A location near Bethel that served as the burial place for Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse (Gen. 35:8). The phrase translates literally as “oak of weeping.”

The firstborn son of Joktan (Gen. 10:26; 1 Chron. 1:20), who lived in a territory in North Arabia.

A tree found in Palestine as early as patriarchal times producing an edible nut and mild oil. It is among the first of flowering trees to bloom in the spring, with blossoms appearing before leaves. The Hebrew word (shaqed ) implies “watching,” “hastening,” or “awakening.” Jacob sent almond delicacies to Joseph in Egypt (Gen. 43:11). The almond-tree design of the seven-branched lampstands of the tabernacle and later the tabernacle (Exod. 25:33–34; 37:19–20) included almond blossoms on its “stems” and “bowls” fashioned after the same flower. Aaron’s rod budded, blossomed, and produced ripe almonds (Num. 17:8). In a play on words, God showed Jeremiah an almond branch as a symbol of the dependability of divine forwardness. God was watching and about to act, fulfilling his promises to punish the unfaithfulness of the people (Jer. 1:11–12). The usual allegorical interpretation of “the almond tree blossoms” (Eccles. 12:5) is a reference to an elderly person’s hair turning white like the almond tree.

Altars were places of sacrifice and worship constructed of various materials. They could be either temporary or permanent. Some altars were in the open air; others were set apart in a holy place. They could symbolize either God’s presense and protection or false worship that would lead to God’s judgment.

Old Testament

Noah and the patriarchs. The first reference in the Bible is to an altar built by Noah after the flood (Gen. 8:20). This action suggests the sanctuary character of the mountain on which the ark landed, so that theologically the ark’s resting place was a (partial) return to Eden. The purpose of the extra clean animals loaded onto the ark was revealed (cf. 7:2–3). They were offered up as “burnt offerings,” symbolizing self-dedication to God at this point of new beginning for the human race.

Abram built altars “to the Lord” at places where God appeared and spoke to him (Gen. 12:7) and where he encamped (12:8; 13:3–4, 18). No sacrifice is explicitly mentioned in association with these altars. Thus, they may have had the character of monuments or memorials of significant events. In association with Abram’s altars, he is said to have “called on the name of the Lord” (12:8)—that is, to pray. The elaborate cultic procedures associated with later Israelite altars (e.g., the mediation of priests) were absent in the patriarchal period. Succeeding generations followed the same practices: Isaac (26:25) and Jacob (33:20; 34:1, 3, 7). God’s test of Abraham involved the demand that he sacrifice his son Isaac as a burnt offering. In obedience, Abraham built an altar for this purpose, but through God’s intervention a reprieve was granted, and a ram was substituted (22:9, 13). Moses erected an altar after the defeat of Amalek at Rephidim, to commemorate this God-given victory (Exod. 17:15–16).

Moses and the tabernacle. In the context of making the covenant with Israel at Sinai, God gave Moses instructions on how to construct an altar (Exod. 20:24–26; cf. Josh. 8:31). It could be “an altar of earth” (of sun-dried mud-brick construction?) or else made of loose natural stones. The Israelites were expressly forbidden to use hewn stones, perhaps for fear of an idolatrous image being carved (making this prohibition an application of Exod. 20:4; cf. Deut. 27:5–6). Even if the altar was large, it was not to be supplied with steps for the priest to ascend, lest his nakedness be shown to God. The requirement that priests wear undergarments reflects the same concern (Exod. 28:42–43). An altar made of twelve stones, the number representing the number of the tribes of Israel, was built by Moses for the covenant-making ceremony (Exod. 24:4), in which half the blood of the sacrifice was sprinkled on the altar (representing God?) and the other half on the people, the action symbolizing the covenant bond created (24:6–8).

For the tabernacle, a portable “altar of burnt offering” was made (Exod. 27:1–8; 38:1–7). It had wooden frames sheathed in bronze and featured a horn at each corner. There was a ledge around the altar halfway up its sides, from which was hung bronze grating, and it had four bronze rings into which poles were slipped for transport. As part of the cultic ritual, blood was smeared on the horns (29:12). This altar stood in the open air in the courtyard of the tabernacle, near the entrance to the tabernacle. Included among the tabernacle furnishings was a smaller “altar of incense,” with molding around the top rim (30:1–10; 37:25–28). This altar was, however, overlaid with gold, for it stood closer to God’s ritual presence, inside the tabernacle, “in front of the curtain that shields the Ark of the Covenant law,” the curtain that separated the most holy place from the holy place. The high priest placed fragrant incense on this altar every morning and evening. The fact that this was a daily procedure and the description of the positioning of the tabernacle furnishings in Exod. 40:26–28 (mentioning the altar of incense after speaking about the lampstand) might be taken as implying that the incense altar was in the holy place, but 1 Kings 6:22 and Heb. 9:4 suggest that it was actually in the most holy place, near the ark.

God, through Moses, instructed the people that on entering the Promised Land they were to destroy all Canaanite altars along with the other paraphernalia of their pagan worship (Deut. 7:5; 12:3). Bronze Age altars discovered at Megiddo include horned limestone incense altars and a large circular altar mounted by a flight of steps. In Josh. 22 the crisis caused by the building of “an imposing altar” by the Transjordanian tribes was averted when these tribes explained to the rest of the Israelites that it was intended as a replica of the altar outside the tabernacle and not for the offering of sacrifices. The worship of all Israel at the one sanctuary both expressed and protected the religious unity and purity of the nation at this vital early stage of occupation of the land. In later narratives, however, Gideon (Judg. 6), Samuel (1 Sam. 7:17), Saul (1 Sam. 14:35), and David (2 Sam. 24) are said to build altars for sacrifice and to have done so with impunity, and in fact with the apparent approval of the biblical author. The established custom of seeking sanctuary from threat of death in the nation’s shrine is reflected in 1 Kings 1:50–53; 2:28–35, where Adonijah and Joab are described as “clinging to the horns of the altar.”

Solomon’s temple and rival worship centers. In the temple built by Solomon, the altar of incense that belonged to the “inner sanctuary” was overlaid with gold (1 Kings 6:20, 22). Solomon’s prayer at the dedication of the temple was made before the bronze altar in the courtyard (1 Kings 8:22, 54). The altar for sacrifices was much larger than the one that had been in the tabernacle (1 Chron. 4:1 gives its dimensions).

Although many of the psalms may originally have been used in worship in the first temple, there are surprisingly few references to the altar in the Psalter (only Pss. 26:6; 43:4; 51:19; 84:3; 118:27). They express the psalmist’s devotion to God and the temple as the place where God’s presence is enjoyed as the highest blessing.

After the division of the kingdom, Jeroboam offered sacrifices at the rival altar that he set up in Bethel (1 Kings 12:32–33). An unnamed “man of God” (= prophet) predicted Josiah’s desecration of this altar, which lay many years in the future (1 Kings 13:1–5). Amos and Hosea, who prophesied in the northern kingdom of the eighth century BC, condemned this and the other altars in that kingdom (e.g., Amos 3:14; Hos. 8:11–13). Ahab set up an altar to Baal in Samaria (1 Kings 16:32), and the suppression of Yahwism by Jezebel included the throwing down of the Lord’s altars in Israel (19:10, 14). The competition on Mount Carmel between Elijah and the prophets of Baal involved rival altars (1 Kings 18), and Elijah’s twelve-stone altar recalls that of Exod. 24, for he was calling the nation back to the exclusive monotheism preached by Moses (1 Kings 18:30–32).

With regard to the southern kingdom, the spiritual declension in the time of Ahaz manifested itself in this king making an altar modeled on the Assyrian prototype that he had seen on a visit to Damascus (2 Kings 16:10–14). He shifted the Lord’s altar from in front of the temple, where it had previously stood. Godly Hezekiah’s religious reform included the removal of the altars at the high places that up to that time had been centers of deviant worship (2 Kings 18:4, 22). The apostasy of King Manasseh showed itself in his rebuilding the high places that Hezekiah his father had destroyed and in erecting altars to Baal (2 Kings 21), thus repeating the sin of Ahab (cf. 1 Kings 16:32). Josiah’s reform included the destruction of all altars outside Jerusalem (2 Kings 23) and the centralizing of worship in the Jerusalem temple.

In Ezekiel’s vision of the new temple of the future, the sacrificial altar is its centerpiece (Ezek. 43:13–17). The altar was to be a large structure, with three-stepped stages and a horn on each corner, and it was to be fitted with steps on its eastern side for the use of the priests.

The second temple. The Israelites’ return from Babylonian exile was with the express aim of rebuilding the temple. The first thing that the priests did was to build “the altar on its foundation” (i.e., its original base; Ezra 3:2–3). The returnees placed the altar on the precise spot that it had occupied before the Babylonians destroyed it along with the temple. They took such care because they wanted to ensure that God would accept their sacrifices and so grant them protection. At the very end of the OT period, the prophet Malachi condemned the insincerity of Israel’s worship that was manifested in substandard sacrifices being offered on God’s altar (Mal. 1:7, 10; 2:13).

New Testament

In the NT, the altar is mentioned in a number of Jesus’ sayings (e.g., Matt. 5:23–24; 23:18–20). In the theology of the book of Hebrews, which teaches about the priesthood of Jesus Christ (in the order of Melchizedek), the role of the priest is defined as one who “serve[s] at the altar” (7:13), and Christ’s altar (and that of Christ’s followers) is the cross on which he offered himself as a sacrifice for sin (13:10). Another argument of Hebrews is that since on the most important day in the Jewish ritual calendar (the Day of Atonement), the flesh of the sacrifice was not eaten (see Lev. 16:27), the eating of Jewish ceremonial foods is not required, nor is it of any spiritual value. The altar in the heavenly sanctuary is mentioned a number of times in the book of Revelation (6:9; 8:3, 5; 9:13; 11:1; 14:18; 16:7). It is most likely the altar of incense and is related to the prayers of God’s persecuted people, which are answered by the judgments of God upon the people of the earth.

An Edomite chief from the genealogical line of Esau (Gen. 36:40; 1 Chron. 1:51). At 1 Chron. 1:51 the NRSV and NASB use the variant name “Aliah.”

The firstborn son of Shobal, a Horite clan chief from the genealogical line of Seir (Gen. 36:23; 1 Chron. 1:40). At 1 Chron. 1:40 the NRSV and NASB use the variant name “Alian.”

The Amalekites inhabited the Negev territory south of Judah (Num. 13:29). Amalek is described as “first among the nations” (Num. 24:20 [cf. 1 Sam. 27:8]); indeed, one story about it is set prior to the lifetime of its eponymous ancestor, Amalek (Gen. 14:7). The OT represents the Amalekites as descended from Esau and thus related to the Edomites (Gen. 36:12, 16). Several texts refer to “the Amalekites and Canaanites,” suggesting that the former were not considered a Canaanite people (e.g., Num. 14:45).

The history of relations between the Amalekites and the Israelites is one of perpetual hostility. The Amalekites attacked the Israelites shortly after the Red Sea crossing. The outcome of the battle included a declaration of perpetual war between the Amalekites and the God of Israel (Exod. 17:8–16; Deut. 25:17–19). There were several subsequent conflicts (Num. 14:45; Judg. 3:13; 6:3, 33; 7:12; 10:12), continuing in the campaigns of Saul (1 Sam. 15:1–9) and David (1 Sam. 27:8; 30:16–20).

The final chapter in the historic struggle between Israel and the Amalekites is Mordecai and Esther’s confrontation with Haman, who is identified as an “Agagite”—that is, a descendant of Agag, the Amalekite king spared by Saul (Esther 3:1; cf. 1 Sam. 15:8).

The Amalekites inhabited the Negev territory south of Judah (Num. 13:29). Amalek is described as “first among the nations” (Num. 24:20 [cf. 1 Sam. 27:8]); indeed, one story about it is set prior to the lifetime of its eponymous ancestor, Amalek (Gen. 14:7). The OT represents the Amalekites as descended from Esau and thus related to the Edomites (Gen. 36:12, 16). Several texts refer to “the Amalekites and Canaanites,” suggesting that the former were not considered a Canaanite people (e.g., Num. 14:45).

The history of relations between the Amalekites and the Israelites is one of perpetual hostility. The Amalekites attacked the Israelites shortly after the Red Sea crossing. The outcome of the battle included a declaration of perpetual war between the Amalekites and the God of Israel (Exod. 17:8–16; Deut. 25:17–19). There were several subsequent conflicts (Num. 14:45; Judg. 3:13; 6:3, 33; 7:12; 10:12), continuing in the campaigns of Saul (1 Sam. 15:1–9) and David (1 Sam. 27:8; 30:16–20).

The final chapter in the historic struggle between Israel and the Amalekites is Mordecai and Esther’s confrontation with Haman, who is identified as an “Agagite”—that is, a descendant of Agag, the Amalekite king spared by Saul (Esther 3:1; cf. 1 Sam. 15:8).

Ben-Ammi was the son of Abraham’s nephew Lot and the younger of Lot’s two daughters (Gen. 19:36–38). He is represented as the ancestor of the Ammonites, a Transjordanian people who were a perennial threat to Israel from the wilderness period through to David’s reign.

The nation of Ammon was located east of the Jordan, just north of the Dead Sea. Its capital was Rabbah, and it bordered Gad to the west, the half-tribe of Manasseh to the northwest, and Moab to the south (see also Deut. 3:16). Much of the source of their contention was over the fertile land of Gilead, which encompassed the Jordan River and bordered Ephraim, the western tribe of Manasseh, Benjamin, and Judah.

The exodus and the period of the judges. According to the biblical record, while moving to enter Canaan, Moses and the Israelites avoided Amman (Rabbah) and marched through Sihon instead (Num. 21:24–35). Later the Israelites were told explicitly not to attack the Ammonites, for that territory was given to the descendants of Lot (Deut. 2:19, 37).

The first conflict between the Ammonites and the Israelites is recorded in Judg. 3:13, where the Moabite king Eglon was allied with the Ammonites (and the Amalekites) against Ehud. In Judg. 10:6–7 the Israelites are punished for their idolatry by being put under the thumb of the Philistines and the Ammonites. Jephthah led the Gileadites against the Ammonites, who had provoked them to battle. This story is perhaps better known with respect to Jephthah’s fateful oath to Yahweh to offer up as a burnt offering whatever came out of his door if Yahweh would give him victory over the Ammonites (Judg. 11). It was his daughter who came out to meet him. In Judg. 12 the Ephraimites voiced their displeasure at not having been asked to join in the battle, so they came to Jephthah, threatening to burn his house down. Jephthah responded that he did call but they did not come. A battle ensued between them, which sparked the famous shibboleth/sibboleth incident, in which Jephthah’s forces could identify Ephraimite opponents by their inability to pronounce the sh.

The monarchy. During the early monarchic period, the Ammonite king Nahash besieged Jabesh of Gilead. Rather than negotiate, the Ammonites demanded that the right eye of every Jabeshite male be put out. They appealed to Saul for help, who came and slaughtered many and scattered the rest (1 Sam. 11:1–11). Saul’s act was remembered kindly when, after his death at the hand of the Philistines, the men of Jabesh brought back the bodies of Saul and his sons, burned them, buried the remains, and fasted for seven days (31:11–13). In 1 Sam. 12:12 Samuel refers to the Nahash incident as the impetus for the Israelites’ desire to be ruled by a king.

In 2 Sam. 10–12 David conquers the Am­mon­ite capital of Rabbah, under the rule of Hanun son of Nahash (see also 1 Chron. 19:1–20:3). This is the context in which David’s affair with Bathsheba took place (2 Sam. 11–12). Uriah, her husband, was killed while attacking Rabbah. During the revolt by his son Absalom, David was given material aid from several sources, one of which was “Shobi son of Nahash from Rabbah of the Ammonites” (2 Sam. 17:27).

Solomon’s marriages to foreign wives included Ammonites (1 Kings 11:1). As a result, Solomon followed the foreign gods, including “Molek the detestable god of the Ammonites” (11:5). It is not mentioned how many Ammonite wives Solomon had, but one of them, Naamah, was the mother of Rehoboam, the first king of Judah during the divided kingdom (14:31).

The divided kingdom. Later, during the divided monarchy, the Ammonites appear again. Ammon, Moab, and Edom formed a coalition against Jehoshaphat king of Judah (2 Chron. 20:1–30). Jehoshaphat was victorious with God’s assistance. Likewise, during the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah, a coalition of Babylonian, Aramean, Moabite, and Ammonite forces attacked him, although this time it was at God’s direction because “he did evil in the eyes of the Lord, just as his predecessors had done” (2 Kings 23:36–24:6). According to 2 Chron. 26:8; 27:5, the Ammonites had earlier brought tribute to Uzziah and his son Josiah.

The Ammonites appear on the scene again just before the fall of Judah. During the reign of Zedekiah, a coalition of several nations including Ammon was thwarted by God through Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (Jer. 27:1–7).

The exilic and postexilic periods. Am­mon­ite opposition to Judah continued. According to Jer. 41:10, 15, governor Gedaliah’s assassin found refuge among the Ammonites. Later, under Nehemiah, the Ammonites actively resisted the rebuilding of Jerusalem (Neh. 4:1–3). In the postbiblical period, the Ammonites are mentioned as those among whom Jason, who slaughtered his fellow citizens, was given refuge (1 Macc. 4:26; 5:7).

In addition to the historical books, the Ammonites are mentioned numerous times in the prophetic books. Isaiah predicts that Ephraim and Judah will together “swoop down” and subject Edom, Moab, and the Ammonites (11:14). Jeremiah prophesies against them at some length (49:1–6), mainly because of the worship of Molek, although God will “restore the fortunes of the Ammonites” (v. 6). Likewise, Ezekiel prophesies the destruction of Ammon (21:28–32; 25:1–7, 10).

Eventually, Rabbah became a shell of its former self (see Jer. 25:5) and was rebuilt by Ptolemy II Philadelphus (285–246 BC), who renamed the city “Philadelphia.” It became a city of the Decapolis (a group of ten Greek cities [see Matt. 4:25; Mark 5:20; 7:31]).

Ben-Ammi was the son of Abraham’s nephew Lot and the younger of Lot’s two daughters (Gen. 19:36–38). He is represented as the ancestor of the Ammonites, a Transjordanian people who were a perennial threat to Israel from the wilderness period through to David’s reign.

The nation of Ammon was located east of the Jordan, just north of the Dead Sea. Its capital was Rabbah, and it bordered Gad to the west, the half-tribe of Manasseh to the northwest, and Moab to the south (see also Deut. 3:16). Much of the source of their contention was over the fertile land of Gilead, which encompassed the Jordan River and bordered Ephraim, the western tribe of Manasseh, Benjamin, and Judah.

The exodus and the period of the judges. According to the biblical record, while moving to enter Canaan, Moses and the Israelites avoided Amman (Rabbah) and marched through Sihon instead (Num. 21:24–35). Later the Israelites were told explicitly not to attack the Ammonites, for that territory was given to the descendants of Lot (Deut. 2:19, 37).

The first conflict between the Ammonites and the Israelites is recorded in Judg. 3:13, where the Moabite king Eglon was allied with the Ammonites (and the Amalekites) against Ehud. In Judg. 10:6–7 the Israelites are punished for their idolatry by being put under the thumb of the Philistines and the Ammonites. Jephthah led the Gileadites against the Ammonites, who had provoked them to battle. This story is perhaps better known with respect to Jephthah’s fateful oath to Yahweh to offer up as a burnt offering whatever came out of his door if Yahweh would give him victory over the Ammonites (Judg. 11). It was his daughter who came out to meet him. In Judg. 12 the Ephraimites voiced their displeasure at not having been asked to join in the battle, so they came to Jephthah, threatening to burn his house down. Jephthah responded that he did call but they did not come. A battle ensued between them, which sparked the famous shibboleth/sibboleth incident, in which Jephthah’s forces could identify Ephraimite opponents by their inability to pronounce the sh.

The monarchy. During the early monarchic period, the Ammonite king Nahash besieged Jabesh of Gilead. Rather than negotiate, the Ammonites demanded that the right eye of every Jabeshite male be put out. They appealed to Saul for help, who came and slaughtered many and scattered the rest (1 Sam. 11:1–11). Saul’s act was remembered kindly when, after his death at the hand of the Philistines, the men of Jabesh brought back the bodies of Saul and his sons, burned them, buried the remains, and fasted for seven days (31:11–13). In 1 Sam. 12:12 Samuel refers to the Nahash incident as the impetus for the Israelites’ desire to be ruled by a king.

In 2 Sam. 10–12 David conquers the Am­mon­ite capital of Rabbah, under the rule of Hanun son of Nahash (see also 1 Chron. 19:1–20:3). This is the context in which David’s affair with Bathsheba took place (2 Sam. 11–12). Uriah, her husband, was killed while attacking Rabbah. During the revolt by his son Absalom, David was given material aid from several sources, one of which was “Shobi son of Nahash from Rabbah of the Ammonites” (2 Sam. 17:27).

Solomon’s marriages to foreign wives included Ammonites (1 Kings 11:1). As a result, Solomon followed the foreign gods, including “Molek the detestable god of the Ammonites” (11:5). It is not mentioned how many Ammonite wives Solomon had, but one of them, Naamah, was the mother of Rehoboam, the first king of Judah during the divided kingdom (14:31).

The divided kingdom. Later, during the divided monarchy, the Ammonites appear again. Ammon, Moab, and Edom formed a coalition against Jehoshaphat king of Judah (2 Chron. 20:1–30). Jehoshaphat was victorious with God’s assistance. Likewise, during the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah, a coalition of Babylonian, Aramean, Moabite, and Ammonite forces attacked him, although this time it was at God’s direction because “he did evil in the eyes of the Lord, just as his predecessors had done” (2 Kings 23:36–24:6). According to 2 Chron. 26:8; 27:5, the Ammonites had earlier brought tribute to Uzziah and his son Josiah.

The Ammonites appear on the scene again just before the fall of Judah. During the reign of Zedekiah, a coalition of several nations including Ammon was thwarted by God through Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (Jer. 27:1–7).

The exilic and postexilic periods. Am­mon­ite opposition to Judah continued. According to Jer. 41:10, 15, governor Gedaliah’s assassin found refuge among the Ammonites. Later, under Nehemiah, the Ammonites actively resisted the rebuilding of Jerusalem (Neh. 4:1–3). In the postbiblical period, the Ammonites are mentioned as those among whom Jason, who slaughtered his fellow citizens, was given refuge (1 Macc. 4:26; 5:7).

In addition to the historical books, the Ammonites are mentioned numerous times in the prophetic books. Isaiah predicts that Ephraim and Judah will together “swoop down” and subject Edom, Moab, and the Ammonites (11:14). Jeremiah prophesies against them at some length (49:1–6), mainly because of the worship of Molek, although God will “restore the fortunes of the Ammonites” (v. 6). Likewise, Ezekiel prophesies the destruction of Ammon (21:28–32; 25:1–7, 10).

Eventually, Rabbah became a shell of its former self (see Jer. 25:5) and was rebuilt by Ptolemy II Philadelphus (285–246 BC), who renamed the city “Philadelphia.” It became a city of the Decapolis (a group of ten Greek cities [see Matt. 4:25; Mark 5:20; 7:31]).

One of the nations that occupied part of Canaan and the Transjordan (by the Jordan River) before Israel’s conquest. They appear in lists of the peoples (up to ten) occupying Canaan (e.g., Gen. 15:21; Exod. 3:8, 17; 23:23; Neh. 9:8). According to the Table of Nations (Gen. 10), they are descendants of Canaan, one of the sons of Ham. This territory was conquered by Abram and his forces (Gen. 14), and in fact Abram was living “near the great trees of Mamre the Amorite” (14:13). Later the Israelites remain enslaved for four generations because the sin of the Amorites has not reached its full measure (15:16).

The name is of Akkadian origin (amurru) and refers to the western portion of Mesopotamia. By the end of the third millennium BC, Amorites were abundant in Mesopotamian cities, which eventually led to Amorite control over Babylon around 2000–1595 BC. During this time Babylonian kings had Amorite names, one of whom was the famous Hammurabi (1792–1750 BC).

The Amorites were constantly in conflict with the Israelites. They were to be driven out of Canaan, along with the other Canaanite peoples (Exod. 23:23; 33:2). In Num. 21:21 the Amorites are mentioned as one nation through which Israel would need to go in order to reach Canaan. King Sihon refused, a war ensued, and the Israelites were victorious and settled in the land of the Amorites (Num. 21:31).

The Amorites are mentioned numerous times throughout the OT. At times, the name simply represents the general population of Canaan (like “Canaanites” [e.g., Josh. 24:15]). This illustrates that throughout much of the biblical period Amorites were not so much a specific ethnic or cultural designation, but had become assimilated into the general Canaanite population. This Amorite and mixed influence on Israel is expressed at length in Ezekiel’s allegory of unfaithful Jerusalem (Ezek. 16, esp. vv. 3, 45).

A member of a coalition of four kings who raided Canaan during Abraham’s lifetime (Gen. 14:1, 9). They defeated five local kings, plundered the area, and kidnapped Lot along with some other people. According to Gen. 14, Abraham set out and defeated these kings, recovered the plunder, and rescued Lot and the other captives. Amraphel was king of Shinar (i.e., Babylon). At one time, Amraphel was thought to be the famous Hammurabi, an early king of Babylon, but today this identification is doubted. He may be an obscure minor king from the area of Babylon predating Hammurabi.

(1) One of the sons of Zibeon, he was the father of Oholibamah, one of the wives of Esau (Gen. 36:2; 1 Chron. 1:40). Anah is credited with a discovery in the wilderness (Gen. 36:24). What he discovered is subject to debate (NIV, NASB: “hot springs”; KJV: “mules”; others suggest “spirits in the form of serpents”). (2) One of the seven sons of Seir, and a chief among the Horites (Gen. 36:20, 29; 1 Chron. 1:38, 41). The relationship between these two men named “Anah” is unclear due to textual difficulties.

The descendants of Anak, the Anakites (NRSV: “Anakim”), known for their height (Deut. 2:10, 21; 9:2), inhabited the Judean hill country when Israelite spies entered the land (Num. 13:21–33; Deut. 1:28). The spies viewed them as Nephilim (Num. 13:33; cf. Gen. 6:4). Arba, a hero among the Anakites, gave his name to Kiriath Arba (Josh. 14:15), later Hebron (Josh. 15:13–14; Judg. 1:20). The Anakites were related to the Rephaites, originally from the regions of Moab and Ammon but destroyed by the time of the conquest (Deut. 2:10–11, 20–21). After Joshua completely destroyed Anakite habitations in the hill country, remnants moved westward and lived in the Philistine cities of Gaza, Gath, and Ashdod (Josh. 11:21–22).

One of the sons of Mizraim (Gen. 10:13) and a grandson of Ham. The descendants of Ham became the peoples of North Africa and may be equated with Cyrene in modern-day Libya.

One of the sons of Mizraim (Gen. 10:13) and a grandson of Ham. The descendants of Ham became the peoples of North Africa and may be equated with Cyrene in modern-day Libya.

There are thirteen primary genealogical lists in the OT and two in the NT, although there are numerous passages that include more limited lineages to identify an individual. Genealogical lists could also function to engender a notion of commonality of relationship outside single family lines, such as when extended family genealogies are given (Gen. 10; 25:12–18; 36:1–30). For priests and kings, it was of utmost importance to be able to establish ancestral identity. This necessity may have played a role in at least two discussions of Jesus. His genealogical lists in both Matt. 1 and Luke 3 established his claim to the line of David, and his spiritual ancestry in the person of Melchizedek in Heb. 7 granted him superior status to the priesthood of Levi.

Worship of ancestors, or the related but distinct cult of the dead, was common in nearly every culture with which Israel interacted and may have even found expression in popular practice among Israelites, as evidenced by the apparent leaving of gifts at several tomb locations throughout Palestine (cf. Ezek. 43:7–9). However, the biblical record is consistent throughout that such practices were prohibited. Among laws centered on the topic of ancestral worship were restrictions on consulting the dead at all (Deut. 18:11), giving offerings to the dead (Deut. 26:14), self-laceration for the dead (Deut. 14:1; Jer. 16:6), and seeking ancestors to foretell the future (Isa. 8:19; 65:4–8).

(1) An Amorite chief who allied himself with Abraham in the pursuit of the four kings who invaded Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. 14:13, 24). (2) A Levitical town allotted to the Kohathites from among the tribe of Manasseh (1 Chron. 6:70).

The English word “angel” refers to nonhuman spirits, usually good. The biblical words usually translated “angel” (Heb. malak; Gk. angelos) mean “messenger” and can refer to one sent by God or by human beings. A messenger must be utterly loyal, reliable, and able to act confidentially (Prov. 13:17). The messenger speaks and acts in the name of the sender (Gen. 24).

Messengers sent by God are not always angels. Yahweh’s prophets were his messengers (Hag. 1:13), as were priests (Mal. 2:7).

Old Testament

There are few references to angels (plural) in the OT. In heaven they praise God and worship him (Pss. 103:20; 148:2). God sends his angels to accompany his people (Gen. 28:12; 32:1) and to protect them (Ps. 91:11) and once sent them to destroy Egypt (Ps. 78:49).

An angel in human form was referred to as a “man of God” (Judg. 13:6), the same term used for a prophet (cf. 1 Kings 13:14).

Angels evoked fear and wonder. They are described as shining (Matt. 28:3; Acts 12:7). When humans bowed to worship angels, they were rebuked because God alone is to be worshiped (Rev. 22:8–9).

God himself, not being a part of the created order, cannot be seen. In order to communicate with people, he sometimes speaks through a form called “the angel of the Lord.” The angel of the Lord appeared to Abraham in human form (Gen. 18; cf. Josh. 5:13–15), but to Moses as fire (Exod. 3:2). When he spoke, it was God speaking (Exod. 3:4, 14). He guided and guarded Israel out of Egypt and through the desert (23:20–23). He appeared within the pillar of fire or cloud (13:21–22; 14:19), being seen through the pillar on occasion as “the glory of the Lord” (16:7–10; 24:16–17; 33:9–11; 40:17, 34–38), and later as he filled Solomon’s temple (1 Kings 8:11).

In a series of visions of the glory of the Lord (Ps. 18:7–15; Ezek. 1; Rev. 4:7) we encounter four “living creatures” called “cherubim” (Ezek. 10:20–22) that are not explicitly identified as angels and whose visible appearance is part human and part animal. Their form was placed on the cover of the Ark of the Covenant (Exod. 25:18) and embroidered on the curtains of the tabernacle (26:1). Cherubim guarded the eastern entry into the garden of Eden (Gen. 3:24), implying that Eden, the place where God appeared on earth, was now excluded from the area allocated to humankind.

In Isaiah’s vision of God’s glory, he describes, literally, “flaming ones” (Heb. seraphim) located above God and crying, “Holy, holy, holy” (Isa. 6:1–7). All we know of them is that they had six wings, whereas the cherubim had four (Ezek. 1:11). It may be that seraphim are not a separate class of angels but simply a description appropriate to all angels, since elsewhere we are told (Ps. 104:4; Heb. 1:7) that God’s angels are “flames of fire.”

Angels are also called “holy ones” (Deut. 33:2) and “spirits” or “winds” (Zech. 6:5; cf. Ps. 104:4). Since God’s people are also called “holy ones” (Dan. 7:27; NIV: “holy people”), it may be difficult to know if a given reference is to angels or people (e.g., Deut. 33:3).

Angels are first named in the book of Daniel: Gabriel, whose name means “hero of God” (8:16; 9:21; [cf. Luke 1:19, 26]); Michael, whose name means “who is like God?” (10:13, 21; 12:1 [cf. Jude 9; Rev. 12:7]) and who is also called “one of the chief princes,” “your prince,” and “the great prince.” The Hebrew word for “prince” (sar) also means “commander” (e.g., 1 Sam. 17:55) and thus might refer to Michael’s standing as a commander of God’s angelic armies (cf. Jude 9, where he is called “archangel”). During the intertestamental period, texts outside the Scriptures tend to give more attention to angels in elaborate stories, introducing such names as Raphael and Uriel (see Tobit, 1 Enoch, etc.).

Intertestamental Period and New Testament

During the intertestamental period some Jews came to think that angels ranked higher than humans, since the Greeks asserted that anything physical was evil and only purely spiritual beings could be holy. Increasingly detailed stories about angels served to distance God from the evils of physical reality. The myth of the fall of the angels arose during this time through a series of writings claiming to come from the pen of Enoch (1 Enoch), stimulating a large number of other writings. Some people even went so far as to worship angels (Col. 2:18).

Some references to angels are difficult to understand. In Matt. 18:10 Jesus warns people to treat children well because their angels have constant access to God. The simplest meaning is that angelic messengers will tell God what has happened with these children. Rhoda’s reference to Peter’s “angel” as if it were his ghost probably reflects a local superstition (Acts 12:15) or a sectarian Jewish belief that the righteous become angels when they die. Paul’s comment that a woman should have “authority over her own head” (i.e., her head covered) “because of the angels” (1 Cor. 11:10) remains something of a puzzle, and his unique reference to the language of angels appears to be hyperbole (1 Cor. 13:1).

Paul warns us that Satan can appear as “an angel of light,” meaning that he would work through one who claimed to bring a message in accord with the gospel (2 Cor. 11:14). The devil has his “angels/messengers” (Matt. 25:41), although we know little about them.

Angels do not marry, reproduce, or die (Matt. 22:30; Mark 12:25; Luke 20:35–36). The NT affirms that angels rank below God’s people and serve them (1 Cor. 6:3; Heb.1:4–14; 2:5, 16), as they did Jesus (Matt. 4:11; Mark 1:13; cf. 1 Kings 19:5–7; Luke 22:43). Angels have limited understanding or knowledge of God’s plans and purposes (1 Pet. 1:12), although they reveal God’s word (Rev. 1:1). They bring the spirits of God’s people to heaven when they die (Luke 16:22) and implement God’s judgment on the last day (Matt. 13:39, 49; 16:27; 24:31; 25:31; Mark 8:38; 13:27; Luke 9:26; 2 Thess. 1:7; Rev. 14:15–19). They rejoice when a sinner repents (Luke 15:10). Christians already stand in the greater assembly that includes the angels (Heb.12:22). Eventually, Jesus will welcome his people into the heavenly courtroom in the presence of the angels (Luke 12:8–9; Rev. 3:5). See also Archangel.

The words “wrath” and “anger” are used in Bible translations for a variety of Hebrew and Greek words that refer to the disposition of someone (including God) toward persons (including oneself [Gen. 45:5]) or situations considered to be seriously displeasing. There may be degrees of anger (Zech. 1:15), and it may be accompanied by other sentiments such as distress (Gen. 45:5), hatred (Job 16:9), jealousy (Rom. 10:19), grief (Mark 3:5), and vengeance (Mic. 5:15).

Anger may be a proper response to sin or a sin-distorted world, as seen in, for example, Moses’ reaction to the golden calf (Exod. 32:19). Paul envisages an anger that does not necessarily involve sin (Eph. 4:26). Jesus is said to display anger at the willful stubbornness of his contemporaries (Mark 3:5), and his response to the mourning for Lazarus (John 11:33) might be rendered as “outrage,” an anger directed not so much at the mourners as at the ugliness of death, the consequence of sin, and with thoughts, perhaps, of his own impending death necessitated by this fallen world.

On the other hand, a display of anger may be the result of distorted perceptions or values (Gen. 4:5–6). A tendency to anger in oneself needs to be kept in check (James 1:19) and in others needs to be handled prudently (Prov. 15:1). Unchecked, anger may lead to violence and murder (Gen. 49:6). In several NT lists anger is associated with such other sinful behavior as quarreling, jealousy, selfishness, slander, malice, gossip, conceit, strife, idolatry, sorcery, and bitterness (2 Cor. 12:20; Gal. 5:20; Eph. 4:31; Col. 3:8).

In Ps. 76:10 NLT (cf. ESV, NASB, NRSV) God is said to cause human anger to bring him praise (but see NIV, NET, where it is God’s wrath against human beings that brings him praise). Perhaps an instance of this is seen in Rom. 13:4–5, where the wrath of the civil authority serves to maintain justice under God.

The Bible does not offer a charter of animal rights, but the Mosaic law does require what the rabbis call Tsa’ar Ba’alei Chayim, a prohibition against unnecessarily inflicting pain and suffering on animals. The ox is entitled to food while it works (Deut. 25:4), a principle that Jesus and Paul apply to human beings (Matt. 10:10; Luke 10:7; 1 Tim. 5:18), and along with other livestock, a Sabbath every seventh day and year (Exod. 20:8–10; 23:12; Lev. 25:6–7; Deut. 5:14). An ox or sheep could be sacrificed only after remaining seven days with its mother (Lev. 23:26–27). Killing an ox or sheep and her young on the same day is not permitted (Lev. 23:28). Taking the mother along with the young or eggs from a nest is not permitted (Deut. 22:6–7). The law actually begins with the ideal setting of a garden, in which human beings and animals do not eat one another but rather live in peaceful harmony (Gen. 2:19–20). At the root of these laws is reverence for all life: “The righteous care for the needs [lit., ‘life’] of their animals” (Prov. 12:10). Jesus teaches that not a single sparrow is forgotten by or dies apart from the Father (Matt. 10:29; Luke 12:6). At the time, sparrows were bought and sold in the market as economic commodities, a cheap treat. The singular sacrifice of Jesus Christ has saved not only human beings but also countless lives of would-be sacrificial victims.

Animals play a significant role in both their literal presence in the biblical texts and in their figurative uses. From the beginning of creation, animals were placed under the dominion and care of humanity. The Bible is careful to highlight that humankind is a creation superior to animals and also has a responsibility to see to the betterment of the animal kingdom (Gen. 1:28–30; 2:19–20; Deut. 25:4). Furthermore, the biblical record goes to some lengths to describe the proper means by which humans and animals ought to function in this world and what lines ought not to be crossed (Exod. 22:19; Lev. 18:23; Deut. 27:21).

Regarding the consumption of animals, Genesis suggests that such was not the case before the flood (cf. 1:30 with 9:3). Scripture separates animals into those that are unclean, those that are clean, and those that are permissible to be used in offerings. Although the rationale for such distinctions has been the subject of considerable discussion for some time among scholars, the similarities between their divisions and those of humanity (Gentile, Israelite, and priest) may suggest that God utilized the animal kingdom and Israel’s interaction with it as an ongoing reminder of Israel’s greater role in the world of humanity. Other proposed rationales for distinguishing between clean and unclean animals include protection of health, abstinence from pagan practices, the symbolic nature of the animal’s activities for desirable or unpleasant qualities, and the regulations being simply a test of Israel’s faithfulness. Whatever the specific reason, it is clear that God intended the food laws to function more generally as a means of separating Israel from the world (Lev. 11).

Occasionally in the prophetic literature and more regularly in apocalyptic texts, animals serve a symbolic purpose in terms of either their physical characteristics or the demeanor that they exuded (e.g., Isa. 30:6). The lion early on became a symbol of strength and ferocity and so was utilized as a picture of the tribe of Judah, Satan, powerful enemies, and even God (Gen. 49:9; Amos 3:8; Nah. 2:11–12; 1 Pet. 5:8; Rev. 5:5). The lamb was alternately used as a symbol of innocence, sacrifice, and naiveté (Isa. 53:6–7; Jer. 11:19; John 1:29; 1 Pet. 1:19; Rev. 5:6). Other animals symbolically used in Scripture include the serpent (Gen. 49:17), the dog (Isa. 56:10; 2 Pet. 2:22), the deer (Isa. 35:6; Hab. 3:19), the antelope (Isa. 51:20), and the bull or cow (Ps. 22:12; Amos 4:1–4). Daniel used grotesque portrayals of animals to symbolize the corrupted nature of human kingdoms that were in opposition to the cause of God (Dan. 7).

For many animals listed in Scripture there is some level of disagreement about their identity. For instance, the second animal listed in Exod. 25:5; 26:14 is alternatively identified as a badger, a goat, a porpoise, a manatee, and as a reference not to a specific animal at all but rather to a type of leather. The last of these seems most likely because of availability and also because the specific animals identified as an option are unclean and seem ill-suited for use in connection with tabernacle instruments. Behemoth of Job 40:15 has been identified as an elephant, a water buffalo, or a hippopotamus, though the word itself simply means beast or cattle. The animal identified as a chameleon in Lev. 11:30 is sometimes simply viewed as a large lizard or perhaps even a mole. Finally, the debate continues concerning the identity of the beast that swallowed Jonah (1:17), with most translators preferring to go the more reserved route of “huge fish” rather than the more traditional “whale.” The identification of animals in antiquity, and even up to the nineteenth century, seems to have centered as much on appearance as actual anatomy. This may explain why names applied loosely to creatures that had a similar general appearance in earlier periods found misapplication in some earlier translations.

From an ecological standpoint, God’s care and concern for animals (including but not limited to proper care and humane means of slaughter), as well as his expectations of humankind as stewards of the animal kingdom, leave the clear impression that the biblical ideal for God’s people includes investing energy in preservation. Perceptions of humankind as having unrestrained freedom to do with animals as they see fit seem at odds with the more holistic view of human beings as both lords over creation and caretakers of that which actually belongs to someone else.

The act of announcing, usually associated with the arrival of a significant figure. In church history the term has been specifically applied to the announcement of the arrival of a son to Mary whose name would be called “Jesus” (Luke 1:26–35). More generally speaking, however, notice of the coming miraculous birth of any child can appropriately be called an annunciation. For instance, the reporting of the coming of Isaac to Abraham and Sarah (Gen. 18:10), the arrival of Samson to Manoah and his wife (Judg. 13:2–5), and the birth of John to Zechariah and Elizabeth (Luke 1:11–20) could also be identified as annunciations. In each case, the arrival of the child is to a barren womb, and thus the miraculous intervention of God in the lives of the human families is emphasized. As is often the case when comparing the events of Jesus’ life with earlier events, his coming took on a heightened importance. Only with the annunciation of Jesus did God reveal that the child would be born of a virgin.

These were the people who lived before the worldwide flood in Noah’s time. They were divided between two ancestral lines, those of Cain (Gen. 4:17–24) and Seth (Gen. 5). Although it is common to speak of the Cainites and Sethites, the second line is depicted as starting with Adam, not Seth (5:3). To label one line as ungodly and the other as godly is overly schematic. The generation of the flood was wholly wicked (Noah excepted), including the offspring of both Cain and Seth (6:5, 11), and was decimated by the flood as a judgment upon universal sin. The line of Seth survived only because of God’s grace shown to Noah (6:8).

The names in the genealogy of Seth bear a striking resemblance to Cain’s descendants (Cain/Kenan, Enoch/Enoch, Mehujael/Mahalalel, Irad/Jared, Methushael/Methuselah, Lamech/Lamech), again implying that the two lines were quite similar. Genesis 6:1–4, admittedly an obscure passage, may depict intermarriage between the lines, reinforcing the guilt of the entire human race.

The increase in population in Gen. 6:1 fits with the procreation theme of Gen. 5. The 120-year limit decreed by God in Gen. 6:3 cannot lay down the limit of a normal life span, for many people in Genesis lived well beyond this supposed limit, and so it is best understood as an announcement that 120 years remain until the flood.

The first ancestral line climaxed with boastful, violent, and vengeful Lamech, who tried to outdo his forefather Cain (Gen. 4:24). Though morally corrupt, Cain’s descendants are credited with significant cultural and technological achievements.

The genealogy of Seth in Gen. 5 is given a fuller treatment than Cain’s, for his line survived the flood. It focuses on the first (Adam’s [vv. 1–5]), seventh (Enoch’s [vv. 21–24]), and ninth generations (Lamech’s [vv. 5:28–31]), climaxing with another Lamech, Noah’s father.

The longevity of the antediluvians is a notable feature (life spans of 930 years, 912 years, etc.), but so too is the reign of death (note the mournful refrain “and then he died” throughout Gen. 5). The sole exception is godly Enoch (5:24). Sumerian lists show a belief that antediluvian kings reigned for thousands of years each. Figures for age and life span are not supplied so that we can calculate the date of creation, nor are birth notices of “other sons and daughters” (e.g., 5:4, 6) inserted to explain where Cain got his wife. Despite the baneful effect of death, in the providence of God life continued.

The study of human beings, their nature and origins. The Christian understanding of anthropology stems from a biblical view of humankind’s relationship to God.

The Origin of Humankind

According to Genesis, the creation of humankind took place on the sixth day of the creation week. The amount of narrative space allotted to this day (Gen. 1:24–31) testifies to the special importance of what happened. Human beings were made on the same day as the animals. Human beings were not given a day of their own, showing that they have a certain kinship with the animals, although they are far more than highly successful and adaptive mammals. This has implications for the care of animals and of the environment generally. The value of human beings and their special place in the created order is clear in passages such as Pss. 8:5–6; 104:14–15.

Created in the image of God. When it came to the making of human beings, God deliberated over this crucial step (Gen. 1:26). The plural of exhortation in “Let us make man in our image” signals that the decision to make humankind was the most important one that God had made so far. Genesis 1 says that human beings are like God in some way.

Various opinions have been canvassed as to what the “image” is. We cannot totally exclude the physical form of humans, given God’s humanoid form in OT appearances (theophanies; e.g., Isa. 6:1; Ezek. 1:26; Amos 9:1). The image has sometimes been interpreted as a task, the exercising of dominion (Gen. 1:28), with humanity appointed as creation’s king, ruling under God. But the image is better understood as the precondition for rule rather than rule itself. The image shows human worth (Gen. 9:6) and differentiates humans from all other creatures. It is proper for the Bible to use anthropomorphic language for God, for humans are remarkably like God. Both male and female are in the image of God (“in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them” [1:27]), so that the divine image is not maleness, nor is sexual differentiation the image. Commonly, the image of God is thought to be some peculiar quality of human beings—for example, rationality, speech, moral sense, personality, humans as relational beings.

Every century has its own view of what is the essence of humanity. However, nothing in the passage allows a choice among such alternatives. The point of the passage is simply the fact of the likeness, with no exact definition being provided. The fact of the image is the basis of the divine prohibition of murder and of the strict penalty applied to the transgressor (9:4–6). The fall into sin affected every aspect of the human constitution, and the Bible does not minimize the fact of human sinfulness (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Rom. 3:10–18); nevertheless, humans are still in the image of God (Gen. 5:1–3; 9:6; 1 Cor. 11:7). God’s plan of salvation is aimed at ridding creation (and especially humanity) of the baneful effects of sin, and this will be achieved through the work of Christ, who is the image of God (2 Cor. 4:4; Col. 1:15–20; Heb. 1:1–3; 2:5–18). The outcome will be the conformity of believers in Christ to his glorious image (Rom. 8:29–30; 2 Cor. 3.18).

Place in the created order. God’s purpose in giving human beings the divine image is “so they may rule” (NET [Gen. 1:26b translated as a purpose clause]). The syntax suggests that the image is a presupposition of dominion. It is plain that such a delegated authority makes humans stewards. The vegetarian diet of Gen.1:29 (there was no eating of meat at first) represents a limitation to the human right of dominion. Adam’s naming of the animals was (in part) expressive of his sovereignty over them (2:19). Later, Noah was charged to bring pairs of animals into the ark to preserve them alive (6:19–20), showing care for other creatures. The patriarchs tended flocks (13:2–9; 26:12–14), and Joseph’s relief measures saved the lives of people and animals (47:15–18). The wanton destruction of the Promised Land was expressly forbidden (Deut. 20:19–20). Humanity is accountable to God for the stewardship of the earth. The divine command “be fruitful and multiply” (Gen. 1:28 NRSV) shows that God’s purpose is that the human race populate the whole earth.

At Gen. 2:7 the biblical narrative becomes thoroughly anthropocentric, picturing the little world that God establishes around the first man, so this account is quite different from the cosmic presentation of Gen. 1. In Gen. 1 humankind is the apex of a pyramid, the last and highest of a series of creatures; in Gen. 2 the man is the center of a circle, everything else made to fit around him, and his connection to the physical earth is emphasized. In either view, a very special place is given to human beings in the created order. The two pictures are complementary, not contradictory.

The “man” (’adam) is formed from the “ground” (’adamah), with the related Hebrew words making a pun. Man’s name reminds him of his earthy origins. He is made from the “dust,” which hints at his coming death. He will return to the dust (Gen. 3:19; cf. Job 10:8–9; Ps. 103:14; Isa. 29:16). The reference to “the breath of life” (Gen. 2:7) is due to the fact that this leaves a person at death (Job 34:14–15; Ps. 104:29–30), so man’s (potential) mortality is implied. Ironically, the making of man is described using the language of death. What is described in Gen. 2 is the making of the first man, from whom the rest of the human race has descended, not the making of humankind, though the word ’adam can mean that in other contexts.

The Nature of Humankind

Body, soul, and spirit. Arguments over whether human nature is bipartite (body and soul) or tripartite (body, soul, spirit) are not to be decided by arbitrary appeal to isolated verses. Verses can be found in apparent support for both the first view (e.g., Matt. 10:28) and the second (e.g., 1 Thess. 5:23), but certainly the first scheme is much more prevalent in the Bible. “Soul” and “spirit” can be used interchangeably (Eccles. 3:21; 12:7; Ezek. 18:31). Death is marked by the parting of soul/spirit and body, but it would be a mistake to think that human beings are made up of separate component parts, or that the physical body is only a dispensable shell and not essential to true humanity. The physicality of human existence in the “body” is owned and celebrated in Scripture, part of that being the positive attitude to sexuality when properly expressed (Song of Songs; 1 Cor. 7) and the nonascetic nature of biblical ethics (1 Cor. 10:31; Col. 2:23). The doctrine of the resurrection of the body is the fullest expression of this (1 Cor. 15), in contrast to ancient Greek thought that viewed the body as inherently evil and understood salvation as the immortality of the liberated, disembodied soul.

The different words used in relation to persons are only intended to refer to and at times focus on different aspects of unified human nature. References to the “soul” may stress individual responsibility (e.g., Ezek. 18:4 NASB: “The soul who sins will die”). In Ps. 103:1–2, “O my soul” expresses emphatic self-encouragement to praise God and is in parallel with “all my inmost being”—that is, “my whole being” (an example of synecdoche: a part standing for the whole [cf. Ps. 35:10]). These are ways of referring to oneself as a person who expresses will and intention (cf. Ps. 42:5–6, 11). The “flesh” is used to stress the weakness of mortal humanity (e.g., Isa. 40:6 RSV: “All flesh is grass”). The “heart” is the volitional center of a human being (Prov. 4:23; cf. Mark 7:17–23). The emotional and empathetic reactions of humans are described by reference to the organs: “liver,” “kidneys,” “bowels.”

Morals and responsibility. In Gen. 2 the complexities of the man’s moral relation to God and his relations with the soil, with the animals, and with the woman are explored. God deposited the man in the garden “to work it and take care of it” (2:15). The words chosen to designate the man’s work prior to the fall have an aura of worship about them, for they are later used in the OT for the cultic actions of serving and guarding within the sanctuary. The priests served by offering sacrifices, and the Levites guarded the gates of the sacred precinct. A theology of work as a religious vocation is presented. The man was a kind of king-priest in the garden of God.

The moral responsibility of humanity is signaled from the beginning. God’s command gives permission for the man to eat from “any tree” except one (Gen. 2:16–17) and as such indicates man’s freedom, so that this command is no great restriction. The wording “you are free to eat” reinforces the point about God’s generous provision. The prohibition is embedded in the description of God’s fatherly care for the man and gracious act in placing him in the garden. The divine restriction is slight and not at all overbearing, though the serpent will seek to make it appear mean-spirited (3:1). The command and prohibition are the very first words of God to the man, marking them out as of fundamental importance for the relationship between them. The prohibition (“you must not eat . . .”) is an absolute one in the style of the Decalogue (Exod. 20:1–17; Deut. 5:6–21). What is placed before the man is a test that gives him the opportunity to express his loyalty to God. A relationship of obedience and trust requires the possibility of choice and the opportunity to disobey (if that is what he wants to do). The moral nature and responsibility of individuals is not a late discovery by the prophet Ezekiel (Ezek. 18); rather, it is the presupposition behind the Mosaic law, for the commands of the Decalogue (“you shall not . . .”) are phrased as commands to individuals (as the Hebrew makes clear). On the other hand, the concept of corporate responsibility is also present (e.g., Achan’s punishment in Josh. 7).

Relationships. Human beings are relational by nature, as the creation of the woman as a helper and partner for the first man makes plain (Gen. 2:18–25). Later in Scripture this is put in more general terms, so that friendship and mutual cooperation are shown to be essential to life (Eccles. 4:7–12). The body life of the church reflects the same fact and need (1 Cor. 12). In Psalms, human needs and vulnerability find their answer and fulfillment in God, with the psalmist acknowledging his frailty and his creaturely dependence on God (e.g., Ps. 90). This also shows the folly of sinful human pride, against which the prophets so often inveighed (e.g., Isa. 2:9, 11–17, 22).

A special type of figure of speech that is quite common in the Bible. Most figures of speech (metaphors, similes, etc.) work by bringing two very separate items into a comparative relationship by using language that is directly appropriate for the one to create colorful imagery for the other. Thus, figures of speech confront the reader with both points of similarity and points of dissimilarity.

Anthropomorphism is a figure of speech in which God is represented with human features or human characteristics. Anthropomorphisms abound in Scripture. Isaiah 59:1, for example, states: “Surely the arm of the Lord is not too short to save, nor his ear too dull to hear.” Likewise, note the colorful anthropomorphic description of God in Ps. 104:2–3: “The Lord wraps himself in light as with a garment; he stretches out the heavens like a tent and lays the beams of his upper chambers on their waters. He makes the clouds his chariot and rides on the wings of the wind.”

In fact, Scripture typically describes God with a wide range of terminology normally associated with people and not with deity. The Bible refers to God as having hands, arms, feet, a face, a nose, breath, a voice, and ears. He walks, sits, hears, looks down, thinks, talks, remembers, gets angry, shouts, lives in a palace, holds court, prepares tables, anoints heads, builds houses, and pitches tents. He has a rod, staff, scepter, banner, garments, cloak, tent, throne, footstool, vineyard, field, chariot, shield, breastplate, helmet, and sword. He is identified as father, husband, king, judge, potter, and shepherd. All these are human actions or human features that are used figuratively to describe God and his actions.

On the other hand, scholars are divided over whether all of these anthropomorphisms are really figures of speech. Perhaps some of them actually describe literal aspects of God. Perhaps some of the “anthropomorphic” similarities between human beings and God are due to the fact that we are created in the image of God (Gen. 1:27). Thus, we reflect similarity to him in some aspects and dissimilarity in many others. Since God is spirit, the description of God as “looking down” or the mention of his face would be anthropomorphism (i.e., figurative language). On the other hand, many of God’s actions and emotions such as anger, love, patience, mercy, hurt, and compassion are probably literal realities. Although we as human beings understand these emotions because we experience them, this does not necessarily mean that in regard to God they are merely figurative. Although God does not have ears, he does, for example, “get angry,” “love,” and “feel sorrow.”

The final book of the Bible is known by its opening line: “The revelation of Jesus Christ” (1:1 ESV, NRSV, KJV). This phrase could indicate a “revelation about Jesus Christ” (the main character), or a “revelation from Jesus Christ” (the primary giver of the message to John; so NIV), or, as many believe, some of both.

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.

Genre and Historical Context

Genre. Revelation is best understood in light of its literary genre and its historical context. The literary genre of Revelation—letter, prophecy, and apocalyptic literature—explains much of the strangeness of the book. The entire book is a single letter to seven churches in Asia Minor (note the letter greeting in 1:4–5 and the benediction in 22:21). John is commanded to write what he sees and send it to the seven churches (1:11). A letter to seven churches is in reality a letter to the whole church, since the number “seven” symbolizes wholeness or completeness in Revelation. NT letters were intended to be read aloud to the gathering of Christians, and the same is true of Revelation. The book opens with a blessing on the one who reads the letter aloud and on those who listen (1:3) and closes with a stern warning to anyone (reader or listener) who changes the book (22:18–19). Like other NT letters, Revelation also addresses a specific situation. For this reason, any approach to Revelation that ignores the situation faced by the seven churches will fail to grasp its central message. Many say that the message of Revelation extends beyond the first century, but it certainly does not ignore its first audience.

Revelation is also a letter that is prophetic. In both the opening (1:3) and the closing (22:7, 10, 18–19), the book is described as a “prophecy” (cf. 19:10). In 22:9 the angel identifies John as a prophet: “I am a fellow servant with you and with your fellow prophets.” As a prophetic book in line with OT prophetic books, Revelation contains both prediction about the future and proclamation about God’s will for the present, with emphasis falling on the latter.

Finally, Revelation is a prophetic letter that is apocalyptic. In the opening phrase, “the revelation of Jesus Christ,” the term “revelation” is a translation of the Greek term apokalypsis, meaning “to unveil” or “to reveal” what has been hidden. Most believe that apocalyptic literature grew out of Hebrew prophecy. The OT books of Daniel and Zechariah are often associated with apocalyptic literature, and there were many Jewish apocalypses written during the time between the Testaments (e.g., 1–2 Enoch, 2–3 Baruch, 4 Ezra).

In apocalyptic literature there is a revelation from God to some well-known human figure through a heavenly intermediary. God promises to intervene in human history, to defeat evil, and to establish his rightful rule. Such is the case with Revelation, which assumes a situation where God’s people are threatened by hostile powers. God is portrayed as sovereign, and he promises to intervene soon to destroy evil. Through bizarre visions and imagery common to apocalyptic literature, those who hear Revelation are transported to another world for much-needed heavenly perspective. As the hearers move outside their hopeless circumstances and see God winning the war against evil, their perspective is reshaped, and they are empowered to persevere faithfully. They are simultaneously called to live holy and blameless lives as they worship the one, true God.

Historical context. Along with understanding the literary genre of Revelation, one must grasp its historical context in order to read the book responsibly. Revelation itself describes a historical situation where some Christians are suffering for their faith with the real possibility that the suffering could become more intense and widespread. John himself has been exiled to the island of Patmos because of his witness for Jesus (1:9). Antipas, a Christian in Pergamum, has been put to death for his faith (2:13). In his message to the church at Smyrna, Jesus indicates that they should not be surprised by what they are about to suffer (2:10). The book also includes several references to pagan powers shedding the blood of God’s people (6:10; 16:6; 17:6; 18:24; 19:2). Revelation addresses a situation in which pagan political power has formed a partnership with false religion. Those who claim to follow Christ are facing mounting pressure to conform to this ungodly partnership at the expense of loyalty to Christ.

The two primary possibilities for the date of Revelation are a time shortly after the death of Nero (AD 68–69) or a date near the end of Domitian’s reign (AD 95). Although there is solid evidence for both dates, the majority opinion at present favors a date during the reign of Domitian, when persecution threatened to spread across the Roman Empire. The imperial cult (i.e., the worship of the Roman emperor) was a powerful force to be reckoned with primarily because it united religious, political, social, and economic elements into a single force. As chapters 2–3 indicate, not every Christian was remaining faithful in this difficult environment. Some were compromising in order to avoid religious or economic persecution. Revelation has a pointed message for those who are standing strong as well as for those who are compromising, and this central message ties into the overall purpose of the book.

Purpose and Interpretation

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.

There are five main theories about how Revelation should be interpreted: preterist, historicist, futurist, idealist, and eclectic. The preterist theory views Revelation as relating only to the time in which John lived rather than to any future period. John communicates to first-century readers how God plans to deliver them from the wickedness of the Roman Empire. The historicist theory argues that Revelation gives an overview of the major movements of church history from the first century until the return of Christ. The futurist theory claims that most of Revelation (usually chaps. 4–22) deals with a future time just before the end of history. The idealist theory maintains that Revelation is a symbolic portrayal of the ongoing conflict between good and evil. Revelation offers timeless spiritual truths to encourage Christians of all ages. The eclectic theory combines the strengths of several of the other theories (e.g., a message to the original audience, a timeless spiritual message, and some future fulfillment), while avoiding their weaknesses.

Outline and Structure

There have been many attempts to understand how Revelation is organized. Some see a threefold structure based on 1:19:

What you have seen (past) (1:1–20)

What is now (present) (2:1–3:21)

What will take place later (future) (4:1–22:21)

Others see the book organized around seven dramatic scenes with interludes occurring throughout:

Prologue (1:1–8)

Act 1: Seven Oracles (1:9–3:22)

Act 2: Seven Seals (6:1–17)

Act 3: Seven Trumpets (8:1–9:21)

Act 4: Seven Signs (12:1–14:20)

Act 5: Seven Bowls (16:1–21)

Act 6: Seven Visions (19:1–20:15)

Act 7: Seven Prophecies (21:2–22:17)

Epilogue (22:18–21)

The following outline provides an overview of Revelation in ten stages:

I. Introduction (1:1–20)

II. Messages to the Seven Churches (2:1–3:22)

III. Vision of the Heavenly Throne Room (4:1–5:14)

IV. Opening of the Seven Seals (6:1–8:1)

V. Sounding of the Seven Trumpets (8:2–11:19)

VI. The People of God versus the Powers of Evil (12:1–14:20)

VII. Pouring Out of the Seven Bowls (15:1–16:21)

VIII. Judgment and Fall of Babylon (17:1–19:5)

IX. God’s Ultimate Victory (19:6–22:5)

X. Conclusion (22:6–21)

I. Introduction (1:1–20). 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.

II. 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.

III. 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.

IV. 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.

V. 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.

VI. 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.

VII. 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).

VIII. 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).

IX. 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.

X. 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).

Characters and Themes

The foregoing outlines are helpful for understanding Revelation, but perhaps an even better way to grasp the message of the book is to look closely at its main characters and story line. The following seven themes capture the overall theological message of this dynamic prophetic-apocalyptic letter.

1. God. Revelation presents God as a central character in the story. He is sovereign and firmly in control of history, as his description from 1:4–8 suggests: “the Alpha and the Omega” (the beginning and the end), “the one who is, and who was, and who is to come” (God of the past, the present, and the future), and “the Lord God, . . . the Almighty” (ruler over the universe). The throne room vision of chapters 4–5 also clearly asserts God’s sovereign rule. The throne of God itself stands as a central symbol in the book, representing God’s sovereignty over all things. As a main character, God rightly receives worship. He is worshiped because he is the creator (e.g., 4:11; 14:7) and the righteous judge who condemns evil and vindicates his people (15:3–4; 16:5–7; 19:1–2). Revelation also describes God as one who desires to be fully and intimately present with his people. God cares for and protects his people (e.g., 7:2–3; 14:1; 21:4). As the book closes, God announces the fulfillment of his long-standing promise to live among his people (21:6–7; cf. Exod. 29:45–46; Lev. 26:11–12). God’s children have unhindered access to their loving Father as they serve him, see his face, and bear his name—all in his presence (22:1–5).

2. God’s enemies. Although God reigns supreme, he has enemies who oppose him and his people. As God’s chief enemy, Satan (also known as the dragon, the devil, the serpent, the accuser) works through worldly systems with the intent of thwarting God’s plan. Chapter 12 summarizes this cosmic conflict. In that scene, God defeats the dragon, who then turns his anger against the woman and the rest of her offspring. The dragon’s evil partners include the beast from the sea (traditionally called the “antichrist”) and the beast from the earth (the “false prophet”). The first beast often has been identified with Rome, the dominant pagan power in the first century, although the reference likely extends beyond Rome to any political-economic power that demands absolute allegiance (see 13:1–8; 19:19–20; 20:10). The second beast uses miraculous signs to deceive people into worshiping the first beast. This opponent represents religious power organized in support of the first beast (13:11–18; 19:20; 20:10). The dragon, the beast from the sea, and the false prophet constitute the unholy trinity. God’s enemies also include people (usually called the “inhabitants of the earth”) who follow the beast (13:8, 12), indulge in the ways of this world (17:2), and persecute believers (6:10; 11:10).

3. The Lamb of God. Jesus, the Lamb of God, plays a central role in God’s redemptive plan. In Revelation the Lamb is clearly identified as a divine figure who shares in the authority, glory, and worship reserved for God (5:6, 9–14; 7:10, 17; 12:10; 21:22–23; 22:1, 3). Expressions that refer to God are also used of Jesus, thereby affirming Jesus’ deity (e.g., “Alpha and Omega,” “Lord” [see also 1:4–5]). Revelation highlights the Lamb’s sacrificial death as the key to his victory over evil, paradoxical though it may be (1:5, 18; 5:9). As the slaughtered yet risen Lamb (1:17–18), Jesus is able to identify with his suffering people (1:9; 12:17; 20:4). The Lamb promises to return as the warrior-judge to defeat God’s enemies and rescue God’s people (1:7; 3:11; 16:15; 19:11–21). The famous battle with the forces of evil is recorded in 19:20: “But the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet.” The two beasts are then condemned to the lake of fire, and their followers become the banquet meal for the birds of prey.

4. God’s people. The people of God figure prominently in the book of Revelation. John uses a variety of terms and images to portray God’s people (e.g., church, saints, great multitude, bride of the Lamb, new Jerusalem). These people have been redeemed by the Lamb, and they continue to rely upon his sacrificial death in spite of opposition (1:5; 5:9; 14:3–4). They are a genuinely multicultural people, as indicated by the seven uses of a fourfold formula: every “tribe, language, people, and nation” (5:9; 7:9; 11:9; 13:7; 14:6; cf. 17:15). They are also a persecuted people (1:9; 2:9–10; 7:14; 11:9–10; 12:10; 13:16–17) and at times even a martyred people (6:9–11; 16:6; 17:6; 18:24; 19:2; 20:4). Throughout Revelation, God’s people are characterized as those who obey the commandments of God (1:2, 9; 6:9; 12:17; 14:12; 20:4; 22:9) and who hold fast to the testimony of Jesus (1:2, 9; 6:9; 12:17; 19:10; 20:4). They are a tempted people who are warned throughout the book to endure in faith (13:10; 14:12; 18:4). Like their Savior, they conquer evil by holding fast to their confession even to the point of death (12:11).

5. God’s judgment. God’s judgment of evil plays a crucial role in the book. The central section of Revelation contains three series of seven judgments: the seals (6:1–8:1), the trumpets (8:2–11:19), and the bowls (15:1–16:21). God sends these plagues on his enemies to demonstrate his power and to vindicate his people. These images of judgment also encourage repentance and remind people that God will win the battle against evil. Using two images of judgment—the grain harvest (14:14–16) and the winepress (14:17–20)—chapter 14 presents a clear choice: fear and glorify God (14:7) or face God’s inescapable and eternal judgment (14:11, 19). God’s final judgment on “Babylon the great, the mother of prostitutes” is reported in 17:1–19:6. Babylon represents the worldly system that has blasphemed God and persecuted his people. God’s final judgment of the satanic trinity, their followers, and death itself is described in 19:11–21; 20:7–15. Evil has been destroyed, preparing the way for the restoration of creation.

6. The paradise of God. The story culminates in God’s ultimate restoration of his people and his creation—the paradise of God. What God began to do in Gen. 1–2 he now completes in Rev. 21–22. The river of life replaces the sea. The tree of life supplies food for all. God’s throne as a symbol of God’s sovereign rule over all reality serves as the source of life. God has kept his promise to conquer his enemies, vindicate his people, and restore his creation. The Abrahamic covenant of Gen. 12, that God would bless “all peoples on earth” (v. 3), is fulfilled as the tree of life provides healing for the nations (Rev. 22:2). The new heaven and new earth is identified primarily as the place where God lives among his people (22:4). In the paradise of God there will be no more Satan or sin or death or evil of any kind. God’s people will bask in his glory and respond in worship.

7. The present struggle. A final theme of Revelation is the believer’s struggle to live out God’s story in the present. The Lamb’s followers rely upon the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus for their victory, but they continue to live in enemy territory. They long for the new heaven and new earth, but they must wage war in the present against the forces of evil. Jesus challenges the seven churches to “overcome” or “conquer,” a requirement for inheriting his promises of eternal life, provision, justice, victory, and the presence of God (21:7). A voice from heaven summarizes what it means to overcome: “They [Christians] triumphed over him [Satan] by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony; they did not love their lives so much as to shrink from death” (12:11).

They triumph in the same way that Jesus triumphed: victory through faithfulness, even if it includes suffering. This calls for rejecting false teaching, resisting idolatry, living righteously, and refusing to compromise. Triumphing includes authentic faith that results in obedience to Jesus. Above all, to triumph or overcome means to follow the Lamb.

These seven themes of Revelation reveal how the book offers hope to those who are suffering for the cause of Christ and warning to those who are compromising with the world. Revelation presents the final chapter in God’s grand plan to defeat evil, reverse the curse of sin, transform creation, and live forever among his people. For first-century readers or twenty-first-century readers, Revelation offers a dramatic and empowering vision of what it means to follow Jesus.

The word “apocalypse” means “revelation.” It is used in Rev. 1:1 to identify what follows as information that would otherwise be known only in heaven. “Apocalyptic” therefore refers to uncovering something that is hidden—revealing secrets. It focuses on the gracious acts of God whereby he informs his servants of his plans and purposes about what is happening and will happen on earth. Scholars have identified those texts that resemble the form of the book of Revelation as “apocalyptic literature,” including the visions of Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, and Zechariah.

Apocalyptic texts also appear outside of the Bible, although many of them are inspired by biblical accounts. The record of Enoch’s journey into the heavens (Gen. 5:24) stimulated the imagination of many during the Second Temple period, resulting in the production of a large number of apocalyptic works purporting to record what Enoch learned while in the heavens. These then formed the basis for a distinctive, and ultimately misguided, interpretation of contemporary Jewish experience (see, e.g., 1 Enoch, Jubilees). The popularity of apocalyptic literature grew significantly after the appearance of John’s Revelation, particularly in later gnostic literature and the works of various forms of Jewish mysticism.

The genre of apocalyptic literature. For there to be apocalyptic literature, some things must be accepted as true: God exists and is in sovereign control over what happens on earth; God has a plan, and humankind cannot know anything of that plan unless it be revealed. This literature claims to be the result of a gracious act of God. It may be delivered through a vision of God himself. Alternately, it might involve seeing things in the heavens either as a vision or as a guided tour.

God’s revelation occurred in many ways on many occasions (Heb. 1:1–2). The entire Bible is, in this sense, an apocalypse—a revelation. Some forms of this revelation, however, are easier to understand than others.

As a literary form, apocalyptic literature might best be described as verbal cartoons. The images that are so graphically portrayed would have had, for the original readers, something of the instant impact that a political cartoon might have on us today. In order to understand such images, one must be familiar with the symbols being used. The cartoons and posters from the two World Wars—in which animals such as the lion of England, the Russian bear, the Uncle Sam character, and bestial monsters depicted the enemy at the time—are a sufficient example to shed light on how the original readers would have read these biblical works. To understand individual pictures such as the beast of Rev. 13 or the four-headed leopard of Dan. 7, one had to know something of the specific historical background.

Earlier images could be adapted and reapplied. So, for example, Joseph’s vision of his family as the sun, moon, and stars (Gen. 37:9) is used to identify the woman of Rev. 12:1 as the personification of the nation of Israel—the line from which the Savior would come.

God’s revelation to his people. Apocalyptic literature functions in much the same way that Jesus used his parables (Matt. 13:11). It is often used in situations where God’s people appear to be under physical threat. The symbols and the patterns used enable those on the inside to follow what is happening while leaving those on the outside none the wiser. The ability of God’s people to understand the revelation identifies and discriminates them from God’s enemies, who appear confused.

Apocalyptic literature is not always about the future, let alone about the end of the world. Mostly it is designed to enable the believer to see past the confusions and fears of present experience, and to be reminded that God is in control and that everything is going according to his plans and purposes. God’s plans may include calling upon his people to face a range of challenges or to suffer persecution. These visions enable believers to see meaning and purpose in these experiences and to keep their focus faithfully on God.

The book of Job offers some insight into the nature of apocalyptic literature, even though it is not usually regarded as such. The narrator (without explaining how he knows these things) begins by informing the reader of the events that transpired in God’s heavenly court. This enables the reader (unlike Job or his friends) to put Job’s experience in proper context. Eliphaz’s challenge then has powerful irony when he asks Job, “Do you listen in on God’s council? Do you have a monopoly on wisdom?” (15:8). The resolution of their deliberations is made possible only when God comes to earth in visible form and reveals his judgment on the matter. This is designed to evoke not a blind faith but an informed faithfulness that allows for the reality of God’s superior wisdom and his right to determine all things for his glory.

When the king had a dream in Gen. 41:15–16 (cf. Dan. 2:27–28), the point is made that no one can discover the mind of God. However, God has graciously revealed his plans to his servants, who can then explain them to a world that lives in darkness and ignorance of these things.

The one who received such revelations often needs an interpreting angel (Dan. 7:16; Zech. 1:9; cf. Gen. 28:10–17; Exod. 3:1–6). The seer, like the reader, is initially confused. The interpreting angel answers the seer’s questions, and the reader can in turn understand what is happening.

Understanding apocalyptic literature. Given the historical distance between the modern reader and the original authors of the biblical apocalyptic texts, we might be tempted to think that they cannot be understood with any certainty. They are nonetheless God’s revelation to his people and were given with the intention that they be understood. Comprehending an apocalyptic vision requires us to search the Scriptures to see how these symbols and patterns were interpreted, and then to see how they are again used to give us some insight into God’s power, grace, and calling upon his people in each age.

For example, the beasts representing four successive kingdoms (Dan. 7:1–7, 15–23) later are redrawn into a composite symbol of any contemporary human power operating under Satan’s rule (Rev. 13:1–3). The similarities between Babylon and Rome identified both as agents of Satan’s regime; the connection then became an apocalyptic accusation (1 Pet. 5:13) offering assurance to God’s people. Herod’s attempt to kill Jesus (Matt. 2:16) follows the pattern of Pharaoh’s attempt on Israel (Exod. 1–2), so the picture of Satan as the red dragon attacking the woman giving birth identifies the one behind Herod’s actions while pointing to the God who brought his people out of Egypt as the one who will save those who put their trust in Jesus.

The word “apocrypha” is derived from a Greek word meaning “secret” or “hidden” and refers to texts regarded by some Jews and Christians as religiously valuable but not meeting the criteria of canonicity. The more specific title “New Testament Apocrypha” distinguishes certain writings from those commonly referred to as “the Apocrypha,” a collection of works written by Jews (with later Christian editing in places) between approx. 200 BC and AD 90, recognized as Scripture by Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches but generally rejected by Protestants (see Apocrypha, Old Testament). What is loosely called New Testament Apocrypha is no single collection but actually a vast, amorphous corpus that can only be selectively discussed here. (The Apostolic Fathers, texts written mainly in the late first century and second century, and later church fathers are not considered here as part of this grouping.) In broadest terms, these texts concern themselves with Jesus Christ and his apostles, but often from a perspective that differs from the NT portraits. Nevertheless, many of the works appear to be either dependent upon or influenced by the genres and characters of the NT, principally gospels, letters, apostolic acts, and apocalypse.

These writings remain outside of the Christian canon for the following reasons. First, the texts, at least in their final form, were published in the postapostolic period (the second century), whereas all of the NT writings were believed to have been written by an apostle (Matthew, John, Paul, Peter) or an apostolic associate (Mark, Luke). Some apocryphal writings (e.g., Gospel of Thomas) may simply adapt earlier, apostolic tradition. Second, the point of view in these writings does not represent a broad constituency in the early church. Some appear to reflect the ideology of various gnostic groups, which became prominent in the second century throughout the Mediterranean, with centers in Antioch in Syria and Alexandria in Egypt. Although a diverse phenomenon, gnosticism generally embraced secret knowledge as a vehicle for salvation from the material world, a development of extreme Platonism. Therefore, Jesus saves through an esoteric teaching, not his atoning death. The diminution of the cross led to the orthodox rejection of this perspective. In attempting to refute gnostics, Irenaeus of Lyons (died c. AD 195) appropriates what he calls the “rule of faith” (regula fidei), which was passed on by the apostles and everywhere accepted by the churches (Haer. 1.8.1; 1.9.4). Other apocryphal texts appear to represent a conservative Jewish-Christian perspective. The church gradually shifted from being primarily a Jewish religious group that accepted non-Jews to what Christians themselves described as a “third race” in distinction from Jews and pagans. Relationships between Jews and Christians continued to sour because of mutual persecution, competition, and misunderstanding. By the second century, some Christian writers claimed God had rejected Israel (e.g., the author of Epistle of Barnabas). Many texts emphasize celibacy, fasting, and other rigorously ascetic practices, which go beyond the moderate guidelines in the NT. These factors contributed to the marginalization of Jewish believers in Jesus, making their writings suspect. Like the gnostic texts, the primary concern was a diminished Christology. Consequently, many of these writings were not copied (and therefore preserved) by Christian copyists and thus eventually were lost. However, many texts were discovered at Nag Hammadi in Egypt in 1945. Scraps of papyri have also been recovered from various sites in the dry sands of the desert. But many of the apocryphal writings survive only in fragments (e.g., Acts of Paul ).

The New Testament Apocrypha provide a window into the various ways Christians attempted to live out their faith in Jesus Christ, the rise of ascetic monasticism, and why orthodox Christianity ultimately parted ways with both rabbinic Judaism and gnosticism. The diversity of the church’s past may provide context and insight for the challenges of the present.

Gospels

The apocryphal Gospels often amplify or add to material that is more limited in the canonical Gospels. This is especially the case with Jesus’ youth and the passion narrative. The Infancy Gospel of Thomas depicts, among other things, the child Jesus making sparrows out of clay and then bringing them to life. The Gospel of Peter, which dates probably from the middle of the second century and is likely dependent on Mark’s Gospel, begins with Jesus’ trial and breaks off in what is presumably a resurrection appearance to a group of disciples. According to some scholars, the Gospel of Peter is cited by Origen (c. AD 185–255) as evidence that Jesus’ purported brothers were Joseph’s from an earlier marriage, thereby protecting the perpetual virginity of Mary (Comm. ser. Matt. 10.17). This gospel reflects a strong anti-Jewish bias. The Protevangelium of James relates the miraculous birth of Jesus’ mother, Mary.

Other apocryphal Gospels single out a particular apostle who alone is given special revelation. A complete version of the Gospel of Thomas was discovered among the Nag Hammadi writings and is perhaps the earliest apocryphal gospel. The emphasis on Thomas suggests a Syrian provenance. Containing little narrative, the text is primarily a collection of Jesus’ sayings (loosely grouped according to theme), some of which are dependent on the Gospel of Luke (e.g., 47, 104). James, the brother of the Lord, is given prominence (12), but there are also polemics against traditional Jewish piety: prayer, fasting, alms, and circumcision (6, 14, 53, 104). The Gospel of Judas, which is dated to around the middle of the second century and survives in one or two copies, consists primarily of dialogues between Judas Iscariot and Jesus during his passion. Judas is presented as the only disciple to recognize Jesus’ true origin and identity. In response, Jesus praises him: “You will exceed all of [the other apostles]. For you will sacrifice the man that clothes me” (43). This text reflects a gnostic point of view (probably Sethian, representing a group that venerated the biblical figure of Seth and viewed Jesus as his reincarnation, as in the Apocryphon of John, the Gospel of the Egyptians, and the Apocalypse of Paul  ). Whereas Peter makes a confession of faith in the canonical Gospels, Judas says, “I know who you are and where you have come from. You are from the immortal realm of Barbelo” (35). (In gnostic mythology, Barbelo [Coptic for “Great Emission”] is the divine Mother of all, who is often described as the “Forethought of the Father,” the “Infinite One.”) The Gospel of Judas has Jesus reject the God of Israel (21) and attack the Christian church and its leadership (26–27).

The church fathers often mention Jewish gospels (Gospel of the Hebrews, Gospel of the Nazarenes, Gospel of the Ebionites), including a Hebrew version of Matthew (Irenaeus, Haer. 3.1.1; Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 6.25.4). Clement of Alexandria (c. AD 150–215) cites a saying of Jesus from the Gospel of the Hebrews: “He that marvels shall reign, and he that has reigned shall rest” (Strom. 2.9.45; 5.14.96). Epiphanius (c. AD 310/320–403) preserves part of the Gospel of the Ebionites: “It came to pass that John was baptizing, and Pharisees and all Jerusalem went out to him and were baptized. And John had a garment of camel’s hair and a leather girdle about his waist, and his food, it is said, was wild honey, the taste of which was that of manna, as a cake dipped in oil” (Pan. 30.13.4–5). The Ebionites (the “poor”) were a Jewish-Christian group. The wording may reflect a vegetarian perspective, a popular form of asceticism, which annoyed Epiphanius, who claimed that the Ebionites “were resolved to make the word of truth into a lie and to put a cake in the place of locusts.” However, the text only claims that the wild honey had the taste of manna, “as a cake dipped in oil.” The discovery of papyri in Egypt has also provided agrapha (unwritten sayings) of Jesus. Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 840 depicts a debate between Jesus and a Pharisaic chief priest over viewing the holy utensils in the temple in an impure state.

Apostolic Acts

This subgenre typically involves a narrative of an apostle’s missionary activity (e.g., Andrew, Peter, John, Paul, Philip) from the time of Jesus’ resurrection to his own martyrdom (or, in the case of John, simply his death). Books of acts also feature other important individuals in the early history of the church, such as Barnabas and even Pilate. Some function to explain how the Christian faith reached a community. The Acts of Thomas, which originates probably in Syrian Christianity, depicts his missionary activity in India. They are partly dependent on Luke’s book of Acts, but they reflect a greater interest in biographical detail. The Acts of Paul and Thecla provides a physical description of the apostle: “a man of small stature, with a bald head and crooked legs, in a good state of body, with eyebrows meeting and nose somewhat hooked, full of friendliness.” Contrary to popular assumption and the impression that one gets from Paul’s letters (2 Cor. 10:10), the depiction in its cultural context is flattering. Thecla is presented as a young, engaged woman from a prominent family in Iconium. She believes Paul’s gospel, which emphasizes sexual abstinence (see 1 Cor. 7:1–16). She breaks off her engagement, and the apostle permits her to become a teacher. The details may be a reaction against developments in the early church, which struggled over sexuality and women’s roles in leadership. In the Acts of Peter, Luke’s presentation of a conflict between Simon Magus and Simon Peter is greatly expanded; this version describes, among other things, Simon Magus levitating over Rome, only to be grounded by the prayers of Peter (4, 6, 9, 11–18, 23, 31).

Letters

The letter genre was not especially popular for those writing Christian apocryphal literature. In one letter, Abgar, king of Edessa, writes Jesus, inviting him to visit his city. Jesus responds with a courteous letter relating that he must fulfill his mission but, following his ascension, will send a disciple (see Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 1.13). There are also fourteen letters between Paul and the Stoic philosopher Seneca (c. 4 BC–AD 65). No one treats these letters as authentic, but they do provide insight into early Christian curiosities. Paul mentions a letter to the Laodiceans, which has not survived (Col. 4:16), so someone in the fourth century or earlier patched together phrases mainly from Philippians and Galatians to provide such a letter. The work known as 3 Corinthians, which contains a letter from the Corinthian church and Paul’s reply, probably serves the same purpose.

Apocalypses

An apocalypse features a seer who receives revelation from a supernatural revealer. Apocalypses are attributed to, among others, Paul, Peter, Thomas, Stephen, and James. They typically feature revelations made by Jesus to his disciples in the period between his resurrection and ascension. The book of Revelation appears to have had little influence on these works. Many of them are gnostic. But the Apocalypse of Peter, which most likely originated in Palestinian Jewish Christianity during the Bar Kokhba Revolt (AD 132–135), was highly valued, particularly for its depiction of hell, in which twenty-one sinners suffer in ways appropriate to their sin.

Apocrypha, Old Testament–The Greek word apokrypha means “hidden” or “concealed,” and later it came to refer to religious books considered to be of inferior quality to the OT and the NT. During the third century, several church fathers (e.g., Origen [d. 253], Irenaeus [d. c. 200], Tertullian [d. 220]) used this term to distinguish these works from canonical works. Currently, the phrase “Old Testament Apocrypha” refers to Jewish literary works written between approximately 200 BC and AD 90 that were included in the earliest Greek codices of the LXX.

The Apocrypha and the Development of the Canon

By the first century AD, many Jews believed that prophecy continued only until about the time of Ezra, around the end of the fifth century BC, and thus several of the apocryphal works were associated with famous biblical characters such as Jeremiah, Baruch, or Solomon, most likely in order to give them credibility. In Matt. 23:34–35; Luke 11:49–51 Jesus appears to limit the OT canon to the books known to be in the Jewish canon. Both passages record Jesus stating that the Jewish nation will be held responsible for the blood of the prophets from “the blood of Abel” (see Gen. 4:8–10), the first recorded murder, “to the blood of Zechariah” (see 2 Chron. 24:20–22), the last recorded murder. The implication is that biblical history spans from Genesis to Chronicles (most likely the last book in the order of the Hebrew Bible at the time of Jesus), which is equivalent to saying from Genesis to Malachi in the English Bible.

Based upon this evidence, it is doubtful that the early Jews ever considered the apocryphal works part of their canon. In reality, the early Greek codices were Christian collections from the fourth to fifth centuries AD. Apparently, by that time there were significant questions concerning which books made up the OT canon. By the end of the first century AD, Christians had been dispersed all over the Roman Empire, so it is more than likely that few Christians would have had contact with Jews or exposure to their scriptural canon. It is reasonable to assume that during this period of uncertainty, the apocryphal books were thought by some to be part of the Jewish OT canon. A major turning point occurred in the fourth century AD when Jerome (c. 345–420) was asked to write a standardized translation of the Latin Bible. Jerome used original Greek and Hebrew texts to correct his Latin translation. He did not believe that the apocryphal books were part of the OT since they were not included in the Hebrew manuscripts. Nevertheless, some argue that he was coerced into adding them to the Latin Vulgate by Augustine of Hippo (354–430), who believed that at least part of the apocryphal books were to be included in the OT canon. The Latin Vulgate became the standard translation of the Roman Catholic Church for well over a thousand years, and thus the Old Testament Apocrypha were gradually accepted in the church. Another major turning point occurred during the Protestant Reformation when Luther’s views were argued at the Council of Trent (convened three times between 1545 and 1563) that the Apocrypha were not part of the OT canon. The Roman Catholic Church had used 2 Macc. 12:43–45 to substantiate its doctrines of purgatory and praying for the dead; likewise Tobit and other apocryphal works were used to substantiate works of righteousness (i.e, not faith alone for salvation). On April 8, 1546, at the Council of Trent, the Roman Catholic Church decreed that the Apocrypha were indeed part of the Christian canon and pronounced anathema upon those who disagreed.

Since the time of Luther, Protestants have rejected the canonicity of the Apocrypha. However, the Roman Catholic Church has argued that fifteen apocryphal works are part of their authoritative Scriptures. The Greek Orthodox Church includes two additional works (3 Maccabees; Psalm 151) in its authoritative canon.

Arguments against including Apocryphal Books in the Canon

There are significant arguments for not including these books in the church’s authoritative canon.

1. The NT never cites any apocryphal books as inspired; Jesus’ usage of Scripture suggests that only the books in the Hebrew Bible were authoritative (Matt. 23:34–35; Luke 11:50–51).

2. None of the apocryphal books claims to be the word of the Lord, as do many OT books (Num. 35:1, 9; Josh. 1:1; Isa. 1:10, 18, 24; Jer. 1:2; Ezek. 1:3; Hos. 1:1; Joel 1:1).

3. The OT canon is confirmed by many sources: 2 Esd. 14:45 (twenty-four books); Josephus, Ag. Ap. 1.37–42 (twenty-two books); Melito (all OT books except perhaps Esther); the Jerusalem List (all thirty-nine books); Origen (twenty-two books). All of these sources list the same thirty-nine OT books except that they are grouped differently (with the exception of Melito, who may omit Esther).

4. There is little evidence to suggest that there were two different OT canons, one that developed in Palestine and one in Egypt. In fact, Philo, a Jew from Alexandria, never quotes from an apocryphal book as authoritative.

5. There are significant historical inaccu­racies in the Apocrypha. For example, the events in the book of Tobit (1:3–5) are chronologically incompatible: Tobit is said to live in Nineveh about 722 BC and yet also to have seen the division of the united kingdom in about 931 BC.

6. There are theological inconsistencies. For example, 2 Macc. 12:43–45 espouses praying for the dead, but canonical books maintain that decisions about one’s eternal destiny can be made only before death (Heb. 9:27). Eleven out of fifteen apocryphal books contain some type of inaccuracies. Those that do not either are very short (i.e., Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Three Young Men; Prayer of Manasseh) or their content makes it difficult to determine if they contain errors (i.e., Wisdom of Solomon; Susanna).

7. Many early church fathers spoke against the canonicity of much or all of the Apocrypha (Melito, Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, Athanasius, Jerome); no major church father accepted all of the apocryphal books until Augustine. The apocryphal books have never been universally accepted by the church.

8. The earliest list of OT canon by Melito (c. AD 170) does not include them.

9. During the Council of Trent, Martin Luther’s views against the canonicity of the Apocrypha were discussed, citing the NT, early church fathers, and Jewish teachers in support. The Roman Catholic Church responded by canonizing the Apocrypha.

The Books of the Old Testament Apocrypha

Even though the apocryphal books should not be considered part of the authoritative canon, they are useful for understanding Jewish thought and interests in the intertestamental period and the development of certain concepts during this period (e.g., the importance of the Torah, the apocalyptic view of history, the kingdom of God).

Traditionally, the Apocrypha consisted of fifteen books that were included in Roman Catholic Bibles and were usually identified as deuterocanonical (i.e., second canon) works. However, more recently this number has been reduced to thirteen since 4 Ezra (sometimes called 2 Esdras or Apocalypse of Ezra) and the Prayer of Manasseh were never found in the oldest Greek codices of the LXX: Vaticanus (c. AD 350), Sinaiticus (c. AD 400), and Alexandrinus (c. AD 450). These two works are now correctly considered pseudepigraphal books (i.e., false writings that were never thought to be part of the biblical canon).

The list below follows the Roman Catholic canon. In addition to these texts, several other writings are included in the Greek Orthodox, Armenian, Georgian, Syriac, and Ethiopian canons: 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, Psalm 151, Psalms 152–55, 1 Enoch, Jubilees, 2 Baruch (Letter of Baruch), 3 Baruch (Apocalypse of Baruch), 4 Baruch (Paralipomena of Jeremiah), and 1–3 Megabyan (Ethiopic Maccabees).

Books included in the Old Testament Apocrypha. The following thirteen books are included in the Old Testament Apocrypha.

• Wisdom of Solomon (latter part of the first century BC): This work contains Jewish wisdom traditions and describes the benefits of wisdom and the joys that accompany righteous living, as well as punishments for the wicked.

• Sirach (or Ecclesiasticus; c. 180 BC): This book is very similar to the biblical book of Proverbs, also containing Jewish wisdom traditions. It includes moral and ethical maxims, proverbs, songs of praise, theological and philosophical reflections on life, and customs of the day.

• Tobit (c. 180 BC): A romantic story teaching that God comes to the aid of those who remain faithful to his laws. Tobit, a righteous Israelite living in Nineveh, is an example to the rest of the captives even in the midst of great adversities. Tobit becomes blind and prays to God to restore his sight. At the same time in Media, Sarah, Tobit’s niece, who had lost seven bridegrooms in succession, prays to God for deliverance from the demon Asmodeus. God sends the angel Raphael to deliver them both.

• Judith (c. 150 BC): Nebuchadnezzar sends Holofernes to punish the people west of Babylon for their insubordination. The author exhorts the Jews to remain obedient to the law amid foreign occupation by the Babylonians. The people of Judea pray to God for help; in answer, Judith beguiles Holofernes, gets him thoroughly drunk, and then decapitates him.

• 1 Esdras (or 3 Ezra; c. second to first century BC): This book is a retelling of parts of Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah. It begins abruptly describing the reinstitution of the Passover by King Josiah in Jerusalem about 622/621 BC and continues to Ezra’s reforms about 458 BC. The majority of the book emphasizes Ezra’s reforms.

• 1 Maccabees (c. latter part of the second century BC): This book describes Judean history and especially the military campaigns of the Maccabees from the accession of Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) in about 175 BC to the reign of John Hyrcanus I (134–104 BC). This work is a very accurate history and is the primary source of recorded events during this period.

• 2 Maccabees (c. end of second century to beginning of first century BC): This book is much more theologically oriented than 1 Maccabees in recording events of Jewish history from the time of the high priest Onias III and the Syrian king Seleucus IV (c. 180 BC) to the defeat of Nicanor’s army (c. 161 BC). It appears to adopt an anti-Hasmonean viewpoint by highlighting concepts such as the resurrection of the body and the efficacious nature of martyrdom.

• Baruch (c. second to first century BC): This claims to be a letter from Baruch to those living in Jerusalem. It begins with a confirmation that Jerusalem was destroyed because of Israel’s sinfulness and was to be read on a feast day as a confession of their sin (1:14).

• Epistle of Jeremiah (third to first century BC): The date of this work is now confirmed by a first-century BC Greek manuscript from Cave 7 of Qumran. The text contains 72 or 73 verses and is most likely influenced by Jer. 10:1–16. This letter, supposedly from Jeremiah to Jewish captives soon to be taken to Babylon, describes the folly of worshiping idols.

• Additions to Esther (c. second to first century BC): These six additions (e.g., Mordecai’s dream and its interpretation, prayers of Mordecai and Esther) to the Greek text of Esther apparently were introduced to highlight the religious aspect of the story that the author felt was lacking.

• Susanna (c. second to first century BC): This work and the next two were added to the book of Daniel sometime during the first century BC. Susanna is tried and found guilty because of the lies that two elders of Israel told about her after she refused their sexual advances. Daniel, however, inspired by God, cross-examines the two men, proves that they have lied, and exonerates Susanna.

• Bel and the Dragon (c. second to first century BC): This work contains two stories demonstrating the wisdom of Daniel. In the first, he outwits the priests of Bel who go each night through a secret entrance to eat the offerings left for Bel. Daniel reveals their deception and proves their great statue of Bel, the patron deity of Babylon, to be a worthless idol. In the second story, Daniel is thrown into the lions’ den for killing a dragon that the Babylonians believed to be a god. However, the angel of the Lord protects Daniel and brings Habakkuk from Judea with food for him. On the seventh day, Daniel is removed from the lions’ den and his enemies are thrown in.

• Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Three Young Men (c. second to first century BC): Before being thrown into the fiery furnace (cf. Dan. 3:23), Abednego (“Azariah” in Hebrew) prays, asking God to bring glory to his name through this ordeal. Then follows the song of the three young men (Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego), who sing praise and glory to God.

Books no longer in the Old Testament Apocrypha. The following two books are no longer included in the Old Testament Apocrypha.

• 2 Esdras (or 4 Ezra, Apocalypse of Ezra; c. first century AD): An apocalyptic book dealing with the problem of evil in the world, or more specifically why an all-powerful, loving God allows such great evils to befall humankind. The reason why turns out to be human sinfulness.

• Prayer of Manasseh (c. second to first century BC): According to 2 Chron. 33:10–13, Manasseh prayed to God while in captivity and asked for forgiveness for his many sins. God responds by forgiving him and allowing him to return to Israel. This work purports to record this amazing prayer.

KJV and RSV translation of a Hebrew word in Gen. 3:7 (khagor, khagorah; NIV: “coverings”; NRSV: “loincloth”) that refers to a garment that was wrapped around the body’s midsection. The garment was very basic in nature and served the purpose of maintaining modesty once maturity had been reached. In the NT, the apron appears to be outerwear of some sort. Aprons (and handkerchiefs) that had touched Paul’s skin were used to heal the sick (Acts 19:12).

A large peninsula lying between the Red Sea on the west and the Persian Gulf on the east. In the Bible the term is actually seldom used (2 Chron. 9:14; Isa. 21:13; Jer. 25:24; Ezek. 27:21; 30:5; Gal. 1:17; 4:25), and when it is, it refers more to the general area than to any specific group of people or geographic location. It seems to stand as a designation for that expanse of land that lies to the south and east of Canaan and the Transjordan peoples. On several occasions the term “Arabs” is used to designate the people from those regions (2 Chron. 17:11; 21:16; 22:1; 26:7; Neh. 4:7; Acts 2:11). Elsewhere they are referred to as “eastern peoples” (Gen. 29:1; Judg. 6:3, 33; 7:12; 8:10) or “people of the East” (1 Kings 4:30; Job 1:3; Jer. 49:28; Ezek. 25:4; 25:10). In Gen. 25:6 Arabia is referred to as the “land of the east,” and in Isa. 2:6 simply as “the East” (although this may refer simply to Syria and Mesopotamia).

Clearly, Arabia is a presence in the Scripture, although its role is not nearly as dominant or even as clear as that of other nations or regions, whether superpowers such as Babylon, Assyria, and Egypt or lesser nations such as the Am­mon­ites or the various Canaanite peoples. Still, the importance of Arabia should not be overlooked.

Like many other peoples in the OT, how these people are evaluated by biblical writers is diverse, which is compounded by the fact that the various referents for “Arabs” or “Arabia” can only really be determined, if at all, from a close examination of the context. Nevertheless, we see that “all the kings of Arabia and the governors of the territories” gave gifts to Solomon (2 Chron. 9:14). The Arabs are also said to bring tribute to Jehoshaphat (17:11). Elsewhere in the historical books their relationship with the Israelites is more hostile (e.g., 2 Chron. 21:16; 22:1; Neh. 4:7).

Neither do they escape the attention of the prophets. In Isa. 21:13–16 their troubles are predicted at the hands of other nations (notably the Babylonians and the Assyrians, both of whom waged battles at later points in Israel’s history). Isaiah also refers to Dedanites and Kedar, the first being an Arabian tribe and the second a home of Bedouin tribes. Both references assume their nomadic lifestyle. According to Jer. 25:24, they will be among many nations who will drink of the cup of God’s wrath. According to Ezek. 30:5, Arabia will fall by the sword (Nebuchadnezzar’s) as one of several allies of Egypt.

In the NT, Arabs were among those present at Pentecost (Acts 2:11). After his conversion Paul journeyed to Arabia (Gal. 1:17), by which is meant the Nabatean kingdom, stretching from the Transjordan southwest toward the Sinai Peninsula. Interestingly, Paul’s reference to Mount Sinai as being in Arabia (Gal. 4:25) may suggest a location other than the traditional one of the Sinai Peninsula—for example, across the Gulf of Aqaba (the eastern arm of the Red Sea) in or near Midian (see Exod. 2:11–3:3)—although there is no consensus on this matter.

(1) Shem’s son (Gen. 10:22; 1 Chron. 1:17) and ancestor to the Arameans. (2) Kemu­el’s son, grandson of Abraham’s brother Nahor (Gen. 22:21). (3) Shemer’s son in the genealogy of Asher (1 Chron. 7:34). (4) The KJV has “Aram” in the genealogy of Christ (Matt. 1:3; Luke 3:33), whereas other translations have “Ram” (consistently in the Luke passage; the Matthew reference has further complications and thus the versions differ, only some having Ram [KJV, NIV, NASB] and others Ami [NRSV, NLT, NET]). (5) An important Aramean nation located in modern Syria. Many English translations inaccurately refer to this state as “Syria.”

Literally, “Aram of the Two Rivers.” This is a region of the northern Euphrates above the point where it is joined by the River Harbor in the west of what is now Syria, and thus northwest of Mesopotamia proper. Associated with the patriarchs, its proximity to Israel also made it a place from which opposition might come. Genesis 24:10 notes that it was here that Abraham’s servant came to the city of Nahor and met Rebekah at the well, while Deut. 23:4 indicates that this was Balaam’s home region. Cushan-Rishathaim, Israel’s first foreign oppressor in Judges, came from here (Judg. 3:8), while both 1 Chron. 19:6 and the title of Ps. 60 indicate that the Ammonites hired mercenaries from the region when engaged in war against David.

Descendants of Shem (Gen. 10:22) and Nahor (Gen. 22:21) identified in the LXX and English translations as “Syrians.” According to the patriarchal narratives in Genesis, Arameans originated from Upper Mesopotamia in the early second millennium. Abraham is referred to as a “wandering Aramean” (Deut. 26:5), which suggests that the Hebrews descended from Arameans.

The Arameans gradually grew until increasing numbers, famine, drought, or other agents forced them to spread east and west. Their eastern expansion faced opposition by the Assyrian Empire, whose sources record numerous conflicts between their kings and the “Ahlamu” (the Assyrian reference to the Arameans).

The western expansion impacted ancient Israel as early as the days of Saul (1 Sam. 14:47). David defeated the alliance of the Ammonites with the Aramean king Hadadezer (2 Sam. 8:3–8; 10–12). King Asa of Judah made a treaty with an Aramean king in his war against Baasha of Israel (1 Kings 15:16–22). King Ahab was defeated and killed in his battles with the Arameans (1 Kings 22:1–38). Later, God provided a “deliverer” (possibly an Assyrian king or officer), which relieved Aramean pressures upon Israel (2 Kings 13:3–5). This allowed Jehoash of Israel to defeat the Arameans and regain previously lost territories. In the eighth century BC the Aramean king Rezin, in alliance with Israel and Tyre, attempted to force Ahaz of Judah into their league to oppose the growing Assyrian threat (2 Kings 16:5–9; Isa. 7:1–9). By the end of the eighth century, all Aramean territories had become provinces in the Assyrian Empire.

Very little is known about Aramean society. They were nomadic pastoralists who established tribal states throughout Mesopotamia. By the ninth century BC, these states developed into monarchies, their kings competing for power and greater territories. There was never an Aramean empire. Although the Arameans were polytheistic, Hadad was the most prominent deity and the patron of the kings. The Aramaic language had a long-lasting influence in the ancient world. It was adopted as the official language of international diplomacy during the time of the Persian Empire and remained so even into the Hellenistic era.

The son of Dishan mentioned in the genealogy of Seir the Horite (Gen. 36:28; 1 Chron. 1:42). Aran became a clan of Edom.

Ararat refers to a mountainous region in eastern Asia Minor. The LXX uses “Armenia” for Ararat (except at Isa. 37:38), implying the modern country of Armenia or eastern Turkey (Kurdistan), two hundred miles southeast of the Black Sea around Lake Van (cf. Josephus, Ant. 1.3).

As early as the thirteenth century BC, Assyrian texts call this area “Urartu” (inscription of Shalmaneser I). As a kingdom, Urartu reached its peak of power in the eighth century. The same location occurs in 2 Kings 19:37 (cf. Isa. 37:38). These texts show that Ararat could be the enemy not only of Assyria (2 Kings 19:37) but also of Babylon (Jer. 51:27). Along with the kingdoms of Minni and Ashkenaz, Ararat is summoned by God to fight against Babylon and vindicate Zion. In God’s hands such nations are instruments, and God’s supremacy will be preserved.

The best-known reference to Ararat is as the location where Noah’s ark comes to rest after the flood. Genesis 8:4 actually speaks of the “mountains of Ararat,” not one particular mountain. In Gen. 8:2–14 the perspective is of the rain stopping and the floodwaters slowly receding in an extended process during which the ark is deposited on the Ararat mountain range. Tradition has favored Agri Dag, an extinct volcano rising 16,916 feet on the northeastern border of Turkey, as a viable site for Ararat. See also Armenia.

One who serves as a facilitator of reconciliation between two parties. The role of a mediator was taken by different individuals and offices in the OT, as seen in Abraham interceding for Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. 18:22–32), Moses asking God to forgive Israel (Exod. 32:31–32), and the Israelites begging Moses to speak to God on their behalf (Exod. 20:19). In addition, judges, prophets, kings, and priests assumed intermediary functions at times. Mediation functions bidirectionally: from God to humans, and from humans to God. The prophets are quintessentially the first kind of mediators (God to humans), while the priests took, mostly, the second function (humans to God).

In the NT, the role of mediator is given to Christ, since he alone, as God incarnate, is qualified for it (the “one mediator between God and mankind” [1 Tim. 2:5]). This implies that insomuch as reconciliation between sinful humankind and a holy God is conceivable, Christ alone can facilitate that mediation.

Hebrews develops a theology of mediation by comparing Christ to angels, Moses, and the prophets, declaring that Christ is superior to each in every aspect. Hebrews says that Christ is the mediator of a new and better covenant (8:6; 9:15; 12:24). Many NT passages present Christ engaging in prophetic ministry as he proclaims and interprets God’s will for the lost world. His priestly work consists not only of giving himself as the ultimate sacrifice but also of interceding for humans before God and giving the “priestly blessing” from his heavenly abode.

Christ’s mediation is to be appreciated in terms of both who he is and what he has done. The eternal mystery surrounding Christ is his incarnate person (God-man) and his atoning death (cleansing all guilt). Through the patristic period and the following scholastic movement, theological reflection on Christ was channeled to the meaning of incarnation, emphasizing Christ’s unique status as both true God and true human that makes redemptive work possible.

By comparison, the Protestant Reformers brought Christ’s salvific and mediatory work into the forefront of their theology. The Reformed tradition developed the mediatory role of Christ in a threefold manner: prophet, priest, and king.

A chief or first angel. The word “archangel” refers to a particular class of angels; it also refers to a rank in the angelic hierarchy. In the OT, no particular angel is identified as the highest in the angelic hierarchy. Michael and Gabriel are the two named angels in the OT. In the book of Daniel, Michael is identified as “one of the chief princes,” which is taken to mean archangels (10:13). The distinction between Michael and Gabriel in the book of Daniel is that of function, not hierarchy. Michael functions as a warrior (10:13, 21; 12:1), whereas Gabriel functions as a re­vealer of mysteries (8:16; 9:21). In the NT, Michael is specifically called “the archangel” and is the divine warrior who contends with the devil over the body of Moses (Jude 9); and Michael and his angels engage in a heavenly battle against Satan and his angels (Rev. 12:7). In 1 Thess. 4:16 the imagery used is of God as a divine warrior par excellence who comes down from heaven with a shout, with the voice of his archangel, and with a trumpet declaring his victory as he comes to gather his people.

Angelology is more developed in Second Temple period (intertestamental) literature, wherein the identities and functions of angels are clarified. The archangels comprise one class of angels within the angelic hierarchy. Scripture refers to other classes of angels, such as cherubim (e.g., Gen. 3:24; Exod. 25:18–22; Pss. 18:10; 80:10; 99:1), seraphim (Isa. 6:2, 6), watchers (Dan. 4:13, 17, 23), Satan and fallen angels (Matt. 9:34; 25:41; Eph. 2:2; 2 Pet. 2:4; Jude 6; Rev. 10:12). For example, 1 En. 6 gives the names of the twenty fallen watchers (cf. Gen. 6:1–4), and 1 En. 20 has the earliest reference to the seven archangels: Uriel, Raphael, Raguel, Michael, Zerachiel, Gabriel, and Remiel. There are, however, other lists that give alternate names to the seven archangels. In 3 En. 17:1–3 the archangels are Michael, Gabriel, Shatqiel, Baradiel, Shachaqiel, Baraqiel, and Sidriel. In the Testament of Solomon four of the seven archangels are mentioned: Michael, Ouriel, Raphael, and Gabriel (1:6; 2:4; 5:9; 18:6). In the book of Tobit, the angel Raphael disguises himself in human form and finally reveals his identity thus: “I am Raphael, one of the seven angels, who stand ready and enter before the glory of the Lord” (12:15; cf. Rev. 8:2).

The archangels also perform various other functions. In Tobit, Raphael functions as a protective guide and healer. In 3 En. 17:1–3 the seven archangels are in charge of the seven heavens, and each is accompanied by 496,000 ministering angels. In Rev. 12:7–9 Michael commands the angel army that battles the dragon and its army. In T. Levi 3:3–6 the archangels are regarded as temple personnel; they serve and offer proprietary sacrifices on behalf of all the sins of ignorance of the righteous ones in uppermost heaven, the holy of holies (cf. Jub. 2:2; 1 En. 14:23). In a similar fashion, in Rev. 8:1–10:11 the seven angels appear before God and also serve at the altar to offer incense and to take the prayers of the saints before the throne. See also Angel.

Archers were significant to warfare. As early as 2370 BC the composite bow emerged as an adaptation to the equipment of enemies. Usually stationed on city walls (2 Sam. 11:24), archers gained more mobility through chariots (2 Kings 9:24).

In contrast to the shepherding patriarchs (e.g., Isaac, Jacob), the nonchosen line is self-reliant, symbolized by their bows (Ishmael [Gen. 21:16], Esau [27:3]). Except for Jonathan (1 Sam. 20:20), most of the archers of the OT are foreigners (1 Sam. 31:3; 1 Kings 22:34; 1 Chron. 10:3; 2 Chron. 35:23), with some Israelites (1 Sam. 2:4; 1 Chron. 8:40).

(1) A people group descended from Canaan, Ham’s son (Gen. 10:17; 1 Chron. 1:15). These peoples were most likely residents of Irqata, modern Tell Arqa, located eighty miles north of Sidon in Syria. The city was conquered by Tiglath-pileser III of Assyria and by Thutmose III of Egypt. It appears in the Amarna letters and was renamed “Caesarea Libani” during the Roman period. (2) A clan located southwest of Bethel that became part of Benjamin (Josh. 16:2). Hushai, David’s counselor, was an Arkite (2 Sam. 15:32; 16:16; 17:5, 14; 1 Chron. 27:33). Their territory was the southern boundary marker of the tribe of Joseph (Josh. 16:2) and included the town of Ataroth (Num. 32:3, 34).

Architecture is the technology and the art of design and construction. The technology of architecture includes an understanding of mathematical and engineering principles; the art of architecture focuses attention on interest and beauty in design. The creative imagination of the architect is constantly considering how to artfully manage form and function in the design and construction process.

Architecture and the Bible

The term “architecture” does not occur in most English translations of the Bible. There is, however, evidence of and reference to the architectural activity of God’s people. In addition, Israel and the church were contextualized in significant architectural periods (Egyptian, Assyrian, Greek, and Roman), so the major empires of the biblical period often influenced the design and construction of cities, temples, and structures referenced in the biblical text. Architecture offers biblical studies a way to better understand the historical intentions of the Bible. By means of architectural investigation, the history and the heritage of past civilizations are illuminated. As a result, our reading of the biblical text is enhanced.

When we investigate the biblical text with attention to the technology and art of architecture, two perspectives emerge. First, architecture draws our attention to the background of the biblical text. In certain biblical texts we learn about the design and the construction that took place in Egypt, Assyria, and Palestine during major biblical events. For example, the patriarchal and Mosaic periods occurred during times of expansion and development in the Eighteenth to Twentieth Dynasties of Egypt (i.e., New Kingdom, sixteenth to eleventh centuries BC). For these periods, we gain knowledge about capital relocations along with temple and pyramid constructions. We learn that during the conquest, Israel took over existing Canaanite cities in keeping with the Mosaic policies. The architecture of Palestine enables us to better understand the form and function of these infrastructures.

Second, architecture draws our attention to the theological implications of the form and function of structures designed by God. In keeping with the scope of architecture, we are forced to understand that what God designed for altars, the ark, the tabernacle, and the temples of the past and the future included more than just the functional requirements of a nation’s religious system. The interpreter of the biblical text must consider how the design of these structures elicits response and communicates meaning. These structures are also windows on the social, political, and economic aspects of the Israelite nation.

Old Testament

Cities and fortifications. The biblical rec­ord makes reference to architectural structures, materials, and furnishings. Cities are referenced frequently throughout the OT canon. The city is obviously the context for architectural expression. The cities of the Bible are not described in extensive detail. We learn that Cain was a city builder who named his work after his son Enoch. The architectural feature of cities mentioned 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 place for city life and activity (Gen. 23:1; Prov. 31:31). There was also sinister activity at city gates. Abner, for example, was killed in the city gate (2 Sam. 3:22–30). In addition, executions for covenant violations were carried out at the city gate (Deut. 17:5). There was more than one city gate, as we learn from the postexilic construction activity of Ezra and Nehemiah.

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

Cities were protected by a wall system (Lev. 25:29) that also provided space for housing (Josh. 2:15). The conquest of Jericho recounts the familiar defeat of that city by the very unconventional destruction of its walls (Josh. 6:20). A city square is another feature of the city architecture (Judg. 19:15–17) that served the public needs of the community.

The biblical descriptions of Jerusalem offer a measure of insight into its architecture. During the rebuilding process in the postexilic period, Nehemiah comments on both the construction and the building materials (Neh. 2:8; 13:31; cf. Ezra 6:4) and the spacious nature of the city (Neh. 7:4). From another perspective, the psalmist comments, “Jerusalem is built like a city that is closely compacted together” (Ps. 122:3).

Beyond these textual details we learn through the writings of the prophets that cities are the subject of God’s wrath for covenant violation (Jer. 6:6; Hos. 11:6; Mic. 5:11). Despite this, the nation of Israel is not left without the hope of restoration. The prophets also anticipated the return of the people along with the restoration of the city infrastructure (Amos 9:14; Mal. 1:4).

The temple and sacred structures. The other architectural features referenced by the writers of Scripture include altars, the tabernacle, the tent of meeting, and the temple. The tent and the tabernacle were also outfitted with unique furniture items described in detail and expertly crafted. The construction projects of Solomon are detailed in 1 Kings 5–7. Solomon, like David, pursued his architectural ambitions. The book of Ezekiel gives extensive architectural detail for the construction of a future temple in which God will reign and rule (Ezek. 40–48).

The temple and royal residences were made of stone with cedar roofing. The chamber buildings that surrounded the temple were three stories high. The interior walls and ceilings were lined with cedar to cover all the stone (1 Kings 6:1–10). In all the construction details for the temple, the text does not elaborate on architectural style. Perhaps the builders were influenced to some degree by the styles of the major periods.

What are the theological implications related to the form and function of the sacred structures in the biblical material? The first is that God is the ultimate designer of Israel’s architecture. God’s signature work certainly is not the tabernacle or the Solomonic temple, but rather the created realm. The beauty and the complexities of the created world continue to draw attention to God’s beauty and intelligence. As the psalmist declares, the creation, which God designed, is a constant source of praise (Ps. 19).

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

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

The tabernacle and the temple were divine residences (Exod. 30:6; 40:34; 2 Sam. 7:5; 1 Kings 8:11). For this reason, the design and function of each structure reflected the glorious worth of God and reminded the nation of its own uncleanness. Beyond the structures of temple and tabernacle, the city of Jerusalem was privileged to be the resting 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).

The history of Israel reveals that the sustainability of these sacred structures was influenced by physical and spiritual factors. God occupied the structures or met with Israel at these sacred places as long as Israel conformed to the terms of the Mosaic covenant (1 Sam. 4:21; 1 Kings 9:6–9). During the monarchy, kings who departed from Torah would strip the temple to pay tribute to foreign overlords (2 Kings 24:13) or would modify the function of the structure to accommodate the worship of foreign gods (see 2 Kings 23). Although there were periodic times of rebuilding the sacred structures, sustainability was short lived. The ideology of the sacred structures anticipates a future time when their original function will be replaced with the opportunity to live in God’s presence forever.

New Testament

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

In terms of physical buildings, the church of the NT was a house church. During the time of Christ the significant architectural structures were the temple and synagogues. Herod the Great was the major builder of the time, whose impressive temple dominated the landscape of the Jerusalem area. Although the synagogue was a central structure during the life of Christ and the early church, function is emphasized over form 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).

The focus of the NT is also on the church’s function instead of its architectural form. The church, however, prospered and grew in the context of a significant Hellenistic architectural period (300 BC to AD 300). In this period the Seleucids were responsible for establishing large Greek cities across western and central Asia. The primary construction material continued to be the mud-brick, which resulted in rapidly decaying buildings. Although cities continued to be laid out in a grid format, a more dynamic, hilly format was being introduced. The homes in these cities often were built with courtyards like ones in Mesopotamia and Egypt. The temples of the Hellenistic period were designed with landscaping and terracing, along with porticoed enclosures and stairways.

The book of Revelation closes the canon with extensive detail about the new city of Jerusalem, which God will design and build (Rev. 21) and which will function to serve his sovereign purposes as creator and redeemer.

(1) Son of Benjamin (Gen. 46:21). (2) Son of Bela and grandson of Benjamin (Num. 26:40), called “Addar” in 1 Chron. 8:3 (erroneously?), who was the progenitor of a significant clan, the Ardites, in the tribe of Benjamin.

The son of Gad who fathered a significant clan, the Arelites, in the tribe of Gad (Gen. 46:16; Num. 26:17).

(1) The king of Ellasar who joined a coalition against five kings of the Dead Sea region (Gen. 14:1, 9). Abram was swept up in this conflict because his nephew Lot was captured in Sodom (14:12). Several similar-sounding names (for both Arioch and Ellasar) are known from extrabiblical sources, though none of them can be identified with confidence with the biblical king. (2) The captain of the guard in the court of Nebuchadnezzar who was commanded to kill the wise men of Babylon, including Daniel (Dan. 2:14–15). Arioch protected Daniel by warning him of the king’s order and then securing an audience for Daniel with the king (2:24–25).

God announced to Noah that he was going to destroy all the inhabitants of the earth and commanded him to build an “ark” (Heb. tebah; Gen. 6:14–16). Apart from the Genesis flood narrative, Exod. 2:3–5 is the only other passage in the Bible where this word is used, there for the ark of bulrushes in which the infant Moses was placed. Both arks were made waterproof by a coating of pitch (tar). An ark is something built to save people from drowning. It is not the name of a kind of boat as such (e.g., yacht), but rather a geometric boxlike shape. The ark was without rudder, sail, or any navigational aid.

Noah was told to make it of “gopher wood” (Heb. goper), which the early Jewish Aramaic translations (Targumim) identified as cedar (NIV, NRSV, NET: “cypress wood”). The Hebrew word goper occurs only here in the Bible, but the Akkadian equivalent (kupru) is found at a similar point in the Epic of Gilgamesh. It was, then, the right kind of wood for a boat. The ark was to have “rooms”—that is, cubicles (lit., “nests”)—for the different animals to be housed in and kept apart from other animals.

After the general description of the ark (Gen. 6:14), details were provided by God on how to build it (6:15). Its length (300 cubits), width (50 cubits), and height (30 cubits) were specified. “Cubit” literally means “forearm” (the distance from elbow to tip of middle finger), so the ark was approximately 450 feet (140 meters) long, 75 feet (23 meters) wide, and 45 feet (13.5 meters) high (see NIV mg.). We cannot be exactly sure if “roof” (6:16) is the correct translation of the Hebrew word tsohar, which may refer to a hatchway or skylight (Vulg.: fenestra [“window”]; note the NIV 1984 mg.: “Make an opening for light”). Another possibility is “pitched roof.” The usual Hebrew word, gag, is not used because that refers to a flat roof (see Josh. 2:6, 8; 2 Sam. 11:2). The instruction to “finish it to a cubit above” (RSV) refers to the pitch of the roof or its overhang. The “window” (Heb. khallon) that Noah opens in Gen. 8:6 is probably to be equated with this skylight in the roof, not a window in the side (since Noah cannot see out). In Gen. 8:13 Noah removes the “covering” (Heb. mikseh) from the ark, so as to see the surface of the earth. (Gen. 5:1-32; Gen. 6:1-22; Gen 7:1-24; Gen. 8:1-22).

The ark was to have a door in its side, which was closed by God (Gen. 6:16; 7:16). The structure was also to have three decks, which suggests that the ark was viewed as a microcosmos, with its three levels matching sky, earth, and sea. Genesis 6:17 explains why an ark is needed. The destruction will be by means of water, and the ark will carry Noah and his family (eight persons), as well as at least one pair of every living creature. The NT refers to Noah’s construction of the ark (Heb. 11:7; 1 Pet. 3:20) and his entering it (Matt. 24:38; Luke 17:27).

A sacred cultic object, in the shape of a box, that represented the presence of God among the Israelites. The ark (Heb. ’aron), constructed in wood, measured 45 inches long, 27 inches wide, and 27 inches high (Exod. 25:10), and it was transported by means of two poles inserted on either side of the ark. The most important aspects of the ark were the cover and the cherubim attached to the ark cover. Blood was ritually sprinkled on the cover, which was the designated place of atonement. In the earliest accounts, the ark became the place of atonement, meeting, and revelation between God and Israel.

In a few instances the Hebrew word ’aron also denotes a collection box (NIV: “chest”) in the temple (2 Kings 12:9–10; 2 Chron. 24:8, 10–11), and in one case it refers to Joseph’s sarcophagus, or coffin (Gen. 50:26). The Scriptures mention the ark 195 times, frequently (82 times) in association with the Lord or God, resulting in expressions such as “the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord,” the “ark of the God of Israel,” and the “ark of God.”

The Function and Locations of the Ark

The ark was housed first in the portable sanctuary or tabernacle used for worship in early Israelite history, and Exodus and Deuteronomy note that it served as a receptacle for the “testimony” or two tablets of the Ten Commandments. Consequently, the ark is often referred to as the “ark of the testimony,” since the Hebrew word for “testimony” is synonymous with the common Hebrew word for “covenant” (Pss. 25:10; 132:12), and the designations 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 also contained a gold jar of manna and Aaron’s blossoming rod (Heb. 9:4; cf. Exod. 16:32–34; Num. 17:8–10). The location of the ark became associated with the centralized place of gathering and worship by the Israelites. Moses composed what has come to be called the “Song of the Ark” (Num. 10:35–36), signifying the ark’s role in preceding the nomadic Israelites in the wilderness and indicating where they should rest.

In the 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 dry ground, when carrying the ark into the river caused the waters to be swept in a heap, depicts the supernatural relationship between the ark and the presence of God. The ark became so closely associated with the divine presence that the Israelites assumed that the presence of God resided within the ark. Only the consecrated Levitical priests could carry the ark, which was covered by three layers 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, and Uzzah, who was not a priest, reached out and touched the ark to steady it, resulting in his death (cf. 1 Chron. 13:7–10). Following the entry into the Promised Land, the ark abided at the Gilgal sanctuary, and eventually it shifted from Bethel to Shiloh.

The function of the ark as the place where the tribal confederacy sought divine counsel for holy war led also to employing the ark as a war symbol, carried forth into battle to assure victory (Josh. 6:4–21). This use of the ark most likely originates from ancient Near Eastern religious concepts and practices that associated the presence of a god with an emblematic war throne useful for divination and success in battle. The expression “the Lord Almighty, who is enthroned between the cherubim” links God’s roles as king and warrior, reinforcing the ark as God’s throne or his “footstool” (1 Sam. 4:4), symbolic of the invisibly enthroned deity. Other Canaanite deities, including El, had footstools that resembled gold-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,” and the psalmist enjoins the people to gather and worship at God’s footstool (Ps. 99:5). Similarly, Ps. 132, a liturgical poem linked to the formal procession of the ark, refers to the “footstool of [God]” as the centralized place of worship.

The Ark of the Covenant rested in the Shiloh temple in the custody of Eli until it was captured by the Philistines, who possessed it in their territory for seven months (1 Sam. 4–6). The loss of the ark was mourned as symbolizing the abandonment or departure of God’s presence, and yet its capture emphasized the Israelites’ false presumptions concerning the ark as a guarantor of military success and reinforced the fact that God could not be manipulated. Following a plague inflicted by God upon the Philistines, the ark was returned and remained at Kiriath Jearim for twenty years (6:21–7:2).

Eventually, King David transported the ark to the city of Jerusalem, reinforcing the political and cultic importance of the location. Here it remained in a “tent” until it was placed in Solomon’s temple (2 Sam. 6:17; 7:2). The ark disappeared sometime during the late monarchical period; its capture is not listed in the temple assets seized by Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings 25:13–17). The ark was never replaced after the return from the Babylonian exile, and Jeremiah declared that the ark should not be remade (Jer. 3:16). The ark is not mentioned in Ezekiel’s description of the new temple (Ezek. 40–48).

The book of Hebrews mentions the ark in relation to its prominence and purpose in the temple (9:4–5). In addition, Heb. 9:1–14 contrasts the application of Christ’s own blood in the heavenly holy place with the priestly sprinkling of blood on the “mercy seat” (NIV: “atonement cover”) of the ark. Revelation 11:19 speaks of the ark of God’s covenant being located in the heavens.

The Ark and the Holiness of God

The Ark of the Covenant underscores the holiness of God and his necessary separation from sin. The holiness or consecration of those who approach God at the ark signifies the importance of cleansing from impurity as a prerequisite to maintaining the covenant relationship with God. Although the ark and the presence of God became inseparably linked in the minds of the Israelites, God’s promise to be present among them did not imply a spatial or corporeal limitation. The law tablets contained in the ark are inextricably linked with the glory of God’s presence and the point of covenant accessibility through the word of God. The portable nature of the ark, and the tent in which it was housed, emphasizes that God’s presence or revelation is not limited to a specific location.

The NT also concretizes the ark to the holiness of God and his law. God is both merciful and just; his holiness requires propitiation for sin, and his mercy provides it through the blood atonement accomplished through the death and resurrection of Christ. Christ’s sufficient and efficacious vicarious sacrifice on the cross replaced the yearly ritual necessary to secure the salvation and forgiveness of God’s people, highlighting the superiority of Christ and salvation by grace through faith in his redemptive work on the cross. The sacrificial death of Christ provides infinite atonement and reconciliation for believers, who affirm God’s immanence while at 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 live with and among them eternally.

A sacred cultic object, in the shape of a box, that represented the presence of God among the Israelites. The ark (Heb. ’aron), constructed in wood, measured 45 inches long, 27 inches wide, and 27 inches high (Exod. 25:10), and it was transported by means of two poles inserted on either side of the ark. The most important aspects of the ark were the cover and the cherubim attached to the ark cover. Blood was ritually sprinkled on the cover, which was the designated place of atonement. In the earliest accounts, the ark became the place of atonement, meeting, and revelation between God and Israel.

In a few instances the Hebrew word ’aron also denotes a collection box (NIV: “chest”) in the temple (2 Kings 12:9–10; 2 Chron. 24:8, 10–11), and in one case it refers to Joseph’s sarcophagus, or coffin (Gen. 50:26). The Scriptures mention the ark 195 times, frequently (82 times) in association with the Lord or God, resulting in expressions such as “the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord,” the “ark of the God of Israel,” and the “ark of God.”

The Function and Locations of the Ark

The ark was housed first in the portable sanctuary or tabernacle used for worship in early Israelite history, and Exodus and Deuteronomy note that it served as a receptacle for the “testimony” or two tablets of the Ten Commandments. Consequently, the ark is often referred to as the “ark of the testimony,” since the Hebrew word for “testimony” is synonymous with the common Hebrew word for “covenant” (Pss. 25:10; 132:12), and the designations 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 also contained a gold jar of manna and Aaron’s blossoming rod (Heb. 9:4; cf. Exod. 16:32–34; Num. 17:8–10). The location of the ark became associated with the centralized place of gathering and worship by the Israelites. Moses composed what has come to be called the “Song of the Ark” (Num. 10:35–36), signifying the ark’s role in preceding the nomadic Israelites in the wilderness and indicating where they should rest.

In the 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 dry ground, when carrying the ark into the river caused the waters to be swept in a heap, depicts the supernatural relationship between the ark and the presence of God. The ark became so closely associated with the divine presence that the Israelites assumed that the presence of God resided within the ark. Only the consecrated Levitical priests could carry the ark, which was covered by three layers 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, and Uzzah, who was not a priest, reached out and touched the ark to steady it, resulting in his death (cf. 1 Chron. 13:7–10). Following the entry into the Promised Land, the ark abided at the Gilgal sanctuary, and eventually it shifted from Bethel to Shiloh.

The function of the ark as the place where the tribal confederacy sought divine counsel for holy war led also to employing the ark as a war symbol, carried forth into battle to assure victory (Josh. 6:4–21). This use of the ark most likely originates from ancient Near Eastern religious concepts and practices that associated the presence of a god with an emblematic war throne useful for divination and success in battle. The expression “the Lord Almighty, who is enthroned between the cherubim” links God’s roles as king and warrior, reinforcing the ark as God’s throne or his “footstool” (1 Sam. 4:4), symbolic of the invisibly enthroned deity. Other Canaanite deities, including El, had footstools that resembled gold-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,” and the psalmist enjoins the people to gather and worship at God’s footstool (Ps. 99:5). Similarly, Ps. 132, a liturgical poem linked to the formal procession of the ark, refers to the “footstool of [God]” as the centralized place of worship.

The Ark of the Covenant rested in the Shiloh temple in the custody of Eli until it was captured by the Philistines, who possessed it in their territory for seven months (1 Sam. 4–6). The loss of the ark was mourned as symbolizing the abandonment or departure of God’s presence, and yet its capture emphasized the Israelites’ false presumptions concerning the ark as a guarantor of military success and reinforced the fact that God could not be manipulated. Following a plague inflicted by God upon the Philistines, the ark was returned and remained at Kiriath Jearim for twenty years (6:21–7:2).

Eventually, King David transported the ark to the city of Jerusalem, reinforcing the political and cultic importance of the location. Here it remained in a “tent” until it was placed in Solomon’s temple (2 Sam. 6:17; 7:2). The ark disappeared sometime during the late monarchical period; its capture is not listed in the temple assets seized by Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings 25:13–17). The ark was never replaced after the return from the Babylonian exile, and Jeremiah declared that the ark should not be remade (Jer. 3:16). The ark is not mentioned in Ezekiel’s description of the new temple (Ezek. 40–48).

The book of Hebrews mentions the ark in relation to its prominence and purpose in the temple (9:4–5). In addition, Heb. 9:1–14 contrasts the application of Christ’s own blood in the heavenly holy place with the priestly sprinkling of blood on the “mercy seat” (NIV: “atonement cover”) of the ark. Revelation 11:19 speaks of the ark of God’s covenant being located in the heavens.

The Ark and the Holiness of God

The Ark of the Covenant underscores the holiness of God and his necessary separation from sin. The holiness or consecration of those who approach God at the ark signifies the importance of cleansing from impurity as a prerequisite to maintaining the covenant relationship with God. Although the ark and the presence of God became inseparably linked in the minds of the Israelites, God’s promise to be present among them did not imply a spatial or corporeal limitation. The law tablets contained in the ark are inextricably linked with the glory of God’s presence and the point of covenant accessibility through the word of God. The portable nature of the ark, and the tent in which it was housed, emphasizes that God’s presence or revelation is not limited to a specific location.

The NT also concretizes the ark to the holiness of God and his law. God is both merciful and just; his holiness requires propitiation for sin, and his mercy provides it through the blood atonement accomplished through the death and resurrection of Christ. Christ’s sufficient and efficacious vicarious sacrifice on the cross replaced the yearly ritual necessary to secure the salvation and forgiveness of God’s people, highlighting the superiority of Christ and salvation by grace through faith in his redemptive work on the cross. The sacrificial death of Christ provides infinite atonement and reconciliation for believers, who affirm God’s immanence while at 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 live with and among them eternally.

(1) A people group descended from Canaan, Ham’s son (Gen. 10:17; 1 Chron. 1:15). These peoples were most likely residents of Irqata, modern Tell Arqa, located eighty miles north of Sidon in Syria. The city was conquered by Tiglath-pileser III of Assyria and by Thutmose III of Egypt. It appears in the Amarna letters and was renamed “Caesarea Libani” during the Roman period. (2) A clan located southwest of Bethel that became part of Benjamin (Josh. 16:2). Hushai, David’s counselor, was an Arkite (2 Sam. 15:32; 16:16; 17:5, 14; 1 Chron. 27:33). Their territory was the southern boundary marker of the tribe of Joseph (Josh. 16:2) and included the town of Ataroth (Num. 32:3, 34).

The Bible depicts war and warlike acts throughout. The arms are both offensive and defensive in nature. The most common types of offensive weapons are swords, axes, spears, bows and arrows, slings, and stones. Defensive weapons include the shield and the helmet. An army’s arsenal was usually kept in a storehouse called an armory (1 Kings 10:17; Isa. 22:8; Neh. 3:19).

Arms

Sword. In the OT, the word “sword” (khereb) appears for the first time in Gen. 3:24 after Adam and Eve have been evicted from the garden of Eden. A flaming sword was placed there “to guard the way to the tree of life.” Thus, the first use of the sword is defensive. Later in Genesis, Jacob’s sons use swords to avenge the rape of their sister Dinah (Gen. 34:25–26). In most cases the word describes the weapon of choice for most of antiquity. Swords were manufactured of iron (1 Sam. 13:19; Joel 3:10). Some were short and easy to maneuver (Judg. 3:16), while others were long and heavy (1 Sam. 21:9). They could be single- or double-edged, and they were worn in a sheath or scabbard (1 Sam. 17:51; 2 Sam. 20:8). The sword was also supported by a girdle made of leather studded with nails (1 Sam. 18:4; 2 Sam. 20:8). Sometimes, the sword was used figuratively to speak of God’s judgment (Lev. 26:6; Isa. 1:20; Jer. 47:6; 50:35–37; Ezek. 21:9, 28; Hos. 11:6). In the NT, the most common word describing a sword is the Greek machaira, which is used to describe the weapons wielded by the mob that came to arrest Jesus (Matt. 26:47, 55; Mark 14:48), as well as the weapon used by Peter to cut off Malchus’s ear (John 18:10). Another Greek word translated “sword” is rhomphaia, which describes a longer sword, generally worn over one’s shoulder (Rev. 1:16; 6:8; 19:21). The word “sword” is also used figuratively in the NT. The word of God is designated as “the sword of the Spirit” (Eph. 6:17) and as a “double-edged sword” (Heb. 4:12).

Spear. Four main words in the Bible are translated as “spear” or “javelin.” The Hebrew word romakh is translated “spear” or “javelin,” and it appears fifteen times in the OT. The spear was made of iron (Joel 3:10), and those who fell prey to it never survived its penetration (Num. 25:7; 1 Kings 18:28). The other Hebrew word used for the spear is khanit, which appears about fifty times in the OT. It is used to describe Goliath’s spear when he fought David (1 Sam. 17:7), Saul’s spear when he hurled it at David (1 Sam. 18:10–11), and the Assyrian-made “glittering” spear (Nah. 3:3). The third word is khidon, which appears about ten times in the OT. It describes a weapon in the arsenals of Joshua (Josh. 8:18, 26), Goliath (1 Sam. 17:6), and the Babylonians (Jer. 6:23). In the NT, the word “spear” (Gk. longchē) occurs only once, referring to the weapon used to pierce Jesus’ side at his crucifixion (John 19:34).

Bow and arrow. The bow and arrow was an important offensive weapon in Israel and the surrounding cultures. In the Bible, bow and arrow, either in combination or individually, appear in both a literal (2 Kings 9:24; Isa. 37:33) and a figurative sense (Pss. 11:2; 64:7; Isa. 49:2; Lam. 3:12; Zech. 9:13). There is extrabiblical evidence suggesting that the Egyptians and the Syrians also used the bow and arrow as part of their military arsenal.

Sling. Primitive but effective, the sling was used not only in Israel but also in Egypt and Babylon. Easy to manufacture, it used stones as ammunition; thus it was the weapon of choice for those lacking raw material to build weapons made of metal. Besides David’s use of the sling in his encounter with Goliath (1 Sam. 17:40), men from the tribe of Benjamin used the sling with remarkable accuracy (Judg. 20:16).

Ax. Besides its primary role for cutting down trees (Deut. 19:5; Judg. 9:48; Jer. 10:3), the ax probably was used in war as well. (See also Ax, Ax Head.)

Armor

Shield. The shield is one of the most ancient defense weapons. Two Hebrew words are used to depict a shield. The magen appears for the first time in Gen. 15:1, where it is used figuratively to speak of God’s protection of Abraham. It is used in the same manner one other time, in Deut. 33:29. It is frequently used as a figure of speech by the psalmists to denote the same idea of divine protection (Pss. 3:3; 7:10; 18:2, 30; 28:7; 33:20; 59:11; 84:9, 11; 115:9–11; 119:114; 144:2). When used literally, the term refers to a shield made of wood and sometimes overlaid with leather. Solomon used gold to manufacture shields (1 Kings 10:17), while Rehoboam manufactured them of bronze (1 Kings 14:27). This type of shield was used as a defensive weapon by the Israelites throughout their history (Judg. 5:8; 1 Chron. 5:18; 2 Chron. 9:16; 14:8; 17:17; 23:9; Neh. 4:16). It was also used by the Syrians (Isa. 22:6), Assyrians (Isa. 37:33), Egyptians (Jer. 46:3), and Persians (Ezek. 27:10). The other Hebrew term translated “shield” is tsinnah. This was larger than the magen and was meant to cover the fighter’s entire body. It was the type of shield carried by Goliath’s shield bearer (1 Sam. 17:7, 41), manufactured by King Solomon (1 Kings 10:16), used by the Gadites who joined David while fleeing from Saul (1 Chron. 12:8), and used by Israel’s army during the reigns of Rehoboam (2 Chron. 11:12) and Asa (2 Chron. 14:8). The Greek word thyreos is the LXX rendering of the Hebrew tsinnah, and it appears only once in the NT. Paul uses the word figuratively when speaking about the “shield of faith” (Eph. 6:16).

Helmet. The helmet had the obvious defensive purpose of protecting a combatant’s head. It was made of leather or light metal, such as bronze (1 Sam. 17:5, 38). In both Testaments, salvation is spoken of figuratively as a “helmet” (Isa. 59:17; Eph. 6:17; 1 Thess. 5:8).

Coat of mail. Body armor was used for the protection of the warrior not only in Israel but also in other ancient Near Eastern nations. The Hebrew term shiryon is variously translated as “coat of mail” (ESV, RSV, NRSV), “coat of scale armor” (NIV), or “habergeon” (KJV). Goliath wore this type of body armor (1 Sam. 17:5, 38), and his was manufactured of bronze. Despite wearing a shiryon, Israel’s king Ahab was fatally wounded in battle (1 Kings 22:34). In an attempt to strengthen Judah’s military power, King Uzziah also provided coats of mail for his army (2 Chron. 26:14). It was also used during postexilic times, Nehemiah’s workers having benefited from its protection (Neh. 4:16). Shiryon (Gk. thorax) is used figuratively to speak of a “breastplate” of righteousness and of love (Isa. 59:17; Eph. 6:14; 1 Thess. 5:8).

The Bible depicts war and warlike acts throughout. The arms are both offensive and defensive in nature. The most common types of offensive weapons are swords, axes, spears, bows and arrows, slings, and stones. Defensive weapons include the shield and the helmet. An army’s arsenal was usually kept in a storehouse called an armory (1 Kings 10:17; Isa. 22:8; Neh. 3:19).

Arms

Sword. In the OT, the word “sword” (khereb) appears for the first time in Gen. 3:24 after Adam and Eve have been evicted from the garden of Eden. A flaming sword was placed there “to guard the way to the tree of life.” Thus, the first use of the sword is defensive. Later in Genesis, Jacob’s sons use swords to avenge the rape of their sister Dinah (Gen. 34:25–26). In most cases the word describes the weapon of choice for most of antiquity. Swords were manufactured of iron (1 Sam. 13:19; Joel 3:10). Some were short and easy to maneuver (Judg. 3:16), while others were long and heavy (1 Sam. 21:9). They could be single- or double-edged, and they were worn in a sheath or scabbard (1 Sam. 17:51; 2 Sam. 20:8). The sword was also supported by a girdle made of leather studded with nails (1 Sam. 18:4; 2 Sam. 20:8). Sometimes, the sword was used figuratively to speak of God’s judgment (Lev. 26:6; Isa. 1:20; Jer. 47:6; 50:35–37; Ezek. 21:9, 28; Hos. 11:6). In the NT, the most common word describing a sword is the Greek machaira, which is used to describe the weapons wielded by the mob that came to arrest Jesus (Matt. 26:47, 55; Mark 14:48), as well as the weapon used by Peter to cut off Malchus’s ear (John 18:10). Another Greek word translated “sword” is rhomphaia, which describes a longer sword, generally worn over one’s shoulder (Rev. 1:16; 6:8; 19:21). The word “sword” is also used figuratively in the NT. The word of God is designated as “the sword of the Spirit” (Eph. 6:17) and as a “double-edged sword” (Heb. 4:12).

Spear. Four main words in the Bible are translated as “spear” or “javelin.” The Hebrew word romakh is translated “spear” or “javelin,” and it appears fifteen times in the OT. The spear was made of iron (Joel 3:10), and those who fell prey to it never survived its penetration (Num. 25:7; 1 Kings 18:28). The other Hebrew word used for the spear is khanit, which appears about fifty times in the OT. It is used to describe Goliath’s spear when he fought David (1 Sam. 17:7), Saul’s spear when he hurled it at David (1 Sam. 18:10–11), and the Assyrian-made “glittering” spear (Nah. 3:3). The third word is khidon, which appears about ten times in the OT. It describes a weapon in the arsenals of Joshua (Josh. 8:18, 26), Goliath (1 Sam. 17:6), and the Babylonians (Jer. 6:23). In the NT, the word “spear” (Gk. longchē) occurs only once, referring to the weapon used to pierce Jesus’ side at his crucifixion (John 19:34).

Bow and arrow. The bow and arrow was an important offensive weapon in Israel and the surrounding cultures. In the Bible, bow and arrow, either in combination or individually, appear in both a literal (2 Kings 9:24; Isa. 37:33) and a figurative sense (Pss. 11:2; 64:7; Isa. 49:2; Lam. 3:12; Zech. 9:13). There is extrabiblical evidence suggesting that the Egyptians and the Syrians also used the bow and arrow as part of their military arsenal.

Sling. Primitive but effective, the sling was used not only in Israel but also in Egypt and Babylon. Easy to manufacture, it used stones as ammunition; thus it was the weapon of choice for those lacking raw material to build weapons made of metal. Besides David’s use of the sling in his encounter with Goliath (1 Sam. 17:40), men from the tribe of Benjamin used the sling with remarkable accuracy (Judg. 20:16).

Ax. Besides its primary role for cutting down trees (Deut. 19:5; Judg. 9:48; Jer. 10:3), the ax probably was used in war as well. (See also Ax, Ax Head.)

Armor

Shield. The shield is one of the most ancient defense weapons. Two Hebrew words are used to depict a shield. The magen appears for the first time in Gen. 15:1, where it is used figuratively to speak of God’s protection of Abraham. It is used in the same manner one other time, in Deut. 33:29. It is frequently used as a figure of speech by the psalmists to denote the same idea of divine protection (Pss. 3:3; 7:10; 18:2, 30; 28:7; 33:20; 59:11; 84:9, 11; 115:9–11; 119:114; 144:2). When used literally, the term refers to a shield made of wood and sometimes overlaid with leather. Solomon used gold to manufacture shields (1 Kings 10:17), while Rehoboam manufactured them of bronze (1 Kings 14:27). This type of shield was used as a defensive weapon by the Israelites throughout their history (Judg. 5:8; 1 Chron. 5:18; 2 Chron. 9:16; 14:8; 17:17; 23:9; Neh. 4:16). It was also used by the Syrians (Isa. 22:6), Assyrians (Isa. 37:33), Egyptians (Jer. 46:3), and Persians (Ezek. 27:10). The other Hebrew term translated “shield” is tsinnah. This was larger than the magen and was meant to cover the fighter’s entire body. It was the type of shield carried by Goliath’s shield bearer (1 Sam. 17:7, 41), manufactured by King Solomon (1 Kings 10:16), used by the Gadites who joined David while fleeing from Saul (1 Chron. 12:8), and used by Israel’s army during the reigns of Rehoboam (2 Chron. 11:12) and Asa (2 Chron. 14:8). The Greek word thyreos is the LXX rendering of the Hebrew tsinnah, and it appears only once in the NT. Paul uses the word figuratively when speaking about the “shield of faith” (Eph. 6:16).

Helmet. The helmet had the obvious defensive purpose of protecting a combatant’s head. It was made of leather or light metal, such as bronze (1 Sam. 17:5, 38). In both Testaments, salvation is spoken of figuratively as a “helmet” (Isa. 59:17; Eph. 6:17; 1 Thess. 5:8).

Coat of mail. Body armor was used for the protection of the warrior not only in Israel but also in other ancient Near Eastern nations. The Hebrew term shiryon is variously translated as “coat of mail” (ESV, RSV, NRSV), “coat of scale armor” (NIV), or “habergeon” (KJV). Goliath wore this type of body armor (1 Sam. 17:5, 38), and his was manufactured of bronze. Despite wearing a shiryon, Israel’s king Ahab was fatally wounded in battle (1 Kings 22:34). In an attempt to strengthen Judah’s military power, King Uzziah also provided coats of mail for his army (2 Chron. 26:14). It was also used during postexilic times, Nehemiah’s workers having benefited from its protection (Neh. 4:16). Shiryon (Gk. thorax) is used figuratively to speak of a “breastplate” of righteousness and of love (Isa. 59:17; Eph. 6:14; 1 Thess. 5:8).