Tag: Historical Bible Books

Posted in Exposition

NEHEMIAH 13:15-31

Posted on by writtenexposition

13:15-22 RESTORATION OF SABBATH OBSERVANCE

Nehemiah finds that in his absence (‘in those days’) some in Judah have not been observing the Sabbath, but engaging in trade and commerce on the holy day. The offenders listed were involved in the main industry – agriculture – and included wine makers, farmers, fruit growers and haulage operatives. The word translated ‘sheaves’ means ‘heaps’ and need not be restricted to grain. As well as violating the command not to work, the loading and transportation of goods by donkey into Jerusalem also transgressed the concept of no (or very limited) travel on the Sabbath (Ex 16:29; Acts 1:12). Sabbath observance is prescribed in the one of the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:8-11; 31:12-17) and was viewed by Isaiah (56:1-8) as something that results in blessing. The prophets Jeremiah (17:19-27), Ezekiel (20:12-24) and Amos (8:4-5) identified profanation of the Sabbath as a cause of the woes that befell the Israelites; because they had became just like the heathens around them.

Nehemiah also observes that merchants from Tyre who had set up a trading colony in Jerusalem were selling fish and all kinds of wares to the local people on the Sabbath.

THE PHOENICIAN PORT OF TYRE

Tyre was an important port for the Phoenicians, a nation famous in ancient times for seafaring and commerce. Just as the Arabs with their camel trains dominated the transportation of goods over land so the Phoenician merchant navy dominated the shipping routes; conveying goods to and from the three continents (Africa, Asia and Europe) bordering the Mediterranean. They carried not only seawater fish from the Mediterranean and freshwater fish from the Nile but also an abundance of other foodstuffs, exported in cylindrical clay jars. These included: fish paste, pine nuts, olives, olive oil, wine, honey and grain. They shipped luxury goods like furniture, metal tableware (e.g. decorated bowls, candelabra), purple dye, and carved ivories, and were also experts in the delivery of bulk timber by sea (1 Kgs 5:9; 1 Chron 22:4; 2 Chron 2:3-16; Ezra 3:7). The prowess of the Phoenicians (Tyre and Sidon) as merchants and human traffickers is acknowledged by the Old Testament Hebrew prophets (Isa 23:1-8, 17-18; Ezekiel 27:1-36; 28:1-5; Joel 3:4-7; Amos 1:9). Ezekiel chapter 27 is of special historical interest because it not only gives a list of commodities traded by the Tyrians but also details the many and widespread locations where they did business.

NEHEMIAH PROMOTES SABBATH OBSERVANCE

Nehemiah confronts the Judaean nobles and accuses them of profaning the Sabbath (for this expression see: Neh 13:17, 18; Ezek 20:16, 21, 24, ; 22:8; 23:38) and adding to God’s wrath against them. He warns them about God’s punishment (13:18). He then institutes practical measures to enforce Sabbath observance and ensure the sanctity of the day.

  • Nehemiah closes the gates of Jerusalem on the Sabbath and initially has his servants guard them so that no burden could be carried into the city.
  • Some of the merchants camp outside the city gates so that the locals can go out and buy from them. Nehemiah tells them to leave or face forcible removal. They leave.
  • Nehemiah then hands over responsibility for guarding to gates to the Levites, after they purify themselves for the Sabbath.

13:22 Nehemiah again asks God to take note of his actions and ‘spare’ (have compassion on) him.

13:23-29 PROBLEM OF EXOGAMOUS MARRIAGES

Upon his return from Persia Nehemiah discovers that in his absence an old issue has resurfaced. Some Israelite men have married foreign women, contrary to God’s law (Deut 23:3-6)and the covenant that had been signed in chapter ten. One of the points of that covenant was the cessation of exogamous marriage (10:30). Nehemiah cites two specific examples of the problem.

1) Half the children spoke (Aramaic?) in a foreign dialect and could not speak ‘the language of the Jews’ i.e. Hebrew. Nehemiah could easily distinguish between the speech of children of Ashdodite mothers and that of children from all Jewish households. He was concerned about ungodly foreign cultural influence and was also very much aware that Jewish national identity was bound up with the worship of God. Since Hebrew was the language of the Jewish religion children who did not speak it could not be taught or understand the scriptures. Men who had married foreign wives were not only neglecting the Hebrew language, they were jeopardizing the purity of the Jewish religion.

Nehemiah therefore takes the offenders to court and challenges their actions. He calls down the curses of the broken covenant upon them, subjects them to a public shaming ritual (see Isa 50:6) and makes them take an oath once again not to marry their children off to foreigners. The reason (vv. 26-27) given for this is the sin of Solomon. In spite of the fact that God loved him (2 Sam 12:24-25) and made him king over all Israel (1 Kgs 4:1) Solomon entered into diplomatic marriages with foreign wives (1 Kgs 11:1-10; 2 Chron 8:11) who led him away from the true worship of Yahweh.

2) Jehoiada, son or grandson of the High Priest Eliashib, had married the daughter of Sanballat the Horonite, who was an enemy of Nehemiah (2:19; 4:1-2, 7; 6:1-9, 14) and a pagan. In the regulations recorded in Lev 21:10-15 the high priest was required to ‘take a virgin of his own people to wife’. In practical terms this prohibition against marrying a foreign wife probably extended to the sons and grandsons of a high priest since they could possibly become high priest in the future. Nehemiah expelled Jehoiada from Judea.

Nehemiah’s prayer at the end of this section (v29) is not about himself but he instead directs his prayer against the high priestly family who, because of intermarriage, had set a bad example to the people, defiled the priesthood and broken the covenant of 10:29-30.

13:30-31 SUMMARY OF NEHEMIAH’S CULTIC REFORMS

Nehemiah ends his memoir by summarizing his main achievements. He lists these as action taken against foreign marriages (10:30; 13:23ff), reorganisation of the temple duties of the priests and Levites (10:37-39; 12:44-47; 13:12-13), the institution of a wood offering (10:34) and the revival/rescheduling of the firstfruits offering (10:35-37).

SUMMATION

Nehemiah chapter thirteen emphasizes the need for continual vigilance in upholding God’s standards and reminds us that spiritual renewal is an ongoing process. The chapter underscores the importance of maintaining purity, honouring the Lord’s demands, and the people of God keeping separate from unholy influences. In spite of Nehemiah’s accomplishments chapter thirteen ends on a somewhat negative note. Sadly, the Israelites do not seem to have shared Nehemiah’s enthusiasm for the things of God. They yielded to secular and religious pressure from outside their community and, despite pledging ‘to walk in God’s law’ (10:29), they abandoned their commitments concerning intermarriage (10:30), Sabbath observance (10:31), and support of the Temple service (10:37-39) soon after Nehemiah left for Persia.

Chapter thirteen records Nehemiah’s final efforts to restore Jerusalem’s spiritual and moral fabric, and provides us with valuable examples of active leadership, faithfulness, and a timely warning about the possibility of departure from the will of God.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

Carson, D.A. (2018). NIV Biblical Theology Study Bible : Follow God’s Redemptive Plan as it Unfolds Throughout Scripture [Previously published as NIV Zondervan Study Bible]. Grand Rapids, Mi: Zondervan.

Grabbe, L.L. (2012). An introduction to Second Temple Judaism : History and Religion of the Jews in the time of Nehemiah, the Maccabees, Hillel and Jesus. London Bloomsbury.

Knut Larson, Anders, M. and Dahlen, K. (2005). Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther. Nashville, Tenn. Broadman & Holman C.

López-Ruiz C. and Doak, B.R. (2019). The Oxford Handbook of the Phoenician and Punic Mediterranean. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Ruckman, P.S. (2004). The Books of Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther. (The Bible Believer’s Commentary Series).

JOURNAL ARTICLES

Berlin, A.M. (1997). From Monarchy to Markets: The Phoenicians in Hellenistic Palestine. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 306, pp.75–88. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/1357550.

Master, D.M. (2014). Economy and Exchange in the Iron Age Kingdoms of the Southern Levant. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 372, pp.81–97. doi:https://doi.org/10.5615/bullamerschoorie.372.0081.

Noonan, B.J. (2011). Did Nehemiah Own Tyrian Goods? Trade between Judea and Phoenicia during the Achaemenid Period. Journal of Biblical Literature, 130(2), pp.281–298. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/41304201.

Nehemiah 13:1-3

Nehemiah 13:4-14

Posted in Exposition

NEHEMIAH 13:4-14

Posted on by writtenexposition

13:4-9 EXPULSION OF TOBIAH FROM THE TEMPLE

The main problem Nehemiah addresses in this section is the fact that Eliashib the priest had allowed Tobiah the Ammonite, a non-Jew, to occupy a spacious ‘room’ in the temple. Some suggest that Tobiah may have used the space for commercial purposes since in 13:5 the word liškāh (translated ‘room’ or ‘chamber’) often means storeroom (1 Chron. 9:26; 2 Chron. 31:11; Ezra 8:29; Neh. 10:38-39), but 13:7 uses the word nišḵāh, which refers to living quarters.

ELIASHIB

This ‘Eliashib the priest’ is probably the same Eliashib who was High Priest at that time (3:1, 20-21; 12:10, 22; 13:28) and would certainly have had the authority provide this space to Tobiah. He had participated in the building of the walls (3:1) but thereafter continued to associate with (‘allied’ = ‘close to’ v.4b) Nehemiah’s enemy Tobiah, especially while Nehemiah was away from Jerusalem. Sometimes ‘the priest’ is shorthand for ‘High Priest’, for example: Zadok (1 Kgs 1:8, 26, 32, 34, 38, 39, 44, 45; 2:35; 4;2 ,4) and Joshua in Ezra chapter 3, cp. Zech 6:11).

TOBIAH

Tobiah first appears in 2:10 where he is mentioned as one of the local dignitaries unhappy that Nehemiah had come ‘to seek the welfare of the people of Israel’. He and his friends mocked Nehemiah’s work on the walls, saying that the walls would be so weak that even a fox could knock them down (4:3). Tobiah, however, seems to have established close links with local Israelite officials, including members of the priesthood. This he partly achieved through marriage alliances with prominent Israelite families:

‘Moreover in those days the nobles of Judah sent many letters unto Tobiah, and the letters of Tobiah came unto them. For there were many in Judah sworn unto him, because he was the son in law of Shechaniah the son of Arah; and his son Johanan had taken the daughter of Meshullam the son of Berechiah (see 3:30). Also they reported his good deeds before me, and uttered my words to him. And Tobiah sent letters to put me in fear’ Neh 6:17-19

The provision by Eliashib the priest of a large ‘room’ in the temple for use by Tobiah (13:5) was a serious violation of the law as Deut 23:3-6 prohibited non-Jews from entering the temple or participating in its worship. It would seem that little has changed since then; even today some religious leaders still think that they are above God’s laws.

The room allocated to Tobiah was in an area of the temple which had been designated for the storage of paraphernalia relating to worship (12:44,) such as:

  • Grain offering
  • Frankincense
  • Vessels
  • Agricultural tithes (corn, new wine, oil).

The people had previously committed themselves in writing to provide the above items and store them in the Temple (9:38; 10:38-39). These goods were for the support of temple staff: the Levites, the singers, the porters and the priests. Although the items had been sanctified (12:47), Eliashib the priest had removed them from the storage area in order to accommodate Tobiah. This was a deliberate act of desecration.

Nehemiah emphasizes that he was out of the country (because he had returned to report to the king in Persia) when this happened and did not therefore become aware of it until he returned to Jerusalem (13:6-7). Neither Eliashib nor Tobiah may have expected Nehemiah to return so soon.

Nehemiah was furious when he heard of the arrangement and took immediate action to correct the problem. Determined to restore the temple to its proper state he used his power as Persian governor to overrule this poor decision by the temple authorities. He summarily removed Tobiah’s furniture and belongings (13:8) and had the area purified (13:8-9) and restocked.

13:10-14 REORGANISATION OF THE LEVITES

Nehemiah learns that the giving of tithes had ceased during his period of absence with the result that the Levites and the singers, who were responsible for conducting the temple services (‘that did the work’ KJV), had not received their portions of tithes and offerings.

The Torah envisaged that the tribe of Levi would be supported by the other tribes by means of the tithe (Num 18:21-24; Deut 14:27-28). The apostle Paul directly references this Old Testament system and applies its principles to the support of Christian workers in the New Testament era:

Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar? Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel. 1 Cor 9:13-14

The Levites had therefore left their duties (13:10, ‘fled’ i.e. the situation was forced upon them) and returned to their fields in order to support themselves financially; thus severely disrupting the worship of Yahweh. The passage may imply that this state of affairs was brought about by Tobiah’s occupation of the storage unit.

In theory the Levites ought not to have had pastureland other than that surrounding towns that had been allocated to them by the Lord (a list of the ‘Levitical cities’ is recorded in Josh 21:1-41 and in 1 Chron 6:54-81). It would seem, however, that in Nehemiah’s day Levites lived and farmed in various additional locations throughout the territory of Judah (7:72; 11:20; 12:27).

Since the ruling class in Judah had neglected their responsibilities with regards to the financial support of the Temple personnel, Nehemiah, as Persian governor, conducted a court case against them (13:11a) and accused them of forsaking the house of God, i.e. of breaking the covenant they made in 10:29ff. The word translated as ‘rebuke’ (5:7) and ‘contend’ (13:11,17, 25) in KJV means ‘to conduct a lawsuit or legal case’.

Nehemiah then gathered ‘them’ (the Levites and singers, not the rulers) together and got them back to their work in the temple. With the temple service revived the people of Judah responded positively. Soon the tithes were given and collected and proper distribution of the provisions restored. Nehemiah seized the opportunity to reorganise the Levites (13:13). No longer would responsibility for looking after the temple storerooms and distribution of support for the Levites be controlled by one man who, like Eliashib, might prove unreliable. Instead, Nehemiah assigned these tasks to a panel of three officials, Shelemiah, Zadok and Pedaiah. Hanan the son of of Zaccur, the son of Mattaniah was appointed to assist them. All of these committee members were honest and trustworthy men who, it appears, acted on behalf of the main parties which had an interest in the smooth operation of the system of tithing.

Shelemiah was a priest.

Pedaiah was a Levite (cp 3:25).

Hanan, presumably, was a singer. He was a grandson of Mattaniah who was the Temple choirmaster (11:17, 22; 12:8, 25).

Zadok the Scribe would have represented the interest of the Persian government.

13:14 – Throughout this chapter Nehemiah finishes his account of each reform with a short prayer (13:14, 22, 31). Here he asks God not to blot out the good deeds he had so loyally and faithfully performed for the temple of God and its services.

In this prayer Nehemiah uses the metaphor of God maintaining a ledger. The idea occurs several times throughout scripture, for example: Psa 56:8; 139:16; Isa 65:6; Dan 7:9-10; Mal 3:16; Rev 20:12; 21:27.

Nehemiah 13:1-3

Nehemiah 13:15-31

Posted in Exposition

NEHEMIAH 13:1-3

Posted on by writtenexposition

Nehemiah chapter 13 concludes the book of Nehemiah and provides insight into the reforms implemented by Nehemiah upon his return to Jerusalem from Persia. The background to chapter 13 may be summarised as follows:

BACKGROUND TO NEHEMIAH CHAPTER 13

Nehemiah, a Jewish cupbearer to king Artaxerxes I (465-424 BCE) of Persia, received news from home about the deteriorating state of Jerusalem and its broken walls. He therefore sought permission from the king for leave of absence from his job at Susa in order to return to Jerusalem, rebuild the walls and restore the glory of the city.

Having obtained the king’s blessing and support, Nehemiah travelled to Jerusalem in 445 BCE (2:1; 5:14) and rallied the people to rebuild the walls. Despite some local opposition, the walls were completed in fifty-two days (6:15). Nehemiah then focused on the spiritual renewal of the Jewish community. After twelve years in Jerusalem (5:14; 13:6) Nehemiah returned to the Persian court in 433 BCE. He must have continued to receive news from Jerusalem because he soon became aware that, in a spiritual sense, things were not progressing well there since his departure.

In chapter 13, Nehemiah returns to Jerusalem after an unspecified period of absence in Babylon. The date was probably 430 or 429 BCE. True enough, he finds that the people have reverted to various forms of disobedience and have neglected the laws of God. This final chapter highlights several significant events:

13:1-3 SEPARATION RENEWED

13:4-9 EXPULSION OF TOBIAH FROM THE TEMPLE

13:10-14 REORGANISATION OF THE LEVITES

13:15-22 RESTORATION OF SABBATH OBSERVANCE

13:23-29 PROBLEM OF EXOGAMOUS MARRIAGES

13: 30-31 SUMMARY OF NEHEMIAH’S CULTIC REFORMS

13:1-3 SEPARATION RENEWED

‘On that day’ (‘at that time’ i.e. in Nehemiah’s era) there was a public reading from the ‘book of Moses’ (cf. 2 Chron 25:4.; 35:12; Neh 8:1). This is certainly a reference to the torah (first five books of the Old Testament) since vv. 1b-2 cite Deut 23:3-6; a section of law dealing with persons excluded from Israelite worship. When the passage was read aloud the people learned that Ammonites or Moabites were specifically excluded from any religious assembly of Israel until ten generations had passed. This rule was to last forever. Interestingly, the reasons given for that do not include the origin of the two nations from the incestuous sexual relations each of Lot’s daughters had with him (Gen 19:30-38). Rather, the prohibition was based on on historical events. These two nations had opposed the Israelites after the exodus from Egypt and had hired a non-Israelite prophet called Balaam to curse them (Num 22-24). This, in turn, triggered a curse on them in accordance with God’s promise to Abraham in Gen 12:2-4. Although he could not actually bring himself to curse the Israelites Balaam nevertheless advised the Moabites how to lead them into sin (Num 31:16; 2 Pet 2:15; Jude 11; Rev 2:14).

MOAB

The Bible has nothing good to say about the Moabites or Ammonites but Moab in particular is singled out for criticism. The prophet Jeremiah gives a penetrating assessment of this inveterate enemy of the Israelites in his book:

‘Moab hath been at ease from his youth, and he hath settled on his lees, and hath not been emptied from vessel to vessel, neither hath he gone into captivity: therefore his taste remained in him, and his scent is not changed.‘ Jer 48:11

Moab, as we have mentioned, had a bad beginning. Nevertheless, like many who oppose God and his people today, everything seemed to go well for them. Their history was characterized by comfort and prosperity. Unlike Israel, nothing disturbed or interfered with their lives of ease. They were never taken into captivity. Jeremiah paints a word picture from the ancient process of wine-making. Totally at ease in its wickedness, unthinking and unconcerned about its sinful idolatry, never having yearned for deliverance, Moab went to rot.

Jeremiah’s metaphorical language conveys a sense of stagnation and lack of transformation. Despite being a nation that had been established for a long time, Moab had never undergone significant changes or been refined through challenging experiences. As a result, the character and behaviour of the Moabites remained unchanged, they were self-assured and unyielding. This important verse condemns Moab’s pride and self-reliance, suggesting that their failure to grow spiritually and morally would lead to their downfall and judgment from God. Devastation would come upon Moab as a consequence of their actions.

After the public reading of the law a ‘separation’ (Ezr 9:1; 10:11; Neh 10:28) of ‘the mixture’ took place. Not just Ammonites and Moabites were separated, but all foreigners. Intermarriage with the Canaanite nations had been forbidden because family relationships with idolators was perceived as likely to cause a turning away from the worship of Yahweh, the one true God (Deut 7:3-4). This problem seems to have plagued the Israelites throughout their history. During the era of Ezra and Nehemiah at least three attempts were made over a period of thirty years (468-429 BCE) to resolve the issue. Although these measures were fairly drastic (e.g. mass divorce, covenant not to intermarry), they were not entirely successful (Ezra 9-10; Neh 9:2; 10:28-30; 13:1-3). Nehemiah returns to the topic of unacceptable marriages later in the chapter.

The New Testament teaches the same general principle; that when it comes to spiritual matters a mixture never produces positive results. Every so often there must be a return to the word of God; accompanied by self-assessment leading to remedial action. 2 Corinthians 6:14-18:

‘Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you.’

Nehemiah 13:4-14

Nehemiah 13:15-31

Posted in General

WHO WAS ZADOK THE PRIEST?

Posted on by writtenexposition

INTRODUCTION

The term ‘Zadok the Priest’ usually brings to mind a piece of music composed by George Frideric Handel in 1727 and first performed during the coronation of King George II and Queen Caroline of England on 11th October of that year. Since then this iconic anthem has been sung at the coronation of every British monarch (with the exception of Edward VIII who abdicated the throne before the date set for his coronation) and was therefore played during the coronation of King Charles III and Queen Camilla.

‘Zadok the Priest, and Nathan the Prophet anointed Solomon King.
And all the people rejoiced, and said:
God save the King! Long live the King!
May the King live for ever,
Amen, Alleluia.’

The biblical passage 1 Kings 1:38-48 is the inspiration for those words of the anthem:

So, what does the Bible tell us about Zadok?

THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF ZADOK’S STORY

Zadok was a priest in the time of King David and King Solomon who ruled over the ancient kingdom of Israel; David being the second king and Solomon his son and successor. David is believed to have become king around 1010 BCE, while Solomon reigned c. 970 – 930 BCE. David established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and united the Israelite tribes into a single kingdom, Solomon was known for his wisdom, for building the first Temple in Jerusalem, and for expanding Israel’s trade and influence. Zadok is famous for anointing Solomon as king.

ZADOK’S GENEALOGY

In 1 Chronicles 6:3-8 and 6:50-53, Zadok is listed as a descendant of Eleazar, Aaron’s third son. In 1 Chronicles 24:3, Zadok is again listed as a descendant of Eleazar. This genealogy stretching back to Aaron demonstrates that Zadok was of the priestly family descended from Aaron (the brother of Moses). He was therefore a member of the Aaronic priesthood.

ZADOK’S LOYALTY TO KING DAVID

Almost nothing is known about Zadok’s early life but it seems that he may have belonged to a family of warrior priests. We learn that David was proclaimed king of Judah after the death of King Saul and established his capital in Hebron (2 Sam 2:1-4) where he reigned over Judah for seven and a half years before being acclaimed as king over all Israel (2 Sam 5:1-5). 1 Chronicles chapter 12 records that thousands from Israel defected to David at Hebron and in the census list of armed contingents that came over to David there is a reference (vv. 27-28) to ‘Zadok, a young man of valour.’

The young Zadok supported David’s cause and appears to have been rewarded for his loyalty. Once David firmly established the united monarchy he appointed Zadok and Abiathar as co-priests (2 Sam 8:17; 20:25) in Jerusalem; likely as keepers of the Ark of Covenant which had been transported there and housed in a tented shrine (2 Sam 6:1-17; 7:2; 1 Kgs 2:26; 1 Chron 16:39-40). In David’s administration Zadok also served as chief officer of the Aaronites (1 Chron 27:17) and he worked closely with another priestly colleague called Ahimelech in the organisation of the rotating courses of the priests for religious service (1 Chron 18:16; 24:3, 6, 31).

Later Zadok again aligned himself with the king when David’s son Absalom rebelled. Since it seemed likely that Absalom’s conspiracy to usurp the throne would succeed David decided to flee Jerusalem. Zadok, Abiathar and a group of Levites left the city with him, taking the Ark of the Covenant as well. David, however, convinced that Jerusalem was the place where the ark ought to be, asked them to take it back. The two priests did so and, along with their two sons, remained there as secret agents. They kept David informed of events in the city (2 Sam. 15:13-36; 17:15-22). After Absalom’s rebellion failed David sent Zadok and Abiathar as emissaries to the elders of Judah in order to win back their support and negotiate his return to Jerusalem. Their mission was successful (2 Sam 19:11-15).

ZADOK’S INVOLVEMENT IN THE ANOINTING OF KING SOLOMON

Zadok once again demonstrated his loyalty to King David in the matter of Adonijah’s failed rebellion. Adonijah was the fourth son of King David, born in Hebron (2 Sam 3:4). He attempted to seize the throne while his father was still alive. The events surrounding Adonijah’s revolt are described in 1 Kings 1:5-53. Since David had grown old and infirm, Adonijah saw himself as the heir apparent and arranged to hold a grand feast at which he intended to proclaim himself king, and to which he invited many of David’s officials and supporters; but did not include others whom he knew would be loyal to David. The latter included Solomon, Nathan the prophet and Zadok the priest. Adonijah had the support of Joab, the commander of David’s army, and Abiathar the priest (for Abiathar’s part in the insurrection Solomon later dismissed him from his position as priest, 1 Kgs 2:26-27).

The prophet Nathan and Bathsheba, Solomon’s mother, brought the matter of Adonijah to David’s attention. He immediately took action to ensure that Solomon would be his successor. David instructed Nathan the prophet and Zadok the priest to proclaim Solomon as king (1 Kgs 1:34) and ride him on David’s own mule to the Gihon spring, where he would be officially anointed king over Israel.

So Zadok the priest, and Nathan the prophet, and Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, and the Cherethites, and the Pelethites, went down, and caused Solomon to ride upon king David’s mule, and brought him to Gihon.
And Zadok the priest took a horn of oil out of the tabernacle, and anointed Solomon. And they blew the trumpet; and all the people said, God save king Solomon. 1 Kgs 1:38-39

This was done, and the people rejoiced, while Adonijah’s followers fled in fear. Thus David settled the succession question by appointing Solomon co-regent. Father and son ruled together until David’s death. Solomon was later anointed as king a second time; along with him Zadok was anointed to be (chief) priest (1 Chron 29:22), possibly serving for a time at Solomon’s temple.

SOME LESSONS FROM THE LIFE OF ZADOK

Be loyal to God and to your leaders. Zadok was loyal to God and to King David. Even when David made mistakes, Zadok remained faithful. This is a valuable lesson for us to learn, it is important to be loyal to those in authority, even when they make mistakes.

Be a person of action. Zadok was a man of action. He was willing to stand up for what he believed in, even when it was difficult to do so. We ought to be willing to stand up for what we believe in, even when that involves personal cost.

Be a person of integrity. Zadok was a man of integrity. He was honest, trustworthy. and was doubtless a great example to his children. David described Zadok’s son Ahimaaz as ‘a good man’ (2 Sam 18:27) – he may have been the same Ahimaaz who married Solomon’s daughter Basmath (1 Kgs 4:15). Another of Zadok’s sons (or perhaps a grandson? 1 Chron 6:8-9), Azariah, was one of the top officials in Solomon’s administration (1 Kgs 4:2).

Zadok was a priest who faithfully served God and the king. He made sound choices in life and was able to play an important role in the history of Israel. He is therefore an example for us to follow.

Posted in Exposition

EZEKIEL 1:1-3 – INTRODUCTION AND SUPERSCRIPTION

Posted on by writtenexposition

1. Now it came to pass in the thirtieth year, in the fourth month, in the fifth day of the month, as I was among the captives by the river of Chebar, that the heavens were opened, and I saw visions of God. 2. In the fifth day of the month, which was the fifth year of king Jehoiachin’s captivity, 3. The word of the LORD came expressly unto Ezekiel the priest, the son of Buzi, in the land of the Chaldeans by the river Chebar; and the hand of the LORD was there upon him.

INTRODUCTION AND SUPERSCRIPTION

These verses introduce the book of Ezekiel and provide historical background, as well as some information about the prophet Ezekiel and his message. They indicate when and where he was active; thus situating his visions within a specific historical and cultural context.

1:1 Ezekiel’s prophetic ministry is said to have begun ‘in the thirtieth year.’ The significance of the ‘thirtieth year’ is not explained but it is usually understood to mean that Ezekiel was thirty years of age at the time. The date given is the fifth day of the fourth month. This would have been the month of Tammuz and therefore the time of year was late June/early July.

The vision occurred while Ezekiel was among the exiles by the Chebar, which was most likely a canal near Babylon. It seems that many exiled Jews had been settled in this area. Ezekiel’s location by the canal underscores the fact that he was living among the exiles and sharing in their experiences and struggles.

1:2 Verse 2 provides more detailed historical context by specifying that it was the fifth year of King Jehoiachin’s exile. This information dates Ezekiel’s inaugural vision (592 BCE) and places it within the larger context of the Babylonian exile.

King Jehoiachin (2 Kgs 24:6-16; 2 Chron 36:9-10, also known as Jeconiah (Jer 24:1; 27:20; 28:4; 29:2) and Coniah (Jer 22:24, 28; 37:1), was the son of King Jehoiakim of Judah and a grandson of King Josiah. Jehoiachin became king of Judah at the age of eighteen (2 Kgs 24:8). His short reign was marked by political instability and conflict with the Babylonians. According to the Chronicler he ‘did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord’ (2 Chron 36:9). Jeremiah 22:24-30 has the Lord directly addressing Jehoiachin, prophesying his captivity and exile in Babylon. The Lord also declared that Jehoiachin’s descendants would neither prosper nor sit on the throne of David, thus signifying the end of the dynasty.

In 597 BCE King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon deported King Jehoiachin of Judah along with many of the leading citizens of Jerusalem (2 Kgs 24:15-16); including Ezekiel, who would have been twenty-five years of age at that time. Jehoiachin’s captivity in Babylon lasted for thirty-seven years. During that time, he was reportedly well-treated by the Babylonians and eventually released from captivity by King Evil-Merodach, who succeeded Nebuchadnezzar as ruler of Babylon. According to 2 Kings 25:27-30, Jehoiachin was then given a high position at the Babylonian court (new clothes, a daily allowance for the rest of his life, and allowed to dine at the king’s table).

Despite his short troubled reign and his captivity in Babylon, Jehoiachin was an important figure in the history of Judah. His deposition and deportation marked the beginning of the Babylonian Exile, a period of great spiritual and cultural significance for the Israelites. The Exile came to an end in 538 BCE.

During this difficult time Ezekiel, himself taken into captivity during Jehoiachin’s reign, provided spiritual guidance and hope to the exiles over a period of twenty years. The date of his inaugural vision in verse 2 is the first chronological marker in the book. The others are:

8:1 The vision of idols and abominations in the temple.

20:1 Ezekiel’s response to the elders.

24:1 The parable of a cooking pot

26:1 Threats against Tyre.

29:1 Prophecy against Egypt.

29:17 Desolation of Egypt.

30:20 Pharaoh’s defeat.

31:1 The cedar of Lebanon.

32:1 Lament over Pharoah..

32:17 Lament over Egypt.

33:21 News of the Fall of Jerusalem.

40:1 Vision of a new temple.

1:3 Verse 3 identifies Ezekiel as a member of the priestly class. This would suggest that his prophetic message was informed by his knowledge of Jewish ritual and tradition, which gave him religious authority to speak on behalf of God. Note that many respected commentators confidently assert that Ezekiel was a Zadokite priest. This they assume purely on the basis that Ezekiel speaks highly of the Zadokites in chapters 40-48, which contain his vision of how a future ideal temple might look and operate. In these chapters Ezekiel assigns a dominant role to the Zadokites (43:18-27; 44:15-16; 45:4; 46:19-24), presumably as a reward for remaining relatively (22:26) faithful (44:10-11, 15-16; 48:11) during the Exile. There is zero scriptural evidence for Ezekiel having a Zadokite heritage.

The reference to the “hand of the Lord” being upon him indicates that Ezekiel was divinely inspired and empowered to deliver God’s message to the exiles. The ‘land of the Chaldeans’ refers to the Neo-Babylonian empire ruled over by Nebopolassar (627-605 BCE) and his son Nebuchadnezzar (605-562 BCE).

SUMMATION

The opening verses of Ezekiel set the stage for the prophetic message that follows. The fact that Ezekiel received his vision among the exiles by the Chebar canal underscores the fact that his message is directed to the Israelite community in exile. The political and social upheaval of the time is also reflected in the references to King Jehoiachin’s exile and the Babylonian conquest.

Ezekiel 1:1-3 offers spiritual lessons that are still relevant today:

First, we see that God is not limited by our circumstances. Even in the midst of exile and captivity, God can still reveal himself and speak to his people.

Second, we see that God chooses ordinary people to do extraordinary things. Ezekiel was a priest, but God called him to be a prophet and to deliver his message to the exiles.

Finally, we see that God’s word is powerful and authoritative. Ezekiel’s prophetic message was not his own, but rather it came directly from God.

As we read the book of Ezekiel, we are reminded that God is sovereign over all of history, and that his word has the power to transform our lives and to give us hope even in the midst of difficult situations.

EZEKIEL’S VISION OF THE GLORY OF YAHWEH (1:4-28)

AND HE SAID TO ME’ – EZEKIEL’S CALL TO BE A PROPHET – 2:1-3:15

EZEKIEL’S WATCHMAN ROLE: A PROPHETIC CALL TO RESPONSIBILITY- 3:16-27

Posted in General

NATHAN : PROBABLY THE MOST INFLUENTIAL PROPHET MOST PEOPLE HAVE NEVER HEARD OF

Posted on by writtenexposition

Although it was still seven months to the coronation of King Charles III at the time of publication, the British tabloid newspaper Daily Mail printed ‘An A to Z guide to the Coronation’ by Claudia Connell on Saturday, October 15, 2022. The following was listed under N:

Nathan the Prophet

Perhaps not the most familiar of prophets but next May he’s going to be name-checked by the Archbishop of Canterbury in front of millions of TV viewers around the world. During the anointing of the King, the Archbishop will recall ‘as Solomon was anointed King by Zadok the Priest and Nathan the Prophet.’

Who was Nathan the prophet and what was his legacy?

INTRODUCTION

Nathan the Prophet is a biblical character who was active in the political and religious life of Israel during the reign of King David c. 1000 BCE. He is the second of two prominent prophets in the Books of Samuel each of whom had a strong influence on King David. These two prophets lived during a period of great social, political and religious change; Samuel, who preceded Nathan, identified more with the earlier way of life, Nathan with the latest developments.

In the years leading up to 1000 BCE there was a growing trend in the Ancient Near East away from loose tribal confederacies towards the centralisation of political power. This produced a gradual change from a pastoral, nomadic existence to a more settled urban way of life, with the economy based on agriculture rather than herding. Territory (where one lived) rather than tribe (who one was) began to take precedence. Monarchy, rather than chiefdom, became the political norm. In spite of the inevitable loss of freedom and additional expense involved the Israelites desired this type of arrangement. Ignoring warnings by Samuel (1 Sam 8:11-18) they insisted that they too wanted government by a king – a system that had already been adopted by Edom (1 Chron 1:43) and Ammon (1 Sam 12:12). Samuel eventually succumbed to pressure (1 Sam 12:1) and reluctantly anointed Saul as the first king of Israel. Later he also anointed David (1 Sam 16:13), the second king.

Nathan the prophet had a close relationship with David and was considered one of his most trusted advisors. He is connected with several important events in David’s reign, including the confrontation with David over his affair with Bathsheba and the anointing of Solomon as David’s successor.

2 Samuel 7:1-29 & 1 Chron 17:1-27 A ‘HOUSE’ FOR GOD AND A ‘HOUSE’ FOR DAVID.

Nathan’s role in these chapters is significant for he delivers a message from God to King David regarding the building of the Jerusalem temple.

Having built a ‘house’ (palace) for himself in Jerusalem David expressed to Nathan his desire to build a ‘house’ (temple) for Yahweh. Nathan, rather presumptuously and without consulting Yahweh, told David to go ahead with the building project. However, Yahweh spoke to Nathan and instructed him to tell David that he would not build the temple, but that his son would do that. Nathan mediated this message to David, emphasizing that it was God’s plan and that David should not be discouraged since God would establish a ‘house’ (dynasty) for David. His offspring would reign over Israel and, by implication, the kingdom would last forever. Christians view this as a prophecy of the coming of Jesus Christ, who would be a descendant of David and establish an eternal kingdom.

2 Samuel 12:1-25 NATHAN, DAVID, BATHSHEBA AND URIAH

In 2 Samuel chapter 12, the prophet Nathan again plays a crucial role in delivering a message from God, this time to confront King David about his sin with Bathsheba and the murder of her husband Uriah.

The story of David, Bathsheba, Uriah, and Nathan in 2 Samuel 11 is a complex and interesting narrative that highlights themes of power, lust, betrayal, and repentance. It concerns King David’s sexual liaison with Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah, one of David’s elite soldiers. It also details the role of Nathan the prophet, who is sent by God to confront David with his sin and call him to repentance.

David is described as staying behind in Jerusalem while his army goes out to battle. From his rooftop, he sees Bathsheba bathing and is overcome with lust for her. He sends for her and sleeps with her, even though she is married to Uriah, who is away fighting in the war against the Ammonites.

When Bathsheba becomes pregnant and send word to David, he tries to cover up his sin by bringing Uriah back from the front lines and encouraging him to go home and sleep with his wife. Uriah refuses to go to his house, saying that it would be unfair to enjoy home comforts while his fellow soldiers are still at war. David then sends Uriah back to the battlefield with a letter to Joab, the commanding officer of the army, instructing him to put Uriah in the front lines of battle and then withdraw so that Uriah will be killed. Uriah dies as planned, and David then takes Bathsheba as his wife.

Displeased with David’s actions YHWH sends Nathan the prophet to confront him. Nathan approaches David with a parable about a rich man who had taken a poor man’s only lamb, which the poor man loved and cared for like a daughter. In spite of the fact that he had many animals of his own, the rich man slaughtered the poor man’s lamb in order to feed a visitor. Outraged by the rich man’s actions David declares that he deserves to die for his cruelty. At this point, Nathan reveals that the rich man in the parable is David, who had committed a much greater injustice by taking Bathsheba (another man’s wife) and killing her husband.

Convicted by Nathan’s words David confesses his sin, acknowledging his guilt before God. Nathan tells David that God has forgiven him but warns him that there will be consequences for his actions, including the death of the child that Bathsheba is carrying. In addition, members of David’s own family would rebel against him and try to oust him as king.

The story of David, Bathsheba, Uriah, and Nathan is a cautionary tale about the dangers of power and lust, and the importance of accountability and repentance. It highlights the role of the prophet as a messenger of God speaking truth to the wealthy and influential and calling for justice and righteousness. It also underscores the idea that powerful leaders are not above the law and that all actions have consequences, both for the individual and for those around them.

1 Kgs 1:1-46; 4:5 SOLOMONS’S ACCESSION NARRATIVE

Nathan played a significant role in the succession of Solomon as king of Israel after David. As had been prophesied following David’s sin with Bathsheba, much strife and conflict took place within David’s family. David had many sons, and there seemed to be no clear line of succession. Adonijah, one of the sons, assumed that he was next in the line of succession and took steps to appoint himself co-regent with David, who was then in old age.

Nathan, however, intervened to ensure that Yahweh’s plan for the throne of Israel was fulfilled. He advised Bathsheba to go to David and remind him of a promise made to her that her son, Solomon, would succeed him on the throne (1 Kings 1:11-14). Nathan also supported Bathsheba’s claim by approaching David and confirming that Solomon was indeed the one to succeed him. Thus, through Nathan’s intervention, Solomon was anointed as king with David’s blessing, ensuring a relatively peaceful and orderly transition of power.

1 Chron 29:29 & 2 Chron 9:29 THE BOOK OF NATHAN THE PROPHET

The Book of Nathan the Prophet is mentioned in both 1 Chronicles 29:29 and 2 Chronicles 9:29. These verses suggest that Nathan wrote a historical account of King David’s reign, and that this account was preserved as a written record and was a source available to the compiler(s) of the Books of Kings and Chronicles. Material from it may also have been used in the Books of Samuel.

The mention of the Book of Nathan the Prophet in these verses reminds us that other texts and traditions existed as part of the religious and cultural landscape of ancient Israel, but did not become part of the biblical canon and have not survived.

2 Chron 29:25 NATHAN ASSISTED DAVID IN THE ORGANIZATION OF PUBLIC WORSHIP

2 Chronicles 29:25 describes the actions of Hezekiah, the thirteenth king of Judah, as he restores the worship practices of the temple in Jerusalem. The verse states:

‘And he set the Levites in the house of the LORD with cymbals, with psalteries, and with harps, according to the commandment of David, and of Gad the king’s seer, and Nathan the prophet: for so was the commandment of the LORD by his prophets.’

From this verse we learn that temple worship traditions and instructions handed down by earlier generations, in this case from David, Gad, and Nathan, were observed for centuries. Three hundred years after their institution Hezekiah honoured these traditions and instructions; ensuring the continuity of religious practices for which Nathan the prophet had been partly responsible.

SUMMATION

Nathan the Prophet played an important role in the lives of two kings and in the development of Israelite religion and literature. He was important as a prophet of Yahweh and for his good interpersonal, political and organisational skills. He is credited with having prophesied to David about the future of his dynasty and the construction of the temple in Jerusalem. He also confronted David about his affair with Bathsheba and helped to facilitate the succession of David’s son, Solomon, to the throne.

In addition to his role as an advisor to the king, it seems that Nathan was also a writer and historian. According to 1 Chronicles 29:29 and 2 Chronicles 9:29, he wrote a history of the reigns of David and Solomon, called the ‘Book of Nathan the Prophet’.

Overall, Nathan’s historical significance lies in his role as a key figure in the history of ancient Israel. As prophet and counsellor to kings he played an important role in the political and religious affairs of the Israelites, and his writings and prophecies helped to shape their religious and cultural identity.

BIBLIOGRAPHIES

1) GENERAL BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

Alter, R. (2009). The David Story: A Translation with Commentary of 1 and 2 Samuel. W. W. Norton & Company.

Alter, R. (2013). Ancient Israel : the Former Prophets : Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings : a Translation with Commentary. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.

Anderson, A. A. (1989). 2 Samuel. Paternoster.

‌Auld, A. G. (2011). I & II Samuel : a Commentary. Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox Press.

‌Baretz, J. (2015). The Bible on Location. U of Nebraska Press.

Barron, R. (2017). 2 Samuel. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Brazos Press, A Division Of Baker Publishing Group.

‌Brenner, A (1994). A Feminist Companion to Samuel and Kings. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.

Beal, L. W. (2014). 1 & 2 Kings. InterVarsity Press.

Brueggemann, W. (2000). 1 & 2 Kings. Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans.

‌Brueggemann, W. (2012). First and Second Samuel. Louisville, Kentucky: John Knox Press.

Cartledge, T.W. (2001). 1 & 2 Samuel. Macon, Ga.: Smyth & Helwys Pub.

Chisholm, R.B. (2013). 1 and 2 Samuel. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.

Franke, J. R. and Oden, T. C. (2014). Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1-2 Samuel. InterVarsity Press.

Fox, E. (2014). The Early Prophets : Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings : a New Translation with Introductions, Commentary, and Notes. New York: Schocken Books.

Galil, G. Levwinson-Gilboa, E. Maeir, A. M. and Kahn, D. (2012). The Ancient Near East in the 12th-10th centuries BCE : Culture and History : proceedings of the international conference, held at the University of Haifa, 2-5 May, 2010. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag.

Gordon, R.P. (1984). 1 & 2 Samuel. Sheffield: JSOT.

‌Huffmon, H. B. (2008). A Tale of the Prophet and the Courtier: A Responsive Reading of the Nathan Texts. In S. Dolansky (Ed.), Sacred History, Sacred Literature: Essays on Ancient Israel, the Bible, and Religion in Honor of R. E. Friedman on His Sixtieth Birthday (pp. 33–42). Penn State University Press.

Japhet, S. (2009). Kingship. In The Ideology of the Book of Chronicles and Its Place in Biblical Thought  (pp. 308–383). Penn State University Press.

Jones, G.H. (1990). The Nathan Narratives. Sheffield: Jsot Press.

Laffey, A. L. (1988). An Introduction to the Old Testament : a Feminist Perspective. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

‌Lamb, D.T. (2021). 1–2 Kings. Zondervan Academic.

Lipinski, E. (2020). JERUSALEM IN THE BRONZE AGE AND IRON AGE I. In A History of the Kingdom of Jerusalem and Judah (Vol. 287, pp. 7–26). Peeters Publishers.

McKenzie, S. L. (2000). King David : a Biography. New York: Oxford University Press.

‌McShane, A. (1990). Lessons for Leaders. John Ritchie Ltd. Kilmarnock

McShane, A. (2002). I & II Kings. John Ritchie Ltd. Kilmarnock

MacLeod, F. (2016). 1 & 2 Kings: A Devotional Look at the Kings of Israel and Judah. Createspace Independent Publishing Platform.

Mann, T. W. (2011). 2 Samuel. In The Book of the Former Prophets (1st ed., pp. 171–242). The Lutterworth Press.

‌Nelson, C. M. (1982). 1 & 2 Kings, Interpretation : a Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching, Old Testament. Atlanta: John Knox Press.

Newsome, J.D. (1982). 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel. Atlanta (Ga.): Knox Pr.

Peters, F. E. (1985). Holy Land, Holy City. In Jerusalem: The Holy City in the Eyes of Chroniclers, Visitors, Pilgrims, and Prophets from the Days of Abraham to the Beginnings of Modern Times (pp. 3–41). Princeton University Press.

Petroelje, S.L. (2012). Discover 2 Samuel. Faith Alive Christian Resources

Rosenberg, J. (1986). King and Kin : Political Allegory in the Hebrew Bible. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

‌Rossier, H.L. (2015). Meditations on 1 Kings. Irving Risch.

Rossier, H.L. (2015). Meditations on 2 Samuel. Irving Risch.

Segal, A. F. (2012). No Peace in the Royal Family. In Sinning in the Hebrew Bible: How The Worst Stories Speak for Its Truth (pp. 180–221). Columbia University Press.

Taylor, W. M. (1875). David, King of Israel: His Life and its Lessons, New York: Harper & Brothers

Willis, J. T., Graham P. M., Marrs, R. R. and Mckenzie, S. L. (1999). Worship and the Hebrew Bible : Essays in Honour of John T. Willis. Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic Press.

Witherington, B. (2014). Courting the Prophets: Prophets and the Early Monarchy. In Jesus the Seer: The Progress of Prophecy (pp. 62–103). 1517 Media.

Woodhouse, J. and Hughes, R.K. (2015). 2 Samuel : Your Kingdom Come. Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway.

‌JOURNAL ARTICLES

Bishop, E. F. F. (1935). Why ‘Son of David’?. The Expository Times, 47(1), pp.21–25.

Bodner, K. (2001). Nathan: Prophet, Politician and Novelist? Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 26(1), pp.43–54.

Bosworth, D. A. (2006). Evaluating King David: Old Problems and Recent Scholarship. CBQ, 68(2), pp. 191–210.

Bowman, J. (1989). David, Jesus Son of David and Son of Man. Ancient Near Eastern Studies, 27(0), pp.1–22.

Brown, R. M. (1984). The Nathan Syndrome: Stories with a Moral Intention. Religion & Literature, 16 (1), pp. 49–59.

Haran, M. (1999). The Books of the Chronicles ‘of the Kings of Judah’ and ‘of the Kings of Israel’: What Sort of Books were they?. Vetus Testamentum, 49(2), pp.156–164.

Harper, W. R. (1904). Constructive Studies in the Prophetic Element in the Old Testament. IV. Prophecy and Prophetism during the Davidic Period. The Biblical World, 24(1), pp. 47–58.

Harrington, D. J. (1991). ‘Jesus, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham …’; Christology and Second Temple Judaism. Irish Theological Quarterly, 57(3), pp.185–195.

Kalimi, I. (2016). Reexamining 2 Samuel 10-12: Redaction History versus Compositional Unity. CBQ, 78(1), pp. 24–46.

Kingsbury, J.D. (1976). The Title ‘Son of David’ in Matthew’s Gospel. Journal of Biblical Literature, 95(4), p.591.

Levin, Y. (2006). Jesus, ‘Son of God’ and ‘Son of David’: The ‘Adoption’ of Jesus into the Davidic Line. Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 28(4), pp.415–442.

Pagani, S. (2017). « Roi ou serviteur » ? La tentation du Prophète, ou le choix d’un modèle. Archives de Sciences Sociales Des Religions, 62(178), pp.43–68.

Reich, K.H. (2003). Teaching Genesis: A Present‐Day Approach Inspired by the Prophet Nathan. Zygon®, 38(3), pp .633–641.

Smith, S.H. (1996). The Function of the Son of David Tradition in Mark’s Gospel. New Testament Studies, 42(4), pp.523–539.

Van der Bergh, R. H. (2008) Deadly Traits: A Narratological Analysis of Character in 2 Samuel 11. Old Testament Essays, 21, pp.180-192.

Wantaate, F. (2019), Nathan as a Courageous Follower: An Inner Texture Analysis of 2 Samuel:1-14, American Journal of Biblical Theology, Vol. 19 (10)

2) BIBLIOGRAPHY FOR 2 Samuel 7:1-29 & 1 Chron 17:1-27 A ‘HOUSE’ FOR GOD AND A ‘HOUSE’ FOR DAVID.

BOOKS

Avioz, M. (2006). Nathan’s Oracle (2 Samuel 7) and its Interpreters. Bern ; Oxford: Peter Lang.

Eslinger, L. (1994). House of God or House of David. Sheffield Academic Press.

Janthial, D. (2013). L’oracle de Nathan et l’unité du livre d’Isaïe. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Knoppers G. N. (2007). ‘Changing History: Nathan’s Oracle and the Structure of the Davidic Monarchy in Chronicles’, In M. Bar-Asher et al (eds), Shai le-Sara Japhet: Studies in the Bible, its Exegesis and its Language, (pp. 99-123). Jerusalem: The Bialik Institute

MacDonald, N. (2015). Covenant and Election in Exilic and Post-Exilic Judaism. Tübingen, Germany, Mohr Siebeck.

Schniedewind, W.M. (1999). Society and the Promise to David : the Reception History of 2 Samuel 7:1-17. New York: Oxford University Press.

JOURNAL ARTICLES

Avioz, M. (2004). Nathan’s Prophecy in II Sam 7 and in I Chr 17: Text, Context, and Meaning. Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, 116(4). pp. 542-554

Avioz, M. (2006). Josephus’ Retelling of Nathan’s Oracle (2 Samuel 7). Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament, 20(1), pp. 9–17.

‌Cudworth, T.D. (2016). Yahweh’s Promise to David in the Books of Kings. Vetus Testamentum, 66(2), pp.194–216.

Johnston, G. H. (2011). The Nature of the Davidic Covenant in the Light of Intertextual Analysis. A Paper Presented to the Old Testament Narrative Literature Study Group National Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society: San Francisco.

Knoppers, G. N. (1996). Ancient Near Eastern Royal Grants and the Davidic Covenant: A Parallel? Journal of the American Oriental Society, 116(4), pp. 670–697.

Kruse, H. (1985). David’s Covenant. Vetus Testamentum, 35(2), pp. 139–164.

Mroczek, E. (2015). How Not to Build a Temple: Jacob, David, and the Unbuilt Ideal in Ancient Judaism. Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman Period, 46(4/5), pp. 512–546.

Phillips, A. (1966). The Interpretation of 2 Samuel xii 5-6. Vetus Testamentum, 16 (2), pp.242–244.

Sergi, O. (2010). The Composition of Nathan’s Oracle to David (2 Samuel 7:1–17) as a Reflection of Royal Judahite Ideology. Journal of Biblical Literature, 129(2), pp. 261–279.

Ttsevat, M. (1963). STUDIES IN THE BOOK OF SAMUEL: III The Steadfast House: What Was David Promised in II Sam. 7:11b—16? Hebrew Union College Annual, 34, 71–82.

Tsevat, M. (1965). The House of David in Nathan’s Prophecy. Biblica, 46(3), pp. 353–356.

Tsumura, D. T. (2010). Tense and Aspect of Hebrew Verbs in 2 Samuel 7:8-16—from the Point of View of Discourse Grammar. Vetus Testamentum, 60 (4), pp. 641–654.

Zimran, Y. (2014). “The Covenant Made with David”: The King and the Kingdom in 2 Chronicles 21. Vetus Testamentum, 64 (2), pp. 305–325.

‌3) BIBLIOGRAPGY FOR 2 Samuel 12:1-25 NATHAN, DAVID, BATHSHEBA AND URIAH

BOOKS

Afoakwah, J. D. (2015). The Nathan-David confrontation (2 Sam 12:1-15a) : a Slap in the Face of the Deuteronomistic Hero? New York: Peter Lang Edition.

Boda, M.J. (2021). A Severe Mercy : Sin and Its Remedy in the Old Testament. University Park, PA: Penn State University Press.

Karras, R. M. (2021). I Have Sinned Against the Lord: Sex and Penitence. In Thou Art the Man: The Masculinity of David in the Christian and Jewish Middle Ages (pp. 101–135). University of Pennsylvania Press.

McLaughlin, J. L. (2021). ‘Collateral Damage: Divine Punishment of Others for David’s Sins in 2 Samuel.’ In J. L. McLaughlin & C. Carvalho (Eds.), God and Gods in the Deuteronomistic History (pp. 143–159). Catholic University of America Press.

Koenig, S. M. (2018). Bathsheba Survives. University of South Carolina Press.

Mohammed, K. (2015). David in the Muslim tradition : the Bathsheba affair. Lanham, Maryland: Lexington Books.

Salisbury, J.E. (2001). Encyclopedia of Women in the Ancient World. Santa Barbara, Calif.: Abc-Clio.

‌The (2019). LIFE Women of the Bible. Time.

Widmer, M. (2015). David: Repentant Sinner, Priestly Intercessor, and Yhwh’s Change of Mind (2 Samuel 24). In Standing in the Breach: An Old Testament Theology and Spirituality of Intercessory Prayer (Vol. 13, pp. 224–250). Penn State University

JOURNAL ARTICLES

Abasili, A. I. (2011). Was it Rape? The David and Bathsheba Pericope Re-examined. Vetus Testamentum, 61(1), pp.1–15.

Berger, Y. (2009). Ruth and the David—Bathsheba Story: Allusions and Contrasts. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 33(4), pp. 433–452.

Berman, J. (2013). Double Meaning in the Parable of the Poor Man’s Ewe (2 Sam 12:1–4). Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, Vol. 13. Article 14.

Buford, M. A. (2009). The Nathan Factor: The Art of Speaking Truth to Power. Journal of Biblical Perspectives in Leadership, 2(2), 95-113.

Cohen, H.H. (1965). David and Bathsheba. Journal of the American Academy of Religion, XXXIII(2), pp.142–148.

Daube, D. (1982). Nathan’s Parable. Novum Testamentum, 24(3), 275–288.

Dorn, L. O. (1999). Untranslatable Features in the David and Bathsheba Story (2 Samuel 11–12). The Bible Translator, 50(4), pp. 406–411.

Firth, D. (2008). David and Uriah (With an Occasional Appearance by Uriah’s Wife) – Reading and Re-Reading 2 Samuel 11. 21. Old Testament Essays, 20/2, pp. 310-328

Garsiel, M. (1993). The Story of David and Bathsheba: A Different Approach. CBQ, 55(2), pp. 244–262

Jacobs, J. (2013). The Death of David’s Son by Bathsheba (II Sam 12:13-25): A Narrative in Context. Vetus Testamentum, 63(4), pp. 566–576.

Lasine, S. (1984). Melodrama as Parable: The Story of the Poor Man’s Ewe-Lamb and the Unmasking of David’s Topsy-Turvy Emotions. Research affiliated with Wichita State University

‌Létourneau, A. (2018). Beauty, Bath and Beyond: Framing Bathsheba as a Royal Fantasy in 2 Sam 11,1-5. Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament, 32(1), pp.72–91.

Nicol G. G. (1998) David, Abigail and Bathsheba, Nabal and Uriah: Transformations within a Triangle, Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament, 12 (1), pp. 130-145.

Schipper, J. (2007). Did David Overinterpret Nathan’s Parable in 2 Samuel 12:1-6? Journal of Biblical Literature, 126(2), pp. 383–391.

Van der Bergh, R. H. (2008). Is Bathsheba Guilty? The Septuagint’s Perspective. Journal for Semitics 17, no. 1 182-193.

4) BIBLIOGRAPHY FOR 1 Kgs 1:1-46; 4:5 SOLOMONS’S ACCESSION NARRATIVE

BOOKS

Finkelstein, I. and Silberman, N. A. (2007). David and Solomon. Simon and Schuster.

‌Kalimi, I. (2018). Writing and Rewriting the Story of Solomon in Ancient Israel. Cambridge University Press.

Miller, V. (2019). A King and a Fool?: The Succession Narrative as a Satire. Leiden, The Netherlands, Brill.

JOURNAL ARTICLES

Ball, E. (1977). The Co-Regency of David and Solomon (1 Kings I). Vetus Testamentum, 27(3), pp.268–279.

Frolov, S. (2002). Succession Narrative: A “Document” or a Phantom? Journal of Biblical Literature, 121(1), 81–104.

Langlamet, F. (1982). DAVID, FILS DE JESSÉ: UNE ÉDITION PRÉDEUTÉRONOMISTE DE L’« HISTOIRE DE LA SUCCESSION ». Revue Biblique (1946-), 89(1), pp. 5–47.

Willis, J., Pleffer, A., & Llewelyn, S. (2011). Conversation in the Succession Narrative of Solomon. Vetus Testamentum, 61(1), pp. 133–147.

Posted in General

SOME THINGS SAID TO BE ‘OF DAVID’ IN THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS

Posted on by writtenexposition

King David is a towering figure in the Bible. His name (according to my search of a KJV Bible app) occurs 841 times in the Old Testament and 54 times in the New Testament. The following is a list of things that are said to be ‘of David:’

OLD TESTAMENT

House of David – 1 Sam 20:16; 2 Sam 3:1; 7:26; 1 Kgs 12:26; 13:2, 14:8; 2 Kgs 17:21; 1 Chron 17:24; 2 Chron 10:19; 21:7; Neh 12:37; Psa 122:5; Isa 7:2, 13; 22:22; Jer 21:12; Zech 12:7, 8, 10, 12; 13:1.

City of David – 2 Sam 5:7; 6:16; 1 Kgs 2:10; 3:1; 9:24; 11:27, 43; 14:31; 15:8, 24; 22:50; 2 Kgs 8:24; 9:28; 12:21; 14:20; 15:7; 15:38; 16:20; 1 Chron 11:5, 7; 13:3; 15:1, 29; 2 Chron 8:11; 9:31; 12:16; 14:1; 16:14; 21:1, 20; 24:16, 25;27:9; 32:5,30; 33;14; Neh 3:15; 12:37; Isa 22:9.

Days of David – 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 2:1.

Throne of David – 1 Kgs 2:12, 24; Isa 9:7.

Statutes of David – 1 Kgs 3:3.

Heart of David – 1 Kgs 8:17.

Sons of David – 1 Chron 3:1, 9.

Reign of David – 1 Chron 4:31.

Mercies of David – 2 Chron 6:42; Isa 55:3.

Order (legal decision) of David – 2 Chron 8:17.

Way(s) of David – 2 Chron 11:17; 34:2.

Lord God of David – 2 Kgs 20:5; 2 Chron 21:12.

Commandment (edict) of David – 2 Chron 29:25; 35:15.

Instruments of David – 2 Chron 29:26; Neh 12:36.

Words of David – 2 Chron 29:30.

Writing of David – 2 Chron 35:4.

Ordinance of David – Ezra 3:10.

Sepulchres of David – Neh 3:16.

Horn of David – Psa 132:17.

Tower of David – Song of Solomon 4:4.

Tabernacle of David – Isa 16:5; Amos 9:11.

Seed of David – Jer 33:22.

NEW TESTAMENT

Son of David – Mt 15:22; 20:30, 31; 21:9, 15; 22:42.

House of David – Lk 1:27.

City of David – Lk 2:11.

Seed of David – Jn 7:42; Rom 1:3; 2 Tim 2:8.

Mouth of David – Acts 1:16.

Mercies of David – Acts 13:34.

Tabernacle of David – Acts 15:16

Root of David – Rev 5:5; 22:16.

Offspring of David – Rev 22:16

Posted in General

‘EBENEZER’

Posted on by writtenexposition

Closing message on our last Sunday with our church before moving to live elsewhere.

1 Samuel 7:12 ‘EBENEZER’

‘Then Samuel took a stone, and set it between Mizpeh and Shen, and called the name of it Ebenezer, saying, Hitherto hath the Lord helped us.’ 1 Samuel 7:12

There is a certain form of words occurring throughout our Bible which makes a very interesting study. I’ll mention the following example references:

Deuteronomy chapters 31-34 – the speaker is Moses.

Joshua chapters 23-24 – the speaker is Joshua.

1 Samuel chapter 12 – the speaker is Samuel.

1 Kings chapter 2 and also 1 Chronicles chapters 28 -29 – the speaker is David,

Luke chapter 22 and also John chapters 13-17 – the speaker is the Lord Jesus Christ.

Acts chapter 20 – the speaker is the apostle Paul.

You may have already realized that in these chapters we have what scholars term ‘THE FAREWELL ADDRESS.’

You will be relieved to know, although this is our last Sunday here, that I am not about to deliver a long farewell speech.

Instead I would like to leave this verse from 1 Samuel with you, not only because it is my favourite Bible verse but also because we have experienced, and can testify to, its truth. Today we look back over the 32 years since we walked in the door of the old building one Sunday morning in September 1989, with two small children in tow and not knowing anyone in this part of the world.

Ebenezer is an unusual name. Personally, I don’t know anyone called Ebenezer. Unless familiar with the Bible most people would probably recall it as the name of the miser Scrooge in Charles Dicken’s story, ‘A Christmas Carol’ – but Ebenezer Scrooge bears no relation to the Ebenezer of the Bible because:

The biblical Ebenezer was not a person, it was a place.

The biblical Ebenezer was not a scrooge, it was a stone.

The biblical Ebenezer was not a miser, it was a marker.

In 1 Samuel chapters 4-7 you can read for yourselves the historical background to Samuel’s erection of this stone monument. Sufficient to say that for a long period of time the ancient Israelites forgot God and had consequently suffered defeat at the hands of their neighbours, the Philistines. These enemies captured the Ark of the Lord, which was gone for twenty years (7:2). After a national turning to the Lord, however, and intercession on the part of Samuel, the Philistines were defeated. Samuel then set up the memorial stone as a reminder to the people of the faithfulness of God to those who trust in him alone.

As we review more than three decades spent here:

EBENEZER REMINDS US OF THE PAST

Looking back we recognise God’s help and protection in our lives. There have been many good times and some difficult times; there has been employment and also unemployment; there has been health and there has been sickness. However, we can honestly say: ‘Ebenezer …. Hitherto hath the Lord helped us.’ Had we set up a memorial stone for every occasion on which the Lord helped us there would be a long trail of gratitude behind us, stretching back over thirty-two years. As well as reminding us of the past…

EBENEZER DIRECTS US TO THE PRESENT

‘Hitherto’ means ‘up to now’ and that, of course, includes the present time. We can therefore be confident that the Lord who has helped us in the past is now helping us in the present. The One who HAS helped us is STILL helping us. As we undergo the stress of uprooting our lives and moving to one of the other countries in the UK ‘Ebenezer’ reminds us to be thankful for what the Lord is doing now.

Ebenezer reminds us of the past.

Ebenezer directs us to the present, but also:

EBENEZER POINTS US TO THE FUTURE

When we get to a certain point in time and can still say ‘hitherto’ that means that we haven’t reached the end yet. The Lord has more to do, for us and with us, and he will help us until our lives on earth come to a close. I suppose that as we contemplate the future we can change the ‘hitherto hath the Lord helped us’ to ‘henceforth the Lord will help us’.

Let me publicly pay tribute to all the members of this church (to the many who have already gone to be with the Lord, and to you all who remain) and thank you for your fellowship, your friendship, your kindness to us and your confidence in us as we have fulfilled our various roles and responsibilities in this assembly.

We brought up our children here and are thankful that, at a young age, both of them placed their trust in Jesus Christ for eternal salvation. Thank you for providing a loving and caring atmosphere in which we could raise our family and for being a positive Christian influence upon young lives.

We ask you to pray for us as we assume a nomadic lifestyle for a few months, that the Lord will guide us as to where we ought to settle down and live in retirement and that we might be of help in whatever assembly of Christians we meet with.

I trust that you all (individually and as an assembly of believers) will continue to experience the Lord’s help and blessing and be able to say, as we can: ‘Ebenezer …. hitherto hath the Lord helped us.’