DOCSLIB.ORG

Kingdoms of Israel and Judah I. History and Archaeology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Kingdoms of Israel and Judah I. History and Archaeology 285 Kingdoms of Israel and Judah 286 Portrayals of the kingdom of God and God’s prayerful use of “Blessed are You, O Lord, Our God, kingship use a variety of devices to portray and King of the Universe,” introducing the table grace project the kingdom into different contexts. A film in Unstrung Heroes (dir. Diane Keaton, 1995, US) and that blends ancient and contemporary is DeMille’s within the lighting of the Shabbat candles at the silent film, The King of Kings (1927, US). As the title outset of Schindler’s List (dir. Steven Spielberg, 1993, of the film foreshadows, the story, otherwise set in US), to Joyeux Noël (dir. Christian Carion, 2005, FR/ ancient Israel, culminates with the image of gigan- DE/UK/BE/RO/NO) wherein a subversive Christmas tic Jesus, resurrected king, arms outstretched reign- Eve peace on “no man’s land” is initiated with the ing over images of 1927 American agricultural and singing of “Stille Nacht/Silent Night” and crowned industrial capitalist enterprise and the text, “Lo, I with “Adeste Fideles/O Come, All Ye Faithful,” am with you always” (Matt 28 : 20). DeMille’s pro- which hails Jesus’ birth as the birth of a king. jection of Jesus the king and his kingdom is a con- Bibliography: ■ Griere, S., “Mark Dornford May: Transpos- fluence of Jesus’ kingship and the American doc- ing the Classic,” in The Bible in Motion: A Handbook of the Bible trine of Manifest Destiny. As DeMille’s film ends and Its Reception in Film, pt. 2 (ed. R. Burnette-Bletsch; HBR with a vision of Jesus reigning over “today,” recon- 2; Berlin 2016) 721–28. textualization of Jesus’ story in effect projects the Samuel Giere kingdom of God and Jesus’ kingship into new See also /Afterlife; /Heaven; /Heaven, Gates space. In David Greene’s Godspell: A Musical Based on of; /Key, Keys; /Paradise the Gospel according to St. Matthew (1973, US), Jesus’ story is set in New York City. God’s kingship is clear from the beginning of the film, when against Kingdoms of Israel and Judah shots of the city the Divine Narrator says: “My name is known – God and king, the most in maj- I. History and Archaeology esty in whom no beginning can be and no end…” II. Judaism III. Film As the disciples are drawn from their lives by a Pied Piper-like John the Baptist, the life of the city is suspended while Jesus and his disciples enact the I. History and Archaeology kingdom of God as a troupe of clowns throughout 1. The Early Monarchy. There is very little con- the otherwise empty city. The impact of the king- crete archaeological evidence for the early stages of dom of God, however, is unclear as the film ends the Israelite/Judahite monarchy(ies). While it has with the disciples carrying Jesus’ body and melting been suggested to identify the formation of a polity back into the city’s bustling life. In Mark Dornford- in the region north of Jerusalem in the late Iron I/ May’s Son of Man/Jezile (2006, ZA), a recontextualiza- early IIA (ca. 11th/10th cent. BCE), mirroring the tion of the Jesus story in contemporary South Af- biblical tradition of the kingdom of Saul, this is rica, this world is claimed by Jesus in tension with somewhat hard to prove. Even more so, the very of both God and Satan. In the immediate wake of the the existence of archaeological evidence (and evi- slaughter of the innocents, God’s archangel Gabriel dence or lack thereof) of the “United Monarchy” invites the boy Jesus to come with him. The child, has been, extensively discussed. refusing to go, replies, “This is my world!” Like- While most scholarship in the mid-to-late 20th wise, when the adult Jesus is being tempted by Sa- century CE believed that concrete evidence of the tan in the desert, Jesus (Andile Kosi) pushes Satan “United Monarchy” could be identified (such as the down a sand dune as he declares, “This is my so-called “Solomonic gates” at Hazor, Gezer and world!” In this recontextualization, Jesus pushes Megiddo), at present, this is a highly contested against both God and Satan for rule over the topic and many question whether there is any sub- present. Also, in relation to DeMille’s casting of Je- stantial archaeological evidence of the United Mon- sus’ reign over 1927 America, in Son of Man the im- archy. Positions on this differ considerably, from age of Jesus’ reign is a brightly colored mural on those who believe that the United Monarchy was a the side of a building in a contemporary township. large and prosperous kingdom, mirroring to a large In this mural Jesus hangs on the cross, which in Son extent the image portrayed in the biblical text, of Man is an unmasking of the evil powers of the those who suggest that there was a kingdom of Da- present. Other films which recontextualize the vid and Solomon but of a minor scale, and those kingdom of God and God’s kingship in Christ are: who question the very existence of this early king- Jesus Christ Superstar (dir. Norman Jewison, 1973, dom and see it instead as a literary creation of either US), Babette’s Feast (dir. Gabriel Axel, 1987, DK), Jé- the later Judahite kingdom or of post-Iron Age sus de Montréal (dir. Denys Arcand, 1989, CA/FR), times. By and large, these positions are related to and Still Crazy (dir. Brian Gibson, 1998, UK). the various approaches on the understanding of the The image of God’s kingdom/kingship also rise of the early Israelite/Judahite kingdoms, plays a prominent role in both Jewish and Christian whether in fact that of the biblical narrative of an piety, as depicted in a number of films. From the initial “United Monarchy” followed by a northern Encyclopedia of the Bible and Its Reception vol. 15 Authenticated | [email protected] © Walter de Gruyter, Berlin/Boston, 2017 Download Date | 8/16/17 1:28 PM 287 Kingdoms of Israel and Judah 288 and southern kingdom, or whether the Northern the 9th century BCE onwards, which is mirrored as (Israelite) Kingdom was the first substantial polity, well in the regional role of this kingdom in the bib- and only later, with its weakening and destruction, lical text. It is at this time that the Kingdom of Is- did the Southern (Judahite) Kingdom create a narra- rael is embroiled in a geopolitical struggle with the tive – claiming earlier primacy. Aramaeans, in particular under the reign of Hazael In any case, the lack of substantive epigraphic of Damascus. Various destruction layers at sites in materials from the early Iron Age II, along with ad- the north and south of the Levant have been related ditional explicit and extensive archaeological evi- to these events (e.g., Reḥov, Jezreel, Aphek, Gath, dence, indicates that even if an early United Monar- Zayit and others), and events during this period are chy existed, it lacked a high level of political and most likely the background for the so-called “House bureaucratic complexity. The mention of the of David” inscription from Tel Dan. Due to the fact “House of David” in the Tel Dan inscription (and that the material remains of the northern Kingdom possibly in the Mesha inscription as well), dating to during the 9th century are more impressive and ex- the mid 9th century BCE, is seen by many as an tensive than those found at most contemporaneous indication that even if the size of the Judahite mon- southern, Judahite sites, some believe that the Isra- archy during the 10th century was not as large as elite kingdom of the 9th century BCE was the first, depicted in the biblical text, there was some sort of and original, kingdom of the Israelite/Judahite cul- Judahite polity already during the 10th century tures, and the biblical description of the earlier BCE. Some also see the archaeological finds from “United Monarchy” is a later ideologically driven Iron IIA levels in the City of David in Jerusalem, narrative, with little basis. and Khirbet Qeiyafa in the Shephelah, as evidence From this it is suggested that during the 9th of this early polity. century BCE, the Judahite monarchy was subservi- The Sheshonq/Shishaq campaign of ca. 925 ent to the Israelite Kingdom, only slowly rising to BCE, in which this Egyptian Pharaoh of the 22nd importance in the 8th century BCE and in particu- Dynasty (Sheshonq I) campaigned to the Levant, is lar, after the fall of the Samaria to the Assyrians in an important interface between the archaeological 722 BCE. Archaeological evidence of a substantial remains, and biblical and non-biblical records. Over southern, Judahite Kingdom, is as stated above, the years, destruction levels at various sites have somewhat minimal during the 9th century BCE. been connected to this campaign, as well as a frag- Nevertheless, at sites such as Jerusalem, Lachish ment of the Sheshonq stela at Megiddo, and most and Beth Shemesh, there appears to be evidence re- recently, a Sheshonq scarab at Faynan. Apparent lating to this period (and without a doubt towards changes in settlement patterns is some areas may the end of the 9th cent.), most probably indicating reflect this event as well. Some scholars believe that the existence of a small kingdom at first, expanding the supposedly clear cut archaeological evidence can during the 9th century BCE, and becoming more only be explained as a) evidence of a clear biblical dominant during the 8th century Both in the memory of this event; b) that this reflects an Egyp- northern and southern kingdoms there is very little tian attempt to curtail the geopolitical status evidence of literacy during the 9th and early 8th “United Monarchy” and its immediate aftermath.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2 the Assyrian Empire, the Conquest of Israel, and the Colonization of Judah 37 I
    ISRAEL AND EMPIRE ii ISRAEL AND EMPIRE A Postcolonial History of Israel and Early Judaism Leo G. Perdue and Warren Carter Edited by Coleman A. Baker LONDON • NEW DELHI • NEW YORK • SYDNEY 1 Bloomsbury T&T Clark An imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc Imprint previously known as T&T Clark 50 Bedford Square 1385 Broadway London New York WC1B 3DP NY 10018 UK USA www.bloomsbury.com Bloomsbury, T&T Clark and the Diana logo are trademarks of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc First published 2015 © Leo G. Perdue, Warren Carter and Coleman A. Baker, 2015 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publishers. Leo G. Perdue, Warren Carter and Coleman A. Baker have asserted their rights under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as Authors of this work. No responsibility for loss caused to any individual or organization acting on or refraining from action as a result of the material in this publication can be accepted by Bloomsbury or the authors. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN: HB: 978-0-56705-409-8 PB: 978-0-56724-328-7 ePDF: 978-0-56728-051-0 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. Typeset by Forthcoming Publications (www.forthpub.com) 1 Contents Abbreviations vii Preface ix Introduction: Empires, Colonies, and Postcolonial Interpretation 1 I.
    [Show full text]
  • Alexander Janneus As High Priest and King: Struggling Between Jewish and Hellenistic Concepts of Rule
    religions Article Alexander Janneus as High Priest and King: Struggling between Jewish and Hellenistic Concepts of Rule Vasile Babota Department of Biblical Theology, Faculty of Theology, Pontifical Gregorian University, Piazza della Pilotta, 4, 00187 Roma RM, Italy; [email protected] Received: 6 December 2019; Accepted: 9 January 2020; Published: 12 January 2020 Abstract: Josephus refers explicitly to Alexander Janneus in his narratives in both War and Antiquities only as king. Janneus’s high priestly office is only implied, and that in a context that is hostile to him (War 1.88//Ant. 13.372). If one looks at Josephus’s list of high priests in Ant. 20.242, there he reports that Janneus acted both as king and priest for “twenty-seven years”. Was it Josephus who did not want to refer explicitly to Janneus as high priest in his narratives, was this dictated by his source/s, or by some other reason/s? More specifically, why is there a contrast between the narratives and the list? This study adopts source-critical, comparative, and interdisciplinary approach. It also compares Janneus with other rulers from the Hellenistic world with whom he shared many characteristics. However, certain aspects make the Hasmonean high priestly monarchy unique, dictated mainly by theological reasons. That of Janneus is an example of an institutional clash. Josephus was aware of the complexity and controversial aspects surrounding the institution of Hasmonean kingship and its combination with the high priesthood. For various reasons he chose not to identify Janneus explicitly as high priest in his narratives, but rather focus mainly on the royal policy.
    [Show full text]
  • Are the Hasmoneans Legitimised As Kings in 1 Maccabees?
    Are the Hasmoneans Legitimised as Kings in 1 Maccabees? Dongbin Choi September 2013 Dissertation submitted as partial requirement for the degree of MRes in Theology and Religious Studies at the University of Nottingham Abstract Concerning the belief about continuation of the Davidic dynasty in the Second Temple Jewish literature, the present study seeKs to understand how the belief may have been understood in 1 Maccabees. Specifically, it asKs whether the Hasmoneans are legitimised as Kings in the booK, replacing the Davidic dynasty. Through examining relevant passages such as 2:57, 5:62, 14:25–49, and 14:41, it is argued that the author of 1 Maccabees does not present the Hasmoneans as legitimate kings. Instead, he preserves the traditional belief that the Davidic dynasty will continue. 1 AcKnowledgements I would liKe to express my gratitude to my supervisor Professor Roland Deines for the important comments, suggestions and, most of all, his unceasing encouragement. I am responsible for any errors and defects in the present study. I should also thank those scholars with whom I made dialogues in the present study. Even if I disagree with some of them, I should acKnowledge that I have learned a lot from them. I would also like to thanK my parents for supporting me in many ways. Finally, I would liKe to thanK my loving wife for her untiring support and unfailing love. Particularly, despite undergoing the first trimester of her pregnancy, she remained supportive to my study and I owe her so much. This worK is dedicated to her. 2 Table of Contents 1.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is the Basic Timeline of the Old Testament?
    What is the basic timeline of the Old Testament? The following timeline of the Old Testament has been compiled with the assumption that the genealogies are literal and complete. If so, God created the world about 6000 years ago. All years are approximate. Creation to the Flood Creation: 4000 B.C. (we don't know how long Adam and Eve lived in the Garden before their exile.) Adam: 4000 B.C. – 3070 B.C. (Genesis 2:7; 5:5) Methuselah: 3350 B.C. – 2350 B.C. (Genesis 5:21; 5:27) Noah: 2950 B.C. – 2000 B.C. (Genesis 5:29; 9:29) Flood: 2350 B.C. (Genesis 6-9) Note that Methuselah died a very short time before the Flood. It is possible that his name, literally "death/spear/violence – bring," was the prophecy "his death shall bring." His death certainly did herald a significant event. The Flood to Abraham Flood: 2350 B.C. (Genesis 6-9) Tower of Babel: 2250 B.C. (Genesis 11:1-9) Egypt founded: 2170 B.C. Abraham: 2165 B.C. – 1990 B.C. (Genesis 11:26; 25:8) The genealogies in the Old Testament show that Noah died while Abraham's father was living. Noah's father, Lamech, was born about eighty years before Adam died. It's very possible that the story of creation could have been passed on through very few steps. Abraham to the Exile Abraham: 2165 B.C. – 1990 B.C. (Genesis 11:26; 25:8) Abraham goes to Canaan: 2090 B.C. (Genesis 11:31) Ishmael: 2080 B.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Exile and Return Beihefte Zur Zeitschrift Für Die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft
    Exile and Return Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft Edited by John Barton, Ronald Hendel, Reinhard G. Kratz and Markus Witte Volume 478 Exile and Return The Babylonian Context Edited by Jonathan Stökl and Caroline Waerzeggers DE GRUYTER ISBN 978-3-11-041700-5 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-041928-3 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-041952-8 ISSN 0934-2575 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress. Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2015 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Printing and binding: CPI books GmbH, Leck ♾ Printed on acid-free paper Printed in Germany www.degruyter.com Table of Contents Introduction | 1 Laurie E. Pearce Identifying Judeans and Judean Identity in the Babylonian Evidence | 7 Kathleen Abraham Negotiating Marriage in Multicultural Babylonia: An Example from the Judean Community in Āl-Yāhūdu | 33 Gauthier Tolini From Syria to Babylon and Back: The Neirab Archive | 58 Ran Zadok West Semitic Groups in the Nippur Region between c. 750 and 330 B.C.E. | 94 Johannes Hackl and Michael Jursa Egyptians in Babylonia in the Neo-Babylonian and Achaemenid Periods | 157 Caroline Waerzeggers Babylonian Kingship in the Persian Period: Performance and Reception | 181 Jonathan Stökl “A Youth Without Blemish, Handsome, Proficient in all Wisdom, Knowledgeable and Intelligent”: Ezekiel’s Access to Babylonian Culture | 223 H. G. M. Williamson The Setting of Deutero-Isaiah: Some Linguistic Considerations | 253 Madhavi Nevader Picking Up the Pieces of the Little Prince:Refractions of Neo-Babylonian Kingship Ideology in Ezekiel 40–48? | 268 VI Table of Contents Lester L.
    [Show full text]
  • The Religion of Idumea and Its Relationship to Early Judaism
    religions Article The Religion of IdumeaArticle and Its Relationship to Early The Religion of Idumea and Its Relationship to Judaism Early Judaism Yigal Levin The Israel and Golda Koschitzky DepartmentYigal Levin of Jewish History and Contemporary Jewry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan 5290002, Israel;The [email protected] Israel and GoldaKoschitzky Department of Jewish History and Contemporary Jewry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan 5290002, Israel; [email protected] Received: 1 September 2020; Accepted: 21 September 2020; Published: 24 September 2020 Received: 1 September 2020; Accepted: 21 September 2020; Published: 24 September 2020 Abstract: For several hundred years, from the late Iron Age to the end of the 2nd century BCE, the southern neighbor of Judea was “Idumea”, populated by descendants of Edomites, together with Abstract: For several hundred years, from the late Iron Age to the end of the 2nd century BCE, Qedarite and other Arabs and a mix of additional ethnicities. This paper examines the known data the southern neighbor of Judea was “Idumea”, populated by descendants of Edomites, together with on the identity, especially religious identity, of these Idumeans, using a wide range of written Qedarite and other Arabs and a mix of additional ethnicities. This paper examines the known data sources and archaeological data. Within the Bible, “Edom” is presented as Israel’s twin and its on the identity, especially religious identity, of these Idumeans, using a wide range of written sources harshest enemy, but there are hints that the Edomites worshipped the God of Israel. While the and archaeological data. Within the Bible, “Edom” is presented as Israel’s twin and its harshest origins of the “Edomite deity” Qaus remain obscure, as does the process of their migration into enemy, but there are hints that the Edomites worshipped the God of Israel.
    [Show full text]
  • An Overview of Israelite and Jewish History by Felix Just, S.J., Ph.D
    An Overview of Israelite and Jewish History by Felix Just, S.J., Ph.D. Main Stages of Israelite & Jewish History: 4000 Years of Development (Adapted from the Encyclopedia of Religion) 0. Pre-Historic Period (begins 3760 BCE, acc. to traditional Jewish calendar) { Creation of the World; Adam & Eve; Cain & Abel; Noah & the Flood; Tower of Babel (factual history or mythical stories?) I. Hebrew/Israelite Period (Second Millennium to 539 BCE) { Abraham & the Israelite Patriarchs; Moses & the Exodus { Joshua & the Conquest; Era of Judges (Confederation of 12 Tribes) { United Monarchy (Saul, David, Solomon) { Divided Monarchies (N: Israel; S: Judah); Destruction of 1st Temple; Babylonian Exile II. Second Temple Period (ca. 539 BCE - 70 CE) { Persian Era (Jews return from exile, rebuild Jerusalem & Temple) { Hellenistic/Greek Era (Alexander the Great; Ptolemies & Seleucids) { Maccabean/Hasmonean Era (desecration & rededication of Temple) { Roman Era (Herod the Great; Jesus; Destruction of 2nd Temple) III. Rabbinic Period (ca. 70 CE - 6th Century) { Leading rabbis adapt Judaism for the post-Temple era; focus on reinterpreting & applying the Torah (both written & oral) { Canonization of the Hebrew Bible; Codification of the Mishnah; Compilation of the Talmuds; other rabbinic literature IV. Medieval Period (6th - 16th Centuries) { Solidification of Jewish life & culture & literature; Persecution/Expulsion of Jews from various countries at various times { Division of Jews into various cultural/geographical groups: Ashkenazi Jews, Sephardic Jews, Yemeni Jews, etc. V. Early Modern & Modern Period (17th - 21st Centuries) { Division of Judaism into more branches: Hasidic, Orthodox, Conservative, Reform, Restorationist, Humanist, Non-Religious, etc. { Rise of Zionist Movements (late 1800's); Nazi-era Holocaust / Shoah (1933-1945); modern State of Israel established (1948) MAIN POINTS: Domination & Independence 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Session 17: the Maccabean Revolt
    Session 17: The Maccabean Revolt • After the remnant of Jews had returned to Judah, they lived in peace for nearly 100 years until Alexander the Great conquered the known world in the 330s BC, as Greece (Hellas) supplanted Persia as the new world power. The Greeks, by a process of Hellenization, tried to unify the world under Greek culture, language, philosophy, and religion. Because the Greek religion was pagan and polytheistic, the faithful Jews, who are monotheistic, could not comply to Hellenization. Because of the Jews’ noncompliance, Alexander the Great sought to punish them but relented when he personally witnessed, and was impressed by, their devotion to Judaism, and thus he permitted religious freedom to them. • However, when Alexander the Great died unexpectedly at the age of 33, the Greek empire was divided among five of his generals. First, the general Ptolemy and his dynastic line, called the Ptolemies, reigned over Judah, and the Ptolemies permitted religious freedom to the Jews. Later, however, the general Seleucid and his dynastic line, called the Seleucids, reigned over Judah, and again tried to enforce Hellenization upon the Jews. • In fact, in an effort to intensify Hellenization upon the Jews, the Seleucid king Antiochus IV began a terrible religious persecution of the Jews, putting to death those who would not comply to Hellenization, and these are called martyrs (witnesses). He even attacked the three symbols of the Jews return to Judah. First, he desecrated the Temple that had been rebuilt under Zerubbabel, trespassing into its sanctuary, plundering its gold and silver, and erecting in its precincts an altar to the god/demon Zeus.
    [Show full text]
  • The Persian Empire and the Colony of Judah." Israel and Empire: a Postcolonial History of Israel and Early Judaism
    "The Persian Empire and the Colony of Judah." Israel and Empire: A Postcolonial History of Israel and Early Judaism. Perdue, Leo G., and Warren Carter.Baker, Coleman A., eds. London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2015. 107–128. Bloomsbury Collections. Web. 25 Sep. 2021. <http:// dx.doi.org/10.5040/9780567669797.ch-004>. Downloaded from Bloomsbury Collections, www.bloomsburycollections.com, 25 September 2021, 17:59 UTC. Copyright © Leo G. Perdue, Warren Carter and Coleman A. Baker 2015. You may share this work for non-commercial purposes only, provided you give attribution to the copyright holder and the publisher, and provide a link to the Creative Commons licence. 4 The Persian Empire and the Colony of Judah I. Historical Introduction1 Cyrus II and the March to Empire Establishing the Achaemenid dynasty that was to endure until the conquest of Persia by Alexander the Great in 332 BCE, Cyrus II, the Achaemenid King of Persia (559530 BCE), entered unopposed the city of Babylon in 539 BCE, where he was hailed as the new ruler of the former capital of the Neo-Babylonian Empire. According to the Babylonian Chronicle: In the month of Arahshamnu, the 3rd day, Cyrus entered Babylon, green twigs were spread in front of himthe state of peace (ulmu) was imposed upon the city.2 Persia became the metropole of a vast empire that ruled most of the ancient Near East and even Egypt for some two centuries. The road to this imperial status was a long and winding one that took years to travel before reaching its destination. Defeating the Medes by 550 BCE whose king, Astyages, was killed in battle, Cyrus then moved east, taking control of Lydia in 546 BCE.
    [Show full text]
  • I. Historical Time-Line / History of Israel A. up Through Midterm Exam: Age
    I. Historical Time-line / History of Israel A. up through midterm exam: Age of Patriarchs to Babylonian Captivity * = years are approximate Note: there is no independent historical evidence for 1-3 (and very little even for 4); so do not accept as simple historical fact 1. 1800-1650 BCE*: age of Patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and his 12 sons); Hebrews as semi- nomadic, semi-nobodies wandering the Fertile Crescent; maybe not originally from Canaan (at least, for whatever reason, their stories want to suggest that they came from elsewhere else—in fact, the word “Hebrew” is normally understood as derived from apiru or “wanderer” or “nomad”—called by God, and given land that didn’t really belong to them … chosen for this “covenant,” though no explanation is given for why exactly) 2. 1650-1250 BCE*: time in Egypt (including slavery) 3. Exodus a) c. 1250 BCE*: Exodus / covenant at Sinai b) c. 1250-1200 BCE*: leadership of Moses and Aaron; 40 years of wandering in the desert before they get back to the Promised Land (Moses never enters: see end of Deuteronomy) 4. 1200-1050 BCE*: Israelite conquest of Canaan under Joshua and others (“judges”); the confederation of 12 tribes (named for the sons of Jacob); please note that the Books of Joshua and Judges give very different accounts of this “conquest” * starting with phase 4, “Israelites” would be a better term for the people than Hebrews; at this stage, Hebrew is really just the name of their language 5. 1050-921 BCE*: the United Monarchy (Saul—first king—David, Solomon) a) c.
    [Show full text]
  • “Babylonian Exile”
    ST. JOHN THE BELOVED ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 2020 SUMMER BIBLE STUDY ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ “Babylonian Exile” Updated 5 July 2020 1 These notes accompany the five (5) different hour-long Bible Study discussions that are available online: Session 1: Israel in Exile II Kings 17 https://livestream.com/stjohnmclean/events/9195384/videos/208085876 Session 2: Judah in Exile II Kings 18-25 https://livestream.com/stjohnmclean/events/9196786 Session 3: First Return from Exile (Zerubbabel) Book of Tobit Book of Judith Book of Ezra, chapters 1-6 https://livestream.com/stjohnmclean/events/9198094 Session 4: Second Return from Exile (Ezra) Book of Esther Book of Ezra, chapters 7-10 https://livestream.com/stjohnmclean/events/9198985 Session 5: Third Return from Exile (Nehemiah) Book of Nehemiah https://livestream.com/stjohnmclean/events/9201370 Kindly send corrections and suggestions to [email protected] 2 Session 1: EXILE OF ISRAEL ( -722 BC) II Kings 17 ​ ​ Senses of Scripture Catechism of the Catholic Church par. 115: “two senses of Scripture: literal and the spiritual, ​ latter subdivided into allegorical, moral and anagogical senses. The profound concordance of the four senses guarantees all its richness to the living reading of Scripture in the Church.” Typology Role of the Historical-Critical Method Dei Verbum, the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation of the Second Vatican Council ​ New is Hidden in the Old and the Old is revealed in the New. Paradoxical? Overview of Old Testament History 12 Time Periods of the Bible Timeline 1: Early World (
    [Show full text]
  • The Roots of the Great Jewish Revolt Against Rome
    Divided We Fall: The Roots of the Great Jewish Revolt against Rome Robert Eisenberg During the Roman occupation of Judea, lasting from 6-638 CE, 1 the well-being of the Jewish population was hardly guaranteed. For the early part of this period, the Judean Jews were given a large degree of autonomy over their own affairs, and Rome allowed them considerable religious free - dom. However, between 66-73 CE (and again in 132-135 CE), the province of Judea engaged in active revolt against Roman rule. During this time, Judean society was factionalized, therefore the decision to revolt was not unanimous, but it was instead divided into three camps. A small minority, called the Kanaim (Zealots), was composed of radicals who actively cam - paigned for revolt from the outset of hostilities. The second group was the old aristocratic, Tzdokim (Sadducees), who wanted peace at all costs, and the last group was composed of the mainstream Prushim (Pharisees), who initially did not favor revolt, but who became active participants once the rebellion was underway. The major divide between the advocates and opponents of the war can be drawn along the line of class and religious belief. In general, it was the lower-class, faced with severe economic and religious oppression by 148 HIRUNDO 2007 both the upper-class Jews and by the Romans, who turned to the dangerous belief of imminent messianism and supported revolt. Conversely, the en - trenched aristocracy preferred to maintain the status quo, either because they saw revolt as futile, or more likely in order to protect their wealth and social standing .
    [Show full text]