God’s revelation did not come into a vacuum. He spoke to a people who were a part of the contemporary culture and called them to become followers of His true way. In the process, God did not ignore the culture surrounding His called ones.¹ There are many points of contact with the cultures of the Mesopotamians, Canaanites, Egyptians, Hittites and others. The large question is, how much of the revelation of God is couched in terms and concepts familiar to all people in that region and how much is unique. Cross is critical of Yehezkel Kaufmann for his insistence that Israelite religion “was absolutely different from anything the pagan world ever knew.” Cross insists that this approach violates fundamental postulates of scientific historical method.² The Evangelical will find himself in more sympathy with Kaufmann than with Cross.

Nevertheless, it is mistaken to assume that there is no connection between the Bible and its cultural milieu. Cross uses the term “epic” to describe the genre of Israel’s religious expression (in contrast to mythic). He believes that the word “historical” is a valid description of what goes on in this religious expression, but he says, “At the same time confusion often enters at this point. The epic form, designed to recreate and give meaning to the historical experiences of a people or nation, is not merely or simply historical. In epic narrative, a people and their god or gods interact in the temporal course of events. In historical narrative only human actors have parts. Appeal to divine agency is illegitimate. Thus the composer of epic and the historian are very different in their methods of approach to the materials of history. Yet both are moved by a common impulse in view of their concern with the human and the temporal process. By contrast myth in its purest form is concerned with ‘primordial events’ and seeks static structures of meaning behind or beyond the historical flux.”³

Mesopotamian culture and the Patriarchs.

Abraham and His Milieu

God called Abraham from Ur and made a unique covenant with him. The record also indicates that the main center of Patriarchal activity before coming to Palestine was Haran (Aram-Nahariam, Gen. 24:10. Padan-Aram, Deut. 26:5). Many of the place names in the region of Haran are tied in with Abrahamic history: Serug, Nahor, Terah.⁴

Culture at Nuzu

“Nuzi [sometimes Nuzu], modern Yorghan Tepe, about 9 miles south-west of Arrapha, modern Kirkuk, in the eastern hill-country of ancient Assyria, was excavated (1925-31) by the American Schools of Oriental Research in Baghdad, first with the Iraq Museum and later with Harvard University, under the direction of E. Chiera, R. H. Pfeiffer, and R. F. S. Starr. The settlement, originating before 3000 B.C., had, c. 2200 B.C., an Akkadian population and was called Gasur, but by 1500 B.C. its name was Nuzi and its population mainly Hurrian. The ruins, including a temple in seven levels, a palace, with some painted rooms, and many private houses, contained pottery, and other small objects. Most important, however, were some 4,000 cuneiform tablets dating c. 1500-1400 B.C. and written in Akkadian influenced by Hurrian vocabulary and idioms.”⁵ While the dates of these tablets are considerably later than the date for Abraham (c. 2000 B.C., though critical scholars would date the patriarchs, if they even existed, in the middle of the second millennium), the fact that the patriarchal narratives have more in common with these data than with those later in Israelite history, makes their discussion pertinent to patriarchal studies. Kitchen’s excellent little work defends the patriarchal authenticity and deals with the parallels. He also argues that the Hurrian influence has been exaggerated. Many of these parallels are found in Mesopotamia in general.⁶

Filial adoption

The purpose of this adoption was to provide a childless couple with care in their old age and the performance of religious rites in exchange for an inheritance. This seems to fit the action of Abraham in connection with Eliezer as a “son of his house” who would inherit from Abraham (Gen. 15:2-4).⁷ Weir also includes the adoption of someone into a family without sons. He believes the Jacob and Laban situation fits this description.⁸

Teraphim

The Teraphim stolen by Rachel were once assumed to represent property ownership.⁹ Kitchen believes this is a fallacious identification. He believes she took them for her own protection and blessing.¹⁰

Birthright

The importance of the birthright is stressed at Nuzi. “A double share by the principal son, normally the eldest natural son, as is definitely prescribed in Deut. xxi. 15ff.”¹¹ At Nuzi, an eldest son might be demoted as was Reuben.

Blessings/oaths

Kitchen downplays the significance of blessing-oaths at Nuzi and of the idea of selling a birthright.¹² In other words, he does not believe the Nuzi material is parallel.¹³

Conclusion

Weir concludes his discussion by saying, “The Nuzi documents do not mention any Old Testament incident or personage, nor do they indicate with certainty that any of Israel’s ancestors ever lived in or visited Mesopotamia. Their fifteenth-century provenance cannot accurately date patriarchal traditions since the customs they portray may have originated much earlier and may have persisted in Palestine until the monarchial period. They reveal, however, that the social customs, much of the terminology, and many of the personal names in the Pentateuch and elsewhere in the Old Testament were those current in parts of the Near East during the second millennium B.C., and to that extent they validate Israelite tradition.”¹⁴

Van Seters has led the way in trying to destroy the edifice built up in the Albright era supporting the historicity of the patriarchs. Kitchen has shown that Van Seters’ attempts to tie the patriarchal stories into the first millennium are unsuccessful.¹⁵

Culture and the Mosaic Era

Albright¹⁶ defends the general historicity of the Book of Exodus, though he believes the patriarchs were polytheistic. In so far as Moses is concerned, he makes the following observations:

“It is absurd to deny that Moses founded the Israelite religious system. He was a Hebrew born in Egypt, raised under Egyptian influence. Egyptian slave labor, Rameses, topography of eastern delta, Sinai peninsula fits, etc.”

“The Name YHWH was revealed only to Moses--Exodus 6:1; 3:14. ‘He causes to be.” Yahweh asher yihweh. Beside this fuller form there was also a normally abbreviated form Yahu (the jussive form of the imperfect causative which appears as Yahweh), which is found in all early personal names (shortened in northern Israel to -yau- and after the Exile to -yah). There is no non-Israelite name which has been put forth as an antecedent to this name which can be adequately defended. Elephantine = yaho.” Pettinato tentatively believes he has found a “ya” ending on names.¹⁷ [However, the biblical account in Exodus 3 seems to indicate a qal, the simple form].¹⁸

“An original characteristic of the Israelite God was that he stood alone, no family connections. The Sons of God (Angels and Israelites) were so by creation.”

He was not restricted to any abode. No exact spot.

Anthropomorphic--but the body was always clothed in the Kabod.

Aniconic aspect--nothing to prove Israel ever depicted God. He argues that even the calves of the northern Israel were pedestals for Jehovah.

A sacrificial system was a part of the practice of all Asiatics and particularly imbedded in Semitic thought (cf. Genesis 4).

Law codes were common to Semites (cf. Ur-Nammu and Hammurabi). The striking peculiarity of Israel is that they were commanded not to sin because Yahweh so wills it. There is a moral-ethical element present here that is not present in the other law codes of antiquity.

Was Moses a monotheist? “If by that we mean one who teaches the existence of only one God, the creator of everything, the source of justice, who is equally powerful in Egypt, Palestine and in the desert, who has no sexuality, and no mythology, who is human in form, but cannot be seen by human eye, and cannot be represented in any human form--then the founder of Yahwehism was certainly a monotheist.”¹⁹

The Bible, of course, does not begin monotheism with Moses. The majestic opening of the Bible with Bereshit …Elohim, “In the beginning God . . .” is not simply a Mosaic or later religious thought which has developed through the intellectual process of man, but is a statement of fact. Whether we speak of the time of Abraham (2000 B.C.) or of Moses (1500 B.C.) there is nothing in the surrounding situation which is conducive to monotheism. Crass polytheism has had a long history in the Mesopotamian valley when God calls Abraham out of it. The Canaanite religion as graphically depicted in the Ugaritic literature as well as in the archaeological finds is virulently hostile to monotheism. The only logical conclusion at which one can arrive is that monotheism comes only through divine revelation in a miraculous manner. If this could have happened in the time of Moses, it could have happened in the time of Abraham and, of course, did happen in the time of Adam. Historical study simply will not support the evolutionary hypothesis as an explanation of the development of monotheism.²⁰

Ancient law codes and the Mosaic law

Ur-Nammu. Sumerian (212-2095)ANET, Supplement p. 523.

Laws of Eshnunna--ANE, p. 133 (c. 2000 B.C.) Discovered at Susa around A.D. 1900. It is Amorite and was apparently carried there.

Code of Hammurabi--ANE, p. 138ff (c. 1700 B.C.) Laws found at Ebla antedate Ur-Nammu and Hammurabi by centuries.

Compare the following:

	Hammurabi	Bible
Law #	1	Exod. 23:103; Deut. 5:20; 19:16-21
	8	Lev. 19:11, 13; Exod. 20:15; Deut. 5:19; 22:1-4
	14	Exod. 21:16; Deut. 24:7
	21	Exod. 22:2-3
	24	Deut. 21:1ff
	60	Lev. 19:23-25
	117	Exod. 21:2-11; Deut. 15:12-18
	120	Exod. 22:7-9
	129	Deut. 22:22
	130	Deut. 22:23-27
	154	Lev. 18:6-18; 20:10-21; Deut. 27:20-23
	195	Exod. 21:15
	196ff	Exod. 21:23-25; Lev. 24:19-20; Deut. 19:21
	209	Exod. 21:22-25
	250	Exod. 21:28-36
	266	Exod. 22:10ff

Note that only 16 out of 282 of Hammurabi’s laws bear resemblance to the biblical laws and these are usually quite general. Why are there similarities? Common institutions: marriage, government, private ownership, etc. Common problems: death, murder, theft, slavery, etc. It should be extremely unusual if there were not many points of similarity. Why are there differences? There is no need here even to discuss a common heritage as in the case of the flood. The Mosaic Law was divinely instituted. It was theocratic government as opposed to civil government in the other nations. There was no doubt utilization of many things already practiced by the people, but there is no borrowing from Mesopotamia here.²¹

The Sacrificial System

The origin and explanation of the sacrificial system in the Bible are very vague. Animal sacrifice appears to be taken for granted in Chapter 4 of Genesis, but its origin and significance are simply assumed. Animal sacrifice is part of all the ancient religious systems. (At Ugarit the Shelem [peace] and Asham [guilt] offerings have been identified)²² We can assume from Genesis 4 that God instituted animal sacrifices and explained to Adam their significance. This information was preserved by Noah but perverted and misunderstood by his descendants. The instruction to Moses, then, is taking at least some things which are familiar to the people and placing them in their true perspective.

The Sanctuary

Many have argued and some still do, that the tabernacle is nothing but the later temple anachronistically placed in the time of Moses. Few would hold that today even though the antiquity of the details would be denied.²³

Some link the ark with a portable shrine as used by the Arabs.²⁴ This illustrates the attempt by many to find every possible link with identifiable objects in history, however tenuous, based on a philosophy of no supernatural revelations.²⁵

The Canaanites and Israel²⁶

The term Canaanite is historically, geographically and culturally synonymous with the Phoenicians. Canaanite refers to a northwest Semitic people and culture of western Syria and Palestine before the 12th century B.C., and the term Phoenician refers to the same people and culture after that.

The Canaanites played an important part in history of civilization. In 3-2 millennium, they bridged the gap between Egypt and Mesopotamia, and to them we no doubt owe much of the slow, but constant transfusion of culture which we find in the ancient near east.

Forced out of Palestine and most of Syria in the 13th and 12th centuries, the Phoenicians turned their energies seaward and became the great mariners and traders of all time.

The Greeks attribute their achievements in the arts of peace to them (cf. also writing).

Inscription and Grammar Work--chiefly Gesenius

Renan--1860-61 cf. Pritchard.

Byblos--Montet--Dunand (1921- )

Ugarit--Schaeffer (1929- )

Khadattu (Arslan Tash) Thureau Dangin (1928)

Hamath (Orontes) Ingholt (1931-38)

Plains of Antioch (McEwan) (1932-37) (Around Orontes)

Mari--Parrot (1933- )

Alalakh-Wooley (1936-39)

Ugarit

Schaeffer, Excavation; C. H. Gordon--Texts.²⁷ There were at least two consonantal alphabetic scripts which had been devised by the Canaanites. The cuneiform alphabet was used at Ugarit. The other was a direct progenitor of later Phoenician. They were also familiar with Akkadian, Egyptian hieroglyphics and Byblian syllabic characters (this is a hieroglyphic form syllabary in use toward the end of the third millennium B.C.--used to write a very early form of Canaanite).

Canaanite Culture

Among other reasons it did not reach a greater height was that it had a low religious level. The Canaanites had a primitive mythology. Their religion contained the most demoralizing cultic practices then existing in the near east. Human sacrifice, sacred prostitution, eunuch priests, serpent worship, brutal mythology.

Literature

The relation of Ugaritic to the Old Testament has been demonstrated but over-extended by Dahood especially. For a more conservative treatment, see Craige in Word Biblical Commentary Psalms.

Phoenicians

They spread the Canaanite culture, religion, language and alphabet all over the Mediterranean area.²⁸ They established colonies as far as Spain.²⁹ They founded Carthage (Qart-hadasht—new town, hence, several names like this). Tarshish—Smelting plant (several), Moloch--idol. Child sacrifice. For example, a stele (55 x 12 cm.) was found in a field of stelae and Urns with offering remains mostly of children in Carthage. Donner & Rollig #79. “To the Lady, to Tanat the face of Baal and to the Lords to Baal Hamon; This is what Canami slave of Eshmunamas son of Baalyatan vowed--his flesh . . .” (My translation, 3rd century, B.C.). The rest concerns warnings to those who would disturb the stone.³⁰ Albright agrees with O. Eissfeldt that “molek was a sacrificial term and not the name of a Canaanite divinity. Punic molk and Heb. molek (vocalized correctly by MT) are in fact the same word, and both refer to a sacrifice which was, for Phoenicians and Hebrews alike, the most awe-inspiring of all possible sacred acts--whether it was considered as holy or as an abomination.”³¹

The Contacts with Paganism during the Time of the Judges

In the Canaanite religion El is the head of the pantheon. He has been displaced by Baal as Chronos was by Zeus. He probably declined in relative prominence during the period 2500-1500 B.C. He was still worshipped, however, at local shrines and his name is retained in El Elyon and El Olam. His wife seems to be Asherah (Ashirat in Ugaritic literature). Her longer name is “the Lady who treads on the Sea (dragon).” She is the foe of Baal and his wife/sister Anath. The word Asherah is usually translated grove (Judges 3:7) in KJV since the symbol of her presence was a sacred tree or pole.³² Mot killed Baal and took him to the underworld. Anath freed him after a violent struggle with Mot. Anath was also called the Queen of Heaven. These gods were sadistic and sexual.³³ Amos and Hosea inveigh against this religious system which had completely permeated the northern kingdom.

The most important offspring of this “couple” is Baal. Baal is really a title. The names of Baal include Zabul (the exalted), Lord of Earth, Rider of the Clouds, Lord of Heaven. Baal-zebul (not zebub) in Ekron. Beelzebub is a title for Satan in the New Testament. He is also called Hadad (cf. Ben-Hadad in Scripture). The idea of Yahweh being Baal was once accepted and people named their children thusly. However, this is later looked on with disfavor because of Baal worship and these names are changed, e.g., Ishbaal = Ishbosheth (bosheth--shame).³⁴

Ashtoreth (Astarte) is mentioned quite frequently in the Old Testament. It is not clear whether she is the wife of Baal. In any event she is the goddess of love and the Egyptians called her and Anath, goddesses who conceive but do not bear (cf. Deut. 28:4 where ashtaroth means fruit of flocks). In Phoenician Palestine Astarte grew in importance while Anath became hidden under various appellations. Her name was later fused in Aramaic as Atargatis. The Queen of Heaven, Venus, Diana, Aphrodite and Mary are all part of the virgin cult originating in the earliest days of man’s apostasy.

Dagon is a grain god who is the son of El and father of Baal in Ugaritic literature. References in Judges: Baalim, 2:11; Baal, 2:13; 10:6; Ashtoreth, 2:13; 10:6; Groves, 3:7; Altar of Baal and Grove by it, 6:25; Ephod, 8:27; Baal-berith, 8:33; house of Baal-berith, 9:4; Men of Hamor? 9:28; house of their god, 9:27; Gods of Syria, Sidon, Moab, Ammon, Philistines, 10:6; Chemosh, 11:24; Dagon, 16:23; ephod, teraphim, graven image, molten image, 18:14.

The Baal cycle portrayed in ANET, pp. 129-142 is the seasonal cycle in which Baal breeds, dies and is later revived. The sexual activity pictured in the literature was carried out in practice by the people. Small wonder God condemned the religion of the Canaanites and the later prophets inveighed against it. This kind of culture can only degrade.³⁵

---

¹As indicated above, an important work on this subject is John H. Walton, Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament.

²F. M. Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel, p. viii.

³Ibid., is it possible that this discussion has bearing on the current debate about contextualization of the Gospel in the missions? Does one not need to be able to distinguish between culture as a neutral issue and culture that is antithetical to the biblical revelation?

⁴J. Kelso, Archaeology and Our Old Testament Contemporaries, p. 19.

⁵C. J. Mullo Weir, “Nuzi” in AOTS, p. 73. The following discussion is based primarily on this essay.

⁶K. Kitchen, The Bible in Its World. See Provan, et al., A Biblical History of Israel, p. 115 for a recent discussion of Nuzi and the Patriarchs.

⁷Ibid., p. 70 and Weir, “Nuzi,” p. 73.

⁸Ibid.

⁹C. H. Gordon, “Biblical Customs and the Nuzu Tablets,” Biblical Archaeologist 3.1 (1940): 1-12.

¹⁰K. Kitchen, The Bible in Its World, p. 70.

¹¹Weir, “Nuzi,” p. 76.

¹²Ibid., pp. 76-77.

¹³Kitchen, The Bible in Its World, p. 76.

¹⁴Weir, “Nuzi,” p. 83.

¹⁵Ibid., see J. Van Seters, “The Problem of Childlessness in Near Eastern Law and the Patriarchs of Israel,” JBL 87 (1968): 401-8 (See f.n. 2 for a list of Nuzi text publications); Abraham in History and Tradition, 1975.

¹⁶W. F. Albright, SATC.

¹⁷K. Kitchen, The Bible in Its World, p.47.

¹⁸Cf. Segal, Pentateuch, only the meaning is revealed, not the name at this time. Cf. also John Day “Religion of Canaan” in Anchor Bible Dictionary 1:834, who agrees with me on the Qal form.

¹⁹Albright, SATC, p. 272. Albright’s point of view, of course, has been completely rejected by modern secular writers. The data has not changed; only the interpretation.

²⁰Cf. Albright’s own views on the evolution of religion, Ibid., pp. 170ff. He quotes with favor anthropologist Fr. Schmidt (Ursprung der Gottsidee) who argues that the existence of “high” gods among present primitive peoples points to monotheism. At least, he says, Schmidt has disproved the fetishism-polytheism-monotheism approach.

²¹See Walton, Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament, p. 293 for a comparison.

²²W. F. Albright, Archaeology and the Religion of Israel, p. 59.

²³See Albright, Archaeology and the Religion of Israel.

²⁴See Wright, BA, chapter 7.

²⁵For further reading from a critical point of view see Eissfeldt, The Old Testament an Introduction, Wright, Biblical Archaeology, Albright, Archaeology and the Religion of Israel, and SATC, DeVaux, History of Israel. From an evangelical point of view, see Walton, Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament.

²⁶See W. F. Albright, Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan. Also “The Role of the Canaanites in the History of Civilization” in BANE. See also F. M Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic. More recently J. Van Seters, In Search of History and Jonathan N. Tubb, Canaanites in Peoples of the Past.

²⁷See ANET.

²⁸For a further discussion, see A. Mazar, Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, pp. 356-57.

²⁹See J. G. Scheuer, “Searching for the Phoenicians in Sardinia,” BAR 16:1 (1990) 53-60.

³⁰Carthage was traditionally founded in 814 B.C., although nothing prior to 750 B.C. has been found archaeologically (time of Uzziah). The Carthaginians became famous in history through the Punic (corruption of Phoenician) Wars (264-241, 218-201, 149-146). Carthage was destroyed during the final war.

³¹W. F. Albright, Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan, p. 236. But see also Diana Edelman, “Biblical Molek Reassessed,” JAOS 107 (1987) 727-31. For child sacrifice at Carthage see Stager and Wolf, “Child Sacrifice at Carthage, BAR 10/1 (1984) 37-51 and Patricia Smith, “Infants Sacrificed? The Tale Teeth Tell,” BAR 40/4 (2014) 54-56, 68.

³²See “Queries & Comments,” BAR 40:3 (2014) 8 for the debate on this meaning between Dever and Lipinski.

³³ANET, p. 139, h.I AB.

³⁴Cf. Hosea 2:16, “You will call me Ishi (my man) and you will no longer call me Baali (my husband).

³⁵Source for this discussion: Ernest. R Lacheman, Studies on the Civilization and Culture of Nuzi and the Hurrians.

Early Period—2000-1800.

The homeland of Assyria was in the northeast corner of the Fertile Crescent where the Tigris River flows southward across the plains, and the mountains of Kurdistan loom up in the background. The city which gave its name to the country and empire, even as it took its own name from the national god, was Ashur. It was located strategically on a low bluff on the right bank of the Tigris at a place now called Qalat Sharqat (cf. Gen. 10, Nimrod).¹

Assyria first appeared historically after the time of the Kingdom of Accad to whose sphere of influence it had belonged (2300-2100 B.C., but this early period is vague). The Assyrians had colonies in Asia Minor where they carried on extensive trade (see the Cappadocian Tablets and the unit on the Hittites—see the tablet at ANE #56). These were interrupted by the rise of the Hittite state. There is a governor from the neo-Sumerian period ruling in Assyria (2000-1900 B.C.).

The Old Kingdom--1800-1700.

The Old Kingdom centers on the person of Shamshi-Adad I (1813-1781 B.C.).² He had inherited a territory near Mari with which he came into conflict. He may have moved against Babylon. At any rate, he captured a town on the Tigris River which opened up Assyria to him. Assyria had just regained her independence from the south. From his Assyrian throne, he moved west and eventually conquered Mari. The whole of upper Mesopotamia was now in his control and the Cappadocian colonies began to show renewed activity. His son, Ishme-Dagon, was able to retain only Assyria. Mari fell back to the original Amorite dynasty through Zimrilim.

Hammurabi conquered Mari and perhaps Assyria and began the Old Babylonian Empire.

The Period of Decline--1700-1300 B.C.

During this period, Assyria was dominated by others. Mitanni seems to have controlled Assyria (see Unit 9 for Mitanni). Mitanni was defeated by the Hittites (1380-1340 B.C.), and thus the Assyrians were free to resume their expansion.

The Middle Kingdom--1300-1100 B.C.

The Middle Assyrian Kingdom arose in the 14th and 13th centuries. It was reconstituted about 1100 B.C. Names appear here which are better known in the New Assyrian Kingdom: Ashur-uballit (I), Adad-nirari (I), Shalmaneser (I), Tiglath-Pileser (I). There was a decline from 1100 to 900 B.C.³

The New Kingdom--900-600 B.C.

Assyria rose to the height of its power at the time of the New Kingdom. The Assyrians subjugated all of Mesopotamia, including Babylonia, and the border regions. They also extended their rule over a part of Asia Minor, all Syria, and, for a while, even over Egypt.

The rise of the New Assyrian Kingdom began in the 9th century under the kings Ashurnasirpal II (884-859 B.C.) and Shalmaneser III (859-824 B.C.) who energetically advanced as far as middle Syria without being able to establish lasting control there.

Then the succession of the great Assyrian conquerors began with Tiglath-Pileser III (745-727 B.C.). They conquered Syria and Palestine, as well as other lands, and undertook frequent campaigns there. They include Shalmaneser V (727-722 B.C.), Sargon II (722-705 B.C.), Sennacherib (705-681 B.C.), and Esarhaddon (681-669 B.C.ANE#121) who undertook several campaigns against Egypt and occupied the Delta and the old royal city of Memphis.

The last goal of Assyrian expansion, the overthrow of Egypt, was brought very close. Esarhaddon’s son and successor, Ashurbanipal (669-631 B.C.), could indeed still garrison the upper Egyptian royal city of Thebes, but, under him, the Egyptian adventure soon came to an end, and the decline of the Assyrian might began.

This decline came about swiftly under his successors. In 612 B.C., the Assyrian capital city of Nineveh fell to a combined attack of the Medes and Neo-Babylonians. In Mesopotamia, and in Syro-Palestine, the Neo-Babylonian Empire then succeeded the Assyrian Kingdom.

Major Assyrian Kings in the New Kingdom.

Ninth Century

Ashur-nasir-pal II (884-859 B.C.)ANE 1 #118).

He established a ferocious reputation. His capital was at Calneh (Nimrud).⁴ Layard excavated simultaneously at Calneh and Nineveh. Most of his work was done at the acropolis. The outstanding discovery was the palace of Ashur-nasir-pal II. It contained huge winged bulls and human figures. The black obelisk of Shalmaneser III was discovered here in December, 1846. (It was almost lost at sea in a storm.)

Shalmaneser III (859-825 B.C.ANE#155).

Sixth year (853 B.C.). “In the year of (the eponym) Daian-Ashur, in the month Aiaru, the 14th day, I departed from Nineveh. I crossed the Tigris and approached the towns of Giammu on the river Balih…I departed from Aleppo and approached the two towns of Irhuleni from Hamath. I departed from Argana and approached the city of Karkara. I destroyed, tore down and burned down Karkara, his royal residence. He brought along to help him 1,200 chariots, 1,200 cavalrymen, 20,000 foot soldiers of Hadad-ezer of Damascus, 700 chariots, 700 cavalrymen, 10,000 foot soldiers of Irhulei from Hamath, 2,000 chariots, 10,000 foot soldiers of Ahab, the Israelite, 500 soldiers from Que, 1,000 soldiers from Musri, 1000 chariots, 10,000 soldiers from Irqanata, 200 soldiers of Matinu-ba’lu from Arvad, 200 soldiers from Usanata, 30 chariots, 10,000 soldiers of Adunu-ba’lu from Shian, 1,000 camel-(rider)s of Gindibu’, from Arabia [. . .],000 soldiers of Ba’sa, son of Ruhub, from Ammon‑-(all together) these were twelve kings. They rose against me [for a] decisive battle. I fought with them with (the support of) the mighty forces of Ashur, which Ashur, my lord, has given to me, and the strong weapons which Nergal, my leader, has presented to me, (and) I did inflict a defeat upon them between the towns Karkara and Gilzau. I slew 14,000 of their soldiers with the sword, descending upon them like Adad when he makes a rainstorm pour down. I spread their corpses (everywhere), filling the entire plain with their widely scattered (fleeing) soldiers. During the battle I made their blood flow down the hur-pa-lu of the district.”⁵

This battle is not mentioned in the Bible. These twelve kings decided that they needed to put a stop to the westward expansion of the Assyrians. Ahab of Israel and Hadad-ezer of Damascus, normally bitter enemies, joined the coalition as allies. Shalmaneser claimed complete victory, but it was several years before he returned.⁶ Kitchen believes the “Musri” are Egyptians.⁷ This would be a token force in support of Byblos, an ally of Egypt. Since Ahab’s two sons ruled 12 years (parts of years combined), and Jehu paid tribute in 841 B.C. to Shalmaneser, Ahab must have died in 853.⁸ His death occurred when he resumed hostilities with Damascus over Ramoth-Gilead (1 Kings 22).

On Shalmaneser’s black obelisk is a depiction of Jehu bowing down to Shalmaneser to pay his tribute (ANE 1 #100A, B). “The tribute of Jehu, son of Omri; I received from him silver, gold, a golden saplu-bowl, a golden vase with pointed bottom, golden tumblers, golden buckets, tin, a staff for a king, (and) wooden puruhtu”⁹ Since Jehu’s payment of tribute can be dated by Assyrian chronology to 841 B.C., these two dates become the last year of Ahab and the first of Jehu.

Adad Nirari III (810-783 B.C.)

Jehoahaz was ruling in the north and Joash in the south. “In the fifth year (of my official rule) I sat down solemnly on my royal throne and called up the country (for war). I ordered the numerous army of Assyria to march against Palestine. I crossed the Euphrates at its flood. As to the numerous hostile kings who had rebelled in the time of my father Shamshi-Adad (V) and had wi[th held] their regular (tributes)…I received all the tributes […] which they brought to Assyria. I (then) ordered [to march] against the country Damascus. I invested Mari’ in Damascus [and he surrendered]. One hundred talents of gold (corresponding to) one thousand talents of [silver], 60 talents…[I received as his tribute].”¹⁰

This battle, likewise, is not recorded in the Bible, but it has far-reaching effects on the future of both Judah and Israel. We read in 2 Kings 13:7, during Jehu’s son Jehoahaz’ rule, ‘For he left to Jehoahaz of the army not more than fifty horsemen and ten chariots and 10,000 footmen, for the king of Aram had destroyed them and made them like the dust at threshing.”

The crushing of Damascus by Adad Nirari removed the dreaded Aramean oppression and allowed a renascence of Israel and Judah. Under Jeroboam II in the North and Uzziah (Azariah) in the south (both with long reigns) there was great prosperity.¹¹ During this period of prosperity, Hosea and Amos preached against the violations of the covenant and promised that God’s punishment would be the captivity.

Eighth Century

Tiglath-pileser III (745-727 B.C. ANE#119)

This monarch brought Assyria to new life. Isaiah, in chapter 1, uses language to describe the state of Judah that sounds as though they have undergone a siege. “Your land is desolate, your cities are burned with fire, your fields—strangers are devouring them in your presence; it is desolation as overthrown by strangers” (Isaiah 1:7). Isaiah began his ministry in the last days of Uzziah (Isaiah 6 may be inaugural; in which case, the call would have come in the same year Uzziah/Azariah died. 2 Chron. 26:22 says that Isaiah wrote “Acts of Uzziah.” This could have been done after Uzziah’s death, but more likely would have come during some of the life of Uzziah. Thus, I would say “in the last days of Uzziah.”). The question is of what devastation does this speak? Tadmor argues that the reference in Tiglath-pileser’s annals to a certain Azirau from Juda can only refer to our Azariah/Uzziah.¹² Some scholars reject the equation, but Tadmor’s arguments are cogent. How could there be two Judah’s and two Azariah’s from the very same period?

Tiglath-pileser says “[In] the (subsequent) course of my campaign [I received] the tribute of the kin[gs…A]zriau from Iuda in…countless, (reaching) sky high…eyes, like from heaven…by means of an attack with foot soldiers…He heard [about the approach of the] massed [armies of] Ashur and was afraid…. I tore down, destroyed and burnt [down …for Azr]iau they had annexed, they (thus) had reinforced him…like vine/trunks…was very difficult…was barred and high …was situated and its exit…I made deep…I surrounded his garrisons [with earthwork], against…I made them carry [the corvee-basket] and…his great…like a pot [I did crush…] (lacuna of three lines)…Azriau…a royal palace of my own [I built in his city…] tribute like that [for Assyrian citizens I imposed upon them . . .] the city Kul[lani…] his ally…the cities…19 districts belonging to Hamath and the cities in their vicinity which are (situated) at the coast of the Western Sea and which they had (unlawfully) taken away for Azariau, I restored to the territory of Assyria. An officer of mine I installed as governor over them. [I deported] 30,300 inhabitants from their cities and settled them in the province of the town Ku[…]; 1,223 inhabitants I settled in the province of the Ullaba country.”¹³

Of King Menahem of Israel, the Bible says, “There came against the land Pul [Tiglath-Pileser III],¹⁴ the King of Assyria, and Menahem gave Pul a thousand talents of silver, that his hand be with him to confirm the kingdom in his hand” (2 Kings 15:19). Tiglath-Pileser III’s annals say, “[As for Menahem, I ov]erwhelmed him [like a snowstorm] and he…fled like a bird, alone, [and bowed to my feet (?)]. I returned him to his place [and imposed tribute upon him, to wit:] gold, silver, etc. Israel [Omri land], all its inhabitants (and) their possessions I led to Assyria.”¹⁵

Ahaz was attacked by Syria and Ephraim, probably around 735, when he first came to the throne. This coalition first began to threaten Judah in the latter days of Jotham, Ahaz’ father. The usual interpretation is that Syria and Ephraim are forming an anti-Assyrian coalition and do not dare leave their southern flank uncommitted. Consequently, they planned to put a certain “Ben Tabel” on the throne.¹⁶

The chronology is difficult. Kings (2 Kings 16:5) tells us that Rezin and Pekah waged war on Jerusalem, but could not conquer him. Chronicles (2 Chron. 28:5-15) tells us that there was a tremendous slaughter of Jews and that 200,000 were taken captive. They were subsequently released under the prophecy of a certain Oded. Further, Isaiah 7:1-3 tells us that word has come back to Ahaz that “Syria is resting on Ephraim.” This indicates a coalition and apparently further action against Jerusalem. It was at this point that Isaiah confronted Ahaz and challenged him to trust in Yahweh, but Ahaz has already made up his mind to go to Assyria (2 Kings 16:7-9). This meant that Ahaz and Judah became vassals of Assyria and also subordinated themselves to the gods of Assyria. The sequence of events must have been something like this: a major attack was made against the fortified cities of Judah with devastating results (much as when Sennacherib came west in 701 B.C.). However, the goal of defeating Jerusalem and Ahaz directly so as to put an anti-Assyrian on the throne failed. Consequently, Syria and Ephraim had decided to come back later to complete the task. This was what frightened Ahaz and his advisers so badly that they sent to Tiglath-pileser for help.¹⁷

Tiglath-pileser gladly responded. He says, “I laid siege to and conquered the town Hadara the inherited property of Rezon of Damascus [the place where] he was born. I brought away as prisoners 800 (of its) inhabitants with their possessions…their large (and) small cattle…of the 16 districts of the country of Damascus I destroyed (making them look) like hills of (ruined cities over which) the flood (had swept)…Israel…all its inhabitants (and) their possessions I led to Assyria. They overthrew their king Pekah and I placed Hoshea as king over them. I received from them 10 talents of gold, 1000(?) talents of silver as their [tri]bute and brought them to Assyria.”¹⁸ This took place after his ninth year or after 736 B.C.

The Bible says (2 Kings 15:29-30), “In the days of Pekah king of Israel Tiglath-pileser king of Assyria came and captured Ijon, Abel-beth-maacah, Jaoah, Kedesh, Haor, Gilead, and Galilee, all the land of Naphtali; and he carried the people captive to Assyria. Then Hoshea the son of Elah made a conspiracy against Pekah the son of Remaliah ad struck him down, and slew him and reigned in his stead.”

Shalmaneser V (727-722 B.C.)

Hoshea sat on the Israelite throne at the pleasure of Assyria. Under Tiglath-pileser’s successor (Shalmaneser V), Hoshea foolishly refused to send tribute to Assyria and turned to a certain “So” of Egypt (2 Kings 17:1-4). “And the king of Assyria found conspiracy in Hoshea; for he had sent messengers to So king of Egypt, and offered no present to the king of Assyria, as he had done year by year” (2 Kings 17:3-4). “And it came to pass…that Shalmaneser king of Assyria came up against Samaria, and besieged it. And at the end of three years they took it…and the king of Assyria carried Israel away unto Assyria, and put them in Halah…and in the cities of the Medes” (2 Kings 18:9-11).

There is much debate about the identity of this Egyptian, but see my notes on Osorkon where Kitchen believes that “So” is an abbreviation for Osorkon. Whoever he was, he was in no position to oppose Assyria, and Hoshea was left twisting in the wind. Shalmaneser apparently began the siege, and Sargon II finished it when Shalmaneser died.

Sargon II (722-705 B.C.ANE 1 #120)

Sargon says, “(Property of Sargon, etc., king of Assyria, etc.) conqueror of Samaria and of the entire (country of) Israel who despoiled Ashdod (and) Shinuhti, who caught the Greeks who (live on islands) in the sea, like fish, who exterminated Kasku, all Tabali and Cilicia, who chased away Midas king of Musku, who defeated Musur in Rapihu, who declared Hanno, king of Gaza, as booty, who subdued the seven kings of the country Ia’, a district on Cyprus, (who) dwell (on an island) in the sea, at (a distance of) a seven-day journey.” “I besieged and conquered Samaria, led away as booty 27,290 inhabitants of it. I formed from among them a contingent of 50 chariots and made remaining (inhabitants) assume their (social) positions. I installed over them an officer of mine and imposed upon them the tribute of the former king. Hanno, king of Gaza and also Sib’e, the turtan of Egypt set out from Rapihu against me to deliver a decisive battle. I defeated them; Sib’e ran away, afraid when he (only) heard the noise of my (approaching) army, and has not been seen again. Hanno, I captured personally.”¹⁹ Sargon’s claim to have defeated Samaria agrees with neither the biblical data nor Shalmaneser V’s annals. As Finegan suggests, Sargon may have come to the throne on the heels of the defeat of Samaria and carried out the deportation begun by Shalmaneser V.²⁰

In 711 B.C. Sargon put down a rebellion in Ashdod. Shabako, the Nubian, was ruling Egypt at that time. Isaiah used this incident to show Judah the utter futility of expecting Egypt to give them help against Assyria. “Even as My servant Isaiah has gone naked and barefoot three years as a sign and a token against Egypt and Cush, so the king of Assyria will lead away the captives of Egypt and the exiles of Cush, young and old, naked and barefoot with buttocks uncovered, to the shame of Egypt. Then they shall be dismayed and ashamed because of Cush their hope and Egypt their boast. So the inhabitants of this coastland will say in that day, ‘Behold, such is our hope, where we fled for help to be delivered from the king of Assyria; and we, how shall we escape?’” (Isaiah 20:3-6). Sargon’s description is quite vivid and shows that Judah was conspiring (under Hezekiah) to throw off the Assyrian yoke.²¹

Seventh Century

Sennacherib (705-681 B.C.)

Sennacherib ruled at the end of the eighth century and beginning of the seventh. The northern kingdom exists no more and Hezekiah is on the throne in Judah as an unwilling vassal of Sennacherib. (2 Kings 18, ANEP. 200; for Lachish, see ANE 1 #101). Isaiah has been trying to get the Judeans to trust in Yahweh for deliverance, and that is what happened in 701 B.C. when Sennacherib came west to put down a concerted rebellion.

“In my third campaign I marched against Hatti, Luli, king of Sidon, whom the terror‑inspiring glamor of my lordship had overwhelmed, fled far overseas and perished. The awe‑inspiring splendor of the ‘Weapon’ of Ashur, my lord, overwhelmed his strong cities (such as) Great Sidon, Little Sidon, Bit Zitti, Zaribru, Mahalliba, Ushu (i.e. the mainland settlement of Tyre), Akzib (and) Akko, (all) his fortress cities, walled (and well) provided with feed and water for his garrisons, and they bowed in submission to my feet. I installed Ethba’al upon the throne to be their king and imposed upon him tribute (due) to me (as his) overlord (to be paid) annually without interruption.

“As to all the kings of Amurru—Menahem from Samsimuruna, Tuba’lu from Sidon, Abdili’ti from Arvad, Urumilki from Byblos, Mitinti from Ashdod, Buduili from Beth‑Ammon, Kammusunadbi from Moab (and) Aiarammu from Edom, they brought sumptuous gifts and—fourfold—their heavy ( ) presents to me and kissed my feet. Sidqia, however, king of Ashkelon, who did not bow to my yoke, I deported and sent to Assyria, his family‑gods, himself, his wife, his children, his brothers, all the male descendants of his family. I set Sharruludari, son of Rukibtu, their former king, over the inhabitants of Ashkelon and imposed upon him the payment of tribute (and of) ( ) presents (due) to me (as) overlord—and he (now) pulls the straps (of my yoke)!

“In the continuation of my campaign I besieged Beth‑Dagon, Joppa, Banai‑Barka, Azuru, cities belonging to Sidqia who did not bow to my feet quickly (enough); I conquered (them) and carried their spoils away. The officials, the patricians and the (common) people of Ekron—who had thrown Padi, their king, into fetters (because he was) loyal to (his) solemn oath (sworn) by the god Ashur, and had handed him over to Hezekiah, the Jew—

(and) he (Hezekiah) held him in prison, unlawfully, as if he (Padi) be an enemy—had become afraid and had called (for help) upon the kings of Egypt (and) the bowmen, the chariot(‑corps) and the cavalry of the king of Ethiopia, an army beyond counting—and they (actually) had come to their assistance. In the plain of Eltekah, their battle lines were drawn up against me and they sharpened their weapons. Upon a trust(‑inspiring) oracle (given) by Ashur, my lord, I fought with them and inflicted a defeat upon them. In the melee of the battle, I personally captured alive the Egyptian charioteers with the(ir) princes and (also) the charioteers of the king of Ethiopia. I besieged Eltekah (and) Timnah, conquered (them) and carried their spoils away. I assaulted Ekron and killed the officials and patricians who had committed the crime and hung their bodies on poles surrounding the city. The (common) citizens who were guilty of minor crimes, I considered prisoners of war. The rest of them, those who were not accused of crimes and misbehavior, I released. I made Padi, their king, come from Jerusalem and set him as their lord on the throne, imposing upon him the tribute (due) to me (as) overlord. [See map of Battle of Eltekah, p. 132].

“As to Hezekiah, the Jew, he did not submit to my yoke, I laid siege to 46 of his strong cities, walled forts and to the countless small villages in their vicinity, and conquered (them) by means of well‑stamped (earth‑) ramps, and battering‑rams brought (thus) near (to the walls) (combined with) the attack by foot soldiers, (using) mines, breeches as well as sapper work. I drove out (of them) 200,150 people, young and old, male and female, horses, mules, donkeys, camels, big and small cattle beyond counting, and considered (them) booty. Himself I made a prisoner in Jerusalem, his royal residence, like a bird in a cage. I surrounded him with earthwork in order to molest those who were leaving his city’s gate. His towns which I had plundered, I took away from his country and gave them (over) to Mitinti, king of Ashdod, Padi, king of Ekron, and Sillibel, king of Gaza. Thus I reduced his country, but I still increased the tribute and the katru‑presents (due) to me (as his) overlord which I imposed (later) upon him beyond the former tribute, to be delivered annually. Hezekiah himself, whom the terror‑inspiring splendor of my lordship had overwhelmed and whose irregular and elite troops which he had brought into Jerusalem, his royal residence, in order to strengthen (it), had deserted him, did send me, later, to Nineveh, my lordly city together with 30 talents of gold, 800 talents of silver, precious stones, antimony, large cuts of red stone, couches (inlaid) with ivory, nimedu‑chairs (inlaid) with ivory, elephant-hides, ebony‑wood, box‑wood (and) all kinds of valuable treasures, his (own) daughters, concubines, male and female musicians. In order to deliver the tribute and to do obeisance as a slave he sent his (personal) messenger.”²²

There was a battle between Egypt and Sennacherib at Eltekah (see map p. 132.²³ The Egyptians were routed under Taharqa, then a prince not a king, but God routed the Assyrian army supernaturally.

In spite of the evidence of God’s divine deliverance of the city of Jerusalem, Hezekiah decided he must look elsewhere for help. Consequently, he turned to the rising Chaldean group in southern Mesopotamia. They were a part of the Assyrian empire, but these “Bit Yakin” as the Assyrians called them, kept revolting against their overlords. In 702 Merodach-baladan sent messengers to Hezekiah apparently to encourage him to join an anti-Assyrian coalition in the west. (The date is debated. If it is 702, then Hezekiah received the ambassadors prior to Sennacherib’s invasion. Further, the placement of Isaiah 38-39 would point to the Babylonian emphasis of 40-66). Isaiah warns Hezekiah of the futility of his move and speaks of the fall of Babylon in 13-14. I believe, with S. Erlandson that the fall of Babylon in Chapters 13-14 refers to Sennacherib’s attack on Babylon in 689, just about a decade after the visit of the ambassadors.²⁴ Isaiah is showing that leaning on Babylon for help against Assyria will not work, for Assyria will defeat Babylon.²⁵ Sennacherib finally became fed up with this constant rebellion and went south to raze the city. He says, “In my second campaign I advanced swiftly against Babylon, upon whose conquest I had determined, like the oncoming of a storm I broke loose, and I overwhelmed it like a hurricane. I completely invested that city, with mines and engines my hands (took the city), the plunder…his powerful…whether small or great, I left none. With their corpses I filled the city squares (wide places). Shuzubu, king of Babylonia, together with his family and his (nobles) I carried off alive into my land. The wealth of that city,—silver, gold, precious stones, property and goods, I doled out to my people and they made it their own…The city and (its) houses,—foundation and walls, I destroyed, I devastated, I burned with fire. The wall and outer wall, temples and gods, temple-tower of brick and earth, as many as there were, I razed and dumped them into the Arahtu-canal. Through the midst of that city I dug canals; I flooded its site with water, and the very foundations thereof I destroyed. I made its destruction more complete than that by a flood. That in days to come, the site of that city, and (its) temples and gods, might not be remembered, I completely blotted it out with (floods) of water and made it like a meadow.”²⁶

Esarhaddon (681-669)

Esarhaddon became king as a younger brother and had to fight for the throne.²⁷ It would appear that Manasseh, Hezekiah’s son, became a vassal of Assyria. Esarhaddon says, “Ba’lu, king of Tyre, Manasseh, king of Judah…together 22 kings of Hatti, the seashore and the islands; all these I sent out and made them transport under terrible difficulties, to Nineveh, the town (where I exercise) my rulership, as building material for my palace: big logs, etc.”²⁸ Ashurbanipal (668-633) also lists Manasseh as a supporter in his Egyptian war: “Ba’al, king of Tyre, Manasseh, king of Judah…servants who belong to me, brought heavy gifts to me and kissed my feet. I made these kings accompany my army over the land…”²⁹

This vassalage would also include submission to the Assyrian deities which Manasseh did with a passion. His was a long and wicked rule. The Chronicler says, “Therefore, the Lord brought upon them the commanders of the army of the king of Assyria, who took Manasseh with hooks and bound him with fetters of bronze and brought him to Babylon. And when he was in distress he entreated the favor of the Lord his God and humbled himself greatly before the God of his fathers. He prayed to him, and God received his entreaty and heard his supplication and brought him again to Jerusalem into his kingdom. Then Manasseh knew that the Lord was God” (2 Chron. 33:11-13).

Even though this is not recorded in Kings nor in the Assyrian records, as Bright says, “it is quite reasonable to suppose that it rests on a historical basispossibly in connection with the revolt of Shamash-shum-ukin (652-648)…Whether Manasseh was found innocent or was pardoned, as the Egyptian prince Neco had been, we cannot say. But it is quite possible that he was no more loyal to Assyria than he had to be, and would gladly have asserted his independence had he been able.”³⁰

Esarhaddon invaded Egypt in 674 and was defeated. He invaded again in 671 and defeated Taharqa. “From the town of Ishhupri as far as Memphis, his royal residence, a distance of 15 days (march), I fought daily, without interruption, very bloody battles against Tirhakha, king of Egypt and Ethiopia, the one accursed by all the great gods. Five times I hit him with the point of (my) arrows (inflicting) wounds (from which he should) not recover, and (then) I led [sic] siege to Memphis, his royal residence, and conquered it in half a day by means of mines, breaches and assault ladders.”³¹ He set out again in 669 but died on the way.

Ashurbanipal (669-631).

This king may well have been trained as a scholar rather than a king because of his constant boasts about his education. It is that which has produced so much archaeologically, for he gathered the greatest collection of texts known from that period of history. At his palace in Nineveh were found thousands of tablets containing information from many areas of study. It was here that the Gilgamesh epic was found.

Ashurbanipal defeated Egypt and forced a number of kings, including Manasseh, “to accompany my army over the land” in his attack on Egypt. The Assyrians now ruled Egypt completely. Taharqa fled to his Nubian capital, Napata, and Assyria appointed Necho I as a subordinate king. Taharqa’s son Tantamani returned north and reconquered Egypt. Ashurbanipal sent his army back (663) and again routed the Nubians, driving Tantamani back to Napata. They looted Thebes completely (Nahum refers to the fate of No-Amun or Thebes in 3:8-10).

The letter in Ezra 4:10 says, “then wrote Rehum the commander and Shimshaia the scribe and the rest of their colleagues, the judges and the lesser governors, the officials, the secretaries, the men of Erech, the Babylonians, the men of Susa, that is the Elamites, and the rest of the nations which the great and honorable Osnappar deported and settled in the city of Samaria, and in the rest of the region beyond the River” (Ezra 4:9-10). Most commentators identify this Osnappar with Ashurbanipal.³² This deportation is otherwise unknown, but his defeat of 22 kings in the west is known.³³ Furthermore, Isaiah 7:8 mentions a mysterious 65 year period during which “Ephraim will be shattered, so that it is no longer a people.” If the Syro-Ephraimite attack was in 735/34, then 65 years would bring us to 670/69 or the first year of Ashurbanipal.

“It is quite possible that Judah suffered during the Assyria invasions of Egypt (675, 671, 667 and 663 B.C.), and, on the strength of Is. vii, 8, it has often been calculated that there was some fresh deportation of Ephraim, perhaps in connection with a pro-Egyptian revolt. Be that as it may, for some reason Manasseh was carried off in chains to Babylon (2 Chron. xxxiii, 11), and fresh colonists settled in Samaria by Esarhaddon and, apparently, by Ashurbanipal (Ezr. iv, 2, 10). Necho of Egypt, who had been removed by Ashurbanipal, had been sent back with every mark of royal favour--it was Assyrian policy to conciliate the Deltaand therefore the Chronicler’s statement that Manasseh was captured and afterwards allowed to return is not to be regarded as incredible. It is only natural that before Manasseh returned he must have been able to assure Assyria of his loyalty.”³⁴

Continued revolt by the Egyptian princes apparently convinced Ashurbanipal that he could not hold Egypt without larger garrisons than he could spare. Consequently, he quietly let go of Egypt and, for all practical purposes, Egypt and Assyria became allies.

Ashurbanipal ruled from Nineveh, but his brother, Shamash-shum-ukin, had been installed in Babylon by Esarhaddon. This diarchite proved to be a source of friction. No one could rule Babylon without the approval of the Chaldeans who had infiltrated the cities and exercised much control. Shamash-shum-ukin decided to rebel against his brother, and a protracted civil war followed. It was concluded by a siege of Babylon resulting in the suicide of Shamash-shum-ukin. Ashurbanipal installed another Assyrian governor in Babylon and continued the previous practice.

In spite of the strength of Ashurbanipal’s rule, his latter days were beset by physical illness and disruption in his family. His son and successor, Ashur-etil-ilani (631-619), had to fight for the throne. This struggle was long and left Assyria weak. In the south, Nabopolassar, the Chaldean prince, broke away from Assyria and began hostilities. Palestine, under Josiah, broke away from Assyria during this time. Josiah was able to extend his reform to the north and may even have established some political control as well.

Sin-shar-ishkun succeeded Ashur-etil-ilani. He was a good ruler, but he faced the combined armies of the Chaldeans and the Medes and his army had been weakened in the previous two decades. Nabopolassar was able to defeat the Assyrians in 616. Cyaxares, the Median general, marched on the Assyrians in 614 sacked the ancient Assyrian capital of Ashur for the first time in Assyrian history. Nabopolassar joined in the looting, and the Chaldeans and Medes became fast allies.

Sin-shar-ishkun depended on the Scythians to help him, but they betrayed him, perhaps in the expectation of great booty. As a result, Nineveh fell in 612 to the combined forces of the Medes, Babylonians, and Scythians. The Babylonian chronicle says, “On that day Sin-sar-iskun, the Assyrian king…The great spoil of the city and temple they carried off and [turned] the city into a ruin-mound and heaps of debri[s…”³⁵

Nahum (3:8-15) says, “Are you better than No-amon [Thebes], which was situated by the waters of the Nile, with water surrounding her, whose rampart was the sea, whose wall consisted of the sea? Ethiopia was her might, and Egypt too without limits, Put and Lubim were among her helpers. Yet she became an exile, she went into captivity; also her small children were dashed to pieces at the head of every street; they cast lots for her honorable men, and all her great men were bound with fetters. You too will become drunk, you will be hidden. You too will search for a refuge from the enemy. All your fortifications are fig trees with ripe fruit--when shaken, they fall into the eater’s mouth. Behold, your people are women in your midst! The gates of your land are opened wide to your enemies; Fire consumes your gate bars. Draw for yourself water for the siege! Strengthen your fortifications! Go into the clay and tread the mortar! Take hold of the brick mold! There fire will consume you, the sword will cut you down; it will consume you as the locust does.”

The Assyrians refused to quit. Under Ashur-ubalit, perhaps a brother of Ashurbanipal, they regrouped at Haran. Nabopolassar was unwilling to attack Haran alone. He was finally joined by the Medes and Scythians once more. Egypt had come to Assyria’s side and joined with them outside the city of Haran. Haran was captured by Babylon and sacked. The Assyrians and Egyptians were defeated in 609, but the struggle against Egypt continued until 605 when Necho was defeated at Carchemish. Nebuchadnezzar probably set up his command post in Riblah to which Jehoiakim would have come to offer fealty. Daniel and others were taken hostage at that time. Jeremiah (46:1-2) mentions the defeat of Necho at Carchemish in 605.

Assyria was completely despoiled and enslaved. Very little evidence of Assyrian culture is left from that time on.³⁶

---

¹See Finegan, Light from the Ancient Past.

²CAH 2,1:178 says that Shamshi-Adad died in the tenth year of Hammurabi (1792-1750).

³There was pressure from the young and powerful Aramean states that damaged Assyria until the new kingdom (CAH 3:5-6).

⁴See M. E. L. Mallowan, “Nimrud” in AOTS, 57-72.

⁵ANET, pp. 278-79. Note Ahab in the underlined section.

⁶So Olmstead, History of Assyria, p. 137, and Sidney Smith, CAH 3:22.

⁷The Third Intermediate Period in Egypt (1100-650 B.C.).

⁸See Thiele, The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings.

⁹See ANEP, 351-55, ANET, pp. 280.

¹⁰ANET, p. 282.

¹¹See 2 Kings 14:22-29.

¹²Tadmor, “Azarijau of Yaudi” Scripta Hierosolymitana 8 (1961): 232-271. However, Israelite and Judaean History, Old Testament Library, edited by John H. Hayes and J. Maxwell Miller. London: SCM Press, 1977 says, “Recently, Na’aman [Nadav Na’aman. “Sennacherib’s ‘Letter to God’ on His Campaign to Judah,” BASOR CCXIV (1974) 25-39] has argued that the fragment presumably mentioning Azriau king of Yaudi actually belongs to the time of Sennacherib and refers not to Azariah but to Hezekiah. In Tiglath-Pileser’s annals there are two references to an Azariah (in line 123 as Az-ri-a-[u] and in line 131 as Az-r-ja-a-í) but neither of these make any reference to his country. Thus the Azriau of Tiglath-pileser’s annals and Azariah of the Bible should be regarded as two different individuals. Azriau’s country cannot, at the present, be determined.” Na’aman separates the country (Yaudi) from the name Azriau (p. 36). Also p. 28 on line 5 where the original transcription was “[I]zri-ja-u mat Ja-u-di” he reads “ina birit misrija u mat Jaudi.” However, Kitchen, OROT, p. 18, is less dogmatic. He says “Hence we cannot certainly assert that this Azriau (without a named territory!) is Azariah of Judah; the matter remains open and undecided for the present and probably unlikely.” See Also CAH, 3:35-36.

¹³ANET, 282,83.

¹⁴CAH 3:32 says the Pul may be the original name or the one used in Babylon.

¹⁵ANET, p. 283-84.

¹⁶Albright argues that this was a descendent of David through an east Jordan woman (W. F. Albright, “The Son of Tabeel [Isaiah 7:6],” BASOR 140 [1955] 34-35).

¹⁷See E. J. Young, Isaiah in NICOT, loc. cit.

¹⁸ANET, pp. 283-84.

¹⁹ANET, pp. 284-85.

²⁰Light from the Ancient Past, p. 210. But see Thiele, Mysterious Numbers, p. 168, who argues that Sargon merely claimed credit, but was only involved in later suppression.

²¹ANET, p. 287.

²²ANET, pp. 287‑288.

²³See discussion under Taharqa of Egypt, p. 115.

²⁴Seth Erlandsson, Burden of Babylon, pp. 65-108.

²⁵For an excellent discussion, see D. D. Luckenbill, The Annals of Sennacherib, pp. 9-19

²⁶Luckenbill, Annals of Sennacherib, p. 17.

²⁷ANET, pp. 289-90.

²⁸ANET, p. 291.

²⁹ANET, p. 294.

³⁰J. Bright, History of Israel, p. 290. See also p. 122.

³¹ANET, p. 293.

³²Cf. Williamson, Ezra/Nehemiah in the Word Commentary, p. 55 where he says, “The confusion of l and r at the end of the word may reflect Persian influence, but the loss of medial rb cannot be explained on such philological grounds.”

³³ANET, p. 294.

³⁴S.A. Cook, CAH 3:393.

³⁵D. J. Wiseman, Chronicles of Chaldaean Kings (626-556 B.C.) in the British Museum, p. 61; see his discussion pp. 15-16.

³⁶This discussion on the last days of Assyria comes from S. Smith, CAH 3:113-131 and Wiseman, Chronicles, pp. 5-27. See also M. Noth, The Old Testament World, Oppenheim, Ancient Mesopotamia, W. W. Hallo, “From Qarqar to Carchemish.” BAR #2, and Durant, Our Oriental Heritage, pp. 264-85.

The Rise of the Chaldeans

The Chaldeans (Kaldu to the Assyrians) are a sub-grouping of the Arameans who settled in the northwest (later capital at Damascus) and east (on the Assyrian border), southeast (Babylonia) and further southeast in the marshlands of the head of the Persian Gulf. (The Aramaic language of the Bible is somewhat different from Chaldean, but in earlier times, it was thought to be Chaldean. Now it is identified with the more broadly dispersed Aramaic dialect.)

Strictly speaking, the word Chaldean should be limited to the area called by the Assyrians “land of the sea,” the extent of which is unknown. “When these tribes migrated to Babylonia is uncertain, as is also their original home; but as they are closely related to the Aramaeans, it is possible that their first settlements lay in the neighborhood of the Aramean states bordering on the Holy Land.”¹ Pinches indicates that Sennacherib refers to 75 strong cities and fortresses of Chaldea, and 420 smaller towns which were around them. There were also Chaldeans (and Arameans) in Erech, Nippur (Calneh), Kis, Hursag-kalama, Cuthah, and probably Babylon.² The Chaldeans in the Persian Gulf area were known as Bit Yakin (Merodach Baladan’s tribe), Bit Dakkuri and Bit Amukkani.³

The Aramaic tribes were showing interest in settling in the rich lands of the middle Euphrates. Tiglath-Pileser I (beginning of the first millennium) was forced to confront the pressing hordes of Arameans. They controlled the caravan trade around the Habur and settled along the eastern, western borders of the Assyrian country. Ironically, David’s reduction of the Arameans of Damascus probably took pressure from the Assyrians and allowed the Neo-Assyrian Empire to develop.

For three hundred years there was constant interaction between the Assyrians and surrounding peoples, including the Arameans. In the eighth century, the mighty Tiglath-Pileser III (745-727) set out to establish Assyrian control. One of his major tasks was to establish order in Babylonia so as to secure his southern border. The Chaldeans around the marsh land of the Persian Gulf recognized only their own authority. The Aramean tribes on the east bank of the Tigris were likewise not submitting to a central authority, the Arameans around Cuthah, Sippar and Babylon were becoming restless.⁴ He began by attacking the Arameans on the Assyrian border, then crossed the Tigris to the east, then attacked the Arameans around Nippur.

Aramean/Chaldean Groupings in Neo-Assyrian Times

The Babylonian king was presumably Nabu-nasir who was left on the throne and proved a faithful vassal until his death in 734.⁵ When Nabu-nasir died, confusion reigned, culminating in the usurpation of the throne by a Chaldean of the Bit-Amukkani tribe. Tiglath-Pileser violently suppressed the revolt, and the Chaldean areas were severely reduced. Merodach-Baladan of Bit-Yakin paid homage and tribute to him. This is the same man who sent messengers to Hezekiah (Isaiah 39). Tiglath-Pileser took the throne himself (he took the hands of Marduk), and adopted the name Pul (as used in the Bible).

It became Merodach-Baladan’s task to unite the disparate and divided Chaldean tribes. He apparently was eventually able to do so. He also formed an alliance with the Elamites, the only people who might be able to stand against the Assyrians. In 721 he threw off the Assyrian yoke, entered Babylon and “took the hands of Bel.”

Sargon set out in 720 to confront the combined armies, but Merodach-Baladan failed to join up with the Elamites in time. The battle was indecisive, but apparently the Assyrians withdrew and Merodach-Baladan was left to rule in peace. However, after a decade, Sargon moved south and Merodach-Baladan was forced to flee. Sargon allowed him to remain chief of the Bit Yakin, perhaps as a conciliatory move.

When Sennacherib became king in 705, Merodach-Baladan resumed his intrigue against Assyria. He could entice the Arameans to the north and east to join him, but he had trouble with the Babylonians who had a lingering resentment of his previous rule. He enlisted the aid of Elam again and sent messengers west to induce the rulers of that area to rise up against Assyria, probably to be timed with his invasion of Babylon. Hezekiah gladly received the messengers and was soundly rebuked by Isaiah.

The plans of Merodach-Baladan were frustrated when the Babylonians appointed their own king, forcing him to march on the city earlier than he had planned and take the throne once more. This was in 703 B.C. Sennacherib put his troops in the field and soundly defeated the Elamites and their allies. Only the Elamites proved a worthy fighting force. Merodach-Baladan fled, and Sennacherib marched on Babylon, where he was gladly received by the inhabitants. Sennacherib dealt a severe blow to the entire Chaldean district. He placed a certain Bel-Ibni on the throne in Babylon. Sennacherib made another punitive raid against the Chaldeans in 700 and deported many from Bit Yakin, while Merodach-Baladan fled once more to the Elamites. (N.B. it would appear to me that Merodach-Baladan appealed to Hezekiah prior to the 701 invasion by Sennacherib. If so, Isaiah 38-39 took place before 36-37. Their placement in that order by Isaiah would indicate the Babylonian emphasis of 40-66.)

Merodach-Baladan died, and after a period of time, a certain Chaldean by the name of Mushezib-Marduk proclaimed himself king of Babylon. Sennacherib, after an arduous battle, laid siege to Babylon and defeated it in 689. “The sack of Babylon marks a turning point in Sennacherib’s policy. For some sixteen years he had endeavoured to refound a separate kingdom in Babylonia, and his endeavours had ended in complete failure. The capital city itself, always previously well disposed to Assyria, had finally become a stronghold of the Chaldaean party. The force of circumstances alone was sufficient to cause any man of ability to take severe measures…The damage to the city during the siege and the sack was reparable, and it is known that Sennacherib himself commenced the work of rebuilding the city.”⁶

Sennacherib placed his son, Esarhaddon, on the throne in Babylon. When Esarhaddon became king, there was a decade of relative peace in Babylonia. His two sons, Ashurbanipal and Shamash-shum-ukin, ruled after him in Nineveh and Babylon. The Chaldeans were so well ensconced in Babylonia that no one could rule without their cooperation. The result was an anti-Assyrian feeling that forced Shamash-shum-ukin to rebel against his brother, the king of Assyria in 652. Ashurbanipal, after a bloody war, defeated his brother, who committed suicide.

Southern Babylonia broke away from Assyria after Ashurbanipal’s death under Nabopolassar, the chosen leader of the Chaldeans in 626 and began hostilities in 625 B.C.

The Neo-Babylonian Empire⁷

This political entity is called Neo-Babylonian to contrast it with the Old Babylonian Empire lasting from about 1800 to 1500 B.C. As indicated above, the rulers of this new empire are interlopers from the point of view of the native population. Though the Chaldeans had been making their presence felt for generations and no doubt had intermarried and intermixed, there apparently was still a distinction to be made between them and the “Babylonians.”⁸

The biblical material needs to be discussed before the Neo-Babylonian Empire is taken up. The most remarkable Judean monarch of the century was Manasseh’s grandson, Josiah, who reigned from about 640-609 B.C. Recent studies of Assyrian chronology make it possible to correlate Judah’s movement toward independence rather precisely with events in Assyria.

In 2 Chronicles 34:3 we are told that Josiah began to seek the God of David his father in the 8th year of his reign. This would be 633-632 or about the time of the death of Ashurbanipal. The death of Ashurbanipal’s successor, Asshuretelilani, about 629 was immediately followed by disorders in Assyria and Babylonia.

In the twelfth year (629/628 B.C.) of Josiah’s reign there was a thoroughgoing religious reform. Such a purge assumes military control over the Assyrian provinces of Samaria and Megiddo.

In 628-627 B.C., during Josiah’s thirteenth year, Jeremiah received his call as God’s prophet (Jer. 1:2).

The finding of the old law book in the temple during the eighteenth year of Josiah’s reign (623-622 B.C.) resulted in a still more thoroughgoing religious reform, in which all sacrificial worship was confined to the Jerusalem temple (2 Kings 22-23). On Josiah’s part, the reform probably signaled the final break with Assyria. We know that by 623 B.C., Assyrian control over Babylonia had ceased entirely, and that a Babylonian king, Nabopolassar, had consolidated his position and was preparing to attack Assyria itself.⁹

Josiah was killed trying to protect Babylon from Egypt. In 2 Kings 23:29, the Hebrew ‘al, must mean “in behalf of,” since we know from the Babylonian Chronicle¹⁰ that Egypt was supporting Assyria. Josiah wanted no assistance to go to Assyria. Later the Babylonians defeated Necho at Carchemish. Apparently Egypt wanted a weak Assyria as a buffer state against Babylon and so went to Assyria’s assistance (so in the Babylonian Chronicle). Josiah did not want Egypt to reassert control over Syria and so went against Necho at the cost of his own life.¹¹

Nabopolassar (626-605 B.C.)

Properly speaking, the Neo-Babylonian Empire begins with Nabopolassar who became king of Babylon in 626 B.C. and began hostilities against his overlord Assyria in 625 B.C. With his allies, the Medes and Scythians, he defeated Assyria, driving her to the west. He defeated the Assyrians and Egyptians in Haran in 609 B.C. and the Egyptians again in 605 B.C., giving him undisputed control of Syria and Palestine.

Nebuchadnezzar (Nebuchadrezzar) (605-562 B.C.)

The officer who led these campaigns was the oldest son of Nabopolassar and crown prince Nebuchadnezzar. Nebuchadnezzar, becoming king at his father’s death in 605, was the most illustrious of the rulers of this era. The name is more properly Nebuchadrezzar (Nabu-kudurri-usur). The name, according to Wiseman, means “O Nabu, protect my offspring” rather than “O Nabu, protect my boundary.”¹² The name was used by a middle kingdom Babylonian (1124-1103) and thus has ancient connections. The spelling with an “n” may be merely an inaccuracy, though some would argue it represents an Aramaic spelling. Jeremiah and Ezekiel use the more correct form.

Nabopolassar is generally identified as a Chaldean from the Sea Lands of the Bit Yakin group.¹³ However, Wiseman argues that the evidence for this identification is not clear and that all that Nabopolassar says is that he was not a member of the royal house.¹⁴ Nebuchadnezzar has for a wife, Amyitis, the daughter of Astyages, the Mede. This would accord with the practice of the Chaldeans to ally with the Medes. For the family tree see p. 150.

Thompson argues that the priesthood at Babylon was so strong that Nabopolassar was virtually under their control. At least he shows considerable deference to them in his building projects and constant self-abnegation. He says that the same policy of deference was carried on by Nebuchadnezzar.¹⁵

Nebuchadnezzar was in sole control of the army at Carchemish. There, having routed the Egyptians and taken over the area of “Hatti land” or Syro-Palestine, he heard of his father’s death in Babylon. He made the five hundred mile plus journey back in twelve to fifteen days and was crowned king.¹⁶

Egypt apparently exercised temporary control of Palestine. Jehoahaz succeeded his father but was deposed by Necho within three months. Necho put up Eliakim (Jehoiakim) who paid tribute to Necho but later was forced to submit to Babylon (2 Kings 24:1). Jeremiah was busy at this time. Jehoiakim burned his scroll (Jer. 36).

The Chronicle says, “In the first year of Nebuchadrezzar in the month of Sivan he mustered his army and went to the Hatti-territory, he marched about unopposed in the Hatti-territory until the month of Kislev. All the kings of the Hatti-land came before him and he received their heavy tribute. He marched to the city of Askelon and captured it in the month of Kislev. He captured its king and plundered it and carried off [spoil from it…] He turned the city into a mound and heaps of ruins and then in the month of Sebat he marched back to Babylon.”¹⁷ Note that the Chronicle does not mention any city but Ashkelon. Jerusalem is not mentioned. Daniel 1:1 says that Nebuchadnezzar besieged it, but this phrase can mean “treated it as an enemy.” 2 Kings 25:1 says, “In his days Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up, and Jehoiakim became his servant for three years; then he turned and rebelled against him.” 2 Chron. 36:6 says, “Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up against him and bound him with bronze chains to take him to Babylon.” Wiseman believes the removal of Jehoiakim would have been within the first year of Nebuchadnezzar’s rule.¹⁸

There is some debate about the time, but Nebuchadnezzar at some point besieged Tyre. Thompson says: “Tyre, safeguarded by the sea, appears always to have clung to her independence, both against Egyptian and Babylonian. Josephus says that a few years after the battle of Carchemish Tyre led a Phoenician revolt; according to Menander, Nebuchadrezzar besieged the city for thirteen years in the reign of Ithobalus (Ethbaal), and Ezekiel (ch. xxix) refers to the great difficulty of the operations: ‘Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon, caused his army to serve a great service against Tyre: every head was made bald and every shoulder was peeled: yet he had no wages, nor his army, from Tyre, for the service that he had served against.’ Presumably Nebuchadrezzar was compelled to recognize that he must ‘contain’ it only, which he could do with a small force.”¹⁹

How are we to reconcile the account of Ezekiel 26 attributing the disastrous fall to Nebuchadnezzar with Ezekiel 29:17‑20 and the non‑biblical accounts that indicate Babylon’s apparent inability to capture Tyre?²⁰ Jerome says that the Tyrians carried off all wealth when it became apparent the city would fall.²¹

Some would argue that the destruction of Tyre refers to a mainland city with that name, while the failure to gain pay (Ezekiel 29) refers to the island fortress. A reference in ANET, p. 477, from the thirteenth century B.C. indicates two cities: “Let me tell you of another strange city, named Byblos. What was it like? And its goddess? Once again--[thou] hast not trodden it. Pray instruct me about Beirut, about Sidon and Sarepta. Where is the stream of the Litani? What is Uzu [ed. Note “old Tyre on the mainland”] like? They say another town is in the sea, named Tyre-the-port. Water is taken (to) it by the boats, and it is richer in fish than the sands.”

More likely, however, the prophecy has both specific and general implications. Having begun in a generalized way: nations (1‑6), he becomes particular with Babylon (7‑11), but he becomes general again in v. 12. “They” (the nations) will despoil her. At this point we are looking to the subsequent devastating calamity under Alexander the Great.

In his fourth year (601 B.C.) Nebuchadnezzar began further law enforcement in “Hatti land.” At that time, he decided to invade Egypt. He was met by the Saite king, Necho II, and the battle was fiercely fought. Egypt had reorganized and re-provisioned her army after the Carchemish debacle and the battle was a standoff. The Chronicle says, “In open battle they smote the breast (of) each other and inflicted great havoc on each other. The king of Akkad [Nebuchadnezzar] and his troops turned back and returned to Babylon. In the fifth year the king of Akkad (stayed) in his own land and gathered together his chariots and horses in great numbers.”²²

Jehoiakim apparently thought this battle indicated Egyptian superiority and shifted his allegiance from Babylon to Egypt. He rebelled after three years (2 Kings 24:1-2), and Nebuchadnezzar dealt with him by encouraging bands of brigands until he could deal with him himself. Jehoiakim died mysteriously (Jer. 22:19), possibly murdered to placate Nebuchadnezzar. In any event, “in the seventh year [598], the month of Kislev, the king of Akkad mustered his troops, marched to the Hatti-land, and encamped against (i.e. besieged) the city of Judah and on the second day of the month of Adar he seized the city and captured the king [Jehoiachin]. He appointed there a king of his own choice (lit. heart) [Zedekiah], received its heavy tribute and sent (them) to Babylon.”²³

An internal rebellion took place 595/4. The text is fairly cryptic: “In the tenth year the king of Akkad (was) in his own land; from the month of Kislev to the month of Tebet there was rebellion in Akkad…with arms he slew many of his own army [Wiseman reads in Nebuchadrezzar, p. 34, “his numerous leading persons/officials”]. His own hand captured his enemy.”²⁴ Wiseman also links this event with Jeremiah 29 (written shortly after 597) were Jeremiah says that the King of Babylon roasted a certain Zedekiah and Ahab in fire.²⁵

Zedekiah, refusing to learn from the mistake of Jehoiakim and to listen to Jeremiah’s warnings, rebelled against Babylon (Jer. 27:1-11). The data of the last days of Zedekiah come from the Bible (the Chronicle is missing at this point). Zedekiah rebelled in 588 and Nebuchadnezzar besieged the city with the intent of starving it into submission. Apries, the new Egyptian king responded to Zedekiah’s appeals, probably with a limited force (Ezek. 17:15 for the appeal). The city fell in 586.

Jeremiah predicted Babylonian attacks on Egypt (43:8-13), but there is little evidence in the Babylonian records for it.²⁶ Ezekiel’s prophecy (29:17-20) seems to contradict what is known of Egyptian history during the Babylonian period. The usual point made is that Nebuchadnezzar did not invade Egypt, but Persia did.²⁷ During the Babylonian period, it is said, Egypt prospered. For an excellent presentation of an alternate view, see J. B. Reilly, “The Historicity of Nebuchadnezzar’s Invasion of Egypt,” Th.M. thesis, DTS. He argues three basic points:

(1) Amasis (Egyptian ruler during Nebuchadnezzar’s time) was confined to the western part of the delta with Greek mercenaries. Any discussion of prosperity for Egypt should be confined to that area.

(2) Cambyses (the Persian ruler who invaded Egypt) did not go south of the Delta and did not destroy Egypt. The Elephantine papyri should read, “They [Babylon] had destroyed the temples of Egypt, but not the temple of Yaho.”²⁸

(3) The period from 567 B.C. (Nebuchadnezzar’s invasion) to 525 B.C. is the forty years of destruction spoken of by Ezekiel. After Persia’s entrance, Egypt began to prosper.

“Nebuchadnezzar died about August-September, 562 B.C., and was succeeded by his son Amel-Marduk (562-560 B.C.), whom Jeremiah calls Evil-Merodach.”²⁹

Amel-Marduk (Evil-Merodach) (562-560 B.C.)

Josephus quotes Berosus who says of Amel-Marduk: “After beginning the wall of which I have spoken, Nabuchodonosor fell sick and died, after a reign of forty-three years, and the realm passed to his son Evil-maraduch. This prince, whose government was arbitrary and licentious, fell a victim to a plot, being assassinated by his sister’s husband, Neriglisar, after a reign of two years.”³⁰

Amel-Marduk ruled only two years. From Jeremiah 52:31-34 we learn: “Now it came about in the thirty-seventh year of the exile of Jehoiachin king of Judah (560 B.C.), in the twelfth month, on the twenty-fifth of the month, that Evil-Merodach king of Babylon, in the first year of his reign, showed favor to Jehoiachin king of Judah and brought him out of prison. Then he spoke kindly to him and set his throne above the thrones of the kings who were with him in Babylon. So Jehoiachin changed his prison clothes, and had his meals in the king’s presence regularly all the days of his life. And for his allowance, a regular allowance was given him by the king of Babylon, a daily portion all the days of his life until the day of his death” (see also 2 Kings 25:27-30). “10 (sila) to Ia-ku-u-ki-nu, the son of the king of Ia-ku-du (i.e. Judah). 2 1/2 sila for the 5 sons of the king of Judah.”³¹ This tablet actually comes from Nebuchadnezzar’s time, and so Amel-Marduk increased the ration established by his father. Thompson says, “He was given little time to prove his worth; the two years of his brief reign are merely enough to show that political conditions were again hostile to the royal house.”³²

Nergal-sharra-usur (Neriglissar) (559-556 B.C.)

Whether there was a revolution or Amel-Marduk died in 559 is not clear, but Neriglissar succeeded him to the throne.³³ He was married to a daughter of Nebuchadnezzar and may have been next in line after Amel-Marduk. “He is probably to be identified with Nergal-sharezer who held the office of rab mag at the siege of Jerusalem in 586 B.C. If, as seems likely, the Neriglissar is also the same man, he was already middle-aged on his accession.”³⁴ Little is known about this man except that he restored temples in Babylon and Borsippa. Wiseman translates a tablet that for the first time reveals an extensive military campaign in Cilicia.³⁵

The six or so years of the reign of these two kings are passed over in silence in the Bible, except for the elevation of Jehoiachin. Daniel is involved through 539 when Cyrus comes to Babylon, but no mention is made of Amel-Marduk or Neriglissar. Ezekiel’s prophecies do not extend beyond 571 B.C. when Nebuchadnezzar was still ruling.

Labashi-Marduk (556 B.C.)

Neriglissar died in 556 B.C. of unknown causes. His son Labashi-Marduk attempted to assume the throne but was opposed. After just three months of rule, he was overthrown by officers of the state. They placed Nabu-na’id (Nabonidus) on the throne.

Nabu-na’id (Nabonidus) (556-539 B.C.)

Nabonidus usurped the throne though he was not a direct descendant of Nebuchadnezzar. Wiseman suggests that he may have married a daughter of Nebuchadnezzar which would make Belshazzar a grandson (and hence a “son”) of the sacker of Jerusalem.³⁶

Nabonidus was probably rather old when he ascended the throne. He had connections with the city of Haran (the last stronghold of the Assyrians in 609 B.C.). Either his father or mother was a priest(ess) of the Moon God at Haran.³⁷

Nabonidus took his army west, but withdrew from Palestine in 553. The excuse he gives is to rebuild the temple in Haran. This homage to a foreign deity (to the Babylonians) apparently created hostility in the priests of Babylon.

There follows a very mysterious time in Nabonidus’ life. “He let (everything) go, entrusted the kingship to him and, himself, he started out for a long journey, the (military) forces of Akkad marching with him; he turned towards Tema (deep) in the west. He started out the expedition on a path (leading) to a distant (region). When he arrived there, he killed in battle the prince of Tema, slaughtered the flocks of those who dwell in the city (as well as) in the countryside, and he, himself, took his residence in [Te]ma, the forces of Akkad [were also stationed] there.”³⁸

Nabonidus spent his declining years in this pleasant oasis for unknown reasons. Perhaps he was unwelcome in Babylon or perhaps Haran was not safe from the Medes.³⁹ “Seventh year [549 B.C.]: The king (i.e. Nabonidus, stayed) in Tema; the crown prince, his officials and his army (were) in Akkad…Eighth year: (blank of two lines)…Ninth year: Nabonidus, the king, (stayed) in Tema; the crown prince, the officials and the army (were) in Akkad…Tenth year: The king (stayed) in Tema; the crown prince, his officials and his army (were) in Akkad…Eleventh year [545 B.C.]: The king (stayed) in Tema; the crown prince, the officials and his army (were) in Akkad.”⁴⁰ By 547 Cyrus was already putting pressure on Babylon. An Elamite governor was apparently appointed in Erech. This would mean that Cyrus had a pincer movement on Babylon ten years before conquering it.⁴¹

During Nabonidus’ stay in Tema his son and crown prince, Belshazzar was ruling in Babylon. Until recent times, the existence of this man was unknown outside the Bible and provoked much skepticism as to his authenticity. With the publication of the Babylonian materials, he is now well-known as the “vice-regent” in Babylon in the absence of his aged father.

“[Seventeenth year:]…Nebo [went] from Borsippa for the procession of [Bel…] [the king (Nabonidus)] entered the temple…In the month of Tashritu, when Cyrus attacked the army of Akkad in Opis on the Tigris, the inhabitants of Akkad revolted, but he (Nabonidus) massacred the confused inhabitants. In the 14th day, Sippar was seized without battle. Nabonidus fled. The 16th day, Gobryas (Ugbaru), the governor of Gutium and the army of Cyrus entered Babylon without battle. Afterwards Nabonidus was arrested in Babylon when he returned (there)…In the month of Arahshamnu, the 3rd day, Cyrus entered Babylon, green twigs were spread in front of him--the state of ‘Peace’ was imposed upon the city. Cyrus sent greetings to all Babylon. Gobryas, his governor, installed (sub-) governors in Babylon.”⁴² Oates says, “The reasons for the king’s return to Babylon are as obscure as those which led to his departure. After 10 years, and now certainly approaching 70 years of age, he left Taima.”⁴³ He came back, for whatever reason, and resumed the religious ritual. After the defeat at Opis mentioned above, he fled to Babylon. There Herodotus tells us, while the Babylonians were reveling (“Belshazzar the King made a great feast to a thousand of his lords and drank wine before the thousand”), the Persians broke into the city unopposed. Herodotus preserves the story (doubted by some) that Cyrus diverted the Euphrates River (flowing through Babylon) and was able thus to enter the city.⁴⁴ Belshazzar was killed that night (Dan. 5:30), but “The old king Nabonidus was given Carmania to rule, or much more probably as a place of abode in a new land.”⁴⁵

Connections of the Neo-Babylonian Empire with Daniel and Ezekiel

The key issues in Daniel are:

The captivity of Daniel (fourth year/third year) and whether there was a deportation.

The identity of Darius the Mede (perhaps the most knotty of all the problems).

The historicity of Belshazzar (now proven).

The identity of the Chaldeans as a special religious class.

These issues have all been confronted by Evangelicals. Robert Dick Wilson, Studies in the Book of Daniel; Wiseman and Kitchen (see bibliography); J. Whitcomb, Darius the Mede. G. Archer, Daniel in EBC.

Nebuchadnezzar’s mental illness.

Is there anything in the extra‑biblical record to support the biblical statements on Nebuchadnezzar’s madness? Thompson says: “The name of Nebuchadrezzar became the centre of much romance, notably the story of his madness in the book of Daniel. ‘His own inscriptions speak only of a four‑year‑long suspension of interest in public affairs, which may not be a reference to his malady, though tradition of something of the kind may have lent verisimilitude to the account of it in Daniel’ (C.H.W. Johns, E.Bi. col. 3371). His religious character is illustrated above; like Ashurbanipal he may have suffered some mysterious affliction (p. 127), and this might have been ascribed to a divine visitation.”⁴⁶

Because of Nabonidus’ long stint in Tema, the hostility of the Bab-ylonian priesthood to him, and a fragment from Qumran attributing a sickness of seven years to Nabonidus through which he was instructed by a Jewish soothsayer, some want the Nebuchadnezzar story to be transferred to Nabonidus.⁴⁷ However, there is no reason why the problem could not have happened to Nebuchadnezzar, and one surely would not expect to find a record of it in the accounts. If Nebuchadnezzar “withdrew from public life for four years,” a seven year hiatus should not be considered improbable.

Was Nebuchadnezzar a believer in the sense of an OT saint? Certainly, he acknowledges the existence, position and power of the Most High God. However, the acknowledgement of the person of God in Daniel two does not prevent him from trying to kill the three Jewish men for worshipping the same God in chapter three. Furthermore, in chapter four the same lesson has to be learned again. It seems unlikely to me that he was ever more than a polytheist.

Ezekiel prophesies entirely during Nebuchadnezzar’s reign. The symbolism, metaphors and parables can only be understood with the backdrop of the historical happenings in Babylonia, Egypt and Judah over a ten year period. (Only one prophecy is beyond that era. It is against Tyre and refers to events in 571 B.C.)

Babylon’s Influence on the Bible

Babylon, Babylonian, Babylonish

Genesis 10:10; 11:9.
Joshua 7:21 (Babylonish garment).
2 Kings 17-25 = 31 x’s
1 Chronicles = 1
2 Chronicles 32-36 = 9 x’s
Ezra = 15.
Nehemiah = 2
Esther 2:6.
Ps. 87:4; 137:1,8.
Isaiah 13; 14; 21; 39; 43; 47; 48 = 13 x’s.
Jeremiah 20-52 = 168 x’s! (70 x’s in 50-52).
Ezekiel = 20 x’s.
Daniel = 17 x’s.
Micah 45:10
Zech. 2:7; 6:10.
Matt. 4 x’s (genealogy).
Acts 7:43 (Stephen’s sermon).
1 Peter 5:13.
Rev. 14; 8; 16:19; 17:5; 18:2,10,21 = 6 x’s.

Total: 370

Chaldea, Chaldean

Gen. 11:28, 31; 15:7 = 4 x’s.
Job 1:17
2 Kings 24:2; 25 = 8 x’s.
Ezra 5:12.
Isaiah 13; 23; 43; 47:1, 5; 48:14,20 = 7 x’s.
Jeremiah = 42 x’s.
Ezekiel = 8 x’s.
Daniel = 12 x’s.
Hab. 1:6
Acts 7:4.

Total: 85

	Chaldee(a/n)	Babylon(ia/n)	Total
Early:	5	3	8
Eighth century: (Isaiah/Mic)	7	20	27
Seventh century: (Jer/Kg/Ch)	50	203	253
Sixth century: (Ez/Dan/Hab)	21	37	58
Fifth century:	1	23	24
New Testament:	1	12	13
All Occurrences	85	298	383

Observations:

The very early occurrences have to do primarily with the Table of Nations and Abraham.

The eighth century contacts are primarily in Isaiah and have to do with the contacts with Hezekiah and prophetically to the Babylonian exile.

The seventh century contacts are found in Jeremiah, Kings and Chronicles. This of course is the height of the Neo-Babylonian Empire and so we find the most frequent mentions here.

The sixth century contacts are in Ezekiel and Daniel.

The references are diminishing in the following period, because such references are usually to the past.

The importance of Babylon to the Bible.

The beginning of civilization is in Mesopotamia. Babel along with Erech, Accad and Calneh are attributed to the building enterprises of Nimrod. The Babylonian word Babilu means “Gate of God.” The reference to Babel with the meaning of “confusion of language” is a play on that word. Here originates writing, astrology, languages, pagan religion, mathematics, etc. It is Ur of the Chaldees from which Abraham comes as well. The flood account of Genesis has much in common with the Babylonian account.

Babylon becomes sort of an archetype of evil and seems to be used somewhat that way in Isaiah 13/14. The same seems to be true in Zechariah 5 when “evil” is taken to Shinar and a temple is set up for her. Isaiah castigates Babylon for her idolatry (Isa. 47:11-15).

Babylon in Jeremiah’s time was looked upon as a scourge in God’s hand which took credit for what she did to Israel and in turn was punished for it (Isa. 47:6; Jer. 25; Zech. 1:15).

Babylon’s downfall is predicted in drastic terms in Isaiah 13 and 21, but this probably refers to the fall to Sennacherib in 689 B.C. Jeremiah’s prediction (using much of Isaiah’s terminology) has to refer to 539 B.C., since he is prophesying fifty years later (Jer. 25:12; 50-51). The language of Jeremiah is “destruction language” and refers to the fact that the empire was utterly defeated by the Persians. The city continued for another two hundred years and only gradually fell into the ruin we now see. It was last mentioned on a clay tablet in 10 B.C. (R. K Harrison in Zondervan Bible Dictionary).

Most commentators take the reference to Babylon in Revelation 17-18 as symbolic, referring actually to Rome. Peter’s reference, in my opinion, is probably to be taken literally: there was a Jewish community near Babylon on into the fifth century A.D. The Rabbis used Babylon to refer to Rome, saying that Babylon destroyed the temple twice, 586 B.C. and 70 A.D.⁴⁸

The city of Babylon was one of the Seven Wonders of the World. Herodotus says it was 200 square miles and located on both sides of the river. It had eight access gates, the most famous of which was Ishtar. There were over 50 temples. The hanging gardens were on huge arches and were watered by mechanical devices. At the center was ziggurat which was 300 feet square and 300 feet high.

Historical Chronology Of The Last Days Of Judah

640-609

Josiah reigned in Judah. He began reform in his 12th year (628/7) and extended it further in his 18th year (623/2) after the weakness of Assyria became apparent when they were driven from Babylon by Nabopolassar (626/5). Egypt also felt free to begin to move into Canaan. Jeremiah began his ministry in the 13th year of Josiah (Jer. 1:2).

626-623

Tablet #25127 (British Museum).

Nabopolassar defeated the Assyrian army at the gates of Babylon and was crowned king of Babylon on November 23, 626. He was not yet strong enough to attack Nineveh.

616-608

Tablet #21901

A gap covering 622-617 exists. Medes were the head of an Anti-Assyrian group. Egypt had allied herself with Assyria.

614-12

The Medes defeated Asshur in 614. Nabopolassar joined them and defeated Nineveh in 612 B.C.

609-8

A remnant of the Assyrian army fled to Haran under Assurballit II who tried to reconstitute the kingdom. They were forced out of Haran by Babylon in spite of extensive Egyptian help in 609.

The Egyptians joined Assyria in an effort to retake the garrison in 609 but failed. Josiah tried to interdict the Egyptian army at Megiddo and was killed (2 Kings 23:28-30; 2 Chron. 35:20-27).

The Egyptians at this point took over control of Syria after the defeat of the Assyrians.⁴⁹ Pharaoh Necho, on his way back, deposed Jehoahaz who had ruled only three months after the death of Josiah, his father, and put Jehoiakim, another son of Josiah, on the throne.

607-6

Tablet #22047

Babylonian armies under Nabopolassar and Nebuchadnezzar battled against mountain people and tried to control the Egyptians in Syria. The latter were entrenched at Carchemish. Nabopolassar returned to Babylon in 606/5 where he died.

605-594

Tablet #21946

Nebuchadnezzar, in sole command of the army, marched against the Egyptians at Carchemish and defeated them. Jer. 46:2 places this in the fourth year of Jehoiakim (cf. also Jer. 25:1, which relates the fourth year of Jehoiakim to the first year of Nebuchadnezzar).

605

Nebuchadnezzar came against Jerusalem and Jehoiakim became his vassal. (2 Kings 24:1). Dan. 1:1 says that in Jehoiakim’s third year Nebuchadnezzar carried off captives.⁵⁰ Daniel must be using the accession year of Nebuchadnezzar which was not counted as his first year in Babylon. Cf. also 2 Chron. 36:6 where Jehoiakim was bound but apparently not carried off, or was taken temporarily as a hostage of war and returned.

601-600

In December Nebuchadnezzar marched against Egypt. Judah was probably still a vassal of Babylon (he would not likely have left his rear exposed to a hostile army). The battle was fierce and Babylon suffered heavy losses. Nebuchadnezzar returned to Babylon to regroup his army. (ANET sup. p. 564).

600-599

While Nebuchadnezzar was refurbishing his troops, Judah enjoyed a measure of independence but Nebuchadnezzar probably was involved in encouraging other of his vassals against Jerusalem (2 Kings 24:2).

598-97

In December Nebuchadnezzar came west again to put an end to the rebellion. Jehoiachin, son of the now dead Jehoiakim, was on the throne. On March 16, 597, Jerusalem was surrendered, Jehoiachin and others were deported to Babylon, and Zedekiah, another son of Josiah, was put on the throne.

595-4

A local rebellion in Babylon led Zedekiah’s advisors to believe they could throw off Babylon’s yoke. This was in direct opposition to the word of the Lord (cf. Jer. 28:1ff).

586

The final destruction of the city and temple were absent from the Babylonian Chronicle due to a gap. The data for that final destruction and deportation are found in 2 Kings 25 and 2 Chron. 36.

560

Thirty-seven years after the first attack on Jerusalem, Jehoiachin was elevated by Evil-Merodach (Ewal-Marduk) (2 Kings 25:2-30). He seems to be regarded as the official king even in exile (c. Ezek. 1:2).

Sources:

W. F. Albright, “King Jehoiachin in Exile,” B. A. Reader #1.

D. N. Freedman, “The Babylonian Chronicle,” B. A. Reader #1.

        The Ancient Near Eastern Texts, pp. 303-312.

F. F. Bruce, Israel and the Nations.

On Nabonidus’ prolonged absence in Tema, see ANET, p. 306.

On mention of Belshazzar, see ANET, p. 310, footnote.

---

¹T. G. Pinches, “Chaldea” in International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, 1:589, 1929 edition.

²Ibid.

³S. Smith, CAH 3:33.

⁴Smith, CAH 3:33.

⁵Ibid.

⁶Ibid., p. 69.

⁷See CAH 3:40 on origins of the rulers of the Neo-Babylonian Empire.

⁸When Merodach Baladan sent emissaries to Judah (Isa. 38-39; 2 Kings 20) he was the head of the Chaldean grouping in southern Mesopotamia. He made himself head of Babylon but was unwelcome by the people who received Sennacherib with open arms (CAH 3:63-65).

⁹See: F. M. Cross, Jr. & D. N. Freedman, “Josiah’s Revolt against Assyria,” JNES, XII (1953), pp. 56-58, and Wright, BA.

¹⁰D. J. Wiseman, Chronicles of the Chaldaean Kings.

¹¹D. N. Freedman, “The Babylonian Chronicle,” BAR #1, pp. 113-127.

¹²D. J. Wiseman, Nebuchadrezzar and Babylon, p. 2-3.

¹³W. W. Hallo, The Ancient Near East: A History, 1971, p. 145.

¹⁴Wiseman, Nebuchadrezzar, pp. 5-6.

¹⁵Thompson, “The New Babylonian Empire,” CAH 3:206ff.

¹⁶Ibid., p. 18.

¹⁷Wiseman, Chronicles, p. 69.

¹⁸Wiseman, Nebuchadrezzar, pp. 24-25.

¹⁹CAH 3:214.

²⁰See A. S. Lawhead, “A Problem of Unfulfilled Prophecy in Ezekiel: a Response,” WTJ 16 (1981): 15-19 and J. Bright, History of Israel, p. 333 (he says they were obliged to acknowledge Babylonian suzerainty). See also Wiseman, Nebuchadrezzar, pp. 27ff, who shows Babylonian control of Tyre. Lawhead was responding to D. L. Thompson, “A Problem of Unfulfilled Prophecy in Ezekiel,” WTJ 16 (1981): 93-106 who argues for a general interpretation of Scripture (Tyre will fall) and not a specific fulfillment. For an overall discussion, see John C. Beck, The Fall of Tyre According to Ezekiel’s Prophecy, Th.M. Thesis, DTS.

²¹Keil, Ezekiel, 1:421-22.

²²Wiseman, Chronicle, p. 71.

²³Ibid., p. 73.

²⁴Ibid.

²⁵Wiseman, Nebuchadrezzar, p. 35.

²⁶Ibid, p. 39f. Bright, History of Israel, p. 333, is much more sanguine about the idea of an invasion.

²⁷Thompson, CAH 3:215, says, “The small fragment of a Babylonian Chronicle first published by Pinches shows that Nebuchadrezzar launched an expedition against Egypt in his thirty-seventh year, i.e. about 567 B.C. Whether Pinches’ ingenious restoration (Ama)su, ‘Amasis,’ for the lost king’s name is correct, or whether Nebuchadrezzar marched against Egypt with any aim other than conquest, we cannot say; the very distance to which he penetrated is a matter of dispute. One tradition says he made Egypt a Babylonian province, another that he invaded Libya, while Jeremiah ‘foretold’ that he would set up his throne in Tahpanhes, but there is no proof that he did so. We might almost assume from the tradition that certain Babylonian deserters built a ‘Babylon’ in Egypt near the Pyramids, which appears to have existed as an important fort in the time of Augustus, that his army at all events left some mark there.”

²⁸ANET, 492: “Now, our forefathers built this temple in the fortress of Elephantine back in the days of the kingdom of Egypt, and when Cambyses came to Egypt he found it built. They [Babylon] [had] knocked down all the temples of the gods of Egypt, but no one did any damage to this temple.”

²⁹Thompson, CAH 3:217.

³⁰Josephus, Contra Apionem, I, 20 (147).

³¹ANET, p. 308.

³²R. C. Thompson, CAH 3:217. See also Joan Oates, Babylon, p. 131.

³³Wiseman leaves it vague (Chronicles, p. 38), but Thompson (CAH 3:218) argues for a revolution.

³⁴Wiseman, Chronicles, p. 38. Joan Oates, Babylon, 131.

³⁵Wiseman, Chronicles, pp. 39-42.

³⁶Wiseman, Nebuchadrezzar, p. 12.

³⁷For a personal account of his remarkable mother, Adad-guppi’, see ANET, pp 560-62. She lived to be either 102 or 104. Her life spanned most of the neo-Babylonian period.

³⁸ANET, p. 313.

³⁹For the literature on this issue, see ANET, p. 306, n. 5. (J. Lewy, “The Assyro-Babylonian Cult of the Moon and Its Culmination at the Time of Nabonidus,” HUCA 19 [1946]: 434ff; R. P. Dougherty, “Tema’s Place in the Egypto-Babylonian World of the Sixth Century B.C.” Mizraim 1 [1933]: 140-43; R. P. Dougherty, “Ancient Teima and Babylonia,” JAOS 41 [1922]: 458-59; W. F. Albright, “The Conquests of Nabonidus in Arabia,” JRAS [1925]: 293ff.).

⁴⁰ANET, p. 306.

⁴¹CAH 3:223.

⁴²ANET, p. 306.

⁴³Oates, Babylon, p 134.

⁴⁴A. de Sélincourt, The World of Herodotus, pp. 211ff.

⁴⁵CAH 3:224-225.

⁴⁶CAH 3:217, f.n. 1. Also p. 425, note.

⁴⁷Oates, Babylon, p. 133.

⁴⁸See for the reference and translation Strack-Billerbeck, Kommentar, 3:816. For the text see S. Buber, ed., Midrasch Tanchuma, Vilna, 1885. The reference is found in the commentary on Leviticus 12 (tazria’) 16.

⁴⁹CAH 3:130: The struggle continued from 609-605 when Necho was defeated at Carchemish.

⁵⁰Wilson argues for a foray against Jerusalem before Carchemish in Jehoiakim’s third year. Or we could assume that Jeremiah (46:2) is using Palestinian system and Daniel the Babylonian system.

Too often many of us become concerned, if not burdened, with the cares and difficulties of life. Often, however, it is needless concerns that worry us. Nevertheless, left to themselves such concerns and cares can foster a feeling of discouragement or despondency and in some extreme cases even a disdain for life. As Shakespeare wrote,

Care keeps his watch in every old man’s eye,
And where care lodges, sleep will never lie.¹

Similar words of cares have been voiced by many others. Thus Davies, wrote,

What is life if, full of care,
We have no time to stand and stare?²

Along with such an outlook on life some persons may become self-centered, not caring what happens, “so long as it doesn’t happen to them.”³

Quite to the contrary, others have pointed out that people would lose their pre-occupation with self if they truly cared for the needs of others. Thus Strait observes,

Life needs someone to care for so life can focus on others and not on itself. The care that focuses on others keeps the vision of life clear, not beclouded with self.⁴

In the midst of the concerns and cares of life it is better by far to turn to the Lord for his relief and guidance:

O God, whose smile is in the sky,
Whose path is in the sea,
Once more from earth’s tumultuous strife,
we gladly turn to Thee.

…….

We come as those with toil far spent
Who crave Thy rest and peace,
And from the care and fret of life,
Would find in Thee release.⁵

Similarly, Mansell said,

Low at His feet lay thy burden of carefulness,
High on His heart He will bear it for thee,
Comfort thy sorrows, and answer thy prayerfulness,
Guiding thy steps as best for thee be. ⁶

Such is altogether fitting and proper, for as we have noted previously the Lord is a gracious and compassionate God.⁷ It is he who gives assurance and hope in troublesome and even treacherous times to those who turn to him in faith and full trust:

The LORD says,
“Because he is devoted to me, I will deliver him;
I will protect him, because he is loyal to me.
When he calls out to me, I will answer him.
I will be with him when he is in trouble;
I will rescue him and bring him honor.”(Ps. 91:14-15; cf. Ps. 102:1-2)⁸

Indeed, not only for salvation, but “God’s compassion can extend to and be exercised in man’s everyday needs and affairs.”⁹

In the following study we explore what the Scriptures teach with regard to the concern and care that the God of grace and compassion has for mankind. We shall also note the implications of this teaching for believers in their walk before and with the Lord.

Concern and Care in the Old Testament

The Old Testament contains many examples of God’s concern and care for his people both as a nation and as individuals. It is a theme that occurs frequently. God’s careful creation of the world and mankind also comes to mind as well as his preservation of mankind through the flood in Noah’s time. Not to be forgotten is the Lord’s care in bringing Abram from Ur of the Chaldees to a land of God’s perpetual concern (Gen. 12:1-3). Among the many examples of God’s careful watch over Abraham in accordance with his divine promises and Abraham’s faithfulness is his sparing of Abraham’s only son Isaac (Gen. 23:13-14). The Lord was especially involved in many events in Isaac’s life as well as that of his son Jacob and in turn, the life of Joseph, especially in Joseph’s rise to power in Egypt. Indeed, Joseph’s position there would prove to be the means of preserving the Lord’s people during a time of great famine. Particularly noteworthy are Joseph’s words to his brothers as he lay dying in Egypt:

“I am about to die. But God will surely come to you and lead you up from this land to the land he swore on oath to give to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.” Joseph made the sons of Israel swear an oath. He said, “God will surely come to you. Then you must carry my `bones up from this place.” (Gen. 50:24-25)

In Joseph’s last words can be seen his confidence in the Lord’s concern for his people. Although the root (“pqd”) of the verb used here (NET, “come”) comes has a wide range of meanings both in Hebrew and other Semitic languages, here it expresses Joseph’s supreme confidence in the Lord’s providential care and faithfulness to his earlier promise made to the patriarchs. Thus the NASB translates it, “take care of.” A similar rendering may be noted in God’s words to Moses in the days leading up to his bringing Israel out of Egypt:

Go and bring together the elders of Israel and tell them, “The Lord, the God of your fathers, appeared to me—the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—saying, ‘I have attended carefully to you and what has been done to you in Egypt, and I have promised that I will bring you up out of the affliction in Egypt to the land of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites, to a land flowing with milk and honey.’” (Exod. 3:16-17; cf. 4:31)

Accordingly, Williams appropriately remarks: “God was not only concerned (pqd) for the Israelites in Egypt, but delivered them from their bondage.”¹⁰ Of further interest is the report of Moses’ action at the time of Israel’s exodus from Egypt: “Moses took the bones of Joseph with him, for Joseph had made the Israelites solemnly swear, ‘God will surely attend to you and you will carry my bones up from this place with you’” (Exod. 13:19).¹¹ The Lord is thus truly a God who demonstrates his concern for his own.

This can be seen not only in his concern for his people while they were in Egypt and at the time of the exodus, but as well in his continued care for them during their wanderings in the wilderness on the way to the Promised Land. Thus Hosea records God’s words to that effect, “I cared for you in the wilderness, in the dry desert where no water was” (Hos. 13:5). Indeed, it was Yahweh, their Deliverer “who alone could and did care for them during their wilderness wanderings (cf. Exod. 15:22-17:7; 40:36-38; Num. 11:4-34; 20:1-13; Deut. 2:7; Ps. 105:39-41; 107:4-6).”¹² Nevertheless, instead of being appreciative of all that God had done for them, “Rather than being grateful or even taking note of him, they became self-satisfied and proud, Rather remembering God, they forgot him.”¹³It is small wonder, then, that Moses would later charge the Israelites of the need for faithfulness, for their Lord truly is a God who is concerned for them and their spiritual condition, and cares for his own.

Elsewhere through Moses the Lord communicated a message concerning the urgent for them to follow the God’s commands and standards if they were to continue to experience his blessings in the land to which they were about to enter. Thus Moses admonished the people,

Today the LORD has declared you to be his special people (as he already promised you) so you may keep all his commandments. Then he will elevate you above all the nations he has made and you will receive praise, fame, and honor. You will be a people holy to the LORD your God, as he has said.” (Deut. 26:18-19).

Even their land will be under the watchful eye of the Lord (Deut. 11:11-14). Theirs could be a life of great blessings, enjoyment, and fulfillment.

If you indeed obey the LORD your God and are careful to observe all his commandments I am giving you today, the LORD your God will elevate you above all the nations of the earth. All these blessings will come to you in abundance, if you obey the LORD your God. (Deut. 28:1-2; cf. 31:9-15)

As Craigie observes with regard to the further listing of all of these blessings,

“The blessing of God would extend to every sphere of Israel’s life; to urban life and rural life (v. 3); to fertility, in man, in the ground, and in animals (v. 4); to the provision of household necessities (v. 5); to the daily activities that a man might undertake (v. 6).¹⁴ Should Israel prove to be ungrateful and unfaithful, they might well expect the judgment of a righteous and holy God (Deut. 28:15ff.).

God’s loving care did indeed extend to his people upon their entrance into the Promised Land under the leadership of Joshua. With Moses dead, the Lord appeared unto Joshua as he began his leadership of the people of Israel and charged him to fulfill his duties responsibly:

Make sure you are very strong and brave! Carefully obey all the law my servant Moses charged you to keep! Do not swerve from it to the right or the left, so that you may be successful in all that you do. This law scroll must not leave your lips! You must memorize it day and night so you can carefully obey all that is written in it. Then you will prosper and be successful. (Josh. 1:7-8)

The charge to be “very strong and brave” (or courageous) was a familiar one to Joshua, for Moses had delivered a similar challenge to him previously (Deut. 31:7-8). These words were to prove to be a divine admonition for many generations of believers (cf. 2 Sam. 10:12; 1 Chron. 19:13; 2 Chron. 32:7-8; see also, 1 Cor. 16:13).¹⁵ This charge carries with it, however, the need to obey “carefully” the standards in the Word of God. To do so brings spiritual health and well being, as well as the assurance of God’s presence and guidance: “I repeat, be strong and brave! Don’t be afraid or panic, for I, the LORD your God, am with you in all that you do” (Josh. 1:9).

Not only for Joshua but for all believers, such strength comes only from the Lord himself. Many examples of God’s care and concern for his faithful followers may be seen in subsequent Old Testament times, such as for David in the face of persecution by Saul; for Jeremiah, who often was imprisoned for his faithful ministry for the Lord; and for Daniel and his three friends in their many trials. The Lord’s challenge to Joshua was doubtless one that Job could also embrace. For he testified of a similar hope and belief:

You gave me life and faithful love,
and your care has guarded my life. (Job 10:12, HCSB)

Here Job assures the Lord of his deep, underlying conviction that it is God alone who ultimately is “directing the course of events that befall a person.”¹⁶ Moreover, despite his oft negative reactions to his physical and emotional struggles, here he expresses his confidence in God’s concern for him. For deep within his heart Job knows that it is simply the case that the Lord, the sovereign Creator, is a righteous God who can be trusted in every circumstance, no matter how difficult or terrifying. The Lord reminds Job of how great God really is and how he does look after all creation for its good (Job 38-39; 40:6-41:34), and then he confronts Job saying, “Will the one who contends with the Almighty correct him?” (Job 40:2). Job at last does come to a conscious realization of how true all of this is, and of his own need of full dependence on the Lord (Job 40:3-5; 42:1-6). Today’s believers may well commiserate with Job in his struggles, for we too often face many hardships and trials. But above all, we need to recall and keep in mind Job’s earlier words of confidence in the fact that ultimately the Lord is the One who is in control of all that occurs and that all that happens in our lives is for God’s glory and our good.¹⁷

As we noted several examples of God’s concern and care for people, we also saw that the Lord is a righteous God. Quite obviously, then, his followers should also strive to live righteously before God, and like the Lord, have a concern for the needs of others. As the ancient proverb puts it,

The righteous person knows the rights of the poor,
but the wicked one does not understand these concerns. (Prov. 29:7; NASB)

To be sure, this statement deals with legal affairs, particularly the plight of the poor and underprivileged members of society. Yet the righteous should be concerned with more that the legal right of the poor. As does the Lord, they should be concerned also for their broader needs.

The poor person and the oppressor have this in common;
the LORD gives light to the eyes of them both. (Prov. 29:13)

As Ibn Ezra once remarked, “The Lord giveth light to the eyes of both of them by giving them their want.” ¹⁸

As Waltke points out, believers should be those who understand that,

both the oppressed and the oppressor are beneficiaries of God’s common grace…. The oppressor should abandon oppressing the poor but value and share with him, recognizing that he himself enjoys life only by God’s forbearance. A poor person should not despise or envy his oppressors but recognize that even they are recipients of God’s uncommonly common grace and their lives are in God’s hands.¹⁹

Of all people, then, believers should be concerned both for the lives and the basic needs of all people -- even the poor (cf. Prov. 22:9). In a wider perspective, the Scriptures teach the need to show love to one’s neighbors. This does not stop with those living close by or simply one’s friends, but for all people (cf. Lev. 19:18).

Although God’s judgment of his people caused them to be exiles in foreign lands, the Lord’s concern for his people never wavered (cf. Isa. 41:10-20). To be sure, he had no choice but to judge them because of their sinful ways (2 Kings 17:7-12; 2 Chron. 36:15-2); yet the despite their exiled status, they had not changed their behavior. Even Israel’s leaders in Ezekiel’s day failed to profit by the Lord’s judgment. Rather, they were self-serving men—false shepherds who put their own desires above the needs of the flock, the people, who were entrusted to their care. The result was devastating. Therefore God spoke through Ezekiel:

You have not strengthened the weak, healed the sick, bandaged the injured, brought back the strays, or sought the lost, but with force and harshness you have ruled over them. They were scattered because they had no shepherd… My sheep were scattered over the entire face of the earth with no one looking or searching for them. (Ezek. 34:4-5a, 6b).

As Cooper remarks, “For lack of positive moral or spiritual leadership the people were wanderers from the Lord and became a prey to idolatry and immorality.”²⁰

Therefore, God, the good shepherd, would see to the welfare and re-gathering of his sheep. The message concerning God’s role as the shepherd of his flock, his people, is a familiar one in the Old Testament (e.g., Ps. 23:1-2; Isa. 40:11). The Lord’s shepherding of his flock is “presented as guiding (Ps. 100:3), protecting (Ps. 78:52), saving (Ezek. 34:22), and gathering (Jer. 31:10) the people, as well as leading them out to find proper nourishment (Jer. 50:19; Mic. 2:12-13).”²¹

Ezekiel returns to the subject of the judged and exiled people and Lord’s concern as a shepherd in chapter 36. Here, however, there is a significant shift of emphasis. Having noted his people’s past sinfulness, which brought about the Lord’s judgment and their resultant scattering (Ezek. 36:16-19), the Lord charges them with further misconduct; “When they arrived in the nations where they went, they profaned my holy name” (v. 20a). Thus because of their spiritually depraved conduct, the people around them belittled the Lord (v. 20b), bringing a blot on the very name of the Lord. As the Lord himself declares, “I was concerned for my holy reputation, which the house of Israel profaned among the nations where they went” (v. 21). As Block points out, “A failure of outside observers to distinguish between ultimate human causation and immediate divine action could lead to false views of God, hence the profanation of his name.”²²

Despite his people’s sinfulness, however, a caring God would see to their need for the sake of his name (vv. 22-23) and take them back to their own land (vv. 24, 28-30). Not only this, but the Lord would purify his people (v. 25) and put a new spirit within them (v. 26). Such will be a spirit, which will lead them to desire to live a holy life, for it will be controlled by the Holy Spirit: “I will put my Spirit within you; I will take the initiative and you will obey my statutes and carefully observe my regulations” (v. 27). Thus the Lord’s concern for his name and the welfare of his people are brought together in God’s gracious deliverance and restoration, and the spiritual cleansing and maturing of his people. Alexander’s remarks are appropriate to all of this: “What a contrast between God’s holiness and grace and humanity’s sin! Sin never deserves mercy. Yet the Lord always deals graciously and mercifully as well as justly.”²³

Still further, it is evident in these and the further verses in this passage that there is a verbal allusion to God’s existing covenant with his people. Thus Feinberg observes, “God is said to be sanctified when his character is made evident to the world, especially in and through those who are in covenant relation to him.”²⁴

Indeed, elsewhere Ezekiel does distinctly record prophetic details concerning a new covenant between God and his people. As I have pointed out previously, Ezekiel’s use of the covenant theme is in harmony with one of the dominant theme of the Old Testament:

Much like the inviolable Royal Grant treaties of the ancient Near East, The Abrahamic Covenant (Gen. 12:1-7; 13:14-17; 15:1-18; 17:1-8) was irrevocable. Yet it would be channeled through the Davidic Covenant (2 Sam 7:11-16; 1Chron 17:10-14; 2 Sam. 23:5; Ps. 89:28-39) and ultimately both would find their climax and completion in one grand New Covenant (Jer. 31:31-37; 33:25-26; Ezek. 34:11-14, 22-30; 37: 22-27). ²⁵

Praise the Lord, “Whatever eschatological implications there may be in the age-old promise to Abraham, it is also true that such blessings have already been initiated in Christ (Rom. 4:13-17; 8:14-17; 11:13-32).”²⁶

Moreover, a concerned, caring God will also see to the fulfillment of all of his covenant promises in terms of the New Covenant centered in Christ Jesus, the Lord. As Jesus himself declared in connection with the Last Supper: “This is my blood, the blood of the covenant, that is poured out for many, for the forgiveness of sins” (Matt. 26:28). Paul recalls his words by emphasizing that Jesus is speaking of the New Covenant (1 Cor. 11:25). All believers are indeed now permanently united in one grand New Covenant. Nevertheless, as Israel was to do, they should have a concern for God’s holy name in all they do and say, and be grateful for his constant concern and care for them.

Appropriately, we now turn to examine the theme of God’s concern and care in the New Testament.

Concern and Care in the New Testament

Jesus is perhaps the supreme demonstration of God the Father’s concern and care. Such is shown in Jesus’ oft praying to the Father with the accompanying sense that he is always with him (e.g., John 16:32). Likewise The Apostle Paul was consistently aware of God’s concern and care for him, even in the face of great danger (e.g., Acts 27:21-26). God’s concern for all people is highlighted in his sending of his son Jesus Christ to die for all mankind (cf. John 3:16; 11:25-26; 14:1-3).

The author of Hebrews, building upon Psalm 8:4-6, points out that the Lord’s concern for man is indeed shown in Christ’s coming to die for man, so that people may live eternally through Christ’s sacrifice (Heb. 2:6-8). The eighth Psalm is basically a creation psalm and stresses the importance of man and his role, which God has designed for him within that creation (cf. Ps. 8:4-6). Man has been assigned the highest place. The writer of Hebrews cites these verses saying,

What is man that you think of him, or
the son of man that you care for him?
You made him lower than the angels for a little while.
You crowned him with glory and honor.
You put all things under his control. (Heb. 2:6-8)

Although the term “son of man” (v. 6b) is a parallel term for “man” in verse 6a (cf. Ps. 8:4), it is of interest to note that Daniel employed it of the coming Messiah to whom ultimate authority and control is given (Dan. 7:13-14). Jesus often called himself the “Son of Man” and declares, that one day mankind will “see the Son of Man arriving on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory” (Matt. 24:30; cf. Dan. 7:13). Hence, it is not surprising or without precedent that the author of Hebrews would cite Psalm 8:4-6 in referring to Jesus in God’s concern for mankind. As Lightfoot remarks, “Man originally was given dominion. He is still destined to achieve it. But this dominion can only be realized, as the author goes on to say, through the ideal or representative man, Jesus Christ.”²⁷

Indeed, the “Son of Man,” the Messiah, our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, who is coming both to fulfill his mission, gave his life so that people may live everlastingly (Heb. 2:9-15). As Bruce observes, “Because the Son of Man suffered, because his suffering has been crowned by His exaltation, therefore His death avails for all.”²⁸ The author of Hebrews brings things to a head by saying,

For surely his concern is not for angels, but is concerned for Abraham’s descendants. Therefore he had to be made like his brothers and sisters in every respect, so that that he could become a merciful and faithful high priest in things relating to God, to make atonement for the sins of the people. (Heb. 2:16-17)

As Hughes remarks, “In taking to himself the ‘seed of Abraham’ he shows not only that he belongs to but also that he is the fulfillment of the line of the covenant. The covenant established by God with Abraham is brought to a head and finds its consummation in Christ.” ²⁹ It is also vital to remember that all believers, not just Jews “are one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s descendants, heirs according to the promise” (Gal. 3:28-29).

Divine concern for man, especially believers, is reflected in Jesus’ teaching with regard to a concern for one’s “neighbors.” The care and concern one shows or fails to show flow from one’s inner perspective on spiritual concerns and demonstrate one’s relation to the Lord. As Jesus challenged his hearers, may we, “Be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matt. 5:48).

Jesus also displayed his concern for his disciples, their spiritual welfare, and their eternal relationship with him. Such is emphasized repeatedly in Jesus’ parting speech to them (John 14-16; see, e.g., John 14:1-7, 25-26; 15:9-17; 16:12-16), which culminates in assuring words:

I have told you these things so that in me you may have peace. In the world you have trouble and suffering, but take courage, I have conquered the world. (John 16:33; cf. 14:27)

Moreover, as in God’s role as a shepherd in the Old Testament demonstrated divine concern and care, so an interesting and significant aspect of the divine caring is portrayed in Christ as shepherd in the New Testament. Here God’s son, Jesus Christ presents himself as the Good Shepherd (John 10:11), while others report that he is the Great Shepherd who sees to the needs of his believing flock (Heb. 13:20-21; cf. 1 Pet: 2:25), and the Chief Shepherd who, having entered Heaven and extended the work of shepherding to “under shepherds,” is coming again for his flock (1 Pet. 5:4). Thus just as divine concern for mankind is demonstrated in God the Father, so also it is seen in God’s son, Jesus Christ. Is this still the case? Having asked the question, “Does Jesus care?” the hymn writer answers this with a resounding. “Yes!”

O yes, He cares—I know He cares!
His heart is touched with my grief;
When the days are weary, the long nights dreary,
I know my Savior cares.³⁰

As well, continued divine care may be experienced in the ministry of the Holy Spirit in and through the believer (e.g., John 14:16-17; 16:12-16; Rom. 8:15-17, 26-27). To be sure, the divine presence via the indwelling Holy Spirit and the believer’s union with Christ (Gal. 2:20) is an abiding reality and comfort, even as Jesus himself assured his followers: “Remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age” (Matt. 28:20).

We noted previously that Paul was aware of God’s concern and care for him in his ministry. Paul also expresses his anxious concern for the all the churches (2 Cor. 11:28). So much was this the case that he declares, “Although I am a free man and not anyone’s slave, I have made myself a slave to everyone, in order to win more people” (1 Cor. 9:19; HCSB). Therefore, whether to Jew or Gentile he could say, “I have become all things to all people, so that I may by every possible means save some” (v. 22). If Paul could willingly give himself s a “slave” for the Gospel’s sake, he could advise those who were truly slaves in society,

Were you called while a ‘slave’? It should not be a concern to you. But if you can become free, by all means take the opportunity. For who is called by the Lord as a slave is the Lord’s freedman. (1 Cor. 7:21-22; HCSB).

Paul’s basic advice in this section, however, was to surrender everything to the Lord and trust in him and become contented with whatever status he has:

“Each one must live his life in the situation the Lord assigned when God called him. This is what I commanded in all the churches.…. Brothers each person should remain with God in whatever situation he was called” (vv. 17, 24)

Were they slaves of men? Let that not be a major concern, for if they were true believers, “One who is redeemed by Christ, who feels that he belongs to him, that his will is the supreme rule of action, and who performs all his duties, not as a man-pleaser, but as doing service as to the Lord, and not to men… is inwardly free whatever his external relations may be.”³¹

Similarly, Peter advises his readers to live in humility toward one another, remembering that God has an interest and concern for them (1 Pet. 5:5-6). Therefore, he tells them that as believers they should cast “all your cares on him because he cares for you” (1 Pet. 5:7). Indeed, worldly cares seem trivial when we recall that the Lord genuinely has a concern and has a care for his own. Thus in his now classic commentary on 1 Peter Selwyn points out that Peter’s words have been an

“assurance…through the centuries! We need not be concerned by fiery trial or persecution or hatred or abuse, for we have a heavenly Father Who cares for us. Nothing can cross our paths, nothing can touch us, nothing can harm us without His permissive will. Beloved, He cares for us!”³²

When we live with a concern for one another, it becomes easier to realize that they have a concern for us. What Joy that can bring! Even Paul could feel this way, for he came to understand fully the Philippians’’ long-held concern for him and his ministry (Phil. 4:11). Therefore, even though he was in prison for the Gospel, he could enthusiastically say, “I have great joy in the Lord because now at last you have expressed your concern for me. (Now I know you were concerned but had no opportunity to do anything)” (Phil. 4:10). More than the sustaining gift, which they had sent to Paul (cf. Phil. 2:20), he was thankful for the realization of their concern for him. May we, as did Paul and Peter, have a concern for our fellow man and be joyfully thankful for their concern and care for us!

Application

Sometimes it seems to us that no one cares or we ourselves are tempted to dismiss any concern for a given situation saying, “Oh, who cares?” The Scriptures reveal that there is someone who always cares; it is the Lord. God is moreover the ultimate source of the believer’s help.

I look up to the hills.
From where does my help come?
My help comes from the LORD,
the creator of heaven and earth.
The Lord will protect you in all you do,
now and forevermore. (Ps. 121:1-2, 8)

God’s concern and care are apparent especially in times of great difficulty.³³ The Psalms are replete with indications of God’s helpful care for his own: “God is a ‘help and deliverer’ (Ps. 70:5). In Psalm 115 the declaration that God is their ‘help’ and ‘shield’ is said of three different groups (Ps. 115:9-11).”³⁴ Even in times of great suffering and difficulty the believer may be assured of God’s care for his own. Seen in a different perspective, suffering can be a sacred trust from God, bringing the sufferer to full dependence on the Lord and providing a testimony to others of God’s sufficiency at all times (John 9:2-3), Seeing God as he really is not only brings comfort, but hope and rest, for the suffering believer is thus assured that the Lord’s will shall be accomplished to his glory and the believer’s good (Ps. 34:16; 97:10; Prov. 3:7; Eccl. 12:13-14)). Indeed, God’s power and concern are available to the believer to carry the sufferer through his trial (Ps. 23:4; Prov. 15:3; Jer. 17:17-18). The believer may assuredly say,

“I’m never alone to suffer life’s sorrows;
I’m never alone to face any care;
No, never alone through all life’s tomorrows;
He’s always there, each burden to share;
I’m never alone!”

If God is concerned not only for us but his holy name, should we not be concerned for his name and reputation (cf. Ezek. 36:21; Ps. 60:1-2,4; 68:3-6; 100:4; Luke 11:12; James 2:7)? Likewise, should we not be concerned for the very name of Jesus, our Savior and Lord? The Scriptures challenge us with the fact that,

“God exalted him and gave him a name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow-- in heaven and on earth and under the earth—and every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord to the glory of God the Father” (Phil. 2:9-11; cf. Acts 4:12 ).

As the hymn writer exclaims,

“Jesus,” O how sweet the name, “Jesus,” every day the same;
“Jesus,” let all saints proclaim, its worthy name forever.” ³⁵

Therefore, as believers, let us so live as to bring no shame upon that name, but rather, live so as to bear witness to the power of the living Christ as our “hope of glory’ (Col. 1:27).

Thus Paul advises us to live lives that reflect God’s standard of holiness (Col. 3:12-15). He then gives this challenge:

“Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and exhorting one another with all wisdom, singing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, all with grace in your hearts to God And whatever you do in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.” (Col. 3:16-17)

As the hymn writer says,

More like Jesus would I be, let my Savior dwell in me;
Fill my soul with peace and love, make me gentle as a dove;
More like Jesus while I go, pilgrim in this world below;
Poor in spirit would I be; let my Savior dwell in me.³⁶

The Lord’s concern and care for those in need should also characterize believers. Jesus was not only a living model for believers in his often meeting their physical needs, but reminded his followers of the necessity for believers to care for all people—whatever their need (Luke 10:30-37; see note 24 on Luke 10:36, NET). Having told the story of the good Samaritan’s concern for the needs of a Jewish man, when two Jewish religious leaders did not, Jesus answered the one who had approached him with question of “who is my neighbor?” (Luke 10:29) with his own question as to whether he understood the parable (v. 36). When the man’s reply showed that he did, Jesus then admonished him, “Go and do the same” (v. 37).

Let us also remember to be concerned for the needs of all people. This is particularly pertinent in these times of great international turmoil. And as we do so, let us be concerned for the lives and needs of believers everywhere. We are one spiritual body in Christ and, “If one member suffers, everyone suffers with it” (1 Cor. 12:26). In every way, then, as does the Lord let us be those who are concerned and care for the needs of others, and be those who work, fellowship, and be of spiritual assistance to our fellow believers.

If I can do my duty as a Christian ought,
If I can bring back beauty to a world up-wrought,
If I can spread love’s message that the Master taught,
Then my living shall not be in vain.

…….

If I can help somebody as I pass along,
Then my living shall not be in vain.³⁷

---

¹ William Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet, act II, scene III, line 35.

² William Henry Davies, “Leisure,” as cited in Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations, eds., John Bartlett and Justin Kaplan, 16th ed. (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1992), 610.

³ William Howard Taft, as cited in Quotable Quotations, ed. Lloyd Cory (Wheaton: Victor Books, 1989), 52.

⁴ C. Neil Strait, as cited in Quotable Quotations, ibid.

⁵ John Haynes Holmes, “O God, Whose Smile is in the Sky, “ as cited in Masterpieces of Religious verse, ed. James Dalton Morrison (New York: Harper, 1948), 29.

⁶ John S. B. Mansell, “Worship the Lord in the Beauty of Holiness,” as cited in Masterpieces ibid, 114.

⁷ Richard D. Patterson, “A Great God of Grace and Compassion,” Biblical Studies Press, 2013.

⁸ Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture citations will be from The NET Bible.

⁹ Patterson, op. cit., 10.

¹⁰ See Tyler F.Williams, “pqd,” in New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, ed. Willem A. VanGemeren, 5 vols. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1997) 3:661. See further, Williams’ full discussion, pp. 657-63.

¹¹ See the comments in the NET footnote.

¹² Richard D. Patterson, Hosea (Richardson, TX: Biblical Studies Press, 2009), 128.

¹³ Richard D. Patterson, “Hosea,” in Cornerstone Biblical Commentary, ed. Philip W. Comfort, 18 vols. (Carol Stream, Il: Tyndale Hose, 2008) 10:82.

¹⁴ Peter C. Craigie, The Book of Deuteronomy in The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976), 336.

¹⁵ See further, Richard D. Patterson, “The Source of True Strength,” Biblical Studies Press, 2013.

¹⁶ John E. Hartley, The Book of Job, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 187.

¹⁷ See further my comments in the application section.

¹⁸ Ibn Ezra as cited in Proverbs, The Soncino Books of the Bible, ed., A. Cohen. rev. ed., A. J. Rosenberg (Jerusalem: The Soncino Press, 1985), 196.

¹⁹ Bruce K. Waltke, The Book of Proverbs: Chapters 15-31, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 441.

²⁰ Lamar Eugene Cooper, Sr., Ezekiel, The New American Commentary, ed. E. Ray Clendenen (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1994), 300.

²¹ “Sheep, Shepherd,” in Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, eds. Leland Ryken, James C. Wilhoit, Tremper Longman III (Downers Grove: 1998), 784).

²² Daniel L. Block, The Book of Ezekiel: Chapters 25-48, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 348-49.

²³ Ralph H. Alexander, “ Ezekiel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, eds. Tremper Longman III and David E. Garland, 13 vols. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, rev. ed., 2010) 7: 843.

²⁴ Charles Lee Feinberg, The Prophecy of Ezekiel (Chicago: Moody, 1969), 208-09.

²⁵ Patterson, Hosea: An Exegetical Commentary, 26.

²⁶ Patterson, “Hosea,” in Cornerstone Biblical Commentary, 10:17.

²⁷ Neil R. Lightfoot, Jesus Christ Today: A Commentary on the Book of Hebrews (Grand Rapids; Baker, 1976), 74.

²⁸ F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), 39.

²⁹ Philip Edgecombe Hughes, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), 118-19.

³⁰ Frank E. Graeff, “Does Jesus Care?”

³¹ Charles Hodge, An Exposition of the First Epistle to the Corinthians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956), 125.

³² E. Schuyler, The Life and Letters of Saint Peter (New York: Publication Office, “Our Hope,” Arno C. Gaebelein, Inc., 1941), 229.

³³ See further, Richard Patterson, “Rest in Troublesome Times,” Biblical Studies Press, 2014.

³⁴ “Help, Helper,” in Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, op. cit., 378.

³⁵ W.C. Martin, “The Name of Jesus.”

³⁶ Fanny Crosby, “More Like Jesus Would I Be.”

³⁷ A. Bazel Androzzo, “If I Can Help Somebody.”