Sermon and Worship Resources (2024)

The second king of Israel (r. 1010970 BC), founder of a dynasty that continued with his son Solomon (r. 970–931 BC), who ruled all of Israel; subsequently the remaining “sons of David” ruled the southern kingdom, Judah, until 586 BC.

Human kingship is a late development in Israel, but a number of ancient texts anticipate the establishment of the institution (Gen. 17:6; Deut. 17:14–20) and specifically the rise of a king from Judah (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:17). Thus, it is surprising that the first king of Israel is not from Judah, but from Benjamin. When the people ask Samuel for a king, he anoints Saul (1Sam. 8–12), who proves to be a tremendous disappointment. He forfeits the establishment of his dynasty when he shows a lack of confidence in God by rashly offering prebattle sacrifices (13:13–14). God then rejects Saul as king because he does not execute God’s full judgment against the Amalekites as he knows he should (15:23).

Eventually Saul’s moment of judgment comes. Saul’s final battle is against the Philistines, the major foreign force still inside the borders of the promised land. Both Saul and Jonathan meet their end on Mount Gilboa, and David sings songs that express his sadness over their deaths (1Sam. 31–2Sam. 1).

Even with Saul out of the way, David’s rise to kingship is not easy. He is immediately crowned king of Judah (2Sam. 2:1–7), but the northern tribes choose to follow Ish-Bosheth, the son of Saul. War erupts between the two kingdoms. Eventually, though, the powerful general Abner abandons his support of Saul’s son, sealing the end of that dynasty. Ish-Bosheth is killed by his own men, and soon David becomes king over all Israel (5:1–5).

David’s kingship leads to significant victories that, in essence, complete the conquest of Canaan by finally subduing all the internal enemies. His men take the city of Jerusalem from the Jebusites, and he makes it his capital (2Sam. 5:6–16). He also defeats the Philistines, who have been a thorn in the side of Israel for years (2Sam. 5:17–25; for other victories, see 8:1–14). In celebration, David brings the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem (2Sam. 6).

The David narrative reaches its apex when God enters into a covenant with him that establishes his dynasty (2Sam. 7; 1Chron. 17). After David dies, his son will succeed him, and indeed his dynasty lasts for many hundreds of years (see below).

David is a good king, but not a perfect king. A turning point in his reign comes in 2Sam. 11. Up to this point, David has been content with what God has given him. He does not grasp for anything that does not belong to him. However, when he sees the beautiful Bathsheba bathing, he sends messengers to bring her to his house, where the two have sexual intercourse and she becomes pregnant. In an attempt to conceal this sin of adultery, he orders the death of her husband, Uriah the Hittite. Thus, he adds the crime of murder to that of adultery.

David thinks that the sin is secret, but nothing is hidden from God, who sends his prophet Nathan to confront David (2Sam. 12; cf. Ps. 51). The difference between Saul and David is not that the latter is perfect but rather that David, as opposed to Saul, repents when he sins. Thus, God allows his reign to continue. Even so, David feels the consequences of his sin. First, the son that Bathsheba bears from her illicit union with David is struck with illness and dies. And ever afterward, David’s family life is troubled, with great impact on the political life of Israel. Son is pitted against son (Amnon and Absalom [2Sam. 13]), as well as son against father (Absalom and David [2Sam. 15–18]). Absalom temporarily deposes his father from the throne, but David eventually regains the kingship, though at the cost of the heartbreaking loss of his son.

Even at the very end, there is conflict within David’s house. When David has grown old, another son, Adonijah, attempts to take the throne, with support from powerful people such as Joab and Abiathar. At the instigation of Bathsheba and Nathan, however, David places the son of his choosing, Solomon, on the throne (1Kings 1). David then dies after a reign of forty-one years, seven in Hebron and the rest over all Israel (1Kings 2:10–12).

David’s greatest legacy is the dynasty that bears his name. Beginning with Solomon, however, his successors do not continue his spiritual legacy. Although a number of kings do some good, only Hezekiah (r. 727–698 BC) and Josiah (r. 639–609 BC) are given unqualified approval. Eventually, the Davidic rule comes to an end in Jerusalem at the hands of the Babylonians (586 BC). But God is not done with his redemptive purposes, and his promise to David is that he will have a ruler on the throne “forever” (2Sam. 7:16). The NT recognizes that Jesus Christ is the fulfillment of this promise. He is the greater son of David, the one who is the Christ or Messiah, the anointed king. Jesus is the one who reigns forever in heaven. The life and the rule of David foreshadow the messianic rule of Jesus Christ.

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).

Egypt is one of the earliest ancient civilizations. The first development of writing took place simultaneously in both Egypt and ancient Sumer around 3000 BC.

Ancient Sumer and Egypt were river valley cultures. Sumer was located in Mesopotamia (southeast Iraq), Egypt in the Nile Valley (northeast Africa). The Nile Valley was well suited for long-term growth and cultural success for three reasons. First, the annual flooding of the Nile (July to October) brought sediment and nutrients from up river to the fields of the Nile Valley. The water also washed the salts out of the soil. These brought great fertility to the valley and allowed the same fields to be farmed year after year for millennia without exhausting the land. Second, the Nile provided a central highway for transporting people and goods across Egypt, thus facilitating internal trade and communication. Third, Egypt was surrounded by a buffer zone of desert regions to the east, west, and south, which hindered foreign invasion. Ancient Egyptians called the fertile land of the Nile Valley the “black land” and the desert regions the “red land.” They also divided the land into “upper” and “lower” Egypt. Upper Egypt (from the first cataract northward to Memphis) was in the higher southern elevations of the Nile River (the Nile flows from south to north). Lower Egypt was made up of the Nile Delta region. Only a pharaoh who controlled and unified both could take the epithet “king of upper and lower Egypt.”

Egypt had an ancient and long history, but the following summary will only address Egypt as it comes into contact with biblical history.

First Intermediate period (21342040 BC) and Middle Kingdom (2040–1640 BC). After the death of PepyII came economic collapse due to drought and falling tax revenues. These led to political collapse, and power was split among many competing factions. This time of instability is known as the First Intermediate period; it ended when the Eleventh Dynasty pharaoh MentuhotepII reunified Egypt and reestablished a strong central government. It is likely around the time of the end of the First Intermediate period (2134–2040 BC) and the beginning of the Middle Kingdom (2040–1640 BC) that Abraham visited Egypt and later Joseph, Jacob, and his family entered Egypt. The famous Beni Hasan tomb painting of this period shows a caravan of Semitic peoples moving into Egypt, wearing multicolored clothing. In this period the position of vizier (prime minister) grew to prominence. One vizier, Amenemhet, succeeded to the throne of Egypt. Joseph filled the role of vizier in the biblical account (Gen. 41:39–40). Also dating from this period are turquoise mines in the Sinai region that have the earliest known Semitic inscription. Written on the mine walls in Proto-Sinaitic, this inscription may be the earliest alphabetic script in existence.

Second Intermediate period (1640–1550 BC). At the end of the Middle Kingdom, Egypt again fell into a fractured political situation with the decline of the pharaoh’s power. A Semitic people, the Hyksos (Egyptian for “foreign rulers” or “shepherd kings”), invaded the Nile Delta region and established their capital at Avaris. The Seventeenth Dynasty continued to rule Upper Egypt in the south while the Hyksos were in power. Although the Israelites were servants of Pharaoh from the beginning (keeping his flocks), they were not enslaved until later. It may have been a Hyksos pharaoh or a New Kingdom pharaoh who enslaved them to hard labor.

New Kingdom (1550–1069 BC). The last king of the Seventeenth (Theban) Dynasty, Kamose, attacked the Hyksos, but it was his successor, Ahmose, who drove them out and reunified Egypt. Ahmose is considered the first pharaoh of the Eighteenth Dynasty. It may have been Ahmose or one of his successors who enslaved the Hebrews. During the first half of the New Kingdom, Egypt was at the height of its power and wealth. During this period Egyptians began to call their king “Pharaoh,” meaning “great house.” The Eighteenth Dynasty pharaoh ThutmoseIII and his son AmenhotepII are good candidates for an early-date exodus (c. 1446 BC). A later king of the Eighteenth Dynasty, Akhenaten, moved the capital to Amarna and shifted his allegiance from Amun-Re, the sun god, to sole worship of the god Aton (sun-disk). For this reason, many identify him as the first monotheist. Akhenaten may have made this move in order to defund the temples and priestly orders that had grown very wealthy and powerful over time. His reforms did not last, and the worship of Amun-Re was restored by his successor, Tutankhamen. The Nineteenth Dynasty warrior RamessesII is the likely pharaoh of a late-date Exodus (c. 1250 BC).

Third Intermediate period (1069–664 BC). This period was a time of weak and divided government, with capitals in the north and the south. Pharaoh Siamun has been conjectured to be King Solomon’s father-in-law, who conquered Gezer and gave it to Solomon as a dowry (c. 960 BC; 1Kings 9:16). Later, Sheshonq (biblical Shishak), a Libyan pharaoh of the Twenty-second Dynasty, came to the throne and campaigned against Solomon’s son Rehoboam, plundering Jerusalem in the process (1Kings 14:25; 2Chron. 12:2; cf. 1Kings 11:40). The African Cush*te pharaohs of the Twenty-fifth Dynasty (760–664 BC) ruled the north for a little more than a century but failed to defend against the waves of Assyrian conquest in the seventh century BC.

Late Kingdom period (664–525 BC). The Twenty-sixth (Saite) Dynasty (ruling from the Delta city of Sais) reunified Egypt under native Egyptian control. Pharaoh NechoII tried to support a declining Assyria as a buffer against the Babylonian onslaught but was unsuccessful (c. 609 BC). However, in the process Necho killed King Josiah of Judah in battle at Megiddo and placed one of Josiah’s sons, Jehoiakim, as a vassal upon the throne of Judah (2Kings 23:29–35; cf. 2Chron. 35:20–36:8; Jer. 46:2). After the Babylonian destruction of Judah/Jerusalem (587/586 BC) and the murder of their Jewish governor, Gedaliah, a group of Jewish exiles fled to Egypt. This group forced the prophet Jeremiah to go with them to Egypt (Jer. 40:1–43:7). A small group of Jewish exiles eventually found their way to a tiny island in the upper Nile, Elephantine, where they established a temple and community; there they worked as mercenaries.

Persian period (525–332 BC). CambysesII, king of Persia and son of Cyrus the Great, conquered Egypt in 525 BC. His successor, DariusI, ruled Egypt benevolently and resumed the construction of temples and canals. However, Egypt revolted against Persian rule several times, ultimately winning independence in 404 BC with the help of Greek allies. The last native Egyptian pharaoh was NectaneboII, who ruled in 359–343 BC. However, this period of Egyptian independence was short-lived, with Persia reestablishing control in 343 BC.

Hellenistic-Roman period (332–30 BC; 30 BC and beyond). Alexander the Great conquered Egypt in 332 BC. After Alexander’s death, his general Ptolemy took control of Egypt and ruled as pharaoh. From Alexander’s conquest to the death of Cleopatra, Egyptian rulers were of Greek descent. After Cleopatra’s death (30 BC), Rome annexed Egypt into its empire and governed the country until the fall of the Roman Empire. A large contingent of Jews lived and prospered in the Delta city of Alexandria in this period.

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.

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.

Sin enters the biblical story in Gen. 3. Despite God’s commandment to the contrary (2:1617), Eve ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil at the prompting of the serpent. When Adam joined Eve in eating the fruit, their rebellion was complete. They attempted to cover their guilt and shame, but the fig leaves were inadequate. God confronted them and was unimpressed with their attempts to shift the blame. Judgment fell heavily on the serpent, Eve, and Adam; even creation itself was affected (3:17–18).

In the midst of judgment, God made it clear in two specific ways that sin did not have the last word. First, God cryptically promised to put hostility between the offspring of the serpent and that of the woman (Gen. 3:15). Although the serpent would inflict a severe blow upon the offspring of the woman, the offspring of the woman would defeat the serpent. Second, God replaced the inadequate covering of the fig leaves with animal skins (3:21). The implication is that the death of the animal functioned as a substitute for Adam and Eve, covering their sin.

In one sense, the rest of the OT hangs on this question: How will a holy God satisfy his wrath against human sin and restore his relationship with human beings without compromising his justice? The short answer is: through Abraham and his offspring (Gen. 12:1–3), who eventually multiplied into the nation of Israel. After God redeemed them from their slavery in Egypt (Exod. 1–15), he brought them to Sinai to make a covenant with them that was predicated on obedience (19:5–6). A central component of this covenant was the sacrificial system (e.g., Lev. 1–7), which God provided as a means of dealing with sin. In addition to the regular sacrifices made for sin throughout the year, God set apart one day a year to atone for Israel’s sins (Lev. 16). On this Day of Atonement the high priest took the blood of a goat into the holy of holies and sprinkled it on the mercy seat as a sin offering. Afterward he took a second goat and confessed “all the iniquities of the people of Israel, and all their transgressions, all their sins, putting them on the head of the goat, and sending it away into the wilderness.... The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to a barren region; and the goat shall be set free in the wilderness” (Lev. 16:21–22 NRSV). In order for the holy God to dwell with sinful people, extensive provisions had to be made to enable fellowship.

During the next four hundred years of prophetic silence, the longing for God to finally put away the sins of his people grew. At last, when the conception and birth of Jesus were announced, it was revealed that he would “save his people from their sins” (Matt. 1:21). In the days before the public ministry of Jesus, John the Baptist prepared the way for him by “preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Luke 3:3). Whereas both Adam and Israel were disobedient sons of God, Jesus proved to be the 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 the Suffering 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 wrath of God that God’s people rightly deserved for their sin. With his justice fully satisfied, God was free to forgive and justify all who are identified with Christ by faith (Rom. 3:21–26). What neither the law nor the blood of bulls and goats could do, Jesus Christ did with his own blood (Rom. 8:3–4; Heb. 9:1–10:18).

After his resurrection and ascension, Jesus’ followers began proclaiming the “good news” (gospel) of what Jesus did and calling to people, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, 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 against them (Matt. 6:12; 18:15–20; Col. 3:13). Although believers continue 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 new heaven and earth, where there will be no sin, no death, and no curse (Rom. 8:12–30; Rev. 21–22).

As even this very brief survey of the biblical story line from Genesis to Revelation shows, sin is a fundamental aspect of the Bible’s plot. Sin generates the conflict that drives the biblical narrative; it is the fundamental “problem” that must be solved in order for God’s purposes in creation to be completed.

Judges covers the period between the death of Joshua and the rise of the monarchy in Israel. It was a turbulent period, as the people did not seem to have any center in God. The bulk of the book narrates the stories of judges, mostly military leaders, whom God sent to Israel on those occasions when they turned to him for help (Othniel, Ehud, Shamgar, Deborah, Gideon, Jephthah, and Samson). The book also includes brief mentions of judges who are not associated with violent actions against the enemy (Tola, Jair, Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon [10:15; 12:8–15]), as well as the story of an abortive attempt to establish kingship during this time (Abimelek [chap. 9]).

Indeed, the stories of the judges who were deliverers tend to follow a relatively set pattern. They begin with the sin of the people, which leads to their oppression by a foreign power. The suffering of the people shocks them into realizing that they need God, and they turn to him for help. In such instances, God responds by giving the people a judge, really a military leader, who then delivers them from the power of their oppressors. However, after a period of peace, the people sin again, and another oppressor takes control.

The two stories in the appendix of the book of Judges simply add emphasis to the dark picture painted in the body of the book. These are two accounts of family sins that expand into national tragedies. Individuals from the tribe of Levi, the priestly tribe dedicated to special service to God, play a particularly negative role in the appendix.

This phrase “in those days Israel had no king” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25) is repeated throughout the appendix of the book and alerts the reader to one of the major themes of the book. Who will be the human leader of the people of God? The imperfect judges and the fragmentary condition of the tribes as well as their sad spiritual state cause the reader to yearn for something better: the rise of divinely appointed kingship in Israel. The books of Samuel and Kings, which follow, narrate the promise and ultimate failure of kingship, which itself will lead to the expectation of something even more, the Messiah.

A kingdom signifies the reality and extent of a king’s dominion or rule (Gen. 10:10; 20:9; Num. 32:33; 2Kings 20:13; Esther 1:22). Some kingdoms were relatively small; others were concerted attempts to gain the whole world.

A kingdom presupposes monarchy, rule by an individual, human authority. Although kings only have as much authority as their armies and the general populace allow, they nevertheless exercise an almost absolute power, which invites either profound humility or hubris. Royal arrogance, unfortunately, is the primary motif characterizing kings in the Bible (e.g., Dan.3).

God originally intended Israel to be governed as a theocracy, ruled by the one, true, living God (but see Gen. 17:6; Deut. 17:1420). Israel was to be a “kingdom of priests” (Exod. 19:6), but the people demanded a king (1Sam. 8:1–22). However, even when God granted their request, God remained King over the king and even retained ownership of the land (Lev. 25:23, 42, 55). The Israelite king was nothing more than God’s viceroy, with delegated authority. With few exceptions, most of the kings of Israel and Judah were corrupted by authority and wealth and forgot God (1Sam. 13:13–14; 15:28; Matt. 14:6–11). But God made a covenant with David, so that one of his descendants would become a coregent in a restored theocracy, the kingdom of God (2Sam. 7:1–29; Pss. 89:3; 132:11). In contrast to David’s more immediate descendants, this coming king would return to Jerusalem humble and mounted on a donkey (Zech. 9:9; cf. Isa. 62:11). The Gospels present Jesus Christ as this king (Matt. 21:1–9 pars.). Those who are likewise humble will inherit the land with him (Matt. 5:5).

Mercy is a distinguishing characteristic of the nature of God. God is called “the Father of mercies” (2Cor. 1:3 NRSV [NIV: “Father of compassion”]). God is “rich in mercy” (Eph. 2:4; cf. 2Sam. 24:14; Dan. 9:9). God’s mercy was demonstrated in his covenantal faithfulness to his people (1Kings 8:2324; Mic. 7:18–20). God redeemed the oppressed Israelites from slavery under Pharaoh because of his mercy, which was stirred when he heard their groaning and cry for help.

Jesus Christ lived a life full of mercy. He is, in a sense, the bodily manifestation of God’s mercy. Jesus expressed deep mercy whenever he saw the sick and the lost. The writers of the Gospels describe Jesus’ demonstrations of mercy when he healed the blind, the lame, the deaf, the leprous, the demon-possessed, and the dead (Matt. 9:36; 14:14; 20:34; Mark 1:41; 5:19; 6:34; 8:2; Luke 7:13; John 11:33). Jesus especially had compassion on the crowds, who did not have a spiritual leader, and he compared them to “sheep without a shepherd” (Matt. 9:36).

What is the proper response to God’s mercy and compassion? God expects 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 prophet Nathan was consulted by David when he contemplated building a temple to house the ark (2Sam. 7). Without consulting God, Nathan encouraged David in this laudable project, suggesting that in the prophet’s mind the project was so obviously right (acknowledging as it did God’s supreme kingship over the nation) that there was no need to ask God. However, an unexpected divine refusal came that same night. A divine speech, long by biblical narrative standards (twelve verses), was required to explain the baffling divine refusal. The problem with the project was that the time was not ripe (2Sam. 7:11; cf. 7:1), for David still had battles to fight.

Nathan reappears in biblical narrative in 2Sam. 12, sent by God to rebuke David for taking Bathsheba (this confrontation is alluded to in the superscription of Ps. 51). These interventions of Nathan came at David’s high point and low point.

The final book of the Bible is known by its opening line: “The revelation of Jesus Christ” (1:1 ESV, NRSV, KJV).

In powerful language and vivid imagery, Revelation presents the conclusion to God’s grand story of salvation, in which he defeats evil, reverses the curse of sin, restores creation, and lives forever among his people. Although the details are often difficult to understand, the main idea of Revelation is clear: God is in control and will successfully accomplish his purposes. In the end, God wins. As a transformative vision, Revelation empowers its readers/listeners to persevere faithfully in a fallen world until their Lord returns.

The overall purpose of Revelation is to comfort those who are facing persecution and to warn those who are compromising with the world system. During times of oppression, the righteous suffer and the wicked seem to prosper. This raises the question “Who is Lord?” Revelation says that Jesus is Lord in spite of how things appear, and he will return soon to establish his eternal kingdom. Those facing persecution find hope through a renewed perspective, and those who are compromising are warned to repent. Revelation’s goal is to transform the audience to follow Jesus faithfully.

Introduction (1:120). Chapter 1 includes both a prologue (1:1–8) and John’s commission to write what he sees (1:9–20). John’s vision focuses on the risen, glorified Christ and his continued presence among the seven churches.

Messages to the seven churches (2:1–3:22). Chapters 2–3 contain messages to seven churches of Asia Minor: Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea. The seven messages follow a similar literary pattern: a description of Jesus, a commendation, an accusation, an exhortation coupled with either warning or encouragement, an admonition to listen, and a promise to those who overcome. These messages reflect the twin dangers faced by the church: persecution and compromise.

Vision of the heavenly throne room (4:1–5:14). In chapters 4–5 the scene shifts to the heavenly throne room, where God reigns in majestic power. All of heaven worships the Creator and the Lion-Lamb (Jesus), who alone is qualified to open the scroll because of his sacrificial death.

Opening of the seven seals (6:1–8:1). The unveiling of God’s ultimate victory formally begins here. This section begins the first of a series of three judgment visions (seals, trumpets, and bowls), with seven elements each. When the sixth seal is opened, the question is asked, “Who can withstand it?” Chapter 7 provides the answer with its two visions of God’s people; only those belonging to God can withstand the outpouring of the Lamb’s wrath.

Sounding of the seven trumpets (8:2–11:19). The trumpet judgments, patterned after the plagues of Egypt, reveal God’s judgment upon a wicked world. Again, before the seventh element in the series, there is an interval with two visions (10:1–11; 11:1–14) that instruct and encourage God’s people.

The people of God versus the powers of evil (12:1–14:20). Chapter 12 offers the main reason why God’s people face hostility in this world. They are caught up in the larger conflict between God and Satan (the dragon). Although Satan was defeated by the death and resurrection of Christ, he continues to oppose the people of God. Chapter 13 introduces Satan’s two agents: the beast from the sea and the beast from the earth. The dragon and the two beasts constitute an unholy trinity bent on seducing and destroying God’s people. As another interval, chapter 14 offers a glimpse of the final future that God has in store for his people. One day the Lamb and his followers will stand on Mount Zion and sing a new song of redemption.

Pouring out of the seven bowls (15:1–16:21). The seven golden bowls follow the trumpets and seals as the final series of seven judgments. As the bowls of God’s wrath are poured out on an unrepentant world, the plagues are devastating indicators of God’s anger toward sin and evil. The only response from the “earth dwellers” (MSG; NIV: “inhabitants of the earth” [17:2, 8]; this is a common term in Revelation for unbelievers) is to curse God rather than repent (16:9, 11, 21).

Judgment and fall of Babylon (17:1–19:5). This section depicts the death of Babylon, a pagan power said to be “drunk with the blood of God’s holy people, the blood of those who bore testimony to Jesus” (17:6). The funeral laments for the deceased Babylon of chapter 18 give way to a celebration as God’s people rejoice over Babylon’s downfall (19:1–5).

God’s ultimate victory (19:6–22:5). This climactic section describes God’s ultimate victory over evil and the final reward for the people of God. This scene includes the return of Christ for his bride (19:6–16), Christ’s defeat of the two beasts and their allies (19:17–21), the binding of Satan and the millennial reign (20:1–6), the final defeat of Satan (20:7–10), and the final judgment and the death of death itself (20:11–15). Chapter 21 features a description of the new heaven and new earth, where God’s long-standing promise to live among his people is fully realized.

Conclusion (22:6–21). Revelation closes with final blessings for those who heed the message of the book and warnings for those who do not. Jesus’ promise to return soon is met with John’s prayer, “Come, Lord Jesus” (22:20).

A wooden walking stick that could have various functions. In ancient times, people did considerable amounts of walking. The ground in Israel is very uneven and rocky, making a walking stick a useful item (Gen. 32:10; Matt. 10:10). It is likely that walking sticks were customized so that they could serve as identification (Gen. 38:25).

Besides their utilitarian purpose, a rod or staff also came to denote an office and/or one’s authority. Military figures carried staffs that indicated their status (Judg. 5:14), and Gen. 49:10 predicts that the ruler’s staff will not depart from the tribe of Judah. Shepherds also carried a staff (Ps. 23:4; Mic. 7:14).

Sometimes a staff signified the presence of God with an individual. It was symbolic of the tree from which it was made, and a tree sometimes symbolically represented God. For this reason, some divine signs are associated with a raised staff. This was the case of Aaron’s staff. The Red Sea split after Moses extended his rod, and the Israelites had the better of the Amalekites on the battlefield as long as Moses kept the rod above his head. See also Aaron’s Rod.

(1)The first king of Israel (1Sam. 9:12Sam. 1:27; 1Chron. 9:35–10:14). Out of fear of their enemy the Philistines as well as displeasure over Samuel’s wicked sons, the people of Israel asked Samuel for a king like all the other nations had (1Sam. 8). Though God and Samuel both expressed displeasure with the people’s request, God directed Samuel to anoint Saul as king. Saul’s initial reluctance to make his role public and also his hesitation to immediately confront the Philistines are not a sign of humility, but rather are an early example of the kind of disobedience to God and his prophet Samuel that eventually would bring God’s great anger against him.

Saul’s first significant failure, however, occurred before a battle with the Philistines, while he and his army were camped at Gilgal (1Sam. 13). Before initiating battle, it was necessary to offer sacrifices. Samuel the priest, however, was late in arriving. Saul grew nervous because his troops were deserting, so he sacrificed the animals. When Samuel arrived, he confronted Saul. After all, with God on one’s side, large numbers of troops were unnecessary. Saul thus displayed a lack of confidence in God by his actions. For this, Samuel announced that he would not found a dynasty of kings (13:13–14).

Soon thereafter, Saul showed his disobedience in another important aspect of war. Upon victory, the king should immediately offer all the plunder to God. In addition, if the enemy came from within the land, all the captives were to be put to death (see Holy War). However, after defeating the hated Amalekites (cf. Exod. 17:8–16; Deut. 25:17–19), Saul kept the sheep and did not personally execute King Agag, their leader (1Sam. 15). For this, Samuel announced God’s decision to remove him from the kingship and anoint another king (15:26).

At this time, Samuel anointed David, but David did not immediately become king (1Sam. 16:1–13). For a period of time, David entered into Saul’s service (16:14–23). It was never David’s intention to forcibly remove Saul from the throne (1Sam. 24; 26), but Saul grew intensely jealous of this popular young man. Indeed, Saul was a man deeply plagued by mental problems, perhaps depression and paranoia, even before the conflict with David. His jealousy also brought him into conflict with his own brave son, Jonathan, who had a deep friendship with David. Saul ejected David from the court and then spent much of his energy trying to track him down and kill him. He was, however, unsuccessful.

Eventually, God abandoned Saul. He was defeated and killed by the Philistines in the battle of Mount Gilboa (1Sam. 31), and David mourned his death and the death of his friend Jonathan (2Sam. 1).

(2)Another name for the apostle Paul (see Paul).

There are numerous relationships in the OT that could be characterized as following a servant-master model. These included service to the monarchy (2Sam. 9:2), within households (Gen. 16:8), in the temple (1Sam. 2:15), or to God himself (Judg. 2:8). We also see extensive slavery laws in passages such as Exod. 21:111; Lev. 25:39–55; Deut. 15:12–18. The slavery laws were concerned with the proper treatment of Hebrew slaves and included guidelines for their eventual release and freedom. For example, Hebrew slaves who had sold themselves to others were to serve for a period of six years. On the seventh year, known also as the Sabbath Year, they were to be released. Once released, they were not to be sent away empty-handed, but rather were to be supported from the owner’s “threshing floor” and “winepress.” Slaves also had certain rights that gave them special privileges and protection from their masters. Captured slaves, for example, were allowed rest on the Sabbath (Exod. 20:10) and during special holidays (Deut. 16:11, 14). They could also be freed if their master permanently hurt or crippled them (Exod. 21:26–27). Also, severe punishment was imposed on a person who beat a slave to death (Exod. 21:20–21).

Slavery was very common in the first century AD, and there were many different kinds of slaves. For example, slaves might live in an extended household (oikos) in which they were born, or they might choose to sell themselves into this situation (1Pet. 2:18–25). Although slavery was a significant part of society in the first century AD, we never see Jesus or the apostles encourage slavery. Instead, both Paul and Peter encouraged godly character and obedience for slaves within this system (Eph. 6:5–8; Col. 3:22–25; 1Tim. 6:1–2; Philemon; 1Pet. 2:18–21). Likewise, masters were encouraged to be kind and fair to their slaves (Eph. 6:9; Col. 4:1). Later in the NT, slave trading was condemned by the apostle Paul as contrary to “sound doctrine” and “the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God” (1Tim. 1:10–11).

Jesus embodied the idea of a servant in word and deed. He fulfilled the role of the “Servant of the Lord,” the Suffering Servant predicted by the prophet Isaiah (Isa. 42:1–4; 50:4–9; 52:13–53:12). He also took on the role of a servant in the Gospels, identifying himself as the Son of Man who came to serve (Mark 10:45) and washing the disciples’ feet (John 13:4–5). Paul says that in the incarnation Jesus took on “the very nature of a servant” (Phil. 2:7).

The special relationship between Jesus and his followers is captured in the servant-master language of the NT Epistles, especially in Paul’s letters (Rom. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; Titus 1:1). This language focuses not so much on the societal status of these servants as on the allegiance and honor owed to Christ Jesus.

Shepherds were pastoralists who herded sheep and goats for meat, milk, clothing, and sacrifices. Shepherding was an integral part of life and a potent symbol in Israelite culture, reflected in biblical portrayals of Abel (Gen. 4:2), Moses (Exod. 3:1), David (1Sam. 16:11), and Jesus (Luke 2:820; John 10:11, 14).

A shepherd could herd his or her own flock (Gen. 30:37–43). Sons (Gen. 37:2), daughters (Gen. 29:6, 9), or hirelings (Gen. 13:7; 1Sam. 25:7; Luke 17:7) could assume the task. As agriculture developed and crops were cultivated, shepherds became marginalized (note that it was the youngest son of Jesse, David, who tended the sheep [1Sam. 16:11–13]) and even despised (Gen. 46:34). Shepherds could live in villages, daily herding their flock to and from nearby arable land (Gen. 29:7–14). Once all the grazing land had been consumed, shepherds led the flock to pastureland far enough from town to prohibit daily returns. They would then live a seminomadic existence, wandering when new grazing land and water were needed (Gen. 37:12; cf. Isa. 13:20). Shepherds constructed makeshift enclosures out of available materials (stones, brush) or used a cave and remained with the flock throughout the night (Gen. 31:40; Song 1:8; Luke 2:8)

The vital role of shepherding in ancient Near Eastern culture naturally led to the metaphorical use of the term to refer to both civil authorities (Num. 27:17; 1Kings 22:17; Isa. 44:28; Ezek. 34:1–19) and deity (Gen. 48:15; 49:24; Pss. 23:1; 78:52), both in Israel and among its neighbors. Both the exodus (Exod. 15:13, 17; Ps. 78:52–55, 71–72) and the return from Babylonian exile (Ps. 44:11–23; Jer. 23:1–8; 31:8–14) are portrayed in pastoral terms as Yahweh shepherding his people to safe pasture. In the NT, Jesus called himself the “good shepherd” (John 10:1–16), and the metaphor is extended to church leaders who are to imitate the good shepherd in their provision and protection of God’s people (Acts 20:28; 1Pet. 5:1–3).

“Tabernacle” in Hebrew (mishkan) is a general word for a tent or a dwelling. In the Pentateuch particularly, “tabernacle” most often refers to the special dwelling place of God among the Hebrew people during their wandering through the wilderness. The tabernacle was the abode of God’s glory before the building of Solomon’s temple in Jerusalem. The detailed description of the tabernacle and its construction composes more than one-third of the book of Exodus (chaps. 2540), signifying its theological importance to the life of God’s people before the forming of the nation-state of Israel.

The detailed command of God to build the tabernacle in Exod. 25–30 is part of a larger dramatic narrative. While Moses is on the mountain of God receiving the instructions for the tabernacle, the Hebrews have embarked on a festival of revelry and worship, offering sacrifices to a golden calf, constructed during Moses’ absence (32:1–19). Moses is furious and smashes the tablets of the Ten Commandments on the ground, and yet he returns to the mountain to intercede for the people. God punishes the people with a plague but does not destroy or abandon them completely, for “the Lord, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness” (34:6) renews his covenant with the people, and Moses again returns from the mountain with the Ten Commandments (34:27–29). Exodus 35–40 then recounts the careful obedience with which the people adhere to God’s command to build the tabernacle, assiduously following the instructions given in Exod. 25–30.

The description of the tabernacle given in the text is of an ornate sanctuary within a tent structure situated at the very center of Israel’s camp. The tabernacle thus took the place of the tent of meeting described in Exod. 33:7–11, which was pitched outside the camp. However, the terms “tabernacle” and “tent of meeting” appear to be used synonymously in the Pentateuch after the construction of the tabernacle was completed. According to the text, the dimensions of the tabernacle were as follows: 150 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 7.5 feet high (Exod. 27:18). Around the exterior of the tabernacle was an outer courtyard where an altar for burnt offerings stood at the entrance to the tent of meeting, as well as a basin filled with water for the ritual purifications of the priests. Within the outer enclosure of the tabernacle stood a lampstand, an incense altar, and a table where the bread of the Presence was placed. Within the temple was a second enclosure, the holy of holies, where the ark of the covenant was placed beneath the wings of the golden cherubim.

A divine communication in the form of visual imagery, usually accompanied by words, and often using symbols that require explanation and spur reflection about God’s otherwise imperceptible presence and activity. Presumably, the recipient “sees” the vision as an event of inward perception, often within a dream during sleep or in a divinely induced state of ecstasy (Gen. 15; Dan. 7:1; 10:19; 2Cor. 12:1–4). Characteristically, visions entail conversation with God or an angelic representative, often following a question-and-answer format (Dan. 7:15–28; Zech. 1:8–15, 18–21). The visionary is actually in the scene as direct observer and active participant (Dan. 8:1–2).

Prophetic visions are meant to be retold. For example, imagery is accompanied by the authentication of divine commissioning (Isa. 6; Ezek. 1:1–3:15; Rev. 10), leading to announcement of judgment (Jer. 1:4–19). This close conjunction of image and word (1Sam. 3:21) is reinforced by statements about a prophet “seeing” God’s word (e.g., Mic. 1:1 ESV, NRSV, NASB) and about prophetic books as collections of visions (2Chron. 32:32; Nah. 1:1). Vision reports join oracles and other forms of prophetic speech as essential features of these works. Visions contribute to the community’s spiritual well-being (Prov. 29:18; Ezek. 7:26), but not always (Lam. 2:14; Ezek. 13; Zech. 13:4; Col. 2:18).

Visions drive the narrative surrounding Jesus’ birth (Matt. 1:18–2:23; Luke 1:1–2:20). The baptism of Jesus includes a visionary element, the Holy Spirit’s anointing of Jesus for his ministry, accompanied by the Father’s word (Matt. 3:16–17; Mark 1:10–11; Luke 3:22; John 1:32–33). Jesus’ transfiguration is comparable (Matt. 17:1–9; Mark 9:2–10; Luke 9:28–36). Visions mark key transition points in the narrative of Acts (e.g., chaps. 9–11). The book of Revelation opens with a vision of the Son of Man (1:9–20) and is structured around three vision cycles of judgment interspersed with visions of heaven meant to bolster the readers’ faithfulness.

“Word” is used in the Bible to refer to the speech of God in oral, written, or incarnate form. In each of these uses, God desires to make himself known to his people. The communication of God is always personal and relational, whether he speaks to call things into existence (Gen. 1) or to address an individual directly (Gen. 2:1617; Exod. 3:14). The prophets and the apostles received the word of God (Deut. 18:14–22; John 16:13), some of which was proclaimed but not recorded. The greatest revelation in this regard is the person of Jesus Christ, who is called the “Word” of God (John 1:1, 14).

The psalmist declared God’s word to be an eternal object of hope and trust that gives light and direction (Ps. 119), and Jesus declared the word to be truth (John 17:17). The word is particularized and intimately connected with God himself by means of the key phrases “your word,” “the word of God,” “the word of the Lord,” “word about Christ,” and “the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17; Col. 3:16). Our understanding of the word is informed by a variety of terms and contexts in the canon of Scripture, a collection of which is found in Ps. 119.

The theme of the word in Ps. 119 is continued and clarified in the NT, accentuating the intimate connection between the word of God and God himself. The “Word” of God is the eternal Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:1; 1John 1:1–4), who took on flesh and blood so that we might see the glory of the eternal God. The sovereign glory of Christ as the Word of God is depicted in the vision of John in Rev. 19:13. As the Word of God, Jesus Christ ultimately gives us our lives (John 1:4; 6:33; 10:10), sustains our lives (John 5:24; 6:51, 54; 8:51), and ultimately renders a just judgment regarding our lives (John 5:30; 8:16, 26; 9:39; cf. Matt. 25:31–33; Heb. 4:12).

The second king of Israel (r. 1010–970 BC), founder of a dynasty that continued with his son Solomon (r. 970–931 BC), who ruled all of Israel; subsequently the remaining “sons of David” ruled the southern kingdom, Judah, until 586 BC.

David’s importance can be measured by the vast space devoted to the account of his life (1Sam. 16:1–1Kings 2:12; 1Chron. 11:1–29:30). The titles of many psalms identify him as their author. Although there are no contemporary extrabiblical references to David due to the rarity of inscriptions in Palestine at this time, the “house of David” (or Tel Dan) inscription, dated to the eighth century BC, provides an extraordinarily early reference to his dynasty.

David and Saul

Human kingship is a late development in Israel, but a number of ancient texts anticipate the establishment of the institution (Gen. 17:6; Deut. 17:14–20) and specifically the rise of a king from Judah (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:17). Thus, it is surprising that the first king of Israel is not from Judah, but from Benjamin. When the people ask Samuel for a king, he anoints Saul (1Sam. 8–12), who proves to be a tremendous disappointment. He forfeits the establishment of his dynasty when he shows a lack of confidence in God by rashly offering prebattle sacrifices (13:13–14). God then rejects Saul as king because he does not execute God’s full judgment against the Amalekites as he knows he should (15:23).

At this point the biblical history turns its attention to David. God commands Samuel to go to Bethlehem, specifically to the household of Jesse, to anoint one of his sons as the next king (1Sam. 16). In contrast to Saul, who is notable because of his tall, imposing physical stature (10:23), David is the youngest and smallest of all the children of Jesse, a simple shepherd. Nonetheless, he is the chosen one because God “looks at the heart” (16:7). However, David does not immediately assume the kingship. Indeed, his anointing is kept secret.

The first two accounts of David’s initial public appearance appear in 1Sam. 16:14–17:58. Some doubt attends the question of whether these two stories are chronologically or thematically organized, but in either case they anticipate David’s later role as psalm singer and warrior. The narrative describes David’s work in Saul’s court as a harpist whose music soothes Saul’s tormented mind (16:14–23) and tells the heroic story of David’s courageous stand against Goliath, a gigantic Philistine mercenary (1Sam. 17).

Although David never shows any signs of subversion or disloyalty, his growing popularity increases the paranoia of Saul. However, Saul cannot simply kill off such a popular figure, even though in a fit of madness he throws a spear at him (1Sam. 18:10–11). Saul instead settles on a plan that would lead to David’s death on the battlefield. Saul offers his daughter to David in marriage. After an abortive first attempt involving his daughter Merab, Saul invites him to marry Michal, though as a bride-price he asks through his attendants for one hundred Philistine foreskins (1Sam. 18:25). Saul assumes that David will surely die in the attempt to obtain them, but instead David kills two hundred Philistines and marries Michal. The alliance to the royal house strengthens his later bid for the throne, but for the moment it serves the purpose of making Saul even more suspicious.

While Saul’s hostility increases toward David, Saul’s son Jonathan develops an intense personal friendship with David (1Sam. 18:1–4). Jonathan recognizes his father’s weaknesses and understands that he will not be the next king. He helps David escape his father’s wrath, and forever afterward David is kind to the descendants of Jonathan (1Sam. 19–20).

Eventually, Saul’s murderous intentions toward David become so intense that he must leave the court and live in the hinterlands, moving from place to place, staying one step ahead of Saul and his men. He is not alone, however. With him is an army of six hundred men, a prophet (Gad), and the high priest (Abiathar). In essence, he functions as a kingdom in exile. He saves the Judean city of Keilah from the Philistines (1Sam. 23:1–6) and protects the flocks of Judean landowners such as the aptly named Nabal (“fool”) (1Sam. 25). The latter is not properly grateful for the help, and David is ready to avenge himself against him. Fortunately, Nabal’s wife, Abigail, wisely intercedes with David. Nabal dies of other causes, and David marries Abigail.

David is to be the next king, but he is no usurper. Two times during this period (1Sam. 24; 26) David’s men are in a position to dispatch the king. It may even be possible to justify such a move because Saul is pursuing David to kill him. David knows, however, that it is wrong to harm the anointed of the Lord. He is not going to manipulate the situation and grasp the kingship; he will wait on the Lord’s own timing. David continues to keep out of Saul’s way, even seeking refuge with the Philistines for a period of time.

Eventually, however, Saul’s moment of judgment comes. Saul’s final battle is against the Philistines, the major foreign force still inside the borders of the promised land. Both Saul and Jonathan meet their end on Mount Gilboa, and David sings songs that express his sadness over their deaths (1Sam. 31–2Sam. 1).

David’s Kingship

Even with Saul out of the way, David’s rise to kingship is not easy. He is immediately crowned king of Judah (2Sam. 2:1–7), but the northern tribes choose to follow Ish-Bosheth, the son of Saul. War erupts between the two kingdoms. Eventually, though, the powerful general Abner abandons his support of Saul’s son, sealing the end of that dynasty. Ish-Bosheth is killed by his own men, and soon David becomes king over all Israel (5:1–5).

David’s kingship leads to significant victories that, in essence, complete the conquest of Canaan by finally subduing all the internal enemies. His men take the city of Jerusalem from the Jebusites, and he makes it his capital (2Sam. 5:6–16). He also defeats the Philistines, who have been a thorn in the side of Israel for years (5:17–25; for other victories, see 8:1–14). In celebration, David brings the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem (2Sam. 6).

The David narrative reaches its apex when God enters into a covenant with him that establishes his dynasty (2Sam. 7; 1Chron. 17). After David dies, his son will succeed him, and indeed his dynasty lasts for many hundreds of years (see below).

David is a good king, but not a perfect king. A turning point in his reign comes in 2Sam. 11. Up to this point, David has been content with what God has given him. He does not grasp for anything that does not belong to him. However, when he sees the beautiful Bathsheba bathing, he sends messengers to bring her to his house, where the two have sexual intercourse and she becomes pregnant. In an attempt to conceal this sin of adultery, he orders the death of her husband, Uriah the Hittite. Thus, he adds the crime of murder to that of adultery.

David thinks that the sin is secret, but nothing is hidden from God, who sends his prophet Nathan to confront David (2Sam. 12; cf. Ps. 51). The difference between Saul and David is not that the latter is perfect but rather that David, as opposed to Saul, repents when he sins. Thus, God allows his reign to continue. Even so, David feels the consequences of his sin. First, the son that Bathsheba bears from her illicit union with David is struck with illness and dies. And ever afterward, David’s family life is troubled, with great impact on the political life of Israel. Son is pitted against son (Amnon and Absalom [2Sam. 13]), as well as son against father (Absalom and David [2Sam. 15–18]). Absalom temporarily deposes his father from the throne, but David eventually regains the kingship, though at the cost of the heartbreaking loss of his son.

Even at the very end, there is conflict within David’s house. When David has grown old, another son, Adonijah, attempts to take the throne, with support from powerful people such as Joab and Abiathar. At the instigation of Bathsheba and Nathan, however, David places the son of his choosing, Solomon, on the throne (1Kings 1). David then dies after a reign of forty-one years, seven in Hebron and the rest over all Israel (1Kings 2:10–12).

David’s Legacy

The account in Chronicles emphasizes David’s role in the preparations for the building of the temple. He had wanted to build the structure, but God says that this task is not for the one who completes the conquest of Canaan (1Chron. 22:8), but rather for his son Solomon, who will inherit a stable nation and whose very name means “peace.”

David’s greatest legacy is the dynasty that bears his name. Beginning with Solomon, however, his successors do not continue his spiritual legacy. Although a number of kings do some good, only Hezekiah (r. 727–698 BC) and Josiah (r. 639–609 BC) are given unqualified approval. Eventually, the Davidic rule comes to an end in Jerusalem at the hands of the Babylonians (586 BC). But God is not done with his redemptive purposes, and his promise to David is that he will have a ruler on the throne “forever” (2Sam. 7:16). The NT recognizes that Jesus Christ is the fulfillment of this promise. He is the greater son of David, the one who is the Christ or Messiah, the anointed king. Jesus is the one who reigns forever in heaven. The life and the rule of David foreshadow the messianic rule of Jesus Christ.

Dwelling can refer to a place (“building, residence”[e.g., Exod. 15:17; Acts 7:46]) or an action (“to reside”[e.g., 1Sam. 2:29]). While dwelling characterizes people’sresidence (Gen. 27:39; Num. 24:21; Prov. 24:15; Isa. 32:18; Hab. 1:6;Zeph. 3:6–7), God’s sanctuary, where the ark of thecovenant resides (Exod. 25–26; Ps. 132:8), is described as hisdwelling among his people (Exod. 15:13, 17; Lev. 15:31; 26:11; 1Sam.2:29, 32; 1Chron. 9:19; Zech. 2:13). Both the tabernacle(2Sam. 7:6; 15:25; 1Chron. 16:1) and the temple (2Chron.31:2; 36:15; Pss. 84:1; 132:5; Ezek. 3:12; Mic. 1:2–3) are sodescribed. A sanctuary for the needy and oppressed (Pss. 27:5; 31:20;68:5), it is also a post from which God watches the earth (Pss.33:14; 132:6–9). God himself can also be described as a“dwelling” in which people seek refuge (Pss. 90:1; 91:9;Ezek. 37:27).

Deuteronomy,perhaps in an effort to eliminate any misconception of God’somnipresence or in reaction to the destruction of the first temple,describes the sanctuary as the “dwelling for his Name”(Deut. 12:11; 14:23; 16:2, 6, 11; 26:2; cf. 1Kings 8:29; Isa.18:2–7; Jer. 7:12), while Kings and Chronicles (1Kings8:30, 39, 43, 49; cf. 1Chron. 17:5; 2Chron. 6:21, 30, 33,39; 30:27) maintain that God’s dwelling is in heaven and not onearth. As Solomon confesses, not even the heavens can contain God,let alone a temple (1Kings 8:27; cf. Ps.74:7; Jer. 25:30). Someprophets and writings refer to Jerusalem, the location of the nowdestroyed temple, as the “dwelling of God” (e.g., Ezra7:15; Jer. 31:23; Lam. 2:6), while others prefer the “dwellingplace of God’s Name” (e.g., Neh. 1:9; Isa. 18:7).

Job’sfriend Bildad identifies the dwelling of an evil person as onecharacterized by calamities (Job 18:5–21), while Job, who wantsto make his claim of innocence to God, laments his inability tolocate God’s dwelling (23:3).

Jesusis described in John’s Gospel as the Word (logos) of God thatdwelled or “tabernacled” (skēnoō) among humans(John 1:14). Paul describes believers as groaning in waiting to beclothed with their “heavenly dwelling,” by which theyattain immortality (2Cor. 5:2–4), and says that they arebeing built into a dwelling of God’s Spirit (Eph. 2:22). Thislatter sentiment is echoed in Revelation, which says that the newcity of God will need no physical temple because God and the Lambthemselves are the temple, dwelling among the people (21:3, 22; cf.1Cor. 3:16–17).

For Christians, God is the creator of the cosmos and theredeemer of humanity. He has revealed himself in historicalacts—namely, in creation, in the history of Israel, andespecially in the person and work of Jesus Christ. There is only oneGod (Deut. 6:4); “there is no other” (Isa. 45:5). Because“God is spirit” (John 4:24), he must reveal himselfthrough various images and metaphors.

Imageryof God

God’scharacter and attributes are revealed primarily through the use ofimagery, the best and most understandable way to describe themysterious nature of God. Scripture employs many images to describeGod’s being and character. Some examples follow here.

Godis compared to the father who shows compassion and love to hischildren (Ps. 103:13; Rom. 8:15). The father image is also used bythe prophets to reveal God’s creatorship (Isa. 64:8). Jesuspredominantly uses the language of “Father” in referenceto God (Mark 8:38; 13:32; 14:36), revealing his close relationshipwith the Father. God is also identified as the king of Israel evenbefore the Israelites have a human king (1Sam. 10:19).

ThePsalter exalts Yahweh as the king, acknowledging God’ssovereignty and preeminence (Pss. 5:2; 44:4; 47:6–7; 68:24;74:12; 84:3; 95:3; 145:1). God is metaphorically identified as theshepherd who takes care of his sheep, his people, to depict hisnature of provision and protection (Ps. 23:1–4). The image ofthe potter is also employed to describe the nature of God, whocreates his creatures according to his will (Jer. 18:6; Rom.9:20–23). In Hos. 2:4–3:5 God is identified as thelong-suffering husband of the adulterous wife Israel. In the settingof war, God is depicted as the divine warrior who fights against hisenemy (Exod. 15:3).

Godis also referred to as advocate (Isa. 1:18), judge (Gen. 18:25), andlawgiver (Deut. 5:1–22). The image of the farmer is alsofrequently adopted to describe God’s nature of compassionatecare, creation, providence, justice, redemption, sanctification, andmore (e.g., Isa. 5:1–7; John 15:1–12). God is oftenreferred to as the teacher (Exod. 4:15) who teaches what to do, asdoes the Holy Spirit in the NT (John 14:26). The Holy Spirit isidentified as the counselor, the helper, the witness, and the guide(John 14:16, 26; 15:26). God is often metaphorically compared tovarious things in nature, such as rock (Ps. 18:2, 31, 46), light (Ps.27:1), fire (Deut. 4:24; 9:3), lion (Hos. 11:10), and eagle (Deut.32:11–12). In particular, the Davidic psalms employ many imagesin nature—rock, fortress, shield, horn, and stronghold (e.g.,Ps. 18:2)—to describe God’s perfect protection.

Last,anthropomorphism often is employed to describe God’sactivities. Numerous parts of the human body are used to speak ofGod: face (Num. 6:25–26), eyes (2Chron. 16:9), mouth(Deut. 8:3), ears (Neh. 1:6), nostrils (Exod. 15:8), hands (Ezra7:9), arms (Deut. 33:27), fingers (Ps. 8:3), voice (Exod. 15:26),shoulders (Deut. 33:12), feet (Ps. 18:9), and back (Exod. 33:21–22).

Namesand Attributes of God

TheOT refers to God by many names. One of the general terms used forGod, ’el (which probably means “ultimate supremacy”),often appears in a compound form with a qualifying word, as in ’el’elyon (“God Most High”), ’el shadday (“GodAlmighty”), and ’el ro’i (“the God who seesme” or “God of my seeing”). These descriptive namesreveal important attributes of God and usually were derived from thepersonal experiences of the people of God in real-life settings;thus, they do not describe an abstract concept of God.

Themost prominent personal name of God is yahweh (YHWH), which istranslated as “the Lord” in most English Bibles. At theburning bush in the wilderness of Horeb, God first revealed to Moseshis personal name in sentence form: “I am who I am”(Exod. 3:13–15). Though debated, the divine name “YHWH”seems to originate from an abbreviated form of this sentence. Yahweh,who was with Moses and his people at the time of exodus, is the Godwho was with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. According to Jesus’testimony, “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the Godof Jacob” is identified as the God “of the living”(Matt. 22:32). Hence, the name “Yahweh” is closely tiedto God’s self-revelation as the God of presence and life. (Seealso Names of God.)

Manyof God’s attributes are summarized in Exod. 34:6–7: “TheLord, the Lord, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger,abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands,and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leavethe guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their childrenfor the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.”Below are further explanations of some of the representativeattributes of God.

Holiness.The moral excellence of God is the attribute that underlies all otherattributes. Thus, all God’s attributes can be modified by theadjective holy: holy love, holy justice, holy mercy, holyrighteousness, holy compassion, holy wisdom, and so forth. God is theonly supremely holy one (1Sam. 2:2; Rev. 15:4). God’sname is also holy; those who profane God’s name are condemnedas guilty (Exod. 20:7; Lev. 22:32). God is depicted as the one whohas concern for his holy name, which the Israelites profaned amongthe nations; God actively seeks to restore the holiness of hisdefiled name (Ezek. 36:21–23). God’s holiness is revealedby his righteous action (Isa. 5:16). Not only is God holy, but alsohe expects his people to be holy (Lev. 11:45; 19:2). All thesacrificial codes of Leviticus represent the moral requirements ofholiness for the worshipers. Because of God’s character ofholiness, he cannot tolerate sin in the lives of people, and hebrings judgment to those who do not repent (Hab. 1:13).

Loveand justice.Because “God is love,” no one reaches the true knowledgeof God without having love (1John 4:8). Images of the fatherand the faithful husband are frequently employed to portray God’slove (Deut. 1:31; Jer. 31:32; Hos. 2:14–20; 11:1–4).God’s love was supremely demonstrated by the giving of his onlySon Jesus Christ for his people (John 3:16; Rom. 5:7–8; 1John4:9–10). God expects his people to follow the model of Christ’ssacrificial love (1John 3:16).

God’sjustice is the foundation of his moral law and his ways (Deut. 32:4;Job 34:12; Ps. 9:16; Rev. 15:3). It is also seen in his will (Ps.99:4). God loves justice and acts with justice (Ps. 33:5). God’sjustice is demonstrated in judging people according to theirdeeds—punishing wickedness and rewarding righteousness (Ezek.18:20; Ps. 58:11; Rev. 20:12–13). God establishes justice byupholding the cause of the oppressed (Ps. 103:6) and by vindicatingthose afflicted (1Sam. 25:39). God is completely impartial inimplementing justice (Job 34:18–19). As with holiness, Godrequires his people to reflect his justice (Prov. 21:3).

Godkeeps a perfect balance between the attributes of love and justice.God’s love never infringes upon his justice, and vice versa.The cross of Jesus Christ perfectly shows these two attributes in oneact. Because of his love, God gave his only Son for his people;because of his justice, God punished his Son for the sake of theirsins. The good news is that God’s justice was satisfied by thework of Jesus Christ (Rom. 3:25–26).

Righteousnessand mercy.God’s righteousness shows his unique moral perfection. God’snature, actions, and laws display his character of righteousness(Pss. 19:8–9; 119:137; Dan. 9:14). “Righteousness andjustice” are the foundation of God’s throne (Ps. 89:14).God’s righteousness was especially demonstrated in the work ofJesus Christ (Rom. 3:21–22). God’s righteousness willultimately be revealed in his final judgment (Rev. 19:2; 20–22;cf. Ps. 7:11).

TheEnglish word “mercy” renders various words in theoriginal languages: in Hebrew, khesed, khanan, rakham; in Greek,charis, eleos, oiktirmos, splanchnon. English Bibles translate thesevariously as “mercy,” “compassion,” “grace,”“kindness,” or “love.” The word “mercy”is chosen here as a representative concept (cf. Ps. 86:15). God’smercy is most clearly seen in his act of forgiving sinners. In thePsalter, “Have mercy on me” is the most common form ofexpression when the psalmist entreats God’s forgiveness (Pss.41:4, 10; 51:1). God’s mercy is shown abundantly to his chosenpeople (Eph. 2:4–8). Because of his mercy, their sins areforgiven (Mic. 7:18), their punishments are withheld (Ezra 9:13), andeven sinners’ prayers are heard (Ps. 51:1; Luke 18:13–14).God is “the Father of mercies” (2Cor. 1:3 NRSV).

Godkeeps a perfect balance between righteousness and mercy. Hisrighteousness and mercy never infringe upon each other, nor does oneoperate at the expense of the other. God’s abundant mercy isshown to sinners through Jesus Christ, but if they do not repent oftheir sins, his righteous judgment will be brought upon them.

Faithfulness.God’s faithfulness is revealed in keeping the covenant that hemade with his people. God “is the faithful God, keeping hiscovenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him andkeep his commandments” (Deut. 7:9). God is faithful to hischaracter, his name, and his word (Neh. 9:8; Ps. 106:8; 2Tim.2:13; Heb. 6:13–18). God’s faithfulness is clearly seenin fulfilling his promise (Josh. 23:14). God showed his faithfulnessby fulfilling all the promises that he made to Abraham (Gen. 12:2–3;Rom. 9:9; Gal. 4:28; Heb. 6:13–15), by having Solomon build thetemple that he promised to David (2Sam. 7:12–13; 1Kings8:17–21), and by sending his people into exile in Babylon andreturning them to their homeland (Jer. 25:8–11; Dan. 9:2–3).God’s faithfulness was ultimately demonstrated by sending JesusChrist, as was promised in the OT (Luke 24:44; Acts 13:32–33;1Cor. 15:3–8).

Goodness.Jesus said, “No one is good—except God alone” (Mark10:18). God demonstrates his goodness in his actions (Ps. 119:68), inhis work of creation (1Tim. 4:4), in his love (Ps. 86:5), andin his promises (Josh. 23:14–15).

Patience.God is “slow to anger” (Exod. 34:6; Num. 14:18), which isa favorite expression for his patience (Neh. 9:17; Pss. 86:15; 103:8;Joel 2:13). God is patient with sinful people for a long time (Acts13:18). Because of his patient character, he delays punishment (Isa.42:14). For instance, God was patient with his disobedient prophetJonah and also with the sinful people of Nineveh (Jon. 3:1–10).The purpose of God’s patience is to lead people towardrepentance (Rom.2:4).

Godof the Trinity

TheChristian God of the Bible is the triune God. God is one but existsin three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matt.28:19). The Son is one with the Father (John 10:30); the Holy Spiritis one with God (2Sam. 23:2–3). All three share the samedivine nature; they are all-knowing, holy, glorious, and called“Lord” and “God” (Matt. 11:25; John 1:1;20:28; Acts 3:22; 5:3–4; 10:36; 1Cor. 8:6; 2Cor.3:17–18; 2Pet. 1:1). All three share in the same work ofcreation (Gen. 1:1–3), salvation (1Pet. 1:2), indwelling(John 14:23), and directing the church’s mission (Matt.28:18–20; Acts 16:6–10; 14:27; 13:2–4).

A kingdom signifies the reality and extent of a king’sdominion or rule (Gen. 10:10; 20:9; Num. 32:33; 2Kings 20:13;Esther 1:22). Some kingdoms were relatively small; others wereconcerted attempts to gain the whole world. For example, there wereapproximately fifty million people under the Pax Romana (“Romanpeace”—the consolidated empire) during Augustus’sreign. Demographers estimate that the global population in the firstcentury was about 250 million. Therefore, approximately one-fifth ofthe world’s population was under the authority of a single king(Caesar). The Roman Empire (kingdom) reached its greatest extentunder Trajan (r. AD 98–117), about two million square miles.

Authorityand power. Akingdom presupposes monarchy, rule by an individual, human authority.(The Bible has little to say about democracy; that form of governmentwas developed by the Greeks, but a primarily empire mentalitydominated the context of the biblical world.) Although kings onlyhave as much authority as their armies and the general populaceallow, they nevertheless exercise an almost absolute power, whichinvites either profound humility or hubris. Royal arrogance,unfortunately, is the primary motif characterizing kings in the Bible(e.g., Dan. 3). Gaius Octavius (later Gaius Julius CaesarOctavianus), the grandnephew of Julius Caesar, ruled as emperor from31 BC to AD 14. The Roman senate declared him “Augustus”(Lat. Augusta) on January 13, 27 BC. “Augustus” thenbecame a title held by all reigning emperors except Vitellius. Thetitle means “revered or august one,” connoting superhumanqualities. Egyptian, Greek, and Roman kings were routinely veneratedas gods. By way of analogy, even the Bible presents God as a king(Pss. 5:2; 10:16; 44:4).

Akingdom may be visualized as a series of concentric circles,beginning with the throne, which is the seat of a king’s ruleand judgment, then the court and “retainer class” ofbureaucrats and aides (e.g., scribes, tax collectors), and thenradiating out to the subjects, animals, and landholdings (see Deut.17:18; Esther 1:14; Matt. 2:3). The king typically entered into apartnership with the upper classes: he provided peace and protection,and they in turn offered loyalty and a portion of their wealth.Latifundism, the dividing up of agricultural property into largeestates, enabled kings to reward political supporters and punishtheir enemies (Matt. 14:1–12 pars.). The powerless andmarginalized often found themselves outside this comfortableagreement, without property. When they threatened to change thepolitical order, they were violently crushed (see Matt. 11:7–12).

Royaltyand religion.Kingdom and religion were intertwined, so that the king was oftenhigh priest or had direct influence over the priesthood. Solomon madeZadok, a longtime loyal supporter of his father, David, high priest.His descendants dominated the office until the Seleucid crisis(1Kings 2:26–27, 35; 4:4). Herod the Great and PontiusPilate selected high priests from aristocratic families in Jerusalem.The primary capital of a kingdom was the ownership of land andrevenues from taxation. Kings also took censuses of the people fortaxation purposes. They were also generally free to tax anything inor passing through their realm. Herod Antipas taxed fishermen forusing the Sea of Galilee (see Matt. 9:9–12 pars.).

Godoriginally intended Israel to be governed as a theocracy, ruled bythe one, true, living God (but see Gen. 17:6; Deut. 17:14–20).Israel was to be a “kingdom of priests” (Exod. 19:6), butthe people demanded a king (1Sam. 8:1–22). However, evenwhen God granted their request, God remained King over the king andeven retained ownership of the land (Lev. 25:23, 42, 55). TheIsraelite king was nothing more than God’s viceroy, withdelegated authority. With few exceptions, most of the kings of Israeland Judah were corrupted by authority and wealth and forgot God(1Sam. 13:13–14; 15:28; Matt. 14:6–11). But Godmade a covenant with David, so that one of his descendants wouldbecome a coregent in a restored theocracy, the kingdom of God (2Sam.7:1–29; Pss. 89:3; 132:11). In contrast to David’s moreimmediate descendants, this coming king would return to Jerusalemhumble and mounted on a donkey (Zech. 9:9; cf. Isa. 62:11). TheGospels present Jesus Christ as this king (Matt. 21:1–9 pars.).Those who are likewise humble will inherit the land with him (Matt.5:5).

A kingdom signifies the reality and extent of a king’sdominion or rule (Gen. 10:10; 20:9; Num. 32:33; 2Kings 20:13;Esther 1:22). Some kingdoms were relatively small; others wereconcerted attempts to gain the whole world. For example, there wereapproximately fifty million people under the Pax Romana (“Romanpeace”—the consolidated empire) during Augustus’sreign. Demographers estimate that the global population in the firstcentury was about 250 million. Therefore, approximately one-fifth ofthe world’s population was under the authority of a single king(Caesar). The Roman Empire (kingdom) reached its greatest extentunder Trajan (r. AD 98–117), about two million square miles.

Authorityand power. Akingdom presupposes monarchy, rule by an individual, human authority.(The Bible has little to say about democracy; that form of governmentwas developed by the Greeks, but a primarily empire mentalitydominated the context of the biblical world.) Although kings onlyhave as much authority as their armies and the general populaceallow, they nevertheless exercise an almost absolute power, whichinvites either profound humility or hubris. Royal arrogance,unfortunately, is the primary motif characterizing kings in the Bible(e.g., Dan. 3). Gaius Octavius (later Gaius Julius CaesarOctavianus), the grandnephew of Julius Caesar, ruled as emperor from31 BC to AD 14. The Roman senate declared him “Augustus”(Lat. Augusta) on January 13, 27 BC. “Augustus” thenbecame a title held by all reigning emperors except Vitellius. Thetitle means “revered or august one,” connoting superhumanqualities. Egyptian, Greek, and Roman kings were routinely veneratedas gods. By way of analogy, even the Bible presents God as a king(Pss. 5:2; 10:16; 44:4).

Akingdom may be visualized as a series of concentric circles,beginning with the throne, which is the seat of a king’s ruleand judgment, then the court and “retainer class” ofbureaucrats and aides (e.g., scribes, tax collectors), and thenradiating out to the subjects, animals, and landholdings (see Deut.17:18; Esther 1:14; Matt. 2:3). The king typically entered into apartnership with the upper classes: he provided peace and protection,and they in turn offered loyalty and a portion of their wealth.Latifundism, the dividing up of agricultural property into largeestates, enabled kings to reward political supporters and punishtheir enemies (Matt. 14:1–12 pars.). The powerless andmarginalized often found themselves outside this comfortableagreement, without property. When they threatened to change thepolitical order, they were violently crushed (see Matt. 11:7–12).

Royaltyand religion.Kingdom and religion were intertwined, so that the king was oftenhigh priest or had direct influence over the priesthood. Solomon madeZadok, a longtime loyal supporter of his father, David, high priest.His descendants dominated the office until the Seleucid crisis(1Kings 2:26–27, 35; 4:4). Herod the Great and PontiusPilate selected high priests from aristocratic families in Jerusalem.The primary capital of a kingdom was the ownership of land andrevenues from taxation. Kings also took censuses of the people fortaxation purposes. They were also generally free to tax anything inor passing through their realm. Herod Antipas taxed fishermen forusing the Sea of Galilee (see Matt. 9:9–12 pars.).

Godoriginally intended Israel to be governed as a theocracy, ruled bythe one, true, living God (but see Gen. 17:6; Deut. 17:14–20).Israel was to be a “kingdom of priests” (Exod. 19:6), butthe people demanded a king (1Sam. 8:1–22). However, evenwhen God granted their request, God remained King over the king andeven retained ownership of the land (Lev. 25:23, 42, 55). TheIsraelite king was nothing more than God’s viceroy, withdelegated authority. With few exceptions, most of the kings of Israeland Judah were corrupted by authority and wealth and forgot God(1Sam. 13:13–14; 15:28; Matt. 14:6–11). But Godmade a covenant with David, so that one of his descendants wouldbecome a coregent in a restored theocracy, the kingdom of God (2Sam.7:1–29; Pss. 89:3; 132:11). In contrast to David’s moreimmediate descendants, this coming king would return to Jerusalemhumble and mounted on a donkey (Zech. 9:9; cf. Isa. 62:11). TheGospels present Jesus Christ as this king (Matt. 21:1–9 pars.).Those who are likewise humble will inherit the land with him (Matt.5:5).

(1)Theprophet Nathan was consulted by David when he contemplated building atemple to house the ark (2Sam. 7). Without consulting God,Nathan encouraged David in this laudable project, suggesting that inthe prophet’s mind the project was so obviously right(acknowledging as it did God’s supreme kingship over thenation) that there was no need to ask God. However, an unexpecteddivine refusal came that same night. A divine speech, long bybiblical narrative standards (twelve verses), was required to explainthe baffling divine refusal. The problem with the project was thatthe time was not ripe (2Sam. 7:11; cf. 7:1), for David stillhad battles to fight.

Nathanreappears in biblical narrative in 2Sam. 12, sent by God torebuke David for taking Bathsheba (this confrontation is alluded toin the superscription of Ps. 51). These interventions of Nathan cameat David’s high point and low point. Nathan’s parableabout the “little ewe lamb” caused David to incriminatehimself and pronounce his own sentence. David, on his immediaterepentance, was forgiven (v.13), but the rest of his reign wasthe working out of the punishment pronounced by Nathan: “Thesword will never depart from your house” (v.10). Nathanpredicted the death of the son born from the illicit union (v.14).Later, God sent word through Nathan that a second son, Solomon, wasto be named “Jedidiah” (“loved by the Lord”)(v.25; see NIV footnote). Nathan, in collusion with Bathsheba,took Solomon’s part in the competition for the throne (1Kings1). Nathan and the priest Zadok anointed Solomon king at Gihon(1Kings 1:45). He also had a role in David’s ordering ofthe Levites (2Chron. 29:25). Nathan is the reputed author of abook of chronicles about David’s reign (1Chron. 29:29)and a history about Solomon’s (2Chron. 9:29).

Presumably,the Nathan of 1Kings 4:5 is the prophet, whose son Azariah wasin charge of Solomon’s district officers. Zabud, another son,was a priest (here this refers to a chief officer) and personaladviser (cf. Hushai’s role in 2Sam. 15:37) under Solomon.There is mention of “the house of Nathan” as stillprominent in the postexilic period (Zech. 12:12).

(2)Ason of David, born in Jerusalem (2Sam. 5:14; 1Chron. 3:5;14:4), he is in the genealogy of Jesus (Luke 3:31). (3)Thefather of Igal, one of David’s thirty mighty warriors (2Sam.23:36). (4)AJudahite, the son of Attai and father of Zabad (1Chron. 2:36).(5)Thebrother of Joel, one of David’s mighty warriors (1Chron.11:38). (6)Oneof the leaders enlisted by Ezra to seek Levites willing to return toJerusalem (Ezra 8:16). (7)Oneof the men who were guilty of taking a foreign wife during the timeof Ezra (Ezra 10:39).

In the OT, many palaces are referenced, but the first ofimportance is that of Pharaoh as Abraham sojourned in Egypt (Gen.12:15). When the children of Israel moved to Egypt because of thefamine, they did not know that Joseph was in charge of the palace(Gen. 41:40; 45:16; Acts 7:10). Later, even the palace of Pharaoh wasoverrun by the plagues sent by God upon Egypt (Exod. 8:3, 24).

KingHiram of Tyre sent cedar logs and carpenters to David so that a housecould be built for him (2Sam. 5:11). It later vexed David thathe himself lived in a palace while the ark of God was housed in atent. This prompted David to prepare for building the temple afterconsulting with Nathan (2Sam. 7:2–29).

Evenmore extensive discussion is given about the palace of Solomon. Ittook thirteen years to complete and was built with wood from thecedars of Lebanon. It was 150 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feethigh, with foundations of high-quality hewn stone, cedar columns, andbeam supports. From foundation to roof the sides were trimmed withhigh-grade chiseled stone. There was a throne room lined with cedarfrom floor to ceiling. There were similarly designed living quartersfor Solomon and for the daughter of Pharaoh (1Kings 7:1–12).The account of the tremendous labor and cost for the palace andtemple is given in 1Kings 9:10–23. Later, Solomondecorated the inside of the palace extensively with gold (1Kings10:16–22). Eventually, the king of Babylon took these treasuresfrom the royal palace and burned it down (2Kings 24:13; 25:9).

Inthe NT, the Greek word basileios is used in reference to a palaceonce, when Jesus notes that in contrast to Johnthe Baptist, those who wear soft clothing and have luxuriouslifestyles live in royal palaces (Luke 7:25). The home of the Romangovernor (praitōrion) is referred to as a palace in sometranslations (e.g., John 18:28, 33; 19:9 NIV). John explains that theJews did not actually enter the praetorium, so as not to be defiledfor the Passover feast (John 18:28). Other NT references note thepalace of Herod where Paul was kept under guard (Acts 23:35) and thatof Caesar where Paul may have been imprisoned in Rome (Phil. 1:13).The testimony of Paul was apparently well known there, and some ofhis guards became converts to Christianity (Phil. 1:13; 4:22).

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).

Architecture is the technology and the art of design andconstruction. The technology of architecture includes anunderstanding of mathematical and engineering principles; the art ofarchitecture focuses attention on interest and beauty in design. Thecreative imagination of the architect is constantly considering howto artfully manage form and function in the design and constructionprocess.

Architectureand the Bible

Theterm “architecture” does not occur in most Englishtranslations of the Bible. There is, however, evidence of andreference to the architectural activity of God’s people. Inaddition, Israel and the church were contextualized in significantarchitectural periods (Egyptian, Assyrian, Greek, and Roman), so themajor empires of the biblical period often influenced the design andconstruction of cities, temples, and structures referenced in thebiblical text. Architecture offers biblical studies a way to betterunderstand the historical intentions of the Bible. By means ofarchitectural investigation, the history and the heritage of pastcivilizations are illuminated. As a result, our reading of thebiblical text is enhanced.

Whenwe investigate the biblical text with attention to the technology andart of architecture, two perspectives emerge. First, architecturedraws our attention to the background of the biblical text. Incertain biblical texts we learn about the design and the constructionthat took place in Egypt, Assyria, and Palestine during majorbiblical events. For example, the patriarchal and Mosaic periodsoccurred during times of expansion and development in the Eighteenthto Twentieth Dynasties of Egypt (i.e., New Kingdom, sixteenth toeleventh centuries BC). For these periods, we gain knowledge aboutcapital relocations along with temple and pyramid constructions. Welearn that during the conquest, Israel took over existing Canaanitecities in keeping with the Mosaic policies. The architecture ofPalestine enables us to better understand the form and function ofthese infrastructures.

Second,architecture draws our attention to the theological implications ofthe form and function of structures designed by God. In keeping withthe scope of architecture, we are forced to understand that what Goddesigned for altars, the ark, the tabernacle, and the temples of thepast and the future included more than just the functionalrequirements of a nation’s religious system. The interpreter ofthe biblical text must consider how the design of these structureselicits response and communicates meaning. These structures are alsowindows on the social, political, and economic aspects of theIsraelite nation.

OldTestament

Citiesand fortifications.The biblical rec­ord makes reference to architectural structures,materials, and furnishings. Cities are referenced frequentlythroughout the OT canon. The city is obviously the context forarchitectural expression. The cities of the Bible are not describedin extensive detail. We learn that Cain was a city builder who namedhis work after his son Enoch. The architectural feature of citiesmentioned most often is the city gates (Gen. 19:1; 23:10, 18; Deut.17:5; Josh. 2:5; 7:5; 20:4; Judg. 5:8). This was an important placefor city life and activity (Gen. 23:1; Prov. 31:31). There was alsosinister activity at city gates. Abner, for example, was killed inthe city gate (2 Sam. 3:22–30). In addition, executionsfor covenant violations were carried out at the city gate (Deut.17:5). There was more than one city gate, as we learn from thepostexilic construction activity of Ezra and Nehemiah.

Withinthe city there was a strong tower. The people of Babel usedthoroughly baked bricks instead of stone and tar for mortar in orderto build the city and the tower that was designed to reach to theheavens (Gen. 11:3–4). A city tower functioned as a place ofrefuge for the people within the city limits (Judg. 9:49–51).

Citieswere protected by a wall system (Lev. 25:29) that also provided spacefor housing (Josh. 2:15). The conquest of Jericho recounts thefamiliar defeat of that city by the very unconventional destructionof its walls (Josh. 6:20). A city square is another feature of thecity architecture (Judg. 19:15–17) that served the public needsof the community.

Thebiblical descriptions of Jerusalem offer a measure of insight intoits architecture. During the rebuilding process in the postexilicperiod, Nehemiah comments on both the construction and the buildingmaterials (Neh. 2:8; 13:31; cf. Ezra 6:4) and the spacious nature ofthe city (Neh. 7:4). From another perspective, the psalmist comments,“Jerusalem is built like a city that is closely compactedtogether” (Ps. 122:3).

Beyondthese textual details we learn through the writings of the prophetsthat cities are the subject of God’s wrath for covenantviolation (Jer. 6:6; Hos. 11:6; Mic. 5:11). Despite this, the nationof Israel is not left without the hope of restoration. The prophetsalso anticipated the return of the people along with the restorationof the city infrastructure (Amos 9:14; Mal. 1:4).

Thetemple and sacred structures.Theother architectural features referenced by the writers of Scriptureinclude altars, the tabernacle, the tent of meeting, and the temple.The tent and the tabernacle were also outfitted with unique furnitureitems described in detail and expertly crafted. The constructionprojects of Solomon are detailed in 1 Kings 5–7. Solomon,like David, pursued his architectural ambitions. The book of Ezekielgives extensive architectural detail for the construction of a futuretemple in which God will reign and rule (Ezek. 40–48).

Thetemple and royal residences were made of stone with cedar roofing.The chamber buildings that surrounded the temple were three storieshigh. The interior walls and ceilings were lined with cedar to coverall the stone (1 Kings 6:1–10). In all the constructiondetails for the temple, the text does not elaborate on architecturalstyle. Perhaps the builders were influenced to some degree by thestyles of the major periods.

Whatare the theological implications related to the form and function ofthe sacred structures in the biblical material? The first is that Godis the ultimate designer of Israel’s architecture. God’ssignature work certainly is not the tabernacle or the Solomonictemple, but rather the created realm. The beauty and the complexitiesof the created world continue to draw attention to God’s beautyand intelligence. As the psalmist declares, the creation, which Goddesigned, is a constant source of praise (Ps. 19).

God’sskill and artistic beauty as a master architect are reflected also inthe revelation of his plans for the sacred structures of Israel tothe nation’s artisans. The skill that the artisans manifestedin the construction process was also a gift from God (Exod. 35:35;2 Chron. 2:14).

Thestructures designed by God for construction were primarily for him.This is understandable because the patriarchal and Mosaic periodsincluded long desert pilgrimages and the related tent dwelling.References to homes and houses in the book of Leviticus are not aboutdesign and construction but about function. The domestic home must befree of mildew (Lev. 14:34–41) and thus clean according to thestandards of the law. The construction of Davidic and Solomonic homesis given attention in Scripture (2 Sam. 5:11; 7:1; 1 Kings7:1–12).

Thetabernacle and the temple were divine residences (Exod. 30:6; 40:34;2 Sam. 7:5; 1 Kings 8:11). For this reason, the design andfunction of each structure reflected the glorious worth of God andreminded the nation of its own uncleanness. Beyond the structures oftemple and tabernacle, the city of Jerusalem was privileged to be theresting place of the “Name” (i.e., presence) of the Lord(2 Chron. 6:5–6) and to have David as the chosen ruler(2 Chron. 6:34).

Thehistory of Israel reveals that the sustainability of these sacredstructures was influenced by physical and spiritual factors. Godoccupied the structures or met with Israel at these sacred places aslong as Israel conformed to the terms of the Mosaic covenant (1 Sam.4:21; 1 Kings 9:6–9). During the monarchy, kings whodeparted from Torah would strip the temple to pay tribute to foreignoverlords (2 Kings 24:13) or would modify the function of thestructure to accommodate the worship of foreign gods (see 2 Kings23). Although there were periodic times of rebuilding the sacredstructures, sustainability was short lived. The ideology of thesacred structures anticipates a future time when their originalfunction will be replaced with the opportunity to live in God’spresence forever.

NewTestament

TheNT refers only rarely to architects or architecture. Hebrews 11:10speaks of God as the “architect [technitēs] and builder”of the heavenly Jerusalem. Paul refers to the church as the temple ofGod. Jesus Christ is the foundation, and Christian leaders arebuilding upon that foundation with either gold, silver, and costlystones or wood, hay, and straw (1 Cor. 3:10–17; cf. 6:19;2 Cor. 6:16).

Interms of physical buildings, the church of the NT was a house church.During the time of Christ the significant architectural structureswere the temple and synagogues. Herod the Great was the major builderof the time, whose impressive temple dominated the landscape of theJerusalem area. Although the synagogue was a central structure duringthe life of Christ and the early church, function is emphasized overform in the biblical material. The synagogue was a place for prayer,Scripture study, and the administration of justice (Luke 4:16–30;Acts 13:15; 14:1).

Thefocus of the NT is also on the church’s function instead of itsarchitectural form. The church, however, prospered and grew in thecontext of a significant Hellenistic architectural period (300 BC toAD 300). In this period the Seleucids were responsible forestablishing large Greek cities across western and central Asia. Theprimary construction material continued to be the mud-brick, whichresulted in rapidly decaying buildings. Although cities continued tobe laid out in a grid format, a more dynamic, hilly format was beingintroduced. The homes in these cities often were built withcourtyards like ones in Mesopotamia and Egypt. The temples of theHellenistic period were designed with landscaping and terracing,along with porticoed enclosures and stairways.

Thebook of Revelation closes the canon with extensive detail about thenew city of Jerusalem, which God will design and build (Rev. 21) andwhich will function to serve his sovereign purposes as creator andredeemer.

A sacred cultic object, in the shape of a box, thatrepresented the presence of God among the Israelites. The ark (Heb.’aron), constructed in wood, measured 45 inches long, 27 incheswide, and 27 inches high (Exod. 25:10), and it was transported bymeans of two poles inserted on either side of the ark. The mostimportant aspects of the ark were the cover and the cherubim attachedto the ark cover. Blood was ritually sprinkled on the cover, whichwas the designated place of atonement. In the earliest accounts, theark became the place of atonement, meeting, and revelation betweenGod and Israel.

Ina few instances the Hebrew word ’aron also denotes a collectionbox (NIV: “chest”) in the temple (2 Kings 12:9–10;2 Chron. 24:8, 10–11), and in one case it refers toJoseph’s sarcophagus, or coffin (Gen. 50:26). The Scripturesmention the ark 195 times, frequently (82 times) in association withthe Lord or God, resulting in expressions such as “the Ark ofthe Covenant of the Lord,” the “ark of the God ofIsrael,” and the “ark of God.”

TheFunction and Locations of the Ark

Theark was housed first in the portable sanctuary or tabernacle used forworship in early Israelite history, and Exodus and Deuteronomy notethat it served as a receptacle for the “testimony” or twotablets of the Ten Commandments. Consequently, the ark is oftenreferred to as the “ark of the testimony,” since theHebrew word for “testimony” is synonymous with the commonHebrew word for “covenant” (Pss. 25:10; 132:12), and thedesignations of the container as the “Ark of the Covenant”(Deut. 9:9, 15) and as “the ark of the testimony” (Exod.27:8; 31:18) seem interchangeable. The NT notes that the ark alsocontained a gold jar of manna and Aaron’s blossoming rod (Heb.9:4; cf. Exod. 16:32–34; Num. 17:8–10). The location ofthe ark became associated with the centralized place of gathering andworship by the Israelites. Moses composed what has come to be calledthe “Song of the Ark” (Num. 10:35–36), signifyingthe ark’s role in preceding the nomadic Israelites in thewilderness and indicating where they should rest.

Inthe book of Joshua, the ark led the people in conquest (3:1–5:1;6:1–25). The crossing of the Jordan (3:7–11) amid dryground, when carrying the ark into the river caused the waters to beswept in a heap, depicts the supernatural relationship between theark and the presence of God. The ark became so closely associatedwith the divine presence that the Israelites assumed that thepresence of God resided within the ark. Only the consecratedLevitical priests could carry the ark, which was covered by threelayers of cloth in order to conceal it from the people (Num. 4:5–6,15, 18–20), who had to remain at least a thousand yards away.In 2 Sam. 6:2–7 the oxen carrying the ark stumbled, andUzzah, who was not a priest, reached out and touched the ark tosteady it, resulting in his death (cf. 1 Chron. 13:7–10).Following the entry into the Promised Land, the ark abided at theGilgal sanctuary, and eventually it shifted from Bethel to Shiloh.

Thefunction of the ark as the place where the tribal confederacy soughtdivine counsel for holy war led also to employing the ark as a warsymbol, carried forth into battle to assure victory (Josh. 6:4–21).This use of the ark most likely originates from ancient Near Easternreligious concepts and practices that associated the presence of agod with an emblematic war throne useful for divination and successin battle. The expression “the Lord Almighty, who is enthronedbetween the cherubim” links God’s roles as king andwarrior, reinforcing the ark as God’s throne or his “footstool”(1 Sam. 4:4), symbolic of the invisibly enthroned deity. OtherCanaanite deities, including El, had footstools that resembledgold-plated and ornate boxes upon which to rest their feet,signifying their regal authority and military power. In 1 Chron.28 the ark is referred to as God’s “footstool,” andthe psalmist enjoins the people to gather and worship at God’sfootstool (Ps. 99:5). Similarly, Ps. 132, a liturgical poem linked tothe formal procession of the ark, refers to the “footstool of[God]” as the centralized place of worship.

TheArk of the Covenant rested in the Shiloh temple in the custody of Eliuntil it was captured by the Philistines, who possessed it in theirterritory for seven months (1 Sam. 4–6). The loss of theark was mourned as symbolizing the abandonment or departure of God’spresence, and yet its capture emphasized the Israelites’ falsepresumptions concerning the ark as a guarantor of military successand reinforced the fact that God could not be manipulated. Followinga plague inflicted by God upon the Philistines, the ark was returnedand remained at Kiriath Jearim for twenty years (6:21–7:2).

Eventually,King David transported the ark to the city of Jerusalem, reinforcingthe political and cultic importance of the location. Here it remainedin a “tent” until it was placed in Solomon’s temple(2 Sam. 6:17; 7:2). The ark disappeared sometime during the latemonarchical period; its capture is not listed in the temple assetsseized by Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings 25:13–17). The ark wasnever replaced after the return from the Babylonian exile, andJeremiah declared that the ark should not be remade (Jer. 3:16). Theark is not mentioned in Ezekiel’s description of the new temple(Ezek. 40–48).

Thebook of Hebrews mentions the ark in relation to its prominence andpurpose in the temple (9:4–5). In addition, Heb. 9:1–14contrasts the application of Christ’s own blood in the heavenlyholy place with the priestly sprinkling of blood on the “mercyseat” (NIV: “atonement cover”) of the ark.Revelation 11:19 speaks of the ark of God’s covenant beinglocated in the heavens.

TheArk and the Holiness of God

TheArk of the Covenant underscores the holiness of God and his necessaryseparation from sin. The holiness or consecration of those whoapproach God at the ark signifies the importance of cleansing fromimpurity as a prerequisite to maintaining the covenant relationshipwith God. Although the ark and the presence of God became inseparablylinked in the minds of the Israelites, God’s promise to bepresent among them did not imply a spatial or corporeal limitation.The law tablets contained in the ark are inextricably linked with theglory of God’s presence and the point of covenant accessibilitythrough the word of God. The portable nature of the ark, and the tentin which it was housed, emphasizes that God’s presence orrevelation is not limited to a specific location.

TheNT also concretizes the ark to the holiness of God and his law. Godis both merciful and just; his holiness requires propitiation forsin, and his mercy provides it through the blood atonementaccomplished through the death and resurrection of Christ. Christ’ssufficient and efficacious vicarious sacrifice on the cross replacedthe yearly ritual necessary to secure the salvation and forgivenessof God’s people, highlighting the superiority of Christ andsalvation by grace through faith in his redemptive work on the cross.The sacrificial death of Christ provides infinite atonement andreconciliation for believers, who affirm God’s immanence whileat the same time acknowledging his sovereignty and transcendence.Believers look forward to the literal and physical return of Christ,when they will realize the fulfillment of God’s promise to livewith and among them eternally.

A sacred cultic object, in the shape of a box, thatrepresented the presence of God among the Israelites. The ark (Heb.’aron), constructed in wood, measured 45 inches long, 27 incheswide, and 27 inches high (Exod. 25:10), and it was transported bymeans of two poles inserted on either side of the ark. The mostimportant aspects of the ark were the cover and the cherubim attachedto the ark cover. Blood was ritually sprinkled on the cover, whichwas the designated place of atonement. In the earliest accounts, theark became the place of atonement, meeting, and revelation betweenGod and Israel.

Ina few instances the Hebrew word ’aron also denotes a collectionbox (NIV: “chest”) in the temple (2 Kings 12:9–10;2 Chron. 24:8, 10–11), and in one case it refers toJoseph’s sarcophagus, or coffin (Gen. 50:26). The Scripturesmention the ark 195 times, frequently (82 times) in association withthe Lord or God, resulting in expressions such as “the Ark ofthe Covenant of the Lord,” the “ark of the God ofIsrael,” and the “ark of God.”

TheFunction and Locations of the Ark

Theark was housed first in the portable sanctuary or tabernacle used forworship in early Israelite history, and Exodus and Deuteronomy notethat it served as a receptacle for the “testimony” or twotablets of the Ten Commandments. Consequently, the ark is oftenreferred to as the “ark of the testimony,” since theHebrew word for “testimony” is synonymous with the commonHebrew word for “covenant” (Pss. 25:10; 132:12), and thedesignations of the container as the “Ark of the Covenant”(Deut. 9:9, 15) and as “the ark of the testimony” (Exod.27:8; 31:18) seem interchangeable. The NT notes that the ark alsocontained a gold jar of manna and Aaron’s blossoming rod (Heb.9:4; cf. Exod. 16:32–34; Num. 17:8–10). The location ofthe ark became associated with the centralized place of gathering andworship by the Israelites. Moses composed what has come to be calledthe “Song of the Ark” (Num. 10:35–36), signifyingthe ark’s role in preceding the nomadic Israelites in thewilderness and indicating where they should rest.

Inthe book of Joshua, the ark led the people in conquest (3:1–5:1;6:1–25). The crossing of the Jordan (3:7–11) amid dryground, when carrying the ark into the river caused the waters to beswept in a heap, depicts the supernatural relationship between theark and the presence of God. The ark became so closely associatedwith the divine presence that the Israelites assumed that thepresence of God resided within the ark. Only the consecratedLevitical priests could carry the ark, which was covered by threelayers of cloth in order to conceal it from the people (Num. 4:5–6,15, 18–20), who had to remain at least a thousand yards away.In 2 Sam. 6:2–7 the oxen carrying the ark stumbled, andUzzah, who was not a priest, reached out and touched the ark tosteady it, resulting in his death (cf. 1 Chron. 13:7–10).Following the entry into the Promised Land, the ark abided at theGilgal sanctuary, and eventually it shifted from Bethel to Shiloh.

Thefunction of the ark as the place where the tribal confederacy soughtdivine counsel for holy war led also to employing the ark as a warsymbol, carried forth into battle to assure victory (Josh. 6:4–21).This use of the ark most likely originates from ancient Near Easternreligious concepts and practices that associated the presence of agod with an emblematic war throne useful for divination and successin battle. The expression “the Lord Almighty, who is enthronedbetween the cherubim” links God’s roles as king andwarrior, reinforcing the ark as God’s throne or his “footstool”(1 Sam. 4:4), symbolic of the invisibly enthroned deity. OtherCanaanite deities, including El, had footstools that resembledgold-plated and ornate boxes upon which to rest their feet,signifying their regal authority and military power. In 1 Chron.28 the ark is referred to as God’s “footstool,” andthe psalmist enjoins the people to gather and worship at God’sfootstool (Ps. 99:5). Similarly, Ps. 132, a liturgical poem linked tothe formal procession of the ark, refers to the “footstool of[God]” as the centralized place of worship.

TheArk of the Covenant rested in the Shiloh temple in the custody of Eliuntil it was captured by the Philistines, who possessed it in theirterritory for seven months (1 Sam. 4–6). The loss of theark was mourned as symbolizing the abandonment or departure of God’spresence, and yet its capture emphasized the Israelites’ falsepresumptions concerning the ark as a guarantor of military successand reinforced the fact that God could not be manipulated. Followinga plague inflicted by God upon the Philistines, the ark was returnedand remained at Kiriath Jearim for twenty years (6:21–7:2).

Eventually,King David transported the ark to the city of Jerusalem, reinforcingthe political and cultic importance of the location. Here it remainedin a “tent” until it was placed in Solomon’s temple(2 Sam. 6:17; 7:2). The ark disappeared sometime during the latemonarchical period; its capture is not listed in the temple assetsseized by Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings 25:13–17). The ark wasnever replaced after the return from the Babylonian exile, andJeremiah declared that the ark should not be remade (Jer. 3:16). Theark is not mentioned in Ezekiel’s description of the new temple(Ezek. 40–48).

Thebook of Hebrews mentions the ark in relation to its prominence andpurpose in the temple (9:4–5). In addition, Heb. 9:1–14contrasts the application of Christ’s own blood in the heavenlyholy place with the priestly sprinkling of blood on the “mercyseat” (NIV: “atonement cover”) of the ark.Revelation 11:19 speaks of the ark of God’s covenant beinglocated in the heavens.

TheArk and the Holiness of God

TheArk of the Covenant underscores the holiness of God and his necessaryseparation from sin. The holiness or consecration of those whoapproach God at the ark signifies the importance of cleansing fromimpurity as a prerequisite to maintaining the covenant relationshipwith God. Although the ark and the presence of God became inseparablylinked in the minds of the Israelites, God’s promise to bepresent among them did not imply a spatial or corporeal limitation.The law tablets contained in the ark are inextricably linked with theglory of God’s presence and the point of covenant accessibilitythrough the word of God. The portable nature of the ark, and the tentin which it was housed, emphasizes that God’s presence orrevelation is not limited to a specific location.

TheNT also concretizes the ark to the holiness of God and his law. Godis both merciful and just; his holiness requires propitiation forsin, and his mercy provides it through the blood atonementaccomplished through the death and resurrection of Christ. Christ’ssufficient and efficacious vicarious sacrifice on the cross replacedthe yearly ritual necessary to secure the salvation and forgivenessof God’s people, highlighting the superiority of Christ andsalvation by grace through faith in his redemptive work on the cross.The sacrificial death of Christ provides infinite atonement andreconciliation for believers, who affirm God’s immanence whileat the same time acknowledging his sovereignty and transcendence.Believers look forward to the literal and physical return of Christ,when they will realize the fulfillment of God’s promise to livewith and among them eternally.

There were at least two towns called “Bethlehem” (meaning “house of bread”). (1) A town in Zebulun, in the north, about seven miles northwest of Nazareth (Josh. 19:15).

(2) The well-known town about four miles south of Jerusalem in Judah, situated on a couple of hills about 2,300 feet above sea level. The ancient name was “Ephrath” or “Ephrathah” (Gen. 35:16, 19; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; Ps. 136:2; Mic. 5:2; see also Bethlehem Ephrathah). With the possible exception of the story of the judge Ibzan (Judg. 12:8–10), most references to Bethlehem are to the town in Judah, which still exists.

Bethlehem first enters biblical history when Jacob’s wife Rachel dies there while giving birth to Benjamin (Gen. 35:16–19). After the conquest, the town was inhabited by Ephrathites descended from Caleb, one of whom was called “father of Bethlehem” (in the sense of civic leader; 1 Chron. 2:51; 4:4; cf. 2:54). Judges mentions two Levites passing though, one who moved from Bethlehem to Ephraim (Judg. 17:7–9), and another who lived in Ephraim but took a concubine from Bethlehem (19:1). The most important references to Bethlehem from this era, however, are in Ruth. It was from Bethlehem that Elimelek’s family set out for Moab (Ruth 1:1), and to Bethlehem that Ruth and Naomi returned (1:22). Two generations later, it was into this same Bethlemite family that the future king David was born (Ruth 4:18–22; 1 Sam. 16:1).

Bethlehem is mentioned frequently as David’s hometown (e.g., 1 Sam. 17:12, 58; 20:6). Several of the mighty men on whom David depended so much were from there, including the brothers Joab, Abishai, and Asahel (2 Sam. 2:18, 32) and Elhanan (2 Sam. 23:24). At one point, when Bethlehem was temporarily garrisoned by Philistines, some of the mighty men risked their lives to fetch David water from the town well (2 Sam. 23:14–17; 2 Chron. 11:16–26). Bethlehem was later fortified by David’s grandson Rehoboam (2 Chron. 11:6).

In the eighth century the prophet Micah promised that although Judah’s defeat was inevitable, a new king would arise from this otherwise insignificant town to save the whole of Israel (Mic. 5:2). Both the place and the clan retained their identity through the exile, and 123 men of Bethlehem returned to Judah (Ezra 2:21; see also Neh. 7:26).

Luke stresses that Jesus was born in David’s city (Luke 2:4; cf. 2 Sam. 7:12–16); Joseph had taken Mary to his ancestral home, Bethlehem, for a Roman census. The angels announced Jesus’ birth to some shepherds in the vicinity of town (Luke 2:1–20). Matthew makes a more specific connection to Micah’s prophecy; indeed, it was on the basis of this prophecy that Herod decided where to send the magi (Matt. 2:1–8) and where to slaughter the baby boys (2:16). Matthew sees in this slaughter a fulfillment of Jeremiah’s prophecy that Rachel, who died at Bethlehem, would mourn her children (Matt. 2:18; Jer. 31:15). Ironically, some Jews rejected Jesus because they thought that he came from Galilee (John 7:42). Constantine the Great, the fourth-century Roman emperor, built a church above a cave in Bethlehem, traditionally believed to be the birthplace of Jesus. Today the city boasts a population of about thirty thousand and is one of the most visited sites in Israel, especially during the Christmas season, when thousands of Christians make a pilgrimage to the traditional place of Jesus’ birth.

There were at least two towns called “Bethlehem” (meaning “house of bread”). (1) A town in Zebulun, in the north, about seven miles northwest of Nazareth (Josh. 19:15).

(2) The well-known town about four miles south of Jerusalem in Judah, situated on a couple of hills about 2,300 feet above sea level. The ancient name was “Ephrath” or “Ephrathah” (Gen. 35:16, 19; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; Ps. 136:2; Mic. 5:2; see also Bethlehem Ephrathah). With the possible exception of the story of the judge Ibzan (Judg. 12:8–10), most references to Bethlehem are to the town in Judah, which still exists.

Bethlehem first enters biblical history when Jacob’s wife Rachel dies there while giving birth to Benjamin (Gen. 35:16–19). After the conquest, the town was inhabited by Ephrathites descended from Caleb, one of whom was called “father of Bethlehem” (in the sense of civic leader; 1 Chron. 2:51; 4:4; cf. 2:54). Judges mentions two Levites passing though, one who moved from Bethlehem to Ephraim (Judg. 17:7–9), and another who lived in Ephraim but took a concubine from Bethlehem (19:1). The most important references to Bethlehem from this era, however, are in Ruth. It was from Bethlehem that Elimelek’s family set out for Moab (Ruth 1:1), and to Bethlehem that Ruth and Naomi returned (1:22). Two generations later, it was into this same Bethlemite family that the future king David was born (Ruth 4:18–22; 1 Sam. 16:1).

Bethlehem is mentioned frequently as David’s hometown (e.g., 1 Sam. 17:12, 58; 20:6). Several of the mighty men on whom David depended so much were from there, including the brothers Joab, Abishai, and Asahel (2 Sam. 2:18, 32) and Elhanan (2 Sam. 23:24). At one point, when Bethlehem was temporarily garrisoned by Philistines, some of the mighty men risked their lives to fetch David water from the town well (2 Sam. 23:14–17; 2 Chron. 11:16–26). Bethlehem was later fortified by David’s grandson Rehoboam (2 Chron. 11:6).

In the eighth century the prophet Micah promised that although Judah’s defeat was inevitable, a new king would arise from this otherwise insignificant town to save the whole of Israel (Mic. 5:2). Both the place and the clan retained their identity through the exile, and 123 men of Bethlehem returned to Judah (Ezra 2:21; see also Neh. 7:26).

Luke stresses that Jesus was born in David’s city (Luke 2:4; cf. 2 Sam. 7:12–16); Joseph had taken Mary to his ancestral home, Bethlehem, for a Roman census. The angels announced Jesus’ birth to some shepherds in the vicinity of town (Luke 2:1–20). Matthew makes a more specific connection to Micah’s prophecy; indeed, it was on the basis of this prophecy that Herod decided where to send the magi (Matt. 2:1–8) and where to slaughter the baby boys (2:16). Matthew sees in this slaughter a fulfillment of Jeremiah’s prophecy that Rachel, who died at Bethlehem, would mourn her children (Matt. 2:18; Jer. 31:15). Ironically, some Jews rejected Jesus because they thought that he came from Galilee (John 7:42). Constantine the Great, the fourth-century Roman emperor, built a church above a cave in Bethlehem, traditionally believed to be the birthplace of Jesus. Today the city boasts a population of about thirty thousand and is one of the most visited sites in Israel, especially during the Christmas season, when thousands of Christians make a pilgrimage to the traditional place of Jesus’ birth.

The book of Ezekiel is widely recognized as one of the mostidiosyncratic of the OT prophetic books. Some rabbis prohibitedanyone under the age of thirty from reading portions of the book(i.e., the visions of God’s glory in chapters 1 and 10 mightlead to dangerous speculations about the mystery of God).

Authorshipand Date

Upuntil the beginning of the twentieth century, most scholars viewedthe unparalleled extensive dating in the book (1:1–2; 8:1;20:1; 24:1; 26:1; 29:1, 17; 30:20; 31:1; 32:1, 17; 33:21; 40:1),along with the symmetry achieved by deliberate thematic repetition(i.e., the “watchman” passages in 3:16–21; 33:1–9;Ezekiel’s message of judgment/hope addressed to the mountainsof Israel respectively in chaps. 6; 36) as indisputable proof thatthe book was the product of a single author. Even during the firstone hundred years or so of historical-critical dominance in OTresearch, historical-critical investigations tended to confirm thetraditional views of the unity, authenticity, and date of the book ofEzekiel, although the opinions of the majority of scholars began toshift early in the twentieth century.

Formuch of the first half of the twentieth century, issues ofauthorship, dating, and provenance of the prophet’s ministrydominated critical research on the book of Ezekiel. The book’speculiarities lent themselves to various suggestions regarding theplace of Ezekiel’s ministry. If, as 1:1–3 records,Ezekiel was called to prophetic ministry among the exilic communityin Babylon, how does one explain Ezekiel’s apparent knowledgeof particular events in Jerusalem, such as the death of Pelatiah(11:13) and the various forms of idolatry taking place in and aroundthe temple complex in chapters 8–11? Furthermore, what is oneto make of Ezekiel’s words to those who remained behind inJerusalem (5:8–17; 11:5–12; 33:23–29)?

Manyof those who sought to defend a straightforward understanding of thebook’s own claims looked to mysticism or psychology to explainEzekiel’s visionary involvement in events occurring some sevenhundred miles away. Explanations for the apparent idiosyncrasies ofhis ministry—including extremely violent and graphic language,his extended period of “muteness,” various strikingsign-acts, and the extended length and emotional intensity of hisvisionary experiences—tended to bleed into the discussion ofhow to understand his visionary experience of being transported toremote locations. Earlier solutions ranged from noting thesimilarities between Ezekiel’s experiences and those of themystics to characterizing Ezekiel as having a “complexpersonality” and as one whose life was more attuned to therealities of the supernatural world.

Geographicalsolutions to account for Ezekiel’s apparent knowledge of eventsin Jerusalem include two suggestions. The first is that Ezekielministered only in Jerusalem. His preaching forms the core ofchapters 1–39, and a later exilic redactor updated thesechapters to address the concerns of an exilic audience and also addedchapters 40–48. The second suggestion is that Ezekielministered in Jerusalem from 593 BC until the fall of Jerusalem, atwhich time he was taken into captivity in Babylon, where he continuedhis ministry among the exiles. The appeal of a dual-ministry approachis that it accounts for the double geographical focus of Ezekielwithout resorting to ecstatic or supernatural flight from one city tothe other or positing extensive secondhand editing of the book.

Onthe other hand, there is evidence from other biblical materials thatecstatic or visionary experiences of this sort were part of theprophetic tradition. Many of Ezekiel’s apparent idiosyncrasiesactually resemble characteristics of the preclassical prophets.Viewing Ezekiel’s ministry as part of an accepted culturaltradition provides a more persuasive explanation for the text as itstands. For example, the evidence of continued contacts between theJerusalem and exilic communities (Jer. 29; Ezek. 33:21) suffices toexplain whatever knowledge Ezekiel possessed of events in Jerusalem.The manner of their presentation in his visions is dictated by thecultural standards and expectations of a prophet operating under theinfluence of the “hand of Yahweh” and by the rhetoricalgoals of his preaching.

Itis entirely plausible to suggest that the author of Ezekiel was anIsraelite who was a rough contemporary of the tragic eventssurrounding the dismantling of the Judahite monarchy by theNeo-Babylonian Empire.

HistoricalBackground

Thebook of Ezekiel itself yields pertinent information about Ezekiel’sworld, which, when supplemented with other biblical texts (2Kings,Jeremiah, Daniel, and Habakkuk), enables us to reconstruct a workingpicture of the social, historical, and theological milieu in whichEzekiel lived and ministered.

In701 BC the kingdom of Judah escaped annihilation by the Assyrians, ashad befallen the northern kingdom in 722 BC, due in large part to theministry of Isaiah and the faith of King Hezekiah (2Kings18:1–20:21; Isa. 36–37), albeit at a crippling financialexpense in the form of heavy tribute to Assyria. After Hezekiah’sdeath in 698 BC, his son Manasseh reversed his father’sreligious reforms, which meant disaster spiritually (2Kings21:1–18; 2Chron. 33:1–11) and survival politically.Judah continued to exist for most of the seventh century BC as avassal kingdom under Assyrian domination. The spiritual decline ofJudah was briefly challenged during the reign of Josiah, who ruled inthe years 640–609 BC. However, Jeremiah’s stronginvectives against empty religious formalism and socialirresponsibility during much of Josiah’s reign suggest thatJosiah’s attempts at religious reforms were only nominallysuccessful and did not penetrate to the populace at large.

WhileJosiah was seeking to institute his reforms, power in theinternational scene was shifting. After the death of Ashurbanipal,the last great Assyrian ruler, the Assyrian Empire began to wane. TheNeo-Babylonian Empire, founded by Nabopolassar (626 BC), dealtAssyria its final blow with the conquest of Nineveh (612 BC),followed by the destruction of Harran a few years later. This,coupled with the untimely death of Josiah in battle against theEgyptians at Megiddo (609 BC), spelled disaster for Judah (2Kings23:29–30; 2Chron. 35:20–24). Nebuchadnezzar assumedleadership of Babylon after the death of his father (605 BC). Laterthat same year, Nebuchadnezzar defeated Egyptian forces at Carchemishand also ordered the deportation of some of the educated young Jewishmen to Babylon (Dan. 1:1–4). This was followed by a seconddeportation in 597 BC, which included King Jehoiachin, Ezekiel, andabout ten thousand Jews (2Kings 24:14). Zedekiah was placed onthe Judean throne as a puppet king. His rebellion against Babylon(588 BC) led to Nebuchadnezzar’s one-and-a-half-year siege ofJerusalem before its final demise in 586BC.

Thepolitical crisis of 597–586 BC led to a crisis of faith. Thepromises of an eternal Davidic kingdom (2Sam. 7:7–16; Ps.89:3–4, 35–37) and Yahweh’s vow to set up his abodeforever in the temple at Jerusalem (Pss. 68:16; 132:13–14)seemed to be failing. At the beginning of Ezekiel’s ministry,the Davidic promise was already under a cloud: Jehoiachin, therightful heir of the line of David, had been taken in captivity toBabylon, and in his place sat the puppet king Zedekiah. In addition,the land of Canaan had played a significant role in shaping theIsraelites’ understanding of themselves as Yahweh’schosen people (Gen. 12:1–3; Deut. 4:37–38; 7:1–11).Because true worship of God was so closely aligned with theIsraelites’ inheritance of the land (Deut. 12), to be outsidethe land immediately raised grave concern about their status beforeGod (1Sam. 26:19). To be outside the promised land would leadin a few short years to a questioning of whether true worship waseven possible any longer (Ps. 137:4). Throughout this period, Ezekiel(and Jeremiah) consistently portrayed Nebuchadnezzar as an unwittingpagan king commissioned by Yahweh to execute the covenant curses onthe recalcitrant southern kingdom.

Farfrom recognizing these events as such, many Israelites in therebellion party, supported by rebellion prophets, asserted theirclaim to divine favor and denied the validity of propheticindictments. They supported their claims with appeals to themiraculous deliverance from the formidable Assyrian army (701 BC),selective use of Scripture’s focus on the inviolability ofJerusalem and the temple, the unconditional promises of an eternalDavidic kingdom (see above), and predictions by rebellion prophets ofa quick return for the exiles (Jer. 28; 29:15–32; Ezek.13).

FromEzekiel’s perspective, the people of Judah were making a liarout of Yahweh. Yahweh had always demanded their exclusive worship. Inlight of their recent history of idolatry, the only appropriateresponse was to execute judgment on them (Ezek. 20:4–44). Bydenying this, the only explanation left to the rebellion party forthe destruction of Jerusalem and exile was that a mighty and wickedkingdom that they intensely hated (Ps. 137:4) had bested Yahweh.

Fromthis historical survey one may distill the overall situation faced byEzekiel into a set of opinions probably shared by the majority ofEzekiel’s fellow exiles. First, there was a widespread beliefthat it was proper to worship other deities in addition to Yahweh.Also, it was generally believed that the people of Judah were in goodstanding with Yahweh and were objects of his favor, and that he wouldshortly bring them deliverance. These beliefs combined to eliminateserious consideration of the possibility that destruction of thekingdom and exile were Yahweh’s intention. Consequently, oncethe kingdom was destroyed and exile had become a reality, Yahweh’spower and/or character became suspect in the minds of many.Furthermore, the perceived link between the land and the presence andblessing of Yahweh cast the exilic experience in an extremelynegative light. For those gripped by these convictions, exile raisedthe specter of hopelessness. The sense of hopelessness wasintensified by its conjunction with the belief that destruction ofthe kingdom and exile were undeserved. There was no way to integratethe outcome of the Babylonian crisis with their previously heldbeliefs about Yahweh and his purposes for Israel.

LiteraryConsiderations

Structureand outline.There are several frameworks that can help the reader understand the“inner logic” of the book.

Tripartitestructure.In chapters 1–24 the theme of God’s impending judgment onthe nation of Israel for violation of the covenant laws isemphatically repeated in both word and sign-act. Chapters 25–32serve a Janus (double) function, connecting with chapters 1–24by continuing the theme of God’s judgment, now directed towardthe foreign nations. The pronouncements of coming judgment in thesechapters anticipate the last part of the book, with the message ofhope for Israel that dominates chapters 33–48. The emphasis ondivine judgment in the first half of the book is not a defactostatement that God is finished with Israel; rather, it is recognitionthat only by means of judgment (both of Israel and their neighbors)is future restoration and reconciliation possible. Many recognize afurther subdivision in the third section, with chapters 33–39focusing on the renewal of the nation and chapters 40–48dealing with Ezekiel’s temple vision.

Thisyields the following outline:

I.God’s Judgment on Israel (1–24)

II.God’s Judgment on the Foreign Nations (25–32)

III.Hope for Israel (33–48)

A.Renewal of the nation (33–39)

B.Ezekiel’s temple vision (40–48)

Visions.Visions open and close the book (chaps. 1–3; 40–48), withtwo additional visions in between: temple idolatry and theincremental departure of God’s glory as judgment is executed(chaps. 8–11), and the valley of dry bones (37:1–14).

Themovement of God’s glory.Ezekiel’s sustained concern for the temple as the place whereGod’s glory dwells provides a unifying structure to the book asEzekiel chronicles God’s glory coming to Babylon in his ominousinaugural vision (chaps. 1–3), the incremental departure ofGod’s glory from the temple and the city (chaps. 8–11),and the return of God’s glory in the vision of the new temple(chaps. 40–48).

Genre.The book of Ezekiel is considered by many to be a literarymasterpiece composed of various genres, including extended visionarynarrative (1–3; 8–11; 37:1–14; 40–48),allegory (16; 23), poetry (19; 26–28), parable (17; 24:3), andpopular sayings (8:12; 9:9; 11:3, 15; 12:22, 27; 18:2; 33:10, 17, 20,24, 30; 37:11). Other prophets quoted popular sayings (Isa. 40:27;Jer. 31:29; Amos 5:14; Hag. 1:2; Mal. 1:2, 6–7, 12–13),but the quotations are far more frequent in Ezekiel and are couchedin uniquely theocentric language. In each case it is God who informsEzekiel what the people are saying. Ezekiel uses popular sayings ofthe people to establish their hostility toward God and to vindicateGod by demonstrating his covenant faithfulness. The unparalleledfrequency of Ezekiel’s use of popular sayings in his oraclesagainst the Israelites and the patently theocentric garb in which hiscounterreplies are clothed serve to anchor both the judgment and thehope of restoration in God alone. Ezekiel’s quotations serve asa foil for a frontal attack on the entire religious enterprise of hiscontemporaries in Jerusalem and Babylon. By citing these popularsayings and refuting them, Ezekiel skillfully reveals both thenecessity and purpose of the exilic crisis. He turns the sayings ofthe people against them, exposing the depths of their opposition toGod and thus furthering the purpose of vindicating God.

TheologicalMessage

Thesovereignty of God.The book emphasizes God’s sovereignty over all as Ezekielchallenged the false theology of his fellow Jewish exiles, which heldthat Yahweh, bound by covenantal oath, could not destroy Jerusalem.The formulaic expression (with variations) “After X occurs,then you/they will know that I am the Lord/I have spoken”occurs over sixty-five times in the book to emphasize God’sintervention in human events, including the exile and restoration(e.g., 7:27; 13:23; 29:16), to uphold the covenant and establish hiskingdom.

Theholiness of God.Israel’s sins had obscured God’s holiness in the sight oftheir neighbors (20:9). God’s holiness required both punishmentof Israel’s sins and the continuation of his covenantalrelationship with his people. God’s purging judgment andrestoration would be a fulfillment of his covenantal obligations andwould display his holiness (20:40–44; 28:25; 36:16–32).

Hopein the midst of judgment.God’s covenantal faithfulness would include restoration afterjudgment (chaps. 33–39). The final temple vision (chaps. 40–48)gives a picture of the restoration using typological images andcultural idioms with which the people were familiar.

NewTestament Connections

Thereare approximately sixty-five quotations and allusions to the book ofEzekiel in the NT. Echoes of Ezekiel are prevalent in John’sGospel (John 10:1–30 [Ezek. 34]; John 15:1–8 [Ezek. 15])and the book of Revelation (Rev. 4:6–9 [Ezek. 1]; Rev. 20–22[Ezek. 40–48]).

The book of Haggai is the tenth book in the collection knownas the Minor Prophets or the Book of the Twelve. Haggai was acontemporary of Zechariah, and the two prophets had an overlappingpurpose: to encourage their generation to rebuild the temple. Thoughshort and similar in theme to Zechariah, Haggai has its owninterests, and it repays close reading.

HistoricalBackground

Thesuperscription (1:1) attributes the book to a man named “Haggai”(related to the Hebrew word hag, meaning “festival”).Though mentioned in Ezra 5:1–2; 6:14, these texts add nothingsubstantial to the little knowledge that we have about Haggai fromthe book itself, except that he was responsible for the propheticspeeches contained in the book. These speeches are placed in anarrative context, but it is speculative to argue that anyone otherthan Haggai was responsible for the book.

Haggaiand Zechariah are unusually precise in the dates that they give theiroracles. They are dated to a fairly brief period during the reign ofthe Persian king Darius I (see table 1).

Table1. Dates Given in the Oracles of Haggai and Zechariah:

Haggai1:1 – Year 2/Month 6/Day 1 of Darius’ reign – Aug.29, 520 BC – Temple to be built

Haggai1:15 – Year 2/Month 6/Day 24 of Darius’ reign –Sept. 21, 520 BC – Work on temple resumed

Haggai2:1 – Year 2/Month 7/Day 21 of Darius’ reign – Oct.17, 520 BC – Glory of the temple

Zechariah1:1 – Year 2/Month 8 of Darius’ reign – Oct./Nov.520 BC – Zechariah’s authority

Haggai2:10, 20 – Year 2/Month 9/Day 24 of Darius’ reign –Dec. 18, 520 BC – Zerubbabel as God’s signet

Zechariah1:7 – Year 2/Month 11/Day 24 of Darius’ reign –Feb. 15, 519 BC – First night vision

Zechariah7:1 – Year 4/Month 9/Day 4 of Darius’ reign – Dec.7, 518 BC – An issue about fasting

Ezra6:15 – Year 6/Month 12/Day 3 of Darius’ reign –Mar. 12, 515 BC – Temple completed

Thesituation that Haggai addresses begins in 587/586 BC with thedestruction of Jerusalem and the temple by the Babylonians and thebeginning of the exile. Not all the people of Judah were taken toBabylon, but the vast majority of the leaders were.

In539 BC the Persian Empire, led by Cyrus the Great, defeated Babylonand inherited its vast empire, including its vassals, among which wasJudah. From the start, the Persians adopted a different foreignpolicy. They allowed all the Babylonian vassals to return to theirhomelands to rebuild their temples (this policy is recorded in acontemporary cuneiform text known as the Cyrus Cylinder). Cyrusannounced his intentions to the Jewish people through what has cometo be known as the Cyrus Decree, in which he describes how God hascalled him to have the temple rebuilt (2Chron. 36:23; Ezra1:2–4).

Whileone might have expected droves of Jewish exiles to return home, thatwas not the case. Many had heeded Jeremiah’s call to settledown in the place of their exile (Jer. 29:5–6), but among theearly leaders of those who did return was Zerubbabel, a Davidicdescendant who became governor of the Persian province of Yehud (thePersian period name for Judah). Haggai addressed his letter toZerubbabel and to Joshua, the high priest at the time.

Zerubbabelcame back to Jerusalem in 539 BC (or soon after) and immediatelyrebuilt the altar and the foundation of the temple (Ezra 3:2–10),but then the work faltered. A number of factors contributed to thecessation of work, including conflicts between the returnees andthose who took over their land while they were in exile (Jer.52:15–16; Ezek. 11:3, 15). The need to establish their ownholdings in the land distracted them from the work on the temple.Neighboring people and local Persian officials also put roadblocks inthe way of reconstruction (Ezra 4:1–5; 5:3–5).

Afterseveral years of inactivity on the part of the returnees, God raisedup Haggai and Zechariah to exhort the people to get their prioritiesstraight. The people responded to their message and work resumed,with the result that the second temple was finished in 515 BC.

Outlineand Content

Thebook of Haggai is a narrative presentation of four of Haggai’sprophetic oracles:

I.Superscription (1:1)

II.Oracle Urging the People to Rebuild the Temple and the People’sPositive Response (1:2–15)

III.Oracle of Encouragement concerning the Glory of the Second Temple(2:1–9)

IV.Oracle Encouraging the People to Stay Pure and Receive a Blessing(2:10–19)

V.Oracle of Divine Blessing to Zerubbabel (2:20–23)

Thefirst oracle (August 29, 520) is a disputation whereby God challengeshis people for tending to their own houses and fields whileneglecting the construction of the temple. The people respondpositively and start building the temple just a few weeks later(1:15). The second oracle (October 17, 520), given just a few weeksafter construction has commenced, is a divine encouragement thatalthough the second temple is not as physically grand as the firstone, God’s glory will make this temple greater than the first.The third and fourth oracles are delivered on the same day (December18, 520 BC). The third oracle contains a dialogue between God and thepeople concerning holiness and uncleanness. The point seems to bethat the people want to acquire holiness from the temple just byworking there. It is not contagious, however. They will have to workat being holy. On the other hand, something can be made unholy bycoming into contact with something unclean, so the temple can becomedefiled if a sinful and unrepentant people come into contact with it.The final oracle is a divine pronouncement that Zerubbabel is ofspecial significance to God and his purposes. While this could leadsome to think of Zerubbabel as the expected deliverer (the Messiah),that is not the role he plays.

TheologicalMessage

Theoracles of Haggai are clearly and specifically dated, so modernreaders know that they reflect his prophetic ministry during afour-month period in 520 BC. The historical background to his messagebegins with the early return from exile under Sheshbazzar andZerubbabel, the latter being frequently mentioned in Haggai. Soonafter the return, the altar was rebuilt, and sacrifices began to beoffered in the temple area, but the temple itself was still indisarray. The focus of Haggai’s concern is that God wants hispeople to get busy reconstructing the temple. They have beenhesitant, according to Haggai, because of their own economicstruggles. God, through Haggai, tells his people that they must firsttake care of their religious obligations, and then God will blessthem with personal well-being.

Inaddition, Zerubbabel plays an important role in the prophecy ofHaggai. He is a descendant of David and a leader in postexilic Judah.His presence may have given rise to the expectation of thereestablishment of the Davidic monarchy, or at least that seems to bethe implication of the last verses of the book, based on 2 Sam.7:1–11.

NewTestament Connections

Haggaiand Zechariah’s call to return to the task of rebuilding thetemple had its intended influence. The people of God set to work onthe temple and finished it in 515 BC. Haggai’s messagecontinues to be relevant, however, especially as he calls readers toget their priorities straight. In essence, the principle behindHaggai’s call is to “seek first the kingdom of God”(cf. Matt. 6:33). He reminds God’s people that God comes first,and then other matters fall into their proper place.

Onthe other hand, whatever greater expectation there was regardingZerubbabel never really materialized. Although used for God’spurposes, he fades from biblical history. The expectation of aDavidic ruler was not fulfilled at that time, and this led tointensified expectation. The NT authors understand that the Davidiccovenant came to fulfillment in Jesus Christ.

Jeremiah is the second of the Major Prophets, after Isaiahand before Ezekiel, an order determined by the chronology of thebeginning of their prophetic work. Jeremiah and Ezekiel werebasically contemporaries, but the latter began his ministry afterJeremiah. The book of Jeremiah is the longest of the prophets (21,835words), compared to Ezekiel (18,730 words) and Isaiah (16,932 words).Readers ancient and modern are attracted to the book not only by itsstirring message but also because Jeremiah is the most transparent ofall the prophetic personalities, often referred to as the WeepingProphet.

HistoricalBackground

Authorshipand date.The superscription of the book announces that it contains “thewords of Jeremiah son of Hilkiah, one of the priests at Anathoth inthe territory of Benjamin” (1:1). His prophetic ministry isthen described as taking place between the thirteenth year of KingJosiah and the eleventh year of King Zedekiah, equivalent to 626–586BC, a period of great turbulence (see next section). Chapters 40–44narrate events in the period immediately after the fall of Jerusalem.

Onthe one hand, there is no good reason to question the existence ofthe historical Jeremiah or the attribution to him of the prophecythat bears his name. On the other hand, the text indicates that thebook was not written at one sitting but rather is the product of aprocess. Chapter 36 mentions that the prophet wrote down his sermonsin 605 BC, and when King Jehoiakim burned the scroll, the narratorrelates that Jeremiah again dictated them to Baruch, who wrote themall down, and Jeremiah added many more oracles (36:32). The bookdescribes a close relationship between Jeremiah and his associateBaruch. It is possible that the stories about Jeremiah were writtendown and added by this close friend.

AncientNear Eastern historical context.When Jeremiah started his prophetic work in 626 BC, the world wasundergoing major political change. Assyria had been the dominantsuperpower for the preceding centuries. It had incorporated thenorthern kingdom of Israel into its vast empire in 722 BC, and Judahhad been forced to pay tribute. In 626 BC, however, Babylon began itsrebellion against Assyria. Nabopolassar, a Chaldean chieftain, nowking of Babylon, threw off the yoke of Assyrian bondage, and overwhat was almost two decades he eradicated Assyria and inherited theempire.

In626 BC Josiah was king of Judah. His father, Amon, and hisgrandfather Manasseh had been evil kings, promoting false worship.But Josiah served Yahweh, and soon before Jeremiah began his work,the king began to purify the religious institutions of Judah(2Chron. 34:3b–7). Jeremiah’s early ministry thenoccurred in an environment that would find support from the royalcourt. In 609 BC, however, Josiah tried to block Necho of Egypt fromreinforcing the remnants of Assyria against Babylon and in theprocess lost his life. Although the Egyptians were unsuccessful inhelping Assyria survive, they were able to exercise control overJudah and placed a pro-Egyptian king, Jehoiakim, on the throne. Evenso, by 605 BC Egypt could not stop Babylon under their new king,Nebuchadnezzar, from demanding that Judah be their vassal (Dan.1:1–3). Jehoiakim revolted against Babylon in 597 BC. By thetime the avenging Babylonian army arrived, Jehoiakim was gone,replaced by his son Jehoiachin. The latter was promptly deported toBabylon and replaced by Zedekiah. The book of Jeremiah records thatboth Jehoiakim and Zedekiah were determined opponents of the prophet.In any case, Zedekiah too eventually rebelled against Babylon, andthis time Nebuchadnezzar not only captured and exiled many leadersbut also systematically destroyed the city. He then incorporatedJudah into his empire as a province and appointed a Judean governor,Gedaliah. Jeremiah 40–44 describes how Jewish insurgentsassassinated Gedaliah and killed off the Babylonian garrison troops.Many of the remaining Jewish people then fled to Egypt against God’swill as announced by Jeremiah, who was forced to go with them.

Theseevents provide the background to the prophetic oracles and theactions narrated in the book of Jeremiah. Some of Jeremiah’swords and actions are specifically dated to these events, whileothers are not dated.

Text

Jeremiahis one of the few books of the OT that present a significanttext-critical issue. The main Hebrew text (the MT) is clearlydifferent from the Greek text. The latter is about one-eighth shorterthan the former, lacking about 2,700 words. In addition, the order ofthe book is different. The oracles against the foreign nations arechapters 46–51 in the Hebrew but are found right after 25:13 inthe Greek. The DSS attest to early Hebrew manuscripts that reflectthe Greek tradition, and therefore we cannot attribute the differenceto translation error or intentional rearrangement. A better solutionis to remember that the book of Jeremiah as we know it in the Hebrewis the result of a long history of composition. The Greek text mayreflect an earlier shorter version. The longer Hebrew text thenrepresents the final authoritative edition of the book and is rightlyused for modern translations.

LiteraryTypes

Thebook as a whole is a compendium of prophetic oracles and storiesabout Jeremiah. The following distinct literary types are found inthe book.

Poeticalprophetic oracles of judgment and salvation.Chapters 2–25 are composed primarily of poetic oracles ofjudgment directed toward God’s people. They are God’swords to his people uttered by the prophet. Chapters 46–51 arealso judgment oracles, but these are directed toward foreign nationssuch as Egypt and Babylon. Although salvation oracles are found inthe first part of the book, chapters 30–31 form a strikingcollection of such oracles, the best known of which is theanticipation of the new covenant (31:31–34).

Poeticalconfessions/laments.Jeremiah’s confessions are in the form of laments in which hecomplains about the burdens brought on by his prophetic task. Theselaments have many similarities with laments in the psalms, includingelements such as an invocation, a declaration of innocence, aninvocation against enemies, and divine response. While the lamentshave a certain ritual form, there is no good reason to deny that theyauthentically represent the emotions of the prophet. Theconfessions/laments are found in 11:18–23; 12:1–6;15:15–21; 17:14–18; 18:19–23; 20:7–17.

Proseoracles.Jeremiah’s oracles come in the form of prose as well as poetry.Similarities have been drawn between these oracles (a good example is7:1–8:3) and the theology of the book of Deuteronomy. Some wantto use this similarity to deny a connection with the historicalJeremiah, but there is no good reason to deny that Jeremiah couldreflect the theology of this foundational book.

Prosebiographical material.A significant part of the prose material may be described asbiographical, in that it relates events in Jeremiah’s life(chaps. 26–29; 34–45). These descriptions often carry aprophetic oracle. It is likely that these biographical descriptionswere written by someone other than Jeremiah (Baruch?).

Propheticsign-acts.Perhaps a special category of biographical material is thedescription of events and acts of Jeremiah’s that carryprophetic significance. A good example is 13:1–11, whichnarrates Jeremiah’s trip to the Euphrates River to bury hisdirty underwear.

Outline

I.Introduction and Jeremiah’s Call (1:1–19)

IIThe First Half of Jeremiah’s Ministry (2:1–25:14)

A Sermons, oracles, and sign-acts (2:1–24:10)

B Summary (25:1–14)

III.The Second Half of Jeremiah’s Ministry: Judgment and the Fallof Jerusalem (25:15–51:64)

A.Judgment against the nations (25:15–38)

B.Stories about Jeremiah and reports of oracles (26:1–29:32)

C.The Book of Consolation: Salvation oracles (30:1–33:26)

D.Stories about Jeremiah and oracles of judgment (34:1–38:28)

E.Account of the exile (39:1–44:30)

F.Oracle to Baruch (45:1–5)

G.Oracles against foreign nations (46:1–51:64)

IV.Epilogue (52:1–34)

Structure

Thebook of Jeremiah does not have a clearly delineated structure. Inthis respect, Jeremiah is not unique among the prophets. Nonetheless,we may still make some general observations about the shape of thebook and its large sections, even though we cannot always account forwhy one oracle follows another. When they are given chronologicalindicators, they are not arranged sequentially.

Thereare reasons to think that chapter 25 plays a pivotal role in thebook, though it may be that this was more explicit in an earlier formof the book (when the oracles against the foreign nations followedimmediately after it; cf. the Greek version). Even so, 25:1–14summarizes the message of chapters 2–24, and then 25:15–38announces judgment against the nations. Chapter 1, then, is anintroduction to the book, with its account of the prophet’scommissioning, and chapter 52 is an epilogue describing the fall ofJerusalem.

Withinthese two large sections we can recognize blocks of material. Chapter1 introduces the prophet, recounts his call, and presents two undatedoracles that serve to introduce important themes of the book.

Chapters2–24 follow as a collection of sermons, poetic and proseoracles, and prophetic sign-acts that are undated. Indeed, it isoften difficult to tell when one oracle ends and another begins. Itis likely that these are the oracles that come from the first part ofthe prophet’s ministry, that is, his first scroll, described inchapter 36.

Afterchapter 25 summarizes the first part of the book and turns attentionto the judgment against the nations, a block of prose materialfollows consisting of stories about Jeremiah as well as reports oforacles (chaps. 26–29).

Chapters30–33 are a collection of salvation oracles, a break from theheavy barrage of judgment in the book up to this point.Traditionally, these chapters are known as the Book of Consolation.Chapters 30–31 are poetic oracles, while chapters 32–33are prose.

Chapters34–38 return to prose stories about Jeremiah and oracles ofjudgment. This section culminates with the first account of the fallof Jerusalem.

Thenext section, chapters 39–44, gives the distressing account ofthe exile and the continuing failures on the part of those who stayin the land with Jeremiah. They end up in Egypt because of their lackof confidence in God’s ability to take care of them. Chapter 45is an oracle directed toward Baruch, Jeremiah’s associate.

Thebook ends with a collection of oracles against foreign nations(chaps. 46–51), culminating with a lengthy prophetic statementdirected toward Babylon. The book concludes with a second account ofthe fall of Jerusalem.

TheologicalMessage

Jeremiahis a complex book with many themes. One of the central ideas,however, is covenant. The Bible often uses the idea of a covenant todescribe the relationship between God and his people. A covenant is adivinely initiated and defined agreement. God makes promises andcalls on his people to observe certain requirements. Research hasfound that the biblical covenants are close in form and concept toancient Near Eastern treaties between the kings of superpowers andthose of much less powerful nations (vassal treaties). The powerful,sovereign king announces the law to the vassal, and it is accompaniedby curses and blessings. If the vassal obeys, then the king gives areward, but if the vassal disobeys, then the king issues punishment.

Thereis a series of covenantal relationships between God and his people(Noah [Gen. 9]; Abraham [Gen. 12:1–3; 15; 17]; Moses [Exod.19–24]; David [2Sam. 7]), but most relevant for ourunderstanding of Jeremiah is the covenant with Moses as reaffirmed inDeuteronomy. The Mosaic covenant emphasizes law (see Deut. 5–26)and has an extensive section of curses and blessings (Deut. 27–28).

Jeremiahand many of the other prophets may be styled “lawyers of thecovenant.” God sends them to his people when they disobey thelaw. Their job is to warn the people to change their lives and livein conformity with God’s will or else the curses of thecovenant will come into effect.

Jeremiah’soracles focus on warning the people that they are covenant breakers,particularly in the matter of worshipping false gods (Jer. 10–11).The hope is that the people will repent and thus avoid the mostextreme punishment. But it is not only the judgment oracles that arerelated to the covenant; so too are the salvation oracles. In Jer.31:31–34 the prophet announces that God will replace the oldcovenant with a new one, which will be more internal, more intense,and more intimate.

NewTestament Connections

Jeremiahanticipates the founding of a new and better covenant, and the NTwitnesses tothe fulfillment of this expectation. As he passedthe cup to his disciples, Jesus said, “This cup is thenewcovenant in my blood, which is poured out for you” (Luke 22:20[cf. 1Cor. 11:24–25]). The cup, representing Christ’sdeath, functions as the sign of the new covenant. The point is thatthe new covenant is founded on the death and resurrection of Christ.

Thenew covenant replaces the old. This is the argument of the book ofHebrews, which twice cites the relevant passage in Jeremiah to makethe point (Heb. 8:8–12; 10:15–17; see also 2Cor.3). According to the author of Hebrews, the old covenant failed notbecause of a defect in God or his instrument but because of thepeople (Heb. 8:8). They consistently broke that covenant bydisobeying the law explicated in the covenant with Moses. As aresult, as Jeremiah himself announced, the people would be expelledfrom the land (reversing the fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant),bringing to conclusion the monarchy, which is a provision of theDavidic covenant.

A collection of 150 poems. They are the hymnbook of the OTperiod, used in public worship. Psalms contains songs of differentlengths, types, and dates. The earliest psalm (Ps. 90) is attributedto Moses (mid-second millennium BC), while the content of Ps. 126 andPs. 137 points to the latest periods of the OT (mid-first millenniumBC). They continue to be used as a source of public worship andprivate devotion.

HistoricalBackground

Mostpsalms have a title. In the Hebrew text this title comprises thefirst verse, whereas English translations set it off before the firstverse. Titles vary. Many name an author (e.g., David [Ps. 3]; Asaph[Ps. 77]; sons of Korah [Ps. 42]), while others provide informationabout genre (e.g., Psalms of Ascent [Pss. 120–134]), tune(e.g., “Do Not Destroy” [Ps. 75]), use in worship (Ps.92), and a circ*mstance that led to composition (Ps. 51). Informationin the title gives hints concerning how psalms were written andbrought into a final collection.

Composition

Asmentioned, the titles of the psalms often give indications ofauthorship and occasionally name the circ*mstance that led to thewriting of the psalm. A good example is Ps. 51, where the titlestates, “For the director of music. A psalm of David. When theprophet Nathan came to him after David had committed adultery withBathsheba.” The title connects the psalm with the eventsrecorded in 2Sam. 11–12 and suggests that David wrote thesong in response to his sin and Nathan’s confrontation.

Althoughonly a handful of the psalms have such a historical title, it islikely that most psalms were composed in response to some specificcirc*mstance that encouraged the author to write. Interestingly,though, the psalmists do not speak about the specific circ*mstance inthe psalm itself. Psalm 51, for instance, fits perfectly with thesituation that the title describes in that it expresses guilt towardGod and asks for forgiveness, but nowhere does it speak specificallyabout adultery. The psalmists do this intentionally because they arewriting the song not as a memorial to an event, but rather as aprayer that others who have had similar though not identicalexperiences can use after them. Thus, Ps. 51 has been used as a modelprayer for many penitents, whether they have sinned like David or inanother way.

Mostmodern hymns have a similar background. John Newton, for instance,was inspired to write “Amazing Grace” because of awe thathe felt at his conversion to Christianity from the evil of being aslave trader. However, when he wrote it, he wanted others to sing itas reflecting not on his conversion but on their own.

Collection

Thepsalms were composed over a thousand-year period. Thus, it appearsthat the book of Psalms was a growing collection until it came to aclose at an unknown time between the writing of the two Testaments.

In1Chron. 16:7–36 we may get a glimpse of how the processworked. The text describes David turning a musical composition overto the Levitical musician Asaph and his associates. It is likely thatthe priests kept an official copy of the book of Psalms in the holyplace (the temple while it stood). The psalms, after all, were thehymns of ancient Israel. Their primary function was as a corporatebook of prayer, though certainly they could be used in privatedevotions (note Hannah’s prayer in 1Sam. 2:1–10 andits relationship to Ps. 113).

Organizationand Structure

Thepsalms have no obvious organization that explains the location of allthe psalms. They are not organized in terms of genre, authorship,time of composition, or length. There is only one statement aboutorganization, found in Ps. 72:20: “This concludes the prayersof David son of Jesse.” In the light of this comment, it issurprising that a number of Davidic psalms appear in subsequentsections (Pss. 101; 103; 108–110; 122; 124; 131; 133; 138–145).The best explanation is that at one point Ps. 72 concluded theDavidic psalms, but there was a reorganization before the canonicalorder was permanently closed.

Anumber of contemporary theories try to find some deep structure tothe book, but it is best to refrain from speculation in regard to theoverall structure. Nonetheless, a few structural characteristics areobvious. First, the division of Psalms into five books seems toreflect the fivefold division of the Pentateuch:

I.Book 1 (Pss. 1–41)

II.Book 2 (Pss. 42–72)

III.Book 3 (Pss. 73–89)

IV.Book 4 (Pss. 90–106)

V.Book 5 (Pss. 107–150)

Eachbook ends with a doxology. Such an intentional association with thePentateuch would lend support to the Psalter’s claim toauthority. Although these are prayers to God, they are also God’sword.

Second,within the Psalter there are subcollections. That is, there arepsalms that came into the book not individually but as a group. Thebest-known such group are the Psalms of Ascent (Pss. 120–134),probably so named because worshipers sang them while going up(ascending) to the Temple Mount during one of the annual religiousfestivals in Jerusalem.

Third,it appears that psalms are intentionally placed at the beginning andat the end of the book to serve as an introduction and a conclusion.Psalms 1–2 serve as an introduction that alerts the reader tothe twin important themes of law and messiah. Psalm 1 pronounces ablessing on those who love God’s law. The psalms, after all,are an intimate and personal conversation with God. One must be onthe side of the godly to enter such a holy textual space, just as onemust be godly to enter the precincts of the temple. After the readerenters, Psalm 2 provides an encounter with God and his anointed one(messiah). At the end of the book, the last five psalms (Pss.146–150) constitute a tremendous doxology of praise.

Thisleads to the final observation on structure. Psalms of lamentpredominate at the beginning of the book, but they give way to hymnsof praise toward the end. It is almost as if one enters the Psaltermourning and leaves it praising. Indeed, the Psalter brings thereader into contact with God and thus transforms the reader fromsadness to joy.

LiteraryConsiderations

Genre.The individual psalms may be identified as songs, prayers, or poems.Specifically, they are lyric poems (expressing the emotions of thepoet), often addressed to God, and set to musical accompaniment.Although the categories overlap, seven different types of psalms canbe recognized, with the first three being by far the most common.

• Lament.The largest single group of psalms are the laments, characterized bythe expression of unhappy emotions: sadness, disappointment, anger,worry. The lamenters call on God to save them, even while at timescomplaining about God’s actions toward them (Ps. 42:9–10).Some laments contain petitions for forgiveness (Ps. 51), while othersassert innocence of any wrongdoing (Ps. 26). A few laments evencontain curses directed toward the enemies who are trying to harm thepsalmist (Ps. 69:19–28). Most laments end by praising God orreaffirming confidence in God (Ps. 130:7–8). Usually the reasonfor the change from mourning to rejoicing is not given, but Ps. 77pinpoints the reason as the memory of God’s great salvationevents in the past (vv. 10, 16–20). One psalm, Ps. 88, lamentsbut never makes the turn, remaining in the pit of despair. Yet evenhere we have a glimmer of hope in that the one who laments is stillspeaking to God.

• Thanksgiving.When God answers a lament, the response is thanksgiving. Psalms ofthanksgiving are very similar to hymns (see below), but they cite anearlier problem that God has addressed. Psalm 30 praises God forrestoring the psalmist’s good fortune and health after hesuffered due to his earlier arrogance that led him to forget God (vv.6–7).

• Hymn.Hymns are psalms of unalloyed praise directed toward God. Thepsalmists often call for others to join their worship of God (Ps.100).

• Remembrance.While many psalms evoke memories of God’s actions in the past(as the lament in Ps. 77 recalls the exodus), certain psalms focus onrehearsing the actions of God in the past. Psalm 136 is one of themost memorable examples. As a liturgical psalm, it recites a divineaction (“[God] swept Pharaoh and his army into the Red Sea”[v.15]) followed by a congregational response (“His loveendures forever”).

• Confidence.These psalms are defined by their mood of quiet trust in God even inthe midst of trouble. They often present a reassuring image of God.The picture of God as a shepherd in Ps. 23 or as a mother in Ps. 131are good examples.

• Wisdom.Some psalms meditate on the law (Pss. 1; 119) or have interestssimilar to those of wisdom literature, such as Job, Proverbs, andEcclesiastes (Pss. 49; 73).

• Kingship.A number of psalms praise God as king (Ps. 47) or the human king ashis agent (Pss. 20–21) or both (Ps.2).

Style.The psalms are poems, and so their style is characterized by the useof parallelism and figurative language. Poetry is also notable forits short lines. A poet packs a lot of meaning into very few words.So it is important to slow down and reflect on a psalm in order toderive its maximum effect. Besides brevity of expression,parallelism, and figurative language, poets create interest by usingother literary tools. The psalmists use these poetic devices not onlyto inform their readers’ intellect but also to stimulate theirimagination and arouse their emotions. (See also Acrostic; Imagery;Poetry.)

TheologicalMessage

Althoughthe psalms are not theological essays, readers can learn about Godand their relationship with God from these poems. The book of Psalmsis a bit like a portrait gallery of God, using images to describe whohe is and the nature of our relationship with him. Some examplesinclude God as shepherd (Ps. 23), king (Ps. 47), warrior (Ps. 98),and mother (Ps. 131), and the list could be greatly expanded. Eachone of these picture images casts light on the nature of God and alsothe nature of our relationship with God. After all, theaforementioned psalms explicitly or implicitly describe God’speople as sheep, subjects, soldiers, and children.

Connectionto the New Testament and Today

Jesushimself draws attention to Psalms as a book that anticipated hiscoming suffering and glorification (Luke 24:25–27, 44). TheGospels recognized that Jesus’ zeal for God was well expressedby Ps. 69:9 (John 2:17). When at the apex of his suffering on thecross, Jesus uttered the words found in Ps. 22:1 (Matt. 27:46). TheNT writers also saw that Jesus was the fulfillment of the covenantthat promised that a son of David would have an everlasting throne(2Sam. 7:16). Accordingly, the royal psalms (e.g., Pss. 2; 110)often were applied to Jesus, who is the Messiah (the Christ, “theanointed one”).

Todaywe read Psalms not only as an ancient witness to the coming work ofChrist but also, as John Calvin put it, as a mirror of our souls. Thepsalms were written for worshipers who came after them with similarthough not identical joys and problems. The psalms should becomemodels of our prayers.

These books originally formed a single book and were firstdivided into separate books in the LXX. The book of Kings recountsthe history of Israel from the time of Solomon (c. 970 BC) to thedestruction of Jerusalem in 586 BC. Kings continues the narrative of2Samuel, with 1Kings 1:1–2:11 concluding the storyof David. The book has many references back to David (see thepromises to David in 2Sam. 7:1–17; 1Kings 8:14–26),and prophecy spoken in earlier books reaches its fulfillment only inKings (e.g., prophecy against Jericho [Josh. 6:26; 1Kings16:34] and against the house of Eli [1Sam. 2:27–36;3:11–14; 1Kings 2:27]), showing that it is actually partof a larger historical work beginning in Joshua and ending in2Kings.

Authorshipand Date

Thebook of Kings is anonymous. From the text itself, however, we candeduce a probable situation for its composition. The end of Kingstells the story of the destruction of Jerusalem (c.586 BC) andthe beginning of the Babylonian exile, with the last event narrated(the freeing of Jehoiachin to eat with the Babylonian king) dating toaround 560 BC. Therefore, Kings as we know it could not have beencomposed prior to these events. It is unlikely that the book waswritten after the exile; otherwise, the author would have referred tothe return to Jerusalem. This puts the date of the composition ofKings to the period when Judah was in Babylonian exile and probablybetween 560 and 539 BC.

However,parts of the book clearly were written before the exile. The authorof Kings drew on a variety of sources, three of which are explicitlyreferred to in the text (though none survive today): “the bookof the annals of Solomon” (1Kings 11:41), “the bookof the annals of the kings of Israel” (1Kings 14:19), and“the book of the annals of the kings of Judah” (1Kings14:29). These explicit references to sources direct the reader toinformation not given in Kings, leaving open the possibility thateven more sources were used. The book of Chronicles suggests thatprophets who were active in the reigns of the various kings of Judahand Israel were sources for the author of Kings (e.g., 2Chron.9:29 lists the prophets Nathan, Ahijah, and Iddo as sources for thehistory of Solomon). So the Bible itself tells us that multiplesources were used to compose Kings, and that some of these sourcesstem from God’s prophets. It is no wonder that in Jewishtradition the section of the Bible in which Kings is set has beencalled the “Former Prophets.”

Somescholars believe that a first edition of Kings was written before theexile and may have come out during King Josiah’s reign (c. 609BC). Josiah is an important figure in the story: his birth isprophesied (1Kings 13:2) three hundred years in advance, and herestores true worship, living up to the ideal set by David (2Kings22:2; 23:25). Josiah’s religious reforms may have originallybeen the climax to this first edition of Kings, which hoped thatJosiah would fulfill the Davidic promises and was written to supportJosiah’s reforms. After the exile, this preexilic book wasupdated in light of the apostasy of the later kings of Judah in orderto explain that the destruction of Jerusalem resulted from the sinsof these kings (e.g., 2Kings 24:3). This second edition ofKings is what came to be the canonical book of Kings as we know it.

Genre

Thegenre of Kings is clearly that of historiography (history writing),as it presents an account of Israel’s past. Kings is anextraordinary literary achievement. Prior to its composition, therewas nothing that can properly be called “history writing”in the ancient world. Since the writing of Samuel–Kingspredates Greek historiography, many scholars view them as the firsthistory ever written.

Whentreating Kings as history, we must remember that it is not history aswe would write it today. The author had chiefly theological reasonsfor his selection of material, and at times he refers to divinecausation to the exclusion of any human factors. For example, 2Kings15:37 says that God sent the kings of Aram and Israel against Judah,but it does not comment on the political reasons for the attack (suchreasons surely would have existed). Conversely, modern historiographywould focus solely on the human reasons for an event and exclude anypossible divine causation. In this way, Kings does not live up to thestandard of history writing as practiced today, though as ancienthistory writing it is an exemplar.

Thehistory contained within Kings has been corroborated by extrabiblicalmaterial in many ways and fits well into an overall ancient NearEastern historical context. For example, the names of many of thekings referred to in the book have also been found in ancientAssyrian sources. Kings, however, does not agree perfectly with whatwe otherwise know about the history of the ancient Near East, andsome adjustment is necessary to make it fit with other evidence.However, if the partial nature of archaeological evidence and theacknowledgment of the selectivity of the author of Kings are takeninto account, radical distrust of its history is not justified, as itproves itself quite trustworthy.

Style

Kingsis brilliantly written and contains some of the most memorablestories in the Bible. Although it is a historical writing, Kings,like any good novel, contains both round (e.g., Ahab) and flat (e.g.,Omri) characters. Its plot is compelling as it tells the history ofthe kingship in Israel from its apex under Solomon in all his glorydown to the loss of the kingdom, already foreshadowed in 1Kings9:6–9. It begins as a story about one nation under God, but itbecomes the tragic story of two nations that continually turn awayfrom their God only to finally be judged by him.

ThePlan of the Book

Kingsgives an account of each of the kings of Israel and Judah, notingwhen he began to reign, his age at accession, the length of hisreign, the name of his mother, and an evaluation of his reign. Theevaluation of each king is concerned not with economics or militarysuccess; rather, the kings are judged either to have “done evilin the Lord’s sight” or to have “done what wasright in the Lord’s sight,” depending on theirfaithfulness to God and the purity of the nation’s worship. Thegauge for judging the kings is the law of Deuteronomy. According toDeuteronomy, God should be worshiped only in the “place theLord will choose” (Deut. 12:26; see also vv. 5, 11, 14, 18),making worship at other sanctuaries illegitimate. Proper worship ofGod is without the use of aids such as images (e.g., “calves”[1Kings 12:28–30] or “snakes” [2Kings18:4]) or poles, stone pillars, etc.). Deuteronomy heavily influencedKings and is quoted several times (e.g., 1Kings 11:2; 2Kings14:6). In fact, the law book found during Josiah’s reign(2Kings 22:8) appears to be a form of the book of Deuteronomy(as evidenced by the character of the reforms). Due to thisinfluence, the books of Deuteronomy through 2Kings are widelyreferred to as the Deuteronomistic History.

Themes

Wholeheartedreliance on God.Kings is primarily concerned with proper worship and faithfulness toGod. David set the standard of having a heart “fully devoted tothe Lord” (1Kings 15:3) and is the measuring stick bywhich all the southern kings are judged. Thus, Solomon is contrastedwith David when Solomon falls away from God (1Kings 11:4), andwhen Hez-e-kiah trusts in God, he is compared with David (2Kings18:3). In northern Israel Jeroboam and Ahab are the models of thedegenerate king. Jeroboam is known for setting up golden calves(1Kings 12:28) in northern Israel to be used in the worship ofYahweh, and Ahab is infamous for his promotion of Baal worship inIsrael (1Kings 16:30–33). In Kings, when kings of Israelare assessed, they are often said to partake in Jeroboam’s sins(2Kings 10:31) or judged for doing “as Ahab king ofIsrael had done” (2Kings 21:3; see also 8:18, 27; 21:3).This apostasy culminates in the destruction of the northern kingdomby Assyria in 722 BC (2Kings 17).

Exclusivecommitment to Yahweh meant that the worship of other gods was theworst sin of the Israelite kings, and their fortunes were connectedto their policies regarding the worship of Yahweh. Throughout itsstory, Kings contrasts the themes of apostasy and religious reform.Beginning with Jeroboam, most of the kings are apostates and fail toworship properly. Four Judean Kings (Asa, Jehoshaphat, Amaziah, andAzariah) undertake some religious reforms, but they fall short of theideal. Near the end of the story, two Judean kings fulfill the ideal:Hezekiah and Josiah. Yet following their reforms the next king turnsto even greater apostasy, bringing God’s judgment on thenation.

Thefulfillment of the prophetic word.Prophets are prominent in the story of Kings, with both famous(Isaiah, Elijah, Elisha) and anonymous prophets (e.g., 1Kings13) playing important roles as bearers of the prophetic word of God.Many short-term prophecies are fulfilled in the story of Kings (e.g.,1Kings 13:11–32), where the reader can perceive a patternof prophecy and fulfillment that helps to structure the story ofKings. The way a prophecy is fulfilled is often surprising (see theprophecy of 1Kings 20:42 and its fulfillment in 1Kings22:34–35). The prediction of Josiah’s birth and reformcenturies in advance ties together the beginning of Kings with one ofthe most significant events near the end of the book. This shows howhistorical events are at the mercy of the Lord of history and hisprophetic word.

NewTestament Connections

ThroughoutKings the southern kingdom of Judah has Davidic kings on the throneright up until the exile (compared to the northern kingdom of Israel,which changed dynasties ten times). However, the destruction ofJerusalem appears to end the Davidic dynasty. Will the promises toDavid ever come true? The concluding paragraph at the end of Kings,which describes Jehoiachin, the last king from David’s line,being freed from prison and allowed to eat with the Babylonian king,is messianic and holds out hope that the promises to David will befulfilled. Jehoiachin represents the hope for the future deliveranceof Israel and of the world. In 2Kings 25:28 it is told how thenew king of Babylon “spoke kindly to [Jehoiachin] and gave hima seat of honor higher than those of the other kings who were withhim in Babylon.” Here, the Hebrew word for “seat ofhonor” is literally the word for “throne.” Thus,Kings ends with a son of David on the throne! The promises to Davidare still intact. The line of Judah survives, and a tiny shoot hasbegun to sprout from the stump of David, which will culminate in theMessiah himself. The promise that a son of David would rule is neveragain fulfilled, except in Jesus Christ, who is now at the right handof the throne of God and will return one day.

Outline

I.The United Monarchy: The Reign of Solomon (1Kings 1:1–11:25)

II.The Division of the Kingdom (1Kings 11:26–14:31)

III.The Divided Kingdoms of Israel and Judah (1Kings 15:1–16:22)

IV.The Dynasty of Omri and the Baal Cult in Israel and Judah (1Kings16:23–2Kings 12)

V.The Divided Kingdoms of Israel and Judah (2Kings 13–16)

VI.The Fall of Israel (2Kings 17)

VII.The Kingdom of Judah Alone (2Kings 18–23)

VIII.The Fall of Judah (2Kings 24–25)

The books of Samuel tell the story of how kingship began in Israel and was subsequently secured under David. Almost all of David’s own story is recounted in Samuel, including God’s promise to him of a dynasty. This promise became a key seedbed for the messianic hope within the OT, which finds its fulfillment in Jesus as David’s son (Matt. 1:1).

Genre and Purpose

Samuel is part of a block of texts running from Joshua through Kings (excluding Ruth), which is known in the Hebrew Bible as the Former Prophets. This block offers a more or less continuous account of Israel’s life in the land of promise from its entry under Joshua until the exile after Jerusalem was captured by the Babylonians (2Kings 25). Any assessment of the genre and purpose of Samuel must consider its relationship to these surrounding texts, though it should also recognize the distinctive elements of Samuel itself.

At its simplest, Samuel is a work of narrative prose that tells how kingship began in Israel and was secured under David after the failure of Saul, though it also contains a number of important poems. Although contemporary history writing would not be done in the same way, since Samuel points to the ways in which God is active throughout this time, Samuel certainly offers a testimony to this crucial period in Israel’s history. It is not the whole story of the period, as its testimony is concerned with a specific set of issues, and that testimony is related through God’s purposes for Samuel, Saul, and David. But this observation is vital for appreciating that Samuel is not just the story of how kingship came to Israel but is specifically a theological examination of it. It explores how God was at work, fulfilling the hope for kingship that had been expressed through Judg. 17–21, while also providing hope that the exile was not the end of his purposes for Israel as a whole and the kings of David’s line in particular. We should not think of this as a dry piece of history writing, for an important element is also that the telling of this story should entertain and grip those who either read or (perhaps more likely) heard it. Knowing that God had acted in the past for his people and that these actions continued to be important was not enough; the excitement that this should generate also needed to be apparent in the skill with which the story was told.

Outline

I. The Rise of Samuel (1Sam. 1–7)

II. The Birth of Monarchy (1Sam. 8–12)

III. Saul’s Early Reign and Rejection (1Sam. 13–15)

IV. Long Rivalry Narrative: David and Saul (1Sam.16–2Sam. 1)

A. David’s anointing and arrival at court (1Sam. 16–17)

B. David within Saul’s court (1Sam. 18–20)

C. David as an outlaw in Judah (1Sam. 21–26)

D. David in Philistine territory and Saul’s death (1Sam. 27–2Sam. 1)

V. Short Rivalry Narrative: David and Ish-Bosheth (2Sam. 2:1–5:5)

VI. First Summary of David’s Reign (2Sam. 5:6–8:18)

VII. Narrative of David’s Court (2Sam. 9–20)

A. David accepts Mephibosheth (2Sam. 9)

B. The war with Ammon and David’s sin (2Sam. 10–12)

C. Long rebellion narrative: Absalom against David (2Sam. 13–19)

D. Short rebellion narrative: Sheba against David (2Sam. 20)

VIII. Second Summary of David’s Reign (2Sam. 21–24)

Composition

Authorship and sources. The books of Samuel are anonymous, and any assessment of their authorship needs to start with this basic fact. There is a tradition in the Talmud (b.B.Bat. 14b; 15a) that associates the book with Samuel, Nathan, and Gad, presumably concluding that the books of Samuel constitute the source mentioned by 1Chron. 29:29. But this reference is only to information on David’s life and thus is unlikely to refer to the whole of Samuel. Since Samuel’s own death is recorded in 1Sam. 25:1, the book’s title in our tradition (in the LXX the books of Samuel are the first two books of Kingdoms, which continue into Kings) is unlikely to refer to authorship. Rather, it is more likely that a later author has drawn together a range of source materials in order to offer a coherent testimony about the origins of kingship.

For some time, the main sources behind Samuel seemed to have been identified, and they included a series of Shiloh traditions concerning the end of the house of Eli and the rise of Samuel (1Sam. 1:1–4:1a), an ark narrative (2Sam. 4:1b–7:1; 6), traditions concerning Saul and the origins of kingship (1Sam. 7:2–15:35), a history of David’s rise (1Sam. 16:1–2Sam. 5:5), a succession narrative (2Sam. 9–20), and a Samuel appendix (2Sam. 21–24). Within this analysis, the place of 2Sam. 5:6–25 and 2Sam. 7:1–8:17 remained unclear, but the general thought was that the sources were more or less placed one after the other in their chronological sequence. But the probability of this conclusion has been challenged in recent times because the various sections of the books are clearly aware of information in other parts, so that the whole is actually well integrated. In addition, the actual boundaries of the sources remained unclear. An unfortunate effect of the source theories is that they tended to downplay some parts of the book, especially 2Sam. 21–24, as being of less importance, whereas some recent studies have shown that they are closely integrated into the rest of the book, tying together themes developed elsewhere while also showing the structural integrity of the whole of Samuel.

Samuel is likely the end product of several stages of material collected together, rather than being the product of sources that are kept intact, but it is still a unified work. Possibly the oldest material is the collection of longer poems in 1Sam. 2:1–10; 2Sam. 1:17–27; 22:1–23:7, all of which draws on common themes and language and comments on the nature of kingship. The opening and closing blocks form the bookends, raising the hope of kingship (1Sam. 2:1–10) and then commenting on how the king must submit to God’s reign (2Sam. 22:1–23:7). In the central poem (2Sam. 1:17–27) David laments the deaths of Saul and Jonathan. It is likely that these poems were joined with the stories about Samuel, Saul, and David in the ninth century BC but were then carefully placed to comment on the stories and yet also be commented on by them. Further editing may have continued until the time of Hezekiah in the late eighth century BC. Later on, more or less the whole of Samuel as we know it was included in the Former Prophets, perhaps during the exile. The important point to note here is that Samuel is a carefully composed whole and not simply a collection of source materials.

Literary devices. Evidence for the nature of the book’s composition can be seen in how it employs certain literary devices throughout. Two that are worth noting are the way the text plays with narrative chronology and employs repetition in various forms. The play with narrative chronology means that although the movement of the book is broadly chronological (moving from the origins of the monarchy to the latter period of David’s reign), not every element is recorded in its actual chronological sequence, since at some points other factors were more important. Alternatively, at some points different narrative strands are brought into a chronological relationship with one another, most notably in comparing the locations of David and Saul in 1Sam. 27–2Sam. 1. A simple example of relating material outside its chronological sequence occurs in 1Sam. 26:12, where it is said that God had caused Saul’s soldiers to sleep so that David could enter Saul’s camp only after David had reached Saul, though clearly the soldiers must already have been asleep.

At other points, the breaks with chronological sequence cover different stories about David. For example, in 2Sam. 5:17–8:14 there are four accounts about David, two in which he overcomes enemies (5:17–25; 8:1–14) and two associated with events in Jerusalem and public worship (6:1–7:29). Since 7:1 tells us that David’s desire to build a temple came after God had delivered him from all his enemies, it follows that the events of chapter 7 must have come after those of 8:1–14. Here, arranging the material to highlight the theme of public worship was more important than placing it in chronological sequence.

This same section also demonstrates the use of repetition. Hence, 5:17–25 recounts two nearly identical defeats of the Philistines in which David must trust God, while the victories in 8:1–14 are twice said to come about because God gave David victory wherever he went (8:6, 14). Similarly, both 6:1–23 and 7:1–29 depend upon interest in the ark and thus mutually interpret each other. Other large-scale repetitions include two announcements of the coming of kingship (1Sam. 2:10, 34), two announcements of the end of Eli and his family in the sanctuary at Shiloh (1Sam. 2:27–36; 3:10–14), and two times when David does not kill Saul (1Sam. 24; 26). In an oral culture, such repetitions are not evidence of poor composition but rather are a crucial tool for emphasizing the central themes being developed. In addition, variations within each repetition are a tool for increasing the audience’s interest, showing that the authors of Samuel were interested in both giving historical testimony and entertaining their audience.

Text

It is generally agreed that the text of Samuel poses more than its fair share of difficulties, something that can be seen in the often significant differences between the received Hebrew text (MT) and the early translations, especially the main Greek translation (LXX). For example, in 1Sam. 17 the best-regarded edition of the LXX lacks vv. 12–31, 50, 55–58, and even in shared material it is sometimes significantly shorter. It is generally agreed that the Greek version resolves a number of anomalies, but is this because the MT has been expanded or because the LXX has been abbreviated? In addition, three significant Samuel manuscripts were found at Qumran. Although two of these are only fragmentary, one covers significant portions of Samuel. Although the disputed portions of 1Sam. 17 are absent from it, there are some points where it appears to support the LXX and others where it agrees with the MT while also introducing some other issues of its own.

It is clear, therefore, that complex issues are involved in determining the text of Samuel, and one must avoid taking a doctrinaire position and allow each point to be resolved on its own merits. At the same time, the difficulties should not be magnified beyond reason, since large sections of the text can be established with reasonable certainty, and for all the problems, the MT remains a reliable guide. One might suggest in the case of 1Sam. 17, for example, that the LXX text represents an early attempt to address apparent difficulties in the narrative (especially the question of when Saul met David) that nevertheless failed to realize that not everything in Samuel is narrated in exact chronological order. Nevertheless, anyone who compares different translations of Samuel (e.g., NIV and NRSV) will notice variants and should make use of good commentaries at that point.

Central Themes

The reign of God. Kingship lies at the heart of Samuel. But although it is concerned with the story of Israel’s first two kings (Abimelek in Judg. 9 is an aberration and probably only a local figure), it places their story within the framework of God’s reign. No matter what authority a king in Israel might claim, it was always subject to God’s greater authority. Indeed, Samuel makes clear that God did not need a king but rather chose the monarchy as the means by which his own reign might be demonstrated.

An important way in which God’s reign is demonstrated is through the motif of the reversal of fortunes, in which the powerful are brought down and the weak raised. This is announced in Hannah’s Song (1Sam. 2:4–8) and is then demonstrated when God removed the corrupt family of Eli from their position of power in the sanctuary at Shiloh (2:27–36; 4:1–18). On the other hand, Samuel himself came to prominence even though he had no position of power. Saul, likewise, although a member of a relatively wealthy family (9:1–2), knew that he was not someone who had automatic power (9:21) but still was raised up to be king by God. Yet when he, like Eli before him, became corrupt and clung to power rather than submit to God, he too was removed so that he could be replaced (15:28–29).

David also came from a humble position as the youngest son in his family (1Sam. 16:11), but unlike Eli and Saul, he would not grasp power for himself. Indeed, he twice refused to kill Saul when he had the chance (1Sam. 24; 26) and punished those who claimed that they could exercise violence on his behalf (2Sam. 1:11–16; 4:9–12). Even when it seemed that David had later lost all to Absalom, he held to the fact that he could reign only as long as he had God’s support (2Sam. 15:25–26). This, in fact, is a central theme in 2Sam. 7 when David wanted to build a temple for God, for there it is made clear that David cannot act without God’s authority, and that his descendants will have authority as long as they too submit to God (2Sam. 7:11b–15). David’s closing songs (22:1–23:7) make clear that the king has no authority apart from God.

Kingship. Kingship in Israel is closely related to the theme of God’s reign. The possibility of kingship first arises in Hannah’s Song (1Sam. 2:10) and is confirmed by the man of God who announces the judgment against Eli’s family (2:34). Both references occur before Israel’s elders requested a king because of the failure of Samuel’s sons (8:1–9), indicating that the request for a king did not take God by surprise. In addition, it indicates that authentic kingship in Israel could only be that which was initiated by God.

The story of Saul’s rise to the throne needs to be read in light of this. Although the human move to kingship stemmed from the request of the elders for a king (1Sam. 8:4–9), it was still the case that Saul could become king only because of God’s decision. Although 1Sam. 8–12 often has been broken down into supposedly conflicting sources, it is better to read it as a unified text but to note that the narrator’s voice is not equivalent to any of the characters that speak through it. When the text is understood in this way, it is possible to appreciate that kingship was part of God’s purposes for Israel, but it needed to follow his model. Kings in Israel could prosper only when they submitted to the greater reign of God. It was Saul’s mistake that he did not recognize this. David, although he made some terrible mistakes, always understood this truth, and his closing songs (2Sam. 22:1–23:7) reflect on it. David learned what Saul never did: power is never something to be grasped; rather, it can only be accepted as a gracious gift from God to be used for his purposes.

New Testament Connections

The importance of the books of Samuel for the NT is far greater than its five direct citations there (Acts 13:22; Rom. 15:9; 2Cor. 6:18 [2×]; Heb. 1:5) might indicate. The theme of kingship and the associated promise to David in 2Sam. 7 are fundamental to the messianic hope throughout the OT and are picked up in the NT. Even when the NT cites other OT texts (such as Ps. 2) with reference to Jesus, it is still the books of Samuel that lie behind the citation. In addition, the NT frequently indicates that Jesus was a son of David (e.g., Matt. 1:1). Although such texts do not cite Samuel directly, they clearly allude to it because of God’s promise that David’s throne would be established forever (2Sam. 7:16). Jesus’ ministry transcends that of David in every way, but we cannot understand his ministry apart from David and God’s promise to him.

The NT begins with the claim that Jesus is the “son” or descendant of King David, presupposing the significance of the biblical narrative about the kings of Israel for understanding the gospel (Matt. 1:1, 6; see also Rom. 1:3; 2Tim. 2:8). The epithet also creates an almost immediate conflict with Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1–2), who was given the title “King of the Jews” by the Roman senate in 40 BC, although he was not a Jew. Herod unsuccessfully attempts to kill the infant king, but Jesus finally is executed by the Roman prefect Pontius Pilate as “King of the Jews” (Matt. 27:37 pars.).

Greco-Roman and Jewish Backgrounds

The conflict between the king and the child somewhat parallels a more extensive Greco-Roman motif. Virgil, in his Fourth Bucolic, offers a vision of a golden age to attend the birth of a child king. (Christians in the Middle Ages interpreted his poem as a prophecy of Christ’s birth.) The threat upon Jesus’ life also resembles Herodotus’s account of Cyrus: King Astyages has a dream vision that the magi interpret to be a prophecy that the child of his daughter will eventually rule in his place. He commands Harpagus, his most faithful servant, to take the male child, “adorned for its death,” and kill him. Overcome with emotion, Harpagus pawns the child off to a cowherd, Mitradates, who is instructed to lay the child “in the most desolate part of the mountains.” When Mitradates’s wife sees the beauty of the child, she pleads for his life and devises a plan to switch her stillborn child with Cyrus. They then raise Cyrus under a pseudonym as their own (Herodotus, Hist. 1.107–30). Interestingly, the prophet Isaiah refers to Cyrus as the Lord’s “messiah” or “anointed” (Isa. 45:1), a uniquely positive role for a non-Israelite king. By God’s power, Cyrus will free the exiles (Isa. 45:13).

In the OT, God promises David, the king of Israel, an eternal reign for his “offspring” (2Sam. 7:12–16). After the fall of the Davidic monarchy, the prophets reiterate the promise in visions of God’s future salvation (Isa. 55:3; Hos. 3:5; Amos 9:11; Mic. 4:8; 5:1–5 [cited in Matt. 2:5–6]; Zech. 3:8). By the first century, “son of David” had become a popular messianic title, signifying a warrior who would free the Jews from Roman oppression and establish an everlasting kingdom. Although not viewed as a supernatural being, the Davidic messiah, some claimed, would be without sin, ruling with perfect wisdom, justice, mercy, and power—different from his predecessors. He would restore the ancient tribal divisions and regather the Diaspora, Jews living outside Judea and Galilee. The nations (non-Jews) would pay him homage (see Psalms of Solomon).

Jesus’ Kingship

The popular Jewish emphasis on a violent overthrow of Rome probably explains why in the Gospels Jesus himself does not emphasize his kingship in his ministry, except for the explicit fulfillment of Zechariah’s prophecy of a humble king riding into Jerusalem on a donkey (Matt. 21:1–9 pars.; cf. Zech. 9:9; see also Isa. 62:11). However, following his resurrection and final instructions to his disciples, Jesus ascends to the right hand of the Father (Luke 24:50–51; Acts 1:6–11; 2:33–36), a coronation ceremony foretold in the psalms (Pss. 2; 110). He presently reigns from heaven (Rev. 1:5; cf. Matt. 28:18), but he will return to make his authority explicit on earth, which includes the dispensing of justice (2Thess. 1:5–12). His rule is present, however, in the lives of those who obey him and wherever the Holy Spirit is manifested. Through his ministry, the God of Israel comes near so as to once again exercise sovereign power on behalf of God’s people. For Christians, Jesus alone is Lord and Savior (Phil. 3:20). Paul presents Jesus as the “Savior of all people” (1Tim. 4:10). This title was given to the Roman emperors. (The preamble to a decree by the council of the province of Asia describes Augustus as “the father who gives us happy life; the savior of all mankind.”)

The Western church has largely maintained a distinction between two spheres of authority: political and ecclesiastical. Hosius, bishop of Cordova (AD 296–357), wrote to Emperor Constantius, “For into your hands God has put the kingdom; the affairs of his Church he has committed to us.... We are not permitted to exercise an earthly rule; and you, Sire, are not authorized to burn incense.” Paul affirms the continuing role of government despite the overarching lordship of Jesus Christ, who preferred to speak of the kingdom of God, a restored theocracy that incorporates yet transcends the Davidic covenant (Rom. 13:1–7; cf. John 18:36). But this process does begin a delegitimizing of all contrary claims to authority and will lead to their complete withdrawal. For this reason, the kingdom of God cannot be separated from the political, economic, and religious conflicts taking place in Roman Palestine in the first century and wherever similar conflicts occur today.

The Israelite conquest of the Promised Land is narrated inNumbers through 2 Samuel and includes key figures such as Moses,Joshua, Samuel, Saul, and David, although the main events of theconquest are described in Joshua and Judges. There is considerablescholarly debate about the very complicated details of the conquest.Much of this debate centers on archaeology and the dating of sitesand artifacts that have been excavated in the last century. Furthercomplicating things is the fact that many of the events recorded inthe Bible are not recorded anywhere else, making verification ofevents challenging.

Datingthe conquest (using the destruction of Jericho as a fixed point) isnotoriously difficult. Scholars who accept the biblical account ashistorically reliable tend to date the conquest of Jericho in theearly twelfth century BC. This dating is based on the identificationof the pharaoh in the exodus story as one of the Ramesses (whor*igned in the Nineteenth or Twentieth Egyptian Dynasty, or roughlythe thirteenth to tenth centuries BC). Some archaeologists, however,have argued that during this time Jericho was no more than a small,unwalled village with little or no military significance, thus makingthe story of Jericho’s destruction in the Bible impossible.Thus, other scholars have suggested a fifteenth- orsixteenth-century date for the conquest (when Jericho was knownto be fortified). This solution, however, makes identification of theexodus pharaoh difficult and requires spreading out the events inJudges over four centuries instead of two. Both sides have differenttheories of how to accommodate the statement in 1 Kings 6:1 thatit was 480 years after the exodus that Solomon began to build thetemple. This controversy involving biblical scholars, historians, andarchaeologists promises to continue for many years to come.

Thebackground for the Canaanite conquest is found in the Pentateuchnarratives that describe the Israelites’ exodus from Egypt andtheir trek toward Palestine. Indeed, the conquest is anticipatedalready in God’s promise to Abraham that his descendants willbecome a mighty nation (Gen. 12:1–3; see also 15:16). The storydescribes God’s initial command to quickly conquer the landafter meeting them on Mount Sinai (Num. 13), and the people’srebellion caused by fear of the Canaanites, who are described as“giants in the land” (NLT). As a result, the Israelitesare forced to wander in the Sinai wilderness until the entiregeneration dies (with the exception of Joshua and Caleb).

Asnarrated in the Bible, the conquest begins with defeat of theMidianites on the eastern side of the Jordan River under theleadership of Moses (Num. 31–32). Then, after Moses’death, the Israelites cross the Jordan River to attack Jericho (Josh.1–7). After the miraculous destruction of Jericho, theIsraelites move to Ai and encounter initial defeat due to one man’ssin (Josh. 8). Later, after being tricked by the Gibeonites, theIsraelites engage in battle with the five kings of the Amorites(Josh. 9–10). Finally, Josh. 11 describes the conquest of thenorthern part of the land and especially the military andstrategically important city of Hazor.

Thebook of Judges relates fewer, more concentrated battles againstdifferent enemies, sometimes in offensive attacks and other times asdefensive battles to preserve land control. The final stage of theconquest under David’s kingship is described in 2 Sam.1–8. After Saul’s death, a short and violentconfrontation takes place between Israelite forces still loyal toSaul’s family and those loyal to David. Political power isconsolidated with a few key assassinations, rather than throughfull-fledged war, orchestrated by David’s men (there is somedebate about how involved David was in these events). As a result,David, with the full support of the army (both the forces previouslyloyal to Saul and his own), takes the city of Jerusalem and thenfinally conquers the areas of the Philistines, the Ammonites, and theMoabites (areas that Saul had been unable to subdue). Thus,large-scale fighting for territory ends during David’s reign.

Thetribal boundaries are described in Josh. 14–22. How closelythese boundaries describe land actually conquered and how much of itwas a territorial stake that required further warfare in order to beobtained are subject to intense debate. By the time of David,however, the allotment (described in Joshua) fairly closely reflectsthe largest reaches of the United Kingdom under David (described in2 Samuel).

Thedescriptions of the Israelites’ total destruction of theirenemies, often including women, children, and livestock, have createdtheological difficulties for interpreters trying to reconcile theseeming incongruity of God’s love for humankind, especially theinnocent, and his commands to completely destroy these cultures. Somescholars have sought to justify these actions by describing thehorrific religious practices of these people (such as child sacrificeand ritual sexual perversions), but there are questions about howwidespread these practices actually were and doubt about how theywould justify a response involving the death of innocents. Currently,there is no strong scholarly consensus on how to resolve thisdifficult theological issue.

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).

A sacred cultic object, in the shape of a box, thatrepresented the presence of God among the Israelites. The ark (Heb.’aron), constructed in wood, measured 45 inches long, 27 incheswide, and 27 inches high (Exod. 25:10), and it was transported bymeans of two poles inserted on either side of the ark. The mostimportant aspects of the ark were the cover and the cherubim attachedto the ark cover. Blood was ritually sprinkled on the cover, whichwas the designated place of atonement. In the earliest accounts, theark became the place of atonement, meeting, and revelation betweenGod and Israel.

Ina few instances the Hebrew word ’aron also denotes a collectionbox (NIV: “chest”) in the temple (2 Kings 12:9–10;2 Chron. 24:8, 10–11), and in one case it refers toJoseph’s sarcophagus, or coffin (Gen. 50:26). The Scripturesmention the ark 195 times, frequently (82 times) in association withthe Lord or God, resulting in expressions such as “the Ark ofthe Covenant of the Lord,” the “ark of the God ofIsrael,” and the “ark of God.”

TheFunction and Locations of the Ark

Theark was housed first in the portable sanctuary or tabernacle used forworship in early Israelite history, and Exodus and Deuteronomy notethat it served as a receptacle for the “testimony” or twotablets of the Ten Commandments. Consequently, the ark is oftenreferred to as the “ark of the testimony,” since theHebrew word for “testimony” is synonymous with the commonHebrew word for “covenant” (Pss. 25:10; 132:12), and thedesignations of the container as the “Ark of the Covenant”(Deut. 9:9, 15) and as “the ark of the testimony” (Exod.27:8; 31:18) seem interchangeable. The NT notes that the ark alsocontained a gold jar of manna and Aaron’s blossoming rod (Heb.9:4; cf. Exod. 16:32–34; Num. 17:8–10). The location ofthe ark became associated with the centralized place of gathering andworship by the Israelites. Moses composed what has come to be calledthe “Song of the Ark” (Num. 10:35–36), signifyingthe ark’s role in preceding the nomadic Israelites in thewilderness and indicating where they should rest.

Inthe book of Joshua, the ark led the people in conquest (3:1–5:1;6:1–25). The crossing of the Jordan (3:7–11) amid dryground, when carrying the ark into the river caused the waters to beswept in a heap, depicts the supernatural relationship between theark and the presence of God. The ark became so closely associatedwith the divine presence that the Israelites assumed that thepresence of God resided within the ark. Only the consecratedLevitical priests could carry the ark, which was covered by threelayers of cloth in order to conceal it from the people (Num. 4:5–6,15, 18–20), who had to remain at least a thousand yards away.In 2 Sam. 6:2–7 the oxen carrying the ark stumbled, andUzzah, who was not a priest, reached out and touched the ark tosteady it, resulting in his death (cf. 1 Chron. 13:7–10).Following the entry into the Promised Land, the ark abided at theGilgal sanctuary, and eventually it shifted from Bethel to Shiloh.

Thefunction of the ark as the place where the tribal confederacy soughtdivine counsel for holy war led also to employing the ark as a warsymbol, carried forth into battle to assure victory (Josh. 6:4–21).This use of the ark most likely originates from ancient Near Easternreligious concepts and practices that associated the presence of agod with an emblematic war throne useful for divination and successin battle. The expression “the Lord Almighty, who is enthronedbetween the cherubim” links God’s roles as king andwarrior, reinforcing the ark as God’s throne or his “footstool”(1 Sam. 4:4), symbolic of the invisibly enthroned deity. OtherCanaanite deities, including El, had footstools that resembledgold-plated and ornate boxes upon which to rest their feet,signifying their regal authority and military power. In 1 Chron.28 the ark is referred to as God’s “footstool,” andthe psalmist enjoins the people to gather and worship at God’sfootstool (Ps. 99:5). Similarly, Ps. 132, a liturgical poem linked tothe formal procession of the ark, refers to the “footstool of[God]” as the centralized place of worship.

TheArk of the Covenant rested in the Shiloh temple in the custody of Eliuntil it was captured by the Philistines, who possessed it in theirterritory for seven months (1 Sam. 4–6). The loss of theark was mourned as symbolizing the abandonment or departure of God’spresence, and yet its capture emphasized the Israelites’ falsepresumptions concerning the ark as a guarantor of military successand reinforced the fact that God could not be manipulated. Followinga plague inflicted by God upon the Philistines, the ark was returnedand remained at Kiriath Jearim for twenty years (6:21–7:2).

Eventually,King David transported the ark to the city of Jerusalem, reinforcingthe political and cultic importance of the location. Here it remainedin a “tent” until it was placed in Solomon’s temple(2 Sam. 6:17; 7:2). The ark disappeared sometime during the latemonarchical period; its capture is not listed in the temple assetsseized by Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings 25:13–17). The ark wasnever replaced after the return from the Babylonian exile, andJeremiah declared that the ark should not be remade (Jer. 3:16). Theark is not mentioned in Ezekiel’s description of the new temple(Ezek. 40–48).

Thebook of Hebrews mentions the ark in relation to its prominence andpurpose in the temple (9:4–5). In addition, Heb. 9:1–14contrasts the application of Christ’s own blood in the heavenlyholy place with the priestly sprinkling of blood on the “mercyseat” (NIV: “atonement cover”) of the ark.Revelation 11:19 speaks of the ark of God’s covenant beinglocated in the heavens.

TheArk and the Holiness of God

TheArk of the Covenant underscores the holiness of God and his necessaryseparation from sin. The holiness or consecration of those whoapproach God at the ark signifies the importance of cleansing fromimpurity as a prerequisite to maintaining the covenant relationshipwith God. Although the ark and the presence of God became inseparablylinked in the minds of the Israelites, God’s promise to bepresent among them did not imply a spatial or corporeal limitation.The law tablets contained in the ark are inextricably linked with theglory of God’s presence and the point of covenant accessibilitythrough the word of God. The portable nature of the ark, and the tentin which it was housed, emphasizes that God’s presence orrevelation is not limited to a specific location.

TheNT also concretizes the ark to the holiness of God and his law. Godis both merciful and just; his holiness requires propitiation forsin, and his mercy provides it through the blood atonementaccomplished through the death and resurrection of Christ. Christ’ssufficient and efficacious vicarious sacrifice on the cross replacedthe yearly ritual necessary to secure the salvation and forgivenessof God’s people, highlighting the superiority of Christ andsalvation by grace through faith in his redemptive work on the cross.The sacrificial death of Christ provides infinite atonement andreconciliation for believers, who affirm God’s immanence whileat the same time acknowledging his sovereignty and transcendence.Believers look forward to the literal and physical return of Christ,when they will realize the fulfillment of God’s promise to livewith and among them eternally.

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.

Temples have always been the domain and house of the godsthroughout the ancient Near East. As the abode of the God of Israel,the Jerusalem temple served the same purpose. The temple played animportant role in the social, religious, and political life ofancient Israel. No archaeological remains of the actual templebuilding exist today; nevertheless, the temple has dominated biblicalscholarship. The Jerusalem temple was originally built by Solomon in953 BC and was destroyed by the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar in 586BC. After the exile, the temple was rebuilt and then rededicated byZerubbabel in 515 BC (Ezra). Herod the Great significantly expandedand changed the temple, but it was eventually destroyed by the Romansunder the direction of Titus in AD70.

Thebiblical text refers to the temple in several ways: temple, house ofGod/Yahweh, and sanctuary/shrine. These terms all refer to thedwelling or house of God and an area of sacredness. The sources forinformation on the temple are biblical texts, Josephus, and theMishnah (tractate Middot). The most detailed accounts of theconstruction of the Solomonic temple are found in 1Kings 6–8;2Chron. 2–4. In addition to these major sections, thereare several references to building activities and repairs to thetemple throughout the OT. Another major text is Ezek. 40, but it isdebated whether this represents the actual temple or an ideal temple.There are several references in the NT that directly or indirectlyrefer to functions and specific components of the Temple Mountcomplex.

ArchaeologicalInvestigation

Thelocation of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem has been undisputed.Current scholarly opinion locates the temple on the spot of thecurrent Muslim shrine, the Dome of the Rock. Today the largerenclosed area is referred to as the harem esh-sharif (the noblesanctuary). Explorers in the nineteenth century did not attemptarchaeological research of the temple itself, although variousexplorations focused on recording visible features and conductingsoundings along the sides of the Temple Mount. Even after theunification of Jerusalem in 1967, with three major excavations in thecity, no archaeological investigation of the temple was conducted.Due to the political and religious variables associated with theMuslim holy sites, there are no foreseeable archaeologicalinvestigations. A recent renovation of the Mosque of Omar, located onthe southern end of the Temple Mount, removed truckloads of earth.Unfortunately, there was no archaeological supervision of the projectand no archaeological excavations of the site were conducted.

Inspite of the limited archaeological excavations, several popularaccounts of alternate locations of the temple have been proposed.Most of these place the temple somewhere other than the Dome of theRock, but none of these proposals has garnered scholarly support torival the current location.

FirstTemple: Temple of Solomon

Throughoutthe ancient Near East, temples served as monumental edifices thatprovided divine legitimacy for the king or dynasty. While templesshould be considered part of the religious sphere of society, theirconstruction, maintenance, and associated activities are interlinkedwith the political sphere. The construction of the temple inJerusalem is also linked to state formation by the Israelites. TheSolomonic temple ushered in a new period of religious activity amongthe ancient Israelites. Previously, Israel had worshiped at variousshrines and sanctuaries, and its central religious practice wasassociated with the tabernacle. With the establishment of themonarchy, dynastic kingship and centralized authority were created.Although the biblical text credits Solomon as the Israelite king whobuilt the temple, the project was initiated under David. David unitedthe Israelite tribes, captured Jerusalem and made it the capital ofthe kingdom, and built a royal palace. He made Jerusalem thepolitical capital but also the religious center when he brought theholy ark, the visible symbol of Yahweh’s presence, to Jerusalem(2Sam. 5–6). David intended to build Yahweh a permanentdwelling (2Sam. 7:2).

Location.Thebiblical text preserves multiple traditions and accounts of thelocation and acquisition of land for the temple. In the ancient worldthe city temple was commonly located on the acropolis (highest point)of the city. The temple is located on the highest point of a ridgewhere the OT city of Jerusalem is located (Jebusite city, later theCity of David). There are two accounts of the purchase of the land:the threshing floors of Araunah (2Sam. 24:18–25) and ofOrnan (1Chron. 21:15–30; 2Chron. 3:1 [here the NIVsupplies “Araunah,” but see, e.g., the NET, NASB, ESV]).It is possible that Araunah and Ornan were kin, but most likely theyare the same person, with Samuel and Chronicles using variant names.However, the two accounts disagree further on the amount paid for theland: fifty silver shekels (2Sam. 24:24) and six hundredshekels of gold (1Chron. 21:25). One theory explains thisdiscrepancy as arising from two separate transactions. First, Davidpurchased the threshing floor to build an altar to Yahweh, and helater purchased the whole mountain to build a temple. Later traditionassociates the hill where David built an altar with the locationwhere earlier Abraham built an altar to sacrifice Isaac (MountMoriah).

Constructionand dimensions.Solomon started to build during the fourth year of his reign(2Chron. 3:1), and construction lasted for seven years. Theplan of the temple was revealed to Solomon during a night in thesanctuary at Gibeon (2Chron. 1:7–13). The king obtainedbuilding materials, specifically cedar from Lebanon (2Chron.2:3–10), and construction and design expertise from Phoenicianartisans (1Kings 7:13–14, 45). The Solomonic templeconsisted of a tripartite plan similar to other temples inSyro-Palestine during this period. There are two accounts for theconstruction and dedication of the first temple (1Kings 6–8;2Chron. 3–7). Both accounts offer similar descriptionsbut there are some differences in measurements. Most scholars accountfor these differences by viewing the dimensions in the book ofChronicles as reflecting the temple measurements after Hezekiah’srepair and rebuilding projects.

Thebasic plan was a rectangle, 70 cubits long (120ft. 7in.)and 20 cubits wide (34ft. 5in.) on a straight axis facingeast; the height was 30 cubits (51ft. 7in.). Thesemeasurements refer to the inside dimensions (1cubit=20.67 in.). The three distinct architectural units formed threedistinct rooms where various functions were performed and alsoreflected levels of holiness. The three units were the ’ulam(“porch” or “vestibule”), the hekal (“cella”or “nave”), and the debir (the innermost sanctuary, themost holy place). In the biblical accounts the whole building iscalled the “house [bayit] of the Lord,” and the word“temple” is used for the hekal. There was a three-storystructure built around the sides and back of the temple (see below).

Theporch was 10 cubits (17ft. 2in.) by 20 cubits (34ft.5in.). The account in Kings does not provide its height; theaccount in Chronicles gives the height as 120 cubits. In itsdescription and measurements in the biblical text, the porch isconsidered separate from the temple (bayit, house). The porchcontained two pillars of bronze: yakin (“he will establish”)on the right side and bo’az (“in strength”) on theleft (see Boaz; Jakin). The pillars were bronze, 18 cubits (35 cubitsin Chronicles) in height, with elaborate double capitals. The bottomcapital was 5 cubits, round in shape, and surrounded by nets withpomegranates. Above this was another capital, 4 cubits high, shapedlike a lily.

Thehekal was 40 cubits long and 20 cubits wide and was the only partwith windows (1Kings 6:4). The debir was a cube, 20 cubits perside. The debir is also called the “holy of holies.” Thedifference in height (10 cubits shorter than the hekal  )is due to the rise in the bedrock. This measurement is confirmedtoday in the interior of the Dome of the Rock.

Thewalls of the house (hekal and debir) were built of whole stonesdressed in the quarry, as “no hammer, chisel or any other irontool was heard at the temple site while it was being built”(1Kings 6:7). The roof was made of cedar wood (1Kings6:10), with crossbeams and intersecting boards. The stone walls werecovered from ground to ceiling with boards of cedar wood, and thefloor was made of cypress wood, covered with gold (1Kings6:30). The wood had carved engravings of cherubim, palm trees, andopen flowers. The hekal and the debir were separated by a partitionmade of olive wood.

Thethree-story structure surrounding the temple was constructed of cedarwood. Each story was 5 cubits. The width of the first floor was 5cubits, the middle 6 cubits, and the top 7 cubits. This structure wasentered from the right side of the temple, and the floors wereconnected by openings with ladders. This structure formed chambersand storage for the activities of the priests.

Infront of the temple was a courtyard surrounded by a wall. Inside thecourtyard was a great bronze basin (known as “the Sea”).This basin rested on the backs of twelve bronze oxen. Ten smallerbasins in groups of five were set on elaborate wheeled stands. Alarge altar also was located in this courtyard.

Inthe holy of holies stood two large cherubim of olive wood coveredwith gold. They were 10 cubits in height, with a wingspan of 10cubits. These cherubim stood over the ark of the covenant. In thehekal were the golden altar, the golden table, and ten lampstands.

History.FromSolomon to Zedekiah, the temple was used for political and religiouspower shifts. Kings of Israel raided the temple treasury to pay offinvaders, closed the temple, or placed idols in the temple in periodsof apostasy. During periods of reform they repaired and rebuilt thetemple and its furnishings.

UnderRehoboam’s reign, Shishak king of Egypt ransacked the templeand removed all its treasures (1Kings 14:25–28; 2Chron.12:9). Asa and his father, Abijah, added to the treasure of thetemple with silver, gold, and other vessels (2Chron. 15:18) butused these to pay Ben-Hadad of Syria to help him fight Baasha king ofIsrael (16:2–3). Asa’s son Jehoshaphat (2Chron. 17)ruled during a time of prosperity and reform. It was under his rulethat the court in front of the temple probably was enlarged (20:5).The sons of Athaliah broke into the temple and worshiped Baal. Duringthe reign of Amaziah the temple was plundered by Jehoash king ofIsrael (2Chron. 25). Uzziah ruled for a long period ofprosperity (787–736 BC) but attempted to burn incense on thealtar in the hekal, a ritual kept solely for the priests. A laterking, Jotham, built the Upper Gate of the house of Yahweh (2Kings15:35; 2Chron. 27:3). Jotham’s son Ahaz took the silverand gold from the temple and sent it as a present to the king ofAssyria. He moved and changed various vessels of the temple and shutit* doors (2Chron. 28:24).

Hezekiahson of Ahaz ruled during a time of prosperity and revival. Hereopened the temple doors (2Chron. 29), cleaned out the temple,and created a 500-cubit-square mount around the temple. Hezekiahconducted many building projects in Jerusalem and reforms throughoutthe land. He also “stripped off the gold with which he hadcovered the doors and doorposts of the temple of the Lord” topay a ransom to Sennacherib king of Assyria (2Kings 18:16). Dueto his building activities, most scholars attribute major changes tothe temple to Hezekiah’s reign. The differences in the templedescriptions in Kings and Chronicles probably reflect two differentperiods of history concerning the temple (e.g., Kings represents thetemple during the period of Solomon, while Chronicles represents thechanges to the temple by Hezekiah). Manasseh, Hezekiah’s son,undid the work of his father by building altars in the temple.

Thelast resurgence of the temple in the life of the people of Israel wasunder Josiah. He instigated a reform throughout the land and acleansing of the temple. Hilkiah the high priest found a copy of the“Book of the Law” (2Kings 22:8). After a reading ofthe law in the public square, a collection was taken from the peopleto be given to workers for temple repair. The Babylonians took someof the temple treasure (2Chron. 36:7) under the rule ofJehoiakim. The last two kings of Judah, Jehoiachin and Zedekiah, alsolost temple treasure to Babylon, and eventually the temple wasdestroyed during the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BC (2Chron.36).

SecondTemple: Zerubbabel and the Temple of Herod the Great

Zerubbabel’stemple.Solomon’s temple was rebuilt by the Jews who returned fromexile under the decree of the Persian king Darius (Ezra 6:1–5).The temple was built under the direction of the governor Zerubbabelwith the support of the prophets Haggai and Zechariah (Ezra 6:13–18)and was dedicated in 515 BC. This would have been a poorer temple dueto the poverty of the inhabitants of Judah. During the Hasmoneanperiod (152–37 BC) a platform and a fortress were constructed.Not much is known about the temple during this period. It would begreatly eclipsed by the work of Herod the Great.

Templeof Herod the Great.Herod invested heavily in building projects throughout his kingdom.He was keen on bringing Hellenistic culture to the Jews but also onupholding traditional Jewish religious practices, especially when itcame to the temple. Just as the first temple mimicked the religiousarchitecture of the ancient Near East, the second temple reflectedthe massive sacred architecture of the classical world. John 2:20indicates that thus far it had taken forty-six years (beyond Herod’slife) to build. Herod could not alter the dimensions of the temple,but he was able to make additions to the outside, alter its outerfurnishings, and expand the compound and platform to match thegrandeur of Greco-Roman temples. Today scholars refer to all thesebuildings and the temple as the Temple Mount complex.

Herodexpanded the space of the Temple Mount by building a “box”around the mountain. This was a massive wall with varying height dueto the topography. This wall is still visible today, especially thecurrent religious site of the Western Wall. This construction allowedfor a level platform with various buildings and plazas on the top.The leveling was done by filling in the gaps and buildingsubterranean arches in low areas. One of these areas is located onthe southeast corner (the underground arched supports are erroneouslycalled “Solomon’s Stables” today). The whole areawas surrounded by a colonnaded portico (Solomon’s Colonnade[John 10:23; Acts 3:11; 5:12]). On the northwest corner was theAntonia Fortress (Acts 21:35), and the southern end of the complexcontained the Royal Stoa, a basilica-style building (four rows offorty columns) that housed the Sanhedrin and had other religious andpolitical functions (Luke 22:66).

Thiscomplex became the religious and political center of the city ofJerusalem, and Herod built many auxiliary components. Severalentrances and bridges from the Upper City were built. The publicentered the complex from the south. A southern complex consisting ofmonumental stairs (210 feet wide) and entrance and exit gates (Doubleand Triple Gates) took pedestrians from the outside up throughunderground tunnels to the top of the temple compound. These stairsbecame an area for public forums. In addition, several shops (Mark11:15–17) were built around the complex, as well as a largebathhouse for ritual cleansing. In order to facilitate the manysacrifices, Herod built a complex hydrologic system that broughtwater into the city. This was accomplished by various aqueducts andstorage pools. The Temple Mount had many cisterns and a new pool onthe northeast end of the Temple Mount complex, the Pool of Israel.Although Herod could not alter the dimensions of the temple itself,he was able to enlarge the facade, added storage chambers andauxiliary buildings, build a second story above the temple, andconstruct several courtyards and various buildings associated withthem. In keeping with the earlier tripartite level of holiness, theseadditional temple buildings and courtyards retained the same lineardegree of holiness and exclusion.

Josephuscalled Herod’s temple “a structure more noteworthy thanany under the sun” (Ant. 15.412). Herod built a new monumentalfacade in front of the existing temple and added a second story.Herod’s temple measured 100 cubits (172 ft.) in all threedimensions. It stood on top of a foundation that gave it addedheight. It had two stories, each one 45 cubits (77.5 ft.) in height.On the roof was a parapet, 3cubits in height, which containedgolden spikes, 1 cubit in height, to prevent birds from perching onthe roof’s edge. The temple was decorated with gold overlay.The opening between the ’ulam (“porch”) and thesanctuary was 20 cubits high and 10 cubits wide (34 ft. by 17 ft.).There were two sets of double folding doors. The sanctuary containedthe golden menorah, the table of the bread of the Presence, and thealtar of incense. Between the sanctuary and the holy of holies was alarge tapestry (veil) (Matt. 27:51; Mark 15:38; Luke 23:45). The holyof holies had gold plating on its walls. Around the temple werethirty-eight cells built in three stories (m.Mid. 4:3–4).All of the cells were interconnected by openings between adjoiningcells and by one in the ceiling to reach the cell above. To thenorth, between the outer wall of the temple and the cells, was aninner stairway with access to the top of the temple and the upperchamber (second story of the temple). The upper chamber allowedpriests to service the holy of holies. They would be suspended inbaskets, covered on three sides, through openings in the floor toclean the gold overlay in the holy of holies.

Thetemple courtyard was surrounded by various gates and buildings. Thesewere specific entrances and buildings that the priests used for thevarious functions of the sacrifices and offerings (Mark 13:1–2).These included the Kindling Gate, Wood Chamber, Gate of theFirstlings, Golah Chamber, Water Gate, Chamber of the Hearth, Gate ofJeconiah, Rinsing Chamber, Gate of the Offering-Women, Salt-ParvaChamber, and Gate of the Flame-Singers. In front of the temple weretwo narrow courts: the court of the priests to the west and the courtof the Israelites (men) to the east. Inside the temple court was thealtar of burnt offering. During the Second Temple period it was astationary, square-shaped altar constructed of unhewn stones.According to the Mishnah (m.Mid. 3:1), this altar was 32 cubitssquare at the base and about 10 cubits in height. A ramp 32 cubitslong, also built of unhewn stones, led the priests up to the altarfrom the south. A laver, the great bronze basin known as “theSea,” stood west of the altar between the altar and the templeporch (’ulam) for the washing of hands and feet. North of thealtar was the place of slaughtering.

Thecourt of the women, 135 cubits square, was in front of the temple tothe east. This court had four smaller courts, one at each corner.Women could enter the temple only as far as this court. It wassurrounded by a colonnade. Inside these porches (porticoes) werethirteen collection boxes for money. This is where Jesus saw the poorwidow donating two copper coins (Luke 21:1–3). The court hadfour large lampstands nearly half the height of the temple. TheMishnah states that each of the corner chambers was 40 cubits squareand roofless. The central area was exposed to the sky, with a porticoaround each courtyard—typical of Mediterranean buildings. Thechamber to the immediate right of the court’s entrance(northeast) was the chamber of the woodshed, where priests examinedlogs for impurities (e.g., parasites). To the left (southeast) wasthe chamber of the Nazirites. To the northwest was the chamber of thelepers. A leper who had been healed brought an offering and thenbathed in this chamber before coming to the priests for theperformance of rituals. In the southwest corner was the chamber ofthe house of oil. Between the court of the women and the temple courtwas the Nicanor Gate. Fifteen semicircular steps led up to this gate.It was on these steps that the Levites sang the fifteen Psalms ofAscent (Pss. 120–134).

Surroundingthe temple and the court of the women was a balustrade or railingthat served as a boundary beyond which no Gentile could enter.Outside this boundary was the court of the Gentiles (see John12:20–22; Acts 21:27–29). Archaeologists have found aninscription that forbids Gentiles, upon pain of death, to enter anyfarther. Herod’s temple was destroyed in AD 70. The TempleMount continued to be used and considered sacred, as Roman temples,Crusader churches, and Muslim shrines marked the sacredness of thelocation.

Roleof the Temple

Thetemple was the dwelling place of Yahweh. It was the domain of thereligious leaders, priests, and Levites. It also represented therelationship/covenant between God and the nation of Israel. Variouskings used the temple for their political maneuvering and attempts toshift the religious worship of the nation. The temple was the visiblepresence of God and embodied the political and religious aspirationsof the people. The temple sat on top of a sacred mountain.

Duringturbulent political times the temple was central to God’sprotection and judgment. From the Babylonian and Roman periods, twotexts spoke of a future temple. Ezekiel’s vision saw afuturistic temple measuring 500 cubits square surrounded by a massivecourt measuring 3,000 cubits square (Ezek. 40:1–47:12). Amongthe DSS, the Temple Scroll also talks about a rebuilt temple. Todaymany Christians and Jews look to a future rebuilding of the temple.

The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesusfollowers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christembodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in humanhistory.

Introduction

Name.Early Christians combined the name “Jesus” with the title“Christ” (Acts 5:42; NIV: “Messiah”). Thename “Jesus,” from the Hebrew Yehoshua or Yeshua, was acommon male name in first-century Judaism. The title “Christ”is from the Greek christos, a translation of the Hebrew mashiakh(“anointed one, messiah”). Christians eventually werenamed after Jesus’ title (Acts 11:26). During the ministry ofJesus, Peter was the first disciple to recognize Jesus as the Messiah(Matt. 16:16; Mark 9:29; Luke 9:20).

Sources.From the viewpoint of Christianity, the life and ministry of Jesusconstitute the turning point in human history. From a historicalperspective, ample early source materials would be expected. Indeed,both Christian and non-Christian first-century and earlysecond-century literary sources are extant, but they are few innumber. In part, this low incidence is due to society’s initialresistance to the Jesus followers’ movement. The ancient Romanhistorian Tacitus called Christianity “a superstition,”since its beliefs did not fit with the culture’s prevailingworldview and thus were considered antisocial. Early literary sourcestherefore are either in-group documents or allusions in non-Christiansources.

TheNT Gospels are the principal sources for the life and ministry ofJesus. They consist of Matthew, Mark, Luke (the Synoptic Gospels),and John. Most scholars adhere to the so-called Four SourceHypothesis. In this theory, Mark was written first and was used as asource by Matthew and Luke, who also used the sayings source Q (fromGerman Quelle, meaning “source”) as well as their ownindividual sources M (Matthew) and L (Luke). John used additionalsources.

Theearly church tried to put together singular accounts, so-calledGospel harmonies, of the life of Jesus. The Gospel of the Ebionitesrepresents one such attempt based on the Synoptic Gospels. Anotherharmony, the Diatessaron, based on all four Gospels, was producedaround AD 170 by Tatian. Additional source materials concerning thelife of Christ are provided in the NT in texts such as Acts, thePauline Epistles, the General Epistles, and the Revelation of John.Paul wrote to the Galatians, “But when the time had fully come,God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law” (Gal. 4:4).The first narrative about Jesus by the Christian community was apassion narrative, the account of his death and resurrection. Thefirst extant references to this tradition are found in Paul’sletters (1Cor. 2:2; Gal. 3:1). The resurrection was recognizedfrom the beginning as the cornerstone of the Christian faith (1Cor.15:13–14).

Amongnon-Christian sources, the earliest reference to Jesus is found in aletter written circa AD 112 by Pliny the Younger, the Roman governorof Bithynia-Pontus (Ep. 10.96). The Roman historian Tacitus mentionsChristians and Jesus around AD 115 in his famous work about thehistory of Rome (Ann. 15.44). Another Roman historian, Suetonius,wrote around the same time concerning unrest among the Jews in Romebecause of a certain “Chrestos” (Claud. 25.4). Somescholars conclude that “Chrestos” is a misspelling of“Christos,” a reference to Jesus.

TheJewish author Josephus (first century AD) mentions Jesus in a storyabout the Jewish high priest Ananus and James the brother of Jesus(Ant. 20.200). A controversial reference to Jesus appears in adifferent part of the same work, where Josephus affirms that Jesus isthe Messiah and that he rose from the dead (Ant. 18.63–64). Themajority of scholars consider this passage to be authentic butheavily edited by later Christian copyists. Another Jewish source,the Talmud, also mentions Jesus in several places, but thesereferences are very late and of little historical value.

NoncanonicalGospels that mention Jesus include, for example, the Infancy Gospelof Thomas, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel ofJames, the Gospel of Judas Iscariot, the Gospel of the Hebrews, theEgerton Gospel, and the Gospel of Judas. Although some of these maycontain an occasional authentic saying or event, for the most partthey are late and unreliable.

Jesus’Life

Birthand childhood. TheGospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehemduring the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesuswas probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’sdeath (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of avirginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18;Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governorQuirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place inBethlehem (2:1–5). Both the census and the governorship at thetime of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars.Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to eitherconfirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must bedetermined on the basis of one’s view regarding the generalreliability of the Gospel tradition.

Onthe eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keepingwith the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus”(Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home ofhis parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel ofLuke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth instrength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke alsocontains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).

Jesuswas born in a lower socioeconomic setting. His parents offered atemple sacrifice appropriate for those who could not afford tosacrifice a sheep (Luke 2:22–24; cf. Lev. 12:8). Joseph, Jesus’earthly father, was a carpenter or an artisan in wood, stone, ormetal (Matt. 13:55). From a geographical perspective, Nazareth wasnot a prominent place for settling, since it lacked fertile ground.Jesus’ disciple Nathanael expressed an apparently commonfirst-century sentiment concerning Nazareth: “Nazareth! Cananything good come from there?” (John 1:46).

Jesuswas also born in a context of scandal. Questions of illegitimacy weresurely raised, since his mother Mary was discovered to be pregnantbefore her marriage to Joseph. According to Matthew, only theintervention of an angel convinced Joseph not to break his betrothal(Matt. 1:18–24). Jesus’ birth took place in Bethlehem,far from his parents’ home in Nazareth. According to kinshiphospitality customs, Joseph and Mary would have expected to stay withdistant relatives in Bethlehem. It is likely that they were unwelcomebecause of Jesus’ status as an illegitimate child; thus Maryhad to give birth elsewhere and place the infant Jesus in a feedingtrough (Luke 2:7). A similar response was seen years later inNazareth when Jesus was identified as “Mary’s son”(Mark 6:3) rather than through his paternal line, thereby shaming himas one who was born an illegitimate child. Jesus was likewiserejected at the end of his life as the crowds cried, “Crucifyhim!” (Matt. 27:22–23; Mark 15:13–14; Luke 23:21;John 19:6, 15). When Jesus was arrested, most of his followers fled(Matt. 26:56; Mark 14:50–52), and a core disciple, Peter,vehemently denied knowing him (Matt. 26:69–74; Mark 14:66–71;Luke 22:55–60; John 18:15–17, 25–27). His ownsiblings did not believe in him (John 7:5) and were evidently ashamedof his fate, since from the cross Jesus placed the care of his motherinto the hands of “the disciple whom he loved” (19:26–27)rather than the next brother in line, as was customary.

Baptism,temptation, and start of ministry.After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring tohim as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22).Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instantministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into thewilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11;Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that thetemptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Lukeidentify three specific temptations by the devil, though their orderfor the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesuswas tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine interventionafter jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’skingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation,quoting Scripture in response.

Matthewand Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum inGalilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13;Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirtyyears of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity orperhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of theLevites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning ofJesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples andthe sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).

Jesus’public ministry: chronology.Jesus’ ministry started in Galilee, probably around AD 27/28,and ended with his death around AD 30 in Jerusalem. The temple hadbeen forty-six years in construction (generally interpreted as thetemple itself and the wider temple complex) when Jesus drove out themoney changers (John 2:20). According to Josephus, the rebuilding andexpansion of the second temple had started in 20/19 BC, during theeighteenth year of Herod’s reign (Ant. 15.380). The ministry ofJohn the Baptist had commenced in the fifteenth year of Tiberius(Luke 3:1–2), who had become a coregent in AD 11/12. From thesedates of the start of the temple building and the correlation of thereign of Tiberius to John the Baptist’s ministry, the onset ofJesus’ ministry can probably be dated to AD 27/28.

TheGospel of John mentions three Passovers and another unnamed feast inJohn 5:1. The length of Jesus’ ministry thus extended overthree or four Passovers, equaling about three or three and a halfyears. Passover, which took place on the fifteenth of Nisan, came ona Friday in AD 30 and 33. The year of Jesus’ death wastherefore probably AD 30.

Jesus’ministry years may be divided broadly into his Galilean and hisJudean ministries. The Synoptic Gospels describe the ministry inGalilee from various angles but converge again as Jesus enters Judea.

Galileanministry.The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and aroundGalilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that thekingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment ofprophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ firstteaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30);the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for hiscalling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection andsuffering.

AllGospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in hisGalilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioningof the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers isrecorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministryis the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, inparticular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synopticsfocus on healings and exorcisms.

DuringJesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with hisidentity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority(Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family(3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner ofBeelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesustold parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growingkingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humblebeginnings (4:1–32).

TheSynoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful.No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority orability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized manydemons (Mark 5:1–13), raised the dead (Mark 5:35–42), fedfive thousand (Mark 6:30–44), and walked on water (Mark6:48–49).

Inthe later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew andtraveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are notwritten with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns toGalilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey toJerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fearresolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee,where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ discipleswith lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed thePharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents(7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demandinga sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, whoconfessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus didprovide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).

Jesuswithdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician womanrequested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sentonly to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans hadlong resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality thatallotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere“crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Eventhe dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,”Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-muteman in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’sconfession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The citywas the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.

Judeanministry.Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry ashe resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually ledto his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem intothree phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27).The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of thejourney. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, andthe demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem(Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45;Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journeytoward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvationand judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase ofthe journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are themain themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).

Socialconflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposteinteractions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel(Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomicfeathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who hadlittle value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16;Luke 18:15–17).

PassionWeek, death, and resurrection. Eachof the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with thecrowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Lukedescribes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during whichJesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).

InJerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17).Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because thewhole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “beganlooking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segmentof Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions(12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation(12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s owndestruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, JudasIscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’arrest (14:10–11).

Atthe Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a newcovenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29;Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned thedisciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and laterhe prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agonyand submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42;Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial,crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15;Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18).Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission bymaking disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8)and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return(Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).

TheIdentity of Jesus Christ

Variousaspects of Jesus’ identity are stressed in the four NT Gospels,depending on their target audiences. In the Gospels the witnesses toJesus’ ministry are portrayed as constantly questioning andexamining his identity (Matt. 11:2–5; 12:24; 26:63; 27:11; Mark3:22; 8:11; 11:28; 14:61; Luke 7:18–20; 11:15; 22:67, 70;23:39; John 7:20, 25–27; 18:37). Only beings of the spiritualrealm are certain of his divinity (Mark 1:34; 3:11; Luke 4:41). AtJesus’ baptism, God referred to him as his Son, whom he loved(Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Likewise, when Jesus wastransfigured in the presence of Peter, James, and John, a voiceaffirmed, “This is my Son, whom I love” (Matt. 17:5; Mark9:7). At the moment of his death, the questioning of Jesus’identity culminated in a confession by a Roman centurion and otherguards: “Surely he was the Son of God!” (Matt. 27:54; cf.Mark 15:39).

Miracleworker.In the first-century setting, folk healers and miracle workers werepart of the fabric of society. Jesus, however, performed signs andmiracles in order to demonstrate the authority of the kingdom of Godover various realms: disease, illness, the spiritual world, nature,and even future events. Especially in the Gospel of John, Jesus’signs and miracles are used to show his authority and thus hisidentity.

Nochallenge superseded Jesus’ authority. Among his ample miraclesand signs, he changed water into wine (John 2:7–9), calmed astorm in the sea (Matt. 8:23–27; Mark 4:35–39; Luke8:22–25), exorcized demons (Matt. 9:32–34; Mark 5:1–13;Luke 9:42–43), healed the sick (Mark 1:40–44), raised thedead (Matt. 9:23–25; Mark 5:35–42; Luke 7:1–16;8:49–54; John 11:17, 38–44), performed miraculousfeedings (Matt. 14:17–21; 15:34–38; Mark 6:30–44;8:5–9; Luke 9:10–17; John 6:8–13), and walked onwater (Matt. 14:25–26; Mark 6:48–49; John 6:19).

ThePharisees requested miracles as evidence of his authority (Mark8:11–12). Jesus refused, claiming that a wicked and adulterousgeneration asks for a miraculous sign (Matt. 12:38–39; 16:1–4).The only sign that he would give was the sign of Jonah—hisdeath and resurrection three days later—a personal sacrifice,taking upon himself the judgment of the world (Matt. 12:39–41).

Rabbi/teacher.Jesus’ teaching style was similar to other first-century rabbisor Pharisees (Mark 9:5; 10:51; John 1:38; 3:2). What distinguishedhim was that he spoke with great personal authority (Matt. 5:22, 28,32, 39, 44; Mark 1:22). Like other rabbis of his day, Jesus gathereddisciples. He called these men to observe his lifestyle and to joinhim in his ministry of teaching, healing, and exorcism (Matt. 10:1–4;Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16).

Jesusused a variety of teaching methods. He frequently spoke in parables(Matt. 6:24; 13:24–52; 18:10–14, 23–35;21:28–22:14; 24:32–36, 45–51; 25:14–30; Mark4:1–34; 12:1–12; 13:28–34; Luke 8:4–18;12:41–46; 13:18–21; 14:15–24; 15:1–16:15,19–31; 18:1–14; 19:11–27; 20:9–19; 21:29–33),used figures of speech (John 10:9), hyperbole (Matt. 19:24; Mark10:25; Luke 18:25), argumentation (Matt. 26:11), object lessons(Matt. 24:32), frequent repetition (Matt. 13:44–47; Luke13:18–21), practical examples, and personal guidance.

Majorthemes in Jesus’ teaching include the kingdom of God, the costof discipleship, internal righteousness, the end of the age, hisidentity, his mission, and his approaching death. In his teachings,observance of Torah was given new context and meaning because God’skingdom had “come near” (Matt. 3:2). Jesus had come tofulfill the law (Matt. 5:17).

Jesus’teaching ministry often took place amid social conflict. Theseconflicts were couched in so-called challenge-riposte interactions inwhich the honor status of those involved was at stake. Jesus usedthese interactions as teachable moments. When questioned, Jesus gavereplies that reveal omniscience or intimate knowledge of God’swill, especially in the Gospel of John. In the Synoptic Gospels,Jesus’ answers are both ethical and practical in nature. TheSynoptics portray Jesus as challenged repeatedly with accusations ofviolating customs specified in the Jewish law. Jesus’ answersto such accusations often echoed the essence of 1Sam. 15:22,“To obey is better than sacrifice,” phrased by Jesus as“I desire mercy, not sacrifice” (Matt. 9:13; 12:7). Anoverall “better than” ethic was common in Jesus’public teaching.

TheSermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7) contains a “better than”ethic in which internal obedience is better than mere outwardobedience. For example, Jesus said that anger without cause is equalto murder (Matt. 5:21–22), that looking at a woman lustfullyamounts to adultery (Matt. 5:28), and that instead of revengingwrongs one must reciprocate with love (Matt. 5:38–48). Jesusvalued compassion above traditions and customs, even those containedwithin the OT law. He desired internal obedience above the letter ofthe law.

Jesus’teachings found their authority in the reality of God’simminent kingdom (Matt. 3:2; 10:7; Mark 1:15; Luke 10:9),necessitating repentance (Matt. 3:2), belief (Mark 1:15), dependence(Matt. 18:3–5; Mark 10:15), and loyalty to a new community—thefamily of Jesus followers (Mark 3:34; 10:29–30). Jesus urged,“Seek first [God’s] kingdom and his righteousness”(Matt. 6:33). Preaching with such urgency was common among propheticteachers of the intertestamental period. Jesus, however, had his owngrounds for urgency. He held that God deeply valued all humans (Matt.10:31) and would bring judgment swiftly (Matt. 25:31–46).

Examplesof a “greater good” ethic in the Synoptics include theoccasions when Jesus ate with sinners (Mark 2:16–17). Jesusused an aphorism in response to accusations about his associationswith sinners, saying, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor,but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners”(Mark 2:17). He advocated harvesting and healing on the Sabbath (Mark2:23–28; 3:1–6), and when he was accused of breaking thelaw, he pointed to an OT exception (1Sam. 21:1–6) todeclare compassion appropriate for the Sabbath. Jesus also appliedthe “greater good” ethic in the case of divorce, sincewomen suffered the societal stigma of adultery and commonly becameoutcasts following divorce (Matt. 19:8–9; Mark 10:5–9).

Jesus’kingdom teachings were simultaneously spiritual, ethical, andeschatological in application. The teachings were aimed at internaltransformation (Matt. 5:3–9; 18:3; Mark 10:15) and spurring onlove (Matt. 5:44; 7:21). The Spirit of the Lord had called Jesus tobless the hurting ones as they aspired to a godly character. Jesustaught, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father isperfect” (Matt. 5:48), and “Be merciful, just as yourFather is merciful” (Luke 6:36). The “blessed” onesin Jesus’ teachings are poor of spirit, peace driven, mournful,and hungry for righteousness, consumed with emulating godlycharacter.

Somescholars believe that Jesus promoted an “interim ethic”for the kingdom, intended only for a short period prior to the end oftime. However, he was explicit regarding the longevity of histeachings: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words willnever pass away” (Matt. 24:35; Luke 16:17).

Messiah.The concept of an anointed one, a messiah, who would restore theglories of David’s kingdom and bring political stability wascommon in Jewish expectation. Both before and after the Babyloniancaptivity, many Jews longed for one who would bring peace andprotection. Israel’s prophets had spoken of a coming deliverer,one who would restore David’s kingdom and reign in justice andrighteousness (2Sam. 7:11–16; Isa. 9:1–7; 11:1–16;Jer. 23:5–6; 33:15–16; Ezek. 37:25; Dan. 2:44; Mic. 5:2;Zech. 9:9). Isaiah’s description of the servant (Isa. 53) whosesuffering healed the nation provided a slightly different angle ofexpectation in terms of a deliverer.

Jesus’authority and popularity as a miracle worker called up messianicimages in first-century Jewish minds. On several occasions hearerscalled him “Son of David,” hoping for the Messiah (Matt.12:23; 21:9). Simon Peter was the first follower who confessed Jesusas the Christ, the “Messiah” (Matt. 16:16; Mark 8:29). Inline with Isaiah’s model of the Suffering Servant, Jesusfocused not on political ends but rather on spiritual regenerationthrough his own sacrificial death (Mark 10:45).

Eschatologicalprophet.Many scholars claim that Jesus is best understood as a Jewishapocalypticist, an eschatological prophet who expected God tointervene in history, destroy the wicked, and bring in the kingdom ofGod. Central in this understanding are Jesus’ propheciesconcerning the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem (Matt. 24:1–2,15–22; Mark 13:1; Luke 21:5–24; John 2:19; Acts 6:14). Inaddition, it is noted that Jesus had twelve disciples, representativeof the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:2–28; Luke 22:23–30).Certain of Jesus’ parables, those with apocalyptic images ofcoming judgment, present Jesus as an eschatological prophet (Matt.24:45–25:30; Luke 12:41–46; 19:11–27).

SufferingSon of God.Jesus’ first recorded teaching in a synagogue in Nazareth wasparadigmatic (Luke 4:16–21). He attributed the reading, Isa.61:1–2, to his personal calling to serve, and in doing so herevealed a trajectory of suffering. The Gospel of Mark likewise aptlyportrays Jesus as the suffering Son of God. Jesus’ ownteachings incorporated his upcoming suffering (Mark 8:31; 9:12–13,31; 10:33–34). He summarized his mission by declaring, “TheSon of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give hislife as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). His earthly careerended with a trial in Jerusalem consisting of both Roman and Jewishcomponents (Matt. 26:57–68; 27:1–31; Mark 14:53–65;15:1–20; Luke 22:54–23:25; John 18:19–24;18:28–19:16). He was insulted, scourged, mocked, and crucified.

Jesus’suffering culminated in his humiliating death by crucifixion (Matt.27:33–50; Mark 15:22–37; Luke 23:33–46; John19:16–30). Crucifixion was a death of unimaginable horror,bringing shame and humiliation to the victim and his family. Anyonehanging on a tree was considered cursed (Deut. 21:23; Gal. 3:13).Thus, especially in a Jewish society, anyone associated with acrucified person bore the shame of following one who was executed asa lowly slave and left as a cursed corpse. The apostle Paul referredto this shame of the cross when he stated, “I am not ashamed ofthe gospel” (Rom. 1:16).

ExaltedLord.Jesus had prophesied that he would rise again (Matt. 16:21; 17:9, 23;20:19; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:34; Luke 9:22; 18:33; 24:7, 46).The testimony of the Synoptics is that the resurrection of JesusChrist indeed occurred on the third day, Christ having died on Friday(Mark 15:42–45; Luke 23:52–54; John 19:30–33) andrisen again on Sunday (Matt. 28:1–7; Mark 16:2–7; Luke24:1–7; John 20:1–16). The resurrected Jesus waswitnessed by the women (Matt. 28:8–9), the eleven disciples(Matt. 28:16–17; Luke 24:36–43), and travelers on theroad to Emmaus (Luke 24:31–32). According to Paul, he appearedto as many as five hundred others (1Cor. 15:6). He appeared inbodily form, spoke, showed his scars, and ate (Luke 24:39–43;John 20:27; Acts 1:4). After forty postresurrection days, Jesusascended into the heavenly realm (Acts 1:9).

Asmuch as Jesus’ death was the epitome of shame, his victory overdeath was his ultimate exaltation (Phil. 2:5–11). At Pentecost,Peter proclaimed that in the resurrection God fulfilled OT promises(Ps. 16:10) by raising his Son from the grave (Acts 2:30–31).Furthermore, Christ provided freedom from the law through hisresurrection (Rom. 5:13–14), God’s approval of his lifeand work (Phil. 2:8–9), and God’s designation of him asLord over all the earth, the living and the dead (Acts 17:30–31;Phil. 2:10; Heb. 1:3), and over all his enemies (Eph. 1:20–23).

Jesus’exaltation commenced the beginning of forgiveness and justification(Luke 24:46–47; Acts 13:30–39; Rom. 4:25) and hisintercession for the people of God (Rom. 8:34). His ascensionsignaled the coming of the Holy Spirit as comforter and teacher (John14:26; Acts 2:33) and was accompanied by the promise of his return inglory (Luke 24:51), at which time he will render judgment (Matt.19:28; 24:31; Rev. 20:11–15) and establish his eternal kingdom(1Cor. 15:24; 2Tim. 4:1; Rev. 11:15; 22:5).

Jesus’Purpose and Community

Inthe Gospel of Matthew, Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah, whopreaches the good news of the kingdom, urging people to repent(4:17–23). Repentance and belief allow one to enter thekingdom. The call into the kingdom is a call into a new covenant, onemade in Jesus’ blood (26:28).

Inthe prologue to the Gospel of Mark, the narrator reveals the identityof Jesus (1:1). Jesus is presented as the one who brings good tidingsof salvation (cf. Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1). The centrality of thegospel, the good news (Mark 1:14–15), is evident.

Lukelikewise presents the preaching of the good news as a main purpose ofJesus’ ministry (4:43). The content of this good news is thekingdom of God (4:43; 8:1; 16:16). When the disciples of John theBaptist asked Jesus if he was the one who was to come (7:20), Jesusanswered, “Go back and report to John what you have seen andheard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosyare cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good newsis proclaimed to the poor” (7:22). The kingdom of God, aspresented in Luke, brings freedom for the prisoners, recovery ofsight for the blind, and release for the oppressed (4:18). Jesus’healings and exorcisms announce the coming kingdom of God alreadypresent in the ministry of Jesus (4:40–44; 6:18–20;8:1–2; 9:2; 10:8–9).

Inthe Gospel of John, Jesus testifies to the good news by way of signsthroughout his ministry. These signs point to Jesus’ glory, hisidentity, and the significance of his ministry. Jesus is the Messiah,the Son of God, who offers eternal and abundant life. This abundantlife is lived out in community.

Inthe Gospel of John, the disciples of Jesus represent the community ofGod (17:21). The disciples did not belong to the world, but theycontinued to live in the world (17:14–16). Throughout hisministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a callto loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38;Luke 9:23–26), a call to the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50;Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock Iwill build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call tocommunity. Jesus’ presence as the head of the community wasreplaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).

Jesus’ministry continued in the community of Jesus’ followers, God’sfamily—the church. Entrance into the community was obtained byadopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and through theinitiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26;Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–62; John 1:12; 3:16;10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9).

TheQuests for the Historical Jesus

Thequest for the historical Jesus, or seeking who Jesus was from ahistorical perspective, is a modern phenomenon deemed necessary byscholars who claim that the NT Gospels were written long after Jesus’death and were heavily influenced by the post-Easter understanding ofthe church.

Thebeginning of this quest is often dated to 1770, when the lecturenotes of Hermann Samuel Reimarus were published posthumously.Reimarus had launched an inquiry into the identity of Jesus thatrejected as inauthentic all supernatural elements in the Gospels. Heconcluded that the disciples invented Jesus’ miracles,prophecies, ritualistic religion, and resurrection. Reimarus’sconclusions were not widely accepted, but they set off a flurry ofrationalistic research into the historical Jesus that continuedthroughout the nineteenth century. This became known as the “firstquest” for the historical Jesus.

In1906 German theologian Albert Schweit-zer published The Quest of theHistorical Jesus (German title: Von Reimarus zu Wrede: EineGeschichte der Leben-Jesu-Forschung), a scathing indictment of thefirst quest. Schweitzer’s work showed that nineteenth-centuryresearchers re-created Jesus in their own image, transforming thehistorical Jesus into a modern philanthropist preaching aninoffensive message of love and brotherhood. Schweitzer’sconclusions marked the beginning of the end for this first quest.Schweitzer himself concluded that the historical Jesus was aneschatological prophet whose purposes failed during his last days inJerusalem.

Withthe demise of the first quest, some NT scholars, such as RudolfBultmann, rejected any claim to being able to discover the historicalJesus. This trend continued until 1953, when some of Bultmann’sformer students launched what has come to be known as the “newquest” for the historical Jesus (1953–c. 1970). Thisquest created new interest in the historical Jesus but was stilldominated by the view that the portrait of Jesus in the Gospels islargely a creation of the church in a post-Easter setting.

Asthe rebuilding years of the post–World WarII era wanedand scholars started to reap academic fruit from major archaeologicalfinds such as the DSS, research on the historical Jesus moved on towhat has been called the “third quest.” This quest seeksespecially to research and understand Jesus in his social andcultural setting.

The English word “messiah” derives from theHebrew verb mashakh, which means “to anoint.” The Greekcounterpart of the Hebrew word for “messiah” (mashiakh)is christos, which in English is “Christ.”

OldTestament

InEnglish translations of the Bible, the word “messiah”(“anointed one”) occurs rarely in the OT. In the OT,kings, prophets, and priests were “anointed” with oil asa means of consecrating or setting them apart for their respectiveoffices. Prophets and priests anointed Israel’s kings (1Sam.16:1–13; 2Sam. 2:4, 7). Samuel anointed Saul (1Sam.9:16; 10:1; 15:1) and David (1Sam. 16:12–13). Later,Nathan the prophet and Zadok the priest anointed Solomon, thesuccessor of King David (1Kings 1:34). The word “anoint”occurs even earlier, in the book of Judges, in a parable aboutAbimelek becoming king (Judg. 9:7–15). In 1–2 Samuel andPsalms the king is sometimes called “the Lord’s anointed”(1Sam. 16:6; 24:6; 26:9; Pss. 2:2; 18:50; 20:6). The anointingof priests occurs very early in Israelite tradition, in which Aaronand his sons are consecrated for their priestly service (Exod. 28:41;30:30). In Num. 35:25 the high priest is anointed with “holyoil.” Sacred objects for use in the tabernacle also wereanointed (Exod. 29:36; 30:26; Lev. 8:10–11). As for theanointing of prophets, God commanded Elijah to anoint Elisha as hissuccessor (1Kings 19:16). The prophet Isaiah also claimed to beanointed for his work of proclamation (Isa. 61:1–2).

Theexpectation for a “messiah,” or “anointed one,”arose from the promise given to David in the Davidic covenant (2Sam.7). David was promised that from his seed God would raise up a kingwho would reign forever on his throne. Hopes for such an ideal kingbegan with Solomon and developed further during the decline (cf. Isa.9:1–7) and especially after the collapse of the Davidickingdom.

Theharsh reality of exile prompted Israel to hope that God would rule insuch a manner. A number of psalms reflect the desire that an idealson of David would come and rule, delivering Israel from its currentplight of oppression. Hence, in Ps. 2 God declares that his son(v.7), who is the Lord’s anointed one (v.2), willreceive “the nations [as] your inheritance, the ends of theearth your possession” (v.8). God promises that “youwill rule them with an iron scepter; you will dash them to pieceslike pottery” (v.9; see NIV footnote). In Ps. 89 thepsalmist yearns for the establishment of David’s kingdombecause God has been “very angry with your anointed one”(v.38). Later, the psalmist pleads with God, “For thesake of your servant David, do not reject your anointed one”(Ps. 132:10). In the postexilic literature, Zerubbabel, for example,appears to be understood as a messianic figure. Speaking ofZerubbabel and Joshua, the angel says, “These are the two whoare anointed to serve the Lord of all the earth” (Zech. 4:14).

Apocryphaand Pseudepigrapha

Insome apocalyptic literature a messiah-like figure ushers in God’skingdom, overthrowing the current evil powers that oppress God’speople. In 1Enoch the “son of man” (46.1–3)is an anointed figure (52.6) who will judge the kings and the mightyfrom his heavenly throne and will champion the cause of the faithful(46.4–8; 62.5). In 2Baruch “my anointed”(39.7; 40.1) will reign over the remnant in a place chosen by God(40.2). Finally, in a nonapocalyptic Jewish text, Psalms of Solomon,the author expects deliverance from the Roman oppressors and thecorrupt Hasmonean dynasty by the “Lord Messiah” (18.7):“See, Lord, and raise up for them their king, the son of David,to rule over your servant Israel” (17.21). These texts confirmthe diversity of first-century messianic expectations. Yet the mostcommon hope centered on the “Davidic messiah,” the comingking from David’s line who would establish justice andrighteousness and reign forever on David’s throne.

NewTestament

Jesusdemonstrates great reticence in using the title “Messiah.”In the Synoptic Gospels he almost never explicitly claims it. The twokey Synoptic passages where Jesus accepts the title are themselvesenigmatic. In Mark’s version of Peter’s confession(8:29), Jesus does not explicitly affirm Peter’s claim, “Youare the Messiah,” but instead goes on to speak of the sufferingof the Son of Man. Later, Jesus is asked by the high priest Caiaphasat his trial, “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?”(Mark 14:60). In Mark 14:62, Jesus answers explicitly with “Iam,” while in Matt. 26:64, he uses the more enigmatic “Youhave said so.” Jesus then goes on to describe himself as theexalted Son of Man who will sit at Yahweh’s right hand.

Jesusno doubt avoided the title because it risked communicating aninadequate understanding of the kingdom and his messianic role.Although the Messiah was never a purely political figure in Judaism,he was widely expected to destroy Israel’s enemies and secureits physical borders. Psalms of Solomon portrays the coming “sonof David” as one who will “destroy the unrighteousrulers” and “purge Jerusalem from Gentiles who trampleher to destruction” (Pss. Sol. 17.21–23). To distancehimself from such thinking, Jesus never refers to himself as “sonof David” and “king of Israel/the Jews” as othercharacters do in the Gospels (Matt. 12:23; 21:9, 15; Mark 10:47;15:2; John 1:49; 12:13; 18:33). When Jesus was confronted by a groupof Jews who wanted to make him into such a king, he resisted them(John 6:15).

InMark 12:35–37, Jesus also redefines traditional understandingsof the son of David in his short discussion on Ps. 110:1: he issomething more than a mere human son of David. Combining Jesus’implicit affirmation that he is the Messiah in Mark 8:30 with histeaching about the Son of Man in 8:31, we see that Jesus is a Messiahwho will “suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, thechief priests, and the teachers of the law” (8:31) and throughwhom redemption will come (10:45). Jesus came not to defeat the Romanlegions, but to bring victory over Satan, sin, and death.

Inthe book of Acts, Peter reaffirms the messiahship of Jesus at theconclusion of his sermon: “Therefore let all Israel be assuredof this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord andMessiah” (2:36 [cf. 5:42; 9:22]). Since it is now apparent thatthrough suffering and death Jesus the Messiah would effect salvation,there is no risk of the Jews misunderstanding Christ’smessiahship. However, he is still a deliverer and savior like theLord’s anointed of the OT, but he brings about this salvationthrough unexpected means (3:18–20). Further, Jesus is now theascended and exalted messianic king in the style of Ps. 110:1 (cf.Acts 2:34–36), which he predicted during his earthly ministry(Mark 14:62). The reality of Jesus’ exalted messianic status isso pervasive in early Christian thinking that the title Christosbecomes a synonym for “Jesus” or is used in combinationwith “Jesus.” And indeed, the earliest followers of Jesusafter the resurrection become know as Christianoi (Acts 11:26).

The English word “messiah” derives from theHebrew verb mashakh, which means “to anoint.” The Greekcounterpart of the Hebrew word for “messiah” (mashiakh)is christos, which in English is “Christ.”

OldTestament

InEnglish translations of the Bible, the word “messiah”(“anointed one”) occurs rarely in the OT. In the OT,kings, prophets, and priests were “anointed” with oil asa means of consecrating or setting them apart for their respectiveoffices. Prophets and priests anointed Israel’s kings (1Sam.16:1–13; 2Sam. 2:4, 7). Samuel anointed Saul (1Sam.9:16; 10:1; 15:1) and David (1Sam. 16:12–13). Later,Nathan the prophet and Zadok the priest anointed Solomon, thesuccessor of King David (1Kings 1:34). The word “anoint”occurs even earlier, in the book of Judges, in a parable aboutAbimelek becoming king (Judg. 9:7–15). In 1–2 Samuel andPsalms the king is sometimes called “the Lord’s anointed”(1Sam. 16:6; 24:6; 26:9; Pss. 2:2; 18:50; 20:6). The anointingof priests occurs very early in Israelite tradition, in which Aaronand his sons are consecrated for their priestly service (Exod. 28:41;30:30). In Num. 35:25 the high priest is anointed with “holyoil.” Sacred objects for use in the tabernacle also wereanointed (Exod. 29:36; 30:26; Lev. 8:10–11). As for theanointing of prophets, God commanded Elijah to anoint Elisha as hissuccessor (1Kings 19:16). The prophet Isaiah also claimed to beanointed for his work of proclamation (Isa. 61:1–2).

Theexpectation for a “messiah,” or “anointed one,”arose from the promise given to David in the Davidic covenant (2Sam.7). David was promised that from his seed God would raise up a kingwho would reign forever on his throne. Hopes for such an ideal kingbegan with Solomon and developed further during the decline (cf. Isa.9:1–7) and especially after the collapse of the Davidickingdom.

Theharsh reality of exile prompted Israel to hope that God would rule insuch a manner. A number of psalms reflect the desire that an idealson of David would come and rule, delivering Israel from its currentplight of oppression. Hence, in Ps. 2 God declares that his son(v.7), who is the Lord’s anointed one (v.2), willreceive “the nations [as] your inheritance, the ends of theearth your possession” (v.8). God promises that “youwill rule them with an iron scepter; you will dash them to pieceslike pottery” (v.9; see NIV footnote). In Ps. 89 thepsalmist yearns for the establishment of David’s kingdombecause God has been “very angry with your anointed one”(v.38). Later, the psalmist pleads with God, “For thesake of your servant David, do not reject your anointed one”(Ps. 132:10). In the postexilic literature, Zerubbabel, for example,appears to be understood as a messianic figure. Speaking ofZerubbabel and Joshua, the angel says, “These are the two whoare anointed to serve the Lord of all the earth” (Zech. 4:14).

Apocryphaand Pseudepigrapha

Insome apocalyptic literature a messiah-like figure ushers in God’skingdom, overthrowing the current evil powers that oppress God’speople. In 1Enoch the “son of man” (46.1–3)is an anointed figure (52.6) who will judge the kings and the mightyfrom his heavenly throne and will champion the cause of the faithful(46.4–8; 62.5). In 2Baruch “my anointed”(39.7; 40.1) will reign over the remnant in a place chosen by God(40.2). Finally, in a nonapocalyptic Jewish text, Psalms of Solomon,the author expects deliverance from the Roman oppressors and thecorrupt Hasmonean dynasty by the “Lord Messiah” (18.7):“See, Lord, and raise up for them their king, the son of David,to rule over your servant Israel” (17.21). These texts confirmthe diversity of first-century messianic expectations. Yet the mostcommon hope centered on the “Davidic messiah,” the comingking from David’s line who would establish justice andrighteousness and reign forever on David’s throne.

NewTestament

Jesusdemonstrates great reticence in using the title “Messiah.”In the Synoptic Gospels he almost never explicitly claims it. The twokey Synoptic passages where Jesus accepts the title are themselvesenigmatic. In Mark’s version of Peter’s confession(8:29), Jesus does not explicitly affirm Peter’s claim, “Youare the Messiah,” but instead goes on to speak of the sufferingof the Son of Man. Later, Jesus is asked by the high priest Caiaphasat his trial, “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?”(Mark 14:60). In Mark 14:62, Jesus answers explicitly with “Iam,” while in Matt. 26:64, he uses the more enigmatic “Youhave said so.” Jesus then goes on to describe himself as theexalted Son of Man who will sit at Yahweh’s right hand.

Jesusno doubt avoided the title because it risked communicating aninadequate understanding of the kingdom and his messianic role.Although the Messiah was never a purely political figure in Judaism,he was widely expected to destroy Israel’s enemies and secureits physical borders. Psalms of Solomon portrays the coming “sonof David” as one who will “destroy the unrighteousrulers” and “purge Jerusalem from Gentiles who trampleher to destruction” (Pss. Sol. 17.21–23). To distancehimself from such thinking, Jesus never refers to himself as “sonof David” and “king of Israel/the Jews” as othercharacters do in the Gospels (Matt. 12:23; 21:9, 15; Mark 10:47;15:2; John 1:49; 12:13; 18:33). When Jesus was confronted by a groupof Jews who wanted to make him into such a king, he resisted them(John 6:15).

InMark 12:35–37, Jesus also redefines traditional understandingsof the son of David in his short discussion on Ps. 110:1: he issomething more than a mere human son of David. Combining Jesus’implicit affirmation that he is the Messiah in Mark 8:30 with histeaching about the Son of Man in 8:31, we see that Jesus is a Messiahwho will “suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, thechief priests, and the teachers of the law” (8:31) and throughwhom redemption will come (10:45). Jesus came not to defeat the Romanlegions, but to bring victory over Satan, sin, and death.

Inthe book of Acts, Peter reaffirms the messiahship of Jesus at theconclusion of his sermon: “Therefore let all Israel be assuredof this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord andMessiah” (2:36 [cf. 5:42; 9:22]). Since it is now apparent thatthrough suffering and death Jesus the Messiah would effect salvation,there is no risk of the Jews misunderstanding Christ’smessiahship. However, he is still a deliverer and savior like theLord’s anointed of the OT, but he brings about this salvationthrough unexpected means (3:18–20). Further, Jesus is now theascended and exalted messianic king in the style of Ps. 110:1 (cf.Acts 2:34–36), which he predicted during his earthly ministry(Mark 14:62). The reality of Jesus’ exalted messianic status isso pervasive in early Christian thinking that the title Christosbecomes a synonym for “Jesus” or is used in combinationwith “Jesus.” And indeed, the earliest followers of Jesusafter the resurrection become know as Christianoi (Acts 11:26).

The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesusfollowers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christembodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in humanhistory.

Introduction

Name.Early Christians combined the name “Jesus” with the title“Christ” (Acts 5:42; NIV: “Messiah”). Thename “Jesus,” from the Hebrew Yehoshua or Yeshua, was acommon male name in first-century Judaism. The title “Christ”is from the Greek christos, a translation of the Hebrew mashiakh(“anointed one, messiah”). Christians eventually werenamed after Jesus’ title (Acts 11:26). During the ministry ofJesus, Peter was the first disciple to recognize Jesus as the Messiah(Matt. 16:16; Mark 9:29; Luke 9:20).

Sources.From the viewpoint of Christianity, the life and ministry of Jesusconstitute the turning point in human history. From a historicalperspective, ample early source materials would be expected. Indeed,both Christian and non-Christian first-century and earlysecond-century literary sources are extant, but they are few innumber. In part, this low incidence is due to society’s initialresistance to the Jesus followers’ movement. The ancient Romanhistorian Tacitus called Christianity “a superstition,”since its beliefs did not fit with the culture’s prevailingworldview and thus were considered antisocial. Early literary sourcestherefore are either in-group documents or allusions in non-Christiansources.

TheNT Gospels are the principal sources for the life and ministry ofJesus. They consist of Matthew, Mark, Luke (the Synoptic Gospels),and John. Most scholars adhere to the so-called Four SourceHypothesis. In this theory, Mark was written first and was used as asource by Matthew and Luke, who also used the sayings source Q (fromGerman Quelle, meaning “source”) as well as their ownindividual sources M (Matthew) and L (Luke). John used additionalsources.

Theearly church tried to put together singular accounts, so-calledGospel harmonies, of the life of Jesus. The Gospel of the Ebionitesrepresents one such attempt based on the Synoptic Gospels. Anotherharmony, the Diatessaron, based on all four Gospels, was producedaround AD 170 by Tatian. Additional source materials concerning thelife of Christ are provided in the NT in texts such as Acts, thePauline Epistles, the General Epistles, and the Revelation of John.Paul wrote to the Galatians, “But when the time had fully come,God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law” (Gal. 4:4).The first narrative about Jesus by the Christian community was apassion narrative, the account of his death and resurrection. Thefirst extant references to this tradition are found in Paul’sletters (1Cor. 2:2; Gal. 3:1). The resurrection was recognizedfrom the beginning as the cornerstone of the Christian faith (1Cor.15:13–14).

Amongnon-Christian sources, the earliest reference to Jesus is found in aletter written circa AD 112 by Pliny the Younger, the Roman governorof Bithynia-Pontus (Ep. 10.96). The Roman historian Tacitus mentionsChristians and Jesus around AD 115 in his famous work about thehistory of Rome (Ann. 15.44). Another Roman historian, Suetonius,wrote around the same time concerning unrest among the Jews in Romebecause of a certain “Chrestos” (Claud. 25.4). Somescholars conclude that “Chrestos” is a misspelling of“Christos,” a reference to Jesus.

TheJewish author Josephus (first century AD) mentions Jesus in a storyabout the Jewish high priest Ananus and James the brother of Jesus(Ant. 20.200). A controversial reference to Jesus appears in adifferent part of the same work, where Josephus affirms that Jesus isthe Messiah and that he rose from the dead (Ant. 18.63–64). Themajority of scholars consider this passage to be authentic butheavily edited by later Christian copyists. Another Jewish source,the Talmud, also mentions Jesus in several places, but thesereferences are very late and of little historical value.

NoncanonicalGospels that mention Jesus include, for example, the Infancy Gospelof Thomas, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel ofJames, the Gospel of Judas Iscariot, the Gospel of the Hebrews, theEgerton Gospel, and the Gospel of Judas. Although some of these maycontain an occasional authentic saying or event, for the most partthey are late and unreliable.

Jesus’Life

Birthand childhood. TheGospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehemduring the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesuswas probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’sdeath (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of avirginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18;Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governorQuirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place inBethlehem (2:1–5). Both the census and the governorship at thetime of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars.Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to eitherconfirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must bedetermined on the basis of one’s view regarding the generalreliability of the Gospel tradition.

Onthe eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keepingwith the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus”(Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home ofhis parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel ofLuke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth instrength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke alsocontains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).

Jesuswas born in a lower socioeconomic setting. His parents offered atemple sacrifice appropriate for those who could not afford tosacrifice a sheep (Luke 2:22–24; cf. Lev. 12:8). Joseph, Jesus’earthly father, was a carpenter or an artisan in wood, stone, ormetal (Matt. 13:55). From a geographical perspective, Nazareth wasnot a prominent place for settling, since it lacked fertile ground.Jesus’ disciple Nathanael expressed an apparently commonfirst-century sentiment concerning Nazareth: “Nazareth! Cananything good come from there?” (John 1:46).

Jesuswas also born in a context of scandal. Questions of illegitimacy weresurely raised, since his mother Mary was discovered to be pregnantbefore her marriage to Joseph. According to Matthew, only theintervention of an angel convinced Joseph not to break his betrothal(Matt. 1:18–24). Jesus’ birth took place in Bethlehem,far from his parents’ home in Nazareth. According to kinshiphospitality customs, Joseph and Mary would have expected to stay withdistant relatives in Bethlehem. It is likely that they were unwelcomebecause of Jesus’ status as an illegitimate child; thus Maryhad to give birth elsewhere and place the infant Jesus in a feedingtrough (Luke 2:7). A similar response was seen years later inNazareth when Jesus was identified as “Mary’s son”(Mark 6:3) rather than through his paternal line, thereby shaming himas one who was born an illegitimate child. Jesus was likewiserejected at the end of his life as the crowds cried, “Crucifyhim!” (Matt. 27:22–23; Mark 15:13–14; Luke 23:21;John 19:6, 15). When Jesus was arrested, most of his followers fled(Matt. 26:56; Mark 14:50–52), and a core disciple, Peter,vehemently denied knowing him (Matt. 26:69–74; Mark 14:66–71;Luke 22:55–60; John 18:15–17, 25–27). His ownsiblings did not believe in him (John 7:5) and were evidently ashamedof his fate, since from the cross Jesus placed the care of his motherinto the hands of “the disciple whom he loved” (19:26–27)rather than the next brother in line, as was customary.

Baptism,temptation, and start of ministry.After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring tohim as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22).Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instantministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into thewilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11;Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that thetemptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Lukeidentify three specific temptations by the devil, though their orderfor the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesuswas tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine interventionafter jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’skingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation,quoting Scripture in response.

Matthewand Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum inGalilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13;Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirtyyears of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity orperhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of theLevites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning ofJesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples andthe sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).

Jesus’public ministry: chronology.Jesus’ ministry started in Galilee, probably around AD 27/28,and ended with his death around AD 30 in Jerusalem. The temple hadbeen forty-six years in construction (generally interpreted as thetemple itself and the wider temple complex) when Jesus drove out themoney changers (John 2:20). According to Josephus, the rebuilding andexpansion of the second temple had started in 20/19 BC, during theeighteenth year of Herod’s reign (Ant. 15.380). The ministry ofJohn the Baptist had commenced in the fifteenth year of Tiberius(Luke 3:1–2), who had become a coregent in AD 11/12. From thesedates of the start of the temple building and the correlation of thereign of Tiberius to John the Baptist’s ministry, the onset ofJesus’ ministry can probably be dated to AD 27/28.

TheGospel of John mentions three Passovers and another unnamed feast inJohn 5:1. The length of Jesus’ ministry thus extended overthree or four Passovers, equaling about three or three and a halfyears. Passover, which took place on the fifteenth of Nisan, came ona Friday in AD 30 and 33. The year of Jesus’ death wastherefore probably AD 30.

Jesus’ministry years may be divided broadly into his Galilean and hisJudean ministries. The Synoptic Gospels describe the ministry inGalilee from various angles but converge again as Jesus enters Judea.

Galileanministry.The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and aroundGalilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that thekingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment ofprophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ firstteaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30);the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for hiscalling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection andsuffering.

AllGospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in hisGalilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioningof the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers isrecorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministryis the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, inparticular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synopticsfocus on healings and exorcisms.

DuringJesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with hisidentity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority(Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family(3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner ofBeelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesustold parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growingkingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humblebeginnings (4:1–32).

TheSynoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful.No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority orability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized manydemons (Mark 5:1–13), raised the dead (Mark 5:35–42), fedfive thousand (Mark 6:30–44), and walked on water (Mark6:48–49).

Inthe later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew andtraveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are notwritten with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns toGalilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey toJerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fearresolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee,where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ discipleswith lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed thePharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents(7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demandinga sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, whoconfessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus didprovide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).

Jesuswithdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician womanrequested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sentonly to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans hadlong resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality thatallotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere“crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Eventhe dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,”Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-muteman in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’sconfession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The citywas the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.

Judeanministry.Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry ashe resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually ledto his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem intothree phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27).The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of thejourney. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, andthe demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem(Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45;Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journeytoward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvationand judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase ofthe journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are themain themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).

Socialconflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposteinteractions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel(Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomicfeathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who hadlittle value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16;Luke 18:15–17).

PassionWeek, death, and resurrection. Eachof the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with thecrowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Lukedescribes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during whichJesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).

InJerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17).Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because thewhole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “beganlooking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segmentof Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions(12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation(12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s owndestruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, JudasIscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’arrest (14:10–11).

Atthe Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a newcovenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29;Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned thedisciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and laterhe prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agonyand submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42;Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial,crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15;Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18).Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission bymaking disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8)and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return(Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).

TheIdentity of Jesus Christ

Variousaspects of Jesus’ identity are stressed in the four NT Gospels,depending on their target audiences. In the Gospels the witnesses toJesus’ ministry are portrayed as constantly questioning andexamining his identity (Matt. 11:2–5; 12:24; 26:63; 27:11; Mark3:22; 8:11; 11:28; 14:61; Luke 7:18–20; 11:15; 22:67, 70;23:39; John 7:20, 25–27; 18:37). Only beings of the spiritualrealm are certain of his divinity (Mark 1:34; 3:11; Luke 4:41). AtJesus’ baptism, God referred to him as his Son, whom he loved(Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Likewise, when Jesus wastransfigured in the presence of Peter, James, and John, a voiceaffirmed, “This is my Son, whom I love” (Matt. 17:5; Mark9:7). At the moment of his death, the questioning of Jesus’identity culminated in a confession by a Roman centurion and otherguards: “Surely he was the Son of God!” (Matt. 27:54; cf.Mark 15:39).

Miracleworker.In the first-century setting, folk healers and miracle workers werepart of the fabric of society. Jesus, however, performed signs andmiracles in order to demonstrate the authority of the kingdom of Godover various realms: disease, illness, the spiritual world, nature,and even future events. Especially in the Gospel of John, Jesus’signs and miracles are used to show his authority and thus hisidentity.

Nochallenge superseded Jesus’ authority. Among his ample miraclesand signs, he changed water into wine (John 2:7–9), calmed astorm in the sea (Matt. 8:23–27; Mark 4:35–39; Luke8:22–25), exorcized demons (Matt. 9:32–34; Mark 5:1–13;Luke 9:42–43), healed the sick (Mark 1:40–44), raised thedead (Matt. 9:23–25; Mark 5:35–42; Luke 7:1–16;8:49–54; John 11:17, 38–44), performed miraculousfeedings (Matt. 14:17–21; 15:34–38; Mark 6:30–44;8:5–9; Luke 9:10–17; John 6:8–13), and walked onwater (Matt. 14:25–26; Mark 6:48–49; John 6:19).

ThePharisees requested miracles as evidence of his authority (Mark8:11–12). Jesus refused, claiming that a wicked and adulterousgeneration asks for a miraculous sign (Matt. 12:38–39; 16:1–4).The only sign that he would give was the sign of Jonah—hisdeath and resurrection three days later—a personal sacrifice,taking upon himself the judgment of the world (Matt. 12:39–41).

Rabbi/teacher.Jesus’ teaching style was similar to other first-century rabbisor Pharisees (Mark 9:5; 10:51; John 1:38; 3:2). What distinguishedhim was that he spoke with great personal authority (Matt. 5:22, 28,32, 39, 44; Mark 1:22). Like other rabbis of his day, Jesus gathereddisciples. He called these men to observe his lifestyle and to joinhim in his ministry of teaching, healing, and exorcism (Matt. 10:1–4;Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16).

Jesusused a variety of teaching methods. He frequently spoke in parables(Matt. 6:24; 13:24–52; 18:10–14, 23–35;21:28–22:14; 24:32–36, 45–51; 25:14–30; Mark4:1–34; 12:1–12; 13:28–34; Luke 8:4–18;12:41–46; 13:18–21; 14:15–24; 15:1–16:15,19–31; 18:1–14; 19:11–27; 20:9–19; 21:29–33),used figures of speech (John 10:9), hyperbole (Matt. 19:24; Mark10:25; Luke 18:25), argumentation (Matt. 26:11), object lessons(Matt. 24:32), frequent repetition (Matt. 13:44–47; Luke13:18–21), practical examples, and personal guidance.

Majorthemes in Jesus’ teaching include the kingdom of God, the costof discipleship, internal righteousness, the end of the age, hisidentity, his mission, and his approaching death. In his teachings,observance of Torah was given new context and meaning because God’skingdom had “come near” (Matt. 3:2). Jesus had come tofulfill the law (Matt. 5:17).

Jesus’teaching ministry often took place amid social conflict. Theseconflicts were couched in so-called challenge-riposte interactions inwhich the honor status of those involved was at stake. Jesus usedthese interactions as teachable moments. When questioned, Jesus gavereplies that reveal omniscience or intimate knowledge of God’swill, especially in the Gospel of John. In the Synoptic Gospels,Jesus’ answers are both ethical and practical in nature. TheSynoptics portray Jesus as challenged repeatedly with accusations ofviolating customs specified in the Jewish law. Jesus’ answersto such accusations often echoed the essence of 1Sam. 15:22,“To obey is better than sacrifice,” phrased by Jesus as“I desire mercy, not sacrifice” (Matt. 9:13; 12:7). Anoverall “better than” ethic was common in Jesus’public teaching.

TheSermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7) contains a “better than”ethic in which internal obedience is better than mere outwardobedience. For example, Jesus said that anger without cause is equalto murder (Matt. 5:21–22), that looking at a woman lustfullyamounts to adultery (Matt. 5:28), and that instead of revengingwrongs one must reciprocate with love (Matt. 5:38–48). Jesusvalued compassion above traditions and customs, even those containedwithin the OT law. He desired internal obedience above the letter ofthe law.

Jesus’teachings found their authority in the reality of God’simminent kingdom (Matt. 3:2; 10:7; Mark 1:15; Luke 10:9),necessitating repentance (Matt. 3:2), belief (Mark 1:15), dependence(Matt. 18:3–5; Mark 10:15), and loyalty to a new community—thefamily of Jesus followers (Mark 3:34; 10:29–30). Jesus urged,“Seek first [God’s] kingdom and his righteousness”(Matt. 6:33). Preaching with such urgency was common among propheticteachers of the intertestamental period. Jesus, however, had his owngrounds for urgency. He held that God deeply valued all humans (Matt.10:31) and would bring judgment swiftly (Matt. 25:31–46).

Examplesof a “greater good” ethic in the Synoptics include theoccasions when Jesus ate with sinners (Mark 2:16–17). Jesusused an aphorism in response to accusations about his associationswith sinners, saying, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor,but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners”(Mark 2:17). He advocated harvesting and healing on the Sabbath (Mark2:23–28; 3:1–6), and when he was accused of breaking thelaw, he pointed to an OT exception (1Sam. 21:1–6) todeclare compassion appropriate for the Sabbath. Jesus also appliedthe “greater good” ethic in the case of divorce, sincewomen suffered the societal stigma of adultery and commonly becameoutcasts following divorce (Matt. 19:8–9; Mark 10:5–9).

Jesus’kingdom teachings were simultaneously spiritual, ethical, andeschatological in application. The teachings were aimed at internaltransformation (Matt. 5:3–9; 18:3; Mark 10:15) and spurring onlove (Matt. 5:44; 7:21). The Spirit of the Lord had called Jesus tobless the hurting ones as they aspired to a godly character. Jesustaught, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father isperfect” (Matt. 5:48), and “Be merciful, just as yourFather is merciful” (Luke 6:36). The “blessed” onesin Jesus’ teachings are poor of spirit, peace driven, mournful,and hungry for righteousness, consumed with emulating godlycharacter.

Somescholars believe that Jesus promoted an “interim ethic”for the kingdom, intended only for a short period prior to the end oftime. However, he was explicit regarding the longevity of histeachings: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words willnever pass away” (Matt. 24:35; Luke 16:17).

Messiah.The concept of an anointed one, a messiah, who would restore theglories of David’s kingdom and bring political stability wascommon in Jewish expectation. Both before and after the Babyloniancaptivity, many Jews longed for one who would bring peace andprotection. Israel’s prophets had spoken of a coming deliverer,one who would restore David’s kingdom and reign in justice andrighteousness (2Sam. 7:11–16; Isa. 9:1–7; 11:1–16;Jer. 23:5–6; 33:15–16; Ezek. 37:25; Dan. 2:44; Mic. 5:2;Zech. 9:9). Isaiah’s description of the servant (Isa. 53) whosesuffering healed the nation provided a slightly different angle ofexpectation in terms of a deliverer.

Jesus’authority and popularity as a miracle worker called up messianicimages in first-century Jewish minds. On several occasions hearerscalled him “Son of David,” hoping for the Messiah (Matt.12:23; 21:9). Simon Peter was the first follower who confessed Jesusas the Christ, the “Messiah” (Matt. 16:16; Mark 8:29). Inline with Isaiah’s model of the Suffering Servant, Jesusfocused not on political ends but rather on spiritual regenerationthrough his own sacrificial death (Mark 10:45).

Eschatologicalprophet.Many scholars claim that Jesus is best understood as a Jewishapocalypticist, an eschatological prophet who expected God tointervene in history, destroy the wicked, and bring in the kingdom ofGod. Central in this understanding are Jesus’ propheciesconcerning the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem (Matt. 24:1–2,15–22; Mark 13:1; Luke 21:5–24; John 2:19; Acts 6:14). Inaddition, it is noted that Jesus had twelve disciples, representativeof the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:2–28; Luke 22:23–30).Certain of Jesus’ parables, those with apocalyptic images ofcoming judgment, present Jesus as an eschatological prophet (Matt.24:45–25:30; Luke 12:41–46; 19:11–27).

SufferingSon of God.Jesus’ first recorded teaching in a synagogue in Nazareth wasparadigmatic (Luke 4:16–21). He attributed the reading, Isa.61:1–2, to his personal calling to serve, and in doing so herevealed a trajectory of suffering. The Gospel of Mark likewise aptlyportrays Jesus as the suffering Son of God. Jesus’ ownteachings incorporated his upcoming suffering (Mark 8:31; 9:12–13,31; 10:33–34). He summarized his mission by declaring, “TheSon of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give hislife as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). His earthly careerended with a trial in Jerusalem consisting of both Roman and Jewishcomponents (Matt. 26:57–68; 27:1–31; Mark 14:53–65;15:1–20; Luke 22:54–23:25; John 18:19–24;18:28–19:16). He was insulted, scourged, mocked, and crucified.

Jesus’suffering culminated in his humiliating death by crucifixion (Matt.27:33–50; Mark 15:22–37; Luke 23:33–46; John19:16–30). Crucifixion was a death of unimaginable horror,bringing shame and humiliation to the victim and his family. Anyonehanging on a tree was considered cursed (Deut. 21:23; Gal. 3:13).Thus, especially in a Jewish society, anyone associated with acrucified person bore the shame of following one who was executed asa lowly slave and left as a cursed corpse. The apostle Paul referredto this shame of the cross when he stated, “I am not ashamed ofthe gospel” (Rom. 1:16).

ExaltedLord.Jesus had prophesied that he would rise again (Matt. 16:21; 17:9, 23;20:19; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:34; Luke 9:22; 18:33; 24:7, 46).The testimony of the Synoptics is that the resurrection of JesusChrist indeed occurred on the third day, Christ having died on Friday(Mark 15:42–45; Luke 23:52–54; John 19:30–33) andrisen again on Sunday (Matt. 28:1–7; Mark 16:2–7; Luke24:1–7; John 20:1–16). The resurrected Jesus waswitnessed by the women (Matt. 28:8–9), the eleven disciples(Matt. 28:16–17; Luke 24:36–43), and travelers on theroad to Emmaus (Luke 24:31–32). According to Paul, he appearedto as many as five hundred others (1Cor. 15:6). He appeared inbodily form, spoke, showed his scars, and ate (Luke 24:39–43;John 20:27; Acts 1:4). After forty postresurrection days, Jesusascended into the heavenly realm (Acts 1:9).

Asmuch as Jesus’ death was the epitome of shame, his victory overdeath was his ultimate exaltation (Phil. 2:5–11). At Pentecost,Peter proclaimed that in the resurrection God fulfilled OT promises(Ps. 16:10) by raising his Son from the grave (Acts 2:30–31).Furthermore, Christ provided freedom from the law through hisresurrection (Rom. 5:13–14), God’s approval of his lifeand work (Phil. 2:8–9), and God’s designation of him asLord over all the earth, the living and the dead (Acts 17:30–31;Phil. 2:10; Heb. 1:3), and over all his enemies (Eph. 1:20–23).

Jesus’exaltation commenced the beginning of forgiveness and justification(Luke 24:46–47; Acts 13:30–39; Rom. 4:25) and hisintercession for the people of God (Rom. 8:34). His ascensionsignaled the coming of the Holy Spirit as comforter and teacher (John14:26; Acts 2:33) and was accompanied by the promise of his return inglory (Luke 24:51), at which time he will render judgment (Matt.19:28; 24:31; Rev. 20:11–15) and establish his eternal kingdom(1Cor. 15:24; 2Tim. 4:1; Rev. 11:15; 22:5).

Jesus’Purpose and Community

Inthe Gospel of Matthew, Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah, whopreaches the good news of the kingdom, urging people to repent(4:17–23). Repentance and belief allow one to enter thekingdom. The call into the kingdom is a call into a new covenant, onemade in Jesus’ blood (26:28).

Inthe prologue to the Gospel of Mark, the narrator reveals the identityof Jesus (1:1). Jesus is presented as the one who brings good tidingsof salvation (cf. Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1). The centrality of thegospel, the good news (Mark 1:14–15), is evident.

Lukelikewise presents the preaching of the good news as a main purpose ofJesus’ ministry (4:43). The content of this good news is thekingdom of God (4:43; 8:1; 16:16). When the disciples of John theBaptist asked Jesus if he was the one who was to come (7:20), Jesusanswered, “Go back and report to John what you have seen andheard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosyare cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good newsis proclaimed to the poor” (7:22). The kingdom of God, aspresented in Luke, brings freedom for the prisoners, recovery ofsight for the blind, and release for the oppressed (4:18). Jesus’healings and exorcisms announce the coming kingdom of God alreadypresent in the ministry of Jesus (4:40–44; 6:18–20;8:1–2; 9:2; 10:8–9).

Inthe Gospel of John, Jesus testifies to the good news by way of signsthroughout his ministry. These signs point to Jesus’ glory, hisidentity, and the significance of his ministry. Jesus is the Messiah,the Son of God, who offers eternal and abundant life. This abundantlife is lived out in community.

Inthe Gospel of John, the disciples of Jesus represent the community ofGod (17:21). The disciples did not belong to the world, but theycontinued to live in the world (17:14–16). Throughout hisministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a callto loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38;Luke 9:23–26), a call to the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50;Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock Iwill build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call tocommunity. Jesus’ presence as the head of the community wasreplaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).

Jesus’ministry continued in the community of Jesus’ followers, God’sfamily—the church. Entrance into the community was obtained byadopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and through theinitiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26;Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–62; John 1:12; 3:16;10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9).

TheQuests for the Historical Jesus

Thequest for the historical Jesus, or seeking who Jesus was from ahistorical perspective, is a modern phenomenon deemed necessary byscholars who claim that the NT Gospels were written long after Jesus’death and were heavily influenced by the post-Easter understanding ofthe church.

Thebeginning of this quest is often dated to 1770, when the lecturenotes of Hermann Samuel Reimarus were published posthumously.Reimarus had launched an inquiry into the identity of Jesus thatrejected as inauthentic all supernatural elements in the Gospels. Heconcluded that the disciples invented Jesus’ miracles,prophecies, ritualistic religion, and resurrection. Reimarus’sconclusions were not widely accepted, but they set off a flurry ofrationalistic research into the historical Jesus that continuedthroughout the nineteenth century. This became known as the “firstquest” for the historical Jesus.

In1906 German theologian Albert Schweit-zer published The Quest of theHistorical Jesus (German title: Von Reimarus zu Wrede: EineGeschichte der Leben-Jesu-Forschung), a scathing indictment of thefirst quest. Schweitzer’s work showed that nineteenth-centuryresearchers re-created Jesus in their own image, transforming thehistorical Jesus into a modern philanthropist preaching aninoffensive message of love and brotherhood. Schweitzer’sconclusions marked the beginning of the end for this first quest.Schweitzer himself concluded that the historical Jesus was aneschatological prophet whose purposes failed during his last days inJerusalem.

Withthe demise of the first quest, some NT scholars, such as RudolfBultmann, rejected any claim to being able to discover the historicalJesus. This trend continued until 1953, when some of Bultmann’sformer students launched what has come to be known as the “newquest” for the historical Jesus (1953–c. 1970). Thisquest created new interest in the historical Jesus but was stilldominated by the view that the portrait of Jesus in the Gospels islargely a creation of the church in a post-Easter setting.

Asthe rebuilding years of the post–World WarII era wanedand scholars started to reap academic fruit from major archaeologicalfinds such as the DSS, research on the historical Jesus moved on towhat has been called the “third quest.” This quest seeksespecially to research and understand Jesus in his social andcultural setting.

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).

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).

A collection of 150 poems. They are the hymnbook of the OTperiod, used in public worship. Psalms contains songs of differentlengths, types, and dates. The earliest psalm (Ps. 90) is attributedto Moses (mid-second millennium BC), while the content of Ps. 126 andPs. 137 points to the latest periods of the OT (mid-first millenniumBC). They continue to be used as a source of public worship andprivate devotion.

HistoricalBackground

Mostpsalms have a title. In the Hebrew text this title comprises thefirst verse, whereas English translations set it off before the firstverse. Titles vary. Many name an author (e.g., David [Ps. 3]; Asaph[Ps. 77]; sons of Korah [Ps. 42]), while others provide informationabout genre (e.g., Psalms of Ascent [Pss. 120–134]), tune(e.g., “Do Not Destroy” [Ps. 75]), use in worship (Ps.92), and a circ*mstance that led to composition (Ps. 51). Informationin the title gives hints concerning how psalms were written andbrought into a final collection.

Composition

Asmentioned, the titles of the psalms often give indications ofauthorship and occasionally name the circ*mstance that led to thewriting of the psalm. A good example is Ps. 51, where the titlestates, “For the director of music. A psalm of David. When theprophet Nathan came to him after David had committed adultery withBathsheba.” The title connects the psalm with the eventsrecorded in 2Sam. 11–12 and suggests that David wrote thesong in response to his sin and Nathan’s confrontation.

Althoughonly a handful of the psalms have such a historical title, it islikely that most psalms were composed in response to some specificcirc*mstance that encouraged the author to write. Interestingly,though, the psalmists do not speak about the specific circ*mstance inthe psalm itself. Psalm 51, for instance, fits perfectly with thesituation that the title describes in that it expresses guilt towardGod and asks for forgiveness, but nowhere does it speak specificallyabout adultery. The psalmists do this intentionally because they arewriting the song not as a memorial to an event, but rather as aprayer that others who have had similar though not identicalexperiences can use after them. Thus, Ps. 51 has been used as a modelprayer for many penitents, whether they have sinned like David or inanother way.

Mostmodern hymns have a similar background. John Newton, for instance,was inspired to write “Amazing Grace” because of awe thathe felt at his conversion to Christianity from the evil of being aslave trader. However, when he wrote it, he wanted others to sing itas reflecting not on his conversion but on their own.

Collection

Thepsalms were composed over a thousand-year period. Thus, it appearsthat the book of Psalms was a growing collection until it came to aclose at an unknown time between the writing of the two Testaments.

In1Chron. 16:7–36 we may get a glimpse of how the processworked. The text describes David turning a musical composition overto the Levitical musician Asaph and his associates. It is likely thatthe priests kept an official copy of the book of Psalms in the holyplace (the temple while it stood). The psalms, after all, were thehymns of ancient Israel. Their primary function was as a corporatebook of prayer, though certainly they could be used in privatedevotions (note Hannah’s prayer in 1Sam. 2:1–10 andits relationship to Ps. 113).

Organizationand Structure

Thepsalms have no obvious organization that explains the location of allthe psalms. They are not organized in terms of genre, authorship,time of composition, or length. There is only one statement aboutorganization, found in Ps. 72:20: “This concludes the prayersof David son of Jesse.” In the light of this comment, it issurprising that a number of Davidic psalms appear in subsequentsections (Pss. 101; 103; 108–110; 122; 124; 131; 133; 138–145).The best explanation is that at one point Ps. 72 concluded theDavidic psalms, but there was a reorganization before the canonicalorder was permanently closed.

Anumber of contemporary theories try to find some deep structure tothe book, but it is best to refrain from speculation in regard to theoverall structure. Nonetheless, a few structural characteristics areobvious. First, the division of Psalms into five books seems toreflect the fivefold division of the Pentateuch:

I.Book 1 (Pss. 1–41)

II.Book 2 (Pss. 42–72)

III.Book 3 (Pss. 73–89)

IV.Book 4 (Pss. 90–106)

V.Book 5 (Pss. 107–150)

Eachbook ends with a doxology. Such an intentional association with thePentateuch would lend support to the Psalter’s claim toauthority. Although these are prayers to God, they are also God’sword.

Second,within the Psalter there are subcollections. That is, there arepsalms that came into the book not individually but as a group. Thebest-known such group are the Psalms of Ascent (Pss. 120–134),probably so named because worshipers sang them while going up(ascending) to the Temple Mount during one of the annual religiousfestivals in Jerusalem.

Third,it appears that psalms are intentionally placed at the beginning andat the end of the book to serve as an introduction and a conclusion.Psalms 1–2 serve as an introduction that alerts the reader tothe twin important themes of law and messiah. Psalm 1 pronounces ablessing on those who love God’s law. The psalms, after all,are an intimate and personal conversation with God. One must be onthe side of the godly to enter such a holy textual space, just as onemust be godly to enter the precincts of the temple. After the readerenters, Psalm 2 provides an encounter with God and his anointed one(messiah). At the end of the book, the last five psalms (Pss.146–150) constitute a tremendous doxology of praise.

Thisleads to the final observation on structure. Psalms of lamentpredominate at the beginning of the book, but they give way to hymnsof praise toward the end. It is almost as if one enters the Psaltermourning and leaves it praising. Indeed, the Psalter brings thereader into contact with God and thus transforms the reader fromsadness to joy.

LiteraryConsiderations

Genre.The individual psalms may be identified as songs, prayers, or poems.Specifically, they are lyric poems (expressing the emotions of thepoet), often addressed to God, and set to musical accompaniment.Although the categories overlap, seven different types of psalms canbe recognized, with the first three being by far the most common.

• Lament.The largest single group of psalms are the laments, characterized bythe expression of unhappy emotions: sadness, disappointment, anger,worry. The lamenters call on God to save them, even while at timescomplaining about God’s actions toward them (Ps. 42:9–10).Some laments contain petitions for forgiveness (Ps. 51), while othersassert innocence of any wrongdoing (Ps. 26). A few laments evencontain curses directed toward the enemies who are trying to harm thepsalmist (Ps. 69:19–28). Most laments end by praising God orreaffirming confidence in God (Ps. 130:7–8). Usually the reasonfor the change from mourning to rejoicing is not given, but Ps. 77pinpoints the reason as the memory of God’s great salvationevents in the past (vv. 10, 16–20). One psalm, Ps. 88, lamentsbut never makes the turn, remaining in the pit of despair. Yet evenhere we have a glimmer of hope in that the one who laments is stillspeaking to God.

• Thanksgiving.When God answers a lament, the response is thanksgiving. Psalms ofthanksgiving are very similar to hymns (see below), but they cite anearlier problem that God has addressed. Psalm 30 praises God forrestoring the psalmist’s good fortune and health after hesuffered due to his earlier arrogance that led him to forget God (vv.6–7).

• Hymn.Hymns are psalms of unalloyed praise directed toward God. Thepsalmists often call for others to join their worship of God (Ps.100).

• Remembrance.While many psalms evoke memories of God’s actions in the past(as the lament in Ps. 77 recalls the exodus), certain psalms focus onrehearsing the actions of God in the past. Psalm 136 is one of themost memorable examples. As a liturgical psalm, it recites a divineaction (“[God] swept Pharaoh and his army into the Red Sea”[v.15]) followed by a congregational response (“His loveendures forever”).

• Confidence.These psalms are defined by their mood of quiet trust in God even inthe midst of trouble. They often present a reassuring image of God.The picture of God as a shepherd in Ps. 23 or as a mother in Ps. 131are good examples.

• Wisdom.Some psalms meditate on the law (Pss. 1; 119) or have interestssimilar to those of wisdom literature, such as Job, Proverbs, andEcclesiastes (Pss. 49; 73).

• Kingship.A number of psalms praise God as king (Ps. 47) or the human king ashis agent (Pss. 20–21) or both (Ps.2).

Style.The psalms are poems, and so their style is characterized by the useof parallelism and figurative language. Poetry is also notable forits short lines. A poet packs a lot of meaning into very few words.So it is important to slow down and reflect on a psalm in order toderive its maximum effect. Besides brevity of expression,parallelism, and figurative language, poets create interest by usingother literary tools. The psalmists use these poetic devices not onlyto inform their readers’ intellect but also to stimulate theirimagination and arouse their emotions. (See also Acrostic; Imagery;Poetry.)

TheologicalMessage

Althoughthe psalms are not theological essays, readers can learn about Godand their relationship with God from these poems. The book of Psalmsis a bit like a portrait gallery of God, using images to describe whohe is and the nature of our relationship with him. Some examplesinclude God as shepherd (Ps. 23), king (Ps. 47), warrior (Ps. 98),and mother (Ps. 131), and the list could be greatly expanded. Eachone of these picture images casts light on the nature of God and alsothe nature of our relationship with God. After all, theaforementioned psalms explicitly or implicitly describe God’speople as sheep, subjects, soldiers, and children.

Connectionto the New Testament and Today

Jesushimself draws attention to Psalms as a book that anticipated hiscoming suffering and glorification (Luke 24:25–27, 44). TheGospels recognized that Jesus’ zeal for God was well expressedby Ps. 69:9 (John 2:17). When at the apex of his suffering on thecross, Jesus uttered the words found in Ps. 22:1 (Matt. 27:46). TheNT writers also saw that Jesus was the fulfillment of the covenantthat promised that a son of David would have an everlasting throne(2Sam. 7:16). Accordingly, the royal psalms (e.g., Pss. 2; 110)often were applied to Jesus, who is the Messiah (the Christ, “theanointed one”).

Todaywe read Psalms not only as an ancient witness to the coming work ofChrist but also, as John Calvin put it, as a mirror of our souls. Thepsalms were written for worshipers who came after them with similarthough not identical joys and problems. The psalms should becomemodels of our prayers.

Architecture is the technology and the art of design andconstruction. The technology of architecture includes anunderstanding of mathematical and engineering principles; the art ofarchitecture focuses attention on interest and beauty in design. Thecreative imagination of the architect is constantly considering howto artfully manage form and function in the design and constructionprocess.

Architectureand the Bible

Theterm “architecture” does not occur in most Englishtranslations of the Bible. There is, however, evidence of andreference to the architectural activity of God’s people. Inaddition, Israel and the church were contextualized in significantarchitectural periods (Egyptian, Assyrian, Greek, and Roman), so themajor empires of the biblical period often influenced the design andconstruction of cities, temples, and structures referenced in thebiblical text. Architecture offers biblical studies a way to betterunderstand the historical intentions of the Bible. By means ofarchitectural investigation, the history and the heritage of pastcivilizations are illuminated. As a result, our reading of thebiblical text is enhanced.

Whenwe investigate the biblical text with attention to the technology andart of architecture, two perspectives emerge. First, architecturedraws our attention to the background of the biblical text. Incertain biblical texts we learn about the design and the constructionthat took place in Egypt, Assyria, and Palestine during majorbiblical events. For example, the patriarchal and Mosaic periodsoccurred during times of expansion and development in the Eighteenthto Twentieth Dynasties of Egypt (i.e., New Kingdom, sixteenth toeleventh centuries BC). For these periods, we gain knowledge aboutcapital relocations along with temple and pyramid constructions. Welearn that during the conquest, Israel took over existing Canaanitecities in keeping with the Mosaic policies. The architecture ofPalestine enables us to better understand the form and function ofthese infrastructures.

Second,architecture draws our attention to the theological implications ofthe form and function of structures designed by God. In keeping withthe scope of architecture, we are forced to understand that what Goddesigned for altars, the ark, the tabernacle, and the temples of thepast and the future included more than just the functionalrequirements of a nation’s religious system. The interpreter ofthe biblical text must consider how the design of these structureselicits response and communicates meaning. These structures are alsowindows on the social, political, and economic aspects of theIsraelite nation.

OldTestament

Citiesand fortifications.The biblical rec­ord makes reference to architectural structures,materials, and furnishings. Cities are referenced frequentlythroughout the OT canon. The city is obviously the context forarchitectural expression. The cities of the Bible are not describedin extensive detail. We learn that Cain was a city builder who namedhis work after his son Enoch. The architectural feature of citiesmentioned most often is the city gates (Gen. 19:1; 23:10, 18; Deut.17:5; Josh. 2:5; 7:5; 20:4; Judg. 5:8). This was an important placefor city life and activity (Gen. 23:1; Prov. 31:31). There was alsosinister activity at city gates. Abner, for example, was killed inthe city gate (2 Sam. 3:22–30). In addition, executionsfor covenant violations were carried out at the city gate (Deut.17:5). There was more than one city gate, as we learn from thepostexilic construction activity of Ezra and Nehemiah.

Withinthe city there was a strong tower. The people of Babel usedthoroughly baked bricks instead of stone and tar for mortar in orderto build the city and the tower that was designed to reach to theheavens (Gen. 11:3–4). A city tower functioned as a place ofrefuge for the people within the city limits (Judg. 9:49–51).

Citieswere protected by a wall system (Lev. 25:29) that also provided spacefor housing (Josh. 2:15). The conquest of Jericho recounts thefamiliar defeat of that city by the very unconventional destructionof its walls (Josh. 6:20). A city square is another feature of thecity architecture (Judg. 19:15–17) that served the public needsof the community.

Thebiblical descriptions of Jerusalem offer a measure of insight intoits architecture. During the rebuilding process in the postexilicperiod, Nehemiah comments on both the construction and the buildingmaterials (Neh. 2:8; 13:31; cf. Ezra 6:4) and the spacious nature ofthe city (Neh. 7:4). From another perspective, the psalmist comments,“Jerusalem is built like a city that is closely compactedtogether” (Ps. 122:3).

Beyondthese textual details we learn through the writings of the prophetsthat cities are the subject of God’s wrath for covenantviolation (Jer. 6:6; Hos. 11:6; Mic. 5:11). Despite this, the nationof Israel is not left without the hope of restoration. The prophetsalso anticipated the return of the people along with the restorationof the city infrastructure (Amos 9:14; Mal. 1:4).

Thetemple and sacred structures.Theother architectural features referenced by the writers of Scriptureinclude altars, the tabernacle, the tent of meeting, and the temple.The tent and the tabernacle were also outfitted with unique furnitureitems described in detail and expertly crafted. The constructionprojects of Solomon are detailed in 1 Kings 5–7. Solomon,like David, pursued his architectural ambitions. The book of Ezekielgives extensive architectural detail for the construction of a futuretemple in which God will reign and rule (Ezek. 40–48).

Thetemple and royal residences were made of stone with cedar roofing.The chamber buildings that surrounded the temple were three storieshigh. The interior walls and ceilings were lined with cedar to coverall the stone (1 Kings 6:1–10). In all the constructiondetails for the temple, the text does not elaborate on architecturalstyle. Perhaps the builders were influenced to some degree by thestyles of the major periods.

Whatare the theological implications related to the form and function ofthe sacred structures in the biblical material? The first is that Godis the ultimate designer of Israel’s architecture. God’ssignature work certainly is not the tabernacle or the Solomonictemple, but rather the created realm. The beauty and the complexitiesof the created world continue to draw attention to God’s beautyand intelligence. As the psalmist declares, the creation, which Goddesigned, is a constant source of praise (Ps. 19).

God’sskill and artistic beauty as a master architect are reflected also inthe revelation of his plans for the sacred structures of Israel tothe nation’s artisans. The skill that the artisans manifestedin the construction process was also a gift from God (Exod. 35:35;2 Chron. 2:14).

Thestructures designed by God for construction were primarily for him.This is understandable because the patriarchal and Mosaic periodsincluded long desert pilgrimages and the related tent dwelling.References to homes and houses in the book of Leviticus are not aboutdesign and construction but about function. The domestic home must befree of mildew (Lev. 14:34–41) and thus clean according to thestandards of the law. The construction of Davidic and Solomonic homesis given attention in Scripture (2 Sam. 5:11; 7:1; 1 Kings7:1–12).

Thetabernacle and the temple were divine residences (Exod. 30:6; 40:34;2 Sam. 7:5; 1 Kings 8:11). For this reason, the design andfunction of each structure reflected the glorious worth of God andreminded the nation of its own uncleanness. Beyond the structures oftemple and tabernacle, the city of Jerusalem was privileged to be theresting place of the “Name” (i.e., presence) of the Lord(2 Chron. 6:5–6) and to have David as the chosen ruler(2 Chron. 6:34).

Thehistory of Israel reveals that the sustainability of these sacredstructures was influenced by physical and spiritual factors. Godoccupied the structures or met with Israel at these sacred places aslong as Israel conformed to the terms of the Mosaic covenant (1 Sam.4:21; 1 Kings 9:6–9). During the monarchy, kings whodeparted from Torah would strip the temple to pay tribute to foreignoverlords (2 Kings 24:13) or would modify the function of thestructure to accommodate the worship of foreign gods (see 2 Kings23). Although there were periodic times of rebuilding the sacredstructures, sustainability was short lived. The ideology of thesacred structures anticipates a future time when their originalfunction will be replaced with the opportunity to live in God’spresence forever.

NewTestament

TheNT refers only rarely to architects or architecture. Hebrews 11:10speaks of God as the “architect [technitēs] and builder”of the heavenly Jerusalem. Paul refers to the church as the temple ofGod. Jesus Christ is the foundation, and Christian leaders arebuilding upon that foundation with either gold, silver, and costlystones or wood, hay, and straw (1 Cor. 3:10–17; cf. 6:19;2 Cor. 6:16).

Interms of physical buildings, the church of the NT was a house church.During the time of Christ the significant architectural structureswere the temple and synagogues. Herod the Great was the major builderof the time, whose impressive temple dominated the landscape of theJerusalem area. Although the synagogue was a central structure duringthe life of Christ and the early church, function is emphasized overform in the biblical material. The synagogue was a place for prayer,Scripture study, and the administration of justice (Luke 4:16–30;Acts 13:15; 14:1).

Thefocus of the NT is also on the church’s function instead of itsarchitectural form. The church, however, prospered and grew in thecontext of a significant Hellenistic architectural period (300 BC toAD 300). In this period the Seleucids were responsible forestablishing large Greek cities across western and central Asia. Theprimary construction material continued to be the mud-brick, whichresulted in rapidly decaying buildings. Although cities continued tobe laid out in a grid format, a more dynamic, hilly format was beingintroduced. The homes in these cities often were built withcourtyards like ones in Mesopotamia and Egypt. The temples of theHellenistic period were designed with landscaping and terracing,along with porticoed enclosures and stairways.

Thebook of Revelation closes the canon with extensive detail about thenew city of Jerusalem, which God will design and build (Rev. 21) andwhich will function to serve his sovereign purposes as creator andredeemer.

Architecture is the technology and the art of design andconstruction. The technology of architecture includes anunderstanding of mathematical and engineering principles; the art ofarchitecture focuses attention on interest and beauty in design. Thecreative imagination of the architect is constantly considering howto artfully manage form and function in the design and constructionprocess.

Architectureand the Bible

Theterm “architecture” does not occur in most Englishtranslations of the Bible. There is, however, evidence of andreference to the architectural activity of God’s people. Inaddition, Israel and the church were contextualized in significantarchitectural periods (Egyptian, Assyrian, Greek, and Roman), so themajor empires of the biblical period often influenced the design andconstruction of cities, temples, and structures referenced in thebiblical text. Architecture offers biblical studies a way to betterunderstand the historical intentions of the Bible. By means ofarchitectural investigation, the history and the heritage of pastcivilizations are illuminated. As a result, our reading of thebiblical text is enhanced.

Whenwe investigate the biblical text with attention to the technology andart of architecture, two perspectives emerge. First, architecturedraws our attention to the background of the biblical text. Incertain biblical texts we learn about the design and the constructionthat took place in Egypt, Assyria, and Palestine during majorbiblical events. For example, the patriarchal and Mosaic periodsoccurred during times of expansion and development in the Eighteenthto Twentieth Dynasties of Egypt (i.e., New Kingdom, sixteenth toeleventh centuries BC). For these periods, we gain knowledge aboutcapital relocations along with temple and pyramid constructions. Welearn that during the conquest, Israel took over existing Canaanitecities in keeping with the Mosaic policies. The architecture ofPalestine enables us to better understand the form and function ofthese infrastructures.

Second,architecture draws our attention to the theological implications ofthe form and function of structures designed by God. In keeping withthe scope of architecture, we are forced to understand that what Goddesigned for altars, the ark, the tabernacle, and the temples of thepast and the future included more than just the functionalrequirements of a nation’s religious system. The interpreter ofthe biblical text must consider how the design of these structureselicits response and communicates meaning. These structures are alsowindows on the social, political, and economic aspects of theIsraelite nation.

OldTestament

Citiesand fortifications.The biblical rec­ord makes reference to architectural structures,materials, and furnishings. Cities are referenced frequentlythroughout the OT canon. The city is obviously the context forarchitectural expression. The cities of the Bible are not describedin extensive detail. We learn that Cain was a city builder who namedhis work after his son Enoch. The architectural feature of citiesmentioned most often is the city gates (Gen. 19:1; 23:10, 18; Deut.17:5; Josh. 2:5; 7:5; 20:4; Judg. 5:8). This was an important placefor city life and activity (Gen. 23:1; Prov. 31:31). There was alsosinister activity at city gates. Abner, for example, was killed inthe city gate (2 Sam. 3:22–30). In addition, executionsfor covenant violations were carried out at the city gate (Deut.17:5). There was more than one city gate, as we learn from thepostexilic construction activity of Ezra and Nehemiah.

Withinthe city there was a strong tower. The people of Babel usedthoroughly baked bricks instead of stone and tar for mortar in orderto build the city and the tower that was designed to reach to theheavens (Gen. 11:3–4). A city tower functioned as a place ofrefuge for the people within the city limits (Judg. 9:49–51).

Citieswere protected by a wall system (Lev. 25:29) that also provided spacefor housing (Josh. 2:15). The conquest of Jericho recounts thefamiliar defeat of that city by the very unconventional destructionof its walls (Josh. 6:20). A city square is another feature of thecity architecture (Judg. 19:15–17) that served the public needsof the community.

Thebiblical descriptions of Jerusalem offer a measure of insight intoits architecture. During the rebuilding process in the postexilicperiod, Nehemiah comments on both the construction and the buildingmaterials (Neh. 2:8; 13:31; cf. Ezra 6:4) and the spacious nature ofthe city (Neh. 7:4). From another perspective, the psalmist comments,“Jerusalem is built like a city that is closely compactedtogether” (Ps. 122:3).

Beyondthese textual details we learn through the writings of the prophetsthat cities are the subject of God’s wrath for covenantviolation (Jer. 6:6; Hos. 11:6; Mic. 5:11). Despite this, the nationof Israel is not left without the hope of restoration. The prophetsalso anticipated the return of the people along with the restorationof the city infrastructure (Amos 9:14; Mal. 1:4).

Thetemple and sacred structures.Theother architectural features referenced by the writers of Scriptureinclude altars, the tabernacle, the tent of meeting, and the temple.The tent and the tabernacle were also outfitted with unique furnitureitems described in detail and expertly crafted. The constructionprojects of Solomon are detailed in 1 Kings 5–7. Solomon,like David, pursued his architectural ambitions. The book of Ezekielgives extensive architectural detail for the construction of a futuretemple in which God will reign and rule (Ezek. 40–48).

Thetemple and royal residences were made of stone with cedar roofing.The chamber buildings that surrounded the temple were three storieshigh. The interior walls and ceilings were lined with cedar to coverall the stone (1 Kings 6:1–10). In all the constructiondetails for the temple, the text does not elaborate on architecturalstyle. Perhaps the builders were influenced to some degree by thestyles of the major periods.

Whatare the theological implications related to the form and function ofthe sacred structures in the biblical material? The first is that Godis the ultimate designer of Israel’s architecture. God’ssignature work certainly is not the tabernacle or the Solomonictemple, but rather the created realm. The beauty and the complexitiesof the created world continue to draw attention to God’s beautyand intelligence. As the psalmist declares, the creation, which Goddesigned, is a constant source of praise (Ps. 19).

God’sskill and artistic beauty as a master architect are reflected also inthe revelation of his plans for the sacred structures of Israel tothe nation’s artisans. The skill that the artisans manifestedin the construction process was also a gift from God (Exod. 35:35;2 Chron. 2:14).

Thestructures designed by God for construction were primarily for him.This is understandable because the patriarchal and Mosaic periodsincluded long desert pilgrimages and the related tent dwelling.References to homes and houses in the book of Leviticus are not aboutdesign and construction but about function. The domestic home must befree of mildew (Lev. 14:34–41) and thus clean according to thestandards of the law. The construction of Davidic and Solomonic homesis given attention in Scripture (2 Sam. 5:11; 7:1; 1 Kings7:1–12).

Thetabernacle and the temple were divine residences (Exod. 30:6; 40:34;2 Sam. 7:5; 1 Kings 8:11). For this reason, the design andfunction of each structure reflected the glorious worth of God andreminded the nation of its own uncleanness. Beyond the structures oftemple and tabernacle, the city of Jerusalem was privileged to be theresting place of the “Name” (i.e., presence) of the Lord(2 Chron. 6:5–6) and to have David as the chosen ruler(2 Chron. 6:34).

Thehistory of Israel reveals that the sustainability of these sacredstructures was influenced by physical and spiritual factors. Godoccupied the structures or met with Israel at these sacred places aslong as Israel conformed to the terms of the Mosaic covenant (1 Sam.4:21; 1 Kings 9:6–9). During the monarchy, kings whodeparted from Torah would strip the temple to pay tribute to foreignoverlords (2 Kings 24:13) or would modify the function of thestructure to accommodate the worship of foreign gods (see 2 Kings23). Although there were periodic times of rebuilding the sacredstructures, sustainability was short lived. The ideology of thesacred structures anticipates a future time when their originalfunction will be replaced with the opportunity to live in God’spresence forever.

NewTestament

TheNT refers only rarely to architects or architecture. Hebrews 11:10speaks of God as the “architect [technitēs] and builder”of the heavenly Jerusalem. Paul refers to the church as the temple ofGod. Jesus Christ is the foundation, and Christian leaders arebuilding upon that foundation with either gold, silver, and costlystones or wood, hay, and straw (1 Cor. 3:10–17; cf. 6:19;2 Cor. 6:16).

Interms of physical buildings, the church of the NT was a house church.During the time of Christ the significant architectural structureswere the temple and synagogues. Herod the Great was the major builderof the time, whose impressive temple dominated the landscape of theJerusalem area. Although the synagogue was a central structure duringthe life of Christ and the early church, function is emphasized overform in the biblical material. The synagogue was a place for prayer,Scripture study, and the administration of justice (Luke 4:16–30;Acts 13:15; 14:1).

Thefocus of the NT is also on the church’s function instead of itsarchitectural form. The church, however, prospered and grew in thecontext of a significant Hellenistic architectural period (300 BC toAD 300). In this period the Seleucids were responsible forestablishing large Greek cities across western and central Asia. Theprimary construction material continued to be the mud-brick, whichresulted in rapidly decaying buildings. Although cities continued tobe laid out in a grid format, a more dynamic, hilly format was beingintroduced. The homes in these cities often were built withcourtyards like ones in Mesopotamia and Egypt. The temples of theHellenistic period were designed with landscaping and terracing,along with porticoed enclosures and stairways.

Thebook of Revelation closes the canon with extensive detail about thenew city of Jerusalem, which God will design and build (Rev. 21) andwhich will function to serve his sovereign purposes as creator andredeemer.

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).

Temples have always been the domain and house of the godsthroughout the ancient Near East. As the abode of the God of Israel,the Jerusalem temple served the same purpose. The temple played animportant role in the social, religious, and political life ofancient Israel. No archaeological remains of the actual templebuilding exist today; nevertheless, the temple has dominated biblicalscholarship. The Jerusalem temple was originally built by Solomon in953 BC and was destroyed by the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar in 586BC. After the exile, the temple was rebuilt and then rededicated byZerubbabel in 515 BC (Ezra). Herod the Great significantly expandedand changed the temple, but it was eventually destroyed by the Romansunder the direction of Titus in AD70.

Thebiblical text refers to the temple in several ways: temple, house ofGod/Yahweh, and sanctuary/shrine. These terms all refer to thedwelling or house of God and an area of sacredness. The sources forinformation on the temple are biblical texts, Josephus, and theMishnah (tractate Middot). The most detailed accounts of theconstruction of the Solomonic temple are found in 1Kings 6–8;2Chron. 2–4. In addition to these major sections, thereare several references to building activities and repairs to thetemple throughout the OT. Another major text is Ezek. 40, but it isdebated whether this represents the actual temple or an ideal temple.There are several references in the NT that directly or indirectlyrefer to functions and specific components of the Temple Mountcomplex.

ArchaeologicalInvestigation

Thelocation of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem has been undisputed.Current scholarly opinion locates the temple on the spot of thecurrent Muslim shrine, the Dome of the Rock. Today the largerenclosed area is referred to as the harem esh-sharif (the noblesanctuary). Explorers in the nineteenth century did not attemptarchaeological research of the temple itself, although variousexplorations focused on recording visible features and conductingsoundings along the sides of the Temple Mount. Even after theunification of Jerusalem in 1967, with three major excavations in thecity, no archaeological investigation of the temple was conducted.Due to the political and religious variables associated with theMuslim holy sites, there are no foreseeable archaeologicalinvestigations. A recent renovation of the Mosque of Omar, located onthe southern end of the Temple Mount, removed truckloads of earth.Unfortunately, there was no archaeological supervision of the projectand no archaeological excavations of the site were conducted.

Inspite of the limited archaeological excavations, several popularaccounts of alternate locations of the temple have been proposed.Most of these place the temple somewhere other than the Dome of theRock, but none of these proposals has garnered scholarly support torival the current location.

FirstTemple: Temple of Solomon

Throughoutthe ancient Near East, temples served as monumental edifices thatprovided divine legitimacy for the king or dynasty. While templesshould be considered part of the religious sphere of society, theirconstruction, maintenance, and associated activities are interlinkedwith the political sphere. The construction of the temple inJerusalem is also linked to state formation by the Israelites. TheSolomonic temple ushered in a new period of religious activity amongthe ancient Israelites. Previously, Israel had worshiped at variousshrines and sanctuaries, and its central religious practice wasassociated with the tabernacle. With the establishment of themonarchy, dynastic kingship and centralized authority were created.Although the biblical text credits Solomon as the Israelite king whobuilt the temple, the project was initiated under David. David unitedthe Israelite tribes, captured Jerusalem and made it the capital ofthe kingdom, and built a royal palace. He made Jerusalem thepolitical capital but also the religious center when he brought theholy ark, the visible symbol of Yahweh’s presence, to Jerusalem(2Sam. 5–6). David intended to build Yahweh a permanentdwelling (2Sam. 7:2).

Location.Thebiblical text preserves multiple traditions and accounts of thelocation and acquisition of land for the temple. In the ancient worldthe city temple was commonly located on the acropolis (highest point)of the city. The temple is located on the highest point of a ridgewhere the OT city of Jerusalem is located (Jebusite city, later theCity of David). There are two accounts of the purchase of the land:the threshing floors of Araunah (2Sam. 24:18–25) and ofOrnan (1Chron. 21:15–30; 2Chron. 3:1 [here the NIVsupplies “Araunah,” but see, e.g., the NET, NASB, ESV]).It is possible that Araunah and Ornan were kin, but most likely theyare the same person, with Samuel and Chronicles using variant names.However, the two accounts disagree further on the amount paid for theland: fifty silver shekels (2Sam. 24:24) and six hundredshekels of gold (1Chron. 21:25). One theory explains thisdiscrepancy as arising from two separate transactions. First, Davidpurchased the threshing floor to build an altar to Yahweh, and helater purchased the whole mountain to build a temple. Later traditionassociates the hill where David built an altar with the locationwhere earlier Abraham built an altar to sacrifice Isaac (MountMoriah).

Constructionand dimensions.Solomon started to build during the fourth year of his reign(2Chron. 3:1), and construction lasted for seven years. Theplan of the temple was revealed to Solomon during a night in thesanctuary at Gibeon (2Chron. 1:7–13). The king obtainedbuilding materials, specifically cedar from Lebanon (2Chron.2:3–10), and construction and design expertise from Phoenicianartisans (1Kings 7:13–14, 45). The Solomonic templeconsisted of a tripartite plan similar to other temples inSyro-Palestine during this period. There are two accounts for theconstruction and dedication of the first temple (1Kings 6–8;2Chron. 3–7). Both accounts offer similar descriptionsbut there are some differences in measurements. Most scholars accountfor these differences by viewing the dimensions in the book ofChronicles as reflecting the temple measurements after Hezekiah’srepair and rebuilding projects.

Thebasic plan was a rectangle, 70 cubits long (120ft. 7in.)and 20 cubits wide (34ft. 5in.) on a straight axis facingeast; the height was 30 cubits (51ft. 7in.). Thesemeasurements refer to the inside dimensions (1cubit=20.67 in.). The three distinct architectural units formed threedistinct rooms where various functions were performed and alsoreflected levels of holiness. The three units were the ’ulam(“porch” or “vestibule”), the hekal (“cella”or “nave”), and the debir (the innermost sanctuary, themost holy place). In the biblical accounts the whole building iscalled the “house [bayit] of the Lord,” and the word“temple” is used for the hekal. There was a three-storystructure built around the sides and back of the temple (see below).

Theporch was 10 cubits (17ft. 2in.) by 20 cubits (34ft.5in.). The account in Kings does not provide its height; theaccount in Chronicles gives the height as 120 cubits. In itsdescription and measurements in the biblical text, the porch isconsidered separate from the temple (bayit, house). The porchcontained two pillars of bronze: yakin (“he will establish”)on the right side and bo’az (“in strength”) on theleft (see Boaz; Jakin). The pillars were bronze, 18 cubits (35 cubitsin Chronicles) in height, with elaborate double capitals. The bottomcapital was 5 cubits, round in shape, and surrounded by nets withpomegranates. Above this was another capital, 4 cubits high, shapedlike a lily.

Thehekal was 40 cubits long and 20 cubits wide and was the only partwith windows (1Kings 6:4). The debir was a cube, 20 cubits perside. The debir is also called the “holy of holies.” Thedifference in height (10 cubits shorter than the hekal  )is due to the rise in the bedrock. This measurement is confirmedtoday in the interior of the Dome of the Rock.

Thewalls of the house (hekal and debir) were built of whole stonesdressed in the quarry, as “no hammer, chisel or any other irontool was heard at the temple site while it was being built”(1Kings 6:7). The roof was made of cedar wood (1Kings6:10), with crossbeams and intersecting boards. The stone walls werecovered from ground to ceiling with boards of cedar wood, and thefloor was made of cypress wood, covered with gold (1Kings6:30). The wood had carved engravings of cherubim, palm trees, andopen flowers. The hekal and the debir were separated by a partitionmade of olive wood.

Thethree-story structure surrounding the temple was constructed of cedarwood. Each story was 5 cubits. The width of the first floor was 5cubits, the middle 6 cubits, and the top 7 cubits. This structure wasentered from the right side of the temple, and the floors wereconnected by openings with ladders. This structure formed chambersand storage for the activities of the priests.

Infront of the temple was a courtyard surrounded by a wall. Inside thecourtyard was a great bronze basin (known as “the Sea”).This basin rested on the backs of twelve bronze oxen. Ten smallerbasins in groups of five were set on elaborate wheeled stands. Alarge altar also was located in this courtyard.

Inthe holy of holies stood two large cherubim of olive wood coveredwith gold. They were 10 cubits in height, with a wingspan of 10cubits. These cherubim stood over the ark of the covenant. In thehekal were the golden altar, the golden table, and ten lampstands.

History.FromSolomon to Zedekiah, the temple was used for political and religiouspower shifts. Kings of Israel raided the temple treasury to pay offinvaders, closed the temple, or placed idols in the temple in periodsof apostasy. During periods of reform they repaired and rebuilt thetemple and its furnishings.

UnderRehoboam’s reign, Shishak king of Egypt ransacked the templeand removed all its treasures (1Kings 14:25–28; 2Chron.12:9). Asa and his father, Abijah, added to the treasure of thetemple with silver, gold, and other vessels (2Chron. 15:18) butused these to pay Ben-Hadad of Syria to help him fight Baasha king ofIsrael (16:2–3). Asa’s son Jehoshaphat (2Chron. 17)ruled during a time of prosperity and reform. It was under his rulethat the court in front of the temple probably was enlarged (20:5).The sons of Athaliah broke into the temple and worshiped Baal. Duringthe reign of Amaziah the temple was plundered by Jehoash king ofIsrael (2Chron. 25). Uzziah ruled for a long period ofprosperity (787–736 BC) but attempted to burn incense on thealtar in the hekal, a ritual kept solely for the priests. A laterking, Jotham, built the Upper Gate of the house of Yahweh (2Kings15:35; 2Chron. 27:3). Jotham’s son Ahaz took the silverand gold from the temple and sent it as a present to the king ofAssyria. He moved and changed various vessels of the temple and shutit* doors (2Chron. 28:24).

Hezekiahson of Ahaz ruled during a time of prosperity and revival. Hereopened the temple doors (2Chron. 29), cleaned out the temple,and created a 500-cubit-square mount around the temple. Hezekiahconducted many building projects in Jerusalem and reforms throughoutthe land. He also “stripped off the gold with which he hadcovered the doors and doorposts of the temple of the Lord” topay a ransom to Sennacherib king of Assyria (2Kings 18:16). Dueto his building activities, most scholars attribute major changes tothe temple to Hezekiah’s reign. The differences in the templedescriptions in Kings and Chronicles probably reflect two differentperiods of history concerning the temple (e.g., Kings represents thetemple during the period of Solomon, while Chronicles represents thechanges to the temple by Hezekiah). Manasseh, Hezekiah’s son,undid the work of his father by building altars in the temple.

Thelast resurgence of the temple in the life of the people of Israel wasunder Josiah. He instigated a reform throughout the land and acleansing of the temple. Hilkiah the high priest found a copy of the“Book of the Law” (2Kings 22:8). After a reading ofthe law in the public square, a collection was taken from the peopleto be given to workers for temple repair. The Babylonians took someof the temple treasure (2Chron. 36:7) under the rule ofJehoiakim. The last two kings of Judah, Jehoiachin and Zedekiah, alsolost temple treasure to Babylon, and eventually the temple wasdestroyed during the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BC (2Chron.36).

SecondTemple: Zerubbabel and the Temple of Herod the Great

Zerubbabel’stemple.Solomon’s temple was rebuilt by the Jews who returned fromexile under the decree of the Persian king Darius (Ezra 6:1–5).The temple was built under the direction of the governor Zerubbabelwith the support of the prophets Haggai and Zechariah (Ezra 6:13–18)and was dedicated in 515 BC. This would have been a poorer temple dueto the poverty of the inhabitants of Judah. During the Hasmoneanperiod (152–37 BC) a platform and a fortress were constructed.Not much is known about the temple during this period. It would begreatly eclipsed by the work of Herod the Great.

Templeof Herod the Great.Herod invested heavily in building projects throughout his kingdom.He was keen on bringing Hellenistic culture to the Jews but also onupholding traditional Jewish religious practices, especially when itcame to the temple. Just as the first temple mimicked the religiousarchitecture of the ancient Near East, the second temple reflectedthe massive sacred architecture of the classical world. John 2:20indicates that thus far it had taken forty-six years (beyond Herod’slife) to build. Herod could not alter the dimensions of the temple,but he was able to make additions to the outside, alter its outerfurnishings, and expand the compound and platform to match thegrandeur of Greco-Roman temples. Today scholars refer to all thesebuildings and the temple as the Temple Mount complex.

Herodexpanded the space of the Temple Mount by building a “box”around the mountain. This was a massive wall with varying height dueto the topography. This wall is still visible today, especially thecurrent religious site of the Western Wall. This construction allowedfor a level platform with various buildings and plazas on the top.The leveling was done by filling in the gaps and buildingsubterranean arches in low areas. One of these areas is located onthe southeast corner (the underground arched supports are erroneouslycalled “Solomon’s Stables” today). The whole areawas surrounded by a colonnaded portico (Solomon’s Colonnade[John 10:23; Acts 3:11; 5:12]). On the northwest corner was theAntonia Fortress (Acts 21:35), and the southern end of the complexcontained the Royal Stoa, a basilica-style building (four rows offorty columns) that housed the Sanhedrin and had other religious andpolitical functions (Luke 22:66).

Thiscomplex became the religious and political center of the city ofJerusalem, and Herod built many auxiliary components. Severalentrances and bridges from the Upper City were built. The publicentered the complex from the south. A southern complex consisting ofmonumental stairs (210 feet wide) and entrance and exit gates (Doubleand Triple Gates) took pedestrians from the outside up throughunderground tunnels to the top of the temple compound. These stairsbecame an area for public forums. In addition, several shops (Mark11:15–17) were built around the complex, as well as a largebathhouse for ritual cleansing. In order to facilitate the manysacrifices, Herod built a complex hydrologic system that broughtwater into the city. This was accomplished by various aqueducts andstorage pools. The Temple Mount had many cisterns and a new pool onthe northeast end of the Temple Mount complex, the Pool of Israel.Although Herod could not alter the dimensions of the temple itself,he was able to enlarge the facade, added storage chambers andauxiliary buildings, build a second story above the temple, andconstruct several courtyards and various buildings associated withthem. In keeping with the earlier tripartite level of holiness, theseadditional temple buildings and courtyards retained the same lineardegree of holiness and exclusion.

Josephuscalled Herod’s temple “a structure more noteworthy thanany under the sun” (Ant. 15.412). Herod built a new monumentalfacade in front of the existing temple and added a second story.Herod’s temple measured 100 cubits (172 ft.) in all threedimensions. It stood on top of a foundation that gave it addedheight. It had two stories, each one 45 cubits (77.5 ft.) in height.On the roof was a parapet, 3cubits in height, which containedgolden spikes, 1 cubit in height, to prevent birds from perching onthe roof’s edge. The temple was decorated with gold overlay.The opening between the ’ulam (“porch”) and thesanctuary was 20 cubits high and 10 cubits wide (34 ft. by 17 ft.).There were two sets of double folding doors. The sanctuary containedthe golden menorah, the table of the bread of the Presence, and thealtar of incense. Between the sanctuary and the holy of holies was alarge tapestry (veil) (Matt. 27:51; Mark 15:38; Luke 23:45). The holyof holies had gold plating on its walls. Around the temple werethirty-eight cells built in three stories (m.Mid. 4:3–4).All of the cells were interconnected by openings between adjoiningcells and by one in the ceiling to reach the cell above. To thenorth, between the outer wall of the temple and the cells, was aninner stairway with access to the top of the temple and the upperchamber (second story of the temple). The upper chamber allowedpriests to service the holy of holies. They would be suspended inbaskets, covered on three sides, through openings in the floor toclean the gold overlay in the holy of holies.

Thetemple courtyard was surrounded by various gates and buildings. Thesewere specific entrances and buildings that the priests used for thevarious functions of the sacrifices and offerings (Mark 13:1–2).These included the Kindling Gate, Wood Chamber, Gate of theFirstlings, Golah Chamber, Water Gate, Chamber of the Hearth, Gate ofJeconiah, Rinsing Chamber, Gate of the Offering-Women, Salt-ParvaChamber, and Gate of the Flame-Singers. In front of the temple weretwo narrow courts: the court of the priests to the west and the courtof the Israelites (men) to the east. Inside the temple court was thealtar of burnt offering. During the Second Temple period it was astationary, square-shaped altar constructed of unhewn stones.According to the Mishnah (m.Mid. 3:1), this altar was 32 cubitssquare at the base and about 10 cubits in height. A ramp 32 cubitslong, also built of unhewn stones, led the priests up to the altarfrom the south. A laver, the great bronze basin known as “theSea,” stood west of the altar between the altar and the templeporch (’ulam) for the washing of hands and feet. North of thealtar was the place of slaughtering.

Thecourt of the women, 135 cubits square, was in front of the temple tothe east. This court had four smaller courts, one at each corner.Women could enter the temple only as far as this court. It wassurrounded by a colonnade. Inside these porches (porticoes) werethirteen collection boxes for money. This is where Jesus saw the poorwidow donating two copper coins (Luke 21:1–3). The court hadfour large lampstands nearly half the height of the temple. TheMishnah states that each of the corner chambers was 40 cubits squareand roofless. The central area was exposed to the sky, with a porticoaround each courtyard—typical of Mediterranean buildings. Thechamber to the immediate right of the court’s entrance(northeast) was the chamber of the woodshed, where priests examinedlogs for impurities (e.g., parasites). To the left (southeast) wasthe chamber of the Nazirites. To the northwest was the chamber of thelepers. A leper who had been healed brought an offering and thenbathed in this chamber before coming to the priests for theperformance of rituals. In the southwest corner was the chamber ofthe house of oil. Between the court of the women and the temple courtwas the Nicanor Gate. Fifteen semicircular steps led up to this gate.It was on these steps that the Levites sang the fifteen Psalms ofAscent (Pss. 120–134).

Surroundingthe temple and the court of the women was a balustrade or railingthat served as a boundary beyond which no Gentile could enter.Outside this boundary was the court of the Gentiles (see John12:20–22; Acts 21:27–29). Archaeologists have found aninscription that forbids Gentiles, upon pain of death, to enter anyfarther. Herod’s temple was destroyed in AD 70. The TempleMount continued to be used and considered sacred, as Roman temples,Crusader churches, and Muslim shrines marked the sacredness of thelocation.

Roleof the Temple

Thetemple was the dwelling place of Yahweh. It was the domain of thereligious leaders, priests, and Levites. It also represented therelationship/covenant between God and the nation of Israel. Variouskings used the temple for their political maneuvering and attempts toshift the religious worship of the nation. The temple was the visiblepresence of God and embodied the political and religious aspirationsof the people. The temple sat on top of a sacred mountain.

Duringturbulent political times the temple was central to God’sprotection and judgment. From the Babylonian and Roman periods, twotexts spoke of a future temple. Ezekiel’s vision saw afuturistic temple measuring 500 cubits square surrounded by a massivecourt measuring 3,000 cubits square (Ezek. 40:1–47:12). Amongthe DSS, the Temple Scroll also talks about a rebuilt temple. Todaymany Christians and Jews look to a future rebuilding of the temple.

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).

A form of government that acknowledges God’s kingship.God functions as the ultimate king in every era of biblical history,regardless of the form of human government.

Inthe book of Deuteronomy, theocracy is indicated in affirmations thatYahweh is Israel’s commander in chief. Yahweh goes before hispeople and fights battles on their behalf (1:30, 33; 3:22; 7:1,22–24; 9:3–5; 11:23). An important passage thatanticipates the monarchy prescribes that God chooses the human king(17:15). That king should neither turn the people back to Egypt noramass horses, wives, or riches (17:16–17). Rather, the king isto keep God’s law with him and must “read it all the daysof his life so that he may learn to revere the Lord his God andfollow carefully all the words of this law ... and notconsider himself better than his fellow Israelites” (17:19–20).

Thebook of Judges recounts a series of leaders who fail to uphold thetheocratic ideal of Deuteronomy. Both the tribes and leadersrepeatedly “did evil in the eyes of the Lord” (2:11; 3:7,12; 4:1; 6:1; 10:6; 13:1). The closing chapters of Judges state, “Inthose days Israel had no king; everyone did as they saw fit”(17:6; 21:25; cf. 18:1; 19:1). These refrains show that Israel needsa human king who will help the people to do what is right (ratherthan evil) “in the eyes of the Lord.” Israel mustmaintain theocracy if it is to avoid foreign oppression.

Thesame issue is at stake in the account of Saul’s rise tokingship. The Israelites’ request for a king is problematic notonly because they desired to be like “all the other nations,”but also because they desired a human king who would go before themand fight their battles (1Sam. 8:5, 20). By asking for a kingwho would serve in the role of commander in chief, they effectivelysupplant Yahweh and reject theocracy (1Sam. 8:7; 10:19; 12:12).In keeping with Deuteronomy, Samuel explains that both king andpeople are to fear, serve, and obey Yahweh if they are to experienceblessing (1Sam. 12:14–15, 25; cf. Deut. 17:19–20).Since Saul has failed to uphold theocracy, God rejects him as king(1Sam. 13:14; 15:11, 23, 26–28, 35) and seeks out a manwho meets his own criteria for kingship (13:14; cf. 15:28). ThatDavid has a proper perspective on God’s authority is evident instatements such as “the battle is the Lord’s”(1Sam. 17:47). David especially acknowledges God’skingship by installing the ark in Jerusalem and desiring to build thetemple (2Sam. 6–7), actions that lead to the Davidiccovenant (7:4–17).

TheDavidic covenant is foundational for a biblical theology of God’skingdom. Numerous psalms are devoted to God’s kingship (Pss. 2;20; 21; 47; 93; 145), and eschatological prophecies reveal much aboutthe messianic king/kingdom (Isa. 9; 11; Jer. 23; 30; 33; Ezek. 37;Dan. 2; 7; 9; Mic. 5; Zech. 9; 14). The NT shows that God’skingdom has arrived in part at the first coming of Jesus but awaitsits full consummation at his second coming (Matt. 3:17; 12:28; Mark1:14–15; Luke 17:20–21; Acts 1:6–8).

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).