages several military subgenres to recount the tensionbetween the promise of land occupation and the responsibility ofIsrael to occupy the land. Covenant history is a realisticpresentation of the tensions associated with the covenantrelationship between Yahweh and the nation of Israel.
Finally,the psalms have a direct covenant connection emphasizing covenantworship. Psalm 119 (esp. vv. 57–64) is filled with covenantterms that relate to God’s word (testimonies, laws, oath,judgments). Marching to the place of worship designated by thecovenant is reflected in the Psalms of Ascent.
Covenantin the New Testament. Althoughthe covenant theme is less pervasive in the NT, its christologicalsignificance is profound. The NT highlights the significant messianicrole of Christ in relation to the covenants. Paul references the newcovenant in both books of Corinthians (1 Cor. 11:25; 2 Cor.3:6). Each celebration of the Lord’s Supper reminds us that theshed blood of Christ is the blood of the new covenant. The newcovenant is cut in connection with or on the basis of his death,burial, and resurrection (1 Cor. 11:25). The writer of the bookof Hebrews gives detailed attention to how the new covenant functionsin contrast to the old Mosaic covenant. The writer explains thatJesus is the guarantor of a better covenant (7:22; 8:6–7).Finally, Paul indicates that we are now considered ministers of thenew covenant ministry (2 Cor. 3:6).
Covenant is one of the most significant concepts in thebiblical material that affects our understanding of God, hisrelationship with his people (past, present, and future), and thestructure and message of his word. Since the covenant concept is nota unique biblical idea, comparative literature from the world of theScriptures has enriched our understanding of the nature and thefunction of covenant. This article highlights the covenant conceptand the genre of covenant and provides a brief overview of the majorbiblical covenants.
Terminology
Defining“covenant.”What is a covenant (Heb. berit)? Most dictionaries refer to it as apact/compact or an agreement. Although there is some uncertaintyregarding the etymology of berit, the two most commonly suggestedetymological derivations are from the Akkadian burru, which refers tothe establishment of a legal situation by a testimony with an oath,or the Akkadian bittu, often translated as “to bind, fetter.”The NT counterpart word is diathēkē, defined as a “legaldisposition of personal goods.” Interestingly, this NT term isused in reference to the initiative of one person who establishes theterms and provisions of the relationship, which is in keeping withunilateral OT covenants. Some OT dictionaries list the “covenant”root with the root for the word “to eat,” perhapsassociating the covenant with a covenant meal.
Ifthe concept of binding best represents the covenant terminology, thenthe covenant is something that binds parties together or obligatesone party to the other. Although there are legal implicationsassociated with covenant, the relational aspect of covenant shouldnot be overlooked. A covenant is best understood as a relationshipwith related legalities. Marriage, for example, is a covenant thatestablishes and defines a relationship. This perhaps explains why Godchose from the realm of relationships among humans the covenantmetaphor to establish and communicate his intent in divine-humanrelationships. The concept of a covenant relationship between God andpeople is uniquely developed in the biblical material.
Somecovenants are between persons of equal status (parity treaties);others are between a master and a servant (suzerainty treaties),between nations, between clans, and between a husband and a wife(Mal. 2:14). To “cut a covenant” at any level of societyimplies a solemn commitment to a relationship. Hittite treatiesillustrate reports of covenant commitments that include a record ofnegotiations, formulations of terms, a statement that the act ofcovenant making actually happened, and a closure of negotiations withsolemn ratification of the terms.
Themost significant covenant relationship in the biblical material isthe one between God and humankind. The uniqueness of Israel’scovenant relationship with Yahweh in contrast to all surroundingnations is established on the basis of Deut. 32:8–9. AlthoughYahweh gave the nations their inheritance, he selected Israel for hisown personal care; he established a relationship with the nationindependent of and prior to the nation’s association with hisland. This was a unique application of the covenant that ran counterto the prevailing Semitic mind-set, which connected deities tospecific geographic territories first and was concerned with theinhabitants of those areas only in a secondary sense. Individual OTbelievers celebrated their relationship with Yahweh and proclaimedhim as the unrivaled universal God (Exod. 15; 1 Sam. 2; Isa.40).
Otherkey terms.In addition to the “covenant” terminology word group,several other key terms fill out our understanding of this importantconcept.
“Oath”is a term used synonymously with “covenant” and functionsat times to describe the making of a covenant. The oath emphasizesthe liability and obligation associated in the relationship (Deut.29:19). The oath can be taken by both parties (Gen. 26:28) or by justone party (Ezek. 17:13).
Theword “testimony” refers to the contents of the twotablets of stone (Exod. 31:18) received by Moses from God at MountSinai. The Ark of the Covenant is also identified by the phrase “arkof the testimony” (Exod. 26:34; 30:6; 31:7 KJV, ESV). Testimonyin the context of the covenant refers to the obligations placed uponthe nation in covenant with Yahweh.
Theterm “word” can be understood in connection with covenantcommunication. The conquest of the land (a covenant promise) isviewed as a performance of the word of God (Deut. 9:5 KJV). Thephrases “establish his covenant” (Deut. 8:18 KJV) and“perform his word” (Deut. 9:5 KJV) are parallel ideaswithin the overall concept of covenant. The sure “word of theLord” to David in 2 Sam. 7:4 can be contrasted withworthless words of the nation used in making a covenant with God(Hos. 10:4).
Torahis a Hebrew term related to covenant. The terms berit and torah arefound in parallel structure in Ps. 78:10. The binding arrangementbetween God and his people is ultimately based upon and regulated bythe instructions of his word. The phrase “Book of the Law”(2 Kings 22:8) has the same covenant implications as the phrase“tablets of the Testimony” (Exod. 31:18 ESV, NASB). Godindicted the priesthood for misguiding the people and causing them tostumble at the law (Mal. 2:5–8) and ultimately to be misguidedin their relationship with him.
Khesedis another Hebrew term that is frequently used with relation to acovenant. Defined as “steadfast covenant loyalty,” it isalso understood as grace, mercy, kindness, loving-kindness. Khesed isthat characteristic of God which causes him to act consistently andfaithfully regarding self-imposed obligations in covenantrelationships despite the failure or success of the other party. Thekhesed of God will never cease (Lam. 3:19–21) because he keepscovenant and mercy (Deut. 7:9, 12). The loyalty of God to David isstated in 2 Sam. 7:14–15 and celebrated in Ps. 89:14, 24,28, 33–34, 49. In contrast, the people are indicted for theirlack of loyalty (Hos. 4:1).
Commonphrases. Themost common covenant-making phrase is “to cut a covenant.”Two possible practices lie behind this phrase. The first reflects apractice in Mesopotamia and Syria, cutting a covenant into a tabletwith a stylus. This may be somewhat similar to what is found in Exod.31:18, where it is said that the two tablets of stone were “inscribedby the finger of God.” The second practice behind this phraseis the cutting of sacrificial animals. The halving of animals waspart of the covenant made with Abraham in Gen. 15:9–18. In asituation of covenant violation God tells Israel that he will treatthem like the calf they cut in covenant making (Jer. 34:17–19).Covenant making is also described as establishing a covenant (2 Sam.23:5), giving a covenant (Gen. 9:12), and erecting a covenant (Exod.6:4).
Faithfulnessand loyalty to a covenant are expressed by several phrases. “Keepa covenant” exhorts the covenant parties to watch, guard,exercise faithfulness to the terms of the relationship established(Exod. 34:7). “Observe a covenant” implies thedemonstration of covenant fidelity in observing and doing (Gen.17:9–10; Exod. 19:5; NIV: “keep my covenant”). Godis obviously faithful in observing the covenant (Deut. 7:9–12).“Remember a covenant” conveys more than just a mentalexercise, especially when God is the subject of the verbal action ofremembering. When God remembers a covenant, he acts with resolve andintervention (Gen. 8:1; 19:29; 30:22; Exod. 2:24).
Covenantinfidelity is expressed by the phrases “break the covenant”(Lev. 26:14–16; Jer. 11:10; 31:32; 33:20–21), “notfaithful” (Ps. 78:37), “violate the covenant”(Deut. 17:2; Josh. 7:11, 15; 23:16), and “forsake the covenant”(Jer. 22:9; cf. Deut. 29:25; 1 Kings 19:10, 14).
TheCovenant Genre
Wenow turn to the form, content, and function of a covenant, or thecovenant genre. There is evidence of a common treaty form used byancient Near Eastern peoples to govern relationships between nationsand tribes. This evidence dates back to the third millennium BC andis derived from literary texts discovered in the ancient Near East.The most helpful contributions to this discussion come from theHittites (1400–1200 BC), the Assyrians (800–600 BC), andthe Babylonians. From this evidence, we are able to identify fourancient Near Eastern arrangements.
1. Theintertribal treaty was a legal arrangement between tribes and clansfor various purposes such as the purchase of land, trading, orpeaceful coexistence. The arrangements made in this format wereequally binding on both parties. A possible biblical example is thearrangement between Abraham and Abimelek in Gen. 21:22–34 orthe arrangement between Abimelek and Isaac in Gen. 26:28.
2.The parity treaty was an arrangement made between kings and princeswho were equal in each other’s eyes. This arrangement involvedmutual participation, as illustrated in the economic relationshipestablished between King Solomon and King Hiram of Tyre in 1 Kings5:1–12.
3.The suzerainty treaty was established between two parties, oneinferior and one superior. The distinctive emphasis of the treaty wason the superior party, the suzerain. In this arrangement the suzerainagrees to make certain provisions for the vassal. He agrees to defendthe vassal in the case of attack, along with permitting the existenceof the vassal nation. In addition, the suzerain has the right to taketribute from the vassal at any time. The vassal, for his part, agreesto a position of servanthood but not slavery. Vassals honor thesuzerain with tribute and material goods.
Thereare six basic parts to the format of this treaty. Many scholarsbelieve that the suzerainty treaty form has influenced the structureof the book of Deuteronomy.
(a) Thetreaty begins with the preamble that identifies the treaty’sauthor/originator (cf. Deut. 1:1–6a; 5:6a, 23–27).
(b) Thesecond part is the prologue, which contains a review of the pastrelationship between the vassal and the suzerain constructed in an“I-Thou” format (cf. Deut. 1:6b–3:29; 2:7;4:32–38). The purpose of this section is to review the previousacts of benevolence demonstrated by the suzerain toward the vassal.The faithfulness of the suzerain to the vassal would perhaps instillsome measure of confidence for entrance into this relationship. InHittite treaties there was often a grace ethic ideology thatcharacterized the prologue and served as a basis of appeal forobedience. The Hittites demonstrated a measure of appreciation forconquered vassals and treated them with dignity by allowing themlimited sovereignty. The Assyrians operated with a power ethic thatmotivated obedience by threatening dismemberment, torture, and evendeath. Yahweh appealed to Israel on the basis of the grace ofredemption (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15) and theprivilege of revelation (Deut. 4:12; cf. Rom. 3:2).
(c) Thestipulations are the third part of the treaty form. These are theexpectations of the suzerain for the vassal (cf. Deut. 4:1–23;6:4–7:2; 10:12–22; 12–26). The stipulations callfor the vassal to be loyal in war, to loyally return politicalrefugees, and to not murmur against the suzerain and his kingdom. Theheart of the stipulation in Deuteronomy is the appeal to “lovethe Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and withall your strength” (6:5), one of the most important verses ofthe OT.
(d) Thedeposit and public reading of the treaty is the next division. Thissection instructs the vassal to place the treaty in his sanctuary anddirects the vassal to publicly read the document from one to fourtimes per year (cf. Deut. 10:1–5; 31:9–13). A regularreading was designed to keep the stipulations before the vassal inorder to nurture respect for the suzerain.
(e) Inthe next part, a list of witnesses, usually gods, are called upon toobserve the covenant and to punish any breach of it (cf. Deut.30:19–20).
(f) Thefinal part of the treaty is a section of blessing and curse. Thissection contains a list of potential rewards for faithfulness andterrifying possibilities of retribution for covenant violations (cf.Deut. 28–29).
4.The royal grant treaty, used in both biblical and secular literature,is somewhat similar to the suzerainty treaty. The distinctivedifference is that the obligation of the grant is not on the vassalbut rather on the suzerain to protect the rights of the vassal. Inthis format the curse is directed against any third party that wouldoppose the vassal or against the suzerain who would act unfaithfullyagainst the vassal.
Covenantsin the Bible
Typesof covenants. Thematerial on covenant form, content, and structure comes into playwhen attempts are made to interpret the major covenants recorded inthe Bible (Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, and new). Initialdiscussions usually revolve around whether these covenants areconditional or unconditional. Although there is merit to thisdiscussion, covenants should also be understood in light of whichparty is bearing the treaty obligation. As described above, theobligation of the suzerainty treaty is upon the vassal to fulfill theexpectations of the suzerain. In the grant treaty the obligation isplaced upon the suzerain to fulfill the treaty promises made to thevassal. There is a sense of conditionality and unconditionality inboth treaty forms.
Onthis basis, the Mosaic covenant is most fittingly understood in lightof the suzerainty treaty. This covenant made at Mount Sinaiestablished Israel as a covenant nation. Yahweh never intended tocreate a relationship with Israel on the basis of this covenant.Rather, he chose this covenant form as the means to regulate hisrelationship with Israel, the nation that he had just graciouslyredeemed. The Mosaic covenant addressed every aspect of Israelitelife. so that the prophetic charges against the nation’stransgressions were considered covenant violations.
TheAbrahamic and Davidic covenants are more like a grant. In theAbrahamic covenant Yahweh is obligating himself to gift Israel withland, seed, and blessing (Gen. 12–17). The halving of animalsin Gen. 15:9–20 resembles a covenant-cutting ceremony in whichYahweh, in the form of a smoking firepot, walks between the animals,obligating himself to the terms of the covenant. In the Davidiccovenant (2 Sam. 7; Ps. 89), Yahweh obligates himself to provideDavid and his descendants a king and a kingdom. The new covenant isfirst referenced by Moses in Deut. 30:6 and then developed moreextensively in Jer. 31:31–33 and Ezek. 36. Scholars debate thenature of this covenant and the promises associated with it. Somedefine it as a grant and speak of it in unconditional terms, whileothers view it as an administrative covenant. The new covenantanticipates a change in the heart of the vassal that ultimatelyfacilitates keeping of the law. The OT Scriptures see this happeningin connection with Israel’s occupation of the land at a futuretime.
Covenantleadership positions. Inaddition to the very specific covenant arrangements made by God inthe OT defining and regulating the life and future of Israel, Godestablished three key covenant leadership positions for the nation:prophet, priest, and king (Deut. 17–18). Their connection withthe covenant is evident from the fact that their origin and functionare detailed in the covenant book of Deuteronomy.
Godprovided a prophet (Deut. 18:9–22) for the nation so that itwould not learn the abominations of the Canaanites and surroundingnations. God desired spiritual integrity for his people andestablished the prophet as his mouthpiece to speak what he commanded(Deut. 18:18–20). The prophet was to be an Israelite who fit aMoses-like pattern (Deut. 18:18–19). The writing and nonwritingprophets often called Israel back to covenant fidelity. They did thisby using legal terminology to illustrate covenant violations, thusestablishing covenant lawsuits against them. Isaiah 1 is a case madeby God against the nation. In this lawsuit God functions as judge,jury, and lawyer.
Thepriest (Deut. 17:8–13; 18:1–8; 33:8–11) had athreefold function within the covenant community. He was a mediatorof people before God and of God before people. This particularfunction of the priesthood was broad and encompassed much of itswork. The priest was a teacher who sought from the Torah resolutionto disagreements between parties (cf. Jer. 18:18). It is also worthnoting that the teaching of the priest preceded sacrifice. Finally,he was a minister of sacrifice. The priest led Israel in worship andsacrifice, giving instruction concerning what was clean and unclean(Lev. 13–15).
Theking was also a provision of the covenant (Deut. 17). Kingship wasnot a divine accommodation to the desire of Israel (1 Sam. 8)but rather a part of the overall covenant plan of God revealed toAbraham (Gen. 17:16). The promise of kingship was reiterated in Gen.35:11; 49:10. The duty of the king involved administration of thekingdom on the basis of the word of God (Deut. 17:18–20; cf.Prov. 29:4, 14).
Covenantin the Old Testament.Covenant is a dominant theme that gives cohesiveness to the structureof the OT and distinguishes the history of Israel. The phrase“covenant history” can be used to describe the biblicalliterature that recounts the events and episodes of Israelite life.It is a macrogenre that characterizes the historical narratives ofthe OT. Although this large literary corpus of historical narrativeshares a covenant perspective, the individual books within thenarrative corpus are noted for the attention they give to variousaspects of the covenant relationship. For example, Gen. 12–50develops the covenant promises of seed and blessing through a numberof subgenres such as genealogies and family stories. Joshua, on theother hand, engages several military subgenres to recount the tensionbetween the promise of land occupation and the responsibility ofIsrael to occupy the land. Covenant history is a realisticpresentation of the tensions associated with the covenantrelationship between Yahweh and the nation of Israel.
Finally,the psalms have a direct covenant connection emphasizing covenantworship. Psalm 119 (esp. vv. 57–64) is filled with covenantterms that relate to God’s word (testimonies, laws, oath,judgments). Marching to the place of worship designated by thecovenant is reflected in the Psalms of Ascent.
Covenantin the New Testament. Althoughthe covenant theme is less pervasive in the NT, its christologicalsignificance is profound. The NT highlights the significant messianicrole of Christ in relation to the covenants. Paul references the newcovenant in both books of Corinthians (1 Cor. 11:25; 2 Cor.3:6). Each celebration of the Lord’s Supper reminds us that theshed blood of Christ is the blood of the new covenant. The newcovenant is cut in connection with or on the basis of his death,burial, and resurrection (1 Cor. 11:25). The writer of the bookof Hebrews gives detailed attention to how the new covenant functionsin contrast to the old Mosaic covenant. The writer explains thatJesus is the guarantor of a better covenant (7:22; 8:6–7).Finally, Paul indicates that we are now considered ministers of thenew covenant ministry (2 Cor. 3:6).
It is difficult to imagine a world without consistentmetrological systems. Society’s basic structures, from economyto law, require a uniform and accurate method for measuring time,distances, weights, volumes, and so on. In today’s world,technological advancements allow people to measure various aspects ofthe universe with incredible accuracy—from nanometers tolight-years, milligrams to kilograms.
Themetrological systems employed in biblical times span the sameconcepts as our own modern-day systems: weight, linear distance, andvolume or capacity. However, the systems of weights and measurementsemployed during the span of biblical times were not nearly asaccurate or uniform as the modern units employed today. Preexistingweight and measurement systems existed in the contextual surroundingsof both the OT and the NT authors and thus heavily influenced thesystems employed by the Israelite nation as well as the NT writers.There was great variance between the different standards usedmerchant to merchant (Gen. 23:16), city to city, region to region,time period to time period, even despite the commands to use honestscales and honest weights (Lev. 19:35–36; Deut. 25:13–15;Prov. 11:1; 16:11; 20:23; Ezek. 45:10).
Furthermore,inconsistencies and contradictions exist within the written recordsas well as between archaeological specimens. In addition, significantdifferences are found between preexilic and postexilic measurementsin the biblical texts, and an attempt at merging dry capacity andliquid volume measurements further complicated the issue. This is tobe expected, especially when we consider modern-dayinconsistencies—for example, 1 US liquid pint= 0.473liters, while 1 US dry pint= 0.550 liters. Thus, all modernequivalents given below are approximations, and even the bestestimates have a margin of error of + 5percent or more.
Weights
Weightsin biblical times were carried in a bag or a satchel (Deut. 25:13;Prov. 16:11; Mic. 6:11) and were stones, usually carved into variousanimal shapes for easy identification. Their side or flat bottom wasinscribed with the associated weight and unit of measurement.Thousands of historical artifacts, which differ by significantamounts, have been discovered by archaeologists and thus have greatlycomplicated the work of determining accurate modern-day equivalents.
Beka.Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahsor ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measuremetals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).
Gerah.1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).
Litra.Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight.Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to themodern British pound.
Mina.Approximately 1¼ pounds, or 0.56 kilograms. Equivalent to 50shekels. Used to weigh gold (1Kings 10:17; Ezra 2:69), silver(Neh. 7:71–72), and other goods. The prophet Ezekiel redefinedthe proper weight: “Theshekel is to consist of twentygerahs. Twenty shekels plus twenty-five shekels plus fifteen shekelsequal one mina” (Ezek. 45:12). Before this redefinition, therewere arguably 50 shekels per mina. In Jesus’ parable of theservants, he describes the master entrusting to his three servantsvarying amounts—10 minas, 5 minas, 1 mina—implying amonetary value (Luke 19:11–24), probably of either silver orgold. One mina was equivalent to approximately three months’wages for a laborer.
Pim.Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1Sam. 13:21).
Shekel.Approximately 2⁄5 ounce, or 11 grams. Equivalent toapproximately 2 bekas. The shekel is the basic unit of weightmeasurement in Israelite history, though its actual weight variedsignificantly at different historical points. Examples include the“royal shekel” (2Sam. 14:26), the “commonshekel” (2Kings 7:1), and the “sanctuary shekel,”which was equivalent to 20 gerahs (e.g., Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25;Num. 3:47). Because it was used to weigh out silver or gold, theshekel also functioned as a common monetary unit in the NT world.
Talent.Approximately 75 pounds, or 34 kilograms. Equivalent to approximately60 minas. Various metals were weighed using talents: gold (Exod.25:39; 37:24; 1Chron. 20:2), silver (Exod. 38:27; 1Kings20:39; 2Kings 5:22), and bronze (Exod. 38:29). This probably isderived from the weight of a load that a man could carry.
Table12. Biblical Weights and Measures and Their Modern Equivalents:
Weights
Beka– 10 geraahs; ½ shekel = 1/5 ounce = 5.6 grams
Gerah– 1/10 beka; 1/20 shekel = 1/50 ounce = 0.56 grams
Litra– 12 ounces = 340 grams
Mina– 50 shekels = 1 ¼ pounds = 0.56 kilograms
Pim– 2/3 shekel = 1/3 ounce = 9.3 grams
Shekel– 2 bekas; 20 gerahs = 2/5 ounce = 11 grams
Talent– 60 minas = 75 pounds = 34 kilograms
Linearmeasurements
Cubit– 6 handbreadths = 18 inches = 45.7 centimeters
Day’sjourney = 20-25 miles = 32-40 kilometerse
Fingerbreadth– ¼ handbreadth = ¾ inch = 1.9 centimeterse
Handbreadth– 1/6 cubit = 3 inches = 7.6 centimeters
Milion– 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers
Orguia– 1/100 stadion = 5 feet 11 inches = 1.8 meters
Reed/rod– 108 inches = 274 centimeters
Sabbathday’s journey – 2,000 cubits = ¾ mile = 1.2kilometers
Span– 3 handbreadths = 9 inches = 22.8 centimeters
Stadion– 100 orguiai = 607 feet = 185 meters
Capacity
Cab– 1 omer = ½ gallon = 1.9 liters
Choinix– ¼ gallon = 0.9 liters
Cor– 1 homer; 10 ephahs = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Ephah– 10 omers; 1/10 homer = 3/5 bushel; 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Homer– 10 ephahs; 1 cor = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Koros– 10 bushels; 95 gallons – 360 liters
Omer– 1/10 ephah; 1/100 homer = 2 quarts = 1.9 liters
Saton– 1 seah = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
Seah– 1/3 ephah; 1 saton = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
LiquidVolume
Bath– 1 ephah = 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Batos– 8 gallons = 30.3 liters
Hin– 1/6 bath; 12 logs = 1 gallon; 4 quarts = 3.8 liters
Log– 1/72 bath; 1/12 hin = 1/3 quart = 0.3 liters
Metretes– 10 gallons = 37.8 literes
LinearMeasurements
Linearmeasurements were based upon readily available natural measurementssuch as the distance between the elbow and the hand or between thethumb and the little finger. While convenient, this method ofmeasurement gave rise to significant inconsistencies.
Cubit.Approximately 18 inches, or 45.7 centimeters. Equivalent to 6handbreadths. The standard biblical measure of linear distance, asthe shekel is the standard measurement of weight. The distance fromthe elbow to the outstretched fingertip. Used to describe height,width, length (Exod. 25:10), distance (John 21:8), and depth (Gen.7:20). Use of the cubit is ancient. For simple and approximateconversion into modern units, divide the number of cubits in half formeters, then multiply the number of meters by 3 to arrive at feet.
1cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths
Day’sjourney.An approximate measure of distance equivalent to about 20–25miles, or 32–40 kilometers. Several passages reference a singleor multiple days’ journey as a description of the distancetraveled or the distance between two points: “a day’sjourney” (Num. 11:31; 1Kings 19:4), “a three-dayjourney” (Gen. 30:36; Exod. 3:18; 8:27; Jon. 3:3), “sevendays” (Gen. 31:23), and “eleven days” (Deut. 1:2).After visiting Jerusalem for Passover, Jesus’ parents journeyedfor a day (Luke 2:44) before realizing that he was not with them.
Fingerbreadth.The width of the finger, or ¼ of a handbreadth, approximately¾ inch, or 1.9 centimeters. The fingerbreadth was thebeginning building block of the biblical metrological system forlinear measurements. Used only once in the Scriptures, to describethe bronze pillars (Jer. 52:21).
Handbreadth.Approximately 3 inches, or 7.6 centimeters. Equivalent to 1/6 cubit,or four fingerbreadths. Probably the width at the base of the fourfingers. A short measure of length, thus compared to a human’sbrief life (Ps. 39:5). Also the width of the rim on the bread table(Exod. 25:25) and the thickness of the bronze Sea (1Kings7:26).
Milion.Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration ofRoman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”
Orguia.Approximately 5 feet 11 inches, or 1.8 meters. Also translated as“fathom.” A Greek unit of measurement. Probably thedistance between outstretched fingertip to fingertip. Used to measurethe depth of water (Acts 27:28).
Reed/rod.Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a generalterm for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance(Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).
Sabbathday’s journey.Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About2,000 cubits.
Span.Approximately 9 inches, or 22.8 centimeters. Equivalent to threehandbreadths, and ½ cubit. The distance from outstretchedthumb tip to little-finger tip. The length and width of the priest’sbreastpiece (Exod. 28:16).
Stadion.Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai.Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13;John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).
LandArea
Seed.The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis ofhow much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1Kings18:32).
Yoke.Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. Inbiblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animalscould plow in one day (1Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).
Capacity
Cab.Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer.Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria(2Kings 6:25).
Choinix.Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement,mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).
Cor.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equal to thehomer, and to 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularlyof flour and grains (1Kings 4:22; 1Kings 5:11; 2Chron.2:10; 27:5; Ezra 7:22). In the LXX, cor is also a measure of liquidvolume, particularly oil (1Kings 5:11; 2Chron. 2:10; Ezra45:14).
Ephah.Approximately 3⁄5 bushel (6 gallons, or 22.7 liters).Equivalent to 10 omers, or 1⁄10 homer. Used for measuring flourand grains (e.g., Exod. 29:40; Lev. 6:20). Isaiah prophesied a day ofreduced agricultural yield, when a homer of seed would produce onlyan ephah of grain (Isa. 5:10). The ephah was equal in size to thebath (Ezek. 45:11), which typically was used for liquid measurements.
Homer.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equivalent to1 cor, or 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularly ofvarious grains (Lev. 27:16; Isa. 5:10; Ezek. 45:11, 13–14; Hos.3:2). This is probably a natural measure of the load that a donkeycan carry, in the range of 90 kilograms. There may have existed adirect link between capacity and monetary value, given Lev. 27:16:“fifty shekels of silver to a homer of barley seed.” Alogical deduction of capacity and cost based on known equivalencesmight look something like this:
1homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1 omer = 1 beka
Koros.Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measureof grain (Luke 16:7).
Omer.Approximately 2 quarts, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄10ephah, 1⁄100 homer (Ezek. 45:11). Used by Israel in themeasurement and collection of manna in the wilderness (Exod.16:16–36) and thus roughly equivalent to a person’s dailyfood ration.
Saton.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. Themeasurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven(Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).
Seah.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah,or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various drygoods (e.g., 2Kings 7:1; 1Sam. 25:18).
LiquidVolume
Bath.Approximately 6 gallons, or 22.7 liters. Equivalent to 1 ephah, whichtypically was used for measurements of dry capacity. Used in themeasurement of water (1Kings 7:26), oil (1Kings 5:11),and wine (2Chron. 2:10; Isa. 5:10).
Batos.Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration ofthe Hebrew word bath(see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).
Hin.Approximately 4 quarts (1gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek.4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).
Log.Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture,specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).
Metretes.Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement ofwater at the wedding feast (John 2:6).
A tarlike substance used as mortar for setting bricks, as inGen. 11:3 (NIV: “tar”) with the building of a ziggurat.It was also used, along with pitch, as a waterproofing agent forNoah’s ark (Gen. 6:14) and for the reed basket in which Moseswas placed as an infant (Exod. 2:3).
Self-control involves the willingness to submit to theboundaries of nature, society, and family that God places in theworld to bring about order and harmony in relationships. Theself-restraint of an individual’s thoughts, words, and actionsreflects the ordered discipline of God’s creation (Gen. 1–3;8:22; Prov. 6:6–8). Discipline of the self is essential to livea productive life in community (Prov. 25:28).
“Self-control”is one of the terms that Luke uses to summarize Paul’s messageto Felix (Acts 24:25). God’s people must exercise self-control(1Thess. 5:6; 2Tim. 1:7; 2Pet. 1:6). Ultimately,self-control is a gift, a fruit that comes from being in submissionto God’s Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23).
Covenant is one of the most significant concepts in thebiblical material that affects our understanding of God, hisrelationship with his people (past, present, and future), and thestructure and message of his word. Since the covenant concept is nota unique biblical idea, comparative literature from the world of theScriptures has enriched our understanding of the nature and thefunction of covenant. This article highlights the covenant conceptand the genre of covenant and provides a brief overview of the majorbiblical covenants.
Terminology
Defining“covenant.”What is a covenant (Heb. berit)? Most dictionaries refer to it as apact/compact or an agreement. Although there is some uncertaintyregarding the etymology of berit, the two most commonly suggestedetymological derivations are from the Akkadian burru, which refers tothe establishment of a legal situation by a testimony with an oath,or the Akkadian bittu, often translated as “to bind, fetter.”The NT counterpart word is diathēkē, defined as a “legaldisposition of personal goods.” Interestingly, this NT term isused in reference to the initiative of one person who establishes theterms and provisions of the relationship, which is in keeping withunilateral OT covenants. Some OT dictionaries list the “covenant”root with the root for the word “to eat,” perhapsassociating the covenant with a covenant meal.
Ifthe concept of binding best represents the covenant terminology, thenthe covenant is something that binds parties together or obligatesone party to the other. Although there are legal implicationsassociated with covenant, the relational aspect of covenant shouldnot be overlooked. A covenant is best understood as a relationshipwith related legalities. Marriage, for example, is a covenant thatestablishes and defines a relationship. This perhaps explains why Godchose from the realm of relationships among humans the covenantmetaphor to establish and communicate his intent in divine-humanrelationships. The concept of a covenant relationship between God andpeople is uniquely developed in the biblical material.
Somecovenants are between persons of equal status (parity treaties);others are between a master and a servant (suzerainty treaties),between nations, between clans, and between a husband and a wife(Mal. 2:14). To “cut a covenant” at any level of societyimplies a solemn commitment to a relationship. Hittite treatiesillustrate reports of covenant commitments that include a record ofnegotiations, formulations of terms, a statement that the act ofcovenant making actually happened, and a closure of negotiations withsolemn ratification of the terms.
Themost significant covenant relationship in the biblical material isthe one between God and humankind. The uniqueness of Israel’scovenant relationship with Yahweh in contrast to all surroundingnations is established on the basis of Deut. 32:8–9. AlthoughYahweh gave the nations their inheritance, he selected Israel for hisown personal care; he established a relationship with the nationindependent of and prior to the nation’s association with hisland. This was a unique application of the covenant that ran counterto the prevailing Semitic mind-set, which connected deities tospecific geographic territories first and was concerned with theinhabitants of those areas only in a secondary sense. Individual OTbelievers celebrated their relationship with Yahweh and proclaimedhim as the unrivaled universal God (Exod. 15; 1 Sam. 2; Isa.40).
Otherkey terms.In addition to the “covenant” terminology word group,several other key terms fill out our understanding of this importantconcept.
“Oath”is a term used synonymously with “covenant” and functionsat times to describe the making of a covenant. The oath emphasizesthe liability and obligation associated in the relationship (Deut.29:19). The oath can be taken by both parties (Gen. 26:28) or by justone party (Ezek. 17:13).
Theword “testimony” refers to the contents of the twotablets of stone (Exod. 31:18) received by Moses from God at MountSinai. The Ark of the Covenant is also identified by the phrase “arkof the testimony” (Exod. 26:34; 30:6; 31:7 KJV, ESV). Testimonyin the context of the covenant refers to the obligations placed uponthe nation in covenant with Yahweh.
Theterm “word” can be understood in connection with covenantcommunication. The conquest of the land (a covenant promise) isviewed as a performance of the word of God (Deut. 9:5 KJV). Thephrases “establish his covenant” (Deut. 8:18 KJV) and“perform his word” (Deut. 9:5 KJV) are parallel ideaswithin the overall concept of covenant. The sure “word of theLord” to David in 2 Sam. 7:4 can be contrasted withworthless words of the nation used in making a covenant with God(Hos. 10:4).
Torahis a Hebrew term related to covenant. The terms berit and torah arefound in parallel structure in Ps. 78:10. The binding arrangementbetween God and his people is ultimately based upon and regulated bythe instructions of his word. The phrase “Book of the Law”(2 Kings 22:8) has the same covenant implications as the phrase“tablets of the Testimony” (Exod. 31:18 ESV, NASB). Godindicted the priesthood for misguiding the people and causing them tostumble at the law (Mal. 2:5–8) and ultimately to be misguidedin their relationship with him.
Khesedis another Hebrew term that is frequently used with relation to acovenant. Defined as “steadfast covenant loyalty,” it isalso understood as grace, mercy, kindness, loving-kindness. Khesed isthat characteristic of God which causes him to act consistently andfaithfully regarding self-imposed obligations in covenantrelationships despite the failure or success of the other party. Thekhesed of God will never cease (Lam. 3:19–21) because he keepscovenant and mercy (Deut. 7:9, 12). The loyalty of God to David isstated in 2 Sam. 7:14–15 and celebrated in Ps. 89:14, 24,28, 33–34, 49. In contrast, the people are indicted for theirlack of loyalty (Hos. 4:1).
Commonphrases. Themost common covenant-making phrase is “to cut a covenant.”Two possible practices lie behind this phrase. The first reflects apractice in Mesopotamia and Syria, cutting a covenant into a tabletwith a stylus. This may be somewhat similar to what is found in Exod.31:18, where it is said that the two tablets of stone were “inscribedby the finger of God.” The second practice behind this phraseis the cutting of sacrificial animals. The halving of animals waspart of the covenant made with Abraham in Gen. 15:9–18. In asituation of covenant violation God tells Israel that he will treatthem like the calf they cut in covenant making (Jer. 34:17–19).Covenant making is also described as establishing a covenant (2 Sam.23:5), giving a covenant (Gen. 9:12), and erecting a covenant (Exod.6:4).
Faithfulnessand loyalty to a covenant are expressed by several phrases. “Keepa covenant” exhorts the covenant parties to watch, guard,exercise faithfulness to the terms of the relationship established(Exod. 34:7). “Observe a covenant” implies thedemonstration of covenant fidelity in observing and doing (Gen.17:9–10; Exod. 19:5; NIV: “keep my covenant”). Godis obviously faithful in observing the covenant (Deut. 7:9–12).“Remember a covenant” conveys more than just a mentalexercise, especially when God is the subject of the verbal action ofremembering. When God remembers a covenant, he acts with resolve andintervention (Gen. 8:1; 19:29; 30:22; Exod. 2:24).
Covenantinfidelity is expressed by the phrases “break the covenant”(Lev. 26:14–16; Jer. 11:10; 31:32; 33:20–21), “notfaithful” (Ps. 78:37), “violate the covenant”(Deut. 17:2; Josh. 7:11, 15; 23:16), and “forsake the covenant”(Jer. 22:9; cf. Deut. 29:25; 1 Kings 19:10, 14).
TheCovenant Genre
Wenow turn to the form, content, and function of a covenant, or thecovenant genre. There is evidence of a common treaty form used byancient Near Eastern peoples to govern relationships between nationsand tribes. This evidence dates back to the third millennium BC andis derived from literary texts discovered in the ancient Near East.The most helpful contributions to this discussion come from theHittites (1400–1200 BC), the Assyrians (800–600 BC), andthe Babylonians. From this evidence, we are able to identify fourancient Near Eastern arrangements.
1. Theintertribal treaty was a legal arrangement between tribes and clansfor various purposes such as the purchase of land, trading, orpeaceful coexistence. The arrangements made in this format wereequally binding on both parties. A possible biblical example is thearrangement between Abraham and Abimelek in Gen. 21:22–34 orthe arrangement between Abimelek and Isaac in Gen. 26:28.
2.The parity treaty was an arrangement made between kings and princeswho were equal in each other’s eyes. This arrangement involvedmutual participation, as illustrated in the economic relationshipestablished between King Solomon and King Hiram of Tyre in 1 Kings5:1–12.
3.The suzerainty treaty was established between two parties, oneinferior and one superior. The distinctive emphasis of the treaty wason the superior party, the suzerain. In this arrangement the suzerainagrees to make certain provisions for the vassal. He agrees to defendthe vassal in the case of attack, along with permitting the existenceof the vassal nation. In addition, the suzerain has the right to taketribute from the vassal at any time. The vassal, for his part, agreesto a position of servanthood but not slavery. Vassals honor thesuzerain with tribute and material goods.
Thereare six basic parts to the format of this treaty. Many scholarsbelieve that the suzerainty treaty form has influenced the structureof the book of Deuteronomy.
(a) Thetreaty begins with the preamble that identifies the treaty’sauthor/originator (cf. Deut. 1:1–6a; 5:6a, 23–27).
(b) Thesecond part is the prologue, which contains a review of the pastrelationship between the vassal and the suzerain constructed in an“I-Thou” format (cf. Deut. 1:6b–3:29; 2:7;4:32–38). The purpose of this section is to review the previousacts of benevolence demonstrated by the suzerain toward the vassal.The faithfulness of the suzerain to the vassal would perhaps instillsome measure of confidence for entrance into this relationship. InHittite treaties there was often a grace ethic ideology thatcharacterized the prologue and served as a basis of appeal forobedience. The Hittites demonstrated a measure of appreciation forconquered vassals and treated them with dignity by allowing themlimited sovereignty. The Assyrians operated with a power ethic thatmotivated obedience by threatening dismemberment, torture, and evendeath. Yahweh appealed to Israel on the basis of the grace ofredemption (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15) and theprivilege of revelation (Deut. 4:12; cf. Rom. 3:2).
(c) Thestipulations are the third part of the treaty form. These are theexpectations of the suzerain for the vassal (cf. Deut. 4:1–23;6:4–7:2; 10:12–22; 12–26). The stipulations callfor the vassal to be loyal in war, to loyally return politicalrefugees, and to not murmur against the suzerain and his kingdom. Theheart of the stipulation in Deuteronomy is the appeal to “lovethe Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and withall your strength” (6:5), one of the most important verses ofthe OT.
(d) Thedeposit and public reading of the treaty is the next division. Thissection instructs the vassal to place the treaty in his sanctuary anddirects the vassal to publicly read the document from one to fourtimes per year (cf. Deut. 10:1–5; 31:9–13). A regularreading was designed to keep the stipulations before the vassal inorder to nurture respect for the suzerain.
(e) Inthe next part, a list of witnesses, usually gods, are called upon toobserve the covenant and to punish any breach of it (cf. Deut.30:19–20).
(f) Thefinal part of the treaty is a section of blessing and curse. Thissection contains a list of potential rewards for faithfulness andterrifying possibilities of retribution for covenant violations (cf.Deut. 28–29).
4.The royal grant treaty, used in both biblical and secular literature,is somewhat similar to the suzerainty treaty. The distinctivedifference is that the obligation of the grant is not on the vassalbut rather on the suzerain to protect the rights of the vassal. Inthis format the curse is directed against any third party that wouldoppose the vassal or against the suzerain who would act unfaithfullyagainst the vassal.
Covenantsin the Bible
Typesof covenants. Thematerial on covenant form, content, and structure comes into playwhen attempts are made to interpret the major covenants recorded inthe Bible (Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, and new). Initialdiscussions usually revolve around whether these covenants areconditional or unconditional. Although there is merit to thisdiscussion, covenants should also be understood in light of whichparty is bearing the treaty obligation. As described above, theobligation of the suzerainty treaty is upon the vassal to fulfill theexpectations of the suzerain. In the grant treaty the obligation isplaced upon the suzerain to fulfill the treaty promises made to thevassal. There is a sense of conditionality and unconditionality inboth treaty forms.
Onthis basis, the Mosaic covenant is most fittingly understood in lightof the suzerainty treaty. This covenant made at Mount Sinaiestablished Israel as a covenant nation. Yahweh never intended tocreate a relationship with Israel on the basis of this covenant.Rather, he chose this covenant form as the means to regulate hisrelationship with Israel, the nation that he had just graciouslyredeemed. The Mosaic covenant addressed every aspect of Israelitelife. so that the prophetic charges against the nation’stransgressions were considered covenant violations.
TheAbrahamic and Davidic covenants are more like a grant. In theAbrahamic covenant Yahweh is obligating himself to gift Israel withland, seed, and blessing (Gen. 12–17). The halving of animalsin Gen. 15:9–20 resembles a covenant-cutting ceremony in whichYahweh, in the form of a smoking firepot, walks between the animals,obligating himself to the terms of the covenant. In the Davidiccovenant (2 Sam. 7; Ps. 89), Yahweh obligates himself to provideDavid and his descendants a king and a kingdom. The new covenant isfirst referenced by Moses in Deut. 30:6 and then developed moreextensively in Jer. 31:31–33 and Ezek. 36. Scholars debate thenature of this covenant and the promises associated with it. Somedefine it as a grant and speak of it in unconditional terms, whileothers view it as an administrative covenant. The new covenantanticipates a change in the heart of the vassal that ultimatelyfacilitates keeping of the law. The OT Scriptures see this happeningin connection with Israel’s occupation of the land at a futuretime.
Covenantleadership positions. Inaddition to the very specific covenant arrangements made by God inthe OT defining and regulating the life and future of Israel, Godestablished three key covenant leadership positions for the nation:prophet, priest, and king (Deut. 17–18). Their connection withthe covenant is evident from the fact that their origin and functionare detailed in the covenant book of Deuteronomy.
Godprovided a prophet (Deut. 18:9–22) for the nation so that itwould not learn the abominations of the Canaanites and surroundingnations. God desired spiritual integrity for his people andestablished the prophet as his mouthpiece to speak what he commanded(Deut. 18:18–20). The prophet was to be an Israelite who fit aMoses-like pattern (Deut. 18:18–19). The writing and nonwritingprophets often called Israel back to covenant fidelity. They did thisby using legal terminology to illustrate covenant violations, thusestablishing covenant lawsuits against them. Isaiah 1 is a case madeby God against the nation. In this lawsuit God functions as judge,jury, and lawyer.
Thepriest (Deut. 17:8–13; 18:1–8; 33:8–11) had athreefold function within the covenant community. He was a mediatorof people before God and of God before people. This particularfunction of the priesthood was broad and encompassed much of itswork. The priest was a teacher who sought from the Torah resolutionto disagreements between parties (cf. Jer. 18:18). It is also worthnoting that the teaching of the priest preceded sacrifice. Finally,he was a minister of sacrifice. The priest led Israel in worship andsacrifice, giving instruction concerning what was clean and unclean(Lev. 13–15).
Theking was also a provision of the covenant (Deut. 17). Kingship wasnot a divine accommodation to the desire of Israel (1 Sam. 8)but rather a part of the overall covenant plan of God revealed toAbraham (Gen. 17:16). The promise of kingship was reiterated in Gen.35:11; 49:10. The duty of the king involved administration of thekingdom on the basis of the word of God (Deut. 17:18–20; cf.Prov. 29:4, 14).
Covenantin the Old Testament.Covenant is a dominant theme that gives cohesiveness to the structureof the OT and distinguishes the history of Israel. The phrase“covenant history” can be used to describe the biblicalliterature that recounts the events and episodes of Israelite life.It is a macrogenre that characterizes the historical narratives ofthe OT. Although this large literary corpus of historical narrativeshares a covenant perspective, the individual books within thenarrative corpus are noted for the attention they give to variousaspects of the covenant relationship. For example, Gen. 12–50develops the covenant promises of seed and blessing through a numberof subgenres such as genealogies and family stories. Joshua, on theother hand, engages several military subgenres to recount the tensionbetween the promise of land occupation and the responsibility ofIsrael to occupy the land. Covenant history is a realisticpresentation of the tensions associated with the covenantrelationship between Yahweh and the nation of Israel.
Finally,the psalms have a direct covenant connection emphasizing covenantworship. Psalm 119 (esp. vv. 57–64) is filled with covenantterms that relate to God’s word (testimonies, laws, oath,judgments). Marching to the place of worship designated by thecovenant is reflected in the Psalms of Ascent.
Covenantin the New Testament. Althoughthe covenant theme is less pervasive in the NT, its christologicalsignificance is profound. The NT highlights the significant messianicrole of Christ in relation to the covenants. Paul references the newcovenant in both books of Corinthians (1 Cor. 11:25; 2 Cor.3:6). Each celebration of the Lord’s Supper reminds us that theshed blood of Christ is the blood of the new covenant. The newcovenant is cut in connection with or on the basis of his death,burial, and resurrection (1 Cor. 11:25). The writer of the bookof Hebrews gives detailed attention to how the new covenant functionsin contrast to the old Mosaic covenant. The writer explains thatJesus is the guarantor of a better covenant (7:22; 8:6–7).Finally, Paul indicates that we are now considered ministers of thenew covenant ministry (2 Cor. 3:6).
Covenant is one of the most significant concepts in thebiblical material that affects our understanding of God, hisrelationship with his people (past, present, and future), and thestructure and message of his word. Since the covenant concept is nota unique biblical idea, comparative literature from the world of theScriptures has enriched our understanding of the nature and thefunction of covenant. This article highlights the covenant conceptand the genre of covenant and provides a brief overview of the majorbiblical covenants.
Terminology
Defining“covenant.”What is a covenant (Heb. berit)? Most dictionaries refer to it as apact/compact or an agreement. Although there is some uncertaintyregarding the etymology of berit, the two most commonly suggestedetymological derivations are from the Akkadian burru, which refers tothe establishment of a legal situation by a testimony with an oath,or the Akkadian bittu, often translated as “to bind, fetter.”The NT counterpart word is diathēkē, defined as a “legaldisposition of personal goods.” Interestingly, this NT term isused in reference to the initiative of one person who establishes theterms and provisions of the relationship, which is in keeping withunilateral OT covenants. Some OT dictionaries list the “covenant”root with the root for the word “to eat,” perhapsassociating the covenant with a covenant meal.
Ifthe concept of binding best represents the covenant terminology, thenthe covenant is something that binds parties together or obligatesone party to the other. Although there are legal implicationsassociated with covenant, the relational aspect of covenant shouldnot be overlooked. A covenant is best understood as a relationshipwith related legalities. Marriage, for example, is a covenant thatestablishes and defines a relationship. This perhaps explains why Godchose from the realm of relationships among humans the covenantmetaphor to establish and communicate his intent in divine-humanrelationships. The concept of a covenant relationship between God andpeople is uniquely developed in the biblical material.
Somecovenants are between persons of equal status (parity treaties);others are between a master and a servant (suzerainty treaties),between nations, between clans, and between a husband and a wife(Mal. 2:14). To “cut a covenant” at any level of societyimplies a solemn commitment to a relationship. Hittite treatiesillustrate reports of covenant commitments that include a record ofnegotiations, formulations of terms, a statement that the act ofcovenant making actually happened, and a closure of negotiations withsolemn ratification of the terms.
Themost significant covenant relationship in the biblical material isthe one between God and humankind. The uniqueness of Israel’scovenant relationship with Yahweh in contrast to all surroundingnations is established on the basis of Deut. 32:8–9. AlthoughYahweh gave the nations their inheritance, he selected Israel for hisown personal care; he established a relationship with the nationindependent of and prior to the nation’s association with hisland. This was a unique application of the covenant that ran counterto the prevailing Semitic mind-set, which connected deities tospecific geographic territories first and was concerned with theinhabitants of those areas only in a secondary sense. Individual OTbelievers celebrated their relationship with Yahweh and proclaimedhim as the unrivaled universal God (Exod. 15; 1 Sam. 2; Isa.40).
Otherkey terms.In addition to the “covenant” terminology word group,several other key terms fill out our understanding of this importantconcept.
“Oath”is a term used synonymously with “covenant” and functionsat times to describe the making of a covenant. The oath emphasizesthe liability and obligation associated in the relationship (Deut.29:19). The oath can be taken by both parties (Gen. 26:28) or by justone party (Ezek. 17:13).
Theword “testimony” refers to the contents of the twotablets of stone (Exod. 31:18) received by Moses from God at MountSinai. The Ark of the Covenant is also identified by the phrase “arkof the testimony” (Exod. 26:34; 30:6; 31:7 KJV, ESV). Testimonyin the context of the covenant refers to the obligations placed uponthe nation in covenant with Yahweh.
Theterm “word” can be understood in connection with covenantcommunication. The conquest of the land (a covenant promise) isviewed as a performance of the word of God (Deut. 9:5 KJV). Thephrases “establish his covenant” (Deut. 8:18 KJV) and“perform his word” (Deut. 9:5 KJV) are parallel ideaswithin the overall concept of covenant. The sure “word of theLord” to David in 2 Sam. 7:4 can be contrasted withworthless words of the nation used in making a covenant with God(Hos. 10:4).
Torahis a Hebrew term related to covenant. The terms berit and torah arefound in parallel structure in Ps. 78:10. The binding arrangementbetween God and his people is ultimately based upon and regulated bythe instructions of his word. The phrase “Book of the Law”(2 Kings 22:8) has the same covenant implications as the phrase“tablets of the Testimony” (Exod. 31:18 ESV, NASB). Godindicted the priesthood for misguiding the people and causing them tostumble at the law (Mal. 2:5–8) and ultimately to be misguidedin their relationship with him.
Khesedis another Hebrew term that is frequently used with relation to acovenant. Defined as “steadfast covenant loyalty,” it isalso understood as grace, mercy, kindness, loving-kindness. Khesed isthat characteristic of God which causes him to act consistently andfaithfully regarding self-imposed obligations in covenantrelationships despite the failure or success of the other party. Thekhesed of God will never cease (Lam. 3:19–21) because he keepscovenant and mercy (Deut. 7:9, 12). The loyalty of God to David isstated in 2 Sam. 7:14–15 and celebrated in Ps. 89:14, 24,28, 33–34, 49. In contrast, the people are indicted for theirlack of loyalty (Hos. 4:1).
Commonphrases. Themost common covenant-making phrase is “to cut a covenant.”Two possible practices lie behind this phrase. The first reflects apractice in Mesopotamia and Syria, cutting a covenant into a tabletwith a stylus. This may be somewhat similar to what is found in Exod.31:18, where it is said that the two tablets of stone were “inscribedby the finger of God.” The second practice behind this phraseis the cutting of sacrificial animals. The halving of animals waspart of the covenant made with Abraham in Gen. 15:9–18. In asituation of covenant violation God tells Israel that he will treatthem like the calf they cut in covenant making (Jer. 34:17–19).Covenant making is also described as establishing a covenant (2 Sam.23:5), giving a covenant (Gen. 9:12), and erecting a covenant (Exod.6:4).
Faithfulnessand loyalty to a covenant are expressed by several phrases. “Keepa covenant” exhorts the covenant parties to watch, guard,exercise faithfulness to the terms of the relationship established(Exod. 34:7). “Observe a covenant” implies thedemonstration of covenant fidelity in observing and doing (Gen.17:9–10; Exod. 19:5; NIV: “keep my covenant”). Godis obviously faithful in observing the covenant (Deut. 7:9–12).“Remember a covenant” conveys more than just a mentalexercise, especially when God is the subject of the verbal action ofremembering. When God remembers a covenant, he acts with resolve andintervention (Gen. 8:1; 19:29; 30:22; Exod. 2:24).
Covenantinfidelity is expressed by the phrases “break the covenant”(Lev. 26:14–16; Jer. 11:10; 31:32; 33:20–21), “notfaithful” (Ps. 78:37), “violate the covenant”(Deut. 17:2; Josh. 7:11, 15; 23:16), and “forsake the covenant”(Jer. 22:9; cf. Deut. 29:25; 1 Kings 19:10, 14).
TheCovenant Genre
Wenow turn to the form, content, and function of a covenant, or thecovenant genre. There is evidence of a common treaty form used byancient Near Eastern peoples to govern relationships between nationsand tribes. This evidence dates back to the third millennium BC andis derived from literary texts discovered in the ancient Near East.The most helpful contributions to this discussion come from theHittites (1400–1200 BC), the Assyrians (800–600 BC), andthe Babylonians. From this evidence, we are able to identify fourancient Near Eastern arrangements.
1. Theintertribal treaty was a legal arrangement between tribes and clansfor various purposes such as the purchase of land, trading, orpeaceful coexistence. The arrangements made in this format wereequally binding on both parties. A possible biblical example is thearrangement between Abraham and Abimelek in Gen. 21:22–34 orthe arrangement between Abimelek and Isaac in Gen. 26:28.
2.The parity treaty was an arrangement made between kings and princeswho were equal in each other’s eyes. This arrangement involvedmutual participation, as illustrated in the economic relationshipestablished between King Solomon and King Hiram of Tyre in 1 Kings5:1–12.
3.The suzerainty treaty was established between two parties, oneinferior and one superior. The distinctive emphasis of the treaty wason the superior party, the suzerain. In this arrangement the suzerainagrees to make certain provisions for the vassal. He agrees to defendthe vassal in the case of attack, along with permitting the existenceof the vassal nation. In addition, the suzerain has the right to taketribute from the vassal at any time. The vassal, for his part, agreesto a position of servanthood but not slavery. Vassals honor thesuzerain with tribute and material goods.
Thereare six basic parts to the format of this treaty. Many scholarsbelieve that the suzerainty treaty form has influenced the structureof the book of Deuteronomy.
(a) Thetreaty begins with the preamble that identifies the treaty’sauthor/originator (cf. Deut. 1:1–6a; 5:6a, 23–27).
(b) Thesecond part is the prologue, which contains a review of the pastrelationship between the vassal and the suzerain constructed in an“I-Thou” format (cf. Deut. 1:6b–3:29; 2:7;4:32–38). The purpose of this section is to review the previousacts of benevolence demonstrated by the suzerain toward the vassal.The faithfulness of the suzerain to the vassal would perhaps instillsome measure of confidence for entrance into this relationship. InHittite treaties there was often a grace ethic ideology thatcharacterized the prologue and served as a basis of appeal forobedience. The Hittites demonstrated a measure of appreciation forconquered vassals and treated them with dignity by allowing themlimited sovereignty. The Assyrians operated with a power ethic thatmotivated obedience by threatening dismemberment, torture, and evendeath. Yahweh appealed to Israel on the basis of the grace ofredemption (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15) and theprivilege of revelation (Deut. 4:12; cf. Rom. 3:2).
(c) Thestipulations are the third part of the treaty form. These are theexpectations of the suzerain for the vassal (cf. Deut. 4:1–23;6:4–7:2; 10:12–22; 12–26). The stipulations callfor the vassal to be loyal in war, to loyally return politicalrefugees, and to not murmur against the suzerain and his kingdom. Theheart of the stipulation in Deuteronomy is the appeal to “lovethe Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and withall your strength” (6:5), one of the most important verses ofthe OT.
(d) Thedeposit and public reading of the treaty is the next division. Thissection instructs the vassal to place the treaty in his sanctuary anddirects the vassal to publicly read the document from one to fourtimes per year (cf. Deut. 10:1–5; 31:9–13). A regularreading was designed to keep the stipulations before the vassal inorder to nurture respect for the suzerain.
(e) Inthe next part, a list of witnesses, usually gods, are called upon toobserve the covenant and to punish any breach of it (cf. Deut.30:19–20).
(f) Thefinal part of the treaty is a section of blessing and curse. Thissection contains a list of potential rewards for faithfulness andterrifying possibilities of retribution for covenant violations (cf.Deut. 28–29).
4.The royal grant treaty, used in both biblical and secular literature,is somewhat similar to the suzerainty treaty. The distinctivedifference is that the obligation of the grant is not on the vassalbut rather on the suzerain to protect the rights of the vassal. Inthis format the curse is directed against any third party that wouldoppose the vassal or against the suzerain who would act unfaithfullyagainst the vassal.
Covenantsin the Bible
Typesof covenants. Thematerial on covenant form, content, and structure comes into playwhen attempts are made to interpret the major covenants recorded inthe Bible (Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, and new). Initialdiscussions usually revolve around whether these covenants areconditional or unconditional. Although there is merit to thisdiscussion, covenants should also be understood in light of whichparty is bearing the treaty obligation. As described above, theobligation of the suzerainty treaty is upon the vassal to fulfill theexpectations of the suzerain. In the grant treaty the obligation isplaced upon the suzerain to fulfill the treaty promises made to thevassal. There is a sense of conditionality and unconditionality inboth treaty forms.
Onthis basis, the Mosaic covenant is most fittingly understood in lightof the suzerainty treaty. This covenant made at Mount Sinaiestablished Israel as a covenant nation. Yahweh never intended tocreate a relationship with Israel on the basis of this covenant.Rather, he chose this covenant form as the means to regulate hisrelationship with Israel, the nation that he had just graciouslyredeemed. The Mosaic covenant addressed every aspect of Israelitelife. so that the prophetic charges against the nation’stransgressions were considered covenant violations.
TheAbrahamic and Davidic covenants are more like a grant. In theAbrahamic covenant Yahweh is obligating himself to gift Israel withland, seed, and blessing (Gen. 12–17). The halving of animalsin Gen. 15:9–20 resembles a covenant-cutting ceremony in whichYahweh, in the form of a smoking firepot, walks between the animals,obligating himself to the terms of the covenant. In the Davidiccovenant (2 Sam. 7; Ps. 89), Yahweh obligates himself to provideDavid and his descendants a king and a kingdom. The new covenant isfirst referenced by Moses in Deut. 30:6 and then developed moreextensively in Jer. 31:31–33 and Ezek. 36. Scholars debate thenature of this covenant and the promises associated with it. Somedefine it as a grant and speak of it in unconditional terms, whileothers view it as an administrative covenant. The new covenantanticipates a change in the heart of the vassal that ultimatelyfacilitates keeping of the law. The OT Scriptures see this happeningin connection with Israel’s occupation of the land at a futuretime.
Covenantleadership positions. Inaddition to the very specific covenant arrangements made by God inthe OT defining and regulating the life and future of Israel, Godestablished three key covenant leadership positions for the nation:prophet, priest, and king (Deut. 17–18). Their connection withthe covenant is evident from the fact that their origin and functionare detailed in the covenant book of Deuteronomy.
Godprovided a prophet (Deut. 18:9–22) for the nation so that itwould not learn the abominations of the Canaanites and surroundingnations. God desired spiritual integrity for his people andestablished the prophet as his mouthpiece to speak what he commanded(Deut. 18:18–20). The prophet was to be an Israelite who fit aMoses-like pattern (Deut. 18:18–19). The writing and nonwritingprophets often called Israel back to covenant fidelity. They did thisby using legal terminology to illustrate covenant violations, thusestablishing covenant lawsuits against them. Isaiah 1 is a case madeby God against the nation. In this lawsuit God functions as judge,jury, and lawyer.
Thepriest (Deut. 17:8–13; 18:1–8; 33:8–11) had athreefold function within the covenant community. He was a mediatorof people before God and of God before people. This particularfunction of the priesthood was broad and encompassed much of itswork. The priest was a teacher who sought from the Torah resolutionto disagreements between parties (cf. Jer. 18:18). It is also worthnoting that the teaching of the priest preceded sacrifice. Finally,he was a minister of sacrifice. The priest led Israel in worship andsacrifice, giving instruction concerning what was clean and unclean(Lev. 13–15).
Theking was also a provision of the covenant (Deut. 17). Kingship wasnot a divine accommodation to the desire of Israel (1 Sam. 8)but rather a part of the overall covenant plan of God revealed toAbraham (Gen. 17:16). The promise of kingship was reiterated in Gen.35:11; 49:10. The duty of the king involved administration of thekingdom on the basis of the word of God (Deut. 17:18–20; cf.Prov. 29:4, 14).
Covenantin the Old Testament.Covenant is a dominant theme that gives cohesiveness to the structureof the OT and distinguishes the history of Israel. The phrase“covenant history” can be used to describe the biblicalliterature that recounts the events and episodes of Israelite life.It is a macrogenre that characterizes the historical narratives ofthe OT. Although this large literary corpus of historical narrativeshares a covenant perspective, the individual books within thenarrative corpus are noted for the attention they give to variousaspects of the covenant relationship. For example, Gen. 12–50develops the covenant promises of seed and blessing through a numberof subgenres such as genealogies and family stories. Joshua, on theother hand, engages several military subgenres to recount the tensionbetween the promise of land occupation and the responsibility ofIsrael to occupy the land. Covenant history is a realisticpresentation of the tensions associated with the covenantrelationship between Yahweh and the nation of Israel.
Finally,the psalms have a direct covenant connection emphasizing covenantworship. Psalm 119 (esp. vv. 57–64) is filled with covenantterms that relate to God’s word (testimonies, laws, oath,judgments). Marching to the place of worship designated by thecovenant is reflected in the Psalms of Ascent.
Covenantin the New Testament. Althoughthe covenant theme is less pervasive in the NT, its christologicalsignificance is profound. The NT highlights the significant messianicrole of Christ in relation to the covenants. Paul references the newcovenant in both books of Corinthians (1 Cor. 11:25; 2 Cor.3:6). Each celebration of the Lord’s Supper reminds us that theshed blood of Christ is the blood of the new covenant. The newcovenant is cut in connection with or on the basis of his death,burial, and resurrection (1 Cor. 11:25). The writer of the bookof Hebrews gives detailed attention to how the new covenant functionsin contrast to the old Mosaic covenant. The writer explains thatJesus is the guarantor of a better covenant (7:22; 8:6–7).Finally, Paul indicates that we are now considered ministers of thenew covenant ministry (2 Cor. 3:6).
Common and valuable for food, beans were cooked while green in the pods or after being dried. Dry beans were threshed and winnowed like cereals and other grains. Beans are mentioned twice in the NIV (2Sam. 17:28; Ezek. 4:9).
Covenant is one of the most significant concepts in thebiblical material that affects our understanding of God, hisrelationship with his people (past, present, and future), and thestructure and message of his word. Since the covenant concept is nota unique biblical idea, comparative literature from the world of theScriptures has enriched our understanding of the nature and thefunction of covenant. This article highlights the covenant conceptand the genre of covenant and provides a brief overview of the majorbiblical covenants.
Terminology
Defining“covenant.”What is a covenant (Heb. berit)? Most dictionaries refer to it as apact/compact or an agreement. Although there is some uncertaintyregarding the etymology of berit, the two most commonly suggestedetymological derivations are from the Akkadian burru, which refers tothe establishment of a legal situation by a testimony with an oath,or the Akkadian bittu, often translated as “to bind, fetter.”The NT counterpart word is diathēkē, defined as a “legaldisposition of personal goods.” Interestingly, this NT term isused in reference to the initiative of one person who establishes theterms and provisions of the relationship, which is in keeping withunilateral OT covenants. Some OT dictionaries list the “covenant”root with the root for the word “to eat,” perhapsassociating the covenant with a covenant meal.
Ifthe concept of binding best represents the covenant terminology, thenthe covenant is something that binds parties together or obligatesone party to the other. Although there are legal implicationsassociated with covenant, the relational aspect of covenant shouldnot be overlooked. A covenant is best understood as a relationshipwith related legalities. Marriage, for example, is a covenant thatestablishes and defines a relationship. This perhaps explains why Godchose from the realm of relationships among humans the covenantmetaphor to establish and communicate his intent in divine-humanrelationships. The concept of a covenant relationship between God andpeople is uniquely developed in the biblical material.
Somecovenants are between persons of equal status (parity treaties);others are between a master and a servant (suzerainty treaties),between nations, between clans, and between a husband and a wife(Mal. 2:14). To “cut a covenant” at any level of societyimplies a solemn commitment to a relationship. Hittite treatiesillustrate reports of covenant commitments that include a record ofnegotiations, formulations of terms, a statement that the act ofcovenant making actually happened, and a closure of negotiations withsolemn ratification of the terms.
Themost significant covenant relationship in the biblical material isthe one between God and humankind. The uniqueness of Israel’scovenant relationship with Yahweh in contrast to all surroundingnations is established on the basis of Deut. 32:8–9. AlthoughYahweh gave the nations their inheritance, he selected Israel for hisown personal care; he established a relationship with the nationindependent of and prior to the nation’s association with hisland. This was a unique application of the covenant that ran counterto the prevailing Semitic mind-set, which connected deities tospecific geographic territories first and was concerned with theinhabitants of those areas only in a secondary sense. Individual OTbelievers celebrated their relationship with Yahweh and proclaimedhim as the unrivaled universal God (Exod. 15; 1 Sam. 2; Isa.40).
Otherkey terms.In addition to the “covenant” terminology word group,several other key terms fill out our understanding of this importantconcept.
“Oath”is a term used synonymously with “covenant” and functionsat times to describe the making of a covenant. The oath emphasizesthe liability and obligation associated in the relationship (Deut.29:19). The oath can be taken by both parties (Gen. 26:28) or by justone party (Ezek. 17:13).
Theword “testimony” refers to the contents of the twotablets of stone (Exod. 31:18) received by Moses from God at MountSinai. The Ark of the Covenant is also identified by the phrase “arkof the testimony” (Exod. 26:34; 30:6; 31:7 KJV, ESV). Testimonyin the context of the covenant refers to the obligations placed uponthe nation in covenant with Yahweh.
Theterm “word” can be understood in connection with covenantcommunication. The conquest of the land (a covenant promise) isviewed as a performance of the word of God (Deut. 9:5 KJV). Thephrases “establish his covenant” (Deut. 8:18 KJV) and“perform his word” (Deut. 9:5 KJV) are parallel ideaswithin the overall concept of covenant. The sure “word of theLord” to David in 2 Sam. 7:4 can be contrasted withworthless words of the nation used in making a covenant with God(Hos. 10:4).
Torahis a Hebrew term related to covenant. The terms berit and torah arefound in parallel structure in Ps. 78:10. The binding arrangementbetween God and his people is ultimately based upon and regulated bythe instructions of his word. The phrase “Book of the Law”(2 Kings 22:8) has the same covenant implications as the phrase“tablets of the Testimony” (Exod. 31:18 ESV, NASB). Godindicted the priesthood for misguiding the people and causing them tostumble at the law (Mal. 2:5–8) and ultimately to be misguidedin their relationship with him.
Khesedis another Hebrew term that is frequently used with relation to acovenant. Defined as “steadfast covenant loyalty,” it isalso understood as grace, mercy, kindness, loving-kindness. Khesed isthat characteristic of God which causes him to act consistently andfaithfully regarding self-imposed obligations in covenantrelationships despite the failure or success of the other party. Thekhesed of God will never cease (Lam. 3:19–21) because he keepscovenant and mercy (Deut. 7:9, 12). The loyalty of God to David isstated in 2 Sam. 7:14–15 and celebrated in Ps. 89:14, 24,28, 33–34, 49. In contrast, the people are indicted for theirlack of loyalty (Hos. 4:1).
Commonphrases. Themost common covenant-making phrase is “to cut a covenant.”Two possible practices lie behind this phrase. The first reflects apractice in Mesopotamia and Syria, cutting a covenant into a tabletwith a stylus. This may be somewhat similar to what is found in Exod.31:18, where it is said that the two tablets of stone were “inscribedby the finger of God.” The second practice behind this phraseis the cutting of sacrificial animals. The halving of animals waspart of the covenant made with Abraham in Gen. 15:9–18. In asituation of covenant violation God tells Israel that he will treatthem like the calf they cut in covenant making (Jer. 34:17–19).Covenant making is also described as establishing a covenant (2 Sam.23:5), giving a covenant (Gen. 9:12), and erecting a covenant (Exod.6:4).
Faithfulnessand loyalty to a covenant are expressed by several phrases. “Keepa covenant” exhorts the covenant parties to watch, guard,exercise faithfulness to the terms of the relationship established(Exod. 34:7). “Observe a covenant” implies thedemonstration of covenant fidelity in observing and doing (Gen.17:9–10; Exod. 19:5; NIV: “keep my covenant”). Godis obviously faithful in observing the covenant (Deut. 7:9–12).“Remember a covenant” conveys more than just a mentalexercise, especially when God is the subject of the verbal action ofremembering. When God remembers a covenant, he acts with resolve andintervention (Gen. 8:1; 19:29; 30:22; Exod. 2:24).
Covenantinfidelity is expressed by the phrases “break the covenant”(Lev. 26:14–16; Jer. 11:10; 31:32; 33:20–21), “notfaithful” (Ps. 78:37), “violate the covenant”(Deut. 17:2; Josh. 7:11, 15; 23:16), and “forsake the covenant”(Jer. 22:9; cf. Deut. 29:25; 1 Kings 19:10, 14).
TheCovenant Genre
Wenow turn to the form, content, and function of a covenant, or thecovenant genre. There is evidence of a common treaty form used byancient Near Eastern peoples to govern relationships between nationsand tribes. This evidence dates back to the third millennium BC andis derived from literary texts discovered in the ancient Near East.The most helpful contributions to this discussion come from theHittites (1400–1200 BC), the Assyrians (800–600 BC), andthe Babylonians. From this evidence, we are able to identify fourancient Near Eastern arrangements.
1. Theintertribal treaty was a legal arrangement between tribes and clansfor various purposes such as the purchase of land, trading, orpeaceful coexistence. The arrangements made in this format wereequally binding on both parties. A possible biblical example is thearrangement between Abraham and Abimelek in Gen. 21:22–34 orthe arrangement between Abimelek and Isaac in Gen. 26:28.
2.The parity treaty was an arrangement made between kings and princeswho were equal in each other’s eyes. This arrangement involvedmutual participation, as illustrated in the economic relationshipestablished between King Solomon and King Hiram of Tyre in 1 Kings5:1–12.
3.The suzerainty treaty was established between two parties, oneinferior and one superior. The distinctive emphasis of the treaty wason the superior party, the suzerain. In this arrangement the suzerainagrees to make certain provisions for the vassal. He agrees to defendthe vassal in the case of attack, along with permitting the existenceof the vassal nation. In addition, the suzerain has the right to taketribute from the vassal at any time. The vassal, for his part, agreesto a position of servanthood but not slavery. Vassals honor thesuzerain with tribute and material goods.
Thereare six basic parts to the format of this treaty. Many scholarsbelieve that the suzerainty treaty form has influenced the structureof the book of Deuteronomy.
(a) Thetreaty begins with the preamble that identifies the treaty’sauthor/originator (cf. Deut. 1:1–6a; 5:6a, 23–27).
(b) Thesecond part is the prologue, which contains a review of the pastrelationship between the vassal and the suzerain constructed in an“I-Thou” format (cf. Deut. 1:6b–3:29; 2:7;4:32–38). The purpose of this section is to review the previousacts of benevolence demonstrated by the suzerain toward the vassal.The faithfulness of the suzerain to the vassal would perhaps instillsome measure of confidence for entrance into this relationship. InHittite treaties there was often a grace ethic ideology thatcharacterized the prologue and served as a basis of appeal forobedience. The Hittites demonstrated a measure of appreciation forconquered vassals and treated them with dignity by allowing themlimited sovereignty. The Assyrians operated with a power ethic thatmotivated obedience by threatening dismemberment, torture, and evendeath. Yahweh appealed to Israel on the basis of the grace ofredemption (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15) and theprivilege of revelation (Deut. 4:12; cf. Rom. 3:2).
(c) Thestipulations are the third part of the treaty form. These are theexpectations of the suzerain for the vassal (cf. Deut. 4:1–23;6:4–7:2; 10:12–22; 12–26). The stipulations callfor the vassal to be loyal in war, to loyally return politicalrefugees, and to not murmur against the suzerain and his kingdom. Theheart of the stipulation in Deuteronomy is the appeal to “lovethe Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and withall your strength” (6:5), one of the most important verses ofthe OT.
(d) Thedeposit and public reading of the treaty is the next division. Thissection instructs the vassal to place the treaty in his sanctuary anddirects the vassal to publicly read the document from one to fourtimes per year (cf. Deut. 10:1–5; 31:9–13). A regularreading was designed to keep the stipulations before the vassal inorder to nurture respect for the suzerain.
(e) Inthe next part, a list of witnesses, usually gods, are called upon toobserve the covenant and to punish any breach of it (cf. Deut.30:19–20).
(f) Thefinal part of the treaty is a section of blessing and curse. Thissection contains a list of potential rewards for faithfulness andterrifying possibilities of retribution for covenant violations (cf.Deut. 28–29).
4.The royal grant treaty, used in both biblical and secular literature,is somewhat similar to the suzerainty treaty. The distinctivedifference is that the obligation of the grant is not on the vassalbut rather on the suzerain to protect the rights of the vassal. Inthis format the curse is directed against any third party that wouldoppose the vassal or against the suzerain who would act unfaithfullyagainst the vassal.
Covenantsin the Bible
Typesof covenants. Thematerial on covenant form, content, and structure comes into playwhen attempts are made to interpret the major covenants recorded inthe Bible (Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, and new). Initialdiscussions usually revolve around whether these covenants areconditional or unconditional. Although there is merit to thisdiscussion, covenants should also be understood in light of whichparty is bearing the treaty obligation. As described above, theobligation of the suzerainty treaty is upon the vassal to fulfill theexpectations of the suzerain. In the grant treaty the obligation isplaced upon the suzerain to fulfill the treaty promises made to thevassal. There is a sense of conditionality and unconditionality inboth treaty forms.
Onthis basis, the Mosaic covenant is most fittingly understood in lightof the suzerainty treaty. This covenant made at Mount Sinaiestablished Israel as a covenant nation. Yahweh never intended tocreate a relationship with Israel on the basis of this covenant.Rather, he chose this covenant form as the means to regulate hisrelationship with Israel, the nation that he had just graciouslyredeemed. The Mosaic covenant addressed every aspect of Israelitelife. so that the prophetic charges against the nation’stransgressions were considered covenant violations.
TheAbrahamic and Davidic covenants are more like a grant. In theAbrahamic covenant Yahweh is obligating himself to gift Israel withland, seed, and blessing (Gen. 12–17). The halving of animalsin Gen. 15:9–20 resembles a covenant-cutting ceremony in whichYahweh, in the form of a smoking firepot, walks between the animals,obligating himself to the terms of the covenant. In the Davidiccovenant (2 Sam. 7; Ps. 89), Yahweh obligates himself to provideDavid and his descendants a king and a kingdom. The new covenant isfirst referenced by Moses in Deut. 30:6 and then developed moreextensively in Jer. 31:31–33 and Ezek. 36. Scholars debate thenature of this covenant and the promises associated with it. Somedefine it as a grant and speak of it in unconditional terms, whileothers view it as an administrative covenant. The new covenantanticipates a change in the heart of the vassal that ultimatelyfacilitates keeping of the law. The OT Scriptures see this happeningin connection with Israel’s occupation of the land at a futuretime.
Covenantleadership positions. Inaddition to the very specific covenant arrangements made by God inthe OT defining and regulating the life and future of Israel, Godestablished three key covenant leadership positions for the nation:prophet, priest, and king (Deut. 17–18). Their connection withthe covenant is evident from the fact that their origin and functionare detailed in the covenant book of Deuteronomy.
Godprovided a prophet (Deut. 18:9–22) for the nation so that itwould not learn the abominations of the Canaanites and surroundingnations. God desired spiritual integrity for his people andestablished the prophet as his mouthpiece to speak what he commanded(Deut. 18:18–20). The prophet was to be an Israelite who fit aMoses-like pattern (Deut. 18:18–19). The writing and nonwritingprophets often called Israel back to covenant fidelity. They did thisby using legal terminology to illustrate covenant violations, thusestablishing covenant lawsuits against them. Isaiah 1 is a case madeby God against the nation. In this lawsuit God functions as judge,jury, and lawyer.
Thepriest (Deut. 17:8–13; 18:1–8; 33:8–11) had athreefold function within the covenant community. He was a mediatorof people before God and of God before people. This particularfunction of the priesthood was broad and encompassed much of itswork. The priest was a teacher who sought from the Torah resolutionto disagreements between parties (cf. Jer. 18:18). It is also worthnoting that the teaching of the priest preceded sacrifice. Finally,he was a minister of sacrifice. The priest led Israel in worship andsacrifice, giving instruction concerning what was clean and unclean(Lev. 13–15).
Theking was also a provision of the covenant (Deut. 17). Kingship wasnot a divine accommodation to the desire of Israel (1 Sam. 8)but rather a part of the overall covenant plan of God revealed toAbraham (Gen. 17:16). The promise of kingship was reiterated in Gen.35:11; 49:10. The duty of the king involved administration of thekingdom on the basis of the word of God (Deut. 17:18–20; cf.Prov. 29:4, 14).
Covenantin the Old Testament.Covenant is a dominant theme that gives cohesiveness to the structureof the OT and distinguishes the history of Israel. The phrase“covenant history” can be used to describe the biblicalliterature that recounts the events and episodes of Israelite life.It is a macrogenre that characterizes the historical narratives ofthe OT. Although this large literary corpus of historical narrativeshares a covenant perspective, the individual books within thenarrative corpus are noted for the attention they give to variousaspects of the covenant relationship. For example, Gen. 12–50develops the covenant promises of seed and blessing through a numberof subgenres such as genealogies and family stories. Joshua, on theother hand, engages several military subgenres to recount the tensionbetween the promise of land occupation and the responsibility ofIsrael to occupy the land. Covenant history is a realisticpresentation of the tensions associated with the covenantrelationship between Yahweh and the nation of Israel.
Finally,the psalms have a direct covenant connection emphasizing covenantworship. Psalm 119 (esp. vv. 57–64) is filled with covenantterms that relate to God’s word (testimonies, laws, oath,judgments). Marching to the place of worship designated by thecovenant is reflected in the Psalms of Ascent.
Covenantin the New Testament. Althoughthe covenant theme is less pervasive in the NT, its christologicalsignificance is profound. The NT highlights the significant messianicrole of Christ in relation to the covenants. Paul references the newcovenant in both books of Corinthians (1 Cor. 11:25; 2 Cor.3:6). Each celebration of the Lord’s Supper reminds us that theshed blood of Christ is the blood of the new covenant. The newcovenant is cut in connection with or on the basis of his death,burial, and resurrection (1 Cor. 11:25). The writer of the bookof Hebrews gives detailed attention to how the new covenant functionsin contrast to the old Mosaic covenant. The writer explains thatJesus is the guarantor of a better covenant (7:22; 8:6–7).Finally, Paul indicates that we are now considered ministers of thenew covenant ministry (2 Cor. 3:6).
Palestine has arid and wet Mediterranean climate zones and asteppe zone. Its two seasons are dry/summer and wet/winter (cf. Gen.8:22). In summer the weather is remarkably stable, and the incomingair from the northwest typically is rather arid. With no cloud covermost days, there is, on average, zero rainfall from June throughSeptember—the background for the miracle of 1Sam.12:16–18 (cf. Prov. 26:1).
Inwinter the weather is variable, with rains and thunderstorms arrivingfrom the Mediterranean Sea, generally from the southwest. The rainsusually fall in concentrated amounts over a few hours. Rainfalldiminishes overall from north to south and west to east, thoughvarying elevations create deviations from the overall pattern. Annualrainfall varies significantly (from twelve to forty inches), fallingalmost entirely between November and April. Dew is a significantsource of water in the region, especially in summer, sometimesconstituting 25percent of the annual moisture.
Table11. Average Low–High Temperatures (°F)
1.Tel Aviv (sea level)
January– 34-74
Februrary– 36-80
March– 37-87
April– 42-95
May– 47-99
June– 55-97
July– 60-92
August– 62-91
September– 59-92
October– 50-92
November– 43-87
December– 36-79
II.Jerusalem (2,500 ft.)
January– 39-53
February– 40-56
March– 43-61
April– 49-70
May– 54-77
June– 59-82
July– 63-84
August– 63-84
September– 61-82
October– 57-77
November– 49-66
December– 42-57
III.Tiberias (-650 ft.)
January– 45-61
February– 48-66
March– 54-73
April– 55-77
May– 59-86
June– 68-93
July– 70-95
August– 72-97
September– 68-93
October– 61-88
November– 55-75
December– 50-68
IV.Jericho (-840 ft.)
January– 49-65
February– 49-64
March– 56-73
April– 62-82
May– 68-90
June– 74-98
July– 80-100
August– 80-100
September– 74-95
October– 70-89
November– 64-81
December– 54-69
Apartfrom thunderstorms early in the rainy season, such as occur on theSea of Galilee (cf. Luke 8:23), a high-pressure zone can form overIraq during the wet season, forcing hot, dusty, and sometimesprolonged east winds into Palestine; these are called qadim in theBible (Exod. 10:13; Ps. 48:7; Jon. 4:8). In the transitional periodsbetween the two seasons, the sirocco (Arab. hamsin), may occur, inwhich an east wind from the Arabian desert sweeps up from the southand across Palestine toward a low-pressure zone over Egypt or Libya,causing humidity to drop as low as 10percent and thetemperature to rise as much as 22°F. This can last days or weeks,with sweltering effects (cf. Ezek. 17:10; Hos. 13:15; Luke 12:55).Such storms are often used as a backdrop to highlight the weaknessand transience of earthly existence (Isa. 27:8; Hos. 12:1; James1:11).
Whilevarious weather conditions are described throughout the Bible (rain,snow, storms, lightning, thunder, wind, etc.), Jesus refersspecifically to weather prediction in Matt. 16:2–3, where heaccuses the Pharisees of being able to predict the weather but notable to discern the signs of the times.
It is difficult to imagine a world without consistentmetrological systems. Society’s basic structures, from economyto law, require a uniform and accurate method for measuring time,distances, weights, volumes, and so on. In today’s world,technological advancements allow people to measure various aspects ofthe universe with incredible accuracy—from nanometers tolight-years, milligrams to kilograms.
Themetrological systems employed in biblical times span the sameconcepts as our own modern-day systems: weight, linear distance, andvolume or capacity. However, the systems of weights and measurementsemployed during the span of biblical times were not nearly asaccurate or uniform as the modern units employed today. Preexistingweight and measurement systems existed in the contextual surroundingsof both the OT and the NT authors and thus heavily influenced thesystems employed by the Israelite nation as well as the NT writers.There was great variance between the different standards usedmerchant to merchant (Gen. 23:16), city to city, region to region,time period to time period, even despite the commands to use honestscales and honest weights (Lev. 19:35–36; Deut. 25:13–15;Prov. 11:1; 16:11; 20:23; Ezek. 45:10).
Furthermore,inconsistencies and contradictions exist within the written recordsas well as between archaeological specimens. In addition, significantdifferences are found between preexilic and postexilic measurementsin the biblical texts, and an attempt at merging dry capacity andliquid volume measurements further complicated the issue. This is tobe expected, especially when we consider modern-dayinconsistencies—for example, 1 US liquid pint= 0.473liters, while 1 US dry pint= 0.550 liters. Thus, all modernequivalents given below are approximations, and even the bestestimates have a margin of error of + 5percent or more.
Weights
Weightsin biblical times were carried in a bag or a satchel (Deut. 25:13;Prov. 16:11; Mic. 6:11) and were stones, usually carved into variousanimal shapes for easy identification. Their side or flat bottom wasinscribed with the associated weight and unit of measurement.Thousands of historical artifacts, which differ by significantamounts, have been discovered by archaeologists and thus have greatlycomplicated the work of determining accurate modern-day equivalents.
Beka.Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahsor ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measuremetals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).
Gerah.1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).
Litra.Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight.Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to themodern British pound.
Mina.Approximately 1¼ pounds, or 0.56 kilograms. Equivalent to 50shekels. Used to weigh gold (1Kings 10:17; Ezra 2:69), silver(Neh. 7:71–72), and other goods. The prophet Ezekiel redefinedthe proper weight: “Theshekel is to consist of twentygerahs. Twenty shekels plus twenty-five shekels plus fifteen shekelsequal one mina” (Ezek. 45:12). Before this redefinition, therewere arguably 50 shekels per mina. In Jesus’ parable of theservants, he describes the master entrusting to his three servantsvarying amounts—10 minas, 5 minas, 1 mina—implying amonetary value (Luke 19:11–24), probably of either silver orgold. One mina was equivalent to approximately three months’wages for a laborer.
Pim.Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1Sam. 13:21).
Shekel.Approximately 2⁄5 ounce, or 11 grams. Equivalent toapproximately 2 bekas. The shekel is the basic unit of weightmeasurement in Israelite history, though its actual weight variedsignificantly at different historical points. Examples include the“royal shekel” (2Sam. 14:26), the “commonshekel” (2Kings 7:1), and the “sanctuary shekel,”which was equivalent to 20 gerahs (e.g., Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25;Num. 3:47). Because it was used to weigh out silver or gold, theshekel also functioned as a common monetary unit in the NT world.
Talent.Approximately 75 pounds, or 34 kilograms. Equivalent to approximately60 minas. Various metals were weighed using talents: gold (Exod.25:39; 37:24; 1Chron. 20:2), silver (Exod. 38:27; 1Kings20:39; 2Kings 5:22), and bronze (Exod. 38:29). This probably isderived from the weight of a load that a man could carry.
Table12. Biblical Weights and Measures and Their Modern Equivalents:
Weights
Beka– 10 geraahs; ½ shekel = 1/5 ounce = 5.6 grams
Gerah– 1/10 beka; 1/20 shekel = 1/50 ounce = 0.56 grams
Litra– 12 ounces = 340 grams
Mina– 50 shekels = 1 ¼ pounds = 0.56 kilograms
Pim– 2/3 shekel = 1/3 ounce = 9.3 grams
Shekel– 2 bekas; 20 gerahs = 2/5 ounce = 11 grams
Talent– 60 minas = 75 pounds = 34 kilograms
Linearmeasurements
Cubit– 6 handbreadths = 18 inches = 45.7 centimeters
Day’sjourney = 20-25 miles = 32-40 kilometerse
Fingerbreadth– ¼ handbreadth = ¾ inch = 1.9 centimeterse
Handbreadth– 1/6 cubit = 3 inches = 7.6 centimeters
Milion– 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers
Orguia– 1/100 stadion = 5 feet 11 inches = 1.8 meters
Reed/rod– 108 inches = 274 centimeters
Sabbathday’s journey – 2,000 cubits = ¾ mile = 1.2kilometers
Span– 3 handbreadths = 9 inches = 22.8 centimeters
Stadion– 100 orguiai = 607 feet = 185 meters
Capacity
Cab– 1 omer = ½ gallon = 1.9 liters
Choinix– ¼ gallon = 0.9 liters
Cor– 1 homer; 10 ephahs = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Ephah– 10 omers; 1/10 homer = 3/5 bushel; 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Homer– 10 ephahs; 1 cor = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Koros– 10 bushels; 95 gallons – 360 liters
Omer– 1/10 ephah; 1/100 homer = 2 quarts = 1.9 liters
Saton– 1 seah = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
Seah– 1/3 ephah; 1 saton = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
LiquidVolume
Bath– 1 ephah = 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Batos– 8 gallons = 30.3 liters
Hin– 1/6 bath; 12 logs = 1 gallon; 4 quarts = 3.8 liters
Log– 1/72 bath; 1/12 hin = 1/3 quart = 0.3 liters
Metretes– 10 gallons = 37.8 literes
LinearMeasurements
Linearmeasurements were based upon readily available natural measurementssuch as the distance between the elbow and the hand or between thethumb and the little finger. While convenient, this method ofmeasurement gave rise to significant inconsistencies.
Cubit.Approximately 18 inches, or 45.7 centimeters. Equivalent to 6handbreadths. The standard biblical measure of linear distance, asthe shekel is the standard measurement of weight. The distance fromthe elbow to the outstretched fingertip. Used to describe height,width, length (Exod. 25:10), distance (John 21:8), and depth (Gen.7:20). Use of the cubit is ancient. For simple and approximateconversion into modern units, divide the number of cubits in half formeters, then multiply the number of meters by 3 to arrive at feet.
1cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths
Day’sjourney.An approximate measure of distance equivalent to about 20–25miles, or 32–40 kilometers. Several passages reference a singleor multiple days’ journey as a description of the distancetraveled or the distance between two points: “a day’sjourney” (Num. 11:31; 1Kings 19:4), “a three-dayjourney” (Gen. 30:36; Exod. 3:18; 8:27; Jon. 3:3), “sevendays” (Gen. 31:23), and “eleven days” (Deut. 1:2).After visiting Jerusalem for Passover, Jesus’ parents journeyedfor a day (Luke 2:44) before realizing that he was not with them.
Fingerbreadth.The width of the finger, or ¼ of a handbreadth, approximately¾ inch, or 1.9 centimeters. The fingerbreadth was thebeginning building block of the biblical metrological system forlinear measurements. Used only once in the Scriptures, to describethe bronze pillars (Jer. 52:21).
Handbreadth.Approximately 3 inches, or 7.6 centimeters. Equivalent to 1/6 cubit,or four fingerbreadths. Probably the width at the base of the fourfingers. A short measure of length, thus compared to a human’sbrief life (Ps. 39:5). Also the width of the rim on the bread table(Exod. 25:25) and the thickness of the bronze Sea (1Kings7:26).
Milion.Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration ofRoman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”
Orguia.Approximately 5 feet 11 inches, or 1.8 meters. Also translated as“fathom.” A Greek unit of measurement. Probably thedistance between outstretched fingertip to fingertip. Used to measurethe depth of water (Acts 27:28).
Reed/rod.Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a generalterm for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance(Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).
Sabbathday’s journey.Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About2,000 cubits.
Span.Approximately 9 inches, or 22.8 centimeters. Equivalent to threehandbreadths, and ½ cubit. The distance from outstretchedthumb tip to little-finger tip. The length and width of the priest’sbreastpiece (Exod. 28:16).
Stadion.Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai.Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13;John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).
LandArea
Seed.The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis ofhow much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1Kings18:32).
Yoke.Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. Inbiblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animalscould plow in one day (1Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).
Capacity
Cab.Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer.Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria(2Kings 6:25).
Choinix.Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement,mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).
Cor.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equal to thehomer, and to 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularlyof flour and grains (1Kings 4:22; 1Kings 5:11; 2Chron.2:10; 27:5; Ezra 7:22). In the LXX, cor is also a measure of liquidvolume, particularly oil (1Kings 5:11; 2Chron. 2:10; Ezra45:14).
Ephah.Approximately 3⁄5 bushel (6 gallons, or 22.7 liters).Equivalent to 10 omers, or 1⁄10 homer. Used for measuring flourand grains (e.g., Exod. 29:40; Lev. 6:20). Isaiah prophesied a day ofreduced agricultural yield, when a homer of seed would produce onlyan ephah of grain (Isa. 5:10). The ephah was equal in size to thebath (Ezek. 45:11), which typically was used for liquid measurements.
Homer.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equivalent to1 cor, or 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularly ofvarious grains (Lev. 27:16; Isa. 5:10; Ezek. 45:11, 13–14; Hos.3:2). This is probably a natural measure of the load that a donkeycan carry, in the range of 90 kilograms. There may have existed adirect link between capacity and monetary value, given Lev. 27:16:“fifty shekels of silver to a homer of barley seed.” Alogical deduction of capacity and cost based on known equivalencesmight look something like this:
1homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1 omer = 1 beka
Koros.Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measureof grain (Luke 16:7).
Omer.Approximately 2 quarts, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄10ephah, 1⁄100 homer (Ezek. 45:11). Used by Israel in themeasurement and collection of manna in the wilderness (Exod.16:16–36) and thus roughly equivalent to a person’s dailyfood ration.
Saton.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. Themeasurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven(Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).
Seah.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah,or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various drygoods (e.g., 2Kings 7:1; 1Sam. 25:18).
LiquidVolume
Bath.Approximately 6 gallons, or 22.7 liters. Equivalent to 1 ephah, whichtypically was used for measurements of dry capacity. Used in themeasurement of water (1Kings 7:26), oil (1Kings 5:11),and wine (2Chron. 2:10; Isa. 5:10).
Batos.Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration ofthe Hebrew word bath(see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).
Hin.Approximately 4 quarts (1gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek.4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).
Log.Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture,specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).
Metretes.Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement ofwater at the wedding feast (John 2:6).
Geography
Whereasthe principal direction in the modern world is north, in the ancientworld different cultures used a variety of orientations as theysought to describe their relationship to their geographicalenvironment. In Israel the primary direction was determined by thesunrise: east. This is reflected in Hebrew, where the main word usedto refer to east as a direction was qedem, which could also be usedto simply refer to that which was directly ahead or in front of thespeaker (e.g., Ps. 139:5). Elsewhere, east is designated by the termsmizrakh (“rising” [Josh. 11:3]) or mizrakh hashamesh(“rising of the sun” [Num. 21:11]), both of which derivefrom the direction of sunrise. By way of contrast, in Egypt theprimary direction was south, in alignment with the source of the NileRiver.
Theancient world employed the same notion of four cardinal directions,which persists to the present, and the terminology related to thesewas influenced by the choice of primary direction. Thus, in Israelnorth is often designated by “left”; south could bedesignated by “right,” and west by “behind.”In addition, directions could be specified by reference togeographical features found in those directions. North could bespecified by the word tsapon, which was derived from the name of anorthern Syrian mountain (Zaphon); south by negeb, a name for theregion south of Israel (Negev); and west by yam (“sea”),since the Mediterranean Sea lay to the west.
Symbolism
Asidefrom their purely geographical significance, the directions also cameto bear figurative significance. Some caution is warranted inassigning symbolic significance to language, for there is danger ofreading invalid meanings into texts. Furthermore, given the ambiguityinherent in the use of terms to refer to directions, which also havealternate significances, there is danger of assigning a symbolicmeaning to the direction that actually resides in the alternate. So,for example, while yam (“sea”) carries significantsymbolic overtones in the Bible, this association does not appear tohave been extended to encompass the term when used to designate awesterly direction.
Eastand west.Nonetheless, there is, for example, probably some significance in theexpulsion from Eden and progressive movement eastward to the tower ofBabel through Gen. 1–11, followed by a return to the promisedland, which was approached by reversing the easterly migration andreturning toward Eden. Eden itself was said to lie “in theeast” (Heb. miqqedem; Gen. 2:8), although the same Hebrewexpression in Pss. 74:12; 77:5, 11; 78:2; 143:5 means “inancient times,” and there is perhaps a deliberate ambiguity inthe use of the expression in Gen. 2:8. In Isa. 2:6 the east is thesource of influences on the people that lead them astray. Followingthe exile, Ezekiel sees the glory of God returning to the temple fromthe east (Ezek. 43:1–2). Thus, when used symbolically, “east”is often viewed negatively or else may be used to mark a connectionwith distant antiquity (Gen. 2:8; Job 1:3). Any symbolic significanceassigned to west appears primarily to be associated with it being theantithesis of east. The distance between east and west was usedpoetically to express vast distance (Ps. 103:12).
Northand south.North is significant for two primary reasons. First, it is thedirection from which invading armies most often descended upon Israel(Jer. 1:13) as well as from which Babylon’s destruction is saidto come (Jer. 50:3). In light of this, Ezekiel’s vision of Godapproaching from the north strikes an ominous tone of impendingjudgment (Ezek. 1:1–4). Second, in Canaanite mythology theabode of the gods, and specifically Baal, lay to the north, on MountZaphon. Thus, the king of Babylon’s plans in Isa. 14:13 amountto a claim to establish himself as one of the gods. In contrast tothis, Ps. 48:2 pre-sents Mount Zion as supplanting Mount Zaphon andthus implicitly presents Israel’s one God as supplanting theCanaanite pantheon.
Aswith west, there is little symbolic significance associated with thedirection south in the Bible, aside from its use in combination withother directions.
Thefour directions.The four directions (or sometimes just pairs of directions) are usedtogether to describe both the scattering of the Israelites as well astheir being gathered by God back to the promised land (Ps. 107:3;Isa. 43:5–6; Luke 13:29). They are also used together toexpress the extent of the promised land (Gen. 13:14) or else todescribe something that is all-encompassing (1Chron. 9:24).
Because calendars are culturally constructed systems, thereare several important differences between the modern calendar and thecalendars used in biblical times. When dealing with ancient Jewishand early Christian sources, we can reconstruct complete calendarsystems. However, the Bible itself, written over many centuries,employs several calendar systems and systems of dating. No singlenormative calendar system emerges from biblical materials.Nevertheless, many aspects of life in biblical Israel depended on theuse of calendars, which regulated religious festivals, agriculturalactivity, various aspects of the legal system, and the recording ofhistorical events.
Measurementof Time in Antiquity
Therewere several methods of reckoning time in antiquity. Some units oftime corresponded to the observation of celestial phenomena (see Gen.1:14), such as the rising and setting of the sun (defining the day),the waxing and waning of the moon (the lunar month), the ascension ofthe sun in the sky at noon (the solar year). Other measurements oftime were defined by the agricultural cycle, including planting andthe beginning and end of the harvest (see Exod. 23:16; Ruth 1:22). Anagricultural scheme serves as the basis of the Gezer Calendar, animportant archaeological object of the tenth century BC unearthedabout thirty miles northwest of Jerusalem. The Gezer Calendar dividesthe year into eight periods of one or two months, each of whichcorresponds to the planting, tending, and harvest of various crops.Still other units of time, such as the seven-day week and thelunisolar year (see below), were derived by counting or calculationand did not correspond to any observable celestial or terrestrialphenomena.
Thedivision of days into hours and minutes is possible in modern timesbecause of mechanical and electronic timepieces. Without thesedevices, divisions of time shorter than the day would have beenapproximations at best. Biblical texts refer to dawn, morning, noon,evening, night, and midnight. In NT times, the twelve daylight hourswere numbered (Matt. 27:45; John 11:9). There was also a system ofdividing the night into “watches,” attested in both theNT and the OT.
TheMonth and the Year in the Bible
TheHebrew words for “month” are related to the words for“moon” and “new” (i.e., the “newmoon”), which suggests that the ancient Israelite month was alunar month corresponding to the waxing and waning of the moon over aperiod of twenty-nine or thirty days. The Bible refers to numbereddays in each month, as high as the twenty-seventh day.
Thereare several systems of naming the months in the Bible. Four“Canaanite” month names appear in the OT: Aviv (the firstmonth), Ziv (the second), Ethanim (the seventh), and Bul (theeighth). Because of the infrequent use of these names, some scholarshave questioned whether this system was in widespread use in ancientIsrael. The names probably are derived from agricultural terms.
Inmany cases the months are simply numbered. In this system, the firstmonth began in the spring season. According to biblical narrative,this way of reckoning the beginning of the year was commanded toMoses at the time of the exodus (Exod. 12:1). However, the Bibleapplies this scheme to events much earlier, as in the story of theflood of Noah, which began in the second month (Gen. 7:11), andscholars have associated the numerical system of months with latebiblical sources, around the time of the exile. The system may havecome into use around that time and replaced an older system.
Insome late biblical texts Babylonian month names are adopted,including Nisan (the first month), Sivan (the third), Elul (thesixth), Chislev (the ninth), Tebet (the tenth), Shebat (theeleventh), and Adar (the twelfth). Following biblical usage, theBabylonian month names were adopted in the ancient Jewish calendar,which is still in use today.
Basedon references to the “twelfth month,” the Israelite yearapparently consisted of twelve lunar months. Accordingly, the lunaryear consisted of approximately 354 days, which means that it wouldnot have corresponded to the solar year of approximately 365¼days. The beginning of the year would have drifted between eleven andtwelve days each year. Presumably, this would have been anunacceptable situation, given the fact that many of the biblicalfestivals were both assigned to lunar dates and were correlated toagricultural events. The problem probably was solved through theintercalation of “leap months,” as was the practice inmaintaining the later Jewish calendar. The result is a lunisolarcalendar, in which the year is composed of twelve lunar months and iscorrected relative to the solar year by the periodic addition of asecond Adar (Adar II) seven times in every nineteen-year period.The Bible does not mention this procedure or identify who wasresponsible for maintaining the calendar in ancient Israel.
BiblicalDates
Modernsystems of absolute dating, in which all years are numbered relativeto a single historical reference point—for example, the birthof Jesus (Anno Domini), the journey of Muhammad in AD 622 (AnnoHegira 1) from Mecca to Medina in Islamic culture, and thecreation of the world (Anno Mundi) in Jewish tradition—wereunparalleled in biblical times. Instead, events were usually datedrelative to the reigns of kings, Israelite or otherwise. For example,the accession of Abijah is dated to the eighteenth year of Jeroboam’sreign (1 Kings 15:1), and the proclamation of Cyrus is dated tohis first regnal year (Ezra 1:1). In other cases, events were datedrelative to important historical events. The beginning of Amos’scareer as prophet is dated to “two years before the earthquake”(Amos 1:1), and Exod. 12:41 dates the departure from Egypt to the430th year of the captivity. In other instances, the fixed points onwhich relative dates are based cannot be determined. The beginning ofEzekiel’s career as a prophet is dated to the otherwiseunspecified “thirtieth year” (Ezek. 1:1). The verse maysimply refer to Ezekiel’s age.
Thesame practices of dating events are followed in the NT. The birth ofJohn the Baptist is dated to “the time of Herod king of Judea”(Luke 1:5). The census of Caesar Augustus is identified as “thefirst census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria”(Luke 2:2). As in the OT, such formulas presuppose that the readerhas a basic awareness of the succession and reigns of kings andemperors—an advantage lost to modern interpreters, who continueto debate the absolute dating of these events. Perhaps analogously toEzek. 1:1, the beginning of Jesus’ ministry is dated to histhirtieth year of age (Luke 3:23). Other events and persons reportedin the NT can be correlated to extrabiblical historical records toestablish absolute dates for biblical events (e.g., the death ofHerod Agrippa I in AD 44 [Acts 12:23]). These are distinct frominstances in which biblical authors are making a conscious effort toprovide dates intelligible to their readers. In contrast to OThistorical narrative, for the most part, the NT shows little interestin dating events in its narrative, even according to ancientconventions of relative dating.
Showing
1
to
50
of128
results
1. A View From the Other Window
Illustration
When the whole world was threatened with destruction, Noah built an ark. His big boat had just one window. Where was it? Not in the bottom where he would have to look into the dark and muddy water. Not on the side where he would have to look out into the surrounding storm. But on top where he could look up. Up - to where, as the storm would abate, he could catch the first available glimpse of blue. Up - in the direction of hope. Up - to God.
From our point of living, we look out through various windows. Sometimes we must look down into the murky depths. Sometimes we must look out into the frightful storm. But always we need that other window, the one on top, the one from which we can look up to God.
Today it is through this window we look. In many times and circ*mstances we must of necessity look upon scenes that are dismal and dark. But in the worship of God we look from a different window. And, looking, may we know that, however deep the waters and however severe the storm, God is there above it all.
2. Metro Moments
Illustration
Charles Hoffacker
One of the great things about Washington, D.C. is the Metro system, a network of public transportation, much of it underground, that serves the District of Columbia and a growing area round it. One reaches a number of Metro stations by taking escalators deep down beneath the surface of the city. Some of these escalators, I am told, are among the tallest in the world.
Once you reach the appropriate track, the train you seek will come within only a few minutes, unless it is there already. The train platform is a remarkable place. Why? Because it is governed by a single reality: the coming and going of trains. The people gathered there, whether many or few, have this common point of reference, and all of them are aware of it. There on the platform the coming and going of the trains is inescapable. The train has either left; or the train has stopped, however momentarily; or the train is expected to arrive.
People on the Metro platform have an awareness which sets them utterly apart from Noah's distracted neighbors. Those neighbors were preoccupied by the ordinary business of life, enough to miss the train, or in their case, the ark. People on the Metro platform, however, are governed by the single reality of trains that have gone, trains that have stopped, and trains still to come.
The Christian is someone who recognizes a single reality like that. Not trains, but the Christ who has come, is here, and is yet to come. As Christians, we must avoid the distraction that spelled disaster for Noah's neighbors. We need the sense of awareness, a shared awareness that characterizes the people on the Metro platform. We can have our Metro moments when we recognize that the common point of reference, the determining reality, is the Human Holy One, Jesus, who has come, will come, and is present now among us.
3. The Covenants of the Scripture
Illustration
Merrill F. Unger
Scripture'scovenants and their significance:
Eternal covenant, Hebrews 13:20 :The redemptive covenant before time began, between the Father and the Son. By this covenant we have eternal redemption, an eternal peace from the 'God of peace', through the death and resurrection of the Son.
Edenic covenant, Genesis 1:26-28: The creative covenant between the Triune God, as the first party (Genesis 1:26), and newly created man, as the second party, governing man's creation and life in Edenic innocence. It regulated man's dominion and subjugation of the earth, and presented a simple test of obedience. The penalty was death.
Adamic covenant, Genesis 3:14-19: The covenant conditioning fallen man's life on the earth. Satan's tool (the serpent) was cursed (Gen 3:14); the first promise of the Redeemer was given (3:15); women's status was altered (3:16); the earth was cursed (3:17-19); physical and spiritual death resulted (3:19).
Noahic covenant, Genesis 8:20-9:6: The covenant of human government. Man is to govern his fellowmen for God, indicated by the institution of capital punishment as the supreme judicial power of the state (Genesis 9:5-6). Other features included the promise of redemption through the line of Shem (Genesis 9:26).
Abrahamic covenant, Genesis 12:1-3; confirmed 13:14-17; 15:1-7; 17:1-8: The covenant of promise. Abraham's posterity was to be made a great nation. In him (through Christ) all the families of the earth were to be blessed (Galations 3:16; John 8:56-58).
Mosaic covenant, Exodus 20:1-31:18: The legal covenant, given solely to Israel. It consisted of the commandments (Exodus 20:1-26); the judgments (social) - (Exodus 21:1; 24:11) and the ordinances (religious); (Exodus 24:12-31:18); also called the law. It was a conditional covenant of works, a ministry of 'condemnation' and 'death' (2 Corinthians 3:7-9), designed to lead the transgressor (convicted thereby as a sinner) to Christ.
Palestinian covenant, Deut 30:1-10: The covenant regulating Israel's tenure of the land of Canaan. Its prophetic features include dispersion of disobedience (Deuteronomy 30:1), future repentance while in dispersion (30:2), the Lord's return (30:3), the restoration (30:4-5, national conversion (3:6), judgment of Israel's foes (30:7), national prosperity (30:9). Its blessings are conditioned upon obedience (30:8,10), but fulfillment is guaranteed by the new covenant.
Davidic covenant, 2 Samuel 7:4-17, 1 Chr 17:4-15: The kingdom covenant regulating the temporal and eternal rule of David's posterity. It secures in perpetuity a Davidic 'house' or line, a throne, and a kingdom. It was confirmed by divine oath in Psalm 89:30-37 and renewed to Mary in Luke 1:31-33. It is fulfilled in Christ as the World's Saviour and Israel's coming King (Acts 1:6; Rev 19:16; 20:4-6).
New covenant, Jeremiah 31:31-33; Matthew 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; Hebrew 8:8-12: The covenant of unconditional blessing based upon the finished redemption of Christ. It secures blessing for the church, flowing from the Abrahamic covenant (Galations 3:13-20), and secures all covenant blessings to converted Israel, including those of the Abrahamic, Palestinian, and Davidic covenants. This covenant is unconditional, final and irreversible.
4. The Story of Noah Retold
Illustration
Editor James S. Hewett
And the Lord said unto Noah: "Where is the ark which I commanded thee to build?"
And Noah said unto the Lord: "Verily, I have had three carpenters off ill.
The gopherwood supplier hath let me down-yea, even though the gopherwood hath been on order for nigh upon twelve months. What can I do, O Lord?"
And the Lord said unto Noah: "I want that ark finished even after seven days and seven nights."
And Noah said: "It will be so."
And it was not so. And the Lord said unto Noah: "What seemeth to be the trouble this time?"
And Noah said unto the Lord: "Mine subcontractor hath gone bankrupt. The pitch which Thou commandest me to put on the outside and on the inside of the ark hath not arrived. The plumber hath gone on strike. Shem, my son who helpeth me on the ark side of the business, hath formed a pop group with his brothers Ham and Japheth. Lord, I am undone."
And the Lord grew angry and said: "And what about the animals, the male and female of every sort that I ordered to come unto thee to keep their seed alive upon the face of the earth?"
And Noah said: "They have been delivered unto the wrong address but should arrive on Friday."
And the Lord said: "How about the unicorns, and the fowls of the air by sevens?"
And Noah wrung his hands and wept, saying: "Lord, unicorns are a discontinued line; thou canst not get them for love nor money. And fowls of the air are sold only in half-dozens. Lord, Lord, Thou knowest how it is."
And the Lord in His wisdom said: "Noah, my son, I knowest. Why else dost thou think I have caused a flood to descend upon the earth?"
5. Regret & Comfort
Illustration
J. Ellsworth Kalas
Regret. It has powerful strength to trouble our hearts. Some of our most painful regrets are for opportunities lost. As John Greenleaf Whittier said:
Of all sad words of tongue or pen.
The saddest are these: It might have been!
How many people go under a dark cloud by thinking, even momentarily, of the person they almost married, the investment they almost made, the position they nearly won. But for every person who is filled with regret for an opportunity lost, there is another who regrets a deed done, a word spoken, a relationship consummated. These are the stories of decisions made, of tempers lost, of conversations that cannot be re-called. Here are deeds-sometimes sinful ones, but often only erratic or misguided ones - that have changed the course of a life and have left a person with a crushing burden. "I'd give anything," a man or woman says, absolutely anything, if I could take back that one day of my life." Regret. It can eat at your inward being like the most malevolent cancer, destroying by the inch and the hour. And there is no surgeon's knife, no radium or chemical that can reach it.
Yet, regret can refine and improve character as only a skilled teacher can do. I venture that there are few great saints who have not possessed a high capacity for regret. Effective regret is the growing edge of godliness. But the key word is "effective!"
Saul of Tarsus knew something about regret. His regret was so strong that it surfaced in the midst of a wondrous recital about the resurrection of Christ. As he listed those who had seen the resurrected Christ, he continued, "last of all…he appeared also to me. For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God."
Note:This illustration assumes that Jesus in John 14 is attempting to comfort the disciples for the opportunities they will soon squander by denying their relationship to Jesus.
6. Sinners Outside the Ark
Illustration
Glenn Pease
A mother calling to her son shouted, "Johnny, tell your sister to get in the house out of the rain." "I can't mom," came the reply. "And just why can't you?" demanded his mother. "Because we are playing Noah's Ark mom, and she's one of the sinners."
We like to make the distinction between the sinners on the outside of the ark and the saints on the inside, and it is a legitimate distinction. But in so doing, we tend to cover up the reality that the saints inside are still sinners. Sinners saved by grace, but nevertheless, sinners. Noah didn't take much time before he demonstrated that after the Ark had landed.
Failure to be aware of this reality led the Pharisees of Christ's day, and self-righteous saints all through history, to feel that the message of repentance does not apply to them. Repentance is only relevant to those sinners outside the ark. It is a message you can preach at the mission, but it has no place in the sanctuary of the saints. Billy Graham said, "I have been shocked to find that the theme proclaimed so emphatically by the prophets and apostles is scarcely mentioned by contemporary preachers."
7. The Last Meal
Illustration
Larry Powell
Perhapsyou have visited the Upper Room Chapel in Nashville, Tennessee, and had the opportunity to meditate before the marvelous wood carving and its appointments which so dramatically depict the Last Supper. One of the mysterious features of this particular carving is that no matter where you kneel before the figure of Christ, his eyes gaze strangely into yours. So it must have seemed to the disciples gathered around the table in Jerusalem on that fateful evening. How much more intense it must have been for Judas, and we can but wonder where his eyes were fixed when Jesus uttered those terrible words. "He who has dipped his hand in the dish with me, will betray me" (Matthew 26:23).
So far as the disciples were concerned, they had gathered, as they had done since childhood, to partake of the traditional Passover meal. The streets of Jerusalem were crowded with pious Jews who had come into the city for this express purpose. The ritual was always the same: while at the table, the story of the escape from Egypt would be recounted ... there would be special foods on the table and unleavened bread would be eaten as a reminder of the haste in which the Exodus people had been forced to flee Egypt ... it was always the same.
To the disciples’ surprise however, Jesus suddenly departed from the familiar references; "And he took bread, and gave thanks, and broke it, and gave unto them saying, ‘This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.’ Likewise also the cup after supper saying, ‘This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.’ " Jesus had dramatically transformed the Passover supper into the Lord’s Supper on the evening of his "last supper" with them (see also Mark 14:22-24 and Matthew 26:26-29).
The Lord’s Supper:
1. Is a sacrament, meaning that it was instituted by Christ and commanded to be continued "till he come." In Paul’s familiar passage, used in the sacrament ritual, he adds, "For as often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye proclaim the Lord’s death till he comes" (1 Corinthians 11:26).
2. Symbolizes the new covenant. The Old Testament covenant of the Law was sealed with the blood of animal sacrifice. However, this covenant had failed. The prophets themselves had said, "Behold, the days will come, saith Jehovah, that I will make a new convenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah." The covenant of Law was being superseded by the new convenant of love, sealed by the blood of Christ.
3. Uses of common elements. In addition to using the traditional elements of the Passover, bread and wine, Jesus realized that each day when his followers partook of their meals, two things were certain to be on the table ... bread and wine. Consequently, even an ordinary meal would include reminders of the new covenant.
4. Was observed anxiously. Devout early Christians met daily to observe the sacrament in the prayerful hope that Jesus would return while they were sharing the sacred meal. In time, the early Church observed the sacrament each Sunday, a practice continued until the Reformation. Oddly enough, in Scotland, during the sixteenth century, it was observed in the country twice and in town four times a year.
5. Is called the eucharist, meaning the "thanksgiving," based on the passage, "He took a cup, and when he had given thanks...."
Perhaps John Calvin spoke for each of us when he admitted that "the matter is too sublime for me to be able to express, or even to comprehend ... I rather experience it, than understand it."
8. Leave and Don't Look Back
Illustration
Although Lot is referred to by Peter as "righteous Lot," he chose to live among the wicked in Sodom because he loved money and prominence. He was a double-minded man who wanted to serve God but who also wanted to enjoy the pleasures of this world. I believe this is evident from the fact that Lot chose to live in the plain bordering the wicked cities of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. 13:1-13). Once there, he moved into the city itself and became a part of its culture (19:1). It's true that he didn't give up his belief in the high moral standards he had learned from his uncle Abraham, and he didn't approve of the wicked things he saw and heard. But as an official at the city gate, he apparently had little impact on the wicked society of which he was a part.
Lot's double-mindedness brought him much inner torment and rendered him spiritually powerless. He couldn't even convince his sons-in-law (and their wives) to leave Sodom before God's judgment fell. Only he, his wife, and the two daughters still living at home escaped. And his wife died instantly when she looked back, disobeying God's command. In the end, Lot lost the very things he wanted possessions and position.
9. Time's Up
Illustration
John Jamison
If it kept up like this he wasn't going to get anything done all morning. After the telephone calls, that paper-jam in the copier, and now this, he was beginning to feel that it was pointless to try.
She stepped into his office, "Sorry to interrupt you Reverend, I know you are busy, but I need to talk to you!" She went on to tell him about a problem a dear friend of hers was having, and how it would be really "nice" if the pastor could stop by for a visit sometime. Soon. He wanted to say that if people would just stop bothering him long enough to get his work done he would be glad to go out and visit, but he smiled instead and thanked her for stopping. She had gotten his attention. Four other members had stopped by in the last two days worried about the same couple. One of those worriers was even a son of the couple. He believed it was Shem, although he never could tell those three boys apart. And they all said the same thing. They were concerned about them. Well, not both of them exactly, mostly just about the husband.
And that wasn't all. Just yesterday, during his Kiwanis luncheon, the pastor overheard others at the table talking under their breath about how the old man had "gone off the deep end," and that, obviously, "retirement just didn't suit him well."
Apparently all that extra time on his hands had gotten to be more than he could handle. Somebody said it looked like "The old guy's oil didn't even register on the stick anymore!" The pastor couldn't help but chuckle along. It was all so strange.
The couple had made great plans for retirement. They would plant a huge garden, he would tend his roses, and they would take plenty of time for travel. But the only traveling he did was back and forth, to and from the lumberyard. In the backyard, the rose bed and the spot staked out for the garden, was covered over by this big, uh, wooden thing.
By the way, the guy down at the lumberyard felt a bit guilty about selling the old man all that lumber. And the nails. Noah was no carpenter, and bent more than he drove in. But the old man had made it clear that if he couldn't buy his materials there, he'd just get them someplace else, and, after all, business IS business.
But none of this was news to the pastor. He had been aware of what was going on for months. It had all started back that week when Noah told his Sunday school class (which he had taught for 27 years) about the dreams he had been having. Since that morning, a couple of class members had made it their mission to keep the pastor informed as to what was being taught. Each week it had become stranger and stranger, and the pastor had begun to wonder how to talk to the old man about retiring (without hurting his feelings) when one Sunday morning after class he walked right into the pastor's office and resigned. It seemed he just didn't have the time to prepare a lesson each week and still get enough work done on the "project." And, he said without a smile, "I'm almost out of time." It sounded a lot like this retirement was really getting him down.
But about this thing in the backyard. At first the neighbors were intrigued. They all thought it was kind of cute to see the old guy out there climbing around with his hammers and saws, although some mornings he started hammering way too early, and some evenings kept sawing way too late. And it was cute how his wife kept yelling at him about how she knew he was going to fall off the ladder and break every bone in his body.
And it was kind of fun to try and guess just what it was that he was hammering and sawing on. First, it was a deck for the yard, then a greenhouse for the roses, then a garage. By now they were betting on a very BIG greenhouse, but thought there really should be more windows. And no one could understand why he built it to look so dog-gone much like a boat, until someone remembered that his hometown had been over on the river and that it must bring back some pleasant memories for him.
But it was getting way too big. The cuteness was beginning to wear as thin as the sunlight that was getting to the neighbor's flowerbed. It seems that a windowless-greenhouse-shaped-like-a-big-boat casts one whale of a shadow. There definitely was a zoning problem. Those same neighbors had a backyard wedding set for next Monday afternoon for their only daughter, and this pile of wood cast its shadow all over those well-made, and highly-paid plans.
But the straw that broke the camel's back was the camels. And the elephants, and the chickens, and the lizards, and the penguins. Enough, after all, was most likely enough. When they asked about him moving the shadow the old man mumbled between nails "There just isn't time," which left them with no choice.
On Friday afternoon, the papers were filed at the courthouse. They would be served first thing Monday morning. The "Big Boat" as it had come to be called, would be dismantled and carried away in time before the big wedding. So would the old man. This later part was the reluctant decision of the old guy's family who felt that some time in a safe, peaceful setting might help him come to terms with the "stresses of retirement." Monday morning would come as quite a surprise. The family called to ask if the pastor would be there as well, to help them help him understand.
Fortunately, or unfortunately, the surprise came one day early. It was midway through the second hymn on Sunday morning. "Crazy Old Noah" was sitting in his usual every-Sunday seat, with his family looking rather embarrassed as everyone smiled at them. The pastor closed his hymnbook and started to reach for his sermon notes. But right at the spot where folks usually sang "Amen," God sang instead. It was a bass note. It kind of rumbled around the sanctuary, and down the street outside the church, bouncing off the bank and the furniture store, just thundering its way to wherever thunder goes. And it started to rain. Now, you need to understand that it NEVER rains around here this time of year. But it was raining. Everyone got up and walked to the doors and windows to watch. The pastor saw old Noah just sit there in his seat. The old fool let out a big sigh, looked up at the preacher and said, "Time's up!"
All that the pastor could think as he looked around was that if this rain kept up like this there probably wasn't going to be any wedding tomorrow afternoon.
Now, every time I wade my way into the pulpit, I look around into the faces. One of these days ...
It may be a crazy, old, bearded man.
It may be a young, baby boomer, career woman.
It may be a middle-aged, slightly paunched, nobody.
But I know it as a certainty. One of these days, right in the middle of my full calendar and my printed order of worship, someone is going to look up at me and sigh, "Time's up!"
10. Funny Things Can Happen in Church
Illustration
King Duncan
Funny things happen in church sometimes. Sara Jo Bardsley, a pastor's wife in Huntington, New York, was telling the children of her first-grade Sunday School class the parable of the seeds. She explained that God said we can plant a seed. If the sun shines on the ground and it rains, or we water it, the seed will grow. However, everything we plant does not grow, because sometimes the seed blows over the fence and falls among weeds. If we do not take care of it, it dies.
Then she explained that people are often like this. God creates us to be good, and if we live good lives and love God and help others, we can grow into a beautiful person. But if we get lost or fail to follow God's teachings, we can be like the seeds that never grow.
Six-year-old Mark understood this very well. He announced loud enough for the whole church to hear: "My father! He's over the fence all right. He never comes to church, he doesn't read the Bible, and he never helps anybody."
I would like to have heard the conversation in Mark's car going home that morning. Some funny things happen in church.
Often they are inadvertent. Kolette Irving of Salem, Oregon spotted a "typo" in the church bulletin. It read like this: "The ushers will eat the latecomers." That is one church where you want to be on time.
Some funny things happen in church. Also, of course, some tragic things occur in church. We are not all what God intended us to be. Someone once compared his church to Noah's Ark. "If the flood on the outside were not so bad, you couldn't stand the smell on the inside."
That can happen in the church. We are, after all, only human.
In John's Gospel Jesus prays for the church. He prays that we will all be one. Considering the present fragmentation of the Christian community, Christ is probably still praying that prayer today.
11. The Parable of the Five Brothers
Illustration
Joachim Jeremias
The first point is concerned with the reversal of fortune in the after-life (vv. 19-26), the second (vv. 27-31) with the petition of the rich man that Abraham may send Lazarus to his five brethren. . . [Jesus places] the stress is on the second point. That means that Jesus does not want to comment on a social problem, nor does he intend to give teaching about the after-life, but he relates the parable to warn men who resemble the brothers of the rich man of the impending danger. Hence the poor Lazarus is only a secondary figure, introduced by way of contrast. The parable is about the five brothers, and it should not be styled the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus, but the parable of the Six Brothers.
The surviving brothers, who have their counterpart in the men of the Flood generation [Jeremias' reference to Noah's generation], living a careless life, heedless of the rumble of the approaching flood (Matt. 24:37-39), are men of this world, like their dead brother. Like him they live in selfish luxury, deaf to God's word, in the belief that death ends all (v. 28). Scornfully, Jesus was asked by these skeptical worldlings for a valid proof of a life after death, if they were to be paying heed to his warning. Jesus wanted to open their eyes, but to grant their demand would not be the right way to do so. Why did Jesus refuse it? Because its fulfillment would have been meaningless; even the greatest wonder, resurrection, would be in vain [in John 11:46 ff. the raising of Lazarus served to complete the hardening of the Jews]. He who will not submit to the word of God, will not be converted by a miracle. The demand for a sign is an evasion and a sign of impenitence. Hence the sentence is pronounced: "God will never give a sign to this generation" (Mark 8.12).
12. FOWLER
Illustration
Stephen Stewart
Proverbs 6:5 - "Save yourself like a gazelle from the hunter, like a bird from the hand of the fowler."
Jeremiah 5:26 - "For wicked men are found among my people; they lurk like fowlers lying in wait. They set a trap; they catch men."
Although I don’t suppose that most of us ever use the word "fowler" in the course of your daily conversation, still this is a legitimate term to use for persons who capture birds for food or other reasons. If we will stop to think of the displays of rare birds in our zoos, we must realize that they had to be captured by experts. And that’s just what fowlers are - experts in catching birds.
In biblical times, too, the fowler was a well-known man. Not only did he provide birds for eating, but he also sold birds to be used in sacrifice. These birds, of course, could only be pigeons or turtledoves. You will remember the biblical stories about the sellers of birds in the court of the Temple.
The fowler used various methods to make his captures. Some of them used light traps made with noose cords which entangled the birds’ feet. Others used nets. Still others used bows or throw sticks. Now these methods we can understand and approve. After all, there is something sportsmanlike about such procedures. But unscrupulous fowlers also had other methods that they used, which were not so nice. Among the milder of these was the practice of caging captured birds and then concealing them so that their voices would draw other birds. Well, admittedly, that’s not so bad. But then, sometimes the eyelids of a bird were sown shut, and then it was placed in a camouflaged location where its cries would draw other birds. Now, there is no word for that other than cruel. And, of course, there is a nasty kind of deceit inherent in it.
Because of this method of catching their prey by trickery, in the Bible a "fowler" is the word used to describe those who try to ensnare the unwary and bring them to ruin. Hosea says that the false prophets are like fowlers (Hosea 9:8), but it also works the other way - God snares the wicked (Job 18:9-10; Hosea 7:12). The snare as envisioned in the Bible is wickedness, evil, or idolatry. A very apt description of the wicked man - one who traps the unwary like a trusting bird, ready to fall into the hunter’s hand!
13. This Tithing Business Has to Stop!
Illustration
Bob Younts
Leighton Farrell was the minister of Highland Park Church in Dallas for many years. He tells of a man in the church who once made a covenant with his pastor to tithe ten percent of their income every year. They were both young and neither of them had much money. But things changed. The layman tithed one thousand dollars the year he earned ten thousand, ten thousand dollars the year he earned one-hundred thousand, and one- hundred thousand dollars the year he earned one million. But the year he earned six million dollars he just could not bring himself to write out that check for six-hundred thousand dollars to the Church.
He telephoned the minister, long since having moved to another church, and asked to see him. Walking into the pastor's office the man begged to be let out of the covenant, saying, "This tithing business has to stop. It was fine when my tithe was one thousand dollars, but I just cannot afford six-hundred thousand dollars. You've got to do something, Reverend!" The pastor knelt on the floor and prayed silently for a long time. Eventually the man said, "What are you doing? Are you praying that God will let me out of the covenant to tithe?" "No," said the minister. "I am praying for God to reduce your income back to the level where one thousand dollars will be your tithe!"
14. Can You Top This?
Illustration
Editor James S. Hewett
The story is told about an old minister who survived the great Johnstown flood. He loved to tell the story over and over in great detail. Everywhere he went he would spend all his time talking about this great historic event in his life. One day he died and went to heaven and there in a meeting all the saints had gathered together to share their life experiences. The old minister got all excited and ran to Peter (who, naturally, was in charge) and asked if he might tell the exciting story of his survival from the Johnstown flood. Peter hesitated for a moment and then said, "Yes, you may share, but just remember that Noah will be in the audience tonight."
15. Verbose Grammar
Illustration
Staff
The original title of Noah Webster's first spelling book was "A Grammatical Institute of the English Language, Comprising an Easy, Concise, and Systematic Method of Education, Designed for the Use of English Schools in America, Part I, Containing a New and Accurate Standard of Pronunciation." It can still be purchased in bookstores today with the same title.
16. Everybody's Doing It
Illustration
Editor James S. Hewett
We all hear the cry (from our teenagers, if not many others), "But everybody's doing it!" John Calvin called it "The Appeal to 'Custom' against Truth" in his Prefatory Address to King Francis when he wrote his Institutes:
"Even though the whole world may conspire in the same wickedness, he has taught us by experience what is the end of those who sin with the multitude. This he did when he destroyed all mankind by the Flood, but kept Noah with his little family; and Noah by his faith, the faith of one man, condemned the whole world (Gen. 7:1; Heb. 11:7). To sum up, evil custom is nothing but a kind of public pestilence in which men do not perish the less though they fall with the multitude."
17. The Ties That Bind
Illustration
Bruce Shelley
In modern times we define a host of relations by contracts. These are usually for goods or services and for hard cash. The contract, formal or informal, helps to specify failure in these relationships. The Lord did not establish a contract with Israel or with the church. He created a covenant. There is a difference. Contracts are broken when one of the parties fails to keep his promise. If, let us say, a patient fails to keep an appointment with a doctor, the doctor is not obligated to call the house and inquire, "Where were you? Why didn't you show up for your appointment?" He simply goes on to his next patient and has his appointment secretary take note of the patient who failed to keep the appointment. The patient may find it harder the next time to see the doctor. He broke an informal contract.
According to the Bible, however, the Lord asks: "Can a mother forget the baby at her breast and have no compassion on the child she has borne? Though she may forget, I will not forget you!" (Isaiah 49:15) The Bible indicates the covenant is more like the ties of a parent to her child than it is a doctor's appointment. If a child fails to show up for dinner, the parent's obligation, unlike the doctor's, isn't canceled. The parent finds out where the child is and makes sure he's cared for. One member's failure does not destroy the relationship. A covenant puts no conditions on faithfulness. It is the unconditional commitment to love and serve.
18. Gospel Counterfeits
Illustration
Michael P. Green
The following messages can be heard form the pulpits throughout the United Stets every morning.
- Noah’s message from the steps going up to the Ark was not, “Something good is going to happen to you!”
- Amos was not confronted by the high priest of Israel for proclaiming, “Confession is possession!”
- Jeremiah was not put into the pit for preaching, “I’m O.K., you’re O.K.!”
- Daniel was not put into the lion’s den for telling people, “Possibility thinking will move mountains!”
- John the Baptist was not forced to preach in the wilderness and eventually beheaded because he preached, “Smile, God loves you!”
- The two prophets of the tribulation will not be killed for preaching, “God is in his heaven and all is right with the world!”
But what, in actuality, was the message of all these men of God? A simple singleword: “Repent!”
19. God’s Kind of Revenge
Illustration
King Duncan
A young soldier was utterly humiliated by his senior officer. The officer had gone beyond the bounds of acceptable behavior in disciplining the young soldier and knew it, so he said nothing as the younger man said through clenched teeth, "I'll make you regret this if it is the last thing I ever do." A few days later their company was under heavy fire and the officer was wounded and cut off from his troops. Through the haze of the battlefield he saw a figure coming to his rescue. It was the young soldier. At the risk of his own life, the young soldier dragged the officer to safety. The officer said, apologetically, "Son, I owe you my life." The young man laughed and said, "I told you that I would make you regret humiliating me if it was the last thing I ever did."
That is God's kind of revenge. "Behold the Lamb that takes away the sins of the world..." Something happened on Calvary that bridged the gap between a holy God and unholy humanity. We see Christ in his majesty but also in his mercy.
20. You Won't Regret This
Illustration
Brett Blair
Regret is a part of life. Lost opportunities and lost health but life can also be filled with things we'll never regret. Here's a short list:
- Showing kindness to an aged person.
- Destroying a letter written in anger.
- Offering an apology that will save a friendship.
- Stopping a scandal that was ruining a reputation.
- Helping a childfind themselves.
- Forgiving a wrong.
- Taking time to show consideration to parents, friends, brothers and sisters.
- Refraining from gossip when others around you delight in it.
- Refusing to do a thing which is wrong, although others do it.
- Helping someone out of bind.
- Forgiving a debt.
- Living according to your convictions.
- Saying "I love you" to someone who hasn't heard it in a while.
- Accepting the judgment of God on any question.
Do these and remember them as well as you do your regrets and the shadow of the former will fade.
21. DOORKEEPER
Illustration
Stephen Stewart
Perhaps you live in a modern apartment building where your safety is insured by the use of a security guard at the front entrance. His specific job is to see that no unauthorized persons are admitted to the building, you have at least been to a hotel on a business trip or vacation and have had occasion to notice the doorman who gets your cab for you, or the desk clerk who screens visitors (at least those who choose to announce themselves!).
This is just about what the doorkeeper in ancient times was also - a security guard. Let’s think about that for a moment. Perhaps you don’t know too much about the life style of the Hebrews, but I’m sure that you have heard, somewhere along the line, that the home held a position of particular sanctity for them. This is very true. And a place of particular importance was the doorway. This was because it was the dividing line between the noisy, dangerous, evil outside world, and the peace and security of the inside.
Well, then, it stands to reason, doesn’t it, that they would do everything possible to prevent the intrusion of this outside world into the home itself? And this was the function of the doorkeeper. In larger homes, he was a hired servant, who sat at the entrance to answer inquiries and admit guests (well screened, that is). At night he slept in a little room near the door.
In the smaller village homes this responsibility was shared by the members of the family. And I think it is interesting to note that the father’s place of importance was in the doorway. Well, wasn’t this a nuisance and a waste of money and time? We might think so, but, you see, the doors were kept open all day as a symbol of hospitality. A closed door during the day meant that the family was hiding from something shameful.
Well, then, if this was true for the homes of the people, how much more so must it be true for the House of the Lord! That’s a natural development, don’t you think? And so we find that there were indeed several classes of doorkeepers at the Temple, who kept a twenty-four hour watch. These special doorkeepers were always Levites, as were the singers in the Temple.
It’s interesting to notice that we have no specific mention of them before the Chronicler did his work late in the Old Testament period, but that doesn’t mean that they didn’t exist before that. According to 1 Chronicles 9:19, the doorkeepers had kept watch over the Tent and the camp ever since the days in the desert.
And there’s really no need for us to question this. It was a custom that was prevalent in the ancient world. After all, they didn’t have burglar alarms and all the rest of the security apparatus that we boast today. And they did have some magnificent and very costly objects. So it was reasonable that they should mount a constant guard over them.
Since, of course, the Ark of the Covenant was the most precious object in the Temple, a special guard was placed over it. This guard was formed of the most perfectly developed men of the tribe (Levites), and it was a great honor to be a member of it.
Surprisingly enough, considering the nature of their job, doorkeepers in general received a very small fee, although, of course. those who served in the Temple were tax exempt and were housed in special villages around Jerusalem. But - to show you just how menial the position was for the regular person - even women sometimes served as doorkeepers! And, of course, women were never allowed to do anything that was considered of a very high level. Oh well, at least then it was possible to keep your door open during the day. Now I don’t suppose that even a doorkeeper would keep out the types that are becoming so common to our society. Perhaps we haven’t advanced in this case, but have retrogressed!
22. Building According to Code - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
It is significant that Jesus ended the Sermon on the Mount with the parable of the Wise and Foolish Builders. Throughout the long day Jesus had been preaching to the vast multitude. They listened to him with amazement and awe. But Jesus warned them that that was not enough. It is never enough simply to listen to the words of Jesus, even though we may listen with reverent approval. If His words are to have any genuine effect in our lives we must not only hear them but also act upon them. We must incorporate them in the events of our day-to-day living.
To drive the point home Jesus told the compelling story of two builders who each built a home. Standing inside these homes, going from room to room, there was little to no difference between. Even from the outside one might say they were virtually indistinguishable from one another. But, said Jesus, the foundations, one built upon the rock and the other upon sand. When Jesus spoke about houses and foundations he knew what he was talking about. He was a stonemason by trade and his family was most likely in the construction business.
The people there, listening to Jesus' teaching, understood well the significance of building upon rock verses sand. But very few people in ancient Palestine wanted to live in the rocks. It meant grading the side of a slope and hauling up materials. Living in the hills made for more difficult travel. Water had to be toted and winter winds were colder. Most people followed the path of least resistance and built along the riverbeds.
The scenery more pleasant, the water more conveniently located, and the house was sheltered from the cold winds of winter. And though flooding was a danger, most of the year the streams trickled pleasantly down the hillsides into the river nearby.
But on rare occasions, perhaps only once a generation, the 100-year flood would come. There would be a combination of an unusually heavy snow, a quick spring thaw, a torrential downpour. The result was a vicious flashflood which swept away everything in its path. Entire hamlets washed away. House after house gone and great would be the fall.
That's the image drawn here in Matthew 7. It comes from the life of these people gathered around Jesus on that day he delivered this sermon. Jesus was not simply telling here what I call a preacher story. A preacher story is an illustration that may very well fit the point that is being made, but one that doesn't sound very believable. On the contrary, Jesus was talking about a situation that was very real in the life of the people.
What are some points that we may conclude from this story?
- First, it suggests that we are all involved in building, and that the house that we build bears our own distinctive mark.
- Secondly, everyone must occupy the house they build.
- Third, the real test in life comes when the storms are upon us.
23. Saving the Lost
Illustration
Quoted by Anglican Bishop J.D. Ryle about 100 years ago:
A flood of false doctrine has broken in upon us. Men are beginning to tell us "that God is too merciful to punish souls for ever...that all mankind, however wicked and ungodly...will sooner or later be saved." We are to embrace what is called "kinder theology," and treat hell as a pagan fable...This question lies at the very foundation of the whole Gospel. The moral attributes of God, His justice, His holiness, His purity, are all involved in it. The Scripture has spoken plainly and fully on the subject of hell... If words mean anything, there is such a place as hell. If texts are to be interpreted fairly, there are those who will be cast into it...
The same Bible which teaches that God in mercy and compassion sent Christ to die for sinners, does also teach that God hates sin, and must from His very nature punish all who cleave to sin or refuse the salvation He has provided. God knows that I never speak of hell without pain and sorrow. I would gladly offer the salvation of the Gospel to the very chief of sinners. I would willingly say to the vilest and most profligate of mankind on his deathbed, "Repent, and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be save." But God forbid that I should ever keep back from mortal man that scripture reveals a hell as well as heaven...that men may be lost as well as saved.
24. The Iniquity of us All
Illustration
James Packer
Why did the Father will the death of his only beloved Son, and in so painful and shameful a form? Because the Father had "laid on him the iniquity of us all" (Isa. 53:6). Jesus' death was vicarious (undergone in our place) and atoning (securing remission of sins for us and reconciliation to God). It was a sacrificial death, fulfilling the principle of atonement taught in connection with the Old Testament sacrifices: "without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins" (Heb. 9:22; Lev. 17:11).
As the "last Adam," the second man in history to act on mankind's behalf, Jesus died a representative death. As a sacrificial victim who put away our sins by undergoing the death penalty that was our due, Jesus died as our substitute. By removing God's wrath against us for sin, his death was an act of propitiation (Rom. 3:25; 1 John 2:2,; 4:10 "expiation," signifying that which puts away sin, is only half the meaning). By saving us from slavery to ungodliness and divine retribution for sin, Jesus' death was an act of redemption (Gal. 3:13; Eph. 1:7; 1 Pet. 1:18-19). By mediating and making peace between us and God, it was an act of reconciliation (Rom. 5:10-11). It opened the door to our justification (pardon and acceptance) and our adoption (becoming God's sons and heirs Rom. 5:1,9; Gal. 4:4-5).
This happy relationship with our Maker, based on and sealed by blood atonement, is the "New Covenant" of which Jesus spoke in the Upper Room (1 Cor. 11:25; Matt. 26:28).
25. Without Nobility
Illustration
When Oxford and Cambridge Universities decided to admit commoners as students in the 1600s, the unprecedented flood of new innovative thought had a tremendous impact on British society. Each student was listed on the record by name and title. The commoners' names were listed with the Latin inscription, Sine Nobilitate, meaning Without Nobility. The abbreviation was S. Nob., which within the rigid class systems of the time had both positive and negative connotations. The word "snob" is still in use today.
26. Genes of Joash
Illustration
Larry Powell
Thisis a difficult, and not-too-pretty story to tell. Let us begin by identifying some of the principle characters: Athaliah, daughter of Jezebel, married Jehoram the king of Judah. Like her mother, she was a fanatical champion of Baal worship. She was directly responsible for the desecration of the Jerusalem Temple, the conversion of its sacred vessels into articles used for Baal worship, inciting a general massacre, and seizing the royal throne which she occupied for six years. Ahaziah, son of Athaliah and father of Joash. Joash, who had been rescued as an infant from an attempt to exterminate the royal line by Jehoshabeath, who cared for him secretly for six years. Joash became king at age seven, served well until the death of Jehoiada, then came under the influence of the wicked princes of Judah. Jehoiada, a priest who had educated Joash and made a positive influence upon his character. Zechariah, a prophet and son of Jehoiada, whom Joash had killed for spreading the truth.
Some commentators suggest that Joash was the product of bad genes. There is a case for this claim insofar as his greatgrandfather was King Ahab (who sponsored Baal worship), his great-grandmother was Jezebel, his grandfather King Jehoram, an evil king who "departed with no one’s regret," (12:20) and his grandmother, Athaliah. Not a distinguished gallery of progenitors. Other commentators hold that Joash was the product of his environment, doing well under the influence of Jehoiada, but bottoming out while in the company of the princes of Judah. Both suggestions it appears to me, take the heat off Joash’s own choices, placing the responsibility either on his genes or his environment. I submit that there have been too many individuals who have risen above either genes or environment to become noteworthy for either suggestion to be the "be all, end all." Mary McLoud Bethune, Charles Tindley, Booker T. Washington, Helen Keller, a multitude of historical achievers, as well as persons we know personally, take away Joash’s alibi. The point is, at some significant time in our lives, we each decide at which level we choose to compete and express. Joash, despite whatever influence his genes and environment had upon him, chose the lowlife. At which level do we compete?
27. Adept at Inept
Illustration
F.O. Walsh
F.O. Walsh gave this basis for laziness:
While other men paint,
Or water or weed,
I’m curled up in a chair,
With a good book to read.
While other men shop,
Or shovel, or mow,
I’m having a drink
While watching some show.
I offer to help,
But my wife says, “Forget it,
If you lend a hand,
I know I’ll regret it.”
And therein’s my secret,
I’m very adept
At only one thing,
And that’s being inept.
28. Right Questions
Illustration
James W. Moore
I am a collector of lists. I want to share with you this morning my favorite list of all time. It's a list of answers given by English school children on their religion exams.
Noah's wife was called Joan of the Ark.
A myth is a female moth.
Sometimes it is difficult to hear in church because the agnostics are so terrible.
The Pope lives in a vacuum.
The Fifth Commandment is "Humor your father and mother."
This is my favorite of all:
Lot's wife was a pillar of salt by day and a ball of fire by night.
The point is: right answers are important, but have you thought about this - so are right questions! So the right question I want to raise with you today is this: How long has it been since you had a powerful moment that changed your life forever?
29. God's Dike
Illustration
Staff
Much of Holland was once part of the ocean; but the industrious Dutch built great dikes far out in the shallow sea, and so reclaimed the land. As their dikes hold the ocean back, on the landward side the people occupy their homes, farmers till their land, and the wheels of commerce turn.
Many of the rural lowlanders have a quaint way of referring to Sunday, the Christian sabbath. They speak of it as God's dike. Why? one might ask. Because what God's people do on this day each week serves society in the same way a dike serves the land. As the dike holds back the sea, so does Sunday and the worship experience help to hold back the flood of evil which is forever threatening to overflow the people.
God interposes the instruction and inspiration of Christian worship as a bulwark against wrong. The Christian sabbath is civilization's strongest social buttress against the overwhelming flood of evil and fear and despair which are forever pressing hard upon us. By means of it, the forces of righteousness are made stronger against all the powers that would undo us.
What we do in worship today and every Sunday is to strengthen our dikes, to help keep them in good repair. Today we are not merely doing something for ourselves - we are also doing something for the world. We are taking part in an unceasing effort which involves many millions of people and stretches over many centuries of time. Let's be aware of the vast enterprise we're involved in, and let's be glad we're in it.
30. If I Had Only Known
Illustration
Maxie Dunnam
Years ago there was a billboard which promoted U.S. Saving bonds. It said, "due to lack of interest, tomorrow has been canceled."One of my colleagues reversed it to read, "Due to lack of tomorrow, interest has been canceled."
There is indeed a relationship between the prospects of the future and the motivating interest of today.It is important that we anticipate tomorrow's consequences of what we are doing today. A recurring experience in life is caught up in the cry, "If I had only known." After the horse is stolen, we lock the barn door. After a fatal accident, we erect a stop sign. After a disastrous flood, we build a dam. After the damage is done to our friends, our families, our character, then we begin to shed copious tears for the actions and attitudes that did the damage in the first place. How much more sensible to take the forward look - before traveling further towards some destination
With foresight to forsake it rather than hindsight to regret it.
31. Investing Our Time
Illustration
Barbara Bush
As important as your obligation as a doctor, a lawyer or a business leader may be, your human connections with your spouse, your children and your friends are the most important investment you will ever make. At the end of your life, you will never regret not having passed one more test, not winning one more verdict or not closing one more deal, but you will regret time not spent with your spouse, your children or your friends.
32. The Story of Sarah's Sorrow
Illustration
Max Lucado
Sarah was rich. She had inherited twenty million dollars. Plus she had an additional income of one thousand dollars a day. That's a lot of money any day, but it was immense in the late 1800s.
Sarah was well known. She was the belle of New Haven, Connecticut. No social event was complete without her presence. No one hosted a party without inviting her.
Sarah was powerful. Her name and money would open almost any door in America. Colleges wanted her donations. Politicians clamored for her support. Organizations sought her endorsem*nt.
Sarah was rich. Well known. Powerful. And miserable.
Her only daughter had died at five weeks of age. Then her husband had passed away. She was left alone with her name, her money, her memories, ... and her guilt. It was her guilt that caused her to move west. A passion for penance drove her to San Jose, California. Her yesterdays imprisoned her todays, and she yearned for freedom.
She bought an eight-room farmhouse plus one hundred sixty adjoining acres. She hired sixteen carpenters and put them to work. For the next thirty-eight years, craftsmen labored every day, twenty-four hours a day, to build a mansion. Observers were intrigued by the project. Sarah's instructions were more than eccentric ... they were eerie. The design had a macabre touch. Each window was to have thirteen panes, each wall thirteen panels, each closet thirteen hooks, and each chandelier thirteen globes.
The floor plan was ghoulish. Corridors snaked randomly, some leading nowhere. One door opened to a blank wall, another to a fifty-foot drop. One set of stairs led to a ceiling that had no door. Trap doors. Secret passageways. Tunnels. This was no retirement home for Sarah's future; it was a castle for her past.
The making of this mysterious mansion only ended when Sarah died. The completed estate sprawled over six acres and had six kitchens, thirteen bathrooms, forty stairways, forty-seven fireplaces, fifty-two skylights, four hundred sixty-seven doors, ten thousand windows, one hundred sixty rooms, and a bell tower.
Why did Sarah want such a castle? Didn't she live alone? "Well, sort of," those acquainted with her story might answer. "There were the visitors..." And the visitors came each night.
Legend has it that every evening at midnight, a servant would pass through the secret labyrinth that led to the bell tower. He would ring the bell...to summon the spirits. Sarah would then enter the "blue room," a room reserved for her and her nocturnal guests. Together they would linger until 2:00 a.m., when the bell would be rung again. Sarah would return to her quarters; the ghosts would return to their graves.
Who comprised this legion of phantoms?
Indians and soldiers killed on the U.S. frontier. They had all been killed by bullets from the most popular rifle in America the Winchester. What had brought millions of dollars to Sarah Winchester had brought death to them. So she spent her remaining years in a castle of regret, providing a home for the dead.
You can see this poltergeist place in San Jose, if you wish. You can tour its halls and see its remains. But to see what unresolved guilt can do to a human being, you don't have to go to the Winchester mansion. Lives imprisoned by yesterday's guilt are in your own city. Hearts haunted by failure are in your own neighborhood. People plagued by pitfalls are just down the street .. or just down the hall.
There is, wrote Paul, a "worldly sorrow" that "brings death." A guilt that kills. A sorrow that's fatal. A venomous regret that's deadly.
How many Sarah Winchesters do you know? How far do you have to go to find a soul haunted by ghosts of the past? Maybe not very far.
Maybe Sarah's story is your story.
33. God Will Save You
Illustration
One of the most popular stories of the past decade has to be the story of a man named Henry who lived in a valley near a river. The river had reached flood stage. Everybody was being evacuated to higher ground. Except Henry. He was staying at his house and not abandoning it. God would take care of him, he contended. Soon the water had risen to Henry's porch. His friends paddled by in a rowboat. Henry was sitting on his windowsill. "We have come to save you, Henry," they said. Henry would not budge. "God will save me," he said. It was not long before the flood waters had risen several feet. Henry was now stranded on the second floor. A rescue team came by in a motorboat. As he waved to the people from the window, they shouted to him, "Henry, we've come to save you." Henry said, "Don't worry about me. God will save me." Finally, Henry was sitting on top of his roof. A helicopter hovered overhead and someone shouted through a megaphone, "Henry, grab the rope before it's too late." But Henry would not budge. The waters rose higher. Henry drowned.
As Henry entered the gates of heaven the Lord met him. "Lord," said Henry, "I'm glad to meet you, but frankly, I am very disappointed. I counted on you to save me, but you let me drown." "Henry," said the Lord, shaking his head and smiling with understanding, "I sent a row boat, a motor boat, and even a helicopter to save you. What more did you want me to do?"
34. Sound Peanuts Doctrine
Illustration
Michael P. Green
A Peanuts cartoon pictured Lucy and Linus looking out the window at a steady downpour of rain. “Boy,” said Lucy, “look at it rain. What if it floods the whole world?”
“It will never do that,” Linus replied confidently. “In the ninth chapter of Genesis, God promised Noah that would never happen again, and the sign of the promise is the rainbow.”
“You’ve taken a great load off my mind,” said Lucy with a relieved smile.
“Sound theology,” pontificated Linus, “has a way of doing that!”
35. Billy Graham Interview
Illustration
Brett Blair
SCHULLER: Tell me, what do you think is the future of Christianity?
GRAHAM: Well, Christianity and being a true believer you know, I think there's the Body of Christ, whichcomes from all the Christian groups around the world, or outside the Christian groups. I think everybody that loves Christ, or knows Christ, whether they're conscious of it or not, they're members of the Body of Christ, and I don't think that we are going to see a great sweeping revival that will turn the whole world to Christ at any time.I think James answered that, the Apostle James in the first council in Jerusalem, when he said that God's purpose for this age is to call out a people for His name. And that's what God is doing today, He's calling people out of the world for His name, whether they come from the Muslim world, or the Buddhist world, or the Christian world, or the non-believing world, they are members of the Body of Christ, because they've been called by God. They may not even know the name of Jesus, but they know in their hearts that they need something that they don't have, and they turn to the only light that they have, and I think they are saved, and that they're going to be with us in heaven."
SCHULLER: What, what I hear you saying, that it's possible for Jesus Christ to come into a human heartand soul and life, even if they've been born in darkness and have never had exposure to the Bible. Is that a correct interpretation of what you're saying?
GRAHAM: Yes, it is, because I believe that. I've met people in various parts of the world in tribal situations, that they have never seen a Bible or heard about a Bible, and never heard of Jesus, but they've believed in their hearts that there was a God, and they've tried to live a life that was quite apart from the surrounding community in which they lived."
Schuller: I am so thrilled to hear you say that. There is a wideness in God's mercy.
Graham: There is. There definitely is.
Note: This is a verbatim transcript. You can watch it here onYoutube.
36. Wait and Watch
Illustration
Mark Trotter
Our text concludes with the counsel, "When these things come to pass, stand up and lift up your heads, for your redemption is drawing near." That's been the experience of Christians for all these years. Whether they are in exodus, or in exile, we are not alone.
Our four year old grandson has provided me a wonderful illustration of this. His mother was going to go away for a couple of days. The night before she left, as she was in the two boys' room to hear their prayers, she told them she was going to go away, and asked if in their prayers they would like to ask God to protect her on her journey.
Jesse, the six year old, thought not. But Luke, the four year old, prayed this prayer: "Dear God, if buffaloes or bears, or other mean animals, come near mommy, can you handle it? If you can't, just call on Jesus."
Luke attends a Nazarene preschool. I suspect that is where he got he got that accent. But the words are universally Christian. There is a new covenant now, a new promise, since Christmas, that he will be with us, "Lo, I am with you always till the end of the age."
That's our hope. There is a way of living with that hope. It is found in two words that are always associated with Advent: wait, and watch.
37. Where the Tide Rises
Illustration
Staff
How do you lift a 50,000 ton weight up to a level twenty or thirty feet high? Let me tell you about one way of doing it.
This is the weight of a giant ocean transport vessel steaming up the St. Lawrence Seaway. It approaches the Dwight D. Eisenhower Lock, and there a wall of steel looms before it. But the wall opens and the ship enters. Then the wall closes and water flows in. Gradually the ship is lifted - until it steams out through a gate which opens at the other end.
You see, it's simply a matter of having your ship in the right place - in a right position, in a right relationship. Your ship would never be lifted except it enter the lock. Once there, however, you just rest and let the water do the lifting.
So it is with us in our life and relationship with God. We come to church: we check in with him, we put ourselves before him, and we do our best to be sure of our position in relationship with him. If we are in the right place, there we can rest, and God will do the lifting as the lifting is needed and necessary. He will flood our place with his grace and buoy us up. In worship we try to get ourselves into alignment. In worship, as it were, we put ourselves where the tide rises, and when it does we'll rise with it.
38. Taking the Fun Out of Christmas
Illustration
We prepare for Christmas by repenting. Repenting in the Biblical sense is more than having a change of heart or a feeling of regret. It is more than a New Year's Eve resolution. Repentance is a turning away and a turning back. A turning away from sin and a turning back to God.
Bishop Joe Pennel of the Virginia Conference of the United Methodist Church, once attended a Christmas worship service in Bethlehem at a place called Shepherd's Field. As he heard the songs of the season, he thought to himself and later wrote: "I did not look to God and say: See how virtuous I am. I did not utter: God, pat me on the back for all of the good things I have done. I did not pretend by saying: God, look at all of my accomplishments, aren't you proud of me? Indeed, I found myself asking God to forgive me of my sins. That is how it works. The more we turn away from Christ the more enslaved we become to the power of sin. The more we turn to Christ, the more free we become from the bondage of sin. Turning toward Christ enables us to repent."
Someone once said half jokingly: If we are not careful, John the Baptist can take all of the fun out of Christmas. I disagree. I think that it is John's message that puts the joy into Christmas. For it is his message that calls us not to the way that Christmas is, but that the way Christmas ought to be. Christmas ought to be free from guilt and self-absorption. For that to occur there must be repentance.
39. Spirit Power - Sermon Starter
Illustration
King Duncan
In 1926, a wealthy Toronto lawyer named Charles Vance Millar died, leaving behind him a will that amused and electrified the citizens of his Canadian province. Millar, a bachelor with a wicked sense of humor, stated clearly that he intended his last will and testament to be an "uncommon and capricious" document. Because he had no close heirs to inherit his fortune, he divided his money and properties in a way that amused him and aggravated his newly chosen heirs. Here are just a few examples of his strange bequests:
He left shares in the Ontario Jockey Club to two prominent men who were well‑known for their opposition to racetrack betting.
He bequeathed shares in the O'Keefe Brewery Company (a Catholic beer manufacturer) to every Protestant minister in Toronto.
But his most famous bequest was that he would leave his fortune to the Toronto woman who gave birth to the most children in the ten years after his death.
This last clause in his will caught the public fancy--concerning the woman who produced the most children over a ten-year period. The country was entering the Great Depression. As people struggled to meet even their most basic economic responsibilities, the prospect of an enormous windfall was naturally quite alluring. Newspaper reporters scoured the public records to find likely contenders for what became known as The Great Stork Derby. Nationwide excitement over the Stork Derby built quickly.
In 1936, four mothers‑‑proud producers of nine children apiece in a ten‑year time span‑‑divided up the Millar fortune, each receiving what was a staggering sum in those days, $125,000. Charles Millar caused much mischief with his will. This was his final legacy to humanity.
Let's talk about legacies for a moment. This Memorial Day weekend we remember those who died in our nation's service. Regardless of how we might feel about war in general, or any war in particular, it is only right that we should pay homage to those who lay down their lives for our country. This is the legacy that they bequeathed to us--a free and prosperous land.
When Jesus of Nazareth left this earth, he bequeathed a legacy to his followers. He left his Holy Spirit--to comfort, to guide, to empower them to be all that God had called them to be. Today we celebrate the coming of the Holy Spirit on the church.
1. The Birthday of the Church.
2. A Spirit-filled Church.
3. The Bold Spirit of Christ in Us.
40. A Life Without Clouds
Illustration
Staff
In northern Chile, between the Andes Mountains and the Pacific Ocean, lies a narrow strip of land where the sun shines every day! Clouds gather so seldom over the valley that one can say, "It almost never rains here!" Morning after morning the sun rises brilliantly over the tall mountains to the east. Each noon it shines brightly overhead, and every evening it brings a picturesque sunset. Although storms are often seen rising high in the mountains, and heavy fog banks stretchtheir gray curtains far over the sea, Old Sol continues to shed his warming rays upon this "favored" and protected strip of territory. One might imagine this area to be an earthly paradise, but is far from that! It is a sterile and desolate wilderness! There are no streams of water, and nothing grows there.
We often long for total sunshine and continuous joy in life, and we desire to avoid the heartaches that bring tears to our eyes. Like that sunny, infertile part of Chile, however, life without clouds and even an occasional downpour would not be productive or challenging. Though showers do come, they will also end, and the sun will shine again. "Weeping may endure for a night, but joy comesin the morning." (Psalm 30:5).
41. Hope for the Future
Illustration
Michio Kaku
Consider the words of Benjamin Franklin, America’s last great scientist/statesman, when he made a prediction not just about the next century but about the next thousand years. In 1780, he noted with regret that men often acted like wolves toward one another, mainly because of the grinding burden of surviving in a harsh world.
He wrote: "It is impossible to imagine the height to which may be carried, in a thousand years, the power of man over matter. We may perhaps learn to deprive large masses of their gravity, and give them absolute levity, for the sake of easy transport. Agriculture may diminish its labor and double its produce; all diseases may by sure means be prevented or cured, not excepting even that of old age, and our lives lengthened at pleasure even beyond the antediluvian standard."
He was writing at a time when peasants were scratching a bleak existence from the soil, when ox-drawn carts brought rotting produce to the market, when plagues and starvation were a fact of life, and only the lucky few lived beyond the age of forty. (In London in 1750, two-thirds of children died before they reached the age of five.)
Franklin lived in a time when it appeared hopeless that one day we might be able to solve these age-old problems. Or, as Thomas Hobbes wrote in 1651, life was “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” But today, well short of Franklin’s thousand years, his predictions are coming to pass.
42. The Priorities of a Servant
Illustration
Brett Blair
A young boy by the name of James had a desire to be the most famous manufacturer and salesman of cheese in the world. He planned on becoming rich and famous by making and selling cheese and began with a little buggy pulled by a pony named Paddy. After making his cheese, he would load his wagon and he and Paddy would drive down the streets of Chicago to sell the cheese. As the months passed, the young boy began to despair because he was not making any money, in spite of his long hours and hard work.
One day he pulled his pony to a stop and began to talk to him. He said, "Paddy, there is something wrong. We are not doing it right. I am afraid we have things turned around and our priorities are not where they ought to be. Maybe we ought to serve God and place him first in our lives." The boy drove home and made a covenant that for the rest of his life he would first serve God and then would work as God directed.
Many years after this, the young boy, now a man, stood as Sunday School Superintendent at North Shore Baptist Church in Chicago and said, "I would rather be a layman in the North Shore Baptist Church than to head the greatest corporation in America. My first job is serving Jesus."
So, every time you take a take a bite of Philadelphia Cream cheese, sip a cup of Maxwell House, mix a quart of Kool-Aid, slice up a DiGiorno Pizza, cook a pot of Macaroni & Cheese, spread some Grey Poupon, stir a bowl of Cream of Wheat, slurp down some Jell-O, eat the cream out of the middle of an Oreo cookie, or serve some Stove Top, remember a boy, his pony named Paddy, and the promise little James L. Kraft made to serve God and work as He directed.
43. PREACHER
Illustration
Stephen Stewart
Mark 1:14 - "Now after John was arrested, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the Gospel of God,"
Preaching, the proclamation of a divine message, and the regular instruction of the converted in the doctrines and duties of the faith, is as old as the human family. Noah is referred to as "a preacher of righteousness" (2 Peter 2:5). This is not a distinctly Judaistic or Christian concept; the Mohammedans practice it freely, and it is not unknown among the Buddhists. It has its roots in the activity of the Hebrew prophets and scribes, the former representing the broader appeal, the latter the edification of the faithful, and in the ministry of Jesus Christ and his apostles, where again we have both the evangelical invitation and the teaching of truth and duty. Whichever is emphasized in preaching, the preacher is one who believes himself to be the ambassador of God, charged with a message which it is his duty to deliver.
From the Acts of the Apostles we gather something of the methods adopted by St. Peter and St. Paul, and these we may believe were more or less general for the preachers of the Primitive Church. The Apostles who had known the Lord would naturally recall the facts of his life, and the story of his words and works would form a great deal of their preaching. It is not until we come to Origen (d. 254) that we find preaching as an explanation and application of definite texts, a usage that Christianity adopted from Greek rhetoricians.
The New Testament writers drew a definite distinction between preaching and teaching. Preaching is the proclamation of the gospel to men who have not yet heard it. Teaching is an instruction or exhortation on various aspects of Chrisitan life and thought addressed to a community already established in the faith.
Today, of course, the preacher or minister or pastor of a congregation is usually called upon to perform both functions. But the preaching mission of the church is still its prime function and should be considered so.
See HERALD
44. A Fable on Peace
Illustration
Editor James S. Hewett
When Christ was born, the angel declared to the frightened shepherds, "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to people of good will."
But the world has seen very few years of peace since Christ our Prince of Peace came. I discovered this fable on peace which challenges me.
"Tell me the weight of a snowflake," a sparrow asked a wild dove.
"Nothing more than nothing," was the answer.
"In that case, I must tell you a marvelous story," the sparrow said. "I sat on the branch of a fir, close to its trunk, when it began to snow—not heavily, not in a raging blizzard—no, just like in a dream, without a sound, and without any violence. Since I did not have anything better to do, I counted the snowflakes settling on the twigs and needles of my branch. Their number was exactly 3,741,952. When the 3,741,953rd dropped onto the branch, nothing more than nothing, as you say, the branch broke off."
Having said that, the sparrow flew away.
The dove, since Noah's time an authority on the matter, thought about the story for awhile, and finally said to herself, "Perhaps only one person's voice is lacking for peace to come to the world."
45. The Power of The Wedding March
Illustration
James S. Flora
A group of motion-picture engineers classified the following as the ten most dramatic sounds in the movies:
- a baby's first cry
- the blast of a siren
- the thunder of breakers on rocks
- the roar of a forest fire
- a foghorn
- the slow drip of water
- the galloping of horses
- the sound of a distant train whistle
- the howl of a dog
- the wedding march
And one of these sounds causes more emotional response and upheaval than any other, has the power to bring forth almost every human emotion: sadness, envy, regret, sorrow, tears, as well as supreme joy. It is the wedding march.
46. Sermon Opener - To Be Sure!
Illustration
Theodore F. Schneider
I am always impressed with the litany-like phrases Martin Luther uses in The Small Catechism as petition by petition he explains the Lord's Prayer:
To be sure, God's name is holy itself ...To be sure, the kingdom of God comes of itself, without our prayers ...To be sure, the good and gracious will of God is done without our prayer ...To be sure, God provides daily bread, even to the wicked, without our prayer...
To be sure, to be sure, to be sure! God's gifts come to us despite our unfaithfulness and often without our prayers. Paul quotes an ancient Christian hymn in his second letter to Timothy: "If we are faithless, he remains faithful - for he cannot deny himself (2 Timothy 2:13)." Our faithlessness and ingratitude cannot make of God something that he is not. To be sure!
All of which brings us to the heart of today's gospel. Rudolph Bultmann is quite correct when he notes that the emphasis of Luke's story is not the miracle of 10 lepers cleansed, but rather the contrast of gratitude and ingratitude depicted on the same dramatic canvas.
Luke draws the contrast all the more boldly when he notes that the man returning to give thanks was a Samaritan, a "foreigner." Always the master storyteller among the four evangelists, Luke, having already given us the story of the "Good Samaritan," now gives us the story of the "Thankful Samaritan."
47. Indifference
Illustration
Dan Vellinga
In the book The Screwtape Letters, by C. S. Lewis, a devil briefs his demon nephew, Wormwood, in a series of letters, on the subtleties and techniques of tempting people. In his writings, the devil says that the objective is not to make people wicked but to make them indifferent. This higher devil cautions Wormwood that he must keep the patient comfortable at all costs. If he should start thinking about anything of importance, encourage him to think about his luncheon plans and not to worry so much because it could cause indigestion. And then the devil gives this instruction to his nephew: "I, the devil, will always see to it that there are bad people. Your job, my dear Wormwood, is to provide me with people who do not care."
48. A Poisonous Root
Illustration
Michael Williams
In his book. Lee: The Last Years, Charles Bracelen Flood reports that after the Civil War, Robert E. Lee visited a Kentucky lady who took him to the remains of a grand old tree in front of her house. There she bitterly cried that its limbs and trunk had been destroyed by Federal artillery fire. She looked to Lee for a word condemning the North or at least sympathizing with her loss. After a brief silence, Lee said, "Cut it down, my dear Madam, and forget it." It is better to forgive the injustices of the past than to allow them to remain,take root and poison the rest of our life.
49. Forgiveness Is Not Innate
Illustration
Will Willimon
William Willimon writes: "The human animal is not supposed to be good at forgiveness. Forgiveness is not some innate, natural human emotion.
Vengeance, retribution, violence, these are natural human qualities. It is natural for the human animal to defend itself, to snarl and crouch into a defensive position when attacked, to howl when wronged, to bite back when bitten. Forgiveness is not natural. It is not a universal human virtue."
50. Bah Humbug Department
Illustration
George Bernard Shaw
I am sorry to have to introduce the subject of Christmas in these articles. It is an indecent subject; a cruel, gluttonous subject; a drunken, disorderly subject; a wasteful, disastrous subject; a wicked, cadging, lying, filthy, blasphemous, and demoralizing subject. Christmas is forced on a reluctant and disgusted nation by the shopkeepers and the press; in its own merits it would wither and shrivel in the fiery breath of universal hatred; and anyone who looked back to it would be turned into a pillar of greasy sausages.
We must be gluttonous because it is Christmas. We must be insincerely generous; we must buy things that nobody wants, and give them to people we don’t like; we must go to absurd entertainments that make even our little children satirical.
As for me, I shall fly from it all tomorrow or next day to some remote spot miles from a shop, where nothing worse can befall me than a serenade from a few peasants, or some equally harmless survival of medieval mummery, shyly proferred, not advertised, moderate in its expectations, and soon over.
Note: This ill tempered screed on Christmas can befound in an article published in theSaturday Review(1 January 1898), entitled "Peace and Goodwill to Managers." Shaw's dislike for the commercial and festive aspect of Christmas is well known. So it's not a surprise thathe was not a religious man. Though he understood and respected that people had the right tobelievein whatever they chose, he scorned at the arguments and conflicts religion could cause.Shawalso felt that peoplebelieved in Godnot through their own mind, but through a sense of duty and belonging as it was the done thing.
Showing
1
to
50
of
128
results
- ‘A feat of diplomacy’: Biden hails Russia-US prisoner swap
- Female Olympic boxer quits, reduced to tears after 46-second fight against male competitor
- Irish woman fights prosecution for praying outside abortion clinic: 'Very dark'
- Lutherans, Orthodox Church reach agreement on 1,000-year debate over Nicene Creed
- Black preachers condemn Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood: 'Nothing is more racist in America'
- Murder of 13-year-old budding preacher ‘never supposed to happen,’ suspect says
- Founding elder exits Gateway Church as attendance falls in wake of Robert Morris scandal
- America's youngest Olympic athlete cites Isaiah 40:31 after winning gold medal
- Trump pressed on calls for police 'immunity from prosecution' after Sonya Massey killing
- Liberty University faces civil rights lawsuit after firing trans-identified employee
- Choctaw Bibles Connect Christians with Lost Heritage
- An Assassination Attempt in Brazil Brought Politics into Churches
- In Asian American Churches, Generational Differences Deter Young Leaders
- What Wrestling Taught an Olympic Gold Medalist About God
- O Say Can You See God in These 5 National Anthems?
- Nigerian Church Watches, Prays as Ocean Rises
- New Alliance Aims to Unite Chinese Churches Divided by Geopolitics
- Americans Are Still Inviting People to Church
- ERLC Retracts Announcement Firing President Brent Leatherwood
- Homelessness Hits Record High, Straining Rescue Missions
- We Can't Just Ignore The Truth About Jesus Much Longer
- Boys, Boys, Boys - 3 Quarks Daily
- Founding elder exits Gateway Church as attendance falls in wake of Robert Morris scandal
- Go Ahead And Vote For Trump, But Do It With Your Eyes Wide Open
- 13-year-old budding preacher who lived for the ‘Glory of God’ killed for camera
- JD Vance Appeared on 'The Oprah Winfrey Show'?
- Police, monks gear up for another battle on Mount Athos
- Haniyeh’s Top 5 ‘Moderate’ Moments That the Media Chose to Omit
- Anjem Choudary is only the tip of Britain's Islamism problem
- As India ages, a secret shame emerges: Elders abandoned by their children
- Trump's 'Beautiful Christians' are Not Only Ones Whose Values Matter
- Being Good Is as Important as Being Right
- Blasphème & Olympiques
- Drag Queen in Olympic Opening Ceremony has No Regrets
- Is Hindu Nationalism Friendly to Christianity?
- Where Lynchings Still Happen
- Vatican II: For Better or For Worse
- After the Fall: A Christian's Confession of His Role in Afghanistan
- Art Center Founded By Fr. Rupnik Pushes Back on Removal of Artwork
- The Trad Family
