Artaxerxes I (Longimanus) was the fourth king of the Persian Empire (464–424 BC), after Cyrus, Cambyses (not mentioned in the Bible), and Darius. It was an appeal by provincial officials to Artaxerxes at the beginning of his reign that brought a halt to an early attempt to repair the walls of Jerusalem (Ezra 4:7–23). Ezra went up to Jerusalem in the seventh year of his reign (458 BC; Ezra 7:7). The appearance of beneficence in Artaxerxes’ decree (7:11–26) was spoiled by the revelation of the self-serving political motivation behind its apparent generosity (7:23). Ezra’s nonuse of the sweeping powers given to him by Artaxerxes further suggests that Persian royal assistance might not be the kind of help really needed by God’s people. Nehemiah returned to Jerusalem in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes’ reign (445 BC; Neh. 1:1). The positive impression made on the reader by Artaxerxes’ personal favoritism toward Nehemiah, allowing him to return to rebuild the walls of his native city, Jerusalem (Neh. 2:3, 5), is undercut by Nehemiah’s disparagement of his royal master (1:11: “this man”). Nehemiah’s second mission took place sometime later than the thirty-second year of Artaxerxes’ reign (5:14; 13:6) but before the king’s death.

(1) One of the Levites appointed by David to lead in worship. Asaph was part of the procession to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem. Along with Heman and Ethan, also mentioned in the Psalter, he was appointed by the Levites to the bronze cymbals (1 Chron. 15:19). Subsequently, David assigned Asaph continuing duties (16:7, 37). He served further under Solomon at the dedication of the temple (2 Chron. 5:11–14). Asaph is described as singer (1 Chron. 15:17), the chief (15:19), who played cymbals (15:19), gave thanks to God (16:7), ministered before the ark (16:37), prophesied under direction of the king (25:2), and gave direction to his sons (25:2). The sons of Asaph served under his direction (25:2), prophesied and sang with lyres, harps, and cymbals (25:1, 6), and served as gatekeepers (26:1). The descendants of Asaph continued these duties after the exile (Ezra 2:41; 3:10; Neh. 11:22; 12:46). Twelve psalms are associated with Asaph (Pss. 50; 73–83). They reflect his prophetic ministry by including sections of prophecy or of God speaking. God’s covenant and justice are frequent topics of these psalms.

(2) The father of Joah, a secretary to Hezekiah (2 Kings 18:18, 37).

(3) The keeper of King Artaxerxes’ forest who provided timber for Nehemiah’s building proj­ects in Jerusalem (Neh. 2:8).

A strict division between fortresses and cities was not possible in much of the ancient world, since many major towns were surrounded with protective walls and fortifications. Royal figures, however, did have stand-alone fortresses built within some towns. In 2 Sam. 5:7–9 David captures Zion, a fortress-city, from the Jebusites (see also 1 Chron. 11:5–7). Solomon further enhances the defensive fortifications of Jerusalem (1 Kings 3:1; 2 Chron. 2:1), as do several kings who come after him (e.g., 1 Kings 15:18; 16:18; 18:3; 2 Kings 11:5; 2 Chron. 26:9, 15).

Royal residences, such as those of the pharaohs (Gen. 12:15) and of the kings of Babylon (2 Kings 20:18; Dan. 1:4), Tyre (2 Sam. 24:7), Samaria (2 Kings 15:25), and Persia (Esther 1:5; 5:1; 7:7–8), also served as castles. In Nehemiah’s time, Hananiah is made ruler of the palace fort in Jerusalem (Neh. 2:8; 7:2). Fortified towers also contributed to the defensive equipment of many ancient cities (Gen. 11:1–9; 35:21; Judg. 8:8–9, 17; 9:46, 49; Neh. 3:1; 12:39; Song 4:4; Luke 13:4).

In addition to palaces and fortified cities, numerous smaller castle-type structures are mentioned in the Bible. These forts, usually fairly small, were important for guarding trade routes and major entrance points into a kingdom, and they allowed a ruler to exercise control over a much larger region than would have been possible otherwise. Normally these structures were composed of stone, hardened mud-brick, or a combination of the two, and constituted a tightly packed arrangement of walls, gates, and guard towers. A system of fortresses existed throughout Israel in the time of the unified monarchy, such as those built by David throughout Aram (2 Sam. 8:6) and Edom (2 Sam. 8:14; 1 Chron. 18:13), and those built by Solomon (1 Kings 9:19). Later, Rehoboam expanded this network of forts, which included the strong fortress at Lachish, and further built up the defensive capabilities of many of the towns in Judah (2 Chron. 11:5–11). The later kings Jehoshaphat and Jotham continued this work of fortress building throughout Judah (2 Chron. 17:12; 27:4).

In the four centuries after the conquests of Alexander the Great, new fortresses were built throughout what would become the Roman Empire, including Herod the Great’s palace in Caesarea (Acts 23:35). The Antonia Fortress (see Acts 21:31–37; 22:24; 23:10, 16, 32) overlooked the temple area in Jerusalem and was the headquarters of the Roman army cohort stationed in the city. Herod’s palace on the western hill of Jerusalem may have been the headquarters of Roman governors of Judea, although the Antonia Fortress is also a possible location for this building (see Matt. 27:27; Mark 15:16; John 18:28, 33; 19:9).

The image of a fortress is often invoked in poetic contexts in the Bible to signify God’s unfailing protection (2 Sam. 22:2; Pss. 18:2; 31:2; 46:8; 62:2; 91:2; 144:2; Prov. 14:26; Isa. 25:4; Jer. 16:19). Prophetic denunciation of the fortresses of Israel’s enemies is common in the OT (Isa. 23:11, 13–14; Jer. 49:27; Dan. 11; Amos 1). The destruction of Israel’s own fortresses, especially Jerusalem, is also a common judgment motif in the prophets (Isa. 25:12; Jer. 6:5; 17:27; Hos. 8:14). See also Fort, Fortification.

Biblical references to the face are both literal and metaphorical. The Hebrew word for “face” (paneh) frequently occurs in the plural in the OT (over 2,100 times), and it can express the numerous features of the face, that of God, humans, animals, and inanimate objects. It also can describe a surface, such as “the face of the ground” (Gen. 2:6 KJV) or “the face of the deep” (Gen. 1:2 KJV).

The concept of face must be understood in terms of the diverse emotional expressions and stratified social relationships of the biblical social world. This was a world of honor and shame, loyalty and betrayal. Where the modern person speaks of personal empowerment, the biblical person thought of social restoration. Life was tantamount to social acceptance. In the biblical world of strong corporate solidarity, the face was the most important part of a person’s body. Persons did not merely “contact” each other; rather, faces engaged each other. Face was synonymous with person (e.g., Lev. 19:32, where “the aged/elderly” is literally “the faces of the aged/elderly”). The face essentially describes interpersonal relationships.

Presence and nonpresence are noted in the expressions “hiding the face from” (Ps. 27:9) and “seeing the face of” (Gen. 32:20 KJV). These denote qualities of relationship through acceptance or rejection, especially to superiors. To “see someone’s face” who is a dignitary is to be granted a royal audience (Gen. 44:23). Yet it was not customary to show a sad face in a king’s presence (Neh. 2:2). A person could also try to hide his or her identity, since “face” marks a public expression of one’s character and social standing.

To literally “fall on the face” (Ezek. 1:28; Luke 5:12) shows humility and homage toward a superior. Personal intention or determination is shown in the expressions “set the face against/toward” (Ezek. 35:2) and “turn the face” (2 Kings 20:2). Dishonor and disrespect are expressed with a “fallen face” (Gen. 4:6; NIV: “downcast” face; cf. Gen. 40:7). Striking the face can be an act that humiliates (John 18:22), as with mutilation or having a soiled face (Lev. 21:18; 2 Sam. 19:4–5). By contrast, to speak “face to face” (Exod. 33:11) not only shows respect but also treats another as a social equal. Reflecting rich emotions, a face can be “cheerful” (Prov. 15:13), “aflame” with agony (Isa. 13:8), “red with weeping” (Job 16:16), and covered with “shame” (Ps. 69:7).

“Face” can be used as a metonym (i.e., substitution) for a person’s presence. Significantly, God’s rejection of a person or group can be expressed as them being hidden from his face (Gen. 4:14 KJV) or as God hiding his face from them (Isa. 54:8; Mic. 3:4; cf. Ps. 22:24). Those in distraught prayer ask why God has hidden his face (Job 13:24) or for how long (Ps. 13:1). Similarly, God acts against persons when he sets his face against them (Lev. 17:10; 26:17).

Believers anticipate the day when they will see God “face to face” (1 Cor. 13:12), having received the ultimate gift of God’s acceptance.

Probably a designation for a citizen of Beth Horon, a town located about eleven miles northwest of Jerusalem. In the Bible it is used only for Sanballat, who, along with Tobiah, opposed the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s wall under the direction of Nehemiah (Neh. 2:10, 19; 13:28).

The highest-ranking female member of a royal household. In the book of Esther the position of queen, though tenuous, is shown to be one of influence over the king (chap. 7) and over the nation (1:16–20). A queen may also be associated with great beauty (Esther 2:2–17; Song 6:8–9; Ezek. 16:13). A queen’s participation in governing with the king varies in different passages. Queen Esther is expected to come before the king only when summoned (Esther 4:11), while the queen of King Belshazzar enters the banquet hall freely to counsel the king (Dan. 5:10–12). In Neh. 2:6 the queen of Persia sits enthroned beside the king.

The Queen of Sheba (“Queen of the South” in Matt. 12:42; Luke 11:31) is involved in foreign policy and tests the wisdom of King Solomon before the two leaders exchange royal gifts (1 Kings 10:1–13; 2 Chron. 9:1–12). Other foreign queens mentioned in Scripture include Pharaoh’s wife Tahpenes (1 Kings 11:19) and the Kandake of Ethiopia (Acts 8:27).

In some passages the title of queen is bestowed not on the wife but on the mother of the king, who is called the “queen mother” (1 Kings 15:13; 2 Kings 10:13; 2 Chron. 15:16; Jer. 13:18; 29:2). Hence, Jezebel is referred to not as queen but only by name or as the wife of the king (e.g., 1 Kings 16:31; 21:5–7; cf. Herodias in Matt. 14:3).

Though never called a queen in the Bible (probably because she was a usurper), Athaliah, the mother of King Ahaziah (who had been assassinated by Jehu), reigned as queen of Judah for approximately six years (842–836 BC; 2 Kings 11; 2 Chron. 22:10–23:21). She secured the throne by murdering many in the royal family. The one exception was Joash, a baby son of Ahaziah, saved by his nurse, Jehoshabeath. After six years, the priest Jehoiada executed a successful coup to remove her from the throne and to put seven-year-old Joash, a surviving son of Ahaziah, on the throne.

The term “queen” also appears in prophetic texts in reference to other gods (the “Queen of Heaven” in Jer. 7:18; 44:15–24) and to the city of Babylon (Isa. 47:5–7).

The governor of Samaria who resisted Nehemiah’s efforts to rebuild Jerusalem’s walls. He and his associates (Tobiah and Geshem) appealed to the Persian king but were ultimately unsuccessful (see Neh. 2:10, 19; 4:1–7; 6:1, 2, 5, 12, 14). Even later, Nehemiah deposed one of the sons of the priest Joiada for being the son-in-law of Sanballat (13:28). The name “Sanballat” is Akkadian, meaning “Sin [the god of the moon] gives life,” leading some to think that his family descended from an intermarriage between an Israelite and someone brought into the north by the Assyrians after 722 BC. We know from later inscriptions (e.g., Elephantine papyri and the Wadi ed-Daliyeh Papyrus) that his family continued to be politically important in Palestine during the intertestamental period.

(1) An ancestor of a family that could not prove its Israelite lineage after the exile (Ezra 2:60; Neh. 7:62). (2) An Ammonite, perhaps governor, who resisted Nehemiah’s efforts to rebuild Jerusalem’s walls (Neh. 2:10, 19; 6). He and his associates Sanballat and Geshem appealed to the Persian king but ultimately were unsuccessful. Even later, Nehemiah deposed a priest, Eliashib, who was renting rooms at the temple to Tobiah (13:4, 7). Many believe that the Tobiah family mentioned in the Lachish ostraca and even later extrabiblical sources are people connected with his family.

A month of the Jewish calendar corresponding to late March/early April. It is the month during which the Israelites were delivered from Egypt (Exod. 13:4) and the Passover was celebrated (Exod. 23:15; 34:18; Deut. 16:1). In Neh. 2:1 and Esther 3:7 the month is called “Nisan.” See also Nisan.

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

Architecture and the Bible

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

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

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

Old Testament

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

New Testament

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

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

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

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

A month of the Jewish calendar corresponding to late March/early April. It is the month during which the Israelites were delivered from Egypt (Exod. 13:4) and the Passover was celebrated (Exod. 23:15; 34:18; Deut. 16:1). In Neh. 2:1 and Esther 3:7 the month is called “Nisan.” See also Nisan.

The evidence is clear that the books of Ezra and Nehemiah originally formed a single book. It is not until the Middle Ages that manuscripts show a division between the two. Furthermore, the material in Neh. 8 (and perhaps also chaps. 9–10) is a continuation of the material that follows the story of Ezra begun in Ezra 7–10. Thus, some of the discussion that follows is also relevant for the book of Nehemiah.

The book of Ezra is named after Ezra, a self-described priest and teacher (7:11) of the Lord. This man was commissioned by the Persian king Artaxerxes I (r. 464–424 BC) to reestablish the law of the Lord in the land of Judah.

Author and Date

The issue of the author and date of Ezra must include the evidence of Nehemiah, since they were originally a single composition. These books are unique among the theological histories of the OT in that they contain large portions that are written in the form of memoirs, first-person accounts of people who participated in the events that are narrated. Ezra, for instance, speaks in the first person in parts of Ezra 7–10. However, the memoir is set within the framework of a form more typical to the histories of the OT: third-person omniscient narration. So, although traditionally the authorship of Ezra is associated with Ezra, there is no claim that the book as a whole was written by him; thus, this book, like so many of the histories of Israel, is anonymous.

As for the date of composition, we need to differentiate the memoirs, which come from the time of Ezra (his ministry begins in 458 BC) and the time of Nehemiah (his work begins in 445 BC), and the time of the third-person narrative that incorporates these memoirs. The latter contains no date, but none of the events narrated took place after around 400 BC, and perhaps the final composition of the book took place around this time and no later than 300 BC.

Genre and Structure

The book of Ezra is a theological history, a book that intends to communicate what actually happened in space and time but is selective, with the purpose of showing how God was working among the people of God in the postexilic period. As a theological history in the OT, however, Ezra and Nehemiah are unique in that they contain the memoirs of Ezra and Nehemiah (as detailed by the first outline below). The structure of the book of Ezra makes sense only when paired with Nehemiah, since, again, they were an original unity. The structure may be explained on the basis of its sources as follows:

I. A Historical Review (Ezra 1–6)

II. Ezra’s Memoirs, Part 1 (Ezra 7–10)

III. Nehemiah’s Memoirs, Part 1 (Neh. 1–7)

IV. Ezra’s Memoirs, Part 2 (Neh. 8–10)

V. Nehemiah’s Memoirs, Part 2 (Neh. 11–13)

Or on the basis of the contents as follows:

I. Zerubbabel and Sheshbazzar Lead the People in Rebuilding the Temple (Ezra 1–6)

II. Ezra Leads the People by Reestablishing the Law (Ezra 7–10)

III. Nehemiah Leads the People in Rebuilding the Wall of Jerusalem (Neh. 1:1–7:3)

IV. Renewal, Celebration, Remaining Problems (Neh. 7:4–13:31)

Theological Message

The book of Ezra begins where Chronicles ends, with the decree by King Cyrus of Persia that the Jews be allowed to return to the land. The first six chapters narrate the events of the first phase of that return, from 539 until 515 BC. Zerubbabel and Sheshbazzar are the leaders of the people at this time, and their initial goal is to rebuild the temple. Once they start, however, opposition sets in, and the work stops. However, motivated in large part, as we know, by the prophets Haggai and Zechariah, the people finish the work, and the second temple becomes functional.

Nonetheless, over fifty years later, when the story of Ezra begins (Ezra 7–10), the condition of the people of God is not promising. King Artaxerxes of Persia allows Ezra, a priest and teacher, to lead a return back to Judah with the express purpose of reestablishing the law in the land. When he arrives, he finds that there are sinful practices such as illegitimate intermarriage between Jews and Gentiles, and he works to reestablish the purity of the people. The story of Ezra continues in the book of Nehemiah, where he is seen leading the people in a great renewal of the covenant as they reaffirm their commitment to obey God’s law (Neh. 8–10).

Contemporary Significance

The book of Ezra narrates two periods of return to the promised land from exile with two different primary purposes. The first group, led by Zerubbabel and Sheshbazzar, has as its main purpose the rebuilding of the temple. The primacy of the temple building is an indication of the importance of worship. The second group returns under the leadership of Ezra, whose purpose is to reestablish the observance of the law among God’s people. God’s word plays a central role in Ezra’s reform, and reading about his ancient ministry reminds God’s people today of the importance of Scripture.

Ezra’s style of leadership also provides a model for contemporary leadership. Ezra is sensitive and empathetic. He takes the shortcomings and failures of God’s people on himself. When the people sin, he tears out his own hair and sheds tears of disappointment. That this is not the only possible style of leadership is seen in the next book as we observe Nehemiah at work.

The work of Zerubbabel and Ezra (as well as Nehemiah) also illustrates that at times separation from pagan influences is necessary. Granted, Jesus breaks down the barrier between Jews and Gentiles (Gal. 3:28), but his followers should be distinguished by their new life in him (Gal. 4:8–11; 5:16–26).

Nehemiah son of Hakaliah is one of the most colorful figures in OT history. He is passionate and aggressive; he works hard to achieve the goals that God has set for him. He does not tolerate the sins of others and fights his way through the obstacles that people set in his path. In many ways, he is a study in contrasts with Ezra, his near contemporary. When Ezra discovers sin among his fellow Judeans, he pulls his hair out. When Nehemiah encounters the same problem, he pulls out the hair of the sinners.

The books of Ezra and Nehemiah were originally a single composition, not broken into two parts until the Middle Ages. Thus, many issues, such as date and authorship, are discussed in the introduction to the article on the book of Ezra. Here, the conclusions will be stated for ease of reference, but the evidence is presented in the article on Ezra. The additional details to follow are particularly relevant to the study of Nehemiah.

Literary Considerations

Author and date. Ezra-Nehemiah is an anonymous composition that reached its present form sometime between 400 and 300 BC.

Genre and structure. Ezra-Nehemiah is a theological history, a book that intends to communicate what actually happened in space and time but is selective, with the purpose of showing how God was working among his people in the postexilic period. As a theological history in the OT, however, Ezra (and Nehemiah) are unique in that they contain the memoirs of Ezra and Nehemiah as detailed by the first outline below. The structure of the book of Ezra makes sense only when paired with the book of Nehemiah, again since they were originally a unit. The structure may be explained on the basis of its sources, as follows:

I. A Historical Review (Ezra 1–6)

II. Ezra’s Memoirs, Part 1 (Ezra 7–10)

III. Nehemiah’s Memoirs, Part 1 (Neh. 1–7)

IV. Ezra’s Memoirs, Part 2 (Neh. 8–10)

V. Nehemiah’s Memoirs, Part 2 (Neh. 11–13)

Or it may be explained on the basis of its content:

I. Zerubbabel and Sheshbazzar Lead the People in Rebuilding the Temple (Ezra 1–6)

II. Ezra Leads the People by Reestablishing the Law (Ezra 7–10)

III. Nehemiah Leads the People in Rebuilding the Wall of Jerusalem (Neh. 1:1–7:3)

IV. Renewal, Celebration, Remaining Problems (Neh. 7:4–13:31)

Theological Message

The book begins with Nehemiah serving as the cupbearer of King Artaxerxes of Persia. Nehemiah hears a distressing report from his ancestral homeland in Judah and feels called to return to Jerusalem. Receiving permission from Artaxerxes to go back to Judah, he arrives intent on building the walls of the city, thus completing the physical reconstruction of the city. In spite of the efforts of neighboring groups and provinces to block their efforts, the Jews under Nehemiah’s leadership are remarkably successful at accomplishing their task. In this, the postexilic people of God surely must have recognized that the prophecies of salvation in Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel were coming to fulfillment.

The book of Nehemiah also records Ezra’s leadership in guiding the people to reaffirm their commitment to Yahweh and his law. They confess their sin. One might think of the physical wall that Nehemiah built not only as protection but also as a means of physical separation from the Gentiles. Also, then, Ezra’s reestablishment of the law of God would serve as a spiritual separation from the lawless Gentiles.

Even with all the success, the book of Nehemiah ends in chapter 13 on a note of disappointment. Nehemiah recounts the strenuous efforts that the faithful under his leadership have made to get right with God, but many people persisted in their sin.

Contemporary Significance

Ezra narrates two returns: first under Zerubbabel and Sheshbazzar to rebuild the temple, and second under Ezra to reestablish the law. In the first part, the book of Nehemiah focuses on a third return under Nehemiah to build the walls and thus complete the physical reconstruction of the city. Nehemiah’s leadership provides an alternative model of leadership to that of Ezra. Nehemiah is more assertive and demanding. It is not that one mode of leadership is right or wrong; the contemporary Christian leader looking to Ezra and Nehemiah for a model of leadership should read the situation to know what will best accomplish God’s purposes. Also, the purpose of building the walls was a matter of military defense, but it was also a matter of separation. True, Christ breaks down the wall of separation between Jews and Gentiles (Eph. 2:14–18), but the NT also recognizes that Christians (whether from a Jewish or a Gentile background) must lead holy and distinct lives.

Surprisingly, the book of Nehemiah does not end with a sense of completion, a feeling of mission accomplished. The last chapter finds Nehemiah in prayer for the continuing sin of the people, reminding contemporary readers that repentance is not a onetime act, but a lifestyle.

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]).

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]).

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]).

(1) The son of Hakaliah, he was a prominent leader of the people of God in the late postexilic period (Neh. 1:1–7:73; 8:9–10; 10:1–13:31). He returned to Jerusalem from the Persian capital, Susa, in order to rebuild the wall of Jerusalem and to fortify the morale of its citizens.

Before his return to Jerusalem, Nehemiah worked as the cupbearer to the king of Persia, Artaxerxes. There are three kings by that name during the history of the Persian Empire, but scholars are generally agreed that Nehemiah worked for Artaxerxes I (r. 464–424 BC). The job of the cupbearer was an important one. The king needed to rely on a close confidante to serve him his drink, since poisoning was an occupational hazard for ancient kings.

Although he was in a powerful position in Persia, Nehemiah was deeply saddened to hear the condition of Jerusalem from his visiting brother Hanani. In particular, the city’s walls were torn down and its gates were burned. While we might assume that the condition of the gates was the result of the Babylonian incursion into the city decades before (587/586 BC), it is possible, though not provable, that a more recent event was responsible.

In either case, Nehemiah could not hide his grief as he served Artaxerxes. Artaxerxes then granted him permission to return to Jerusalem and see to the restoration of the city. The king appointed Nehemiah governor of the Persian province of Yehud (Judah), and he returned to Jerusalem in the king’s twentieth year (445 BC).

Even though Nehemiah had the support of the Persian king, the inhabitants of the land and its leaders, notably Sanballat, did everything they could to undermine his efforts. These people were Samaritans from the north who were the descendants of intermarriage between the people of the north and those whom the Assyrians forced to immigrate there after their defeat of the northern kingdom of Israel in 722 BC. In spite of this opposition, Nehemiah successfully led the people in their efforts to rebuild the walls. In doing so, he showed great leadership skills and courage.

Although they are not often mentioned together, Nehemiah’s work in Jerusalem overlapped with that of Ezra. Both men were passionately concerned about the integrity and faithfulness of the people. Both of them at different times confronted Jewish men who divorced their wives and married pagan women. Nehemiah forcefully compelled them to divorce these foreign wives out of fear that the wives would lead their Jewish husbands to worship false gods.

Nehemiah worked hard, and God blessed him and his efforts in many ways. Even so, the account of Nehemiah’s work ends on a note of continuing problems as the people continued sinning (Neh. 13).

(2) A man who returned to Jerusalem from Babylon along with Zerubbabel in 539 BC (Ezra 2:2).

(3) The son of Azbuk, ruler of a half-district of Beth Zur, he helped rebuild the walls and gates of Jerusalem under the direction of Nehemiah son of Hakaliah (Neh. 3:16).

Behind “orchard,” used in various translations in Song 4:13; Eccles. 2:5; Neh. 2:8, is the Hebrew word pardes (a Persian loanword), from which the word “paradise” is derived. See Luke 23:43.

Terminology

The word “Palestine” is derived from the name of one of the Sea Peoples (Heb. pelishtim) who migrated to the southern coastal region of the Fertile Crescent from one or more of the coastal regions of the Mediterranean (see Philistines).

The word “Palestine” has at times been used to refer to an area as small as this southwestern coastal region (functioning at times as a synonym for “Philistia”) and as large as the land on both sides of the Jordan River, including the Negev in the south.

Most English versions of the Bible do not mention “Palestine,” although in the KJV the Hebrew word peleshet (usually rendered “Philistia” or “Philistines”) is translated as “Palestina” in Exod. 15:14; Isa. 14:29, 31 and as “Palestine” in Joel 3:4.

Other designations of this region within the Scripture include “Canaan” (Gen. 10:19; Josh. 22:9), “the land” (Gen. 13:17; Josh. 2:1), “the land of Canaan” (Gen. 17:8; Num. 13:2), “the land of the Hebrews” (Gen. 40:15), “the land . . . promised on oath” (Gen. 50:24; Deut. 6:23), in various combinations and order “the land of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Hivites, Periz-zites, Jebusites, and Girgashites” (Exod. 3:17; 13:5; 23:23), “the Lord’s land” (Josh. 22:19), “the land of Israel” (1 Sam. 13:19; Ezek. 47:18), and “Trans-Euphrates,” which was “beyond the river” from the perspective of those in Persia (Ezra 4:10; Neh. 2:7). Compare also “the tribes of Israel” (2 Sam. 24:2; Ezek. 47:13), “Israel and Judah” (2 Sam. 5:5; 2 Chron. 30:6), and “from Dan to Beersheba” (Judg. 20:1; 1 Kings 4:25).

In the NT, this territory is usually designated by reference to the provinces of Judea and Galilee (Matt. 2:22; John 7:1), which sometimes are mentioned with the Decapolis (Matt. 4:25) and Samaria (Acts 9:31; cf. Luke 3:1).

Boundaries and Size

Boundaries. Palestine is in the southwestern portion of the Fertile Crescent (i.e., western Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Israel). It is located northeast of the Nile River basin and west-southwest of the basins of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers.

Generally speaking, it is bounded by Lebanon to the north, the Mediterranean Sea (= the Sea, the Great Sea, or the western sea) on the west, Wadi el-Arish (= the river of Egypt, the Wadi of Egypt) in the southwest, the Sinai Peninsula in the south, and the Transjordan in the east (Gen. 15:18; Num. 34:3–7, 11–12; Deut. 1:7; 11:24; 34:2; Josh. 1:4; 11:16; 2 Kings 24:7). When the Transjordan is considered part of Palestine (cf. Deut. 34:1), the eastern boundary is the Syrian (Syro-Arabian) Desert. In several biblical texts the northeast boundary of this region is “the great river, the Euphrates” (Gen. 15:18; Deut. 1:7; 11:24; Josh. 1:4; 1 Chron. 5:9; cf. 2 Sam. 8:3).

Size. Because of fluidity in the use of the term “Palestine,” it is difficult to speak precisely of the land area designated by it. Palestine west of the Jordan River is about six thousand square miles, similar to the land area of the state of Hawaii.

A description of “the whole land” viewed by Moses included both the Negev and Gilead, part of the Transjordan (Deut. 34:1–3). In the OT, the Negev is regularly included as one of the regions of the land on the west side of the Jordan (Deut. 1:7; Josh. 10:40; 11:16; Jer. 17:26). The unity of the land on both sides of the Jordan is reflected in texts that focus on Israel’s inheritance of land (Deut. 3:12–17), cities of refuge (Num. 35:14; Josh. 20:7–8), and military victories (Josh. 12:1–8; 24:8–13).

The land area of Palestine increases considerably if one includes these areas, for the Transjordan region is about 4,000 square miles, while the Negev is about 4,600 square miles.

Topographical Regions

Frequent seismic activity, the rising and falling of the landmass, and deposits from the inundation and withdrawal of seas produced seven topographical regions current in Palestine.

Coastal plain. The coastal plain is the fertile terrain bordering the Mediterranean, though the coastline itself consists of beaches, sand dunes, wetlands, and rock cliffs.

The southern portion of the coastal plain was once inhabited by the Philistines (with the coastal cities of Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ashdod). Moving north of the Yarkon River, we pass through the marshy Plain of Sharon and the Dor Plain. In the north, hills rise near Carmel and extend west to the central highlands. North of the Carmel range lie the Acco Plain, the Asher Plain, and the coastlands of Phoenicia (including Tyre and Sidon).

Hill country. The hill country is located between, and runs parallel to, the coastal plain on the west and the Jordan Valley on the east. The hills, ridges, plateaus, and valleys of the hill country are the setting for most of the OT narratives.

The hill country is bisected by the Jezreel Valley, which runs east-west from the Jordan Valley to the Bay of Acco (Haifa Bay), north of Carmel.

The hill country south of the Jezreel Valley is called “the central highlands,” which consist of the rough and rocky hills of Samaria in the north (such as Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal) and the more arid (and, historically, less populated) Judean hill country in the south. The highest hills of this area exceed three thousand feet.

In Scripture the southern hill country (or portions of it) is called “the hill country of Judah/Judea” (Josh. 11:21; Luke 1:39) and “the hill country of Bethel” (Josh. 16:1; 1 Sam. 13:2), while the northern (Samarian) hill country (or portions of it) is called “the hill country of Israel” (Josh. 11:21), “the hill country of Naphtali” (Josh. 20:7), and, most frequently, “the hill country of Ephraim” (Josh. 17:15; Judg. 2:9; 1 Kings 4:8).

The hill country north of the Jezreel Valley consists of two parts, Lower and Upper Galilee, divided by the fault through which runs Wadi esh-Shaghur. Lower Galilee has fertile basins and hills about two thousand feet above sea level. Farther north is Upper Galilee, with hills averaging about three thousand feet. It forms a transition to the mountains of Lebanon, which lie to the north.

The Shephelah (“lowland” or “piedmont”) is the region of gentle and rolling hills between five hundred and one thousand feet above sea level between the Judean hill country and the coastal plain. These hills formerly were covered with sycamore trees and provided Judeans with protection against an attack from the west.

Jezreel Valley. The Jezreel Valley is often equated with the Plain of Esdraelon, though some distinguish the fault basin (Esdraelon) from the rift valley (Jezreel).

On its west side, this fertile plain begins north of Carmel at the coast, moving east to the Jordan Valley. The central highlands lie to the north (Galilee) and south (Samaria) of this plain.

The fertile soil of this low-lying basin was valued for farming. Traders and armies regularly passed through this great plain, and it was often the place of military conflict (cf. Judg. 6:33; 1 Sam. 29:1, 11; Hos. 1:5).

Jordan Valley. The Jordan Valley (also known as the Jordan Rift Valley or the Dead Sea Rift) begins near the base of Mount Hermon in the north (9,232 feet). Moving south, the rift continues to the Hula Valley, through which the Jordan River flows to the Sea of Galilee (Sea of Gennesaret, Lake Kinnereth). The Sea of Galilee is about twelve miles long and five miles wide, located within an area of hills and valleys.

The Jordan River meanders south, flowing through a deep gorge and falling three thousand feet before coming to the Dead Sea (also called “the Sea of the Arabah” [Deut. 4:49; Josh. 3:16] and “the Salt Sea” [Num. 34:3, 12; Josh. 15:2, 5 ESV, NASB]), the lowest place on earth. At its lowest point, the Dead Sea is more than 2,600 feet below sea level.

The Jordan Valley rises as one continues south from the Dead Sea (forty-eight miles long and eight miles wide) through the arid Arabah (cf. Isa. 33:9; Zech. 14:10) to the Gulf of Aqaba.

The term “Arabah” is generally used to refer to the extension of the rift south of the Dead Sea, though at one time in the history of ancient Israel it referred to a region that included the Jordan Valley between the Sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea, on both the east (Deut. 3:17; Josh. 12:1–3) and the west (Deut. 11:30; Josh. 11:2; Ezek. 47:8) sides of the Jordan River.

Transjordan. The Transjordan region is located east of the Jordan Valley and west of the Syrian (Syro-Arabian) Desert. Three major rivers run across this region, each moving from east to west. The Yarmouk (Yarmuk) and the Jabbok (Zarqa) rivers empty into the Jordan River, while the Arnon River (Wadi el-Mujib) flows into the Dead Sea.

In ancient Israel, regions of the Transjordan, from north to south, included Bashan (Karnaim), north of the Yarmuk River; Gilead, south of the Yarmuk; Ammon, the region of modern-day Amman, southeast of Gilead; Moab, south of the Arnon River; and Edom, south of Wadi el-Hesa (Zered River [cf. Num. 21:12; Deut. 2:13–14]).

The capture of the territory belonging to Sihon between the Jabbok and the Arnon rivers was a significant event in the history of ancient Israel (Num. 21:24; Josh. 12:1–2).

Although the Transjordan is often excluded from “Palestine,” there were times in biblical history when the land on both sides of the Jordan was considered a unit. For example, “the other half of Manasseh, the Reubenites and the Gadites” received their tribal inheritance east of the Jordan (cf. Josh. 13:8–32). They inhabited Bashan, Gilead, and the land of the Amorites (cf. Deut. 3:12–17; 34:1; Judg. 20:1).

According to 2 Sam. 8, David established control over Moab (vv. 2, 12), the Beqaa Valley (“along the Euphrates River” [v. 3 GW]), Aram (v. 6; vv. 12–13 MT), Ammon and Amalek (v. 12), and Edom (v. 14; vv. 12–13 LXX, Syriac; cf. 1 Chron. 18:2–13).

In Scripture, the central Transjordan hill country is sometimes called “the hill country of Gilead” (Gen. 31:21, 23, 25; Deut. 3:12). The southern elevated region in Edom is called “the hill country of Seir” (Gen. 36:8–9; Deut. 2:5).

Negev. The Negev (Negeb) is shaped like an inverted triangle with its peak at the southern city of Eilat (Elath) near the biblical Ezion Geber (cf. 1 Kings 9:26). It is bounded on the north by the Judean hill country, on the west by Sinai, and on the east by the Arabah Valley (which lies along the rift south of the Dead Sea).

The Negev is an extremely dry area, with the most rain found in the northern (twelve inches annually) and western (ten inches annually) sections, and the least in the Arabah Valley (two inches annually). It is a place of sand dunes, rocky desert, and brown hills that increase in height as one moves toward Sinai.

Although the Negev is described as “a land of hardship and distress, of lions and lionesses, of adders and darting snakes” (Isa. 30:6), it was also a place of wells and springs, in addition to cities and towns such as Beersheba (Josh. 15:21–32; 2 Sam. 24:7).

Sinai peninsula. The Sinai peninsula is about twenty-three thousand square miles. It consists primarily of plains, plateaus, and hills (the highest of which is Jebel Yiallaq, at 3,656 feet), with a coastline along the Mediterranean of 145 miles.

The longest river in the region is the Wadi el-Arish, which runs 155 miles northward from central Sinai to the Mediterranean.

Israel’s activities in the Desert of Sinai are often mentioned in the Pentateuch (e.g., Exod. 19:1–2; Num. 1:1; 9:5).

The Desert of Sinai is distinguished from the Desert of Sin (Exod. 16:1) and the Desert of Paran (Num. 10:12). Other arid areas within the Sinai Peninsula include the Desert of Zin (Num. 34:3), the Desert of Shur (Exod. 15:22), and the Desert of Etham (Num. 33:8).

Climate

The climate of Palestine consists of a dry and hot season from June to August and a wet season from mid-October to mid-April. It is common for the wet season to consist of two distinct periods of heavy rain, one at the beginning and one toward the end of this period (cf. “spring and autumn rains” [Deut. 11:14; Joel 2:23; James 5:7]).

Two transitional seasons of about six weeks each bridge the wet and the dry seasons. One occurs between early September and the end of October, the other between early April and the middle of June.

Average temperatures throughout the region range from 46.5–55 degrees (Fahrenheit) in January (both the coldest and the wettest month in Palestine) to 71.5–93 degrees in August.

Most rainfall in Palestine occurs as cyclonic storm systems (about twenty-five each year) bring warm air from North Africa eastward over the Mediterranean, clashing with cooler air from Europe and Asia. As clouds move over the land, precipitation falls heaviest on the west side of the hills, leaving the east side of the hills with less rain.

Typically, rainfall is heaviest in the northern areas of Palestine, the regions closest to the Mediterranean, and in the Transjordan. The area around the Dead Sea is extremely dry, with evaporation exceeding precipitation. In contrast, the northern highlands have forty inches of annual rainfall.

In Palestine, precipitation can also take the form of both snow (cf. 2 Sam. 23:20; Prov. 25:13) and, in a significant way, dew (cf. Judg. 6:37–40; Song 5:2). Dew provides moisture for agriculture especially in the coastal plain, the central highlands, and the Jezreel Valley.

During the transitional seasons, desiccating winds (sometimes called sirocco winds) bring warm desert air from the east (and at times from the south), raising the temperature and lowering the relative humidity throughout Palestine. These winds often bring fine dust from the desert. The effects are most onerous in the Jordan Valley. References to an east wind in Scripture are common (Gen. 41:6; Hos. 13:15; Jon. 4:8; see also “south wind” in Job 37:17; Luke 12:55).

Roads

Two major highways passed through Palestine: “the Way of the Sea,” or Via Maris (cf. Isa. 9:1; Matt. 4:15), and “the King’s Highway” (cf. Num. 20:17; 21:22).

The Way of the Sea moved north from Egypt through the coastal plain, heading east through the Jezreel Valley. From this point it branched out in three directions: northwest through Phoenicia, north toward Damascus, and east to join with the King’s Highway.

The King’s Highway was a Transjordanian route passing from the Gulf of Aqaba in the south (cf. Deut. 2:8) through Edom, Moab, Gilead, and Bashan to Damascus in the north.

Merchants and armies used these highways to pass through Palestine, while local traffic often used east-west roads to move throughout the area.

Prior to the rise of the Achaemenid Persian Empire in the mid-sixth century BC, the Persian homeland (Fars) lay to the east of Mesopotamia, in and beyond the Zagros Mountains. The history of the Persians and their rulers prior to their emergence in biblical, Greek, and Mesopotamian history remains poorly understood, but probably they had come to the Iranian plateau from central Asia around 1000 BC, roughly the time of the emergence of monarchic Israel in the Levant. The first Persian accounts of their own history date to the Achaemenid period (the Behistun Inscription), when the Persians adapted Mesopotamian (Semitic) cuneiform writing for their own Indo-European language. Even with the Old Persian inscriptions, the Greek histories of the Greco-Persian wars (preeminently that of Herodotus) remain the richest literary source of information about the Persians. The first known references to the Persians (and to the closely related Medes) in cuneiform sources date to the reign of the Assyrian king Shalmaneser III (mid-ninth century BC). Although the terms “Persia” and “Persian” continued to be used in various senses (political, ethnic, linguistic) from this period to the present, this article focuses on the Achaemenid Empire, which overlapped with the exilic and postexilic periods of biblical history.

Cyrus the Great

As a political entity, the Persians appear in ancient Near Eastern history around 550 BC, when the Persian leader Cyrus II (“the Great”) defeated the Medes (another Iranian people to whom the Persians had been subject) and seized their capital at Ecbatana, along with their royal treasure. Cyrus claimed descent from a line of Achaemenid kings going back to the second half of the seventh century BC and founded by Cyrus I (“of Anshan”). The term “Achaemenid” refers to a yet more distant, and possibly legendary, ancestor Achaemenes, who putatively lived around 700 BC. Cyrus then turned toward the territory of the Lydian (Greek) king Croesus in modern western Turkey, which he conquered with the fall of Sardis and the defeat of Croesus around 546 BC. Cyrus’s territorial gains in Anatolia would remain a part of the Persian Empire until the time of Alexander the Great.

Following this western campaign, which would set the stage for two centuries of Greco-Persian rivalry, Cyrus returned to Mesopotamia, where he marched against the Neo-Babylonian Empire of Nabonidus, taking advantage of a falling out between Nabonidus and the inhabitants of Babylon (Nabonidus had controversially removed images of Marduk from their rightful place in Babylon). It is at this point that the history of the Persian Empire intersects dramatically with biblical history, for Cyrus’s capture of the capital Babylon in the fall of 539 BC came only half a century after the Neo-Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar II had sacked Jerusalem and exiled the elite inhabitants of the southern kingdom of Judah to Mesopotamia, including a group that was brought to Babylon itself. Like the priests of Marduk (the chief Babylonian deity), who in the Cyrus Cylinder inscription lauded Cyrus for delivering them from the impious Nabonidus and restoring the proper worship of Marduk in Babylon, the Hebrew Bible speaks fondly of Cyrus as the restorer of the Jewish people from exile. It was Cyrus, according to 2 Chron. 36:23; Ezra 1:2–4, who mandated that a group of Judeans return to their homeland and reestablish their capital Jerusalem and the temple of their deity, Yahweh. Isaiah 45:1 speaks of Cyrus as Yahweh’s “anointed” and suggests a personal and intimate relationship between the king and the God of Israel. In terms of the biblical periodization of Israelite history, the edict of Cyrus marked the end of the exilic period and the beginning of what modern scholars term the “Persian period” of Israelite and Jewish history.

Based on the evidence of the Bible and the Cyrus Cylinder, the role of Cyrus as a champion of “human rights” and “religious toleration” has at times been overplayed by modern readers who have anachronistically attributed modern values to the ancient monarch. Cyrus may have acted in both cases with motivations that were more propagandistic than pious. The strong presence of friendly forces in Yehud (Judah) served Cyrus’s ambitions in Egypt, which his son Cambyses proceeded to conquer in the 520s BC. In the course of this campaign Cambyses showed as much respect for local Egyptian religion as Cyrus showed toward Judean Yahwism. Cambyses’ successor, Darius, commissioned the Egyptian scholar Udjahorresnet to return to his land and revive its cultural and religious institutions; this mission has often been compared to that of Ezra in Yehud. In sum, Persian policies toward Judeans and their religion, though perceived as enlightened by biblical authors, are probably best understood as having been applied across the board to various peoples, especially when doing so furthered the imperial interests of the Persians.

Darius the Great and His Successors

As mentioned above, Cyrus was succeeded by his son Cambyses II, who conquered Egypt before his death in 522 BC. Darius succeeded Cambyses through a palace intrigue in which he emerged over Cyrus’s son Bardiya (also known as Smerdis or Gaumata). The circumstances of Darius’s succession remain unclear in several respects. He was not in the royal line, yet in his own monuments he insists that it was his rivals who were usurpers and that he was the rightful claimant of the throne. Under Darius (“the Great”), the Achaemenid Empire reached its greatest geographical extent. He organized the empire into twenty-two administrative districts, or “satrapies,” and built up a vast network of roads and cities. The lands of biblical Israel fell into a large satrapy known as “Beyond the River,” or “Trans-Euphrates” (see, e.g., Ezra 4:10). Darius is remembered in the Bible as renewing Cyrus’s order for the rebuilding of the Jerusalem temple. The decree of Darius is represented in Ezra 6:1–15. As a result of his attention to the matter, the temple was completed during his reign, in 515 BC (Ezra 6:15). Daniel 5:31 portrays Darius (“the Mede,” not “the Persian”; see also Dan. 9:1, which reaffirms Darius’s Median ethnicity while making him the son, not the father, of Ahasuerus/Xerxes), not Cyrus, as the conqueror of Babylon (though it is Belshazzar, not Nabonidus, who loses his kingdom).

Darius was succeeded by his son Xerxes, who in 481 BC led a vast army across the Bosphorus into Greece. He was turned back by a series of defeats and was assassinated in 465 BC. Neither Xerxes nor his successors managed to expand the empire beyond the achievement of Darius. The Bible mentions Xerxes (Ahasuerus) at Ezra 4:5–6 and alludes to him at Dan. 11:2. Artaxerxes appears in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah (e.g., Ezra 4:7; Neh. 2:1); however, the identification of this figure is controversial, whether he is Artaxerxes I (r. 464–424 BC), Artaxerxes II (r. 405–359 BC), or even Artaxerxes III (r. 359–338 BC). Moreover, it is debated whether Ezra and Nehemiah were contemporaries (i.e., living under the same king Artaxerxes), and which one of them preceded the other in his mission. Moreover, it is unclear from ancient versions whether the king in the book of Esther is meant to be Xerxes (Ahasuerus) or Artaxerxes I (so the LXX).

The Achaemenid Empire fell in 330 BC, during the reign of Darius III, whom Alexander the Great defeated decisively at Gaugamela in 331 BC.

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

Architecture and the Bible

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

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

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

Old Testament

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

New Testament

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

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

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

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

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

Architecture and the Bible

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

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

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

Old Testament

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

New Testament

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

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

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

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

Occupied as early as 4000 BC, Susa is about two hundred miles east of Babylon. The Hebrew name for the city, shushan, means “lily,” but the name’s proper origin is in the similar sounding “Shush,” which may be traced to In-Shushinak, the high god of the Elamites. Susa is mentioned in Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, and Daniel. Nehemiah served at Artaxerxes I’s palace at Susa (Neh. 1:1, 11; 2:1). A substantial portion of the book of Esther takes place at Susa. Ezra 4:9–10 reports that people from Susa were deported by the Assyrian king Ashurbanipal, and Dan. 8:2 identifies Susa as the setting of Daniel’s vision.

Susa first saw fame as the capital of Elam, from which a number of early texts were recovered, including the law code of Hammurabi. After being destroyed by Ashurbanipal of the Assyrians (c. 640 BC), Susa was rebuilt and eventually rose to its apex in the Persian Empire under Darius (521–486 BC). It served as a capital alongside Persepolis, Ecbatana, and Babylon. After surrendering to Alexander the Great (c. 331 BC), who would soon conquer the entire Persian Empire, Susa remained significant but began a slow decline. Part of its site remains occupied by the city of Shush in the Khuzestan province of Iran.

Occupied as early as 4000 BC, Susa is about two hundred miles east of Babylon. The Hebrew name for the city, shushan, means “lily,” but the name’s proper origin is in the similar sounding “Shush,” which may be traced to In-Shushinak, the high god of the Elamites. Susa is mentioned in Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, and Daniel. Nehemiah served at Artaxerxes I’s palace at Susa (Neh. 1:1, 11; 2:1). A substantial portion of the book of Esther takes place at Susa. Ezra 4:9–10 reports that people from Susa were deported by the Assyrian king Ashurbanipal, and Dan. 8:2 identifies Susa as the setting of Daniel’s vision.

Susa first saw fame as the capital of Elam, from which a number of early texts were recovered, including the law code of Hammurabi. After being destroyed by Ashurbanipal of the Assyrians (c. 640 BC), Susa was rebuilt and eventually rose to its apex in the Persian Empire under Darius (521–486 BC). It served as a capital alongside Persepolis, Ecbatana, and Babylon. After surrendering to Alexander the Great (c. 331 BC), who would soon conquer the entire Persian Empire, Susa remained significant but began a slow decline. Part of its site remains occupied by the city of Shush in the Khuzestan province of Iran.

Occupied as early as 4000 BC, Susa is about two hundred miles east of Babylon. The Hebrew name for the city, shushan, means “lily,” but the name’s proper origin is in the similar sounding “Shush,” which may be traced to In-Shushinak, the high god of the Elamites. Susa is mentioned in Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, and Daniel. Nehemiah served at Artaxerxes I’s palace at Susa (Neh. 1:1, 11; 2:1). A substantial portion of the book of Esther takes place at Susa. Ezra 4:9–10 reports that people from Susa were deported by the Assyrian king Ashurbanipal, and Dan. 8:2 identifies Susa as the setting of Daniel’s vision.

Susa first saw fame as the capital of Elam, from which a number of early texts were recovered, including the law code of Hammurabi. After being destroyed by Ashurbanipal of the Assyrians (c. 640 BC), Susa was rebuilt and eventually rose to its apex in the Persian Empire under Darius (521–486 BC). It served as a capital alongside Persepolis, Ecbatana, and Babylon. After surrendering to Alexander the Great (c. 331 BC), who would soon conquer the entire Persian Empire, Susa remained significant but began a slow decline. Part of its site remains occupied by the city of Shush in the Khuzestan province of Iran.