Sermon and Worship Resources

Matches

Hanokites

(1) One of Midian’s sons and Abraham and Keturah’s grandsons (Gen. 25:4; 1 Chron. 1:33). (2) One of Reuben’s sons who went to Egypt with Reuben and was the clan father of the Hanokites (Gen. 46:9; Exod. 6:14; Num. 26:5; 1 Chron. 5:3).

Haran

(1) A son of Terah and brother of Abraham. He was the father of Lot as well as of Milkah and Iskah. Haran died in Ur of the Chaldeans, where he was born, before Terah took his family and set out for Canaan (Gen. 11:26–32). (2) A son of Ephah, the concubine of Caleb, and father of Gazez (1 Chron. 2:46). (3) A son of Shimei (1 Chron. 23:9). See also Harran.

Hardness of Heart

Hardness of heart describes a spiritual condition of active resistance against God and his ways. In a certain sense this kind of resistance is found in every human being ever since the fall in Gen. 3. Every human being inherits a sin nature from Adam (Rom. 5:12–14) that naturally and inevitably imparts a predisposition to sin. Daniel 5:20 associates a hardened heart with pride, a virtually universal shortcoming. However, hardness of heart often describes more unusual and significant opposition to God. Although it is still possible for God in his grace to rescue people in any spiritual condition, right up until the point of death, the more actively someone resists God, the less likely it is that God will intervene in that person’s life. At the same time, there is always hope, since even Jesus’ own disciples were described as having hard hearts (Mark 6:52). Yet, a deliberately hardened heart is always a serious offense against God because it involves “storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God’s wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed” (Rom. 2:5).

One of the puzzles and mysteries of Scripture is that God himself is often described as being the one who hardens the hearts of various individuals. Pharaoh in the exodus story is a classic illustration. In Exod. 4:21 God says to Moses, “I will harden his [Pharaoh’s] heart so that he will not let the people go.” Other times, more ambiguous language is used, such as in 7:13, where “Pharaoh’s heart became hard.” Still other times, Pharaoh himself is described as being actively involved in this process, such as “when Pharaoh saw that there was relief, he hardened his heart and would not listen to Moses and Aaron” (8:15). The best way to understand this situation is to see hardness of heart as a combination of the active will of fallen human beings and the mysterious workings of a sovereign God. (Salvation and spiritual growth are similar spiritual realities in that both of these also involve a mysterious combination of God’s direct involvement in people’s lives and the necessity of their own human response.) Since the Bible so frequently warns against the danger of a hardened heart, there are clearly genuine opportunities for people to cry out to God for mercy and deliverance from this awful situation.

Haroeh

The son of Shobal, progenitor of Kiriath Jearim. The name in Hebrew means “the seer.” The same Hebrew word, ro’eh, is used by Hagar when she names God ’el ro’i, meaning “God who sees me” (Gen. 16:13). The reading “Haroeh” (1 Chron. 2:52) may be corrupt, and many commentators choose to read it as “Reaiah,” based on the similar Calebite genealogy in 1 Chron. 4:2.

Harran

A city or region approximately sixty miles north of the confluence of the Euphrates and the Balikh rivers. Abraham moved from Ur to Harran en route to Canaan (Gen. 11:26–12:5). There, Eliezer acquired Rebekah as a wife for Isaac (24:1–67), and Jacob later resided, marrying Leah and Rachel (29:1–30).

Hate

A feeling of animosity, a disposition toward hostility, rejection, or negative favoritism.

Hate is as old as the conflict between Cain and Abel or as the rebellion of Satan. Many stories involve hatred and animosity between people (e.g., Gen. 37:4; 2 Sam. 13:22). Beside humans hating each other, people hate God and that which is morally upright (Exod. 20:5; Deut. 5:9; 7:10; 32:41; Pss. 68:1; 81:15; 120:6). It is correct, however, to hate sin (Pss. 97:10; 101:3; Prov. 8:13), as God does (Ps. 5:6; Prov. 6:16–19; Isa. 61:8; Rev. 2:6), though he takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked (Ezek. 18:23; 33:11). The two great commandments oppose the tendency to hate by calling us to love God wholly and love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev. 19:18; Deut. 6:5; 10:12; Matt. 22:37; Mark 12:33; Luke 10:27). The reverse is also commanded: we should not hate our neighbor (Lev. 19:17) nor even hate our enemy, but rather do good and pray for our enemy (Exod. 23:4–5; Prov. 25:21; Matt. 5:44; Luke 6:27; cf. Deut. 10:19). Hateful actions are not necessarily motivated by hateful feelings, as a father who does not give needed punishment to his son is said to treat him with hatred (Prov. 13:24).

With regard to a hate crime, the main issue was intent—that is, whether an accident had occurred or whether a murder had been committed deliberately, “with malice aforethought” (Num. 35:20). Hate was a criterion of intent and had to be established by multiple witnesses for the two parties involved. Having hate did not garner greater punishment or make it a worse crime; hatred signified that it was a crime because it was intentional (Deut. 4:42; 19:4, 6, 11; Josh. 20:5).

With regard to marriage, in a polygamous marriage there was a danger of preferential treatment: a loved wife and a hated wife. The law forbids reducing the care of one wife in favor of another (Exod. 21:10) and protects the rights of the firstborn son even if he is born to the hated wife (Deut. 21:15–17). Hatred may be expressed by either party withholding conjugal relations. This probably lies behind the description in Gen. 29:31 of Jacob hating Leah (some translations say “unloved”).

Rejection, favoritism, or preference may be called “hate,” as in the case of a nonpreferred wife in a polygamous marriage, in not choosing Esau to continue the covenant line (Mal. 1:2–3; Rom. 9:13), or in not having a greater love for Christ than anything else (Matt. 6:24; Luke 14:26; John 12:25).

Hatred

A feeling of animosity, a disposition toward hostility, rejection, or negative favoritism.

Haven

A port or harbor that allows safe anchorage for boats (Gen. 49:13; cf. Ps. 107:30). See also Fair Havens.

Havilah

(1) A son of Cush (Gen. 10:7; 1 Chron. 1:9). (2) A son of Joktan, descendant of Shem (Gen. 10:29; 1 Chron. 1:23). The name has been related to the name of certain Arabic tribes. (3) A land surrounded by the Pishon River and used to describe the location of the garden of Eden. It is characterized by its abundance of fine gold, bdellium, and onyx stones (Gen. 2:11–12). Although the passage is somewhat enigmatic, it appears that Havilah lies outside the garden. Havilah is used elsewhere in connection with Shur to describe the boundaries of the land of the Ishmaelites (Gen. 25:18) and the geographical extent of Saul’s victory over the Amalekites (1 Sam. 15:7). Havilah lies outside the land of Israel. It likely refers to some part of Arabia or to Arabia in general, since this region is characterized by gold, bdellium, and onyx stones and is associated with the Ishmaelites; its name may be associated with the name of a region in southwest Arabia.

Hazarmaveth

A son of Joktan in the Table of Nations (Gen. 10:26; 1 Chron. 1:20). Found in the line of Shem, Joktan was a son of Eber and an ancestor of South Arabian tribes.

Hazazon Tamar

An Amorite village defeated by Kedorlaomer and his allies (Gen. 14:7). In the narrative it appears to be between “En Mishpat (that is, Kadesh)” and “the Valley of Siddim.” If so, this site may be identified with the Tamar in Ezek. 47:19; 48:28 and would be the modern location of Ain Husb (twenty miles south of the Dead Sea). According to 2 Chron. 20:2, an army of Moabites and Ammonites passed through it on the way to attack Jehoshaphat. Here, Hazezon Tamar is identified as En Gedi (on the west side of the Dead Sea). If both of these designations are correct, it is unlikely that both texts refer to the same location. See also En Gedi; Tamar.

Hazel

In Gen. 30:37 the KJV translates the Hebrew word luz as “hazel,” referring to a nut tree that is more precisely identified as an almond tree (so NIV, NRSV).

Hazezon Tamar

Hazo

The fifth son of Milkah and Nahor (Gen. 22:22).

Head

In both Testaments “head” can refer to the literal head of the physical body or be symbolic of leadership and the source of provision.

The physical head played a significant role in Jewish and Christian customs. Cutting off an opponent’s head was a symbol of victory (1 Sam. 17:46; 1 Chron. 10:9–10). The consecration of priests and kings was done by anointing the head with oil (Exod. 29:7; Lev. 8:12; 1 Sam. 10:1). Contrition and shame were displayed by covering one’s head (2 Sam. 15:30; Jer. 14:3). Grief was expressed by casting dust or ashes on the head (Job 1:20; 2 Sam. 13:19; 15:32; Lam. 2:10; Ezek. 27:30; Rev. 18:19) or shaving one’s own head (Job 1:20; Jer. 16:6). The head was the place for receiving blessing, as when Jacob laid his hands on Manasseh and Ephraim to bless them (Gen. 48:14), or guilt, as when Solomon declared that the guilt over the blood of the two Israelite commanders murdered by Joab would rest “on the head of Joab and his descendants forever” (1 Kings 2:33). Lifting up the head was associated with the giving of life in terms of success (Gen. 40:13; Judg. 8:28; Ps. 27:6).

Because of the prominent physical role of the head as the topmost and preeminent part of the body, it was often used as a symbol for leadership and the source of provision. Ancient medical writers such as Hippocrates and Galen viewed the head as the leading member of the body. Ancient political writers adapted the idea and applied it to military and political leaders, such as Nero, who was called the “head” of Rome. For the political writers in particular, the emphasis often was on the power and authority of the head.

Examples of this use of “head” as leader and source of provision in the Bible include Judg. 10:18, where the leaders of Gilead declare that whoever launches the attack against the Ammonites will be the head of the inhabitants of Gilead. After the elders successfully appeal to Jephthah, the people make him “head and commander” over them (Judg. 11:11). Christ’s ruling function is emphasized in Col. 2:10, where he is called the “head over every power and authority.” In Eph. 4:16 Paul states that Christ as the head is the one “from [whom] the whole body . . . grows and builds itself up in love.”

In the NT, Paul’s use of the metaphor for the relationship between Christ and the church and husbands and wives is particularly significant. When Paul applies the metaphor to Christ and the church, he implies that Christ provides both leadership to the body as well as the nourishment needed for its continued growth. Thus, in Col. 2:19 the head is the one “from whom the whole body . . . grows as God causes it to grow,” and in Eph. 5:23–24 Christ is “the head of the . . . body,” the one to whom the church submits.

Paul uses the head/body metaphor in reference to Christ with some flexibility. Whereas Christ is the head of the church, his body, in Ephesians and Colossians, in 1 Cor. 11:3 his headship is part of a series in which God is the head of Christ, Christ is the head of man, and man is the head of woman. In Eph. 1:22 he is head over the entire universe.

In Eph. 5:21–33 the head/body metaphor is applied to the relationship between husbands and wives, and specifically in comparison with Christ and the church’s relationship as head and body. As Christ is the head of the church, so is the husband the head of the wife. Thus, both provide leadership and growth to their respective bodies. It is important to note that the husband’s role as head is defined in terms of loving his wife and bringing her to holiness. The husband’s headship does not consist of an arbitrary power over his wife, especially one based on his own interests and whims. Rather, it is a sacrificial leadership that reflects Christ’s love for the church. It is a leadership in which he gives his life for his wife as Christ gave his life for the church and nourishes her by providing what is most beneficial for her. See also Head of the Church.

Headband

Similar to turbans, these items of clothing were wrapped around the head primarily to provide protection from the sun (1 Kings 20:38) or because they were required for priests (Exod. 29:6; Zech. 3:5). Due to Israel’s climate, they were likely used with great frequency, and ancient art confirms their widespread use. The Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III (858–824 BC) depicts King Jehu with a pointed cap. The Lachish reliefs, portraying Sennacherib’s defeat of the Judean city Lachish, picture men with fringed headscarves covering their ears. The women are pictured with a mantle pulled over the head. Married women in Israel were required to wear a veil covering their head, but unmarried women had veils to cover the face (Gen. 24:65; 38:14–15). In NT times women wore a veil especially in worship contexts (1 Cor. 11:2–16).

Headdress

Heart

Physiologically, the heart is an organ in the body, and in the Bible it is also used in a number of metaphors. The NT uses the Greek term kardia similarly to the OT Hebrew terms leb and lebab and in some cases depends on OT usage.

Mind and Emotions

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. We also should not confuse some modern English idioms or distinctions as being related to the biblical viewpoint. The Bible does not make a distinction between “head knowledge” and “heart knowledge,” nor does it employ language making the “heart” good or superior and the “head/mind” bad, inferior, or merely intellectual. It does not prize the emotional over the thoughtful; it has a more integrated viewpoint.

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; 1 Chron. 29:18; Rev. 18:7), where a person comprehends and has understanding (1 Kings 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; 1 Chron. 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; 1 Kings 3:9; 10:24). The heart is the place of memory (Deut. 4:9; Ps. 119:11). The heart plays the role of conscience (2 Sam. 24:10; 1 John 3:20–21).

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 (1 Sam. 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.

Idioms

The word “heart” also appears in several idioms.

Hardness of heart. A hard heart is obstinate or averse (Mark 3:5), while a tender heart is humble (2 Kings 22:19). In the book of Exodus the translations typically say that God or Pharaoh hardened Pharaoh’s/his heart. These passages in Exodus use not the Hebrew words for hardness but rather those for being heavy or for strengthening. The neutral sense of strengthening the heart takes on nuances in context for being bold or obstinate. Pharaoh was strengthened in his opposition to God, and this obstinacy fits the idiom of having a hard heart.

Uncircumcised/circumcised heart. An uncircumcised heart is a metaphor for an obstinate and rebellious heart, while a circumcised heart is linked to being humble and faithful (Lev. 26:41; Deut. 30:6; Jer. 4:4; Acts 7:51). Perhaps the metaphor is based on the role of circumcision in the covenant.

“A man after his [God’s] own heart” (1 Sam. 13:14). This description of David may mean either “according to his [God’s] choice” (cf. 2 Sam. 7:21), stressing God’s choice over the people’s choice, or it may mean “in accordance with his [God’s] desire” (1 Sam. 14:7; 1 Kings 15:3), referring to how David showed conformity with God’s agenda.

All the heart. The phrase “with all [one’s] heart” in some cases means “wholeheartedly” or “single-mindedly,” which emphasizes unity of purpose and focus. In other cases it seems to mean, more broadly, “with all of one’s thinking or perspective” and implies the work of adjusting our worldview away from common cultural assumptions and toward God’s teaching.

Say in one’s heart. This expression denotes talking to oneself (i.e., thinking) rather than out loud or indicates reflection or deliberation. There are several warnings not to lie to oneself—that is, not to deliberate, believe, and act on the stated false premise.

Take [a matter] to heart. To take something to heart is to take it very seriously or to give it high priority.

Heathen

The word “Gentiles” is often used to translate words meaning “nations” or “peoples.” It has a Latin etymology from gens, meaning “clan” or “family” and, eventually, “race” or “people.” The Greek word genos (“race, kind”) has a close relationship. In the Bible it loosely refers to nations or peoples other than Israel. English Bibles often translate it as “nations,” “peoples,” or “races.”

Old Testament

In general, within the OT, Gentiles are not God’s people. God chose Israel to be his people, not other nations (Deut. 7:6–8; 10:15; 26:18–19). Israelite ancestry determines membership in the covenant people. Some writings thus forbid Gentiles from becoming part of God’s people (Ezra 9–10; Neh. 13).

The OT more commonly envisions Gentiles experiencing covenant blessing through Israel if they functionally become Israelites by keeping the law, including the parts we understand as ceremonial-ritual law. The law is that special life-giving and regulating aspect of the covenant that God revealed to Israel, which defines Israel (Lev. 18:1–5; 20:22–26; Deut. 4:1–8, 32–40; 6:24–25; 8:1–6; 10:12–11:32; 30:11–20; Josh. 1:7–9; Neh. 9:29; Pss. 119; 147:19–20; Ezek. 20:9–13, 21).

Such law/Israel-centered conditions for Gentiles relate to a broader OT understanding: God will reach and restore the world through Israel, the locus of his saving activity. God will bless the nations in and through Abraham’s descendants, Israel (Gen. 12:1–3; 17:4–6; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14). This covenant specifically involves keeping the law (e.g., circumcision [Gen. 17:9–14]). Some passages depict this happening through the nations being subject to Israel (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:9, 17–19; Isa. 11:10–16; 14:2; 54:3). In other passages the nations will be blessed by Israel’s God as they come to Israel, bring back exiled Israel, serve Israel, present Israel with their own wealth, and/or fear Israel’s God (Isa. 45:23; 49:22–23; 51:4–5; 55:5; 60:3–16; 61:5–6; 66:12–13, 18–21; Mic. 7:12–17; Zech. 2:11; 8:22–23). Other passages further elucidate the law-defined nature of such Gentile participation in the God of Israel’s salvation (Exod. 12:48; Isa. 56:1–8; Jer. 12:14–17; Zech. 14:16–21). The portrait of the nations “flowing” up the mountain of God associates Gentile participation in God’s salvation explicitly with the law (Isa. 2:2–5; Mic. 4:1–5).

The Servant Songs in Isa. 40–55 also reflect this law/Israel-centered nature of salvation for the Gentiles. The servant, explicitly identified as Israel (41:8, 9; 42:18–19; 44:1–2, 21; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3; 54:17; see also 65:9; 66:14), serves as God’s instrument for reaching the nations (42:1, 6; 49:6; 52:15). The OT usually condemns Gentiles who remain separate from Israel to some form of judgment, especially Gentiles who have harmed Israel.

Second Temple Judaism and Early Christianity

Second Temple Jewish sources exhibit diverse views about Gentiles, their nature, their possible relation to God, and their fate at the end. Many reflect something resembling the OT views. Israel as God’s people defined by the law, variously understood and contested among Second Temple sources, generally continues to be the locus of God’s ultimate blessing activities.

Situating Jesus and early Christianity within this matrix of Gentile sensitivities is illuminating. As the Jesus movement spread across the Mediterranean, proclaiming the ultimate salvation of the God of Israel in and through Jesus the Messiah, questions about how Gentiles experience this salvation of the Jewish God had paramount importance.

Some Christians, in line with traditional readings of the OT, thought that Gentiles must keep the law, becoming Jews to experience the God of Israel’s salvation in Jesus (Acts 11:1–3; 15:1, 5; Paul’s opponents in Galatia). Gentiles, after all, were separated from God and his salvation promises to Israel (Rom. 9:4–5; Eph. 2:11–13; 1 Pet. 2:10). They stood under God’s condemnation, especially because they were controlled by their passions and sin, lacking self-mastery and the ability to live rightly (Rom. 1:18–32; Eph. 4:17–19; 1 Thess. 4:5; 1 Pet. 1:14, 18).

However, various NT authors, such as Paul, contend that Gentiles need not keep the law, functionally becoming Jews, in order to participate in God’s ultimate salvation in Jesus. Christ, the climax of Israel itself, has replaced the law’s centrality and ultimacy with himself and his death and resurrection (Rom. 10:4). Through being united to Christ by the Spirit, Gentiles are, apart from the law, grafted into true, redefined Israel and become Abraham’s descendants, inheriting God’s promised salvation for Israel (Rom. 3:21–4:25; 8:1–17; 9:30–10:17; 11:13–32; Gal. 2:11–4:7; Eph. 2:11–22; 3:4–6). In Christ, by the Spirit, Gentiles attain self-mastery over their passions and sin and thus live rightly before God, inheriting the kingdom of God in Christ (Rom. 6:1–8:30; 1 Cor. 6:9–11; Gal. 5:16–26; 1 Thess. 4:3–8). Various NT writings thus reconfigure the situation of Gentiles with respect to Israel’s God because of what God did in Christ.

Debates about Gentiles, the law, salvation, and what Christ means for these issues persisted after Paul. Early Christians lacked an unequivocal saying from Jesus on the matter, and not all accepted Paul and some other NT writings.

Heating

In the ancient Near East the type of cooking and heating utilized within a household depended upon the family’s socioeconomic status and lifestyle. A nomadic or seminomadic pastoral lifestyle demanded portability; permanent ovens or heating installations would have been impractical. A stable urban lifestyle made possible the construction of more complex heating and cooking equipment.

Cooking within the Seminomadic Lifestyle

Seminomadic groups, such as Abraham and his family or the Israelites before the settlement of Canaan, probably used an open fire or fire pit. A campfire was kindled on top of the ground or on flat stones. An open fire of this nature could also be ringed with a small stone circle. Shallow holes or fire pits were also dug into the ground near the front of a tent or outside, in the encampment. Since tents did not have chimneys, the smoke from a fire would escape through the door. The seasonal climate dictated whether a fire was kindled inside or outside the tent.

Fires were ignited with twigs or kindling by friction or sparks (Isa. 50:11; 64:2; 2 Macc. 10:3), a skill learned during the early Stone Age. Once lit, the burning embers of the fire could be moved around, kept smoldering, and fanned into a blaze with fresh fuel (Isa. 30:14; cf. Lev. 6:13). Abraham carried some type of an ember or fire with him when he went to sacrifice Isaac (Gen. 22:6). The “smoking firepot with a blazing torch” that symbolized God’s presence before Abraham may refer to a portable device for transporting fire (15:17).

Fuel for fire was gathered from the materials most readily available to seminomadic groups. Potential fuels included thorns and briers (Isa. 10:17), dried grass (Matt. 6:30; Luke 12:28), charcoal (John 18:18 NRSV), twigs or sticks (Isa. 64:2), wood (Gen. 22:6), and dried animal dung (Ezek. 4:15). Fire pits provided some means for keeping a family warm, as well as being used for cooking.

Cooking within the Urban Lifestyle

The sedentary urban lifestyle of the monarchial period provided the opportunity to construct permanent cooking and heating installations. In the four-room Israelite house, cooking normally was done in a fire pit or clay oven in the courtyard of the home. The baking oven ordinarily was located outside, but archaeologists have found cooking utensils and ovens in the central room of the house. This indoor oven also served as a means of heat during the colder wet season. The family most likely utilized the courtyard oven during the hotter dry season.

Egyptian and Mesopotamian reliefs provide illustrations of the structure of ancient ovens. Archaeologists have uncovered scores of examples of different types and sizes all across the ancient Near East. Small domestic ovens (Exod. 8:3) were made of clay in two basic forms. The first had an open top and was cylindrical in shape. It ranged from two to three feet in height and was about two feet in diameter. The second, about the same size, was more egg-shaped, with small openings at the base and in the top.

Some ovens were covered with a plastered layer of potsherds on the outside to improve insulation. They could be embedded in the ground or raised above it. The oven floor was lined with pebbles, and the fire was built upon it. Commercial ovens were larger and were concentrated in specific areas of a city (Neh. 3:11; 12:38).

Ovens and fire pits were used for cooking and heating in the home. Other hearths or heating ovens were employed to warm larger buildings or to perform specific tasks not related to food preparation. A large oval hearth was discovered in the central room of an Iron Age II house at Shechem. Jeremiah 36:22–23 speaks about a “firepot” or hearth used by Jehoiakim to warm his winter apartment. This hearth may have been a raised copper or bronze basin on a three-legged stand. A “fire basin” (NIV: “firepot”) is also mentioned in Zech. 12:6.

Cooking Utensils

Many types of pottery utensils, which were undoubtedly associated with cooking and eating, have been discovered in archaeological excavations in the ancient Near East. Although rare, metal and stone implements have also been found. One area in the tent or the home would be employed as a “kitchen.” A kitchen in the palace of Ramesses III is depicted on an Egyptian wall, and Ezekiel mentions the kitchens located in the new temple (46:24). Cooking and serving vessels included platters, bowls, chalices, jugs, juglets, and cooking pots. Storage vessels and grain pits also were needed to contain spices, oils, grains, and other foodstuffs.

Larger bowls designed specifically for cooking were in common use during the Bronze and Iron Ages. These “cooking pots” often were placed directly into the fire or on hot coals and were used to boil meat or make soups and other similar types of food. Iron Age II cooking pots from Palestine generally bore the trademark of the potter. Cooking pots had a short life and were replaced often. Because the style of these types of pots changed systematically over time, they have become very important in helping archaeologists date the particular level or stratum of a tell in which they were found.

The Cooking of Food

The type of food eaten by families also depended on their socioeconomic status and lifestyle. Food staples included milk products, wine, bread, and occasionally meat. Richer families could afford vegetables, fruits, dates, figs, and other less common foods. All types of households ate bread.

Grains. The most common grains used in bread making were wheat, barley, and spelt (Isa. 28:25). Wheat grew wild in Palestine, and there is evidence that seminomadic people stayed in one place long enough to cultivate small plots of grain. Grain could also be acquired in trade for other agricultural products such as goat’s milk or wool. Grain was winnowed to separate the chaff from the kernels (Matt. 3:12; Luke 3:17). Roasted grain was grain that had been “popped” in the fire instead of being milled (1 Sam. 25:18).

After being winnowed, wheat and other grains were ground initially in a hand mill. Hand mills, or querns, were of two types. The first was a simple device of two stones. The base, or “saddle,” was a flat, elongated stone that became curved through the backward and forward motion of the upper stone. The upper, or “rider,” stone was flat on one side and curved on the top to allow the user to grip the stone with both hands. The grain was placed on the saddle, and the rider stone was run repeatedly over it to grind it. This was considered menial work (Lam. 5:13). This type of grinding may have been assigned to the blinded Samson (Judg. 16:21).

The second, later type of hand mill consisted of two stone disks approximately twelve inches in diameter. The lower stone, or base, had an upright wooden stake at the center. A hole in the upper stone allowed it to fit over the base, and a handle on the upper stone was used to rotate it against the lower stone (Matt. 24:41). Grain was fed through the central hole, and the milled flour exited along the sides. The millstone mentioned in Matt. 18:6; Mark 9:42; Luke 17:2 is a larger example of this type.

Milling grain was a necessary task of the household (Jer. 25:10). Course grain was further milled into fine flour with a mortar and pestle. Course grain could be used to make boiled porridge or gruel. Finely ground flour was used in sacrificial offerings (Exod. 29:40; Lev. 2:4).

The flour was mixed with water and kneaded (Gen. 18:6; 1 Sam. 28:24; 2 Sam. 13:8; Jer. 7:18), small amounts of leaven and salt were added, and then the bread was baked. Three methods of baking bread are mentioned in the OT: over hot coals (1 Kings 19:6; Isa. 44:19), on a griddle (Lev. 7:9; cf. Ezek. 4:3), and in an oven (Lev. 26:26). Leaven was withheld from the dough if the bread was to be made and eaten in haste (Exod. 12:39; Judg. 6:19; 1 Sam. 28:24). Griddle “cakes” were also made in this fashion (Hos. 7:8; cf. Ezek. 4:12).

Bread often was baked in different shapes. Thin bread was used to scoop food from a common pot (Matt. 26:23). Other breads were formed into loaves (John 6:9). In one man’s dream a round loaf of barley bread is described as rolling down a hill and striking and overturning a tent (Judg. 7:13). Both men and women baked bread (Gen. 19:3; 1 Sam. 28:24), and priests baked bread for ritual usage (Lev. 24:5). A king could afford to have men and women as professional bakers (Gen. 40:1; 1 Sam. 8:13). Professional bakers may also have served the larger urban population (Neh. 3:11; Jer. 37:21; Hos. 7:4) in Jerusalem.

Fruits and vegetables. After settling in Canaan, the Israelites made some additions to their diet. Foodstuffs grown in cultivated gardens were now available. These included foods such as cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions, and garlic (Num. 11:5). Some of these vegetables were added to stews; others were eaten uncooked. Vegetable, bean, and lentil soups were prepared in large cooking pots placed directly on the fire. Esau particularly enjoyed lentil soup (Gen. 25:30). Herbs and spices (mint, dill, and cumin) were now accessible as well (Isa. 28:25, 27; Matt. 23:23). Salt came from the Dead Sea.

Fruits too were grown and harvested. Of particular interest was the olive. Olives were crushed in a press to render oil. Olive oil was used in cooking and baking. It was mixed with fine flour to make bread (1 Kings 17:12; Ezek. 16:13; cf. Num. 11:8).

Meat. When a guest arrived or when a special occasion called for it, meat was added to the stew. Meat often was boiled (2 Kings 4:38; Ezek. 24:3–5). Spices were also added (Ezek. 24:10). Since the meat was cut up to boil, this method had the advantage of avoiding the problem of ensuring that the blood was properly drained out of an animal before it could be roasted (Lev. 17:10–11). Milk could be used in the stew; however, cooking a kid in its mother’s milk was prohibited (Exod. 23:19; 34:26; Deut. 14:21).

Meat was roasted over an open fire on a spit. Meat was available from flocks and through hunting. Abraham served his guests veal (Gen. 18:7); Gideon and his guests ate goat meat (Judg. 6:19); Samuel appears to have served Saul a mutton leg (1 Sam. 9:24). Contrary to ritual regulations, Hophni and Phinehas demanded meat for roasting (1 Sam. 2:13–15). Meat certainly was roasted as a sacrifice on the altar of the tabernacle and the temple. It also normally was roasted on feast days such as Passover (Exod. 12:8–9).

Fish were counted among the foods given to Noah and his sons after the flood (Gen. 9:2–3). The Israelites ate fish in Egypt (Num. 11:15), and fishermen plied their trade along the Nile (Isa. 19:8). Fishermen could hook, spear, or net fish (Job 41:1, 7; Eccles. 9:12; Ezek. 29:4; 47:10). In Israel, fish were taken from the Sea of Galilee or the Mediterranean. Jerusalem had a “Fish Gate,” where fish were sold (2 Chron. 33:14; Neh. 3:3; 12:39; Zeph. 1:10). The Phoenicians most likely exported several varieties of edible fish to Israel. Fish with fins and scales were clean, but those without fins or scales were not (Lev. 11:9–12). In Nehemiah’s day Phoenicians were selling fish to the inhabitants of Jerusalem even on the Sabbath (Neh. 13:16).

In NT times, the Phoenicians continued to import much of the fish brought into Palestine. The ministry of Jesus revolved around the smaller fishing industry on the Sea of Galilee. Jesus called several fishermen to follow him as disciples (Matt. 4:18). On a number of occasions Jesus helped his disciples to ply their trade by directing them where to cast their nets (John 21:6, 11). Fish were caught in dragnets (John 21:8) and hand nets (Matt. 4:18). After his resurrection Jesus ate fish with his disciples in Jerusalem and on the Sea of Galilee (Luke 24:42; John 21:9).

Fish became a staple of the common people (Matt. 14:17; 15:34). The fish used to feed the multitudes probably were salted. Fish normally were grilled over an open fire (John 21:9).

Heaven

The present abode of God and the final dwelling place of the righteous. The ancient Jews distinguished three different heavens. The first heaven was the atmospheric heavens of the clouds and where the birds fly (Gen. 1:20). The second heaven was the celestial heavens of the sun, the moon, and the stars. The third heaven was the present home of God and the angels. Paul builds on this understanding of a third heaven in 2 Cor. 12:2–4, where he describes himself as a man who “was caught up to the third heaven” or “paradise,” where he “heard inexpressible things.” This idea of multiple heavens also shows itself in how the Jews normally spoke of “heavens” in the plural (Gen. 1:1), while most other ancient cultures spoke of “heaven” in the singular.

The Abode of God

One of the challenges in understanding “heaven” as the present dwelling place of God involves God’s omnipresence. In one sense, God is present everywhere. David asks in Ps. 139:7, “Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence?” He answers that regardless of whether he goes as high up as anyone can go (“up to the heavens”), as low down as anyone can go (“in the depths), as far east as anyone can go (“the wings of the dawn”), or as far west as anyone can go (“the far side of the sea”), God is still there (Ps. 139:8–9).

Although God is present everywhere, God is also present in a special way in “heaven.” During Jesus’ earthly ministry, the Father is sometimes described as speaking in “a voice from heaven” (Matt. 3:17). Similarly, Jesus instructs us to address our prayers to “Our Father in heaven” (6:9). Even the specific request in the Lord’s Prayer that “your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven” (6:10) reminds us that heaven is a place already under God’s full jurisdiction, where his will is presently being done completely and perfectly. Jesus also warns of the dangers of despising “one of these little ones,” because “their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven” (18:10). Jesus “came down from heaven” (John 6:51) for his earthly ministry, and after his death and resurrection, he ascended back “into heaven,” from where he “will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11).

At times, “heaven” becomes virtually a synonym for God himself. In the parable of the prodigal son in Luke 15, the son confesses to his father, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you” (v. 21). This son’s sin against “heaven” has nothing to do with environmental issues such as air pollution, and everything to do with his relationship with God. Note also Matthew’s expression “the kingdom of heaven” versus “the kingdom of God” used elsewhere.

The Final Dwelling Place for Believers

Given this strong connection between heaven and God’s presence, there is a natural connection in Scripture between heaven and the ultimate hope of believers. Believers are promised a reward in heaven (“Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven” [Matt. 5:12]), and even now believers can “store up for [themselves] treasures in heaven” (6:20). Even in this present life, “our citizenship is in heaven” (Phil. 3:20), and our hope at death is to “depart and be with Christ, which is better by far” (1:23). Since Christ is currently in heaven, deceased believers are already present with Christ in heaven awaiting his return, when “God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him” (1 Thess. 4:14).

However, this picture of heaven is more complicated. It is true that heaven is sometimes used in Scripture to refer to the present abode of all departed believers who have left this present life and entered the intermediate state between death and the bodily resurrection (2 Cor. 5:4). It is this hope in a bodily resurrection that sets Christianity apart from other religions. Ultimately, the Christian hope is not that people will receive new physical bodies and float around some ethereal “heaven” like astronauts in outer space for all eternity. Instead, God has created human beings with physical bodies to inhabit a physical world, and our future hope is one of new resurrection bodies inhabiting new heavens and a new earth (Isa. 65:17; 66:22; 2 Pet. 3:13). Just as there will be a certain continuity between the bodies of believers in this present life and their new resurrection bodies (we will know one another), there will also be a certain continuity between this present earth and the new earth to come. Yet, at the same time, everything will also be changed and made new and perfect, as God has designed it to be (Rom. 8:18–21).

The clearest description of this new reality is found in Rev. 21–22, where John describes how he “saw ‘a new heaven and a new earth,’ for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away” (21:1). Here is “the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband” (21:2), when “God himself will be with them and be their God. ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away” (21:3–4). Even better than all the descriptions of such things as streets of “gold, as pure as transparent glass” (21:21) is that God himself will come and dwell in the midst of his people. As Paul has phrased it, “Now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face” (1 Cor. 13:12). The day will come when we will see God as he is, in all his glory (1 John 3:2).

Two other ideas complete our picture of life in these new heavens and new earth. Heaven will be a place of continued activity and service. Notice Jesus’ blessing in Matt. 25:21: “Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things.” The other principle is that there will be different degrees of reward. Although our ultimate reward is simply being with God himself, Paul also reminds us that if what believers do with their lives “survives, the builder will receive a reward,” and if what they do “is burned up, the builder will suffer loss” (1 Cor. 3:14–15 NRSV). Our choices make a difference for time and eternity (cf. Rev. 14:13). See also Heavens, New.

Heavens

The Abode of God

The Final Dwelling Place for Believers

Heber

(1) A descendant of Asher and son of Beriah who is listed as the head of a clan (Gen. 46:17; Num. 26:45; 1 Chron. 7:31). (2) A Kenite who separated himself from his people and lived at the great tree in Zaanannim near Kedesh (Judg. 4:11). He was married to Jael, who rescued Israel from their Canaanite oppressors. Taking advantage of the fact that Jabin, the Canaanite king, was on friendly terms with the Kenites, Jael lured the fleeing Sisera, commander of Jabin’s army, into her tent. After hiding him and giving him a drink, she pounded a tent peg through his temple while he slept (4:17–21). (3) A descendant of Judah and a son of Mered by his Judean wife (1 Chron. 4:18). He was the father of Soco. (4) A descendant of Benjamin and a son of Elpaal (1 Chron. 8:17). (5) In the Lukan genealogy of Jesus, the name “Eber” appears in the Greek text (Luke 3:35), which some versions translate as “Heber” (KJV, NASB), and others as “Eber” (NIV, NRSV, NET).

Heberite

Hebron

(1) A son of Kohath, grandson of Levi, and uncle of Moses, Aaron, and Miriam (Exod. 6:18; Num. 3:19; 1 Chron. 6:2).

(2) The son of Mareshah, and either the grandson or great-great-grandson of Caleb (1 Chron. 2:42).

(3) A city located in the Judean hills eighteen miles south-southeast of Jerusalem, identified with modern El-Khalil in the West Bank, in an area well supplied with water from nearby wells and springs. There are several archaeological sites in the vicinity, but biblical Hebron has been positively identified with Tel Hebron (Jebel er-Rumeidah). Excavations there uncovered evidence of intermittent occupation ranging from the Early Bronze Age I (3300–3000 BC) to the Late Arab period (AD 1291–1516). Significant finds include a city wall from the Middle Bronze Age II (2000–1550 BC), an Akkadian cuneiform tablet, and five jar handles bearing the royal lmlk (“for the king”) stamp.

Hebron (also known as Kiriath Arba) played a significant role in OT narratives. After Lot chose to dwell in Sodom, Abram settled near the oaks of Mamre in Hebron (Gen. 13:18). When Sarah died, Abraham purchased land in Hebron for her burial (Gen. 23). Both Isaac and Jacob lived in Hebron, and from there Jacob sent Joseph to inquire about his brothers’ welfare (35:27; 37:14). When Moses sent twelve spies into the promised land, their glimpse of the large inhabitants of Hebron significantly influenced their negative report about the prospects for invasion (Num. 13:22, 33).

During the period of the conquest, Hebron’s king was among five kings whom Joshua killed after they attacked Gibeon (Josh. 10). Joshua went on to fight at Hebron, destroying the city and its Anakite inhabitants (11:21). The city was then deeded to Caleb (15:13), but later it was given to the Levites and became a city of refuge (20:7; 21:13).

Hebron played a prominent role during the united monarchy. After Saul died, God instructed David to go to Hebron. There the men of Judah anointed him as king, and he reigned from there for seven and a half years (2 Sam. 2:1–11). During this time, several sons were born to David in Hebron, and it was there that Joab, David’s commander, murdered Abner in revenge for his brother’s death (2 Sam. 3; 1 Chron. 3:1–4). When David’s authority became widely recognized, the elders of all the Israelite tribes came to Hebron and anointed him king over all Israel. He then moved his capital to Jerusalem after capturing it from the Jebusites (2 Sam. 5:1–10; 1 Chron. 11:1–9). When Absalom later conspired to become king, he chose Hebron as his headquarters (2 Sam. 15:1–10).

Hebron is next mentioned as one of the cities that Rehoboam fortified for the defense of Judah (2 Chron. 11:10) and as one of the locations where returning exiles settled (Neh. 11:25). During the Hasmonean period, Judas Maccabeus gained control over Hebron from the Edomites (Idumeans) (1 Macc. 5:65).

Hebronite

(1) A son of Kohath, grandson of Levi, and uncle of Moses, Aaron, and Miriam (Exod. 6:18; Num. 3:19; 1 Chron. 6:2).

(2) The son of Mareshah, and either the grandson or great-great-grandson of Caleb (1 Chron. 2:42).

Heifer

A young cow, typically one that has not produced offspring. Heifers assisted people by plowing (Deut. 21:3) and producing milk, which could be curdled into cheese (Isa. 7:21). Samson compares the animal allegorically to his wife (Judg. 14:18). Jeremiah does the same with Egypt, which will be tormented by a Babylonian gadfly (Jer. 46:20). Hosea compares Israel to a stubborn heifer (Hos. 4:16). The lives of heifers were required for special sacrifices (Gen. 15:9; 1 Sam. 16:1–2). Their sacrifice also purged bloodguilt from the land as a consequence of murder when the culprit was unknown (Deut. 21:1–8). Through an elaborate ritual, the ashes of a red heifer were mixed with water for purification from uncleanness caused by coming into contact with a corpse (Num. 19:1–22; cf. Heb. 9:13).

Heir

Inheritance is an important concept that the Bible uses in several ways.

Family. In the ancient world every culture had customs for the passing of wealth and possessions from one generation to the next. In ancient Israel special provisions were made for inheriting land upon the death of the father. The firstborn son received a double portion; the rest was divided equally among the remaining sons. If a man lacked sons, priority went to the following in order: daughters, brothers, father’s brothers, next of kin (Num. 27:1–11). The OT provides guidance for additional circumstances (Gen. 38:8–9; Num. 36:6; Lev. 25:23–24; Deut. 21:15–17; 25:5–10; Ruth 2:20; 3:9–13; 4:1–12), with an overriding concern for the stability of the family and the retention of the land within a tribe. Under Roman law during the NT period, an heir had legal standing even while the father was still alive; his status was based on birth or adoption rather than the father’s death.

Old Testament. Even more prominent than family inheritance is the assertion that God gave the land of Canaan to Abraham and his descendants as an inheritance (Gen. 12:7; 15:18–21; 17:8; Num. 34:1–29; Deut. 12:10). This inheritance is God’s gracious gift, not something that Israel earned by its righteousness (Deut. 9:4–7). Descriptions of the land (“flowing with milk and honey”) and its fertility portray this gift as a new Eden, where God will dwell with his people (Exod. 3:8, 17; Lev. 20:24; Num. 16:13–14; Deut. 11:9–12). In some texts the language of inheritance moves beyond the land of Canaan to an international scope. In Ps. 2:8 the anointed king recounts God saying to him, “Ask me, and I will make the nations your inheritance, the ends of the earth your possession.” This expansion of inheritance from the land of Canaan to the ends of the earth prepares the way for a similar expansion in the NT (see Rom. 4:13).

God’s relationship with Israel is also described in terms of inheritance. On the one hand, Israel is described as God’s inheritance (Deut. 32:9; 1 Sam. 10:1; 1 Kings 8:51–53); on the other hand, God is Israel’s inheritance (Pss. 16:5; 73:26; Jer. 10:16; 51:19). This mutuality expresses the intimacy of God’s relationship with Israel.

New Testament. Inheritance language is taken up in the NT and expanded in a variety of ways. First and foremost, Jesus Christ is the “heir of all things,” the Son to whom the Father has given all authority in heaven and on earth (Matt. 28:18–20; Heb. 1:2–5). Through their union with Christ, believers share in Christ’s inheritance (Rom. 8:17), having been qualified by the Father to share in that inheritance (Col. 1:12). What believers inherit is described in various ways: the earth (Matt. 5:5), eternal life (Luke 10:25), the kingdom (1 Cor. 6:9–10; James 2:5), salvation (Heb. 1:14), blessing (Heb. 12:17; 1 Pet. 3:9). This inheritance was enacted by the death of Christ and sealed by his blood (Heb. 9:15–28). Believers experience the benefits of this inheritance through the Spirit now (Eph. 1:14, 18), but its fullness is reserved in heaven and awaits the consummation (1 Pet. 1:4–6).

The connection between the believer’s inheritance and the Spirit is especially prominent in Paul. In Gal. 4:1–7 Paul uses a combination of exodus and legal imagery to explain the gospel. Before Christ came, God’s people were heirs under the care of guardians and trustees. But once Christ came and redeemed them from under the law, they received their full inheritance as adopted sons and daughters. Central to that inheritance is the gift of the Spirit, who cries out, “Abba, Father.” It is this gift of the Spirit that definitively marks believers as sons and daughters rather than slaves. Because believers possess the Spirit as an inheritance in fulfillment of the promise to Abraham (Gal. 3:14; cf. Isa. 44:3–5), they have moved from bondage under the law to freedom in Christ (Gal. 5:1).

Heliopolis

The name “Heliopolis” is Greek for “city of the sun.” (1) The Greek name for the city referred to in Hebrew as “On” or “Aven” (Gen. 41:45, 50; 46:20; cf. Ezek. 30:17) (the Hebrew spellings are similar). It is one of the oldest cities in Lower Egypt, dating from the predynastic period. Its ruins are found at Tel Al-Hisn, Ain Shams, and Matariyeh, which are about ten miles northeast of Cairo.

Heliopolis was the center of worship for Re, the sun god, and Atum, the creator god. The priests of Heliopolis were among the most powerful in Egypt. They officiated at all the major festivals and produced one of the major versions of Egyptian religion and mythology. The prominence of the priesthood is reflected in the description of Joseph marrying Asenath, the daughter of Potiphera, the priest of On (Gen. 41:45, 50; 46:20). The Egyptians called the city by a name that means “city of pillars.” Its temples were embellished with many obelisks, to catch the first rays of the morning sun. Jeremiah prophesied the destruction of the obelisks and temples in Heliopolis (Jer. 43:13; cf. Ezek. 30:17). The city flourished as a seat of learning until it was eclipsed by Alexandria.

(2) The Greek name for Baalbek in Lebanon.

Help Meet

In Gen. 2:18, 20 the KJV translates the Hebrew phrase ’ezer kenegdo, used to describe Eve’s relationship toward Adam, as “help meet.” The NIV translates the words as “a helper suitable” (for Adam), but finding a precise English equivalent is difficult in part because this is the only place in the Bible where these two words occur together. Other translations prefer “helper who is just right” (NLT) or “helper as his partner” (NRSV). The Hebrew word ’ezer (“helper”) is often used of God or an aiding human prince or army, and thus it does not denote subordination (e.g., Ps. 30:10). The Hebrew word kenegdo implies mutuality, matching, or correspondence. Those words together make Eve a “suitable helper” (cf. NET: “a companion who corresponds to him”). The disagreement regarding appropriate gender roles makes this a hotly debated text. See also Helper.

Helper

In Gen. 2:18–25 the lone man is provided with a “helper.” This is not necessarily an unromantic view of the marriage relationship (cf. Gen. 1:27–28a), but the main thought is of companionship and partnership (cf. Eccles. 4:9–11). Also, the word “helper” does not require a subservient or demeaning function but rather can include active intervention, such as God himself renders (e.g., Ps. 33:20: “[The Lord] is our help and our shield”). The man needs help to carry out the mandate of Gen. 1:28b, so a wide-ranging helping role is in view. The helper must be “suitable for him” (Gen. 2:18b), that is, come alongside him, as his opposite and complement, and so no mere lowly assistant will be adequate for the task. (See also Help Meet.)

The psalms portray God as the helper of his needy people (Pss. 10:14; 30:10; 54:4; 70:5; 72:12; 146:5). The exodus deliverance is described by using the motif of God as “my helper” (Exod. 18:4). On the other hand, when God acts to judge wicked nations, no human helper (or ally) can provide protection (Isa. 30:5; Jer. 47:4; Ezek. 30:8). In the crisis of persecution forecast in Dan. 11:34, the “little help” (= helper) may be Judas Maccabeus, though the main point is that the godly will not be totally bereft of divine support. Among the charismatically gifted individuals who are to act for the common good listed by Paul in 1 Cor. 12:28 are those able to help others, though the kind of help in mind (distinguished from healing and administration) is not specified.

Hemam

A son of Lotan and a grandson of Seir (Gen. 36:22). The NIV renders the name as “Homam,” based on the parallel account in 1 Chron. 1:39, whereas the KJV follows the Hebrew and opts for “Hemam.”

Hemdan

The first son of Dishon and a grandson of Seir the Horite who lived in the land of Edom (Gen. 36:26). In some versions of 1 Chron. 1:41, in the genealogy of Esau, he is called “Hamran” (NKJV, NRSV; see NIV mg.).

Henoch

(1) The son of Cain after whom Cain named a city (Gen. 4:17). (2) The son of Jared and the father of Methuselah in Seth’s line. According to Gen. 5:23, he lived 365 years, conspicuously shorter than others in the genealogy. Most interpret Gen. 5:24 as saying that God took Enoch to the heavenly realm, without death, due to Enoch’s piety. In the NT, Jude 14 assumes that he wrote or prophesied part of 1 Enoch, a collection of Second Temple Jewish apocalyptic writings.

Herd

A group of domesticated animals. In the OT, a herd (baqar; generally cattle and/or oxen) is often distinguished from a flock (tso’n; sheep and/or goats), and Israelites often had both (Deut. 15:19). From a herd, an Israelite could take an animal to eat (Gen. 18:7) or sacrifice (Lev. 1:2–3). In the NT, the Greek word commonly translated “herd” (agelē) is used only of swine (Matt. 8:30; Mark 5:11; Luke 8:32). A “flock” (poimēn) is made up of sheep or goats.

Herder

English versions generally use the term “herdsman” or “herder” when referring to those who care for cattle, preferring the term “shepherd” when the care of sheep is in view. Herders usually were hired workers who protected their employers’ livestock and led the herd to grazing areas. In at least two biblical instances (Gen. 13:7–8; 26:20), quarreling arose between herders. Amos is referred to as a herdsman in some translations (7:14 KJV, NRSV).

Herdsman

Heth

The second son of Canaan, and the patronymic ancestor of the Hittites (Gen. 10:15; 23:10; 1 Chron. 1:13 KJV, NASB [cf. RSV]; NIV: “Hittite[s]”). These Hittite descendants of Heth were the Neo-Hittites, who maintained some of the culture but not the ethnicity of the Indo-European Hittites.

Hezron

(1) A grandson of Jacob and son of Reuben (Gen. 46:9; Exod. 6:14; 1 Chron. 5:3). His descendants were the Hezronite clan of Reuben (Num. 26:6). (2) A great-grandson of Jacob, grandson of Judah, son of Perez, and the father of Ram (also known as Aram and Arni), listed in the ancestry of David and Jesus (Gen. 46:12; Ruth 4:18–19; 1 Chron. 2:5–9; 4:1; Matt. 1:3; Luke 3:33). The Chronicler makes a point to note that Hezron married again in old age (sixty) and fathered Segub and Ashhur, who was born after Hezron died (1 Chron. 2:21–24). His descendants were the Hezronite clan of Judah (Num. 26:21). (3) One of the cities marking the southern border of the territory allotted to the tribe of Judah in the conquest of Canaan, lying somewhere between Kadesh Barnea and Addar (Josh. 15:3).

Hiddekel

The third of four rivers mentioned stemming from the river originating from the garden of Eden (Gen. 2:14), flowing east from Eden to Assyria. Whereas the KJV transliterates the Hebrew khiddeqel, more-recent versions use the better-known name of this river, “Tigris.” The other three rivers are Pishon, Gihon, and Euphrates. Hiddekel/Tigris is also the site of Daniel’s vision in the third year of Cyrus (Dan. 10:4).

Highest

The designation “Highest” or “Most High” is commonly used for God. It represents God’s exalted status above all others. It occurs primarily in OT poetic or prophetic passages (e.g., Num. 24:16; Deut. 32:8; Pss. 7:17; 9:2; 18:13), although it occurs in the NT as well (e.g., Mark 5:7; Luke 1:35; Acts 7:48; Heb. 7:1). Melchizedek king of Salem and “priest of God Most High” praises God using the title “God Most High,” which Abram then uses to specifically identify God Most High as “the Lord” (Gen. 14:19–20, 22).

Hind

A female deer. This term is usually used poetically, primarily in the KJV and RSV (NIV: “doe” or “deer”). The hind (or doe) can indicate speed and stability (Gen. 49:21; 2 Sam. 22:34; Ps. 18:33; Hab. 3:19), love and gentleness (Prov. 5:19), or the mysterious workings of God (Job 39:1). See also Deer; Doe.

Hip

The most famous reference to a hip in Scripture is in Gen. 32:25, 31–32, where Jacob wrestles with the angel of the Lord until the angel touches his hip (yarekh, “hip,” “thigh,” “side”) and knocks it out of joint. The narrator points out that the Israelites “do not eat the tendon attached to the socket of the hip, because the socket of Jacob’s hip was touched near the tendon” (Gen. 32:32). Judges 15:8 records that Samson struck the Philistines’ “hip and thigh” (KJV, NRSV), resulting in a great massacre. The Hebrew word translated “hip” (shoq) can mean “shoulder,” “leg,” or “hip.” The phrase connotes both the complete destruction of the enemy and the ruthlessness with which Samson slaughtered them.

Hirah

The Adullamite friend of Judah whom the latter was visiting when he met his Canaanite wife (Gen. 38:1–2, 12, 20–23).

Hittites

The name “Hittite” derives from the name of the Hittite homeland: Hatti. The Bible refers to “children (daughters) of Heth” and “Hittite” or “Hittites.”

Historical overview. Hittite precursors appeared in Anatolia (Turkey) during the third millennium. Of unknown origin, their language was Indo-European rather than Semitic like Hebrew. During the second millennium a Hittite kingdom emerged, with Hattusa (modern Bogazkale) as its capital. Hattusili I (c. 1650 BC) was the first Hittite king of historical rec-ord. He gained control of the trade routes and eliminated regional threats. He also established a Hittite law code, and under him Hittite literature flourished. His son, Mursili I, sacked Babylon, ending Hammurabi’s dynasty (1595 BC).

Hittite influence greatly increased under Tadhaliya II (c. 1400 BC) and especially under Suppiluliuma I (c. 1350 BC). At its height, the Hittite Empire spanned from central Anatolia to northern Syria (including Ugarit and Amurru), controlling various vassal states. The Hittites skirmished briefly with Egypt over territory in northern Syria (Muwatalli II engaged Ramesses II at Qadesh in 1275 BC), and then followed a period of negotiated peace and increased contact between the two kingdoms. In contrast, dealings with Assyria, typically strained, eventually led to defeat and loss of Hittite territory (late thirteenth century).

Shortly thereafter, the Hittite Empire, weakened by uprisings and defections among its territories, succumbed to the upheavals of the period. In its wake rose numerous minor states (e.g., Karkamis and Hamath) that saw themselves as successors to the Hittite Empire and perpetuated Hittite culture. These are referred to collectively as the Neo-Hittite states; Karkamis was the last to fall to the Neo-Assyrians (717 BC).

Hittites in the Bible. According to the Bible, the Hittites descended from Canaan (Gen. 10:15; 1 Chron. 1:13 [the NIV reads “Hittites” for the proper name “Heth”) and were destined to be subjugated—for example, by the Israelites (see Gen. 9:25–27). Genesis portrays the patriarchs in regular contact with Hittites, through which we learn of several Hittite individuals. Abraham purchased a cave and surrounding field from “Ephron the Hittite” (Gen. 23). Esau took Hittite wives (27:46); however, discrepancies exist concerning their names and ethnicities (cf. 26:34; 28:9; 36:2–3).

The OT consistently mentions the Hittites among those peoples whom the Israelites would dispossess upon entering the promised land (Gen. 15:18–21; Exod. 3:8). Yahweh vowed to drive them out before the Israelites (Exod. 23:28 [cf. v. 23]), while the Israelites were instructed to eradicate their presence from the land (Deut. 7:1–2; 20:17). The Israelites only partly succeeded, eventually settling among the other peoples (Judg. 3:5–6).

During this time, the Hittites are depicted as occupying the central hill country between the coastal plain to the west and the Dead Sea to the east (Num. 13:29; Josh. 9:1), though Josh. 1:4 refers to the entire region of Canaan and Transjordan as “the Hittite country.” This perhaps recalls Hittite influence upon the region, revealing a generic or political (versus ethnic) use of the term.

Further references pertain to the monarchic period. David had several close Hittite associates: Ahimelek, of whom nothing else is known (1 Sam. 26:6), and Uriah, Bathsheba’s husband and a member of David’s bodyguard (2 Sam. 11:3; 23:39). Under Solomon’s reign Hittites were conscripted for forced labor (1 Kings 9:20). Solomon also conducted trade between Egypt and Hittite states to the north (10:29), taking for himself Hittite wives (11:1). The final reference to extant Hittites comes from Joram’s reign, in the mid-ninth century BC (2 Kings 7:6).

During the exile and afterward, the Hittites became a byword (Ezek. 16:3, 45), exemplifying practices from which pious Jews sought to distance themselves (Ezra 9:1).

Conclusions. Identification of the biblical Hittites with those of Anatolia remains problematic. Clearly, Israel had contact with later Neo-Hittite states during its monarchic period (see 2 Sam. 8:9–10; 1 Kings 10:29; 11:1). Nevertheless, archaeology does not support a Hittite presence in the Judean hill country at the time of the conquest. Thus, the biblical Hittites may have been an unrelated, unidentified people inhabiting Canaan; alternately, “Hittites” (and the like) may have conveyed rhetorically the idea of “otherness, inferiority” (already anticipated by Gen. 9–10; cf. Ezek. 16:3, 45; Ezra 9:1).

Hivites

A people descended from Ham, one of Noah’s sons, through the Canaanites (Gen. 10:17). They were indigenous inhabitants of the promised land, usually referred to along with others (e.g., Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Jebusites) who were to be dispossessed by Israel (e.g., Exod. 3:8; 23:23; Deut. 7:1). They lived primarily near the Lebanese mountains (Judg. 3:3) and Mount Hermon (Josh. 11:3). Despite God’s command to drive the Hivites out, they continued to inhabit these regions in the time of David (2 Sam. 24:7). Hivites also lived farther south near Shechem (Gen. 34:2) and Gibeon (Josh. 9:7; 11:19). A group of Hivites from Gibeon, having heard that Israel intended to destroy them, tricked Israel into entering into a covenant with them, securing their survival (Josh. 9). Hivites are also mentioned as being Israel’s slaves during Solomon’s reign (1 Kings 9:20–21).

Hobah

A town referred to only once in Scripture. In Gen. 14, after Abram and Lot separated, Lot was taken captive, along with the kings of Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboyim, and Bela (Zoar), by a coalition of kings led by Kedorlaomer. When Abraham learned of the defeat, he assembled 318 trained servants in his house and pursued Kedorlaomer. Abraham attacked them, and Hobah was the location to which Abraham pursued them in battle. The exact location of the town is unknown, but it was north of Damascus (14:15).

Holy Spirit

In Christian theology, the Third Person of the Trinity. The usage derives from the NT, in which the divine Spirit is treated as an independent person who is instrumental in salvation and is worthy of the praise accorded to both the Father and the Son (John 14:16–23; Rom. 8:26–27; 1 Pet. 1:2).

Old Testament

The scarcity of the phrase “Holy Spirit” in the OT (only in Ps. 51:11; Isa. 63:10–11) does not imply lack of interest or importance. While it should be recognized that in the OT the person of the Holy Spirit receives nothing like the systematic reflection found in the NT, when one includes correlative terms, such as “Spirit of God,” “my Spirit,” “wind,” or “breath,” it is apparent that OT writers attributed great significance to God’s Spirit. Thus, the Spirit was at work in the beginning of creation (Gen. 1:2). Adam and Eve are uniquely given life by the breath of God (Gen. 2:7). The Spirit enables the building of the tabernacle (Exod. 31:3), gives voice to the message of the prophets (Num. 11:29; cf. 2 Pet. 1:21), empowers Israel’s leaders (1 Sam. 16:13), and provides access to God’s presence (Ps. 51:11). Yet in all this, the work of the Spirit in the OT is sporadic, occasional, and localized. Thus, the prophets long for a new age when God’s people will more perfectly enjoy the Spirit’s presence (Isa. 32:15; 44:3; 61:1; Joel 2:28).

New Testament

The Spirit in the ministry of Christ. The NT views the OT prophetic hope for the Spirit as fulfilled in and through Jesus Christ (Luke 4:18–21). The unique relationship between God’s Holy Spirit and the person and work of Jesus explains the systemic reflection that the Holy Spirit receives in the NT. This is signaled at the very beginning of Jesus’ life, when the Holy Spirit “comes upon” Mary, overshadowing her with “the power of the Most High” (1:35). Similarly, at the start of Jesus’ public ministry, the Holy Spirit “descended on him” at baptism (3:22). This anointing by the Spirit initiates and empowers Jesus’ public ministry, from his preaching, to his miraculous works, to his perfect obedience (Luke 4:14–18; John 3:34; Acts 10:38). Even his sacrificial death is accomplished by the power of the Holy Spirit (Heb. 9:14).

Significantly, just as the Holy Spirit empowered the life and death of Jesus, so too is the Spirit responsible for his resurrection and characteristic of his glorious reign. Death is not a defeat for Jesus: he is “vindicated by the Spirit” (1 Tim. 3:16), “appointed the Son of God in power by his resurrection from the dead” (Rom. 1:4; cf. 1 Pet. 3:18). Furthermore, at his resurrection, Jesus comes into a new phase of full and perfect possession of the eternal Spirit as the reward for his obedience. So complete is this union that Paul at one point claims that “the Lord is the Spirit” (2 Cor. 3:17).

The Spirit in the church and the believer. The church and its members are the immediate beneficiaries of Christ’s spiritual fullness. Since Jesus is now a “life-giving spirit” through his resurrection and ascension (1 Cor. 15:45), he is able to fulfill the promise of Spirit baptism (Luke 3:16). This baptism takes place in the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost, which marks the birth of the NT church. The apostles, illuminated by the Holy Spirit, provide true and powerful testimony about Jesus (John 16:4–15), testimony that serves as the church’s foundation and principal tradition (Eph. 2:20). The work of the Spirit continues within the church in the postapostolic age, uniting its members in Christ for God’s holy purpose (Eph. 2:22).

This same outpouring of the Holy Spirit is the salvation of individual believers. Believers receive the Spirit by faith (Gal. 3:14). The Spirit in turn unites them to Christ and all his benefits (Gal. 3:2; Eph. 1:3), including his life (Heb. 4:15–16), suffering (Phil. 1:29; 1 Pet. 4:14), death (Rom. 6:3), resurrection (Rom. 6:5), justification (Rom. 4:25), and glorious reign in heaven (Phil. 3:20). These benefits, though undoubtedly perfected and consummated only at Christ’s return (Phil. 1:6), are characteristic of believers’ present experience, enjoyed now because the Spirit dwells within them as the “firstfruits” of the harvest to come (Rom. 8:23; cf. Gal. 2:19–20). This indwelling of the Spirit results in new birth and new creation (2 Cor. 5:17), a newness identified with the life that Christ received in his resurrection (Rom. 8:11).

For this reason, believers are urged to further the work of the Spirit in their lives until the bodily resurrection of all God’s people. They are to cultivate the “fruit of the Spirit” (Gal. 5:22), and they are correspondingly warned not to “grieve the Holy Spirit” (Eph. 4:30). Furthermore, since new life is initiated by the Spirit (John 3:6–8), Christians are to remain in that Spirit, not turning aside in reliance on vain and useless principles (Gal. 3:1–5). Conversely, they are to be “filled with the Spirit” (Eph. 5:18), putting off the old person and putting on the new (4:22). This filling grounds every aspect of the believer’s life, from obedience, to worship, to the hope of resurrection. The Spirit, in uniting believers to all the riches of Christ and his resurrection, is therefore central in the work of salvation. See also Spirit.

Homam

Homosexual

Homosexuality is a sexual relationship between two members of the same sex. It is a controversial issue today, especially as it relates to marriage and to serving in the ministry. Several key biblical texts stand at the center of interpreting the Bible’s stance and teachings on this subject.

The Biblical Texts

Genesis 19 (with Ezek. 16:49–50; Jude 7). The biblical narrative regarding the degradation and destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah indicates that their sin was grievous (Gen. 18:20; see also Gen. 13:13). When the two angelic visitors arrived, the men of the city, both young and old, asked to “know” (Heb. yada’) them. As an alternative, Lot offered his two virgin daughters, intended as sexual substitutes. While the Hebrew verb used here occurs frequently and characteristically simply means “to know,” ten times in Genesis it has strong overtones of sexual union. This narrative is sometimes dismissed as a case of gang rape, whereby power over foreigners was demonstrated in sexual terms. Likewise, some suggest that because no father in contemporary Western culture would ever offer his daughters to maintain the honor of guests, what this passage says about homosexuality also reflects cultural remnants of a bygone age. Thus, the incident would have nothing to do with homosexuality as demonstrated in consensual, committed same-sex relationships. In light of these alternative interpretations, it is necessary to investigate further the implications of this event and its subsequent interpretation in Scripture.

There are two explicit commentaries on the Genesis narrative later in the biblical canon. The first is provided by Ezekiel, from whom we learn that Sodom and the surrounding cities were “arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and they did detestable things before [God]” (Ezek. 16:49–50). The clause “they did detestable things” must be translated that way. The interpretation “it [i.e., the arrogance] was detestable” is unacceptable because the Hebrew verb is third-person feminine plural (“they did”), and the subject is Sodom and her sisters (the surrounding towns). Clearly, homosexual practice was not one singular sin there. It was one in the midst of a culture rife with things that were “detestable” in God’s eyes. “Detestable” is used over a hundred times in the Hebrew Bible of things that run absolutely counter to the nature of God. It also appears in Lev. 18; 20, addressed further below. The second direct response to the incident is Jude’s condemnation of the sexual license in Sodom and Gomorrah: the towns “gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion” (Jude 7).

In sum, Sodom and Gomorrah became the paradigm for comprehensively destructive evil (cf. Isa. 1:10; Jer. 23:14; Matt. 10:5–15; 11:20–24; Luke 10:1–15), representing societies entirely corrupt and hardened beyond repentance. This sobering characteristic is particularly evident in Jesus’ references to the cities. Furthermore, what we cannot ignore is that the Genesis narrative of that pervasive evil centers on the perversion of sexuality, starting with men wanting men, followed by Lot’s offering his daughters, and then Lot’s daughters engaging their father in sexual activity.

Judges 19. Tragically, this narrative thread is not isolated in Genesis. The same activity appears again in Judg. 19, where some of God’s people had adopted the ways of the debased Canaanite culture around them. In the narrative, a Levite stopped for the night in the town of Gibeah, a city of the tribe of Benjamin. Some men of the city demanded that his host give them access to him, and again a virgin daughter and the Levite’s concubine were offered in his place. Human sexuality and life itself were being abused in the most heinous ways; the narrative is a shocking testimony to the depths to which humankind can descend, as the Levite’s concubine was raped to death over a long night.

Leviticus 18:22; 20:13. The first of these passages forbids a man to “have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman,” indicating that it is “detestable,” or an “abomination” (KJV; Heb. to’ebah). It is not limited to the violent homosexual activity that characterized the previous narratives; rather, it is a general and blanket prohibition. Leviticus 20:13 pronounces the death penalty for that act.

Because these are in the so-called Holiness Code (Lev. 17–26), significant parts of which deal with ritual matters, some interpretations view these statements as merely addressing outdated purity issues, not sin. Furthermore, because the death penalty is indicated, they are dismissed as no longer relevant for the church. Nevertheless, the great majority of the other prohibitions and infractions noted in these chapters address troubling sexual activities (“uncovering the nakedness [’erwat] of . . .”), including incest, adultery, and bestiality, all of which are still clearly unacceptable. Furthermore, Lev. 19 contains significant ethical instructions, many of which reiterate the Ten Commandments. Thus, these texts must not be dismissed too hastily. Outside Leviticus, to’ebah is used of idolatrous worship, sexually immoral acts, and ethical infractions. Activities that are “detestable” cannot be dismissed as simply referring to uncleanness. Finally, the wages of all sin is (not was) death (Rom. 6:23), and that lesson is soberly evident in Lev. 20.

Romans 1:24–32. Paul commences his comprehensive presentation of the saving work of Christ and the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit by declaring that humankind stands utterly condemned (Rom. 1–3). The order that God intended for all creation has been disrupted because the creatures made in his image neither worship nor obey him, exchanging “the truth about God for a lie” (1:25). Thus, God gave them over to sexual impurity that explicitly includes homosexual activity on the part of both genders (1:26–27). Furthermore, the list that follows condemns every reader in every time and place. In every respect, what is commensurate with the knowledge of God has been intentionally rejected. None of these is in any way restricted in its meaning by cultural assumptions.

It is exegetically indefensible to state that Paul here refers only to women and men who are by nature heterosexual but have chosen to engage in homosexual activity. Further, to claim that this has to do only with certain kinds of sexual offenses (child molestation or ritual pagan rites), or that Paul could not have known about loving, committed same-sex relationships, is to underestimate Paul’s grasp of his own culture. There is a significant body of Hellenistic literature that recognizes nurturing homosexual relationships and explores the possible reasons for homoerotic impulses; Paul most likely knew it well. More significantly, these limited interpretations misread the intent of Paul in these chapters and seriously trivialize the matters of sin and grace. The fundamental message toward which Paul moves and that is the source of hope for all humankind is that the terrible price of human sin has been paid in the sacrificial blood of Christ, so that God became both just and the one who justifies (Rom. 3:26).

First Corinthians 6:9–11 (1 Tim. 1:10). The 1 Corinthians passage states that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God and then lists categories of offenders: the sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, “those who are soft” (malakoi), homosexual offenders (arsenokoitai), thieves, the greedy, drunkards, slanderers, swindlers. The word arsenokoitai is made up of two Greek words that indicate “male” and “to lie with sexually.” Because these two words are used in the LXX of Lev. 18:22 (and 20:13), it is quite likely that Paul was specifically interpreting the Leviticus passages for his own audience, indicating that he saw them as still applicable. This clearly indicates that the behavior is reprehensible. The same term reappears in 1 Tim. 1:10 in a list of those who are ungodly and sinful. Again, however, what Paul goes on to say is most important in terms of his message of much needed grace: “And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God” (1 Cor. 6:11).

Hermeneutical Considerations

Instruction regarding homosexual practice transcends specific chronological periods and genres of text. It is not only in the narrative and warning parts of the Torah; Paul repeatedly addresses the issue, particularly as he describes fallen humankind (Rom. 1; 1 Cor. 6; 1 Tim. 1). He does not qualify his descriptions to include only certain kinds of homosexual activity; instead, they are comprehensive. Homosexual practice is without exception represented in the text as morally offensive in God’s sight.

It is often claimed that “Jesus never condemned homosexuality,” and therefore we should not do so. He also, however, never addressed abortion, incest, or other contemporary ills that are reprehensible. On the other hand, he repeatedly affirmed traditional marriage by his references to Gen. 1:27 (“male and female he created them”) and 2:24 (“a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife”) when asked about issues of marriage and divorce (Matt. 19:1–12).

It is essential to note the deep ethical foundation that must shape the lives of all believers. God’s people are “to act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God” (Mic. 6:8). This injunction refers to the redemptive community that enfolds sinners of all stripes. In fact, the truth of the Gospel is a message of hope; it has everything to do with transformation and new life.