Sermon and Worship Resources

1 Samuel 22:1-5 · David at Adullam and Mizpah

1 David left Gath and escaped to the cave of Adullam. When his brothers and his father's household heard about it, they went down to him there. 2 All those who were in distress or in debt or discontented gathered around him, and he became their leader. About four hundred men were with him.

3 From there David went to Mizpah in Moab and said to the king of Moab, "Would you let my father and mother come and stay with you until I learn what God will do for me?" 4 So he left them with the king of Moab, and they stayed with him as long as David was in the stronghold.

5 But the prophet Gad said to David, "Do not stay in the stronghold. Go into the land of Judah." So David left and went to the forest of Hereth.

David at Adullam and Mizpah

1 Samuel 22:1-5

Understanding Series
by Mary J. Evans

David’s Flight – The Priests at Nob: 21:1–9 Having accepted that Saul’s enmity was fixed and that exile was the only option, David sought initial supplies from the priest at Nob. Ahimelech’s wariness on David’s arrival may have reflected an awareness of Saul’s antipathy toward David and a fear of getting involved in a power dispute. However, it is equally possible that Ahimelech’s expression of ignorance in 22:14–15 was the truth and his fear was that David would bring Philistine troops in his wake. David’s being unaccompanied would have added to Ahimelech’s suspicion that he was being set up for an ambush. The choice to deceive Ahimelech by inventing a secret mission and a hidden troop adds to the impression that Ahimelech was unaware of the real situation, though David’s deception may h…

Baker Publishing Group, Understanding the Bible Commentary Series, by Mary J. Evans

Overview and Insights · The Decline of Saul (and his madness) Versus the Rise of David (and his greatness) (18:1–31:13)

This last section (18:1–31:13) covers the decline of Saul (and his madness) contrasted with the rise of david (and His greatness). God has chosen David to replace Saul as king, but Saul refuses to give in. Throughout this unit David exemplifies good leadership just as Saul continues to demonstrate his incompetence. David will grow stronger and stronger throughout this unit, just as Saul grows weaker and more pathetic as he becomes paranoid about killing David.

In 1 Samuel 18–20 we see David in three relationships: (1) with Saul’s son Jonathan and Saul’s daughter Michal, who both love David; (2) with the people, who also love David; and (3) with Saul, who repeatedly tries to kill David. Indeed, in this section Saul makes numerous unsuccessful attempts to kill David (18:11, 17, 25; 19:1, 10…

The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016

1 Samuel 22:1-5 · David at Adullam and Mizpah

5 But the prophet Gad said to David, "Do not stay in the stronghold. Go into the land of Judah." So David left and went to the forest of Hereth.

Commentary · David at Adullam and Mizpah

After his narrow escape David travels about twelve miles further inland, to the cave of Adullam, in the western foothills (22:1–5). This is close to the place where he killed Goliath, in the Valley of Elah. Word of his whereabouts reaches his family and other individuals who are in trouble with Saul’s regime. About …

The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary by Gary M. Burge, Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Dictionary

Direct Matches

Adullam

A city in the western foothills of Judah, located about fifteen miles southwest of Jerusalem (Josh. 15:35). Prior to the conquest of Canaan, the patriarch Judah lived for some time in Adullam (Gen. 38:1 5). The Israelites conquered the city several hundred years later under Joshua (Josh. 12:15), and Rehoboam fortified the city after the division of Israel (2 Chron. 11:7). Adullam became a refuge for David both before and after his enthronement (1 Sam. 22:1–2; 2 Sam. 23:13–17).

Micah warned the people of Adullam and several nearby cities that disaster was imminent (Mic. 1:10–15); this materialized when Sennacherib captured all the fortified cities of Judah (Isa. 36:1). The Bible does not mention Adullam again until Nehemiah’s returnees from exile reestablish an Israelite presence in the city during the time of Artaxerxes (Neh. 11:30).

David

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Father

People in the Bible were family-centered and staunchly loyal to their kin. Families formed the foundation of society. The extended family was the source of people’s status in the community and provided the primary economic, educational, religious, and social interactions.

Marriage and divorce. Marriage in the ancient Near East was a contractual arrangement between two families, arranged by the bride’s father or a male representative. The bride’s family was paid a dowry, a “bride’s price.” Paying a dowry was not only an economic transaction but also an expression of family honor. Only the rich could afford multiple dowries. Thus, polygamy was minimal. The wedding itself was celebrated with a feast provided by the father of the groom.

The primary purpose for marriage in the ancient Near East was to produce a male heir to ensure care for the couple in their old age. The concept of inheritance was a key part of the marriage customs, especially with regard to passing along possessions and property.

Marriage among Jews in the NT era still tended to be endogamous; that is, Jews sought to marry close kin without committing incest violations (Lev. 18:6 17). A Jewish male certainly was expected to marry a Jew. Exogamy, marrying outside the remote kinship group, and certainly outside the ethnos, was understood as shaming God’s holiness. Thus, a Jew marrying a Gentile woman was not an option. The Romans did practice exogamy. For them, marrying outside one’s kinship group (not ethnos) was based predominantly on creating strategic alliances between families.

Greek and Roman law allowed both men and women to initiate divorce. In Jewish marriages, only the husband could initiate divorce proceedings. If a husband divorced his wife, he had to release her and repay the dowry. Divorce was common in cases of infertility (in particular if the woman had not provided male offspring). Ben Sira comments that barrenness in a woman is a cause of anxiety to the father (Sir. 42:9–10). Another reason for divorce was adultery (Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). Jesus, though, taught a more restrictive use of divorce than the OT (Mark 10:1–12).

Children and parenting. Childbearing was considered representative of God’s blessing on a woman and her entire family, in particular her husband. In contrast to this blessing, barrenness brought shame on women, their families, and specifically their husbands.

Children were of low social status in society. Infant mortality was high. An estimated 60 percent of the children in the first-century Mediterranean society were dead by the age of sixteen.

Ancient Near Eastern and Mediterranean societies exhibited a parenting style based on their view of human nature as a mixture of good and evil tendencies. Parents relied on physical punishment to prevent evil tendencies from developing into evil deeds (Prov. 29:15). The main concern of parents was to socialize the children into family loyalty. Lack of such loyalty was punished (Lev. 20:9). At a very early stage children were taught to accept the total authority of the father. The rearing of girls was entirely the responsibility of the women. Girls were taught domestic roles and duties as soon as possible so that they could help with household tasks.

Family identity was used as a metaphor in ancient Israel to speak of fidelity, responsibility, judgment, and reconciliation. In the OT, the people of Israel often are described as children of God. In their overall relationship to God, the people of Israel are referred to in familial terms—sons and daughters, spouse, and firstborn (Exod. 4:22). God is addressed as the father of the people (Isa. 63:16; 64:8) and referred to as their mother (Isa. 49:14–17).

The church as the family of God. Throughout his ministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a call to loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26), a call to fictive kinship, the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50; Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call to community. Entrance into the community was granted through adopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–63; John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9). Jesus’ presence as the head of the community was eventually replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18). Through the Spirit, Jesus’ ministry continues in the community of his followers, God’s family—the church. See also Adoption.

Gad

(1) A son of Jacob, born to Zilpah, Leah’s maidservant. He was one of Jacob’s twelve sons, destined to become a tribe of Israel. His name can mean “luck,” and this is the etiology given in Gen. 30:11. (2) Another Gad, found in 2 Sam. 24, is called “David’s seer” (v. 11). He was the prophet who confronted David about the census he had taken and offered him three choices: famine, foes, or plague. Gad instructed him to buy Araunah’s threshing floor and build an altar there. When this was done and sacrifice made, the blight ended. Much earlier, he had advised David to return to the land of Judah during his tenure as persona non grata in Saul’s court (1 Sam. 22:5). (3) There is another Gad mentioned in Isa. 65:11, sometimes translated “Fortune,” as in the NRSV: “But you who forsake the Lord, who forget my holy mountain, who set a table for Fortune and fill cups of mixed wine for Destiny”—here perhaps the name of a god worshiped by some Israelites.

Gath

One of the five major cities of the Philistines, each of which was ruled by its own lord (Josh. 13:3). Gath was situated close to the border of Judah. Since the Hebrew word gat means “winepress” and occurs in the names of several places (e.g., Gath Rimmon, Gath Hepher, Moresheth Gath), there may have been other towns of this name. Some of the biblical references (e.g., 1 Chron. 7:21; 8:13) may not be to Philistine Gath.

At the time of the conquest, Gath (mentioned in the Amarna letters of the fourteenth century BC) was inhabited by the formidable Anakites, whom Joshua failed to dislodge (Josh. 11:21 22; see also Deut. 1:28; 9:2), and in David’s day it still boasted warriors of great height and strength (2 Sam. 21:19–22; 1 Chron. 20:5–8). However, it was also one of the cities that God afflicted with tumors when the captured ark of the covenant was stored there (1 Sam. 5:8–9; 6:17), and the mighty Goliath of Gath was no match for God’s anointed (1 Sam. 17:8–58).

On two occasions David fled from Saul to Achish, king of Gath. The first time, he was so scared of Achish that he feigned insanity and escaped as soon as he could (1 Sam. 21:10–22:1; cf. the superscription to Ps. 56). The second time, he settled down with six hundred men and their families to deceive Achish in a different way: he used Gath as a base to attack Israel’s other enemies (1 Sam. 27:1–30:31), all the while claiming that he was wreaking revenge on Saul. When Achish himself defeated Saul and Jonathan, David was horrified by the thought that the town of Gath would hear of their deaths and gloat (2 Sam. 1:20). His horror is poetically echoed in Micah’s eighth-century BC lament over a doomed Judah (Mic. 1:10).

David seems nevertheless to have made friends as well as enemies in Gath. Obed-Edom the Gittite was blessed rather than cursed when the ark was kept at his house before its final journey to Jerusalem (2 Sam. 6:10–11; 1 Chron. 13:3). After David had conquered Gath (1 Chron. 18:1), the six hundred Gittite mercenaries in his army were among his most loyal followers (2 Sam. 15:18–22).

Gath seems to have changed hands fairly frequently thereafter. We know that Achish ruled it in Solomon’s day, when Shimei retrieved his runaway slaves from there (1 Kings 2:39–46), and that it was again in Philistine hands when Uzziah broke down its walls (2 Chron. 26:6). In between, however, we are told that Rehoboam of Judah fortified it (2 Chron. 11:8), and that in Joash’s reign Hazael of Aram conquered it (2 Kings 12:17). The fact that Amos mentions Gath as “in Philistia” (Amos 6:2) but does not group it with the other four cities of the Philistines (1:6–8) may mean that it was under Israelite control at the time. Assyrian records from the eighth century BC describe several campaigns against rebellious Philistine cities, including the city of Gath (Annals of Sargon II).

Judah

The fourth son of Jacob (Gen. 35:23). The meaning of his name is debated, but his mother, Leah, links it to “praise” (29:35). He persuaded his brothers to sell Joseph instead of killing him (37:26 27). He also guaranteed the safety of Benjamin when the brothers returned to Egypt to purchase food (43:1–10). In spite of his despicable behavior with his daughter-in-law Tamar (Gen. 38), his father’s blessing included the promise of kingship (49:10).

King

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

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

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

Land

Israel shared the cosmology of its ancient Near Eastern neighbors. This worldview understood the earth as a “disk” upon the primeval waters (Job 38:13; Isa. 40:22), with the earth having four rims or “corners” (Ps. 135:7; Isa. 11:12). These rims were sealed at the horizon to prevent the influx of cosmic waters. God speaks to Job about the dawn grasping the edges of the earth and shaking the evil people out of it (Job 38:12 13).

Israel’s promised land was built on the sanctuary prototype of Eden (Gen. 13:10; Deut. 6:3; 31:20); both were defined by divine blessing, fertility, legal instruction, secure boundaries, and were orienting points for the world. Canaan was Israel’s new paradise, “flowing with milk and honey” (Exod. 3:8; Num. 13:27). Conversely, the lack of fertile land was tantamount to insecurity and judgment. As Eden illustrated for Israel, any rupture of relationship with God brought alienation between humans, God, and the land; this could ultimately bring exile, as an ethically nauseated land “vomits” people out (Lev. 18:25, 28; 20:22; see also Deut. 4; 30).

For Israel, land involved both God’s covenant promise (Gen. 15:18–21; 35:9–12) and the nation’s faithful obedience (Gen. 17:1; Exod. 19:5; 1 Kings 2:1–4). Yahweh was the earth’s Lord (Ps. 97:5), Judge (Gen. 18:25), and King (Ps. 47:2, 7). Both owner and giver, he was the supreme landlord, who gifted the land to Israel (Exod. 19:5; Lev. 25:23; Josh. 22:19; Ps. 24:1). The land was God’s “inheritance” to give (1 Sam. 26:19; 2 Sam. 14:16; Ps. 79:1; Jer. 2:7). The Levites, however, did not receive an allotment of land as did the other tribes, since God was their “portion” (Num. 18:20; Ps. 73:26). Israel’s obedience was necessary both to enter and to occupy the land (Deut. 8:1–3; 11:8–9; 21:1; 27:1–3). Ironically, the earth swallowed rebellious Israelites when they accused Moses of bringing them “up out of a land flowing with milk and honey” (Num. 16:13). As the conquest shows, however, no tribe was completely obedient, taking its full “inheritance” (Josh. 13:1).

Mizpah

Meaning “watchtower,” this is the name of several sites in the Bible. (1) Along with “Galeed,” a name given to the heap of stones that memorialized the covenant made between Jacob and Laban (Gen. 31:48 49). (2) The place where the Israelites assembled in response to the military threat from Ammon and made Jephthah their leader (Judg. 10:17; 11:11). It may have been the home of Jephthah and may be the same place mentioned in Gen. 31:49. From Mizpah, Jeph-thah and Israel attacked the Ammonites. Mizpah became the place where Jephthah fulfilled his ill-conceived vow (Judg. 11:34–39). This location is most likely synonymous with the Ramath Mizpah in the territory of Gad (Josh. 13:26). (3) A city in the tribal allotment of Benjamin. It is listed between Beeroth and Kephirah and seems to have been close to Gibeon and Ramah (Josh. 18:26; 1 Kings 15:22; Neh. 3:7). Of the various places to bear the name “Mizpah,” the Benjamite location has the most biblical significance. The men of Israel gathered here to decide how to deal with the Benjamites’ behavior toward the Levite’s concubine (Judg. 20:1–3; 21:1–8). It was also here that Samuel called the people of Israel together to pray and renew their relationship with God after the ark of the covenant had been sent back by the Philistines (1 Sam. 7:5–6). As a result, when the Philistines attacked, God caused them to panic, and Israel had the victory. Samuel regularly visited Mizpah to render judgment for the Israelites (1 Sam. 7:16). Also, Saul was presented to Israel as its king at Mizpah (1 Sam. 10:17).

Taken collectively, these references show the religious and civic importance of the site for the fledgling nation. After the division of the kingdom, Mizpah became part of the southern kingdom of Judah. King Asa of Judah fortified Mizpah against King Baasha of Israel with materials used from Baasha’s fortification at Ramah (1 Kings 15:16–22). Mizpah became an important civic center once again after the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonians in 587/586 BC. Gedaliah, the Babylonian-appointed governor of the conquered region, set up his government center at Mizpah (2 Kings 25:23–25). The importance of Mizpah is commemorated by Judas Maccabeus in the intertestamental period (1 Macc. 3:46).

Moab

Moab proper lies between the Arnon and the Zered valleys east of the Dead Sea. The Arnon is the deepest gorge in Jordan (seventeen hundred feet) and is two miles wide at the upper edge. It served as a natural northern boundary for geopolitical Moab, even though the nation frequently expanded its control farther north.

After the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, Lot’s daughters determined to carry on the family line by sleeping with their father (Gen. 19:30 38). The son of the elder daughter was named “Moab.” According to an etymology in the LXX, the name in Hebrew means “from my father” (Gen. 19:37).

Moses’ song refers to leaders of Moab among those whom Israel would encounter (Exod. 15:15). As the Israelites made their way past Edom (Num. 20:14–21), they may also have given a wide berth to geopolitical Moab, moving instead along the desert highway to the east (Num. 21:10–20; Deut. 2:8–9; Judg. 11:18; but see also Deut. 2:29) until they arrived at the territory that Sihon, king of the Amorites, had previously captured from the Moabites (Num. 21:21–26). This is the plateau (Heb. mishor) north of the Arnon (Deut. 2:36) stretching to Ammon (Josh. 13:10). The capital city of Sihon was Heshbon on the plateau (mishor) (Josh. 13:21). After defeating the Amorites, the Israelites camped on the “plains of Moab” (Num. 22:1; 33:48–50), where they remained until crossing the Jordan River. Most likely they did not jeopardize their security by moving down into the Jordan Valley.

Frightened by this multitude, the king of Moab and the elders of Midian sent for Balaam to curse the Israelites (Num. 21–24). Instead, Balaam pronounced four sets of blessings on Israel, and in the final one Balaam spoke of a “star . . . out of Jacob” who would “crush the foreheads of Moab” (Num. 24:17). Because the Moabites refused to welcome the Israelites and hired Balaam, the Moabites, along with the Ammonites, were excluded from the assembly of the Lord for ten generations (Deut. 23:3–6). The verse immediately prior to this passage excludes those born of forbidden marriages, which might be the reason for specifying Moab and Ammon.

The plateau (mishor) was allocated to the tribes of Reuben and Gad (Num. 32:34–38; Josh. 13:8–9). Their presence enabled the Israelites to maintain a hold in the region, a fact that would be significant some three centuries later (Judg. 11:26). As the Israelites prepared to enter the land, Moses restated the covenant on the plains of Moab (Num. 36:13; Deut. 29:1). When it came time for Moses to die, he climbed Mount Nebo from the plains of Moab to the top of Pisgah, and after his death the Israelites mourned him there for thirty days (Deut. 34:1–8).

During the period of the judges, the Moabites pushed north across the Arnon and as far as Jericho. When Ehud killed Eglon, the Moabites were driven back and subjected to Israel for eighty years (Judg. 3). The respite was temporary, however, due to repeated apostasy on the part of the Israelites. They turned to worship the gods of the peoples around them, among them the gods of the Moabites (Judg. 10:6).

The book of Ruth is set during the period of Judges and Ruth herself was a Moabite women, who allied herself with Israel. Ruth’s son was Obed, the father of Jesse, the father of David (Ruth 4:21). This family link with Moab may explain why David sought refuge for his father and mother in Moab in the dark days when he was fleeing from Saul (1 Sam. 22:1–4). David was appealing to a national enemy in doing this since Saul had been fighting against the Moabites along with the Ammonites, the Edomites, and the Philistines since he became king (1 Sam. 14:47). The complexity created for David by this combination of family allegiances and ongoing national concerns is evident in his later actions as king. When he defeated the Moabites, he brutally subdued them, reducing them to a vassal kingdom (2 Sam. 8:2–12). The united kingdom continued to control the plateau of Moab, evident in the towns noted in David’s census; it reached through the tribe of Gad to the city of Aroer in the Arnon Gorge (2 Sam. 24:5).

Moab is the object of stinging rebuke from several prophets (Isa. 15–16; 25:10; Jer. 48; Ezek. 25:8–11; Amos 2:1–3). Moab’s forthcoming judgment is described in grim terms, equating Moab’s end to that of Sodom and Gomorrah (Zeph. 2:9). Even so, God declares, “I will restore the fortunes of Moab in days to come” (Jer. 48:47). Moab will be humbled along with Edom and the Philistines at the word of the Lord (Pss. 60:8; 108:9). After the return from exile, Moabites were among those with whom the Israelites intermarried (Ezra 9:1; Neh. 13:1; cf. Deut. 23:3–6).

Pray

In the OT there is no language or understanding comparable to modern ways of talking about prayer as conversational or dialogical. Prayer does not involve mutuality. Prayer is something that humans offer to God, and the situation is never reversed; God does not pray to humans. Understanding this preserves the proper distinction between the sovereign God and the praying subject. Therefore, prayers in the OT are reverential. Some OT prayers have extended introductions, such as that found in Neh. 1:5, that seem to pile up names for God. These should be seen as instances not of stiltedness or ostentation, but rather as setting up a kind of “buffer zone” in recognition of the distance between the Creator and the creature. In the NT, compare the same phenomenon in Eph. 1:17.

A presupposition of prayer in the OT is that God hears prayer and may indeed answer and effect the change being requested. Prayer is not primarily about changing the psychological state or the heart of the one praying, but rather about God changing the circumstances of the one praying.

The depiction of prayer in the NT is largely consistent with that of the OT, but there are important developments.

Jesus tells his disciples to address God as “Father” (Matt. 6:9; cf. Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). Prayer to God is now to be made in the name of Jesus (Matt. 18:19 20; John 14:13; 15:16; 16:23–26).

Prayer can also be made to Jesus (John 14:14), and such devotion to him in the early church is evidence of his being regarded as deity. Unlike anything prior in the OT, Jesus tells his followers to pray for their enemies (Matt. 5:44). Jesus and his followers serve as examples (Luke 23:34; Acts 7:60).

The Holy Spirit plays a vital role in prayers. It is by him that we are able to call out, “Abba, Father” (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). The Spirit himself intercedes for us (Rom. 8:26). Our praying is to be done in the Spirit (Eph. 6:18; Jude 20; possibly 1 Cor. 14:15).

Jesus encourages fervent and even continual or repeated prayer (Luke 18:1–8), but not showy or repetitive prayer (Matt. 6:5–8).

Jesus becomes the model of prayer. He prays before important decisions (Luke 6:12–13) and in connection with significant crisis points (Matt. 14:23; 26:36–44; Luke 3:21; 9:29; John 12:27). He offers prayers that are not answered (Luke 22:41–44) and prayers that are (Heb. 5:7). Even as he tells his disciples to always pray and not give up (Luke 18:1 [which is also the meaning of the sometimes overly literalized “pray without ceasing” in 1 Thess. 5:17 NRSV]), so he himself wrestles in prayer (Luke 22:41–44; Heb. 5:7). He has prayed for his disciples (John 17; Luke 22:32), and even now, in heaven, he still intercedes for us (Heb. 7:25). Indeed, our intercession before God’s throne is valid because his is (Heb. 4:14–16).

Direct Matches

Adullam

A city in the western foothills of Judah, located about fifteen miles southwest of Jerusalem (Josh. 15:35). Prior to the conquest of Canaan, the patriarch Judah lived for some time in Adullam (Gen. 38:1–5). The Israelites conquered the city several hundred years later under Joshua (Josh. 12:15), and Rehoboam fortified the city after the division of Israel (2 Chron. 11:7).

Adullam became a refuge for David both before and after his enthronement. After fleeing from Saul to the Philistine city of Gath, David stayed at a cave in Adullam, and about four hundred men gathered to him, many of whom were discontented and troubled (1 Sam. 22:1–2). King David’s battles with the Philistines led him back to the stronghold at the cave of Adullam. In one memorable instance, Philistine forces were stationed near Jerusalem in the Valley of Rephaim and in Bethlehem, and three of David’s mighty men broke through Philistine lines and brought water back to David in the stronghold (2 Sam. 23:13–17; 1 Chron. 11:15).

Caves

In biblical times, caves were used for storage, as tombs (Gen. 23:9–20; 25:9; 49:29–32; 50:13; John 11:38), and as shelter for refugees, warriors, and outlaws (Gen. 19:30; Josh. 10:16–27; Judg. 6:2; 1 Sam. 13:6; 22:1; 24:3–10; 2 Sam. 23:13; 1 Kings 18:4, 13; 19:9, 13; 1 Chron. 11:15; Heb. 11:28). The word “cave” came to be used for a robbers’ den (Jer. 7:11; Matt. 21:13; Mark 11:17; Luke 19:46), and in poetry the proud live in clefts of rock like eagles (Jer. 49:16; Obad. 1:3). But although God hid Moses in a cleft to protect him from divine glory (Exod. 33:22), caves, when God judges, will offer no escape from divine wrath (Isa. 2:19–21; Ezek. 33:27; Rev. 6:15).

Forest

In ancient times much of the land of Palestine was covered with forests, especially on the foothills. These forests were, over time, cut down for building materials as well as to clear space for farming. For example, Joshua responded to Ephraim’s and Manasseh’s request for more land on which to settle by saying that they should clear as much of the forests of the hill country as they wished (Josh. 17:15). When David was running from Saul, he used the forest of Hereth as a hiding place (1 Sam. 22:5). A forest also played a significant role in the battle fought between the troops loyal to David and those loyal to his son Absalom. According to the story, “the forest swallowed up more men that day than the sword” (2 Sam.18:8). As Absalom was fleeing after defeat, he too was claimed by the forest when his head became stuck in a low-lying branch that prevented him from escaping (2 Sam. 18:9), whereupon Joab and his armor-bearers killed him. Throughout the OT there are examples in which a forest is personified as praising God (Ps. 96:12) or receiving punishment in the form of fire (Jer. 21:14).

Gad

(1) A son of Jacob, born to Zilpah, Leah’s maidservant. He was one of Jacob’s twelve sons, destined to become a tribe of Israel. His name can mean “luck,” and this is the etiology given in Gen. 30:11. (2) Another Gad, found in 2 Sam. 24, is called “David’s seer” (v. 11). He was the prophet who confronted David about the census he had taken and offered him three choices: famine, foes, or plague. Gad instructed him to buy Araunah’s threshing floor and build an altar there. When this was done and sacrifice made, the blight ended. Much earlier, he had advised David to return to the land of Judah during his tenure as persona non grata in Saul’s court (1 Sam. 22:5). (3) There is another Gad mentioned in Isa. 65:11, sometimes translated “Fortune,” as in the NRSV: “But you who forsake the Lord, who forget my holy mountain, who set a table for Fortune and fill cups of mixed wine for Destiny”—here perhaps the name of a god worshiped by some Israelites.

Gath

The most likely site of Philistine Gath is Tell es-Safi, overlooking the main north-south road through the Shephelah to the west of Jerusalem. Excavations here suggest that the site was inhabited in the pre-Israelite period and during the first millennium BC. Although the city was rebuilt in the Persian period after its destruction by the Babylonians, it seems to have been abandoned between the late first century BC and Crusader times.

At the time of the conquest, Gath (mentioned in the Amarna letters of the fourteenth century BC) was inhabited by the formidable Anakites, whom Joshua failed to dislodge (Josh. 11:21–22; see also Deut. 1:28; 9:2), and in David’s day it still boasted warriors of great height and strength (2 Sam. 21:19–22; 1 Chron. 20:5–8). However, it was also one of the cities that God afflicted with tumors when the captured ark of the covenant was stored there (1 Sam. 5:8–9; 6:17), and the mighty Goliath of Gath was no match for God’s anointed (1 Sam. 17:8–58).

Hareth

The forested region into which David and his men fled from King Saul after being instructed by the prophet Gad to leave the stronghold of Moab (1 Sam. 22:5). The exact location is unknown, though perhaps from the association with David’s sojourn in the cave of Adullam, some scholars identify Hereth with nearby Kharas, which is between Adullam and Giloh.

Hereth

Mizpah

Meaning “watchtower,” this is the name of several sites in the Bible. In some Bible versions, the name also appears as “Mizpeh.” (1) Along with “Galeed,” a name given to the heap of stones that memorialized the covenant made between Jacob and Laban (Gen. 31:48–49). (2) A region near Mount Hermon that was occupied by the Hivites (Josh. 11:3). (3) One of the towns occupying the region of the Shephelah, or coastal plain, listed in Josh. 15:38–39.

(4) The place where the Israelites assembled in response to the military threat from Ammon and made Jephthah their leader (Judg. 10:17; 11:11). It may have been the home of Jephthah and may be the same place mentioned in Gen. 31:49. From Mizpah, Jephthah and Israel attacked the Ammonites. Mizpah became the place where Jephthah fulfilled his ill-conceived vow (Judg. 11:34). This location is most likely synonymous with the Ramath Mizpah in the territory of Gad (Josh. 13:26). (5) A site in Moab where David had his parents stay, with the permission of the king of Moab (1 Sam. 22:3).

(6) A city in the tribal allotment of Benjamin. It is listed between Beeroth and Kephirah and seems to have been close to Gibeon and Ramah (Josh. 18:26; 1 Kings 15:22; Neh. 3:7). Of the various places to bear the name “Mizpah,” the Benjamite location has the most biblical significance. The men of Israel gathered here to decide how to deal with the Benjamites’ behavior toward the Levite’s concubine (Judg. 20:1–3; 21:1–8). It was also here that Samuel called the people of Israel together to pray and renew their relationship with God after the ark of the covenant had been sent back by the Philistines (1 Sam. 7:5–6). As a result, when the Philistines attacked, God caused them to panic, and Israel had the victory. Samuel regularly visited Mizpah to render judgment for the Israelites (1 Sam. 7:16). Also, Saul was presented to Israel as its king at Mizpah (1 Sam. 10:17).

The location of the Benjamite Mizpah is debated today, with two possible sites being possible: Nebi-Samwil is approximately four and a half miles north of Jerusalem, and Tell en-Nasbeh, the more likely site, is approximately eight miles north of Jerusalem.

Mizpeh

Moab

The Geography of Moab

Undisputed territory. Moab proper lies between the Arnon and the Zered valleys east of the Dead Sea. The Arnon is the deepest gorge in Jordan (seventeen hundred feet) and is two miles wide at the upper edge. It served as a natural northern boundary for geopolitical Moab, even though the nation frequently expanded its control farther north. The canyon eventually splits into four branches, “the wadis [NIV mg.: “ravines”] of the Arnon” (Num. 21:14–15 NASB). The Zered to the south is the only river in Jordan that constituted a permanent political border.

The average elevation of Moab is about thirty-two hundred feet, with some mountains nearing four thousand feet. Moab receives considerably more rain (sixteen inches per year) than do the eastern fringes of Israel, as moisture is picked up from the humid Jordan Valley and the Dead Sea by the prevailing westerly winds. The band of arable land is narrow because the terrain next to the Rift Valley is rugged. Cities in Moab were among places mentioned as suitable for livestock for the two and one-half tribes settling in Transjordan (Num. 32:1–4).

The plateau and plains of Moab. When mishor refers to the plateau of Moab, it always has the definite article in Hebrew (Deut. 3:10; 4:43; Josh. 13:9, 16, 17, 21; Jer. 48:8, 21). The plateau begins where the foothills of Gilead end and extends south to the Arnon Gorge. The desert boundary to the east fluctuates somewhat, depending on wet or dry years. The average elevation is about twenty-six hundred feet, with an average rainfall of fourteen to sixteen inches. In the biblical period, primary contenders for control of this region were Moabites and Israelites. The Moabites considered the plateau part of their territory, with their northern boundary reaching the foothills of Gilead.

The “plains [’arebot] of Moab” (Num. 22:1; 26:3; 31:12; 33:48–50; 36:13; Deut. 34:1; Josh. 13:32) could refer to the southeastern corner of the Jordan Valley below the plateau opposite Jericho. Nevertheless, because the Hebrew preposition ’al, used repeatedly in the Numbers passages, can mean “above,” it might refer to plains “above” the Jordan opposite Jericho—in other words, part of the plateau. This makes more sense in light of the events that unfolded while the Israelites were camped there. Both expressions are indicative that the name of Moab was attached to territories beyond the strictly political boundaries.

The History of Moab in the Bible

Origins of the Moabites. After the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, Lot’s daughters determined to carry on the family line by sleeping with their father (Gen. 19:30–38). The son of the elder daughter was named “Moab.” According to an etymology in the LXX, the name in Hebrew means “from my father” (Gen. 19:37).

The exodus and the conquest. Moses’ song refers to leaders of Moab among those whom Israel would encounter (Exod. 15:15). As the Israelites made their way past Edom (Num. 20:14–21), they may also have given a wide berth to geopolitical Moab, moving instead along the desert highway to the east (Num. 21:10–20; Deut. 2:8–9; Judg. 11:18; but see also Deut. 2:29) until they arrived at the territory that Sihon, king of the Amorites, had previously captured from the Moabites (Num. 21:21–26). This is the plateau (Heb. mishor) north of the Arnon (Deut. 2:36) stretching to Ammon (Josh. 13:10). The capital city of Sihon was Heshbon on the plateau (mishor) (Josh. 13:21). After defeating the Amorites, the Israelites camped on the “plains of Moab” (Num. 22:1; 33:48–50), where they remained until crossing the Jordan River. Most likely they did not jeopardize their security by moving down into the Jordan Valley.

Frightened by this multitude, the king of Moab and the elders of Midian sent for Balaam to curse the Israelites (Num. 21–24). Instead, Balaam pronounced four sets of blessings on Israel, and in the final one Balaam spoke of a “star . . . out of Jacob” who would “crush the foreheads of Moab” (Num. 24:17). Because the Moabites refused to welcome the Israelites and hired Balaam, the Moabites, along with Ammonites, were excluded from the assembly of the Lord for ten generations (Deut. 23:3–6). The verse immediately prior to this passage excludes those born of forbidden marriages, which might be the reason for specifying Moab and Ammon.

The judges through the monarchy. During the period of the judges, the Moabites pushed north across the Arnon and as far as Jericho. When Ehud killed Eglon, the Moabites were driven back and subjected to Israel for eighty years (Judg. 3). The respite was temporary, however, due to repeated apostasy on the part of the Israelites. They turned to worship the gods of the peoples around them, among them the gods of the Moabites (Judg. 10:6). At some point during the period of the judges, relations between Israel and Moab were sufficiently friendly that the family of Elimelek could take refuge there during the famine in Judah (Ruth 1). When all the men of the family died, the Moabite Ruth converted to the worship of Yahweh (Ruth 1:16), which meant that she could indeed become part of the congregation of Israel, overcoming the restriction in Deut. 23:3–6.

Ruth’s son was Obed, the father of Jesse, the father of David (Ruth 4:21). This family link with Moab may explain why David sought refuge for his father and mother in Moab in the dark days when he was fleeing from Saul (1 Sam. 22:1–4). David was appealing to a national enemy in doing this since Saul had been fighting against the Moabites along with the Ammonites, the Edomites, and the Philistines since he became king (1 Sam. 14:47). The complexity created for David by this combination of family allegiances and ongoing national concerns is evident in his later actions as king. When he defeated the Moabites, he brutally subdued them, reducing them to a vassal kingdom (2 Sam. 8:2–12). The united kingdom continued to control the plateau of Moab, evident in the towns noted in David’s census; it reached through the tribe of Gad to the city of Aroer in the Arnon Gorge (2 Sam. 24:5).

Solomon built places of worship for the gods of his wives, among them Chemosh, “the vile god of Moab” (2 Kings 23:13). As a result, God removed all but the southern kingdom of Judah from the Davidic dynasty and the plateau of Moab came under the control of the northern kingdom for more than half a century. The Moabite Stone, discovered in the nineteenth century AD at Dibon, indicated that Omri, king of Israel, conquered the plateau of Medeba and reestablished connections with the tribe of Gad. This continued until near the end of Ahab’s reign. Although the Moabite Stone indicates that Mesha revolted during the reign of Ahab, the biblical text puts it after Ahab’s death. The revolt prompted an alliance between Joram and Jehoshaphat to subdue Moab (2 Kings 3:4–27).

The prophets and after the exile. Moab is the object of stinging rebuke from several prophets (Isa. 15–16; 25:10; Jer. 48; Ezek. 25:8–11; Amos 2:1–3). Moab’s forthcoming judgment is described in grim terms, equating Moab’s end to that of Sodom and Gomorrah (Zeph. 2:9). Even so, God declares, “I will restore the fortunes of Moab in days to come” (Jer. 48:47). Moab will be humbled along with Edom and the Philistines at the word of the Lord (Pss. 60:8; 108:9). After the return from exile, Moabites were among those with whom the Israelites intermarried (Ezra 9:1; Neh. 13:1; cf. Deut. 23:3–6).

Moabite

The Geography of Moab

The History of Moab in the Bible

Frightened by this multitude, the king of Moab and the elders of Midian sent for Balaam to curse the Israelites (Num. 21–24). Instead, Balaam pronounced four sets of blessings on Israel, and in the final one Balaam spoke of a “star . . . out of Jacob” who would “crush the foreheads of Moab” (Num. 24:17). Because the Moabites refused to welcome the Israelites and hired Balaam, the Moabites, along with Ammonites, were excluded from the assembly of the Lord for ten generations (Deut. 23:3–6). The verse immediately prior to this passage excludes those born of forbidden marriages, which might be the reason for specifying Moab and Ammon.

Mother

Although essentially characterized by bearing offspring, a mother is associated with much more in the Bible. Especially prominent are the characteristic ways in which a mother relates to her children: she tends to their needs (1 Thess. 2:7), looks after their welfare (1 Kings 3:16–27), comforts them (Ps. 131:2), and instructs them (Prov. 1:8; 31:1).

Motherhood is held in high regard. Bearing a child is an occasion for rejoicing (Gen. 4:1; Ps. 113:9). A virtuous and industrious mother is praised by her children and husband alike (Prov. 31:28). The Bible describes a mother both crowning a king (Song 3:11) and sitting beside his throne (1 Kings 2:19). The death of a mother brings extreme sorrow (Gen. 24:67; Ps. 35:14). Furthermore, God’s promises are often associated with the birth of a child (e.g., Gen. 3:15; 12:2–3; Judg. 13:3; Isa. 7:14). Mary is blessed among women as the mother of Jesus Christ (Luke 1:42–45). Finally, the Bible protects the dignity of a mother as it does that of the father. The law requires honor and reverence for both father and mother (Exod. 20:12; Lev. 19:3; Deut. 5:16) and condemns to death those who strike or curse either parent (Exod. 21:15, 17; Lev. 20:9).

There is also great concern that adult children look after the welfare of their parents as a means of honoring them. David makes provisions for his parents as he flees from Saul (1 Sam. 22:3–4). Jesus condemns the Pharisees and the scribes for taking the resources due their parents and offering them as a gift to God instead (Matt. 15:4–6). Even Jesus’ final act upon the cross is to ensure the welfare of his mother by defining her relationship with the Beloved Disciple as mother and son (John 19:26–27). On the other hand, Jesus makes clear that concern for one’s family is subordinate to discipleship to him (Matt. 10:37; Mark 3:35; Luke 14:26).

The word “mother” also carries symbolic or metaphorical senses. Sometimes the “mother” is a fitting example of other things or persons like it, such as Babylon the Great as the mother of prostitutes and earthly abominations (Rev. 17:5). In the extended analogy between Hosea’s marriage and God’s relationship to Israel, the nation is called a “mother,” and its inhabitants are her “children” (Hos. 2:4; 4:5; cf. Isa. 50:1; Jer. 50:12). The image of a mother may also refer to a large city (2 Sam. 20:19; Gal. 4:26).

Secondary Matches

The following suggestions occured because 1 Samuel 22:1-5 is mentioned in the definition.

Adullamite

A city in the western foothills of Judah, located about fifteen miles southwest of Jerusalem (Josh. 15:35). Prior to the conquest of Canaan, the patriarch Judah lived for some time in Adullam (Gen. 38:1–5). The Israelites conquered the city several hundred years later under Joshua (Josh. 12:15), and Rehoboam fortified the city after the division of Israel (2 Chron. 11:7).

Books of Samuel

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

Genre and Purpose

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

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

Outline

I. The Rise of Samuel (1 Sam. 1–7)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A. David accepts Mephibosheth (2 Sam. 9)

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

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

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

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

Composition

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

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

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

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

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

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

Text

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

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

Central Themes

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

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

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

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

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

New Testament Connections

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

Bulwark

In ancient Israel there were forts, fortification systems (forts protecting routes or borders), and fortified towns/cities. These came in all shapes and sizes (oval, rectangular, square, and rectangular with towers). The question becomes “Is it a fortified city/town, or is it a military outpost (i.e., fort/fortress)?” The answer depends on the size and location of the structure.

There are eight main Hebrew terms used in the Bible to describe a fortress or fortification. However, there is overlap in the use and translation of the terms. The NIV typically translates these words as “fortress,” “stronghold,” “refuge,” or “citadel.” Sometimes the terms are used poetically in a description of God (i.e., God is our “fortress”). The eight Hebrew terms are (1) birah—“fortress, citadel” (2 Chron. 27:4 [NIV: “forts”]; Neh. 2:8; 7:2); (2) birta’—“castle, citadel” (Aramaic word in Ezra 6:2; cf. the Akkadian term birtu, “fortress”); (3) metsurah—“fortress, stronghold” (Nah. 2:1; used with “city,” it can function as an adjective: “fortified city”); (4) misgeret—“stronghold, bulwark” (2 Sam. 22:46; Ps. 18:45; Mic. 7:17 [NIV: “den”]); (5) ma’oz—“stronghold, refuge, fortress” (Judg. 6:26 [NIV: “height”]; Prov. 10:29; Dan. 11:7, 19, 31, 38–39; Nah. 1:7); (6) metsudah—“fastness, stronghold” (1 Sam. 22:4; 2 Sam. 22:2); (7) matsor—“rampart, stronghold” (Zech. 9:3); and (8) misgab—“height, stronghold, fortress” (Pss. 59:16–17; 62:2; Jer. 48:1).

In the tenth century BC the typical smaller fortress was oval, and the larger ones were rectangular, usually with hollow casemate walls with rooms on the inside (e.g., Tel Ein el-Qudeirat, ’Ain Qadeis, and Horvat Ketef Shivta). Many of these oval forts were located in the southern Negev to protect the border and trade routes. Forts usually stood on a height overlooking a trade route, and the local water supply often was a cistern in or near the fortress. Fortresses of the ninth and tenth centuries BC were rectangular, with (and without) corner towers and solid rather than casemate walls (e.g., Tel Arad, Tel Nagila, and Khirbet Abu et-Twein). The seventh- and sixth-century BC fortresses returned to hollow casemate walls for various reasons (e.g., Horvat Radum, Deir Baghl, Tel Ein el-Qudeirat [Kadesh-Barnea]).

Education

Understanding many aspects of education in Israel during OT times and, to a lesser extent, into the NT period is extraordinarily difficult. Many studies draw quite specific conclusions based on very slender evidence and inferences drawn from supposed parallels with neighboring societies, inferences themselves beset by uncertainties. Therefore, conclusions are necessarily tentative at many points. Furthermore, it is reasonable to expect that things did not remain constant through history, and that what can be reliably discerned for one period may not accurately reflect the situation in other times.

Education encompasses several areas of life in the biblical world. Aside from academic education (relating to literacy and numeracy), there was moral and religious education, military education, and vocational training. These are not all distinct; those whose vocation lay in diplomatic circles or within the royal court as scribes would have received academic education, while those living in the country and working a farm would have had little opportunity to access such knowledge.

Old Testament

Settings for education. There were three primary arenas of education in OT times: home, school, and temple.

Home. The most important setting for education in OT times was the home (Deut. 4:9; 6:7; 11:19). Both parents were expected to play a role in a child’s education (Prov. 1:8; 6:20; 23:22; 31:1). Sons generally were trained in their father’s vocation, and such training took the form of an apprenticeship (1 Sam. 16:11; 2 Kings 4:18); girls learned from their mothers as they undertook their work on a daily basis (Exod. 35:25–26; 2 Sam. 13:8).

In part, the extent of home education is tied to the question of the extent of formal schooling in ancient Israel. As noted below, the nature and extent of schools is unclear, and if (as the evidence seems to suggest) schools were virtually nonexistent outside the royal court, then the home ultimately would have been the locus of any academic education received by children and the source of any widespread literacy and numeracy in the community. The frequent use of father/son language in Proverbs, however, need not imply an exclusively familial context for the instruction contained therein, as there is evidence from Egypt that such language was used between teacher and student.

School. The existence, nature, and extent of schools in OT times is extensively debated and ultimately uncertain. The first explicit reference to a school is found in the second century BC in Sir. 51:23. The virtual silence of the OT on the topic may reflect either that schools were absent in ancient Israel or that their existence was somehow of little interest and so warranted little reflection by biblical authors. In any case, it is likely that some form of school for scribes and those training to work in government existed in the vicinity of the royal court, as they did in Mesopotamia and Egypt. These did not form a comprehensive national schooling system for young children but were more specifically targeted to the few individuals who aimed to become scribes or advisers.

Outside the Bible there exist a number of inscriptions that could suggest the existence of schools in Israel prior to the exile. These include abecedaries (lists of the letters of the alphabet written out, usually as practice exercises or as examples), words written out several times, lists of month names, and possible exercises in reading foreign languages, among others.

There is also extensive evidence of schools in Egypt, Mesopotamia, and probably also Ugarit from an early date (cf. Acts 7:22). Whether their existence supports the existence of schools in Israel is unclear. Egypt and Mesopotamia had large and complex bureaucracies necessary to administer their kingdoms, and they employed writing systems far more difficult to master than Hebrew. In addition, mathematical texts reflect a concern with numeracy within the schools of these kingdoms, for which there is no clear evidence in ancient Israel.

The sages and scribes appear to be the primary source for the material supposedly employed in schools. Ecclesiastes 12:9 identifies one of the tasks of the sages as teaching the people, and some claim that Proverbs functioned as a textbook within a school setting. Indeed, Prov. 4:5; 17:16 speak of the “buying” (Heb. qanah) of knowledge, interpreted by some as a reference to teachers paid for providing tuition. Again, the context in which such tuition may have taken place is uncertain.

Temple. Priests were also involved in some teaching (1 Sam. 2:21, 26). According to 2 Chron. 17:7–9, King Jehoshaphat sent five officials, nine Levites, and two priests to teach the people of Judah from the Book of the Law, a point that stresses both the importance of the task and the probable failure of the home setting to adequately convey this instruction, at least by the late fifth century BC.

Types of education. In OT times four types of education can be discerned: moral and religious, academic, vocational, and military.

Moral and religious education. The Bible stresses the importance of moral and religious education above all other forms (Exod. 10:2; 12:26; 13:8; Deut. 4:9; 6:7, 20–21; 32:7, 46).

Academic education. The extent of literacy and numeracy in ancient Israel is difficult to ascertain. Rudimentary numeracy almost certainly was widespread and learned within the home and in the course of vocational training when necessary. Many among the population also appear to have been at least capable of reading and writing names or other simple texts (Deut. 6:9; 11:20; Judg. 8:14).

Vocational training. Most commonly, boys followed in their father’s vocation and thus learned through observation and participation. Under some circumstances, however, children served apprenticeships under the tutelage of others, such as was apparently the case for prophetic schools (2 Kings 2:7; 4:38; 6:1–2; Amos 7:14–15).

Military training. There are clear indications that kings recruited mercenaries to form the most important part of their army (e.g., 1 Sam. 22:2; 25:13). These mercenaries were paid and likely had received some formal training, but the nature of that training is nowhere explained. In addition to these elite forces, all able-bodied men apparently were considered eligible for military service when the need arose (2 Chron. 25:5). So, for example, the elite troops were responsible for staging the attack (2 Sam. 11:14–17; 12:26), while the remainder of the army served as reinforcements where necessary (2 Sam. 12:29). The use of chariots (under David and Solomon) would have required some training, as would the wielding of various weapons (swords, spears, bows, and slings). Ultimately, however, there are only allusions to such training (e.g., Judg. 3:2; 2 Sam. 22:35).

Educational methods. Throughout the ancient Near East there is evidence that corporal punishment played a significant role in education. There is a somewhat comical text from Mesopotamia that relates a day in the life of a student who receives physical punishment for virtually everything he does. Similarly, the book of Proverbs highlights the importance of discipline in raising and training children (e.g., 13:24; 22:15; 29:15, 17). Nonetheless, Proverbs uses “the rod” as a means to signify discipline as a whole without necessarily endorsing corporal punishment as the only or even the primary means of discipline. This is apparent because Proverbs contrasts the rod not with other, lesser forms of discipline but rather with no discipline at all. Thus, although there is evidence that corporal punishment was used extensively (and probably excessively [see Sir. 30]), Proverbs endorses a more nuanced approach to disciplining children.

Academic, religious, and moral education also involved the use of various techniques that facilitated learning. These included the use of poetry or poetic couplets (common in wisdom literature and in psalms), numerical sayings (e.g., Ps. 62:11; Prov. 6:16), and acrostics, as well as the celebration of feasts and memorials at various times throughout the year.

New Testament

Greco-Roman education. Greek education developed from about the fourth century BC and spread throughout the Mediterranean region, adopted with minor modification by the Romans. The curriculum was dominated by sports and a focus on literacy, with little place given to religious education (although philosophy was taught and did bear some religious traits). Education in the Greco-Roman world was expensive, and its provision was a parental responsibility, which tended to restrict formal education to the elite.

At about the age of fifteen, boys could move from elementary schooling to the gymnasium, where they received intellectual and physical training. Some in the Corinthian church may have received such an education, a possibility raised by Paul’s terminology in 1 Corinthians that reflects educational language: his claim to be father of the Corinthian household (4:14–21); sporting imagery (esp. 9:24–27); language of nursing and nature (3:1–4); agricultural imagery (3:5–9); his threat to come with a rod (4:21), which could be related to the rod of correction; the term grammateus (1:20), which may refer to the gymnasium instructor; reference to writing (4:6); and talk of removing the marks of circumcision (7:18).

Education in Israel. One Jewish tradition states that in AD 63 the high priest Joshua ben Gamla decreed that every town should appoint a schoolteacher for the education of children of six or seven years of age. This, together with the existence of Sirach’s school more than two centuries earlier, indicates that some form of schooling existed within Israel in the first century AD.

Although some Jews throughout the ancient world received a standard Hellenistic education, others reacted against the influence of Hellenism and sought to educate their children within the Scriptures and Jewish tradition. The DSS refer to the importance placed on study of the Torah (1QS 6:6–7). There were also rabbinic schools that focused on such teaching.

By NT times, synagogues were well established. Although determining precisely what took place within the synagogues is difficult, indications are that the focus on Scripture and its exposition played an important role in teaching both its importance and the appropriate way to interpret it. Teaching, however, was not confined to synagogues or the temple, as is amply demonstrated by the frequency with which Jesus is described as teaching in a variety of settings. Nonetheless, the temple itself did appear to serve as a center for religious education, as is reflected in the account of the twelve-year-old Jesus’ interactions with the teachers at the temple (Luke 2:41–51). Jesus’ own teaching was remarkable, however, in that it was delivered with authority (Matt. 7:29; Mark 1:22; Luke 4:32).

Education in the church. Paul highlights one of the prerequisites for being an overseer of a church as the ability to teach, stressing the importance of the NT church as a place of learning (1 Tim. 3:2; 2 Tim. 2:2, 24). This teaching involved a familiarity with right doctrine in order to avoid being led astray, an exemplary life that modeled godly behavior for all to see, and the maturity required to apply discipline when necessary.

Fort

Fortification

Insurrection

A revolt against governmental authority. David leads an insurrection against Saul (1 Sam. 19–31; see 2 Sam. 18). Barabbas, the prisoner whom Pilate releases in response to the crowd seeking Jesus’ crucifixion, probably is a terrorist captured during another insurrection (Mark 15:7; Luke 23:19, 25). In Acts, the Pharisee Gamaliel mentions an insurrection led by Judas the Galilean against Rome (Acts 5:37), and a Roman army officer asks Paul, “Aren’t you the Egyptian who started a revolt and led four thousand terrorists out into the desert some time ago?” (21:38). Josephus describes several rebellions, which culminated in the first Jewish War (AD 66–70).

Jesse

From Bethlehem, he was the father of David and a descendant of Ruth the Moabite (Ruth 4:17); 1 Sam. 22:3 implies that Jesse fled to Moab on one occasion. The Gospels recognize him as an ancestor of Jesus (Matt. 1:5–6; Luke 3:32). Prior to the anointing of David, Samuel was sent to Jesse (1 Sam. 16:1) to choose from among his eight sons (1 Sam. 17:12). Like the father of Samuel (1 Sam. 1:1), Jesse is called an “Ephrathite,” a name associated with Bethlehem (1 Sam. 17:12; cf. Ruth 1:2; Mic. 5:2). Isaiah alludes to the Davidic dynasty as a “Root of Jesse” (Isa. 11:1, 10).

Malcam

(1) Descended from Benjamin, he was the fourth of seven sons born to Shaharaim by his wife Hodesh after he divorced Hushim and Baara and was the head of a family (1 Chron. 8:9–10 [KJV: “Malcham”]). Malkam was born in the land of Moab (1 Chron. 8:8), either during the time when Moab was subservient to Israel (cf. 2 Sam. 8:2; 2 Kings 3:5) or during a time of peace (cf. Ruth 1; 1 Sam. 22:3–4). (2) The name appears elsewhere as an object of Judah’s idolatry (Zeph. 1:5 [NIV: “Molek”; KJV: “Malcham”]) and may simply be a variant spelling for “Milcom” (so the NRSV), god of the Ammonites (1 Kings 11:5, 33; Jer. 49:1, 3; cf. Amos 1:15, where the Hebrew term is translated as “[her] king” [NIV]).

Malcham

Malkam

Nob

A village located a little over a mile north of Jerusalem, home mainly to priestly families. David stopped there briefly while on his initial flight from Saul and received some assistance from the senior priest there, Ahimelek. Unfortunately, one of Saul’s herdsmen, Doeg the Edomite, observed this encounter and informed the king. Saul summoned Ahimelek’s family, and when Ahimelek acknowledged his actions, the king ordered the execution of the priests. His own Israelite servants declined to do this, however, so Doeg carried out the killings. One young priest, Abiathar, escaped and found refuge with David (1 Sam. 21–22).

Teaching

Old Testament

Settings for education. There were three primary arenas of education in OT times: home, school, and temple.

Types of education. In OT times four types of education can be discerned: moral and religious, academic, vocational, and military.

Moral and religious education. The Bible stresses the importance of moral and religious education above all other forms (Exod. 10:2; 12:26; 13:8; Deut. 4:9; 6:7, 20–21; 32:7, 46).

New Testament

Wilderness

A broad designation for certain regions in Israel, typically rocky, although also plains, with little rainfall. These areas generally are uninhabited, and most often “wilderness” refers to specific regions surrounding inhabited Israel. A fair amount of Scripture’s focus with respect to the wilderness concerns Israel’s forty-year period of wandering in the wilderness after the exodus (see also Wilderness Wandering).

Geography

More specifically, the geographical locations designated “wilderness” fall into four basic categories: the Negev (south), Transjordan (east), Judean (eastern slope of Judean mountains), and Sinai (southwest).

The Negev makes up a fair amount of Israel’s southern kingdom, Judah. It is very rocky and also includes plateaus and wadis, which are dry riverbeds that can bloom after rains. Its most important city is Beersheba (see Gen. 21:14, 22–34), which often designates Israel’s southernmost border, as in the expression “from Dan to Beersheba” (e.g., 2 Sam. 17:11).

Transjordan pertains to the area east of the Jordan River, the area through which the Israelites had to pass before crossing the Jordan on their way from Mount Sinai to Canaan. (Israel was denied direct passage to Canaan by the Edomites and Amorites [see Num. 20:14–21; 21:21–26]). Even though this region lay outside the promised land of Canaan, it was settled by the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh after they had fulfilled God’s command to fight alongside the other tribes in conquering Canaan (Num. 32:1–42; Josh. 13:8; 22:1–34).

The Judean Desert is located on the eastern slopes of the Judean mountains, toward the Dead Sea. David fled there for refuge from Saul (1 Sam. 21–23). It was also in this area that Jesus was tempted (Luke 4:1–13).

The Sinai Desert is a large peninsula, with the modern-day Gulf of Suez to the west and the Gulf of Aqaba to the east. In the ancient Near Eastern world, both bodies of water often were referred to as the “Red Sea,” which is the larger sea to the south. In addition to the region traditionally believed to contain the location of Mount Sinai (its exact location is unknown), the Sinai Desert is further subdivided into other areas known to readers of the OT: Desert of Zin (northeast, contains Kadesh Barnea), Desert of Shur (northwest, near Egypt), Desert of Paran (central).

Wilderness in the Bible

Wilderness is commonly mentioned in the Bible, and although it certainly can have neutral connotations (i.e., simply describing a location), the uninhabited places often entail both positive (e.g., as a place of solitude) and negative (e.g., as a place of wrath) connotations, both in their actual geological properties and as metaphors. The very rugged and uninhabited nature of the wilderness easily lent itself to being a place of death (e.g., Deut. 8:15; Ps. 107:4–5; Jer. 2:6). It was also a place associated with Israel’s rebellions and struggles with other nations. Upon leaving Egypt, Israel spent forty years wandering the wilderness before entering Canaan, encountering numerous military conflicts along the way. This forty-year period was occasioned by a mass rebellion (Num. 14), hence casting a necessarily dark cloud over that entire period, and no doubt firming up subsequent negative connotations of “wilderness.” Similarly, “wilderness” connotes notions of exile from Israel, as seen in the ritual of the scapegoat (lit., “goat of removal” [see Lev. 16]). On the Day of Atonement, one goat was sacrificed to atone for the people’s sin, and another was sent off, likewise to atone for sin. The scapegoat was released into the desert, where it would encounter certain death, either by succumbing to the climate or through wild animals.

On the other hand, it is precisely in this uninhabited land that God also showed his faithfulness to his people, despite their prolonged punishment. He miraculously supplied bread (manna) and meat (quail) (Exod. 16; Num. 11), as well as water (Exod. 15:22–27; 17:1–7; Num. 20:1–13; 21:16–20). God’s care for Israel is amply summarized in Deut. 1:30–31: “The Lord your God, who is going before you, will fight for you, as he did for you in Egypt, before your very eyes, and in the wilderness. There you saw how the Lord your God carried you, as a father carries his son, all the way you went until you reached this place.”

The harsh realities of the wilderness also made it an ideal place to seek sanctuary and protection. David fled from Saul to the wilderness, the Desert of Ziph (1 Sam. 23:14; 26:2–3; cf. Ps. 55:7). Similarly, Jeremiah sought a retreat in the desert from sinful Israel (Jer. 9:2).

Related somewhat to this last point is Jesus’ own attitude toward the wilderness. It was there that he retreated when he could no longer move about publicly (John 11:54). John the Baptist came from the wilderness announcing Jesus’ ministry (Matt. 3:1–3; Mark 1:2–4; Luke 3:2–6; John 1:23; cf. Isa. 40:3–5). It was also in the desert that Jesus went to be tempted but also overcame that temptation.