The Israelites associated the east with the rising sun (the same Hebrew word, mizrakh, describes both), the desert (Deut. 1:1; Hos. 13:15), scorching winds (Isa. 27:8; Ezek. 17:10; Hos. 13:15; Jon. 4:8), wisdom (1 Kings 4:30; Job 1:3; cf. Matt. 2:1), and, along with the west country, the whole world (Zech. 8:7). The east country is a broad expanse stretching from the middle Euphrates to North Arabia (Gen. 29:1; Num. 23:7; Judg. 6:3, 33; 7:15). Abraham sent the sons of his concubines there (Gen. 25:6).

Scripture describes wind as a powerful force that is under God’s command. The Hebrew word ruakh sometimes is translated as “wind” but other times can mean “breath,” as well as “spirit” (Gen. 1:2). The Greek word for “spirit,” pneuma, hints of a similar range of meaning, although another word is most often used in the NT to denote wind.

Old Testament. Throughout the OT wind is used by God to fulfill his purposes. Psalm 148:8 declares that winds do God’s bidding. Yahweh keeps the wind in storehouses until they are needed (Ps. 135:7; Jer. 10:13). God uses wind to protect and provide for his people. For instance, God sends a wind over the earth to cause the floodwaters surrounding the ark to recede (Gen. 8:1), a strong east wind to drive back the sea during the exodus from Egypt (Exod. 14:21), and a wind that drives quail in from the sea to serve as food for the Israelites in the wilderness (Num. 11:31).

Wind can also be an agent of God’s destruction. God sends a plague upon Egypt by making an east wind blow locusts all across the land; afterward, God uses a west wind to blow the locusts into the sea (Exod. 10:13–19). In the book of Job a mighty wind from the desert causes the house of Job’s eldest son to collapse, killing Job’s seven sons and three daughters (Job 1:19). In the book of Jonah a great wind sent by God threatens to destroy Jonah’s ship, and a scorching east wind later causes Jonah to grow faint and desire death (Jon. 1:4; 4:8). The prophetic books use the subject of wind in communicating God’s judgment (e.g., Isa. 28:2; 64:6; Ezek. 5:2; 13:11).

While a single wind is able to blow in several directions (Eccles. 1:6), many passages specify four winds from the four quarters of the heavens. The north wind brings rain (Prov. 25:23), while the south wind brings heat (Job 37:17), both of which are useful for growing a garden (Song 4:16). Only one verse refers to the west wind specifically (Exod. 10:19), but numerous verses refer to the east wind as an agent of destruction, often appearing along with military terms. When let loose by God (Ps. 78:26), the east wind may shatter ships (Ps. 48:7), and those in its path will scatter (Jer. 18:17) or shrivel (Ezek. 19:12). In Hos. 12:1 God accuses Israel of pursuing the east wind along with multiplying lies and violence. Together, the four winds can be sent to bring destruction (Jer. 49:36) or to bring life (Ezek. 37:9). They also appear in the visions of Daniel (Dan. 7:2; 8:8; 11:4; cf. Rev. 7:1).

God rides on the wings of the wind on cherubim (Ps. 18:10; 2 Sam. 22:11), with the clouds as his chariot (Ps. 104:3). In Ps. 104:4 the winds are called God’s “messengers.” This imagery is strikingly similar to ancient descriptions of the Canaanite god Baal, although Scripture adds that it is Yahweh who created the wind (Job 28:25; Amos 4:13). Yahweh’s power is not contingent upon wind, as Elijah learns when he experiences the presence of Yahweh in the whisper and not the wind (or the earthquake) after his successful contest against the prophets of Baal (1 Kings 19:11–12).

The wisdom literature focuses upon other characteristics of wind besides its power. The transient nature of wind is significant, as wind is the inheritance of those who bring trouble upon their family (Prov. 11:29). Ecclesiastes continually refers to all things done under the sun as “a chasing after the wind” (e.g., 1:14, 17). Empty talk is spoken of as wind (Job 8:2). The function of wind to blow away chaff is also used to declare the fate of the wicked (e.g., Ps. 1:4; cf. Job 21:18). The unpredictability of wind serves as a metaphor for the mystery of God’s actions (Eccles. 11:5).

New Testament. In the NT, the Gospels reveal the divine nature of Jesus by emphasizing his ability to command the wind (Matt. 8:26–27). Jesus declares that the Son of Man will gather his elect from the four winds (Matt. 24:31; Mark 13:27). Wind is a metaphor in John 3:8 for the mystery and unpredictability of those born of the Spirit. Jesus uses the image of empty talk as wind when he refers to John the Baptist as a prophet rather than a reed swayed by the wind (Matt. 11:7; Luke 7:24). In Eph. 4:14 false teaching is referred to as wind. It is wind that easily sways the one who doubts (James 1:6). Finally, a correlation between wind and the Holy Spirit occurs when a sound like a violent wind occurs at the time when the Holy Spirit fills all those in the house at Pentecost (Acts 2:2).

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

Cooking within the Seminomadic Lifestyle

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

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

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

Cooking within the Urban Lifestyle

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

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

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

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

Cooking Utensils

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

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

The Cooking of Food

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(1) A grandson of Seir the Horite, an early inhabitant of the land of Seir, which Esau conquered (Gen. 36:20–23; 1 Chron. 1:38–40). (2) A mountain in north-central Israel overshadowing the city of Shechem on the north. Mount Ebal and its counterpart Mount Gerizim on the south form a natural amphitheater, eminently suitable for the covenantal ceremony commanded by Moses (Deut. 11:29; 27:1–13) and carried out by Joshua and the Israelites (Josh. 8:30–35). Half the tribes stood before Gerizim and half before Ebal, reciting the covenantal blessings and curses, respectively. The Israelites also set up large plaster-coated stones inscribed with the law of Moses. They built a sacrificial altar on Ebal, perhaps the same as the structure discovered there in 1980 dating from the thirteenth to twelfth centuries BC. Its floor was covered with ash and charred animal bones, but its identification and purpose are disputed. See also Gerizim.

(1) A descendant of Shem, son of Shelah, father of Peleg, and ancestor to Jesus (Gen. 10:21–31; 11:14–17; 1 Chron. 1:18–25; Luke 3:35). As hinted in Gen. 10:21, Eber seems to be the source for the name “Hebrew” for that particular line of Semitic people (a name similarly derived from “Shem”). (2) A descendant of Jacob in the tribe of Gad (1 Chron. 5:13). (3) A son of Elpaal in the tribe of Benjamin (1 Chron. 8:12). (4) A son of Shashak in the tribe of Benjamin (1 Chron. 8:22–25). (5) The head of the postexilic priestly family of Amok (Neh. 12:20).

The Economy of Israel

Before the monarchy. The economic life of the Bible begins with the creation account and the reflections communicated there about humankind’s stewardship of that which belongs to God. Humankind is placed in the world as the caregiver and protector of the rest of creation. This purpose will have ramifications for the remainder of the biblical story. Throughout the Bible, God expresses a deep concern for economic justice and economic well-being among his people. The law given by God sets out an economic and political framework that builds on this idea of justice and human stewardship of God’s creation, including some rather striking passages meant to assure a just distribution and maintenance of resources and equality (Lev. 25:1–55; Deut. 10:17–18; 15:1–11). The emphasis on economic and social justice is closely related to spiritual faithfulness throughout the prophetic texts. Isaiah speaks of economic prosperity and peace as an integral part of God’s desire for Israel. Amos, Jeremiah, and Micah denounce the economic injustices within Israel. This attitude and emphasis continue into the NT, where Jesus talks as much about economics in his teachings as he does about the rest of the Christian life. Jesus’ primary emphases in discussing economic matters suggest a need to recognize both the priority of the heavenly economy over the earthly and the fact that one’s economic activities must communicate a sense of justice and mercy as well.

The lack of a centralized government and industry in the early years of Israel’s existence meant that much of the economy revolved around private ownership and agrarian realities. In conquering the land of Canaan, the Israelites were transformed from seminomads into agriculturists, but they were still largely on their own in economic matters. They dwelled in villages and towns and lived off of what they raised in their fields and the milk and meat of their livestock. There was limited trade during this period, primarily existing only through opportunities provided by traveling merchants from Phoenicia and elsewhere. The modifications that took place in the Canaanite material culture when they were assumed by Israel were slight in nature in this early period. The period of the judges reveals a brutal culture, and the people would have remained somewhat constrained economically in the days prior to the monarchy. As stated above, the laws certainly are important in understanding how Israel viewed itself before God; however, it must be admitted that there were relatively few requisites concerning business contained in its precepts (Lev. 19:35–36; 25:36–37, 44–45; Deut. 15:2; 23:20). This may in fact reflect the more individualized nature of the early economic systems of Israel.

The monarchy. With the beginning of the monarchy, and especially the reign of Solomon, signs of extensive external trade begin to manifest themselves within Israel. The primary exports seem still to have been agricultural in nature, as Solomon is said to have sent grains and oil to Tyre in exchange for their timber and workers (1 Kings 5). Horses were a significant sign of wealth in the ancient world, and during his reign, Solomon apparently was able to import quite a few from Egypt (1 Kings 10:28–29). Solomon is even said to have sent ships to the far reaches of the known world to acquire gold, silver, iron, apes, and peacocks (1 Kings 10:22). Solomon also saw the development of an extensive system of internal economic prosperity through division of the land into districts and through establishing firm control of the major arteries of travel within Israel (1 Kings 4). Unfortunately, Solomon’s successors lacked his economic acumen. Due to inner turmoil and outside forces, Israel was unable to regain the standing that it held under Solomon, except for a brief period during the reign of Uzziah. Interestingly, the prophets often equated merchants with the Canaanites (Hos. 12:7; Zeph. 1:11; Zech. 14:21). The kings of the northern kingdom of Israel seem to have fared slightly better in economic matters than did the kings of Judah. Ahab obtained a special standing in the markets of Damascus (1 Kings 20:34), and Jeroboam II raised Israel to powerful status in the world’s economic perspectives.

After the exile. Following the return from the exile, the Jewish community was severely impoverished and had very little business activity except in its larger cities (Neh. 3:31–32). Hellenism brought with it a renewal of trade capabilities, and Josephus reports that by the mid-second century BC, Athenian merchants came regularly to Judea. The Maccabees captured Joppa, and Herod built Caesarea, which ultimately improved the economic standing of the Jews because they then controlled port locations.

Life in the NT seems not to have varied much from that in the OT, the most important exception being the stability and ease of transport resulting from Roman control of the region. This stability was often offset, however, by the imposition of high taxes. The NT relates the vast disparity of economic lifestyle between the enormously wealthy and the severely impoverished. There were also political and religious ramifications to be found in the struggle to find a proper response to taxation. This dilemma is reflected in the two opposing viewpoints among the twelve apostles, including the views of a tax collector and of a Zealot. The early church seems to have dealt with economic matters with various degrees of success (Rev. 2:9; 3:17).

Coinage

The monetary system of Israel seems to have always been based primarily on gold and silver. In fact, the Hebrew word most often translated “money,” kesep, is the word for “silver.” It is unclear exactly when coinage started in Israel. Opinions vary from the period just before the exile to several years after the exile. Up until that point, worth was assessed not by the value of the coin but rather by the weight of the metal. People carried their own weights in a bag that were used to determine the value of an exchange (Deut. 25:13; 2 Sam. 18:12); thus, the focus for ensuring fair trade was almost always on guarding against the use of false weights and scales (Lev. 19:36). The precursors to coinage seem to have been pieces of silver and gold that were considered to be a certain weight, though the emphasis was still on the weight of the product (Josh. 7:21; 1 Sam. 9:8). The basic standard of weight was the shekel.

The Persians developed a more fixed system of coinage. Darius first introduced a reformed currency system around 520–480 BC. The basic standard was the daric, which was comparable to a Babylonian shekel in weight. Because of the inherent value of coins, the purity of the metals used became more important. This resulted in a slight shift in monetary imagery related to purity versus fair weight. In the Roman era, the denarius was the basic unit of money.

Villages and Cities

The OT distinguished in size between villages and cities. The smallest measure of communal living seems to have been farming settlements or homesteads (Exod. 8:9; Neh. 11:25; Ps. 10:8). Larger settlements were referred to as villages (Gen. 25:16; 1 Sam. 6:18) or cities (Gen. 4:17; 19:25, 29). Cities were usually built along a lake or river (Tiberius and Beth Shan) or where natural springs were sufficient to sustain a large population (Jerusalem and Jericho). Streets in the cities seemed to have been named after the place to which they led or by the industry represented on them (Neh. 11:35; Isa. 7:3; Jer. 37:21). Open squares were found mainly at the gates of the city, where most of the commerce took place and which tended to be the centers of city life. The gate and the adjoining open area constituted the marketplace, hence, names such as “Sheep Gate” (Neh. 3:1, 3, 32; 12:39; Zeph. 1:10). The wells sometimes were situated here (2 Sam. 23:15–16). News from the outside was announced first at the gate (1 Sam. 4:18). Finally, court and council sessions were held at the gate (Deut. 13:17; Ruth 4:11; 2 Kings 7:1; Job 29:7; cf. Gen. 19:7).

Economic Issues Addressed in the Bible

Slavery. Slavery was considered legitimate in various circumstances, but since individual possession of a slave was somewhat rare, it never became a centerpiece of the Israelite economic structures. It was a capital offense to kidnap people for the purpose of enslaving them (Exod. 20:10–16; Deut. 24:7). When held by individual families, slaves were to be treated as part of an extended family, and they were permitted to partake in important festivals and to observe the Sabbath (Exod. 20:10; Deut. 16:14). Ideally, slaves in debt bondage and Israelite slaves owned by foreign residents were automatically freed at the Jubilee. If they had not already purchased their freedom, male Israelite slaves were automatically freed once they had worked for six years (Exod. 21:2; Lev. 25:39–55); however, the prophet Jeremiah’s denunciation of the permanent enslavement of Hebrew men and women by their masters (Jer. 34:8–22) suggests that these practices were not faithfully executed within Israel’s history.

Death, marriage, and redemption. The economic impact of death is addressed to some degree in the biblical texts. Daughters who received an inheritance of land because of the lack of a male heir were required to marry within the tribe in order to preserve the tribal allotments outlined by God in his gift of land to the people (Num. 27:7–8; 36:6–9). If the deceased had no children of his own, his closest male relative would receive the land (Num. 27:9–11). The levirate and go’el (“redeemer”) systems seem to have been enacted in order to protect both widows and the property rights of the family. Marriage with a brother’s widow was forbidden as a general rule (Lev. 20:21), but when no male heir was present, the act was considered obligatory (Deut. 25:5–10). Although there is some disagreement, most would consider the case of Ruth to be not one of levirate marriage, but instead an expression of the go’el (Lev. 25:25; Jer. 32:6–9). The two systems apparently are related, with the latter being an extension of the former. But the important distinction is that the go’el’s duties included redemption in much broader terms, including redemption from slavery (Lev. 25:47–55) and vengeance in the case of wrongful death (Deut. 19:6). One clear case of levirate marriage is found in the attempts of Tamar to bear a child with the brother of Er, her deceased husband, and then eventually with Er’s father (Gen. 38).

Tithing. Tithing one’s possessions was a very ancient custom that actually predates the law codes and is found in the time of the patriarchs. Abraham gave Melchizedek “a tenth of everything” (Gen. 14:20), and Jacob made a vow that if he returned to his father’s house in safety, he would acknowledge Yahweh as his Lord and would give him a tenth of all that he possessed (Gen. 28:20–22). The tithe that was applied to the seed of the land or to the fruit of the tree was redeemable. The tithe of cattle, on the other hand, was not redeemable. Determining which animal was the tithe involved counting each animal singly, and every tenth one that passed under the rod became the tithe animal (Lev. 27:30–33). There is apparently some disparity in the biblical texts relating to a tithe. Nehemiah 10:37–38 seems to clearly indicate that there was only one prescribed tithe taken in the OT era. However, there are three texts regulating the tithe in the OT (Lev. 27:30–33; Num. 18:21–32; Deut. 14:22–29). It would seem, then, that each law gives only a partial picture of the regulations involving the tithe, as each assumes both the presence and the regulations of the others. The practice of the tithe in Israel involved a yearly gift to the temple, with the gifts of every third year kept in the community for the care of the poor and oppressed. These laws, then, were a reminder of Israel’s holy status before God and that its enjoyment of the rewards of that status was a consequence of their election. Consequently, the tithe demanded recognition of God’s ownership of all the land. Furthermore, by being allowed to consume part of the tithe (Deut. 14:23), participants were reminded of the priority of God in their economy and lives.

The region within which was situated the primeval garden, the setting of the story of the creation in Gen. 2 and of the fall in Gen. 3. Although numerous attempts have been made to identify its intended location (Turkey, North Africa, the Persian Gulf), the information we can glean from the references to Eden, the rivers that flow from it, and the regions they encompass is insufficient for locating Eden in relation to known geography. It is simply “in the east” (Gen. 2:8).

Eden is portrayed as a mountainous region (Ezek. 28:13–14). Four rivers flow from it: the Pishon and the Gihon, which are unknown, and the Tigris and the Euphrates in Mesopotamia (Gen. 2:10–14). This may be compared with other ancient Near Eastern portrayals of rivers flowing from the mountain dwelling of the gods.

The name “Eden” may be connected with a Hebrew word for “luxury, delight,” though another suggestion is that it derives from a Sumerian word meaning “steppe, plain.” The garden in Eden is also referred to as the “garden of the Lord” (Gen. 13:10; Isa. 51:3) or the “garden of God” (Ezek. 28:13; 31:8–9), or (in a visionary reappearance) as “paradise,” from a Persian word for “garden” (Rev. 2:7).

The garden is depicted as a sanctuary or holy space (Ezek. 28:14) into which humanity is invited on God’s terms to act as God’s agents. It contains the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and the tree of life (Gen. 2:9).

As a picture of fertility, Eden holds out the prospect of a reversal from a desolate state (Isa. 51:3).

A royal or divine command with the force of law. In the religious sense, the term “decree” is one of several synonyms that refer to divine lawgiving, as in Gen. 26:5: “Abraham obeyed me and did everything I required of him, keeping my commands, my decrees and my instructions.” Here, as in numerous other places, “decree” represents the Hebrew word khuqqah (and its related term khoq) and it stands alongside “command” (mitswah) and “law” (torah). Another word that is often juxtaposed with khuqqah or khoq is mishpat, “judgment” (see Deut. 4:1). Because “decree” is frequently conjoined to synonyms, it is difficult to distinguish within biblical legal texts between decrees and other laws. Most often, “decree” is joined with one or more of the synonyms to denote divine law in general, without specific reference to its content.

In 1 Chron. 16:16–18 “decree” is used in parallel with “covenant,” and the content is specified as the promise to Abraham and the patriarchs that they would inherit the land of Canaan.

Biblical authors particularly associate the issuing of royal decrees with the Persians, including Cyrus (Ezra 6:3), Darius (Ezra 6:12; Dan. 6:8), and Artaxerxes (Ezra 7:13; cf. 6:14). Persian royal decrees are presented as immutable, irrevocable, and enforced by harsh punishments (Esther 1:19; 8:8; Ezra 6:11; Dan. 6:8). In the book of Daniel, the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar rules through despotic decrees (e.g., 3:10).

The NT twice refers to Roman imperial decrees (dogma), including the ordering of a census that resulted in Jesus being born in Bethlehem (Luke 2:1; Acts 17:7).

“Edom” denotes Esau (Gen. 25:30; 36:1, 8, 19), or the Edomites collectively (Num. 20:18, 20–21; Amos 1:6, 11; 9:12; Mal. 1:4), or the land occupied by Esau’s descendants, formerly the land of Seir (Gen. 32:3; 36:20–21, 30; Num. 24:18). Edom was renowned in Israel for its wisdom (Jer. 49:7; Obad. 8), and the book of Job seems to reflect an Edomite setting.

The Land of Edom

The region stretched from the Zered Valley to the Gulf of Aqabah (about one hundred miles) and extended to both sides of the Arabah, the great depression connecting the Dead Sea to the Red Sea (Gen. 14:6; Deut. 2:1, 12; Josh. 15:1; Judg. 11:17–18; 1 Kings 9:26). It is a dry, mountainous area with peaks rising to 3,500 feet. Though not a fertile land, it has cultivable areas (Num. 20:14–18). The name is derived from the Semitic root meaning “red, ruddy,” perhaps because of the reddish color of the sandstone in that region.

The earliest reference to Edom comes from Egypt, where Papyrus Anastasi VI preserves the report of an official from the reign of Mer-nep-tah (c. 1220 BC). He noted that the Bedouin tribes of Edom were trying to pass an Egyptian fortress to “the pools of Per-Atum” to keep themselves and their cattle alive.

It is possible that the Semitic place name was in use as early as the fifteenth century BC, if Edom is identified with one of the place names (’i-d-má) from the list of Thutmose III (1490–1436 BC).

The land(s) of Seir (a term often used in the OT to refer to Edom; cf. “the hill country of Seir” in Gen. 36:8–9) appears already in a letter from Amarna written by a king of Jerusalem to Amenhotep III in the first half of the fourteenth century. About a century later, Ramesses II (1290–1224 BC) claimed to have devastated the land of Shosu and plundered Mount Seir. In the next century Ramesses III (1193–1162 BC) made a similar claim.

Thus, there is considerable evidence outside the OT from the fourteenth to the twelfth centuries BC that mentions both Edom and Seir (the latter is more frequent and seems to be better known). The sources do not identify the two places, but they refer to their inhabitants as (Bedouin) shosu.

The Edomites

Following the OT, it seems that Esau’s descendants migrated to the land of Seir and in time became the dominant group, incorporating the original Horites (Gen. 14:6) and others into their number. Esau had already occupied Edom when Jacob returned from Harran (Gen. 32:3; 36:6–8; Deut. 2:4–5; Josh. 24:4). Tribal chiefs emerged here quite early (Gen. 36:15–19, 40, 43; 1 Chron. 1:51, 54), and the Edomites had kings “before any Israelite king reigned” (Gen. 36:31; 1 Chron. 1:43–51).

We know from the OT that after the exodus Israel was denied permission to travel by the King’s Highway (Num. 20:14–21; 21:4; Judg. 11:17–18). Still, Israelites were forbidden to abhor their Edomite brothers (Deut. 23:7–8). Joshua allotted the territory of Judah up to the borders of Edom (Josh. 15:1, 21), but the Israelites were not allowed to encroach on their lands.

Despite the brotherly relationship between Edom and Israel, the biblical evidence shows that the relationship between Edom and Israel was one of continuous hostility from the time of the Israelite kings. King Saul fought the Edomites (1 Sam. 14:47), and David conquered Edom and put garrisons throughout the land (2 Sam. 8:13–14). Edom was subjugated by Israel during the time of David but seems to have regained independence in the eighth century BC.

The prophets of Judah were very bitter against later Edom because of its stance in the destruction of Jerusalem by Babylon (587/586 BC), and they predicted Edom’s destruction (e.g., Obadiah). The oracle of Mal. 1:2–4 indicates that by the time of its writing, Edom was in ruin. The archaeological evidence supports the fall of Edom by the end of the sixth century BC, and there is evidence that the Nabateans (an Arabian tribe) forced their way into Edom and replaced the Edomites, many of whom went westward to southern Judea (later Idumea [cf. 1 Macc. 5:3, 65]), while others may have been absorbed by the newcomers. By 312 BC the area around Petra was inhabited by Nabateans.

Archaeological Evidence

Modern archaeology has shown that the land was occupied before Esau’s time, and recent excavations have shed new light on the history of Edom, unearthing evidence of a settled state society as early as the eleventh century BC. Surveys and excavations support the conclusion that Edom was a sophisticated, urbanized society as early as the tenth century BC, with industrial-scale production of copper at this time in that region.

This new data pushes back the archaeological chronology of this area some three centuries earlier than the prevalent scholarly consensus. At the moment, there are at least thirty-five high-precision dates from Edom dating to the tenth century BC (and some may be even earlier). Egyptian artifacts were found at the site in a layer associated with a serious disruption in production at the end of the tenth century BC, possibly tying Khirbat en-Nahas to the campaign of Pharaoh Sheshonq I (Shishak in the OT), who, following Solomon’s death, sought to crush economic activity in the area. Thus, recent archaeological and scientific data provide a real correlation to the time of Solomon and beyond, as described in the OT (1 Kings 7:46; see also 1 Kings 14:25–26).

There is also strong, and generally undisputed, archaeological evidence for many seventh- and sixth-century sites attributed to the Edomites. Modern Buseirah is generally identified with biblical Bozrah (e.g., Isa. 34:6; Jer. 49:13, 22), probably the Edomite capital. Another site of special interest is Tell el-Khe-leifeh (probably Ezion Geber = Elath [see, e.g., 1 Kings 9:26]). Period IV at this site testifies to a vigorous Edomite civilization in the seventh to sixth centuries BC. Most of the Edomite sites, however, are small villages, farms, or seminomadic sites. The Edomites usually are associated with Edomite pottery, a ware found in both southern Jordan and the Negev.

Economy and Religion

The economy of Edom was based on agriculture (possible especially in the northeast) and commerce. Its prosperity depended mostly on controlling the caravan routes from India and southern Arabia to the Mediterranean coast and Egypt. It seems that whenever Edom lost control of these routes, its civilization declined.

The religion of the Edomites, like that of the Canaanites, was devoted to the gods and goddesses of fertility. The deity peculiar to Edom was Qaus, and this name is incorporated into numerous Edomite personal names.

The inhabitants of Edom and descendants of Esau (Gen. 36:1–17). See also Edom.

Culture and Geography

Egypt is one of the earliest ancient civilizations. The first development of writing took place simultaneously in both Egypt and ancient Sumer around 3000 BC. Using different languages, both developed pictographic writing systems (where pictures of objects stood for words, parts of words, etc.). Egypt kept the pictographic signs and highly stylized them (hieroglyphs), while Sumer changed them into wedge shapes (cuneiform). The Egyptian inscriptions found on pyramids, temples, stelae, tombs, and so forth are mostly in the hieroglyphic form.

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

Politics and religion. The Nile Valley was divided into regional administrative districts, nomes. There were forty-two nomes in all. Each nome had a town or city as its capital. Each of these cities had a ruler, a nomarch (“great overlord”), who governed the region. Kingship likely began when one city ruler began to subjugate other regions and cities. At times, there was more than one dynasty in power (one in Upper Egypt and one in Lower Egypt). Each ruling dynasty had a triad of idol-gods from its home city that it viewed as supreme in the Egyptian pantheon. The triad was made up of a father, a wife, and a firstborn son. In the Eighteenth Dynasty from Thebes, these were the sun god Amun-Re, his wife/consort Mut, and their son the moon god Khonsu.

Early Egyptian religion focused on veneration of animals, sacred burials, and cultic objects. The dead were buried with care in the predynastic period (before writing), which may indicate an understanding of the divine and the afterlife. We know little of this time without written texts. However, once writing was developed, the Egyptians began to create and record elaborate stories that explained their understanding of divine beings, creation, the daily cycle of sunrise/sunset, as well as the afterlife.

The Egyptian view of deities eventually became connected to physical forms. Each deity embodied divine attributes, affinities, powers, and one or more forms (human, animal, or a combination) that allowed the Egyptians to relate to them and that also shaped Egyptian culture and language through time. The god Thoth appeared in drawings, paintings, reliefs, or statues as one of three forms: as a human with an ibis-bird head, as an ibis, or as a baboon. The god Bes was patron of mothers in childbirth, Re (later Amun-Re) was the sun god, and so on. They even had a goddess of divine order, Ma’at, a female with a feather on her head. Ma’at was the embodiment of divine and human social order. At midnight on the day of death, a soul was placed in the balance of Ma’at’s scale and weighed against her feather. A soul heavier or lighter was devoured by the awaiting crocodile-headed destroyer deity; only those in balance could move on into the afterlife. For Egypt, the pharaoh was the great shepherd of the people, who both kept the divine order (Ma’at) and forced out chaos and disorder. With changing dynasties and preferences, deities changed rank, assimilated powers, merged with other deities, and rose or declined in popularity. Many deities were tied to a geographic place, but some were universal (such as Isis, Apis, Geb, Osiris, Bes, Anubis, and Imhotep). The deities were either found in or had power over all areas of the created order (Nile, insects, animals, humans, crops, fertility [of humans, animals, crops], sky, sun, moon, death, etc.). With the proliferation of idols, temples and sacrifices multiplied, and literally thousands of sacred mummified birds, cats, crocodiles, and other animals have been found in Egypt.

From the very beginning the king was viewed as divine. Later he was viewed as the personification of the sun god, with his wife/queen being the personification of the wife goddess in his dynasty triad and his firstborn son tied to the son in the triad. When the pharaoh died, he moved into the afterlife to become the sun god, and his heir took his earthly place. The whole aspect of a proper burial was very important to having a place and a successful experience in the afterlife. The shape of the pyramid tomb reflected the image of the rays of the sun streaming down to earth at angles from the sun. A proper burial on the west bank of the Nile (toward the setting sun) allowed the deceased to begin a proper journey into the afterlife. In order for the deceased to pass through all the gateways and to balance properly in Ma’at’s scales, a copy of the Book of the Dead would be placed in the person’s sarcophagus. This text contained all the correct things that the deceased needed to say to attain an easy passage and gloss over his or her sins. The great pyramid of Khufu has the pyramids of Khufu’s wives nearby, his nobles’ tombs farther out, then the tombs of minor officials, and finally those of foremen who worked on the pyramid with their work crew just beyond them. Each in the pecking order sought to attach himself or herself to the coattails of Pharaoh in his death so that they too might gain entry into the afterlife.

History

Prehistoric period. In the fifth millennium BC the hunter-gatherer culture in Egypt slowly shifted to a farming and shepherding lifestyle. As crop yields increased beyond the need for food, time was available to develop skills in crafts as well as trade. The pottery and material culture (tools, burials, house style, etc.) of Lower Egypt evidenced the Buto-Ma’adi culture, and that of Upper Egypt the Naqada culture. The Naqada expanded northward and unified Egypt in predynastic times. Several proto-kingships developed as nomes or their capital cities allied together or were subjugated by a stronger neighbor.

Early Dynastic period (3000–2575 BC). As indicated by the Narmer Palette, the earliest known king of a unified Egypt was Narmer (c. 3000 BC). The palette shows Narmer defeating the king of Lower Egypt and wearing the crown of Upper Egypt on one side and the crown of Lower Egypt on the other. Laws in Egypt were not codified as they are today. The king made the rules and kept them as he saw fit. The Egyptian story “The Tale of the Eloquent Peasant” from a later Egyptian period explains the way things worked. In this story, the peasant is on the way to market with his goods on his donkey. The rich man sees him coming and covers the pathway with a garment. The peasant has a dilemma: trample the garment or destroy some of the rich man’s field to get by. He is unsuccessful in traveling by without trespass, and the rich man seizes his goods and donkey and throws him in jail. The peasant awaits a chance to speak before Pharaoh, who is the judge. When he has a chance to make his appeal, the peasant is so well spoken that Pharaoh keeps him in prison just so he can keep hearing him argue his case day after day! Eventually the poor man’s goods are restored, and he is freed.

Old Kingdom (2575–2134 BC). The Old Kingdom capital was Memphis. This period was an age of pyramids and a time of political and economic stability. The agricultural economy grew and prospered. The two largest pyramids were constructed in this period: Khufu’s Great Pyramid at Giza and one next to it (along with the Sphinx), belonging to his successor, Chephren. The pyramid workers were not slaves but rather peasants who owed a corvée tax of labor. Workers were paid daily in bread and beer. Egypt was a feudal society. Private citizens could own property, but the pharaoh owned most of the land and parceled it out to his retainers or gave it permanently to temples. The pharaohs sent quarrying expeditions into the deserts for building stone and occasionally made military expeditions southward into Nubia and Punt.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

One of Benjamin’s ten sons (Gen. 46:21). “Ehi” is probably a shortened name. He is likely the same person as Ahiram (Num. 26:38) and Aharah (1 Chron. 8:1).

In the OT, the Hebrew word ’el is used to denote divinity in a generic way or to refer specifically to Yahweh as God. ’El is often translated “god” in passages such as Deut. 32:21; Isa. 44:10, 15; 46:6. ’El is understood specifically as God in passages such as 2 Sam. 22:32. Some verses utilize both meanings, as in Exod. 34:14, “Do not worship any other god [’el], for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God [’el].” In Genesis several titles for God begin with the word ’el and are used to present God’s power and transcendence as well as his concern for humanity. In Gen. 21:33 Abraham calls God ’el ’olam (“Eternal God”). In Gen. 14:18–22 he is ’el ’elyon (“God Most High”). In Gen. 16:13 the Egyptian slave Hagar names God ’el ro’i (“God who sees”). God calls himself ’el shadday (“God Almighty”) when talking to Abraham (Gen. 17:1) and refers to this name when he reveals to Moses his name as “Yahweh” (Exod. 6:3). In Num. 23:8 ’el is used of God in parallel with “Yahweh.” The word ’el appears in the names of locations (e.g., Bethel, “house of God” [Gen. 35:7]) and in many personal names (e.g., “Eliphaz,” “Daniel,” “Israel”).

In ancient Near Eastern texts, especially cuneiform texts found at Ugarit, “El” is a proper name for the head god of the ancient Mesopotamian pantheon. Described as a tent dweller who presides over his divine council on the mount of assembly in the north, El holds many titles, including “creator,” “ancient one,” and “compassionate one.” Texts such as Exod. 34:6 (“The Lord, the Lord [yhwh], the compassionate and gracious God [’el]”) seem to show an awareness of the biblical writers for this understanding of the word, although they use this material to proclaim the supremacy of Yahweh.

Ancient Luz, named by Jacob “Bethel” (“house of El/God” [Gen. 28:19]). A second theophany thirty years later caused Jacob to rename the place “El Bethel” (“El of the house of El” [Gen. 35:7]). The site was located between Hebron and Shechem, ten miles north of Jerusalem. In thematic progression, Jacob’s own name was then changed to “Israel,” now reaffirmed in the land (Gen. 35:10). Fulfilling Jacob’s earlier vow, a divine person had now eclipsed a mere site—“El of the house of El” (cf. Gen. 28:18–22).

The name that Jacob associates with his altar in Gen. 33:20. It can be translated as “El [a name of God] is the God of Israel.” The name indicates Jacob’s new designation (“Israel”) and his loyalty to the God who gave it to him.

The southernmost site conquered by the coalition of four kings during their raid through Canaan (Gen. 14:6). El Paran may well be identified with Elath on the northern shore of the Red Sea (1 Kings 9:26).

In the OT, the Hebrew word ’el is used to denote divinity in a generic way or to refer specifically to Yahweh as God. ’El is often translated “god” in passages such as Deut. 32:21; Isa. 44:10, 15; 46:6. ’El is understood specifically as God in passages such as 2 Sam. 22:32. Some verses utilize both meanings, as in Exod. 34:14, “Do not worship any other god [’el], for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God [’el].” In Genesis several titles for God begin with the word ’el and are used to present God’s power and transcendence as well as his concern for humanity. In Gen. 21:33 Abraham calls God ’el ’olam (“Eternal God”). In Gen. 14:18–22 he is ’el ’elyon (“God Most High”). In Gen. 16:13 the Egyptian slave Hagar names God ’el ro’i (“God who sees”). God calls himself ’el shadday (“God Almighty”) when talking to Abraham (Gen. 17:1) and refers to this name when he reveals to Moses his name as “Yahweh” (Exod. 6:3). In Num. 23:8 ’el is used of God in parallel with “Yahweh.” The word ’el appears in the names of locations (e.g., Bethel, “house of God” [Gen. 35:7]) and in many personal names (e.g., “Eliphaz,” “Daniel,” “Israel”).

In ancient Near Eastern texts, especially cuneiform texts found at Ugarit, “El” is a proper name for the head god of the ancient Mesopotamian pantheon. Described as a tent dweller who presides over his divine council on the mount of assembly in the north, El holds many titles, including “creator,” “ancient one,” and “compassionate one.” Texts such as Exod. 34:6 (“The Lord, the Lord [yhwh], the compassionate and gracious God [’el]”) seem to show an awareness of the biblical writers for this understanding of the word, although they use this material to proclaim the supremacy of Yahweh.

The Hebrew word ’elah, meaning “oak” or “terebinth” (2 Sam. 18:9), is also used as a proper name. (1) A tribal ruler descended from Esau (Gen. 36:40–41; 1 Chron. 1:52). (2) The wicked son and successor of Baasha. Elah ruled Israel for two years (1 Kings 16:6–14). (3) The father of Hoshea, who usurped the Israelite crown (2 Kings 15:30; 17:1). (4) A son of Caleb the faithful spy (1 Chron. 4:15). (5) A Benjamite living in Jerusalem before the exile (1 Chron. 9:8). (6) A valley in the Judean foothills where David killed Goliath (1 Sam. 17), some twelve miles west-southwest of Bethlehem. As one of several fertile valleys in this region between the Philistines on the coastal plain and the Israelites in the hill country, the Elah Valley was a natural battleground between the two peoples.

Elam is one of the oldest of the ancient civilizations, lasting from 2700 BC to 539 BC. Ancient Elam originally consisted of kingdoms on the Iranian Plateau, centered in Anshan. Later, Susa in the Khuzistan lowlands became prominent in documentation of the Elamite civilization. The kings of Elam in the second and first millennia BC customarily called themselves “King of Anshan and Susa.” Despite progress made by researchers in the last few decades, the history of Elam is still one of the least known of the ancient Near Eastern civilizations. Most of the evidence comes from Mesopotamian royal inscriptions, where Elam is portrayed as being in constant contact, either friendly or hostile, with Babylon and Assyria. Elam’s natural resources (e.g., metals, wood, stone) and its location en route to the sources of certain highly desirable materials (e.g., lapis lazuli, tin) made Elam an object of periodic military campaigns of Mesopotamian kings.

Elam appears in various books of the Bible (e.g., Ezra 4:9; Isa. 11:11; 21:2; 22:6; Jer. 25:25; 49:34–39; Ezek. 32:24; Dan. 8:2; Acts 2:9), including Gen. 14, where Kedorlaomer, king of Elam, is mentioned as one of the kings of the east who defeated the five kings of Sodom and Gomorrah. In the second millennium Elam was a powerful state, so much so that even King Hammurabi addressed an Elamite king as “Father.” It is therefore possible that an Elamite king led a coalition of kings on a raid against Canaan. Elam, later subjugated by Assyria during the Assyrian ascendancy (732–604 BC), assisted in its war against Israel. The reference to Elam in Isaiah and Ezekiel (cited above) may be related to this historical fact. During the Achae-menid period, in which the traits of Elamite civilization were still strong, “Elam” was used as a general reference to the Persian province on the Iranian plateau (e.g., Dan. 8:2: “I saw myself in the citadel of Susa in the province of Elam”). In the NT era, Elam, albeit long gone from history, occupied an established place in the view of world history seen as a sequence of world empires (cf. Acts 2:9).

This fortified harbor town, near Ezion Geber at the northern extremity of the Gulf of Aqabah (modern Aqabah), was a way station on the important trade routes to southern Arabia, Africa, and India. It is often identified with El Paran in Gen. 14:6.

Due to its importance for the profitable trade with southern Arabia and beyond, control over Elath was a prized object for Israel, Edom, and other rival powers. King Solomon, for instance, built Ezion Geber close to Elath and dispatched the lucrative “ships of Tarshish” from there with the help of Phoenician sailors (1 Kings 9:26–28; cf. Ps. 48:7). It is possible that the intention of Shishak’s campaign in the Negev was to cut off these trade activities, since the Egyptians were the only competitors to Israel’s shipping on the Gulf of Aqabah. Later Judean kings, such as Jehoshaphat and Uzziah, rebuilt the Red Sea port to resume trade with southern Arabia, although with much less success (2 Chron. 20:36; 26:2). Elath was handed over to the Edomites during the Syro-Ephramite war.

One of the sons of Midian and thus a descendant of Abraham through his wife Keturah (Gen. 25:4; 1 Chron. 1:33).

The choice or selection of a person or group, especially God’s determination of who will be saved.

Terminology

On occasion, the language of being “elect” is used as a description of Christ, or perhaps even a title. Isaiah, in one of his Servant Songs, gives a description that is probably best taken as a veiled reference to Christ in his unique relationship with the Father: “Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen [or ‘elect’] one in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him, and he will bring justice to the nations” (Isa. 42:1). There is similar usage in the NT, where Jesus is described in 1 Pet. 2:6 (using a quotation from Isa. 28:16): “For in Scripture it says: ‘See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen [or ‘elect’] and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame.’ ”

Many times the word “elect” is used in Scripture as a synonym for believers. For example, Jesus speaks of the future time when “he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other” (Matt. 24:31). Similarly, Peter addresses his first letter “to God’s elect” (1 Pet. 1:1). John does something similar in his second letter, addressed to “the lady chosen by God [KJV, RSV: “elect lady”] and to her children, whom I love in the truth” (2 John 1).

Election and Salvation

There is more to this terminology, though, than simply a descriptive name for Christ or God’s people. Other passages are more explanatory in nature and imply a definite and active place for God’s involvement in the salvation process. For example, Peter continues on in his introduction to his first letter with a description of the elect as those “who have been chosen [KJV: ‘elect’] according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to be obedient to Jesus Christ and sprinkled with his blood” (1 Pet. 1:2). Here there is the key question of how we should understand the role of God’s foreknowledge in the expression “chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father.” Some argue that this is simply telling us that God is able to look forward and know ahead of time who will exercise faith and be saved, so salvation is simply based on a purely human decision after all.

However, Rom. 9 suggests otherwise. This chapter, perhaps more than any other, sheds light on God’s election of his people. Paul is in the process of explaining how God’s plan of redemption (which he has been developing in Rom. 1–8) applies to his own Jewish people. If the gospel is really as powerful as Paul claims, why has it produced so little fruit among God’s own covenant people, the Jews? Paul answers, “It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel” (9:6). Then, in the following verses, Paul explains what he means by “not all Israel are Israel.” Not every child of Abraham is a child of faith (9:7–13). The promise has come only through Isaac, and not through Abraham’s other sons, Ishmael and the six sons of Keturah (see Gen. 25:1). Similarly, the line of promise and blessing does not involve all of Isaac and Rebekah’s children either, but only Jacob and not Esau (9:10–13). Here Paul explains, “Before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: not by works but by him who calls” (9:11–12). In support of this conclusion, Paul quotes from Mal. 1:2–3: “Just as it is written: ‘Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated’ ” (9:13). The bottom line, according to Paul, is not one’s ancestry at all, but God’s own choice. God tells Moses in Exod. 33:19, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion” (quoted in Rom. 9:15). Paul gives his summary of election: “It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy” (9:16). He rests his case with the classic OT illustration of God’s hardening of Pharaoh (9:17) before concluding, “Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden” (9:18).

Romans 9 is not an isolated passage of Scripture. The apostle John says much the same of Jesus’ ministry, and how salvation is specifically to all “those who believed in his name”; to them “he gave the right to become children of God—children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God” (John 1:12–13). The last part of this passage is key: salvation ultimately depends not upon “natural descent” or one’s human ancestry (including whether one is Jewish or not), nor upon “human decision” (including any and all acts of the human will), nor upon a “husband’s will” (a more difficult expression that probably refers to the decisions of others in the family), but solely and ultimately only on being “born of God.”

Hardening of Hearts and the Nonelect

Certainly, there is a mystery in all of this. There is no easy way to understand the negative process of the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart or to explain the mechanics of the positive process of election. Scripture often describes God himself as the one who has hardened the hearts of various individuals. In Exod. 4:21, for example, God says to Moses, “I will harden [Pharaoh’s] heart so that he will not let the people go.” Other times, Scripture is less clear and simply tells us that “Pharaoh’s heart became hard” (Exod. 7:13). Then there are still other times when Pharaoh himself is described as being actively involved in this process of hardening his own heart, such as “when Pharaoh saw that there was relief, he hardened his heart and would not listen to Moses and Aaron” (Exod. 8:15). Undoubtedly, the best way to understand this is to see a negative response such as the hardening of a person’s heart as a combination of the active will of fallen human beings and the mysterious workings of a sovereign God. In a similar way, both salvation and spiritual growth are other spiritual realities that also involve the mysterious combination of God’s direct involvement in people’s lives and the necessity of their own human response. Paul captures this tension in Phil. 2:12–13: “Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence—continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you to will and to act in order to fulfill his good purpose.”

There is also the question of the nonelect, sometimes put in terms of “reprobation” or “double predestination.” If God is actively involved in the positive act of bringing human beings into a proper relationship with himself in salvation, is he actively involved equally in choosing those who will never respond in faith and will suffer an eternity of judgment apart from him? Again, Christians are divided, and simplistic overgeneralizations do little to advance our understanding of this topic. Those who give precedence to God’s sovereignty in their understanding of the process of salvation usually see a greater involvement of God in the decisions of those who do not respond in faith; those who emphasize human involvement in salvation will also emphasize human decision in those who do not respond.

Those who emphasize God’s sovereignty in this mystery of the faith lean toward the Calvinistic or Reformed end of the scale. They tend also to emphasize the total depravity of humanity: the notion not that people are as bad as they can possibly be, but simply that sin has tainted every area of the mind, will, and emotions, making a positive turning to God, apart from God’s grace, humanly impossible. They also emphasize the definite atonement, the doctrine that Christ died specifically for the elect. On the other hand, those who emphasize human involvement, often called “Arminians,” tend to emphasize the importance of human free will in order to create a sense of responsibility for one’s decisions. They also emphasize an unlimited atonement, the doctrine that Christ died potentially for anyone and everyone.

Summary

The proper balance in Scripture seems to involve both God’s sovereignty and human involvement. Peter captures some of this need for balance: “Therefore, my brothers and sisters, make every effort to confirm your calling and election. For if you do these things, you will never stumble” (2 Pet. 1:10). Election is ultimately God’s work, but at the same time there is a human involvement in it. Charles Spurgeon’s illustration seems appropriate here. Human will and predestination are like the two rails on a railroad track: everywhere we look they are separate and distinct and thus irreconcilable; yet it is only off in the distance (really in the mind of God himself) that these two complementary truths come together in their perfect resolution. There is no question that “elect” and “election” are biblical terms; the key question is how to understand this difficult topic and to work out all the logical implications in terms of sharing the gospel with others in a meaningful and appropriate manner.

The choice or selection of a person or group, especially God’s determination of who will be saved.

Terminology

On occasion, the language of being “elect” is used as a description of Christ, or perhaps even a title. Isaiah, in one of his Servant Songs, gives a description that is probably best taken as a veiled reference to Christ in his unique relationship with the Father: “Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen [or ‘elect’] one in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him, and he will bring justice to the nations” (Isa. 42:1). There is similar usage in the NT, where Jesus is described in 1 Pet. 2:6 (using a quotation from Isa. 28:16): “For in Scripture it says: ‘See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen [or ‘elect’] and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame.’ ”

Many times the word “elect” is used in Scripture as a synonym for believers. For example, Jesus speaks of the future time when “he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other” (Matt. 24:31). Similarly, Peter addresses his first letter “to God’s elect” (1 Pet. 1:1). John does something similar in his second letter, addressed to “the lady chosen by God [KJV, RSV: “elect lady”] and to her children, whom I love in the truth” (2 John 1).

Election and Salvation

There is more to this terminology, though, than simply a descriptive name for Christ or God’s people. Other passages are more explanatory in nature and imply a definite and active place for God’s involvement in the salvation process. For example, Peter continues on in his introduction to his first letter with a description of the elect as those “who have been chosen [KJV: ‘elect’] according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to be obedient to Jesus Christ and sprinkled with his blood” (1 Pet. 1:2). Here there is the key question of how we should understand the role of God’s foreknowledge in the expression “chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father.” Some argue that this is simply telling us that God is able to look forward and know ahead of time who will exercise faith and be saved, so salvation is simply based on a purely human decision after all.

However, Rom. 9 suggests otherwise. This chapter, perhaps more than any other, sheds light on God’s election of his people. Paul is in the process of explaining how God’s plan of redemption (which he has been developing in Rom. 1–8) applies to his own Jewish people. If the gospel is really as powerful as Paul claims, why has it produced so little fruit among God’s own covenant people, the Jews? Paul answers, “It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel” (9:6). Then, in the following verses, Paul explains what he means by “not all Israel are Israel.” Not every child of Abraham is a child of faith (9:7–13). The promise has come only through Isaac, and not through Abraham’s other sons, Ishmael and the six sons of Keturah (see Gen. 25:1). Similarly, the line of promise and blessing does not involve all of Isaac and Rebekah’s children either, but only Jacob and not Esau (9:10–13). Here Paul explains, “Before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: not by works but by him who calls” (9:11–12). In support of this conclusion, Paul quotes from Mal. 1:2–3: “Just as it is written: ‘Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated’ ” (9:13). The bottom line, according to Paul, is not one’s ancestry at all, but God’s own choice. God tells Moses in Exod. 33:19, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion” (quoted in Rom. 9:15). Paul gives his summary of election: “It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy” (9:16). He rests his case with the classic OT illustration of God’s hardening of Pharaoh (9:17) before concluding, “Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden” (9:18).

Romans 9 is not an isolated passage of Scripture. The apostle John says much the same of Jesus’ ministry, and how salvation is specifically to all “those who believed in his name”; to them “he gave the right to become children of God—children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God” (John 1:12–13). The last part of this passage is key: salvation ultimately depends not upon “natural descent” or one’s human ancestry (including whether one is Jewish or not), nor upon “human decision” (including any and all acts of the human will), nor upon a “husband’s will” (a more difficult expression that probably refers to the decisions of others in the family), but solely and ultimately only on being “born of God.”

Hardening of Hearts and the Nonelect

Certainly, there is a mystery in all of this. There is no easy way to understand the negative process of the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart or to explain the mechanics of the positive process of election. Scripture often describes God himself as the one who has hardened the hearts of various individuals. In Exod. 4:21, for example, God says to Moses, “I will harden [Pharaoh’s] heart so that he will not let the people go.” Other times, Scripture is less clear and simply tells us that “Pharaoh’s heart became hard” (Exod. 7:13). Then there are still other times when Pharaoh himself is described as being actively involved in this process of hardening his own heart, such as “when Pharaoh saw that there was relief, he hardened his heart and would not listen to Moses and Aaron” (Exod. 8:15). Undoubtedly, the best way to understand this is to see a negative response such as the hardening of a person’s heart as a combination of the active will of fallen human beings and the mysterious workings of a sovereign God. In a similar way, both salvation and spiritual growth are other spiritual realities that also involve the mysterious combination of God’s direct involvement in people’s lives and the necessity of their own human response. Paul captures this tension in Phil. 2:12–13: “Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence—continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you to will and to act in order to fulfill his good purpose.”

There is also the question of the nonelect, sometimes put in terms of “reprobation” or “double predestination.” If God is actively involved in the positive act of bringing human beings into a proper relationship with himself in salvation, is he actively involved equally in choosing those who will never respond in faith and will suffer an eternity of judgment apart from him? Again, Christians are divided, and simplistic overgeneralizations do little to advance our understanding of this topic. Those who give precedence to God’s sovereignty in their understanding of the process of salvation usually see a greater involvement of God in the decisions of those who do not respond in faith; those who emphasize human involvement in salvation will also emphasize human decision in those who do not respond.

Those who emphasize God’s sovereignty in this mystery of the faith lean toward the Calvinistic or Reformed end of the scale. They tend also to emphasize the total depravity of humanity: the notion not that people are as bad as they can possibly be, but simply that sin has tainted every area of the mind, will, and emotions, making a positive turning to God, apart from God’s grace, humanly impossible. They also emphasize the definite atonement, the doctrine that Christ died specifically for the elect. On the other hand, those who emphasize human involvement, often called “Arminians,” tend to emphasize the importance of human free will in order to create a sense of responsibility for one’s decisions. They also emphasize an unlimited atonement, the doctrine that Christ died potentially for anyone and everyone.

Summary

The proper balance in Scripture seems to involve both God’s sovereignty and human involvement. Peter captures some of this need for balance: “Therefore, my brothers and sisters, make every effort to confirm your calling and election. For if you do these things, you will never stumble” (2 Pet. 1:10). Election is ultimately God’s work, but at the same time there is a human involvement in it. Charles Spurgeon’s illustration seems appropriate here. Human will and predestination are like the two rails on a railroad track: everywhere we look they are separate and distinct and thus irreconcilable; yet it is only off in the distance (really in the mind of God himself) that these two complementary truths come together in their perfect resolution. There is no question that “elect” and “election” are biblical terms; the key question is how to understand this difficult topic and to work out all the logical implications in terms of sharing the gospel with others in a meaningful and appropriate manner.

(1) A servant of Abram from Damascus (Gen. 15:2). He probably was Abram’s adopted son and potential heir of his household (15:4–5). (2) A second son of Moses, born in Midian (Exod. 4:19–20); his brother was Gershom and his mother was Zipporah (Exod. 18:1–6; 1 Chron. 23:15). He had only one son, Rehabiah (1 Chron. 23:17). (3) A son of Beker, one of Benjamin’s sons (1 Chron. 7:8). (4) One of the priests who played the trumpets when the ark of the covenant was brought to Jerusalem (1 Chron. 15:24). (5) A son of Zikri, and a chief of the tribe of Reuben during the reign of David (1 Chron. 27:16). (6) A son of Dodavahu of Mareshah. He prophesied against King Jehoshaphat’s alliance with King Ahaziah (2 Chron. 20:37). (7) A learned man among those sent by Ezra to Iddo with a request for temple servants (Ezra 8:16–17). (8, 9, 10) Three individuals from the priestly line listed among those who married foreign women during the time of Ezra’s revival (Ezra 10:18, 23, 31). (11) An ancestor of Jesus in Luke’s genealogy (Luke 3:29).

(1) A true prophet raised up by God during the reign of Ahab of Israel (ninth century BC) in order to counter fast-rising idolatry fueled by the king and his foreign-born wife, Jezebel.

False worship at this time focused on Baal, a major Canaanite deity who was the god of fertility, having power over dew, rain, lightning, and thunder. Thus, as people turned to Baal for these life-giving forces, God shut up the heavens so there would be no rain in Israel (1 Kings 17:1). God also at this time sent Elijah the Tishbite to confront the king.

Elijah lived in the wilderness, perhaps to escape the vengeance of the royal couple and to avoid being tainted by the perversities of the state of Israel. He had a distinctive appearance: very hairy and dressed in a loincloth (2 Kings 1:8).

Through the performance of miraculous acts, Elijah demonstrated that God was with him. The first such act was multiplying the food supplies of a widow who provided him with food. Even more dramatically, he prayed for the woman’s son when the child died, and the dead boy began to breathe again (1 Kings 17:17–24).

Elijah’s most dramatic moment came when he confronted Ahab and his many Baal prophets on Mount Carmel (1 Kings 18). Yahweh fought Baal on the latter’s terms. The object was whether Yahweh or Baal could throw fire from heaven to light the altar fire. Baal was purportedly a specialist at throwing fire (lightning), and his prophets went first. However, because Baal did not really exist, they failed. When Yahweh’s turn came, Elijah increased the stakes by pouring water on the wood. Yahweh, the one true God, threw fire from heaven, which burned the sacrifice, wood, stones, and dirt, and even dried up the water. Soon thereafter, God opened up the skies so that it rained again. Even so, Ahab and then his son Ahaziah (2 Kings 1) continued to worship Baal.

Elijah continued to confront the wicked idolatry of these kings. God used him to pronounce judgment against Ahab and Jezebel, as well as the dynasty, after the royal pair unjustly had Naboth the Jezreelite executed simply so they could possess his field (1 Kings 21).

Elijah was a devoted servant of Yahweh. Before Elijah passed from this life, God introduced him to his successor, Elisha. When the end came, he did not die but rather was caught up to heaven (2 Kings 2:1–18)—only the second person reported to leave this life without dying (cf. Enoch in Gen. 5:21–24).

Toward the end of the OT period, the prophet Malachi announced the coming day of the Lord (Mal. 4:5–6). As a precursor to that day, God would send the prophet Elijah as a forerunner. Some people thought that Jesus was Elijah (Matt. 16:14; Mark 6:15; 8:28; Luke 9:8, 19), but Jesus is the one who ushers in the kingdom of God. John the Baptist was his forerunner, and so it was he who is rightly associated with Elijah (Matt. 11:13–14). Indeed, his wilderness lifestyle and ministry echoed those of Elijah. At the Mount of Transfiguration, Elijah appeared to Jesus along with Moses; these two wilderness figures represented the prophets and the law (Matt. 17:1–13; Mark 9:2–13; Luke 9:28–36).

(2) A descendant of Benjamin and ancestor of Saul (1 Chron. 8:27). (3) A descendant of Harim, who married a foreign woman during the time of Ezra (Ezra 10:21). (4) A descendant of Elam, who married a foreign woman during the time of Ezra (Ezra 10:26).

(1) Son of Esau by his Hittite wife Adah (Gen. 36:4; 1 Chron. 1:35). (2) One of Job’s three friends and interlocutors, identified as a Temanite (Job 2:11). Teman is one of the sons of Esau’s son Eliphaz (Gen. 36:11). The participation of Eliphaz in the wisdom discussion of Job is appropriate, as the line of Teman was known elsewhere in the Bible for its sages (Jer. 49:7). Eliphaz is prominent among Job’s three friends, and he speaks three times (Job 4–5; 15; 22). God spoke to Eliphaz as a representative of the three friends (42:7).

(1) A descendant of Japheth, a son of Javan (Gen. 10:4; 1 Chron. 1:7). (2) A place whose name is presumably derived from the Elishah of Gen. 10:4; 1 Chron. 1:7. Its location is in the Aegean, based on the following: Elishah is associated with Javan (Greece) and the Kittites (associated with Cyprus), and it is a producer of blue and purple fabric (Ezek. 27:7). Texts from the second millennium BC suggest that the name referred to Cyprus, either its eastern coast or the whole.

The kingdom ruled by Arioch, one of the four foreign kings who raided Canaan during the time of Abraham (Gen. 14:1, 9). After they plundered the region and kidnapped Lot, Abraham successfully defeated them and regained what they had taken. Its identification is uncertain, but suggestions include the city of Larsa in southern Mesopotamia, Alsi in northern Mesopotamia, and Ilansura near Carchemish.

The names of God given in the Bible are an important means of revelation about his character and works. The names come from three sources: God himself, those who encounter him in the biblical record, and the biblical writers. This article is concerned mainly with the names that occur in the OT, though the NT will be referenced when helpful.

In the Bible the meaning of names is often significant and points to the character of the person so named. As might be expected, this is especially true for God. The names that he gives to himself always are a form of revelation; the names that humans give to God often are a form of testimony.

Yahweh: The Lord

Pronunciation. Unquestionably, for OT revelation the most important name is “(the) Lord.” In English Bibles this represents the name declared by God to Moses at the burning bush (“I am who I am” [Exod. 3:13–15]) and the related term used elsewhere in the OT; in Hebrew this term consists of the four consonants YHWH and is therefore known as the Tetragrammaton (“four letters”). Hebrew does not count vowels as part of its alphabet; in biblical times one simply wrote the consonants of a word and the reader supplied the correct vowels by knowing the vocabulary, grammar, and context. However, to avoid violating the commandment in the Decalogue that prohibits the misuse of God’s name (Exod. 20:7; Deut. 5:11), the Jews stopped pronouncing it. Consequently, no one today knows its correct original pronunciation, but the best evidence available suggests “Yahweh,” which has become the conventional pronunciation (consider the Hebrew word “hallelujah,” which actually is “hallelu-Yah,” hence “praise the Lord”). In ancient Jewish tradition, “Adonai” (“my Lord”) was substituted for “Yahweh.” In fact, when Hebrew eventually developed a vowel notation system, instead of the vowels for “Yahweh,” the vowels for “Adonai” were indicated whenever YHWH appeared in the biblical text, as a reminder. Combining the consonants YHWH with the vowels of “Adonai” yields something like “Yehowah,” which is the origin of the familiar (but mistaken and nonexistent) “Jehovah.” English Bibles typically use “Lord” (small capital letters) for “Yahweh,” and “Lord” (regular letters) for “Adonai,” which distinguishes the two.

Meaning. More vital than the matter of the pronunciation of YHWH is the question of its meaning. There seem to be two main opinions. One sees YHWH as denoting eternal self-existence, partly because it is suggested by the grammar of Exod. 3:14 (the words “I am” use a form of the Hebrew verb that suggests being without beginning or end) and partly because that is the meaning Jesus apparently ascribes to it in John 8:58. The other opinion, suggested by usage, is that YHWH indicates dynamic, active, divine presence: God’s being present in a special way to act on someone’s behalf (e.g., Gen. 26:28; 39:2–3; Josh. 6:27; 1 Sam. 18:12–14). This idea also appears in the episode of the burning bush (Exod. 3:12): when Moses protests his inadequacy to confront Pharaoh, God assures him of his presence, a reality noted with other prophets (1 Sam. 3:19; Jer. 1:8).

Perhaps the best points of reference for understanding the meaning of YHWH are God’s own proclamations. In addition to Exod. 3:13–15, at least two other passages in Exodus give God’s commentary (as it were) about the meaning of his name. An important one is Exod. 34:5–7. A key passage in the theology proper of ancient Israel, its themes echo in later OT Scripture (Num. 14:18–19; Ps. 103:7–12; Jon. 4:2). What is noteworthy about the texts cited is that all of them say something remarkable about the grace of God. This fits, for the revelation of Exod. 34:5–7 is given in the context of covenant renewal after the incident of the golden calf. Moses invokes God’s name in the Numbers text to avoid catastrophic judgment when the Israelites refuse to enter the promised land. The psalm text picks up this theme and connects it with God’s revelation of his ways to the chosen people. Jonah, remarkably, affirms that the same grace extends even toward a wicked Gentile city such as Nineveh.

Another such passage is Exod. 6:2–8. Here God reaffirms his redemptive purpose for captive Israel, despite the fact that Moses’ first encounter with Pharaoh has not gone well. God assures the prophet that he has remembered his covenant with the patriarchs, whom he says did not know him as “Yahweh,” which probably means that the patriarchs did not experience him in the way or character that their descendants would in the exodus event (though it is possible to translate the Hebrew here as a rhetorical question with an affirmative idea: “And indeed, by my name Yahweh did I not make myself known to them?”). God then proceeds to outline the redemptive experience in its fullness: deliverance from bondage, reception into a covenant relationship, and possession of the land promised to their ancestors (vv. 6–8). The statement is bracketed with this declaration: “I am the Lord” (vv. 2, 8). One stated purpose of this redemptive work is that Israel might come to understand this (v. 7). This is important to note because a central theme of Exodus as a book is the identity of the God of Israel. This concern prompts Moses to ask for God’s name at the burning bush (3:13), and this contempt for the God of the enslaved Hebrews causes Pharaoh to be dismissive at his first meeting with Moses and Aaron (5:2). Moses asks with the concern of a seeker and receives one of the most profound declarations of God’s identity in the Bible. Pharaoh asks with the contempt of a scorner and receives one of the most powerful displays of God’s identity in the Bible (the plagues). The contrast is both striking and instructive. The meaning of God’s name, then, is revealed in works as well as words, and his purpose is that not just his people but all peoples may come to understand who he is. Yet another majestic statement in the book of Exodus (9:13–16) makes this abundantly clear.

Based on this pattern of usage, the name “Yahweh” seems to signify especially the active presence of God to bless, deliver, or otherwise aid his people. Where this presence is absent, there is no success, victory, protection, or peace (Num. 14:39–45; Josh. 7:10–12; Judg. 16:20; 1 Sam. 16:13–14). The message that God not only is but also is present to save and deliver may well be the most important truth communicated in the OT, and it is only natural to see its ultimate embodiment in the person and work of Christ (Isa. 7:14; cf. Matt. 1:21–23).

Name used in combination. The name “Yahweh” also is used in combination with other terms. After God grants a military victory to Israel over the Amalekites, Moses names a commemorative altar “Yahweh Nissi,” meaning “the Lord is my Banner” (Exod. 17:15). In Ezekiel’s temple vision Jerusalem is called “Yahweh Shammah,” meaning “the Lord is there” (Ezek. 48:35). A familiar expression is “the Lord of hosts,” which is generally comparable to the expression “commander in chief” used in American culture (cf. 1 Kings 22:19–23).

Elohim

This is the first term for God encountered in the Bible, right in the opening verse. It is a more generic term, denoting deity in contrast to humans or angels. “Elohim” is a plural form; the singular terms “El” and “Eloah” are used occasionally, particularly in poetic texts. “El” is a common term in the biblical world; in fact, it is the name for the father of Baal in the Canaanite religion. This may explain why the Bible commonly uses the plural form, to distinguish the one true God, the God of Israel, from his pagan rivals. Others explain the plural form as a “plural of majesty” or “plural of intensity,” though it is uncertain just what this would mean. Some see the foundation for NT revelation of the Trinity (Gen. 1:26–27; 11:6–7; cf. John 17:20–22), but this is unlikely. The plural form also can serve simply as a common noun, referring to pagan deities (Exod. 12:12), angels (Ps. 97:7, arguably), or even human authorities (Exod. 22:28, possibly).

“El” also occurs in combination with other descriptive terms. The best known is “El Shaddai,” meaning “God Almighty” (Gen. 17:1). The precise meaning of “Shaddai” is uncertain, but it seems to have the notion of “great/powerful one.” The distressed Hagar, caught, comforted, and counseled by the mysterious personage at a well, calls God “El Roi,” which means “the God who sees me” (Gen. 16:13). One of the most exalted expressions to describe God is “El Elyon,” meaning “God Most High.” This title seems to have particular reference to God as the owner and master of creation (Gen. 14:18–20).

Adonai

As noted above, this common word meaning simply “(my) lord/master” is used regularly in place of the personal name of God revealed to Moses in Exod. 3:14. And in the OT of most English Bibles this is indicated by printing “Lord” as opposed to “Lord” (using small capital letters). However, “Adonai” is used of God in some noteworthy instances, such as Isaiah’s lofty vision of God exalted in Isa. 6 and the prophecy of Immanuel in Isa. 7:14. In time, this became the preferred term for referring to God, and the LXX reflected this by using the Greek word kyrios (“lord”) for Yahweh. This makes the ease with which NT writers transfer the use of the term to Jesus (e.g., 1 Cor. 12:3) a strong indication of their Christology.

(1) One of Esau’s two Hittite fathers-in-law (Gen. 26:34; 36:2). (2) One of the three sons of Zebulun (Gen. 46:14; Num. 26:26). (3) A judge from the tribe of Zebulun who succeeded Ibzan and led Israel for ten years (Judg. 12:11–12). He was buried in Aijalon (LXX: “Ailim”), which may be a wordplay on the name “Elon,” as the words are spelled with the same consonants in Hebrew. (4) A place name in the allotment for the tribe of Dan. It was located between Aijalon and Timnah (Josh. 19:43) and may be identified as Khirbet Wadi ‘Alin. This may be the same site as Elon Bethhanan, which was part of king Solomon’s second administrative district (1 Kings 4:9).

A notable tree used in pagan divination practices, visible from the entrance to the city Shechem (Judg. 9:37). This may be the tree near which Abram built an altar after receiving God’s promise regarding the surrounding land (Gen. 12:6–7). This may also be the tree under which Jacob buried his household’s foreign gods and earrings (Gen. 35:4). These possible references cannot be verified. Renderings of the Hebrew ’elon me’onenim also include “plain of Meonenim” (KJV), “diviners’ oak” (NASB, RSV, ESV), and “oracle oak” (MSG).

(1) One of Esau’s two Hittite fathers-in-law (Gen. 26:34; 36:2). (2) One of the three sons of Zebulun (Gen. 46:14; Num. 26:26). (3) A judge from the tribe of Zebulun who succeeded Ibzan and led Israel for ten years (Judg. 12:11–12). He was buried in Aijalon (LXX: “Ailim”), which may be a wordplay on the name “Elon,” as the words are spelled with the same consonants in Hebrew. (4) A place name in the allotment for the tribe of Dan. It was located between Aijalon and Timnah (Josh. 19:43) and may be identified as Khirbet Wadi ‘Alin. This may be the same site as Elon Bethhanan, which was part of king Solomon’s second administrative district (1 Kings 4:9).

This fortified harbor town, near Ezion Geber at the northern extremity of the Gulf of Aqabah (modern Aqabah), was a way station on the important trade routes to southern Arabia, Africa, and India. It is often identified with El Paran in Gen. 14:6.

Due to its importance for the profitable trade with southern Arabia and beyond, control over Elath was a prized object for Israel, Edom, and other rival powers. King Solomon, for instance, built Ezion Geber close to Elath and dispatched the lucrative “ships of Tarshish” from there with the help of Phoenician sailors (1 Kings 9:26–28; cf. Ps. 48:7). It is possible that the intention of Shishak’s campaign in the Negev was to cut off these trade activities, since the Egyptians were the only competitors to Israel’s shipping on the Gulf of Aqabah. Later Judean kings, such as Jehoshaphat and Uzziah, rebuilt the Red Sea port to resume trade with southern Arabia, although with much less success (2 Chron. 20:36; 26:2). Elath was handed over to the Edomites during the Syro-Ephramite war.

In the OT, the Hebrew word ’el is used to denote divinity in a generic way or to refer specifically to Yahweh as God. ’El is often translated “god” in passages such as Deut. 32:21; Isa. 44:10, 15; 46:6. ’El is understood specifically as God in passages such as 2 Sam. 22:32. Some verses utilize both meanings, as in Exod. 34:14, “Do not worship any other god [’el], for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God [’el].” In Genesis several titles for God begin with the word ’el and are used to present God’s power and transcendence as well as his concern for humanity. In Gen. 21:33 Abraham calls God ’el ’olam (“Eternal God”). In Gen. 14:18–22 he is ’el ’elyon (“God Most High”). In Gen. 16:13 the Egyptian slave Hagar names God ’el ro’i (“God who sees”). God calls himself ’el shadday (“God Almighty”) when talking to Abraham (Gen. 17:1) and refers to this name when he reveals to Moses his name as “Yahweh” (Exod. 6:3). In Num. 23:8 ’el is used of God in parallel with “Yahweh.” The word ’el appears in the names of locations (e.g., Bethel, “house of God” [Gen. 35:7]) and in many personal names (e.g., “Eliphaz,” “Daniel,” “Israel”).

In ancient Near Eastern texts, especially cuneiform texts found at Ugarit, “El” is a proper name for the head god of the ancient Mesopotamian pantheon. Described as a tent dweller who presides over his divine council on the mount of assembly in the north, El holds many titles, including “creator,” “ancient one,” and “compassionate one.” Texts such as Exod. 34:6 (“The Lord, the Lord [yhwh], the compassionate and gracious God [’el]”) seem to show an awareness of the biblical writers for this understanding of the word, although they use this material to proclaim the supremacy of Yahweh.

Various methods of preserving dead corpses, human and animal, from organic decay. Mummification was a technical art and a religious rite that was distinctively Egyptian. Most other ancient Near Eastern cultures viewed the decay of corpses as a natural part of the death and burial process. Many of these cultures collected and reburied the bones following decomposition, a practice of secondary burial.

The embalming of Jacob and Joseph (Gen. 50:2–3, 24–26) are OT exceptions. Since Joseph is a state official, his father is embalmed in Egypt before being transported back to Canaan. Joseph is placed in an official sarcophagus (Heb. ’aron [“ark, box”]). En route to his Canaan burial, his bones accompany Israel’s exodus procession (Josh. 24:32).

Practiced as early as 3100 BC in Egypt (predynastic period), mummification reached its peak around 1000 BC (Twenty-first Dynasty). Performed by priests over a seventy-day period, the embalming process involved the removal of internal organs, corpse dehydration, corpse “packing,” and extensive use of linen wrappings. Coptic Christians in Egypt (third century) largely rejected these practices.

“Emites” (NRSV: “Emim”) appears only three times, in two OT passages (Gen. 14:5; Deut. 2:10–11), used to designate a people group dispossessed by the Moabites. They are said to be a tall people like the Anakites and the Zamzummites (Deut. 2:10, 20–21). The name “Emites” may have the pejorative sense of “dreadful people.”

The biblical Shechem traditions refer to an individual named “Hamor” who is a Hivite (Gen. 34:2; cf. “Emmor” in Acts 7:16 KJV). He is also called the “father of Shechem” (Gen. 33:19; Josh. 24:32; Judg. 9:28), which may refer both to the geographical name and to the personal name of his most prominent son. Just as “Shechem” may be a double entendre, so “Hamor” may have multiple nuances. For example, “Hamor” may simultaneously function as a personal name and as an allusion to treaty activity. The latter theory is related to the fact that the Hebrew term khamor actually means “donkey,” and that Amorites (in the Mari texts) ratified treaties by slaughtering donkeys.

A city whose name means “spring of judgment,” evidently an early name for Kadesh (Gen. 14:7). This was one of the places captured by the coalition of four kings under Kedorlaomer en route to conquering the territory of the Amalekites and Amorites, before they attacked the five kings of Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboyim, and Bela. After this battle, many from Sodom, including Lot, were captured. Abraham retaliated and set the captives free.

An unknown location between Timnah and Adullam where Judah’s daughter-in-law Tamar disguised herself for a sexual encounter (Gen. 38:14, 21). The name means “two eyes” (or possibly “springs”). In Gen. 38:14 Tamar positions herself at petakh ’enayim, indicating either a fork in the road (Targum, Syriac, Vulg., NEB) or, more likely, an entrance to the town of Enaim (LXX, NIV, NRSV). Enaim perhaps is the same location as Enam in Josh. 15:34 (cf. b. Soṭah 10a).

Temporary homes for seminomadic peoples as well as military personnel. A number of Hebrew words are translated in the English Bible as “camp” or “encampment.”

For example, a tirah was a camp protected by a stone barrier or wall (Gen. 25:16; Num. 31:10; Ezek. 25:4), a ma’gal was a ring of wagons or a circular camp (1 Sam. 17:20; 26:5, 7), and a nawah was perhaps a nomadic pasturage camp (Ps. 68:12 NIV).

The most frequent word for “camp,” mak­haneh, occurs over two hundred times in the OT and is derived from the verbal root khanah, meaning “to set up a camp or encampment.” Isaac and Jacob camped during their journeys (Gen. 26:17; 31:25). After leaving Laban and meeting the angel of God, Jacob declared the place of the theophany to be “the camp of God” and named it “Mahanaim,” meaning “double camp” (32:1–2). In Gen. 32:21 Jacob’s camp is probably a traveling entourage composed of a number of tents.

In many cases makhaneh refers to a military camp. After the exodus and during the wilderness journeys, the Israelites resided in this type of settlement (Exod. 14:2, 9; Num. 33; Deut. 2:14–15). Moses led the Israelites out of the camp to meet with God at Sinai (Exod. 19:16–17).

Each tribe had its own camp (Num. 2). Because of the presence of God in its midst, Israel’s camp was to be holy. Leviticus and Deuteronomy contain laws regulating camp life (Lev. 14:3, 8; Deut. 23:10–11). Any unclean person or thing was to be put outside the encampment (Num. 5:1–4; Deut. 23:14). The angel of the Lord encamped around them (Ps. 34:7). The Israelite army encamped at numerous places during the conquest of Canaan (Josh. 4:19) and the monarchical period (1 Sam. 29:1).

The NT uses the Greek term parembolē to refer to the Israelite camp where animals sacrificed as sin offerings were “burned outside the camp” (Heb. 13:11–13). Since Jesus suffered outside the gate as a sacrifice for us, believers are called to join him outside the camp, “bearing the disgrace he bore.” Revelation 20:9 speaks of “the camp of God’s people.”

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

A grandson of Adam, a son of Seth, and the father of Kenan (Gen. 5:6–11; 1 Chron. 1:1–2), also listed in Luke’s genealogy of Jesus (Luke 3:38). The ungodliness of Lamech in Cain’s lineage (Gen. 4:23–24) is contrasted by a comment on a return to godliness at the time when Enosh was born (Gen. 4:25–26).

The ancient world knew nothing of terms like “global warming” or “going green.” However, the Bible does contain many ideas that can support environmental awareness today. God created a world that is good (Gen. 1:31), and he enlists those whom he made in his image to rule over it (1:27–28).

Although some have understood the words “dominion” and “subdue” in Gen. 1:28 (KJV, ESV, NRSV) to support excessive exploitation of the earth’s resources, the context rules out such a notion. On the contrary, God creates an orderly world from emptiness and disorder (1:2) and intends the bearers of his image to “work and take care of” the garden that he has given them (2:15). It seems necessary, then, that “dominion” and “subdue” endorse not tyranny, but rather a benevolent rule that mimics what the Creator began and continues to do (Gen. 8:21, 22; Ps. 65).

Another instructive biblical theme is Israel’s duty to care for the land that God gives them (Deut. 11:11–15). This means that the Israelites are to observe certain limitations regarding the land and its crops (Exod. 23:10; Lev. 19:23–25; 25:1–22). Moreover, there is the theme of neighborly love (Matt. 22:37–39; Phil. 2:3).

Some believe that environmentalism is not supported by Scripture because Scripture does not indicate that an ecological crisis will end the world. Nevertheless, it remains true that present and future generations may suffer greatly due to excesses perpetrated in the present. Creation care is neighborly love.

The vice that resents the acceptance, success, and well-being of other people, especially when benefits come to those who are regarded as unworthy. The envious person competes with others—if only in his or her own mind—and therefore cannot love them, serve them, and enjoy their company. Thus, the Bible condemns envy or covetousness, the most familiar text being the last commandment of the Decalogue (Exod. 20:17; Deut. 5:21). It is wrong to smolder with desire for the advantages of one’s neighbors and also wish them to stumble. Envy incited Cain to kill Abel (Gen. 4:1–16), and Scripture acknowledges its destructive tendencies (Prov. 14:30). Jesus warned his disciples that envy’s “evil eye” could defile them (Mark 7:21) and darken their souls (Matt. 6:23).

This vice can do enormous damage in churches and among those who profess to be the people of God. Pilate recognized jealousy behind the case against Jesus (Matt. 27:18), and the apostle Paul faced many difficulties traceable to immature one-upmanship. Factions arose in the churches over coveted associations (1 Cor. 1:11–13) and spiritual gifts (1 Cor. 12–13). Some professing believers even preached Christ simply to advance themselves ahead of others, out of “envy and rivalry,” perhaps to post impressive numbers of converts and gain a following (Phil. 1:15). In response, each person must say with John the Baptist, “He must become greater; I must become less” (John 3:30).

(1) The grandson of Abraham and Keturah and son of Midian (Gen. 25:4; 1 Chron. 1:33). Ephah is commonly considered a patriarch of the Midianites along with Midian (Isa. 60:6). (2) Caleb’s concubine and the mother of three of his sons (1 Chron. 2:46). (3) One of the sons of Jahdai (1 Chron. 2:47). (4) A measurement of dry weight most often used for grains, especially flour, and in particular temple offerings of flour. According to Ezek. 45:11, an ephah was equal in measurement to a bath and also a tenth of a homer. The size of an ephah is uncertain, but it was likely about twenty-two liters. Two-tenths or three-tenths of an ephah was enough to make a loaf of bread (Num. 29:3, 9, 14). Several times the Bible warns that the scales used to measure an ephah must be honest if they are to honor God (Lev. 19:36).

(1) One of Midian’s sons and Abraham and Keturah’s grandsons (Gen. 25:4; 1 Chron. 1:33). (2) A man who was part of the tribe of Judah, and a son of Ezrah (1 Chron. 4:17). (3) One of the seven clan leaders, all brave warriors and famous men, of the Transjordanian half-tribe Manasseh (1 Chron. 5:24).

Joseph’s second son, who received a greater blessing than did his older brother, Manasseh, when they were adopted by Jacob (Gen. 41:52; 46:20; 48:5, 20). Ephraim’s descendants formed one of the tribes of Israel. See also Ephraim, Tribe of.

“Ephrathah” (NIV), “Ephratah” (KJV), and “Ephrath” (both versions) represent variant spellings of the same Hebrew word. The word can designate a person, a location, or a clan and familial designation related to both the person and the location.

(1) Ephrath was the wife of Caleb (the great-grandson of Judah) and the mother of Hur (1 Chron. 2:19, 50). Hur, the son of Ephrathah, is called the “father of Bethlehem” (1 Chron. 4:4), perhaps denoting civic leadership.

(2) Ephrath is the location where Rachel, Jacob’s beloved wife, died giving birth to Benjamin while they were in the process of moving from Bethel to Bethlehem (Gen. 35:16, 19). Genesis 35:19 adds the editorial comment that Ephrath is the same location as Bethlehem, although it is possible that the two were separate towns at first and that only later Ephrath was absorbed into Bethlehem. This story and its identification of Ephrath with Bethlehem is repeated in Gen. 48:7 when Jacob blesses his children before his death. By the time of the prophet Micah, the two place names had become synonymous. Micah’s famous messianic promise that the ruler would come from a small town, and not Jerusalem, praised “Bethlehem Ephrathah” (Mic. 5:2).

(3) David, when preparing to fight Goliath, is recorded as “the son of an Ephrathite named Jesse” (1 Sam. 17:12). Later in the same chapter David says that he is a son of “Jesse of Bethlehem” (1 Sam. 17:58). Thus, the designation between location and being a descendant of Ephrath is blurred (of course, most members of a clan would have lived closely together). This is also the case in Ruth 1:2 when Naomi’s husband and sons are recorded as being Ephrathites from Bethlehem, thus tying the name “Ephrathah” to the geographic location of Bethlehem (see also Ruth 4:11). Similarly, Caleb’s name is associated with Ephrathah in 1 Chron. 2:24, where it is recorded that Hezron, Caleb’s father, dies at Caleb Ephrathah. Because “Caleb Ephrathah” is an unusual place name (cf. KJV: “Calebephratah”; NRSV: “Caleb-ephrathah”) and the Hebrew syntax of this verse is awkward, some prefer to emend the text, giving, for example, “After the death of Hezron, Caleb had relations with Ephrathah, the widow of his father Hezron, and she bore him Ashhur, the father of Tekoa” (NAB).

“Ephrathah” (NIV), “Ephratah” (KJV), and “Ephrath” (both versions) represent variant spellings of the same Hebrew word. The word can designate a person, a location, or a clan and familial designation related to both the person and the location.

(1) Ephrath was the wife of Caleb (the great-grandson of Judah) and the mother of Hur (1 Chron. 2:19, 50). Hur, the son of Ephrathah, is called the “father of Bethlehem” (1 Chron. 4:4), perhaps denoting civic leadership.

(2) Ephrath is the location where Rachel, Jacob’s beloved wife, died giving birth to Benjamin while they were in the process of moving from Bethel to Bethlehem (Gen. 35:16, 19). Genesis 35:19 adds the editorial comment that Ephrath is the same location as Bethlehem, although it is possible that the two were separate towns at first and that only later Ephrath was absorbed into Bethlehem. This story and its identification of Ephrath with Bethlehem is repeated in Gen. 48:7 when Jacob blesses his children before his death. By the time of the prophet Micah, the two place names had become synonymous. Micah’s famous messianic promise that the ruler would come from a small town, and not Jerusalem, praised “Bethlehem Ephrathah” (Mic. 5:2).

(3) David, when preparing to fight Goliath, is recorded as “the son of an Ephrathite named Jesse” (1 Sam. 17:12). Later in the same chapter David says that he is a son of “Jesse of Bethlehem” (1 Sam. 17:58). Thus, the designation between location and being a descendant of Ephrath is blurred (of course, most members of a clan would have lived closely together). This is also the case in Ruth 1:2 when Naomi’s husband and sons are recorded as being Ephrathites from Bethlehem, thus tying the name “Ephrathah” to the geographic location of Bethlehem (see also Ruth 4:11). Similarly, Caleb’s name is associated with Ephrathah in 1 Chron. 2:24, where it is recorded that Hezron, Caleb’s father, dies at Caleb Ephrathah. Because “Caleb Ephrathah” is an unusual place name (cf. KJV: “Calebephratah”; NRSV: “Caleb-ephrathah”) and the Hebrew syntax of this verse is awkward, some prefer to emend the text, giving, for example, “After the death of Hezron, Caleb had relations with Ephrathah, the widow of his father Hezron, and she bore him Ashhur, the father of Tekoa” (NAB).

(1) A Hittite, the son of Zohar, who owned the cave of Machpelah near Mamre, which later was named “Hebron.” Abraham negotiated with Ephron to buy Machpelah in order to have a place to bury his wife, Sarah. Following custom, Ephron offered to give the cave to Abraham, who, also following custom, offered full price (four hundred shekels) for the cave (Gen. 23:7–20). It is recorded that Abraham also was buried in the cave (25:9–10). According to Jacob, in his farewell message before dying, Isaac, Rebekah, and Leah were also buried there, and he desired to be buried there as well (49:29–32). Today Machpelah, or the Cave of the Patriarchs, is a heavily visited shrine, located in the modern city of Hebron.

(2) A mountain that formed part of the northern boundary of the tribe of Judah (Josh. 15:9). The exact location of this mountain is uncertain.

(3) A town, perhaps corresponding to the mountain in Josh. 15:9, that was near Bethel (which would have been near the northern boundary of Judah). It was captured from King Jeroboam of Israel by King Abijah of Judah during skirmishes between Judah and Israel (2 Chron. 13:19).