ELIJAH AS DOMINANT CHARACTER: A NARRATIVE-CRITICAL READING OF

ELIJAH'S REPRESENTATION OF YHWH IN 1 KINGS 18:16-40

by

Charles N. Harris

A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of

PROVIDENCE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree

MASTER OF ARTS

2010 Library and Archives Bibliotheque et 1*1 Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de I'edition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 OttawaONK1A0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre inference ISBN: 978-0-494-68154-1 Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-68154-1

NOTICE: AVIS:

The author has granted a non­ L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, preter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans le loan, distribute and sell theses monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non­ support microforme, papier, electronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats.

The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la these ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation. without the author's permission.

In compliance with the Canadian Conformement a la loi canadienne sur la Privacy Act some supporting forms protection de la vie privee, quelques may have been removed from this formulaires secondaires ont ete enleves de thesis. cette these.

While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires aient inclus dans in the document page count, their la pagination, il n'y aura aucun contenu removal does not represent any loss manquant. of content from the thesis.

•+• Canada TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABBREVIATIONS ii INTRODUCTION 1 0.1 The Process and the Hypothesis 2 0.2 The Boundaries of the Mount Carmel Pericope 7 0.3 The Context of the Contest Narrative 11 CHAPTER 1: THE NARRATIVE-CRITICAL METHOD 16 1.1 The Development of the Literary Approaches to Biblical Narratives 16 1.2 Assumptions and Delimitations 23 1.3 Narrative Criticism and Its Use for Understanding Characters 29 CHAPTER 2: RECENT RESEARCH ON THE ELIJAH NARRATIVES 40 2.1 The Pre-Deuteronomistic History Formation of the Elij ah Narratives 40 2.2 The Insertion of the Elijah Narratives into the Deuteronomistic History 46 2.3 Holistic Approaches and the Elijah Narratives 48 CHAPTER 3: NARRATIVE ANALYSIS WITH AN EMPHASIS ON ELIJAH 53 3.1 A Short Summary of the Plot 54 3.2 Elijah and Ahab(w. 16-20) 57 3.3 Elijah and the People (w. 21-24,30-35,39-40) 64 3.4 Elijah and the Prophets of Baal (w. 25-29) 72 3.5 Elijah and YHWH (w. 30-38) 81 3.6 Some Concluding Remarks on the Character of Elij ah 87 CHAPTER 4: NARRATIVE ANALYSIS WITH AN EMPHASIS ON YHWH 93 4.1 YHWH as the Subject of the Plot 93 4.2 The Effect of YHWH's Absence on the Other Characters 99 4.3 Movement in the Contest Narrative (and a Note on YHWH in Narrated Time). 104 4.4 Preliminary Conclusions on the Character of YHWH 106 CHAPTER 5: SYNTHESIS 108 5.1 YHWH Versus Baal and Elijah Versus the Prophets of Baal 110 5.2 YHWH's Rain and Elijah's Contest 112 5.3 YHWH's Compassion and Elijah's Delay 114 5.4 YHWH's Authority and Elijah's Authority 115 5.5 YHWH's Existence and Elijah's Life 117 5.6 A Superimposition of YHWH and Elijah 119 CHAPTER 6: ELI J AH IN THE LARGER CONTEXT 121 6.1 Elijah's First Appearance (17:1) 121 6.2 Elijah and the Reviving of the Widow's Son (17:17-24) 123 6.3 Elijah as a Solution for Ahab's Drought 126 6.4 Elijah's Resemblance to Moses 130 6.5 Conclusion 132 CONCLUSION 134 7.1 A Review of the Method 134 7.2 A Review of the Argument 135 7.3 Conclusion 137 BIBLIOGRAPHY 139

i ABBREVIATIONS

AB The Anchor Bible ABD The Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by David Noel Freedman, et al. AUSTh&R American University Studies, Series VII: Theology and Religion BDB The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew and English Lexicon, by Francis Brown, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs. Lafayette, IN: Associated Publishers and Authors, 1980 BETL Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium Bib Biblica BHS Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. Edited by K. Elliger and W. Rudolph, 5th ed. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1997 BibSem Biblical Seminar BJS Brown Judaic Studies BO Berit Olam: Studies in Hebrew Narrative & Poetry CBC Cambridge Bible Commentary CBQMS Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series CCom Communicator's Commentary DDD Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, 2n ed. Edited by Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van der Horst DH The Deuteronomistic History DOTHB Dictionary of the Old Testament: Historical Books. Edited by Bill T. Arnold and H. G. M. Williamson Dtr The Deuteronomist FOTL Forms of the Old Testament Literature GBS Guides to Biblical Scholarship HTIBS Historic Texts and Interpreters in Biblical Scholarship ICC International Critical Commentary Int Interpretation ISBL Indiana Studies in Biblical Literature ITC International Theological Commentary JBL Journal of Biblical Literature JBQ Jewish Biblical Quarterly JNSL Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages JPT Journal of Pentecostal Theology JSOTSup Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series LHB/OTS Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies (formerly JSOTSup) LXX Septuagint MT Masoretic Text NAC New American Commentary NIBCOT New International Biblical Commentary: Old Testament Series NIVAC NIV Application Commentary OTL Old Testament Library SBLSemSt Society of Biblical Literature Semeia Studies

ii Ill

SBLSymS Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series SBT Studies in Biblical Theology SJOT Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament SOTBT Studies in Old Testament Biblical Theology SSN Studia Semitica Neerlandica StBL Studies in Biblical Literature S&HBC Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary VTSup Supplements to Vetus Testamentum WBC Word Biblical Commentary INTRODUCTION

Elijah is a hero of Hebrew narrative. When Elijah wages a battle against the prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel for the hearts of the people of Israel he becomes engraved in the memories of millennia of readers. This is a climactic point in Elijah's career. He draws the Israelites, the king, and his opponents onto a divine battlefield where a contest is waged between Baal, a rival deity, and YHWH, the deity of Israel's history and the one whom Elijah serves.1 Elijah stands alone, but strong and confident before all the other characters and he competently constructs a victory for YHWH. This story is found in 1 Kings 18:16-40.2 This pericope is a piece of a larger narrative arc involving the same characters. As part of this larger narrative, two issues are already present when this story starts. The first is the presence of Baalism in Israel, which is attributed to Ahab and his wife Jezebel, and which deprives YHWH of his worshippers

(1 Kgs 16:31-33; 18:18, 21). The second issue is a drought which comes as a consequence to Baalism (17:l).3 Elijah's contest seeks to remedy both these issues. It directly attacks the prophets of Baal and their god, but it implicitly seeks to determine which deity is the provider of rain. Thus the contest is an act of returning Israel to a former and better time—one where they worship the true God and receive the blessing

1 The narrative contains two divine names, "YHWH" and "Baal," and a divine title, "god." YHWH and Baal are the two divine beings competing in the contest for the honour of the title "god." This thesis will match these same terms: YHWH and Baal will be used as the proper names of the competing gods, and "god" will be used as a title. Also, in correspondence with common modern usage, "God" (with a capital "G") will be used when specifically referring to YHWH.

2 Also frequently called "the contest narrative" in this thesis.

3 It is not specifically stated that the drought is a consequence to Baalism, however a couple points in the narrative imply this. First, the drought is introduced immediately after a description of Ahab's sin of worshipping Baal (16:30-17:1), and second, immediately after Ahab accuses Elijah for "troubling" Israel (starting the drought) Elijah clarifies that it is Ahab's Baal-worship that is at fault (18:17-18).

1 2 of rain. Elijah is the hero in this contest: for choosing to wage the battle in the first place, for calling on the correct deity, and for defeating the religious apostasy that caused the drought.

Elijah is a conqueror of sorts; he dominates in the story, controls the events, and directs the dialogue. A pattern emerges in the narrative in which Elijah commands or prompts everything the other characters do. All other characters, including Ahab, the people of Israel,4 the prophets of Baal, and even YHWH, invariably respond to Elijah.

He even seems to control time; or at least the speed in which time passes is always in

Elijah's favour. Elijah's domination in the narrative is near to god-like, beyond human proportions. The image the reader sees of YHWH is different. YHWH acts once in the narrative with clear, unquestionable power to gain his title as the victorious deity, but even this action comes in response to a prayer from Elijah. The rest of the time YHWH is an absent character. In an initial reading, this absence of YHWH appears to conflict with Elijah's attempt in the contest to portray to the other characters that YHWH is God, the one with power and authority, the one who controls the weather, and the one who supports life. Elijah, it seems, fits this picture better. The question is: how does a powerful Elijah-character correspond with a powerful but passive YHWH-character?

0.1 The Process and the Hypothesis

Before immediately addressing this issue, the first two chapters of this thesis will lay the groundwork for a narrative-critical analysis. Ch. 1 will study the background and process of narrative criticism. This is the method of interpretation that will be used

4 Hereafter, "the people." 3 when trying to understand what is taking place in the narrative of Elijah's contest on

Mount Carmel. Understanding this method is important for laying out the interpretive process ahead. Then, ch. 2 seeks to locate this methodological approach within the scope of recent research on the Elijah narratives. It will review the approaches and conclusions and demonstrate that the narrative-critical approach of this thesis fits within the range of current current approaches to the Elijah stories.

The following chapters will compose the actual narrative-critical analysis of the

Mount Carmel story and the surrounding narratives. Through multiple stages this project will analyze the narrative portrayal of the characters of Elijah and YHWH in order to determine why the narrative includes a powerful and authoritative character of

Elijah along with the theoretical concept of YHWH as the true God. It will first address the character of Elijah in ch. 3. It will note especially his dominance in the narrative and the impact this has on the other characters. The chapter will progress successively through an examination of Elijah and Ahab, Elijah and the people, Elijah and the prophets of Baal, and Elijah and YHWH. It will leave the remaining question: where is

YHWH when Elijah is the character in control?

The question of YHWH's absence and Elijah's dominance in the narrative will be answered in ch. 4 where YHWH will be reviewed as a character who is mostly absent from the narrative. It is not new to conceive of YHWH as an absent narrative character.

Typically in narrative studies of the Old Testament YHWH is seen as present and active early in Genesis and then gradually becomes more absent and less active throughout the 4

Pentateuch and into the Historical Books.5 However this scale cannot be applied as a rule to the biblical narratives.6 Even in the Mount Carmel story, though entirely absent otherwise, YHWH makes a brief appearance by sending fire on Elijah's altar (v. 38). In general however, YHWH remains absent as a character from the historical books. This project explores the continued phenomenon of YHWH's absence in the Mount Carmel narrative, and in particular, how it impacts the character of Elijah. Ch. 4 of this thesis specifically focuses on the character of YHWH. It notes that the contest is about him even though his presence in the contest is only momentary. Furthermore, this chapter will reveal how YHWH's absence is important to the development of the other characters. As in ch. 3 this examination will view successively YHWH and Ahab,

YHWH and the people, and YHWH and the prophets of Baal. The examination will reveal how this interaction allows the characters to act, make choices, and display depth in a way that they could not if YHWH were a present character.

Ch. 5 will take up the lacuna of ch. 4, examining the interaction of YHWH and

Elijah. It will synthesize the conclusions of chs. 3 and 4, specifically addressing the reasons for YHWH's absence in the narrative and, as in ch. 4, how that absence facilitates Elijah's actions. In this chapter, the characters of Elijah and YHWH will be compared on a variety of levels, including which opponents they face, what their motivations are, what they expect to achieve, and so forth. This will reveal the commonalities that they share. They will both be shown to share common interests and

5 Amelia Devin Freedman, God as an Absent Character in Biblical Hebrew Narrative: A Literary-Theoretical Study, StBL 82 (New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 2005), 1; Yairah Amit, "Narrative Art of Israel's Historians" mDOTHB (Downers Grove, IL: Inter Varsity Press, 2005), 711.

6 Yairah Amit, Reading Biblical Narratives: Literary Criticism and the Hebrew Bible, trans. Yael Lotan (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2001), 83-84. 5 goals, but differ in the actions they take to achieve that goal. Mostly, it will be evidenced that Elijah fills the role of YHWH's representative. He bears the authority to make choices and takes actions toward the result that they both desire.

Lastly, ch. 6 will test this conclusion briefly in the surrounding narratives. Does

1 Kgs 17-19 support a description of Elijah as a man of power and authority?7

Furthermore, do these stories provide evidence that YHWH has entrusted this power and authority to Elijah? Testing this hypothesis in the larger context will serve to create a more reliable conclusion, demonstrating that the contest narrative is not an anomaly.

The hypothesis is that the contest narrative (and chs. 17-19) develops an image of Elijah as a prophet bearing the authority of YHWH. Elijah is YHWH's representative. Part of his role as representative means that he is in the position to show initiative; to choose and act as he deems necessary. Many of the actions that Elijah takes go beyond any specific commands given to him by YHWH. These extra actions are part of his role, and many times they gain explicit support—sometimes from

YHWH, but also from other characters or the narrator. In addition to this freedom to act by his own volition, Elijah demonstrates the ability to perform miracles. His abilities exceed the normal range for a human being, and he can do things on behalf of YHWH that the reader would normally expect from YHWH himself. Elijah's actions reduce the need for YHWH himself to become involved. Thus, because YHWH does not need to be as involved having Elijah as his representative, his absence from the narrative is understandable.

7 The delimitation of the boundaries for this larger narrative are taken up later in this introduction. 6

Representatives for YHWH are common in biblical narratives when YHWH is absent and this thesis is an exploration of that trend. Prior to the formation of the monarchy, judges were divinely appointed as "stand-ins" for YHWH (Judg 2:16, 18), but once the monarchy was established, prophets become the most common representatives.8 The important question asked in this project, however, is not //Elijah fits the role of YHWH's representative, but how he fits that role. This thesis argues that

Elijah has much freedom to be innovative in his prophetic activity. This is not always the case with the prophets. For example, Samuel twice seeks the advice of YHWH when the nation of Israel asks him to anoint a king for them, and then he reports the words of YHWH to them (1 Samuel 8). And when Samuel anoints a king, he anoints

Saul according to a revelation received from YHWH (1 Sam 9:15-10:8). Similarly,

Nathan speaks to David regarding the building of the Temple according to the words received directly from YHWH (2 Sam 7:4-17). Furthermore, when Nathan convicts

David of his adultery with Bathsheba and murder of Uriah, he precedes his address with,

"Thus says YHWH" (1 Sam 12:7)—a common introduction in the speeches of the prophets.9 Though Elijah receives and responds to commands from YHWH on occasion

(e.g., 1 Kgs 17:3-5, 8-10; 18:1-2; 19:11, 13), he still consistently exhibits his own initiative in his role as YHWH's representative. The narrative analysis in this thesis observes in detail how Elijah functions in this role and what impact it has on the reader's view of Elijah and YHWH.

Freedman, God as an Absent Character, 2.

9 Freedman (ibid.) notes that the prophets of the monarchic period regularly quote divine speech. 7

0.2 The Boundaries of the Mount Carmel Pericope

The first task in evaluating Elijah's role is to determine the exact narrative

passage under review. Yairah Amit asserts that a scholar studying a narrative must first

establish the boundaries of the pericope.10 In the story of Elijah's contest on Mount

Carmel in 1 Kings 18 the boundaries are not clear. The contest narrative is part of a

larger story which means the narrative that comes before and after transitions into and

out of the smaller story. The larger story is one of drought and the need for rain and

includes the entirety of 1 Kings 17-18. The smaller story is a contest to determine the

real god in Israel. Scholars have set the boundaries around the smaller narrative in many

different ways, though most scholars will agree that the narrative comes to an end with

v. 40.11 It is the beginning that provides the most difficulty in declaring a clear

boundary, causing scholars to consider a range of possibilities, though it is normally one

of the following: v. 16, v. 17, v. 19, v. 20, or v. 21.n The difficulty centers on a scene in

which Elijah and Ahab confront one another (w. 17-19; while w. 16 and 20 lead into

Amit, Reading Biblical Narratives, 16.

11 Some scholars have chosen to extend the contest narrative as far as v. 46 (see Marvin A. Sweeney, / & II Kings: A Commentary, OTL [Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2007], 221, 226-27; James R. Battenfield, "YHWH's Refutation of the Baal Myth through the Actions of Elijah and Elisha," in Israel's Apostasy andRestoration: Essays in Honor ofRoland K. Harrison, ed. Avraham Gileadi [Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1988], 19, 23-25).

12 Examples of v. 16 are: Paul R. House, /, 2 Kings, NAC 8 (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 217-20; and Battenfield, "YHWH's Refutation," 19, 23-25. Examples of v. 17 are: Burke O. Long, / Kings: With an Introduction to Historical Literature, FOTL 9 (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1984), 188-89; and Sweeney, I & IIKings, 221, 226-27. An example of v. 19 is Simon J. DeVries, I Kings, WBC 12 (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1985), 223-31. Examples of v. 20 are: Walter Brueggemann, I & 2 Kings, S&HBC (Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys Publishing, 2000), 223-27; Nicholas J. Tromp, "Water and Fire on Mount Carmel: A Conciliatory Suggestion," Bib 56 (1975): 480; and Brevard S. Childs, "On Reading the Elijah Narratives," Int 34 (1980): 130. An example of v. 21 is Jerome T. Walsh, I Kings, BO (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1996), 226, 244-56. Alternatively, some prefer not to place boundaries around the Mount Carmel narrative in particular but have kept the whole chapter as a single pericope (e.g., Mordechai Cogan, / Kings: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, AB 10 [New York: Doubleday, 2001], 434-48). 8 and out of this scene). In one sense the scene is connected to YHWH's command to

Elijah to "Go, show yourself to Ahab and I will send rain on the surface of the land"

(18:1). The narrative that follows this command first includes a scene with Ahab and

Obadiah in dialogue (w. 3-6), then is followed by a scene of dialogue between Obadiah and Elijah. This second scene reflects Elijah's quest to meet Ahab through Elijah's command to Obadiah to "go!" (matching the same imperative YHWH gave to Elijah) and tell Ahab that "Elijah is here" (v. 8). Obadiah twice quotes these words (w. 11, 14) in his hesitancy to do as told, but Elijah, replicating the words of YHWH, ensures

Obadiah that "today I will show myself to him" (v. 15). At last, Ahab comes to meet

Elijah (v. 16). Given YHWH's command in v. 1, now that Elijah confronts Ahab, rain is expected, but instead of the arrival of rain, Elijah sets up a contest between himself and the prophets of Baal, to which Ahab agrees. So, in a second sense the scene is connected with the contest narrative. It is only a later scene (w. 41-46) containing the meeting of Elijah and Ahab which returns the theme of rain.

The first meeting between Elijah and Ahab appears as a transition from the surrounding drought narrative (chs. 17-18) to the contest narrative.13 At first the scene shows no indication of the contest to come, and thus keeps the reader connected to

Elijah's quest to show himself to Ahab (see w. 16-18). Then Elijah quickly takes on the commanding personality that is characteristic of him in the contest narrative (starting in v. 18). He indicates the scene of the contest and names his opponents (v. 19), thus the reader begins to look forward to the contest rather than reflect back on their meeting in

13 Alan J. Hauser, "Yahweh Versus Death—The Real Struggle in 1 Kings 17-19," in From Carmel to Horeb: Elijah in Crisis, JSOTSupp 85 (Sheffield: Almond Press, 1990), 31; Walsh, J Kings, 244. 9 the first place. Furthermore, this confrontation with Ahab is linked with the following contest narrative by Elijah's statement of Ahab's sin: worshipping "the Baals" rather than YHWH (v. 18). The sin thus presents a thematic link to the following narrative—a contest between Baalism and Yahwism which seeks to correct Ahab's misguided worship. Ahab's sin is further connected to the contest when the worship of Baal is seen also in the people (v. 21). Therefore Elijah's accusation can be understood as forward- looking.14

The dialogue between Ahab and Elijah plays an important part in setting the scene of the contest, and on this basis the starting boundary of the narrative will be set at v. 16. Beginning at v. 16, though, needs to be justified because the verse includes both the end of Obadiah's meeting with Elijah and the beginning of Elijah's meeting with

Ahab.15 This verse will be included on the basis of Jerome T. Walsh's description of it as a "departure notice." A departure notice refers to the departure or arrival of a character and it is used as a narrative technique to indicate a change in scene. In this verse, there are two character movements: Obadiah's departure and Ahab's arrival.16 In this way, the verse ends Elijah's dialogue with Obadiah while beginning one with Ahab; it transfers the reader from one scene to another. When v. 16 is taken as the beginning, v. 17 grammatically follows v. 16 with the continuation of the waw-consecutive narrative structure. This grammatical form appears three times in v. 16 and twice in v.

14 It also looks back to Ahab's sin being the reason for the drought in the firstplace . This factor will be discussed in more detail at later.

15 Cogan chooses to separate v. 16 so that the first half which narrates Obadiah's response to Elijah is in the previous scene and the second half which narrates the departure of Ahab to meet Elijah is in the following scene (Cogan, / Kings, 445). The project will not use that same separation.

16 Jerome T. Walsh, Style and Structure in Biblical Hebrew Narrative, (Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 2001), 122, 134. 10

17 forming a temporal phrase: "When he saw... he said" (wayhi kir'ot... wayyomer).

The continued occurrence of the vraw-consecutive is an indicator that w. 16 and 17 work in sequence. One must remember, however, that v. 16 serves as a transition based on content (the double departure of the characters as noted above) rather than on grammar. The waw-consecutive also appears at the beginning of v. 15, thus indicating that the grammatical sequence continues from before v. 16.

The end of the contest narrative will be v. 40, in agreement with scholarly consensus. There are two basic reasons that this verse can be considered the end. First, v. 41 immediately shifts back to the rain plot. This is evidenced by Elijah's use of "go up!" (ylh) when he speaks to Ahab, which recalls the repeated use of the imperative

"go!" (hlk) in the early verses of chapter 18 (w. 1, 8, 11, 14). It is also evidenced by

Elijah's reference to rain, a reference that has not occurred since v. 1. Second, the contest plot reaches a clear resolution in v. 40. This resolution is seen in the rapid sequence of events that follows the sending of fire from heaven and in the completion of the major plot line when YHWH is victorious over Baal.18

Setting the boundaries of the pericope at v. 16 and v. 40 is not meant to separate the pericope from its context. The boundaries are artificial and useful for limiting the area of study to a smaller part of the text. A larger story also exists around the pericope and this will be useful for studying the contest narrative in its larger context.

17 Hauser, "Yahweh Versus Death," 54.

18 Walsh, J Kings, 256. Walsh also points out the completion of a couple of other plot lines which run parallel to the contest plot: Elijah's victory over the prophets of Baal and the conversion of the people. 11

0.3 The Context of the Contest Narrative

The larger context around the contest pericope has boundaries that are comparably clear.19 A good (and common) division includes all of (and only) chs. 17-

19 as the surrounding context for the contest narrative. These three chapters are unified by the inclusion of the character of Elijah and are distinguished from the surrounding narratives where Elijah is absent. However, the presence or absence of Elijah is not alone the aspect that defines the larger pericope nor what draws it all together. Defining chs. 17-19 as the context of the contest narrative is a twofold task: first, to demonstrate that the contest narrative belongs in this larger context, and second, to demonstrate that the entire context is a holistic and coherent story. Both objectives, though, are clearly related.

Toward the demonstration of the contest narrative's appropriate inclusion in the context of chs. 17-19, some important cases can be made. First, the plot in the contest narrative initially seems distinct from the plot in the surrounding drought narrative.

From 17:1 and until 18:46 the story is directly related to the drought that Elijah announced (17:1), while the contest narrative within this drought story concerns itself with demonstrating that YHWH, and not Baal, is God. However, a closer reading can reveal that the two stories are actually related. Douglas Lawrie holds that the contest narrative is strongly linked to the end of the drought. Before the rain comes, the contest demonstrates that YHWH is God, and consequently, that he is the one who sends rain.20

The contest narrative, through its advance against Baal-worship, confirms for the first

19 However, even these boundaries are not free from debate. Battenfield, for example, includes 16:29-32 in the Elijah story ("YHWH's Refutation," 19).

20 Douglas Lawrie, "Telling Of(f) Prophets: Narrative Strategy in 1 Kings 18:1-19:18," JNSL 23 (1997): 169. 12

time what was only hinted at before: that the drought was a consequence of Baal-

worship. This is a well selected consequence since Baal-worshippers consider Baal

the storm god and therefore attribute to him the rain and fertility. Therefore the

presence of the drought is a direct attack on Baal's powers. With Baal's power

challenged by the presence of the drought and YHWH's power substantiated by victory

in the contest, the drought could end and YHWH could receive credit. Second, it is

common to end the narrative after these first two chapters on the drought and to consider

ch. 19 as a distinct story, but this is perhaps a premature judgment. Both Walsh and

Uriel Simon find sufficient links that connect ch. 19 to the previous narrative. Mainly,

ch. 19 occurs as an "aftermath" that is causatively linked to the preceding chapters.22

The events of ch. 19 are necessarily preceded by the drought and contest and any

separation from it would need extended explanation. Rather, there is an unshakable

connection between the drought and contest narratives and the aftermath which Elijah

now faces. Though it is common to perceive of Elijah as demonstrably weak or as a

failure in this chapter,23 Simon draws a mellower picture in which Elijah is afraid and

21 One has to read outside of the proposed context of chs. 17-19 to findth e hint at the reason for the drought. It is in 16:30-33 where Ahab is accused of evil and Baal-worship. That the drought follows almost immediately after this accusation suggests that there is a causative link between Ahab's Baal- worship and the drought.

22 Walsh, 1 Kings, 283; Uriel Simon, Reading Prophetic Narratives, trans. Lenn J. Schramm, ISBL (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1997), 198.

23 There are a variety of different conceptions of Elijah's weakness. For example, Russell Gregory perceives Elijah as "dejected" in ch. 19 because he faces the consequences of his pride and arrogance in the preceding contest (Gregory Hauser, "Irony and the Unmasking of Elijah," in From Carmel to Horeb: Elijah in Crisis, JSOTSupp 85 [Sheffield: Almond Press, 1990], 124). Similarly, Paul J. Kissling defines ch. 19 as the culmination of a growing difference between YHWH's command and Elijah's compliance. In ch. 19 Elijah fails to be obedient and to wait for YHWH's commands, while also demonstrating fear when he has to face YHWH (Paul J. Kissling, Reliable Characters in the Primary History: Profiles of Moses, Joshua, Elijah andElisha, JSOTSupp 224 [Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996], 143-45). In contrast, Dan Epp-Tiessen determines ch. 19 to be a story, partly about Elijah's "depression" and "discouragement," but mostly about his renewal (Dan Epp-Tiessen, "1 Kings 19: The Renewal of Elijah," Direction 35 [2006]: 33-43). 13 disappointed because the contest was not completely successful in reestablishing

Yahwism in place of Baalism. But Elijah is not a failure in this picture—he is only human—and conversely, YHWH stands out as God.24 In this way, even though the drought narrative only extends to the end of ch. 18, the demonstration that YHWH is

God extends further into ch. 19. This is done particularly in YHWH's revelation of himself through a voice out of the silence (w. 12-13), an image which contrasts that in

18:38 when fire falls on the altar. Thus it is reasonable to conclude the contest narrative is tied in closely with the preceding and following narratives of chs. 17-19.

When considering the holistic and coherent nature of the entire passage, one easily notes that chs. 17,18, and 19 function as independent stories, each with its own climax. But even with this in mind, there is a persistent relationship that draws the stories together and which manifests itself through the presence of a variety of elements.

First, the consistency and coherence of chs. 17-19 may be best demonstrated through the chiastic structure that unifies the three stories into one large whole:

A. Elijah in the Jordan Valley (17:2-7) B. Elijah outside of Israel, to the north (17:8-24) C. Yahweh's word; Elijah returns to Israel (18:1) D. Ahab and Elijah on the road to meet [each other] (18:2-20) E. Elijah on Mount Carmel (18:21-45) D'. Ahab and Elijah on the road to Jezreel (18:46) C\ Jezebel's Word; Elijah flees Israel (19:1-3) B'. Elijah outside of Israel, to the south (19:4-18) A'. Elijah in the Jordan Valley (19:19-21)26

This chiasm helps to identify the structure and design that is present in the entire narrative. The plots join together into one and the story rises and falls around the central

24 Simon, Reading Prophetic Narratives, 225.

23 Walsh, 1 Kings, 283.

26 Walsh, 1 Kings, 283-84. 14 event of Elijah's contest on Mount Carmel. While smaller stories are present within the whole, they all are bound together in one, larger narrative. Furthermore, the stories of each chapter demonstrate some clear structural parallels which Robert L. Cohn aims to identify. According to Cohn, each chapter contains an announcement, a journey, two encounters, a miracle, and a conversation—in that order. These parallels "are linked by verbal, thematic, and structural repetitions which create a texture of foreshadows and echoes, of balances and contrasts, of rising and falling action."27 For Walsh, the three stories are three ways of revealing a "comprehensive" picture of Elijah's life: ch. 17 views Elijah in his day-to-day life, ch. 18 puts him in the public and political arena, and ch. 19 shows him in a spiritual encounter. The reader, in this case, is drawn through the story along with each of Elijah's encounters. And even though the plot may shift and the tone may change, the reader still grasps a sense of a continued story. One may attribute this to the various themes that run through the series of narratives. Food and drink, YHWH's protection and provision for Elijah, climactic events in high places, and standing before the king are all themes that appear regularly. In addition, but more subtly, is the consistent appearance of allusions to Moses. Throughout chs. 17-19 Elijah is portrayed by the narrator in a way that parallels the prophet Moses (i.e., Elijah on

Mount Horeb [ch. 19] is reminiscent of Moses on Mount Sinai).30 This can be considered another theme that leads to a consistent narrative.

27 Robert L. Cohn, "The Literary Logic of 1 Kings 17-19," Journal ofBiblical Literature 101 (1982): 343.

28 Walsh, 1 Kings, 284.

29 Ibid., 283-84.

30 The theme of the Moses allusion will be discussed more thoroughly at a later point in this project. 15

In conclusion, the consistent themes, the unifying structures, and the rain motif demonstrate that these three chapters make a unit. Independent stories make up the whole, but enough links run throughout that the reader is better off considering each part in relation to the larger whole. Thus, while this thesis focuses on 1 Kgs 18:16-40, the pericope stands within and interacts with the larger narrative. The pericope is taken up in chs. 3-5, and in ch. 6 is explicitly set within the larger narrative context. CHAPTER 1: THE NARRATIVE-CRITICAL METHOD

The following discussion on the narrative-critical method intends to lay the groundwork for the application of the method to the story of Elijah's contest versus the prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel. It will accomplish this in three parts. First, in an attempt to understand narrative criticism in the larger context of literary scholarship, it will briefly review the development and practice of literary criticism.1 Second, it will establish the assumptions and delimitations that frame the task of narrative criticism as it pertains to this project. Last, it will describe the narrative-critical method itself.

1.1 The Development of the Literary Approaches to Biblical Narratives

Hermann Gunkel, a key figure in the development of form criticism, introduced for the first time to modern biblical scholarship some of the now familiar aspects of literary analysis. His 1901 commentary on Genesis addresses concepts such as characters, narrators, unity and coherence, and themes,2 but his insights were short­ lived. Shimon Bar-Efrat simply notes that this focus, though well-accomplished, was discontinued in comparison to Gunkel's other contributions to form criticism.3

1 Literary criticism/analysis is a term that has had varied meanings in modern history. It has in the past, and even occasionally at present, been used to refer to what is now more commonly called source criticism. The term literary criticism has also developed so as to refer to wide range of methods that approach the texts as literature to be interpreted. Narrative criticism falls into this range, as do rhetorical criticism, structuralism, etc. It is the second meaning that will be assumed when the term is used in this project.

2 Hermann Gunkel, The Legends of Genesis: The Biblical Saga and History, trans. W. H. Carruth (New York: Schocken Books, 1964), 53-54, 58-59, 69-72.

3 Shimon Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art in the Bible, trans. Dorothea Shefer-Vanson, JSOTSup 70 (Sheffield: Almond Press, 1989), 9. Amit argues for a slightly different reason for the discontinuation of GunkeFs focus on literary elements. She critiques that these concepts, though raised in his introduction, did not penetrate into his otherwise historical-critical study (Amit, Reading Biblical Narratives, 11).

16 17

Consequently, the atomistic source and form criticisms would remain in prominence for decades longer and it would not be until the 1950's that the trend would begin its change toward literary analysis. This would start with the small step made by the introduction of redaction criticism by Gunther Bornkamm, Hans Conzelmann, and Willie Marxsen.

It increased attention on the final form of the biblical texts by focusing on the editorial intention in developing a finished work.4 Even though this was still a diachronic approach, it did initiate the shift away from the atomistic approaches.5

A fully synchronic approach was introduced with James Muilenburg's 1968 presidential address to the Society of Biblical Literature in which he advocated for rhetorical criticism.6 Form criticism had reached the limits of its capabilities,

Muilenburg argued, and it was time to show interest "in understanding the nature of

Hebrew literary composition, in exhibiting the structural patterns that are employed for the fashioning of a literary unit, whether in poetry or prose, and in discerning the many and various devices by which the predications are formulated and ordered into a unified whole."7 Bar-Efrat uses the words "becoming" and "being" to illustrate the change that was achieved with Muilenburg's shift away from the source, form, and redaction

4 Sidney Greidanus, The Modern Preacher and the Ancient Text: Interpreting and Preaching Biblical Literature (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1988), 55-56.

5 The later developing canonical approach from Brevard Childs would be an example of a holistic and synchronic approach (Greidanus, Modern Preacher, 73). Yet this approach was also only a precursor to the literary approaches.

6 Published the following year: James Muilenburg, "Form Criticism and Beyond," JBL 88 (1969): 1-18.

7 Ibid., 4, 8. Muilenburg's rhetorical criticism resembles a text-based, narrative approach, but this has changed. The current practice of rhetorical criticism has become reader-centered because of its concern over the impact the author's rhetoric has on the reader. See Lissa M. Wray Beal, The Deuteronomist 's Prophet: Narrative Control of Approval and Disapproval in the Story of Jehu (2 Kings 9 and 10), LHB/OTS 478 (New York: T & T Clark, 2007), 22-23. 18 approaches. The historical approaches were concerned with the "becoming" of the biblical texts—how the texts were developed into their final form. The literary approaches allowed one to explore the "being" of the texts—the content, structure, and style presented.8 Muilenburg believed that the authors demonstrated "skill and artistry" in their presentation, thus rhetorical criticism was the process of exploring the art piece in search of the author's intent.9

Robert Alter's publication of his book, The Art of Biblical Narrative, was responsible for a surge in interest in narrative analysis.10 Though there were works prior to Alter's that demonstrated a growing interest in the approach, The Art of Biblical

Narrative was the "watershed."11 He noted that the authors of biblical narratives chose to write in prose and for this reason he approached the narratives as prose fiction.12 He focused directly on the texts themselves, as opposed to author or audience, drawing on the "literary strategies" for achieving an understanding of the content.13 Meir

Sternberg's The Poetics of Biblical Narrative, which followed shortly after Alter's

8 Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art, 10.

9 Muilenburg, "Form Criticism and Beyond," 18; Phyllis Trible, Rhetorical Criticism: Context, Method, and the Book of Jonah, GBS, ed. Gene M. Tucker (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1994), 26- 27.

10 Robert Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative (New York: Basic Books, 1981).

11 Tremper Longman III, "Literary Approaches to Old Testament Study," in The Face of Old Testament Studies: A Survey of Contemporary Approaches, ed. David W. Baker and Bill T. Arnold (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1999), 97-98. J. P. Fokkelman's Narrative Art in Genesis is an example of a key work in narrative study prior to Alter. Fokkelman conceived of a two-process creation of the text. The first is the limited "creation" of the text completed by the author(s), and the second is the ongoing "recreation" of the text accomplished by the "reading and interpretation" by the reader (thus, author —• text <-+ reader). According to Fokkelman, process two should be completed before process one (J. P. Fokkelman, Narrative Art in Genesis: Specimens of Stylistic and Structural Analysis, SSN 17 [Amsterdam, The Netherlands: VanGorcum, 1975], 3-4).

12 Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative, 24-25.

13 Ibid., 46; Longman, "Literary Approaches," 100. 19 publication, accentuated the arrival of the narrative approach. Sternberg demonstrates an immediate interest in the narrator who uses the narrative and its devices to communicate to the reader.14 With the interest in narrative studies in full swing, an abundance of scholars produced material on narrative and literary approaches around this time or in the years following, including: Shimon Bar-Efrat, Robert Polzin, Adele

Berlin, Yairah Amit, and Jerome T. Walsh.15

The current state of literary criticism is marked by a great amount of diversity.

Reviewing the diversity may best be done with reference to a model of art criticism provided by M. H. Abrams:16

Universe (Mimetic) t Work/Text ^^Objective),^^^ Artist/Author Audience/Reader (Expressive) (Pragmatic)

First, mimetic approaches hold that the text is an imitation of the real world and thus concern themselves with the world the text is trying to communicate. This approach

14 Meir Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative: Ideological Literature and the Drama of Reading, ISBL (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1985), 1; Trible, Rhetorical Criticism, 76-77.

15 Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art; Robert Polzin, Moses and the Deuteronomist: A Literary Study of the Deuteronomic History: Part One, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges (New York: The Seabury Press, 1980), and Samuel and the Deuteronomist: A Literary Study of the Deuteronomic History: Part Two, 1 Samuel, ISBL (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1993); Adele Berlin, Poetics and Interpretation of Biblical Narrative (Sheffield: Almond Press, 1983; Reprint, Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1994; page citations will be to the reprint edition); Yairah Amit, Reading Biblical Narratives, Jerome T. Walsh, Style and Structure in Biblical Hebrew Narrative (Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 2001).

16 Drawn from M. H. Abrams, The Mirror and the Lamp: Romantic Theory and the Critical Tradition (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1958), 6; and Wray Beal, Deuteronomist's Prophet, 17. 20

17 "evaluates literature by how well it imitates, represents, or copies the external world."

Second, expressive approaches view the text as an expression of the author and thus are concerned with understanding the mind of the author behind the text. How has the mind of the author formed the text? What were the author's main concerns? Third, objective approaches hold that the text is a world of its own and is understandable through its intrinsic features. In this approach the text has an aesthetic quality and an "internal coherence."18 And fourth, pragmatic approaches hold that the text is intended to have an impact on the audience, whether that is to teach the audience, to evoke an emotional response, or to entertain.19 All literary approaches can be related to this model. Abrams asserts that "although any reasonably adequate theory takes some account of all four elements, almost all theories, as we shall see, exhibit a discernable orientation toward one only." That is also true of the literary approaches discussed below, which will show a tendency toward either the text or the reader and demonstrate less interest in either the author or the universe. Three approaches will be discussed briefly.

First, structuralism, an approach that entered biblical studies in the 1970's, is a product of the linguistic theorist Ferdinand de Saussure early in the twentieth century. It is an objective approach to the text with an interest on the syntagmatic and paradigmatic structures (mainly logical, syntactical, grammatical, and lexical) deep within the text

Trible, Rhetorical Criticism, 11.

18 Ibid, 12-13.

19 Descriptions of the four approaches of Abrams are taken from: Mark Allen Powell, What is Narrative Criticism?, GBS, ed. Dan O. Via, Jr. (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1990), 11; Trible, Rhetorical Criticism, 10-13.

Abrams, Mirror and Lamp, 6. 21 that give meaning to the literature. With this emphasis on the deeper and covert structures, structuralism separates meaning from the intention of the author and attaches it to the text itself.22 This approach closely resembles narrative and rhetorical criticism due to its text-based interest in the literary structures, but this is perhaps a deception.

Both Trible and Powell note that structuralism goes much deeper into the text while narrative and rhetorical criticism show concern for the surface structures and meanings.23

Second, reader-response criticism is a pragmatic discipline that differs from narrative criticism and structuralism because it is not text-based but centered on the reader's act of interpretation. Its interest is in the impact the reader has on the meaning in the text. The assumption in this approach is that, though often unintentionally and as a consequence of one's own background, a reader "shapes," or perhaps "constructs," the text's meaning through the process of reading.24 Reader-response criticism shows a range of usages. On one side it is the study of how readers impact the meaning of text subtly and unintentionally as they interpret it. On the other side it is the intentional act of using one's own input to shape the meaning of the text, sometimes with the belief that there is no universal meaning in the text.25 Ideological approaches exemplify this

Powell, What is Narrative Criticism?, 13; Longman, "Literary Approaches," 103.

22 Trible, Rhetorical Criticism, 65-66; Powell, What is Narrative Criticism?, 13.

23 Trible, Rhetorical Criticism, 66; Powell, What is Narrative Criticism?, 14.

24 Longman, "Literary Approaches," 106.

25 This act is often associated with skepticism in the reader's ability to objectively draw meaning from the text, such as in deconstruction (Powell, What is Narrative Criticism?, 16-17). 22 second type and make up a subset within reader-response criticism.26 Ideological approaches use a person's background (i.e., economic situation, gender, culture) as a key to interpretation. Thus, for example, feminist approaches reread texts with reference to women or women's rights.

Rhetorical criticism, as developed by Muilenburg, is a text-focused method with attention toward the author's intent. In this form it resembles narrative criticism very closely. However, recent usage of rhetorical criticism puts it in the category of reader- centered criticisms. Its concern is with the impact the text has on the reader. How has the rhetoric influenced the reader? This is notably different than narrative criticism because it moves away from the text and becomes a pragmatic approach. It also differs to a degree from the above mentioned reader-response criticism which is about the reader's impact on the text rather than the text's impact on the reader.

Third, narrative criticism, the method for this project, is an objective approach which resembles structuralism and rhetorical criticism. Even though there are also some subtle differences, there will be many features that can be drawn from these other methods and used within the boundaries and assumptions of narrative criticism. Like structuralism and rhetorical criticism, narrative criticism uses the literary devices in the narratives as keys to understanding the meaning. Placing the method used in this thesis in the context of literary scholarship helps to understand the type of work accomplished and the methods utilized in that endeavor.

Longman, "Literary Approaches," 106.

Wray Beal, Deuteronomist 's Prophet, 21-22. 23

1.2 Assumptions and Delimitations

It is important to lay out the assumptions and delimitations inherent in a narrative-critical approach, because they provide the boundaries for this study by dictating at what point it starts and at what point it will go no further. To begin, narrative criticism assumes that biblical narrative, even with its complicated compositional stages, can be read as a coherent whole. This assumption is built on two component features. The first feature accepts that the narrative, in this case 1 Kgs

18:16-40, can be treated as a completed story.28 Unlike historical-critical methods which treat the text as a collection of pieces which remain discernable, narrative criticism treats the text as the finished product. It does not look for the text's pre­ history, the missing pieces, or a different literary context, nor does it seek to remove parts that might be later additions. This leads to the second component feature of the coherent whole: there is unity.29 The assumption underlying this is that there is purposeful design behind its present form. According to Cohn the parts of the narratives are drawn together through thematic and structural elements that reveal the design and intent of the author.30 The themes are the consistent content that develops throughout the course of the narrative and the structure is the "logical linear progression" that

"creatively integrate^]" the elements of the story. Despite evident editorial activity, it is common now to see in the narratives an intentional, artful, unified, and completed

28 Powell, What is Narrative Criticism?, 1.

29 Ibid.

30 The design of the author will be taken up later.

31 Cohn, "Literary Logic," 333-34. Cohn applies his concepts of themes and structure to the larger narrative of 1 Kgs 17-19, but the ideas are also relevant to the smaller narrative of 1 Kgs 18:16-40. There is the development of theme and structure in the smaller part too. 24 whole. The reader can become engaged in the story without being or becoming aware of the stages of its formation. Inconsistencies and gaps are then a part of the literary technique used to draw the reader through the plot rather than an unintentional consequence of editorial activity.33 The Elijah narratives themselves have been impacted by editorial revisions, but the present text is assumed to be a product brought to completion by an authorial hand. When this assumption is applied to 1 Kgs 18:16-40 it follows that the pericope can function as a full story. That is, the story is final, intact, whole, and unified, and furthermore, that understanding can be drawn from the narrative within the boundaries that are set.

The second assumption is that the pericope is also a component of its narrative context. Amit explains that "a given unit may be regarded as whole in relation to smaller units and as a part in relation to larger ones."34 This is a further extension and application of the first assumption. While it is demonstrable that the smaller part is related to the larger narrative context, the assumption is, as Powell clarifies, "that the narrative is to be read sequentially and completely with all of its parts being related to the work as a whole." It is further assumed that meaning is given to and drawn from the larger context.

See: Iain W. Provan, / and 2 Kings, NIBCOT (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1995), 4; Polzin, Samuel and the Deuteronomist, 9. Robert Polzin goes as far as saying that the scholar is "responsible for making sense of the present text" (Moses and the Deuteronomist, 17).

33 House, 1, 2 Kings, 42, 186.

34 Amit, Reading Biblical Narratives, 15.

35 Mark Allen Powell "Narrative Criticism," in Methods of Biblical Interpretation (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2004), 170. There is a delimitation implied in this assumption. An increasingly wider context can be found for the smaller narrative. The story of Elijah on Mount Carmel is in the context of the drought narrative, and the drought narrative is in the context of the larger Elijah cycle. This context can be increased further to the texts included in the Deuteronomist's (Dtr's) prophetic source, and 25

The last assumption is that the text is a means by which meaning is attainable.

Walsh considers the primal ingredient of meaning to be words.36 The words are used artistically by the writer to build the components of the narrative—aesthetic components that create an experience by exposing the reader to a multitude of stylistic elements. But the stylistic elements do not exist solely for the sake of aesthetics. They are also the formal techniques inseparably linked to the content of the narrative.37 Trible explains:

Although structure [form] and content may be distinguished for analytical purposes, they remain an inseparable whole. A literary artifact is not a container from which ideas or substance can be removed. Conversely, it is not a subject matter from which stylistic and structural wrappings can be removed. No form appears without content and no content without form. How a text speaks and what it says are mixed and mingled indissolubly to give meaning.38

This is the first factor of the assumption. The second is that the combined impact of form and content "yields articulation of meaning."39 Bar-Efrat writes:

It is through techniques that the meaning of the facts of the narrative is determined. Techniques and forms can emphasize or minimize narrative materials, bring a topic into the foreground or push it into the background. They hint at causal and other connections between events and constitute the principle means whereby the narrative impresses itself upon the reader, directing the attitudes and reactions to what is related.40 furthermore into the context of the 1 and 2 Kgs, the Deuteronomistic History (DH), the Old Testament, etc. The delimitation, then, is choosing to limit the context to chs. 17-19.

36 Walsh, Style and Structure, 1, and 7 Kings, BO, ed. David W. Cotter (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1996), xv.

37 Trible, Rhetorical Criticism, 91-92; Fokkelman, Narrative Art in Genesis, 5-6.

38 Trible, Rhetorical Criticism, 92.

39 Ibid., 95.

40 Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art, 10. Trible notes that "meaning" is an inexact term. Of the multiple possible meanings that can be attained in a literary study, she mentions three: the "authorial meaning," the "textual meaning," and the "reader's meaning" (Trible, Rhetorical Criticism, 95-99). This project, as a text-based approach, will place the greatest emphasis on the textual meaning. Within this textual meaning one can refer more specifically to the implied author and implied reader, which is discussed below. 26

Thus, in summary, the words of a narrative are used stylistically to build the content of the narrative, and the stylistic content is used to convey meaning.

In addition to the above assumptions, there are a number of delimitations. Some of them are more obvious than others. First, as has been covered to some degree, a narrative-critical analysis is synchronic in its approach rather than diachronic. Thus, it does not do source, form, or redaction-critical work.41 The exception will be the following chapter, which will review briefly the modern scholarship on the development and interpretation of the Elijah cycle.

Second, narrative criticism is not a text-critical approach, but it cannot avoid it completely. Simply choosing to work with the final form of 1 Kgs 18:16-40 and its larger context of chs. 17-19 does not clarify precisely what text is under discussion.

One can, for example, choose to work with a modern English translation of the text, though that is not done in this case. Of the ancient versions of the text, the two main choices are the Masoretic Text (MT) and the Septuagint (LXX). The focus in this case will be on the MT as it appears in Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS) and, when necessary, text-critical issues will be addressed.

The third delimitation is against the treatment of the narratives as historical accounts despite the likelihood that DH is written in some sense as history.42 Narrative

41 See Trible, Rhetorical Criticism, 93. Trible makes a case for some background work and reflection in the diachronic approaches. "In those cases the critic ponders how the past affects the final form. The possibilities are several: literary harmony may prevail despite a turbulent past; the final form may contain but not absorb disruption; the final form may yield a hodgepodge that undercuts organic unity" (p. 94). The narrative criticism in this study is fastened more strictly to the final form of the text. Though such questions may be legitimate in another context, they would, in this case, interrupt the attention on the elements of the story and how they function together to create the narrative whole.

42 It is common to treat the prophetic narratives differently, in terms of their historicity, than the rest of the narratives in the DH, but Paul R. House argues against this because the author gives "no indication" that these narratives are any less historical than the rest (House, /, 2 Kings, 52). 27 criticism does this, not by denying that they can function in that form, but by accepting that they also function as narratives. On the parallel between the two forms of literature,

Burke O. Long explains that an author of history would not "necessarily exclude elements characteristic of fiction from the account. The writer may develop a dramatic plot, or be concerned with metaphor and imaginative description .... On the other hand, fiction may incorporate features thought essential to historical narrative, such as chronology or concern with cause-effect relations between events."43 It is the style and features of the text that the narrative critic chooses to focus on rather than the text's reflection of history. Furthermore, and as a consequence, narrative criticism does not attempt to make a case on the historicity of the narratives. Normally treating the text as history would raise issues about its ideological nature44 and doubtful factual reliability.45

Yet a narrative approach allows one to bypass these issues. "Normative reading involves an implicit contract by which readers agree to accept the dynamics of the story world that are established by the implied author."46 Whether one believes or disbelieves the content of the narratives in the real world has no bearing on one's acceptance of it in the story world.

Fourth, narrative criticism does not take a socio-cultural approach. It does not concern itself with the social, cultural, economic, political, religious, or historical contexts. The interest the critic holds is not in the real world setting of the narrative, but

43 Long, 1 Kings, 4.

44 John B. Gabel and Charles B. Wheeler, The Bible as Literature: An Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986), 44-45.

45 Brueggemann, 1 & 2 Kings, 1.

46 Powell, "Narrative Criticism," 170-71. Implied author will be discussed in more detail shortly. 28 in the socio-cultural setting created by the implied author. The one exception is that the critic must do enough socio-cultural study to know as much as the implied reader knows.47 For example, Elijah opposes Baalism in Israel by stopping the flow of rain, but the narrative does not make it clear to the reader that in Baal mythology Baal is the provider of rain. This is something the implied reader knows and that the modern reader must research to find out, otherwise the reader cannot fully understand Elijah's intentions. This is where the limitation begins to give way, but only just in part.

Lastly, narrative criticism is not a biblical theology approach though it can often yield similar results. The similarity between the two approaches lies in the fact that both respond to the shaping of the final, holistic text by the author. Both narrative criticism and biblical theology will pick up on some of the same themes in the narratives, such as the importance of worshipping YHWH instead of Baal.48 As noted earlier, literary approaches are interested in the way that form and content produce meaning. Biblical theology is interested in the meaning as well, but not as interested in form and content.

It is here that the difference lies. The theme of YHWH worship versus Baal worship is a literary artifact for narrative critics, but it has further theological meaning for biblical theologians. Biblical theology would be considered mimetic on Abrams's model whereas narrative criticism is strictly text-based. In addition, biblical theology demonstrates attention to the intentions of the real author and the applicable meaning of the text for the real readers. This extended interest goes beyond the scope of narrative criticism. On the relation between the two, Fokkelman writes, "In religious texts ... the

47 Powell, What is Narrative Criticism?, 20. Implied reader will be discussed in more detail shortly.

48 House, /, 2 Kings, 74-75. 29 analysis particularly opens the way to theological conclusions." Thus their similarity hinges on the meaning of the text.

Having considered the assumptions and delimitations inherent in narrative criticism, it will be important to consider next how the method accomplishes its task.

1.3 Narrative Criticism and Its Use for Understanding Characters

Narrative criticism is an objective approach which does not observe external factors. Its "immediate goal... is to understand the narrative"50 by eliminating the focus on elements that fall outside the text such as the real author(s) and the real audience. Instead, these are replaced with their textual equivalents—the implied author and implied reader—which are concepts constructed through the reading of the text. For instance, the reader perceives of an implied author to which is attributed the values and design of the narrative, and an implied reader for which the narrative is designed.51

Both are created out of the content within the text and neither is a real person external to the text. The term "implied author" was coined by Wayne C. Booth to refer to an author built into the text by the real author.52 Without seeing the real author, the reader can see

49 Fokkelman, Narrative Art in Genesis, 6.

50 Powell, What is Narrative Criticism?, 7. This project will remain strictly text-based, though, as David M. Gunn has noted, the term "narrative criticism" is "loose" and has been used to refer to less objective literary approaches. In particular, some forms of the method have paid more attention to the influence a reader has on the narratives (David M. Gunn, "Narrative Criticism," in To Each Its Own Meaning: An Introduction to Biblical Criticisms and Their Applications, ed. Steven L. McKenzie and Stephen R. Haynes, rev. and exp. ed. [Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1999], 201). While it is not here denied that the reader has an impact on the narrative, the approach will be focused as narrowly as possible on the text.

51 Walsh, 1 Kings, xviii; Powell, "Narrative Criticism," 169-70.

52 Wayne C. Booth, The Rhetoric of Fiction (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), 70- 71. 30 the implied author and learn certain things about this author through how and what the author chooses to communicate. Booth explains, "The 'implied author' chooses, consciously or unconsciously, what we read; we infer him as an ideal, literary, created version of the real man; he is the sum of his own choices."53 The implied author has morals, a personality, an attitude, likes and dislikes, and interests; all of which are revealed through the communication of the story. Yet the implied author does not tell anything in the story but uses the narrative tools of the narrator and narratee.54 The narrator, which is distinct from either the real or implied author, tells the story to the narratee. The narratee is the listener to the story who is usually implicit and only rarely identified.55 The implied reader who stands opposite to the implied author is the one who responds as the implied author expects the reader to respond. That is, the implied reader sympathizes with the right characters, agrees with the values being communicated, and feels the appropriate emotions. The implied reader may also be part of a specific socio-cultural group and know certain things.56 The real reader may not respond to the story in the same ways as the implied reader or be a part of the same socio-cultural group, but the real reader can identify the implied reader through the content and communication of the text. A couple of advantages arise out of reading the text in light of the implied author and reader. First, it is possible to conceive of a coherent and unified text as a product of an implied author even when the text is

53 Ibid., 74-75.

54 Seymour Chatman, Story and Discourse: Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1978), 149, 150.

55 Powell, What is Narrative Criticism?, 27.

56 Chatman, Story and Discourse, 150. 31 otherwise the result of multiple stages and authors. The implied author serves as the

en "organizing principle" in this case. The second advantage is that the implied reader can serve as a technique for achieving an objective reading distinguishable from the CO subjective readings provided by real readers, though it is still unlikely to reach complete objectivity.

In any case, the implied author and reader simply form a theoretical framework from which one can attempt an objective narrative analysis. The actual undertaking of the analysis is done through the evaluation of the narrative features in the pericope such as characterization, plot, narration, and setting. In particular, this project studies how the character of Elijah, in his authoritative role in the Mount Carmel narrative, relates to and impacts the character of YHWH. Because of this emphasis on two characters, it is with character and characterization that one must start. Characters compose the point of connection between a narrative and the readers. In the words of Bar-Efrat: The characters can ... transmit the significance and values of the narrative to the reader, since they usually constitute the focal point of interest. Their personalities and histories attract the reader's attention to a greater extent than do other components of the narrative (explanations, settings, etc.). They generally arouse considerable emotional involvement; we feel what they feel, rejoice in their gladness, grieve at their sorrow and participate in their fate and experiences. Sometimes the characters arouse our sympathy, sometimes our revulsion, but we are never indifferent to them. Characterization is the process of building and communicating the characters to whom the readers relate. Shlomith Rimmon-Kenan describes characterization as the use of

Walsh, 1 Kings, xviii. See also Powell, "Narrative Criticism," 169.

Powell, "Narrative Criticism," 170.

Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art in the Bible, 47. 32

"character-indicators distributed along the text-continuum.' That is, it is the ways in which the author has revealed the characteristics, goals, interests, and habits of the various characters throughout the course of the plot, including the ways in which the characters have grown and changed through the progression of events. One of the clearest ways that a character can be revealed is through direct characterization by the narrator.61 This includes clear statements about the appearance, personality, abilities, and aspirations of a character which directly inform the reader about what the character is like.

Much characterization, however, takes place in less direct forms. Instead of the narrator explicitly dictating the characteristics of a character, the characteristics are

"shown" through other means such as action and speech. First, the actions that a character takes can reveal much about the character but only subtly. Distinguishing between the habitual actions of a character and the one-time actions is an important step in evaluating what the actions say about the character. Rimmon-Kenan writes,

One-time actions tend to evoke the dynamic aspect of the character, often playing a part in a turning point in the narrative. By contrast, habitual actions tend to reveal the character's unchanging or static aspect, often having a comic or ironic effect, as when a character clings to old habits in a situation which renders them inadequate. Although a one-time action does not reflect constant qualities, it is not less characteristic of the character. On the contrary, its dramatic impact often suggests that the traits it reveals are qualitatively more crucial than the numerous habits which represent the character's routines.63

Shlomith Rimmon-Kenan, Narrative Fiction: Contemporary Poetics (London: Methuen & Co., 1983), 59.

61 Ibid., 60.

62 See Powell, What is Narrative Criticism?, 52-53, and Booth, The Rhetoric of Fiction, 3-20 on the distinction between showing and telling as methods of characterization.

Rimmon-Kenan, Narrative Fiction, 61. 33

Furthermore, the reader must evaluate what a character chooses to do, chooses not to do, and considers doing.64 All these types of actions are subtle indicators that build characters by showing their choices, preferences, goals, and so forth.

Second, speech can function to characterize both the person speaking and the one being spoken about. It characterizes the speaker through implicit means, such as what the speaker decides to say and how the speaker decides to say it. If the speaker is speaking about another character then that person is also being characterized, but the reader must be cautious about taking the details at face value. Amit explains that the reliability of characterizing statements from other characters is always in question.65

What characters say is not always reliable and therefore these claims need to be weighed according to the context.

Alter recognizes that the different ways of indirect characterization can range in their reliability. Actions, which require much more inference from the reader, fall on the less reliable end of the spectrum. On the other hand, speech is usually more reliable, with inward speech or thoughts being the most reliable because it connects the reader with the "character's conscious intentions."66 The best evaluation of a character is done over the course of a narrative and takes into consideration the cumulative effect of all the factors that build a character. Some details in a narrative serve to reinforce certain prominent characteristics. Rimmon-Kenan calls these analogies and identifies three types: names with meanings that parallel characteristics, physical settings meant to

64 Ibid., 61-62.

65 Amit, Reading Biblical Narratives, 75.

66 Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative, 117. 34 symbolize lifestyle or character traits, or comparisons or contrasts between characters.

All of these analogies, however, can only be made through the prior knowledge of the traits, thus they only serve to reinforce the traits rather than to characterize.

Biblical narrative uses both direct and indirect forms of characterization.

However, Alter notes that direct characterization is done sparingly in biblical narrative and it is inferentially that one must reconstruct characters out of the other narrative features in use.68 Therefore characterization will be reviewed here in light of its development out of plot, narration, and setting.69

First, plot is tied in closely with the characters. Without characters to think, feel, speak, and act there is no plot because nothing can occur without a vehicle to cause movement—there is no one to desire an outcome, to provide conflict, to make pronouncements, to bear emotions, or to accomplish a task. In a story, plot and character become intermingled. Plot provides the framework, the problem, and the goal, but the characters drive the plot forward through their possession of the motivations and provision of the actions. Characters have desires after which they seek and this leads to the progression in the plot.70 The motives are the reasons for the actions of the characters, but the actions are explicit in comparison to the subtle motives. Motives say something about character, and so the narrative critic must work backward from a

Rimmon-Kenan, Narrative Fiction, 67-70.

68 Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative, 114, 116-17.

69 Despite the emphasis on characters here, it is not assumed that characters are the most essential elements of a story. In agreement with Gunn, characters are seen as having essential and shared importance with plot (Gunn, "Narrative Criticism," 213).

See Gunn, "Narrative Criticism," 213-14. 35 character's actions to hypothesize about motives.71 An understanding of the interaction of the characters' motives and actions allows the critic to succeed in making inferences about the characters. One must not assume, though, that the characters provide more for the plot than vice versa. Walsh explains that a "story recounts a series of connected events that move from a situation of stability through a complicating process of destabilization to a situation of new (or reestablished) stability."72 This movement of the plot brings the characters through a variety of situations to which they respond and perhaps even develop or regress as characters. It reveals depth about the characters by testing them against different scenarios. In particular, much can be learned when decisions are made by characters. Some characteristics are more overt and others are implicit; some are unambiguous and the rest are imprecise.74

Second, when the reader reads a narrative, there is faith invested in the story.

For the duration of the reading process, the reader believes all the events that are taking place, the portrayals of the characters, and the moral judgments given. The one in whom the reader is placing the trust is the narrator. This trust is not undeserved by that narrator.75 Rather, the narrator demonstrates knowledge on all that is contained in the

71 Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art in the Bible, 11.

72 Walsh, 1 Kings, xvii.

73 Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art in the Bible, 81.

74 More can be said about plot than is mentioned here. This is simply an introduction to understanding characters in the course of reading a plot. Further questions that can be asked would include: What function does each unit of a plot serve—is it purely functional in the sense that it is moving the plot forward, or is it critical to the meaning of the narrative (see Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art in the Bible, 95-96)? What does the order of the events in the plot suggest—is something out of order and what might this say (see Walsh, 1 Kings, xix)? And what does the entrance, presence, and exit of characters mean to the plot (see Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art in the Bible, 96)?

75 Berlin notes that "it is generally accepted that biblical narrative is narrated in the third person by an omniscient (and reliable) narrator" (Berlin, Poetics and Interpretation, 43). 36 narrative. This storyteller is the one who is always present in the narrative; quoting the characters when they speak, describing the events, and providing commentary. Walsh describes the narrator as "the voice within the text that we hear when all characters' voices are silent."76 This voice can greatly inform readers on the various elements within the narrative, particularly characters. The narrator mediates between the narrative and the reader. Thus, the characters, including their actions, thoughts, personalities, and speech, are communicated through the words of the narrator rather than the reader having direct access to the information.77 The narrator can choose to make explicit statements about the characters, by either describing them or passing judgment on them. On the other hand, and more commonly, the narrator can reveal the characters through the techniques of telling a story. This leads to several questions that can be asked about what the narrator chooses to include, which in turn provides subtle indications about the characters. What are the characters saying, why are they saying what they are saying, and how is this both influenced by and influencing upon

7Q the story? What do characters say about other characters? How do they say what they say?80 What concerns do the characters show and what are their desires?81 What are the characters doing? Do characters change over the course of the story? Through viewing

76 Walsh, 1 Kings, xvii.

77 Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art in the Bible, 13.

78 J. P. Fokkelman, Reading Biblical Narrative: An Introductory Guide, trans. Ineke Smit (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1999), 62; Gunn, "Narrative Criticism," 224.

79 Gunn, "Narrative Criticism," 224.

80 Bar-Efrat notes that characters rarely use dialogue that is different than the style of the narrator. Nonetheless, subtleties can still exist (Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art in the Bible, 65).

81 Fokkelman, Reading Biblical Narrative, 67-68. 37 the characters with these and other questions in mind, it is possible to learn about the characters. One can learn which characters are reliable or unreliable and which are

"flat" or "round."82 All this information is sifted through the narrator. "The narrator draws those lines and selects those details, right down to the smallest, that suit him. ...

He is like a juggler who keeps a lot of balls in the air at the same time. He structures time, sketches space, brings characters on and takes them off again, misleads the reader at times, and enforces his point of view through thick and thin."83 Consequently, the reader is subjected to the way the narrator has presented the story. The words that are used and the way they are puzzled together form a picture for the reader that is inescapably the image the narrator wants to present. The structure, symmetry and asymmetry, emphases, contrasts, repetitions, wordplay, and so forth, are all techniques used by the narrator to impress upon the reader his/her own perspective.84 Thus, it is only within the work of the narrator that one will find the characters, or any other aspect of the narrative.

Furthermore, the narrative critic should look for points where the narrator slows the narrative down to focus on a point in time, or, on the other hand, where the narrator speeds the story up and skims over greater amounts of time. Also, one should be aware of when events are reordered, such as when the narrative jumps back in time (or forward) to include an event or moment that is outside the narrative sequence.

Observing these features allows the critic to see where the narrator is placing weight. It

82 Amit, Reading Biblical Narratives, 71-72; Powell, "Narrative Criticism," 171-72.

83 Fokkelman, Reading Biblical Narrative, 55.

84 Walsh, 1 Kings, xiv-xvi, and Style and Structure, 7-10. Walsh attributes the developments of theme to the larger organizational structures (Style and Structure, 10). 38 is a technique for determining what parts are more important to the plot and themes of the narrative.85 In relation to the characters, one needs to consider which characters are given more time by the narrator, which ones appear more often, which ones are present at the key points in the narrative, which actions, thoughts, or speech become the greater focus of the narrative, and so forth.86 How the narrator sequences time can say a lot about the content of the narrative.

Third, this leads into the need for awareness of the temporal setting of the narrative. What is the time frame for the narrative? What time(s) of day (or year, etc.) are the events taking place? What is the historical period for the narrative? Along with determining the temporal setting, one should also determine the spatial setting. What can be known about where the events are taking place? Is there a specific geographical location? Is there movement? Sometimes symbolism can be attached to either the temporal or spatial settings.87 Sometimes setting provides structure for the plot. How characters move in and out of the settings can be revealing. Sometimes setting can provide a challenge for the characters or offer protection. Often these features of time and space can be subtle, but they can also be telling.

This review of narrative criticism and its place as part of the broader literary criticism shows that the process of reading narrative can be complex. But it can also be

85 Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art in the Bible, 143.

86 When one is considering the movement of time in the narrative, a comparison is being made between "narration time" and "narrated time." Narration time is the steady and continuous time it takes for the narrator to communicate the story to the reader. Narrated time, on the other hand, is the time period represented in the narrative. This is the time that can be summarized or expanded upon. It can skip ahead or back, or even stop. See Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art in the Bible, 143-44; Amit, Reading Biblical Narratives, 105-06; Powell, What is Narrative Criticism?, 36-40

Powell, "Narrative Criticism," 171. 39 rewarding. There is much that can be learned about the characters of Elijah and

YHWH, and especially about how they function together and uniquely within the plot. CHAPTER 2: RECENT RESEARCH ON THE ELIJAH NARRATIVES

The intent of this chapter is to review, in a brief form, the recent scholarship on the Elijah narratives. First, it will consider the development of the stories from their historical core through initial oral stages and compositional forms. Second, it will consider the inclusion of this prophetic composition into the Deuteronomistic History

(DH). Third, it will review holistic treatments of DH and the Elijah narratives. Though often references will be made to the Elijah cycle, the Elisha cycle, or the prophetical narratives generally, the goal of this chapter is to determine the trends in research behind chs. 17-19 specifically. This serves to set the approach of this thesis against the current research, highlighting where it runs parallel or tangentially to previous methods.

2.1 The Pre-Deuteronomistic History Formation of the Elijah Narratives

Benjamin Uffenheimer writes, "There is indeed no doubt that the Elijah Cycle has brought together a number of originally self-contained collections of stories.

However, scholarly attempts to reconstruct the stages in the evolution of the individual narratives must be viewed as flights of the imagination."1 The problem lies in the fact that the further one moves from the present text and toward its hypothesized origins, the rarer the evidence becomes.2 It is safe to assume that the stories about Elijah existed in

1 Benjamin Uffenheimer, Early Prophecy in Israel, trans. David Louvish (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1999), 341.

2 See Terence Collins, The Mantle of Elijah: The Redaction of the Prophetical Books, BibSem 20 (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 132.

40 41

both oral and written forms prior to their redaction into the current DH, but the

information available on these forms is slim. Nonetheless, form criticism has been a

profitable and enlightening discipline, opening up stages in the history of a text that are

otherwise unseen. Form criticism is traceable to Hermann Gunkel who depicts folktales

as a form of artistic oral stories which are told and spread among the ancient Israelites.4

Many only last for a limited, but lengthy, period of time and then pass on while new

ones become familiar to the audience. But not all folktales pass out of use. Folktales

can become more permanent in the culture of the Israelites when they undergo the

3 DH is a historical composition including the books of Deuteronomy through 2 Kings. The idea of single author/editor (Dtr) being responsible for the composition during the exile is the original idea attributable to Martin Noth (Martin Noth, The Deuteronomistic History, JSOTSup 15 [Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1981]; originally published as Uberlieferungsgeschichtliche Studien, 2nd ed. [Tubingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 1957]). Noth's idea was that, though DH consists of selected historical works, it became unified and consistent through the work of an author/editor and thus contained a single theme: divine retribution for Israel's failure to keep the covenant. One of two major developments since Noth's original hypothesis is the theory of two redactional stages to DH originally proposed by Frank Moore Cross (Frank Moore Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel [Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973], 274-89). Cross's two stages correspond to the presence of two themes (grace and retribution, first noted in critiques from Gerhard von Rad, Studies in Deuteronomy, trans. David Stalker, SBT 9 [Chicago, EL: Henry Regnery Company, 1953], 74-91; and Hans Walter Wolff, "The Kerygma of the Deuteronomic Historical Work," trans. Frederick C. Prussner, in The Vitality of Old Testament Traditions, ed. Walter Brueggemann and Hans Walter Wolff, 2nd ed. [Atlanta, GA: John Knox Press, 1982], 84-86) rather than Noth's single theme of retribution. The first redaction (Dtr1), completed during the reign of Josiah, recognized the fate of the Northern Kingdom as judgment for the sins of Jeroboam I but also emphasized the hope and faith available under the reform of Josiah. The second redaction (Dtr2) corresponded more closely to Noth's original idea. Dtr2 was an exilic redaction that explained the fall of the Southern Kingdom as a consequence to the sin of Manasseh. The second development since Noth is attributed to Rudolph Smend and his followers. This school of thought (also known as the Gottingen School) finds three main exilic redactions: DtrH (a historically-focused redaction), DtrP (a prophetically-focused redaction), and DtrN (a nomistically-focused redaction). They are all considered exilic editions and occur in the order listed, from 580 B.C.E. for DtrH to 560 B.C.E. for DtrN (see Steven L. McKenzie, "Deuteronomistic History," in ABD, vol. 2 [New York: Doubleday, 1992], 163). Views on DH have diversified significantly in recent years. A couple of common trends are: (1) to consider DH to be inconsistent due to its complicated editorial history, and (2) to use a literary approach to interpret DH in its final form assuming it to be consistent. Both these trends will be discussed briefly later in the chapter.

4 Hermann Gunkel, The Folktale in the Old Testament, trans. Michael D. Rutter, ed. David M. Gunn, HTBS (Sheffield: Almond Press, 1987); originally published as DasMdrchen im Alten Testament (Tubingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1917). 42 eradication of non-Yahwistic material,5 or when folktales become a part of other traditions, such as when the prophets use folktale imagery and language as a mode of expression.6 Folktales are recorded for posterity when they are changed into legendary material by integration with "historical reminiscences," such as when the historical

Elijah becomes the hero of a folktale. Thus Elijah, along with the folktale, becomes a part of a permanent legend, which eventually becomes the present text.

Alexander Rofe has more recently explored the form and literary history of the

Elijah cycle in his study on the history and types of prophetic stories.8 He theorizes about the progression of the stories from their primal form as legenda—individual stories with stock characters and a simple plot centering around a miracle, but lacking in any extensive moral, political, or religious content9—to their inclusion in the later collection of Elijah stories. The process starts with the historical person:

The principle factor in shaping the story and its focal point was the prophet. By virtue of an extraordinary personality, he made a deep impact on his contemporaries which provided the impetus for the literary creation. Moreover, the ideas of the holy man found acceptance among people who later recorded them together with his activities. Thus the literary category of the story focusing on the prophet was sometimes determined by personality—his ideas and actions—no less than by his words.10

5 Ibid., 171-76.

6 Ibid., 174.

7 Ibid., 175.

8 Alexander Rofe, The Prophetical Stories: The Narratives about the Prophets in the Hebrew Bible; Their Literary Types and History (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1988).

9 Ibid., 13-17. The growth of prophetic stories from legenda, according to Rofe, can take many forms including vita, prophetic historiography, prophetic biography, parable, etc. His work, The Prophetic Stories, is about determining, labeling, and describing these different forms.

10 Ibid., 183. DeVries shares a similar view, stating that the prophetic stories were told "to explicate [the prophets'] ideals and exemplify their paradigmatic virtues" (Simon J. DeVries, Prophet 43

The short legenda first occur in early and oral forms, but time and the broadcasting of the stories leads to the literary forms. Sometimes the written stories reflect closely the original, but often the stories are subject to elaboration. The stories become longer and show more complexity, the characters are better developed, gaps in the story are filled, smaller narratives are associated with a larger narrative body, and the prophets are associated with biographical details.12 Rofe calls these developed "legendary biographies" vita and he considers the shift from legenda to vita to be slow.13 In similar ways, though with different details, most scholars accept the progressive development of the prophetic stories. Don C. Benjamin, for example, depicts the development of the

Elijah stories as popular narratives against the political regime of the Omrides. The

Omrides could not feed the people but instead took food from them, while the stories of

Elijah showed the provision of food and life for the needy when the king could provide

Against Prophet: The Role of the Micaiah Narrative (1 Kings 22) in the Development of Early Prophetic Tradition [Grand Rapids, MI.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1978], 52). Additionally, Cogan finds that the allusions to the prophet of Moses (particularly in ch. 19; i.e., his presence on Mount Horeb and his encounter with YHWH) indicate the reverence with which the person of Elijah was treated (Cogan, 1 Kings, 93). However, Marsha White notes that the Mosaic allusions are more likely later and ahistorical references from the scribes of Jehu useful for legitimating, not Elijah, but Elijah's statement against the Omride dynasty. Thus Jehu's overthrow of the Omride dynasty would also be legitimated. White argues that the core Elijah narrative is of the drought and so the historical person on which the Elijah narratives are based is likely a "rainmaker" (Marsha White, The Elijah Legends and Jehu's Coup, BJS 311 [Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1997], 32, 43).

11 On the early beginnings of the Elijah and Elisha stories J. Gordon McConville writes, "These stories of healings and miraculous provision fit best into a period when prophecy was young in Israel and when the pressing issue was the survival of Yahwism in the face of strong competition from the religion of Baal. This is the natural background of the contest between Elijah and the prophets of Baal on Carmel (IKi 18). The themes in these stories of fire, water, food, and life itself belong to a world in which a fundamental claim to control these things was being entered on behalf of Yahweh and against Baal" (J. Gordon McConville, Grace in the End: A Study in Deuteronomic Theology, SOTBT [Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1993], 68).

12 Rofe, Prophetical Stories, 27-30, 33, 41-42.

13 Ibid., 42-43. 44

neither.14 It is likely that stories were accepted by a prophetic circle, developed,

preserved, and in the words of Martin Noth, "welded together into a more or less unified

continuous narrative before Dtr.'s time."15

Rofe believes the Elijah narratives are a later development than the Elisha

narratives, even adopting some features from the Elisha stories (i.e., the title "man of

God") and using some of the same stories (cf, the widow of Zaraphath's son [1 Kgs

17:17-24] and the Shunammite woman's son [2 Kgs 4:8-37]).16 He dates the final

composition of 1 Kgs 16:29-19:18 within the reign of Manasseh (698-643 B.C.E.) when

Manasseh was rebuilding a setting of Baal-worship resembling that in Elijah's

confrontation against Baal.17 Rofe considers the whole composition to be an "epic." It

is well-developed, filled with characters, and demonstrates a complicated plot. The

story is not magical or mythical, but it is on the human level where Elijah battles to

convince the Israelites "that the Lord is real and that Baal is an illusion."18 He

concludes, "The story of God, Elijah, and Baal is an epic, a broad, sweeping and rich

canvas of images, places and people interacting over a long period of time, which

recounts the mighty battle that determined for all times the fate of the entire nation."19

14 Don C. Benjamin, "The Elijah Stories," in The Land of Carmel, ed. Paul Chandler (Rome: Institutum Carmelitanum, 1991), 27-29.

15 Noth, Deuteronomistic History, 68; see also Anthony F. Campbell, Of Prophets and Kings: A Late Ninth-Century Document (1 Samuel 1 - 2 Kings 10), CBQMS 17 (Washington, DC: The Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1986), 108, 115-16.

16 Rofe, Prophetical Stories, 31, 133, 188. See also Steven L. McKenzie, The Trouble with Kings: The Composition of the Book of Kings in the Deuteronomistic History, VTSup 42 (Leiden, The Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1991), 82.

17 Ibid., 189.

18 Ibid., 193-96.

19 Ibid., 196. 45

Not everyone shares the same opinion as Rofe when he dates the final composition of the Elijah's challenge of Baalism to the reign of Manasseh. DeVries argues for two redactional stages culminating in the completion of chs. 17-19 during

Jehu's reign. The core narrative was the drought legend to which the redactor first added "the prophet-legitimation legend of 1 Kings 17:17-19,21-24."20 The second addition was the contest on Mount Carmel narrative which resembled the anti-Baalism present during the time of Jehu.21 Positing a similar date of composition, Anthony F.

Campbell discerns a "Prophetic Record" in DH which includes prophetic material interspersed in 1 Sam 1:1 to 2 Kgs 10:28.22 The Record is "theologically inspired history" because it gives an account of history in light of the prophetic addresses of political and religious concerns.23 Campbell associates the Elijah narratives with the

Elisha tradition and attributes the Prophetic Record to the disciples of Elisha.24 These disciples are concerned primarily with the current issues of the Northern Kingdom under

Jehu. The anti-Baalism found in the Prophetic Record parallels the religious reform of

Jehu and the military threat on Jehu's kingdom is paralleled by the Prophetic Record's depiction of YHWH's divine deliverance. Thus Campbell places the Prophetic Record in the late-ninth century and in the Northern Kingdom, though he does allow for a

DeVries, Prophet Against Prophet, 115. DeVries describes "prophet-legitimation narratives" as narratives that have no political confrontation but still function to authenticate the prophet (DeVries, Prophet Against Prophet, 57).

21 Ibid.

22 Campbell, Of Prophets and Kings, 1.

23 Ibid., 105.

Ibid., 106. 46 generation of work behind the composition. White similarly dates the composition of the Elijah narratives but disassociates them from any prophetic circle. Rather she credits scribes of Jehu with the composition because they were motivated to legitimate Jehu's overthrow of the Omride dynasty. Elijah is not a hero in these stories, but a functional prophet used in propaganda to discredit the Omride rule and to endorse Jehu's reign.26

It is possible, perhaps even likely, that the Elijah stories developed through an oral tradition, stemming from the historical person, and into the written form. It is difficult, however, to date the composition of the Elijah narratives, though the weight seems in favour of a late-ninth century date. It also appears that the narratives were composed prior to their use in DH.27

2.2 The Insertion of the Elijah Narratives into the Deuteronomistic History

Scholars rarely consider in detail Dtr's insertion of the Elijah narratives into DH.

The use of a prophetic source is well-known, though the question regarding when it was first included in DH is still open. Often a scholar's conclusion on this question is related to his/her estimation of the redactions of DH. For example, Noth, who posited a

25 Ibid., 108. Uffenheimer also supports this period for the composition on account of the absence of references to Jerusalem or the temple. He explains that "the failure of our present author(s) to refer to the Temple of to the centralization of the cult may be attributed to the perplexity of those loyal to the Israelite faith in the northern kingdom at a time when the Temple at Jerusalem was a center of idolatry." It was at this time that Athaliah was supporting Baalism in the Southern Kingdom (Uffenheimer, Early Prophecy, 339-40).

26 White, Elijah Legends, 43, 75.

27 The Gottingen School (particularly W. Dietrich), though hypothesizing DtrP to be subsequent to DtrH, "suggests the existence of a pre-DtrH prophetic narrative work dating to the era of Manasseh" (S. L. Richter, "Deuteronomistic History," in DOTHB [Downers Grove, EL: InterVarsity Press, 2005], 224- 25).

28 J. K. Mead, "Elijah," in DOTHB (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005), 250. 47 single redaction of DH during the exile, argues the prophetic source (along with the

Elijah narratives) is also worked into the history at this time.29 Frank Moore Cross found three themes in 1 and 2 Kings, two indicating an early Josianic edition of DH and one indicating a later exilic edition. Cross determines Elijah's proclamation against

Ahab and his house (1 Kgs 21:17-19) to be thematically linked to the anti-Baalism at the time of Josiah, thus he concludes that this prophecy belongs to the first edition of DH.30

The Gottingen School, traditionally associated with Rudolph Smend, suggests three exilic redactions of DH (in chronological order: DtrH, DtrP, DtrN). The division between DtrH and DtrP is unclear and it is to one of these two layers that one can attribute the insertion of the prophetic source.31 Steven L. McKenzie makes a similar case to Noth with a single exilic edition of DH, but he considers the insertion of the

Elijah narratives of 1 Kgs 17-19 to be post-Dtr and relatively unedited.32

In spite of the openness regarding the dating and process of the inclusion of the

Elijah narratives into DH, one must keep in mind that the final text on Elijah is the one last touched by the redactors. Regardless of when one places the initial insertion of the prophetic source into DH, the editing was likely only completed in the exile. For this reason, this project assumes an exilic composition for chs. 17-19. In light of this

Noth, Deuteronomistic History, 71.

30 Cross, Canacmite Myth, 280-81. From this we can assume that Cross places the Elijah cycle in the first edition though he unfortunately does not refer directly to 1 Kgs 17-19 on this matter.

31 Richter, "Deuteronomistic History," 224-25. DtrP is an addition to Smend's original hypothesis by Dietrich.

32 McKenzie, The Trouble with Kings, 86-87. McKenzie's DH is different than Noth's DH because he supposes heavy editing by Dtr (except in the case of the post-Dtr material) while Noth supposes the input of Dtr to be minimal (McKenzie, The Trouble with Kings, 79-80; Noth, Deuteronomistic History, 71, 84). 48 supposition, Terence Collins's input on the Elijah character of the final redaction is important:

Throughout the Deuteronomist history the prophetic characters such as Samuel, Nathan, Ahijah, Elijah and Elisha appear as literary figures in a story-scheme which is a vehicle for the Deuteronomist views on the cause and meaning of the exile. Elijah and Elisha receive the lion's share of the coverage in the books of Kings .... They are clearly meant to be the heroes of the story, but they are more than that. They are archetypes of all the biblical prophets as rival figures to the kings, offering a different model of leadership with which the people can identify. ... Above all, the Deuteronomists develop the image of Elijah the prophet par excellence: the condemner of idolatry, the defender of the law, the successor to Moses.33

2.3 Holistic Approaches and the Elijah Narratives

When Martin Noth first proposed a single exilic Dtr, inherent in his perspective was a "self-contained whole."34 Dtr was a single influence on the final redaction of DH, drawing together the disparate sources into greater whole. Noth credits to Dtr an

"intentional" and "coherent" history with an identifiable unified theology.35

Furthermore, Noth is able to accept the unity of DH even after considering the history of its formation, but not all the scholarly opinions that have followed have come to the same conclusion.36 Recently, for example, Hartmut N. Rosel examined the motifs of

Terence Collins, The Mantle of Elijah: The Redaction of the Prophetical Books, BibSem 20 (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 130.

34 This phrase serves as a part of the title for Noth's ch. 2 (Noth, Deuteronomistic History, 4-11).

35 Ibid., 6, 10.

36 Thomas C. Romer and Gary N. Knoppers both recognize a trend among recent scholars who have found DH lacking a coherence which could be attributed to a well-planned final composition (Thomas C. Romer, ed., The Future of the Deuteronomistic History, BETL 147 [Leuven, Belgium: Leuven University Press, 2000], viii; Gary N. Knoppers, "Is There a Future for the Deuteronomistic History?," in The Future of the Deuteronomistic History, ed. Thomas C. Romer, BETL 147 [Leuven, Belgium: Leuven University Press, 2000], 120). 49 sin, divine reaction, punishment, and salvation to determine if an "overarching

'Leitmotiv'" exists in DH. He stipulated that the unity produced by a single redactor depends on the presence of a comprehensive theme. However, his analysis demonstrates that the motifs are inconsistently present throughout DH, so he concludes that "one should abandon the theory of a single and uniform deuteronomistic history."35

More positively, however, a trend has taken Noth's conception of a purposely designed literary unit and chosen to read it according to the meaning intended by the final editor. Polzin represents an early form of this aim. He argues that historical criticism on its own has not been successful in ascertaining the meaning of the biblical texts. Instead, he determines that a literary approach is "necessary for even a preliminary scholarly understanding of what this ancient text means," though this must occur alongside historical criticism. He advocates for an approach that begins with a literary analysis, turns to an analysis on the historical issues, and then returns to the literary analysis for further refinement.39 In addition to Polzin, Collins, who holds a similar position, explains that the Elijah narratives "lost their independent identity" when they were worked into the larger whole.40 Now the meaning they hold is dependent on their current context. Collins writes:

The shaping of the various Elijah stories into a continuous narrative must be evaluated as a piece of creative literary activity. It is governed, not by the historian's eye for accuracy, but by the artist's eye for the telling

37 Hartmut N. Rosel, "Does a Comprehensive 'Leitmotiv' Exist in the Deuteronomistic History?," in The Future of the Deuteronomistic History, ed. Thomas C. Romer, BETL 147 (Leuven, Belgium: Leuven University Press, 2000), 195-96.

38 Ibid., 203, 211.

39 Polzin, Moses and the Deuteronomist, 3-8.

40 Collins, Mantle of Elijah, 131. 50

details and their pictorial impact. At the same time the unified narrative cannot be divorced from its complex origins. Regrettably, we do not possess enough evidence to trace the history of the composition of the Elijah narrative through its different stages, but whatever its pre-history, it must now be viewed primarily for what it has become—an integral part of the Deuteronomist story of Israel. The most profitable approach to narrative, therefore, is likely to be the one which gives due attention to its literary function in the present setting.41 Along with the trend toward holistic readings of DH, an abundance of works taking literary approaches to the Elijah narratives has appeared. Brevard S. Childs was one of the first to take such an approach. He asks how one should "interpret biblical narrative in light of all of our new [historical] knowledge," and he answers this in his focus on the Elijah narratives.42 He notes in particular that one must aim for a holistic reading and avoid an approach that "destroys the biblical story."43 Though he takes a literary and holistic angle, his reading is not purely a narrative analysis because he reads with an eye toward historical details and the larger literary context.44 Another literary approach can be found in Long's commentary on 1 Kings. He perceives that a lengthy pre-history underlies the work of the final author, but he emphasizes in particular the effort of the author in organizing the DH "according to some cohering rubric of intelligibility."45 His approach analyzes the stories according to structure, genre, setting, and intention with the purpose of discerning the author's meaning out of the final form.

Ibid., 132. Along the same line of reasoning, House posits that the prophetic narrative functions as literature that gives meaning to the historical events by providing an interpretation of it. Furthermore, the interpretation provided therein unites "narrative, a concern for history, and the belief that failure to live up to theological agreements caused the nation's destruction" (House, 1, 2 Kings, 57).

42 Childs, "On Reading the Elijah Narratives," 136.

43 Ibid., 136-37.

44 Ibid., 130, 134.

Long, 1 Kings, 31-32. 51

In a similar perspective, T. R. Hobbs, in his commentary on 2 Kings, writes, "A methodological presupposition of this commentary is that 2 Kings is the work of one writer whose intention was to tell the story of the failed experiment of monarchy in

Israel and Judah, and to interpret that failure."46 That is, aside from the pre-history of the text, a narrative formed by the final author is present to be interpreted.47 Many more literary readings have emerged, and a number of them elude the historical questions that are asked in these above works. The narrative-critical reading of the Mount Carmel narrative in this thesis can be categorized in this way. It is a literary reading aimed at interpreting Dtr's final product with the historical questions left aside.

In conclusion, the holistic approaches to DH allow the character of Elijah to be read and studied in a new way. In historical approaches Elijah is the product of gradual historical construction, finalized with the input of the last editor. Such approaches tend away from concern with final-form coherence, placing emphasis instead on finding the historical Elijah behind the text and determining the development of the traditions on

Elijah. On the other hand, narrative study reveals a unique, lifelike, and profound

46 T. R. Hobbs, 2 Kings, WBC 13 (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1985), xxvi.

47 One may add John Van Seters into this category of interpreters who emphasize the final form of the text. Van Seters does not accomplish a narrative analysis, but after analyzing the formation of DH he states that "it is wrong to view Dtr as one who simply added pious and didactic phrases to pre-existing units. Rather, [Dtr] subordinated his received material or completely reshaped traditions to conform to his thematic concerns and perspectives" (John Van Seters, In Search of History: Historiography in the Ancient World and the Origins of Biblical History [New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1983], 307, see also p. 359).

48 Many of these have focused on elements or themes in the narratives, such as: the persistent threat of death on YHWH (Hauser, "Yahweh Versus Death," 11-19), the polarization between Elijah and Jezebel (Phyllis Trible, "Exegesis for Storytellers and Other Strangers," JBL 114 [1995]: 3-19), the mentorship role of the prophet (Rickie D. Moore, "The prophet as mentor: a crucial facet of the biblical presentations of Moses, Elijah, and Isaiah," JPT15 [2007]: 155-172), the narrative's refutation of Baalism (Battenfield, YHWH's Refutation of the Baal Myth, 19-37), and the use of geography as a narrative feature (John A. Beck, "Geography as Irony: The Narrative-Geographical Shaping of Elijah s Duel with the Prophets of Baal (1 Kings 18)," SJOT17 [2003]: 291-302). 52

(though more Active) character of Elijah. This is the position of this thesis which falls within the literary and holistic range of approaches to DH. It seeks to benefit from the immeasurable potential for learning about the literary character of Elijah, his motives, and his actions. CHAPTER 3: NARRATIVE ANALYSIS WITH AN EMPHASIS ON ELIJAH

This chapter focuses on Elijah, who is the central figure of this thesis. YHWH, the character with whom Elijah is to be juxtaposed, is the topic of the following chapter.

Each chapter will complete a narrative analysis of 1 Kgs 18:16-40 with an eye toward their respective characters, then a synthesis in ch. 5 will combine the results of the two narrative readings. The vital and larger component of the analysis, though, is the attention paid to the narrator's portrayal of Elijah.

Fokkelman writes, "The trajectory in an independent story is often a search or

'quest' undertaken by the hero in order to solve or cancel the problem or deficit presented at the outset. The hero is the subject of the quest, and he proceeds along the axis of his pursuit: he is on his way to the object of value that he wants to acquire or achieve."1 Elijah serves as the hero in this equation. The narrator portrays him as the one who is the subject of the quest, who is always present, and who shows initiative as the challenges of the plot present themselves.2 He comes across as a powerful character who, when in interaction with other characters, manages to dictate the continued course of the events and obtain positive responses from others, even when they are his opponents. According to the description of Lawrie, Elijah is a stage manager who carefully develops a scene which will emphasize his success.3

1 Fokkelman, Reading Biblical Narrative, 78.

2 Subject of the quest, always present, and shows initiative are Fokkelman's (ibid.) three criteria for identifying the hero.

3 Lawrie, "Telling Of(f) Prophets," 171-72.

53 54

In the contest narrative Elijah interacts with four characters: Ahab, the people, the prophets of Baal, and YHWH. However, Walsh points out that biblical narrative usually has only two active characters at any given point, but it can also have only one or as many as three.4 The narrator of the contest narrative manages to fit five characters into the story by having Elijah interact with each of them in turn, thus having no more than three active "characters at a time.5 In order, he interacts with Ahab, the people, the prophets of Baal, the people (again), and his final interaction is with both YHWH and the people and includes a reference to the prophets of Baal who are in a passive position.6 The following narrative analysis reviews the narrative according to Elijah's interaction with each of the characters, and because the divisions are rarely clear, there will be some overlap. This analysis incurs two important results: the characters are reviewed in greater depth, and Elijah, who acts strategically toward his goal, is revealed as the dominant character in the narrative. First, however, this chapter begins with a short summary of the plot.

3.1 A Short Summary of the Plot

The first element in a plotline is the exposition. It describes the situation that is in existence when the narrative begins and it details the background of the story.7 The contest narrative lays out the expositional details over a number of verses; mainly w.

4 Walsh, Style and Structure, 120-21.

5 Ibid., 131.

6 Walsh (ibid.) notices that the final sequence of the narrative can have a total of four characters (in spite of the regular maximum of three in Hebrew narrative) by leaving the prophets of Baal in the passive position.

7 Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art, 111. 55

16-21 which include an encounter between Elijah and Ahab followed by a confrontational address Elijah gives to the people. First, when Elijah and Ahab meet, there is an initial conflict between them. Ahab calls Elijah the "troubler of Israel" (v.

17) to which Elijah responds by reversing the accusation and faulting Ahab (and his

"father's house"), first, for abandoning "the commandments of YHWH," and second, for following Baal (v. 18).8 This pair of misdeeds is the existing situation that Elijah undertakes to resolve throughout the course of the plot. Baalism needs to be eradicated and Yahwism needs to be renewed, so Elijah immediately sets a scene for the ensuing conflict: Mount Carmel (v. 19). He asks Ahab to assemble "all Israel... and 450 prophets of Baal and 400 prophets of Asherah who eat at the table of Jezebel" (v. 19), and in the following scene all are assembled (v. 20; though no further mention is made of the prophets of Asherah9). Next, when Elijah confronts the people he again takes notice of the presence of Baalism in Israel. He accuses the people of serving both Baal and YHWH, and when their response is silence, the accusation is assumed as true (v.

21). Thus the exposition explains the thoroughness with which Israel has incorporated

Baal worship—it has spread from the king to his people.

Elijah sets the plot in motion by proposing a contest to resolve whether YHWH or Baal is god (w. 23-24). The prophets of Baal are instructed to test Baal first by preparing a sacrifice and calling on Baal to send fire on the altar (v. 25). They obey the instructions but fail to get a response from Baal (w. 26-29). Arguably, this point in the plot could serve as an "illusory conclusion"—a point in the plot where a climax is

8 Elijah actually uses the plural "Baals" (be'alim). This will be discussed later in the chapter.

9 This is a significant omission. This thesis takes the position that the prophets of Asherah did not come to the contest at Mount Carmel, but the reasons for this and the meaning it gives to the narrative will be detailed later. 56 reached but the story does not resolve.10 Instead the action continues to ascend as Elijah prepares his sacrifice for YHWH, drenches it in water, and prays to YHWH for fire (w.

30-37). This prayer and the ensuing fire from YHWH (v. 38) compose the real climax of the narrative. The people, who were once conflicted over the choice between YHWH and Baal, now claim that "YHWH, he is God" (v. 39). The plot resolves through this admission and through the killing of the prophets of Baal (v. 40). This last action is an emphasis on the thoroughness with which Baalism has been eradicated in the contest.'l

In summary, these above elements of the plot can be diagrammed like this:

Climax: Elijah prays to YHWH and he Rising Action: responds Resolution: Illusory Conclusion: Elijah prepares ^^\ Declaration, Prophets of Baal fail sacrifice to ^s' \ "YHWH he is to receive an answer YHWH ./^ \ God" and death St fromB^A \P^ \ of the prophets Exposition: proposed and ^ ^ ^ VfBaal Baalism has offering made replaced to Baal Yahwism

Also present in the plot is a dichotomy. The people want to serve both gods—

YHWH and Baal—but Elijah pushes them to decide between the two. A rift forms between the polytheism of the people and the monotheism of Elijah. This duality creates the trajectory for the plot and a series of pairs occur. Elijah gives the people two choices, there are two sacrifice preparations, two calls for an answer, and two climaxes

10 Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art, \24.

11 Long, 1 Kings, 193. On the other hand, some consider Elijah's killing of the prophets to be excessive or immoral (see esp. Frances Flannery, '"Go Back by the Way You Came': An Internal Textual Critique of Elijah's Violence in 1 Kings 18-19," in Writing and Reading War: Rhetoric, Gender, and Ethics in Biblical and Modem Contexts, ed. Brad E. Kelle and Frank Ritchel Ames, SBLSymS 42 [Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008], 161-73). 57

(one is illusory). However there is only one accepted sacrifice. Central to the trajectory is the repeated use of "to answer" Cnh). When Elijah asks the people who they will follow they give no "answer" (v. 21), Elijah proposes that the god who "answers" is god

(v. 24), the people "answer" (v. 24), the prophets of Baal cry out for an "answer" (v.

26), they receive no "answer" (v. 29), and Elijah prays to YHWH asking twice for an

"answer" (v. 37).12 This indicates that Elijah is not only trying to demonstrate the power of YHWH, but he is also trying to receive an answer to the question that the people could not answer at first: "Who is god?"

3.2 Elijah and Ahab (vv. 16-20)

Having briefly outlined the plot, this analysis now turns to the character of Elijah as he interacts with each character, starting with Ahab. The scene between Elijah and

Ahab opens when Obadiah leaves Elijah to tell Ahab of Elijah's presence. Ahab then comes to see Elijah (v. 16). The movement of Obadiah and Ahab surrounds the stationary character of Elijah and the reader is immediately drawn into his point of view.

Ahab then directly confronts Elijah with the accusation, "troubler of Israel" (v. 17). If the reader has been reading outside this pericope then the threat—particularly of death— that Ahab poses has already been noted. Three times Obadiah has stated (w. 9,12, 14) the threat on his life he feels from Ahab. The reader can sense the persistence of this threat when Ahab speaks to Elijah so tersely and accusingly.13 Elijah, in response, turns

12 Another repeated verb is "to approach" (rigs): Elijah "approaches" the people (v. 21), Elijah asks the people to "approach" and they "approach" (v. 30), and Elijah "approaches" to pray (v. 36). This repetition is discussed in more detail later.

13 Hauser writes at length about the threat of death that Ahab poses to Elijah (see Hauser, "Yahweh Versus Death," 32). 58

Ahab's comment around and directs the same accusation back at Ahab, calling Ahab the troubler instead. Elijah takes this further and explains that Ahab's Baalism is the way in which he has been trouble-making (v. 18). The two opposing charges demonstrate an enmity between them; each is trying to convince the other of guilt.14 However, the reader, who reads the story from Elijah's point of view, feels antipathy toward Ahab.

The reader can understand his anger against Elijah but cannot sympathize because Ahab is the villain, the king that brought Baalism into Israel,15 and Elijah is right to make an equal and opposite retort. The threat Ahab poses is softened by the reader's perception of his guilt, and the reader soon feels more comfort in the quick-responding Elijah.

Elijah stands in contrast to Ahab)—Ahab worships Baal and has abandoned

YHWH's commands, but Elijah is the servant of YHWH.16 In fact, while Elijah worships the one YHWH, he points out specifically that Ahab worships the "Baals"

(be'alim; v. 18). This is the only occurrence of the plural (out of a total of eight occurrences) in the narrative and it appears that Elijah is intending to contrast his monotheism with the idolatrous behaviour of Ahab.17 Part of the problem Elijah opposes (particularly regarding the people [v. 21]) is the presence of polytheism in

Israel. The fact that Elijah accuses Ahab of worshipping the "Baals" doubly emphasizes the polytheistic problem Ahab has caused. Elijah takes his accusations further and

14 Bar-Efrat writes, "Speech directed at someone else is sometimes intended to arouse a certain emotion or attitude in them, and can teach us about both the speaker and the interlocutor" (Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art, 70). In this case, both Ahab and Elijah have directed the same comment at each other. The goals of their speech are similar but opposite.

15 David Jobling, The Sense of Biblical Narrative: Structural Analyses in the Hebrew Bible I, 2nd ed., JSOTSup 7 (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1986), 72.

16 Long, / Kings, 192.

17 Fred E. Woods, Water and Storm Polemics Against Baalism in the Deuteronomistic History, AUSTh&R 150 (New York: Peter Lang, 1994), 98. 59 criticizes Ahab's "father's house" (v. 18), indicating that he blames the monarchy for the trouble in the land. He supports this, though subtly, when he mentions the 850 prophets of Baal and Asherah "eating at Jezebel's table." Eating at the royal table is indicative of the favour of the monarchy, including the provision of regular sustenance.18 This is clear evidence that the monarchy is supporting worship that is opposed to the Yahwistic monotheism of Elijah. Elijah's mention of their number is a rhetorical reference to the extent of the Baalistic loyalties of the monarchy.19

Elijah demonstrates full control over the scene, not just by his quick rebuttal to

Ahab's allegation, but also in his choice to move quickly onto a further matter rather than give Ahab a chance to accuse again.20 Where once Ahab made a statement and

Elijah was left in the position of the responder, now Elijah reverses this positioning for the duration of the contest narrative with a command directed at Ahab. He tells Ahab to assemble the people, the prophets of Baal, and the prophets of Asherah on Mount

Carmel (v. 19) and Ahab complies (v. 20). The narrator quickly portrays Elijah as the dominant figure.21 Thus, even without a reason for the assembly and the location, Ahab responds to Elijah's directives.

Despite the reader's desire to see Elijah move into the dominant role, it is still a surprise to see Elijah make this particular command. The reader knows that Elijah has met with Ahab in order to bring an end to the drought (see w. 1-2), but Elijah appears to

18 Cf, 2 Sam 9:11; 1 Kgs 2:7; 4:27; 2 Kgs 25:29.

19 Patricia Dutcher-Walls, Jezebel: Portraits of a Queen, Interfaces (Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 2004), 33.

20 Simon, Reading Prophetic Narratives, 178.

21 Hauser discusses Elijah's shift into the dominant role (Hauser, "Yahweh Versus Death," 33- 34). 60 have taken this meeting in a different direction. Most likely, Elijah is making a decision based on Ahab's accusation. Elijah's assertion that Ahab's Baalism and abandonment of YHWH's commands are the reasons for the trouble in Israel indicates that the drought is meant to demonstrate the power of YHWH as God and dissolve any beliefs that Baal is the one controlling the rain. But Ahab has blamed Elijah for the drought and shown no recognition of his Baalism as a problem. If rain came now then Ahab may very well attribute it to Baal. He is supposed to have learned already why the drought had cursed his nation, but he has not, and at this point Elijah chooses to demonstrate to him who the real god of Israel is and which god it is that will send rain.22 He shows initiative when he recognizes the presence of the problem and "propos[es] that the issue should be decided once for all, and the responsibility for the trouble firmly and clearly allocated."23

But why does Ahab obey Elijah so easily? Surely he cannot be so intimidated by

Elijah that he obeys him unquestioningly.24 An insightful reader will notice that the command given by Elijah is actually a twist in the plot that favours Ahab. Though

22 See Cohn, "Literary Logic," 340.

23 J. Robinson, The First Book of Kings, CBC (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972), 208.

24 Most scholars hold that Ahab is weak and easily intimidated or that Elijah's personality is too strong. Cohn, for example, suggests that Ahab was either "cowed by Elijah's power or startled by his charge" (Cohn, "Literary Logic," 340). Kissling believes that "Ahab characteristically wilts before strong personalities" (Kissling, Reliable Characters, 98). August H. Konkel hypothesizes that either Ahab fears Elijah because of the control Elijah has over the nation or he "secretly realizes" the problems inherent in Baalism (August H. Konkel, 1 &2Kings, NIVAC [GrandRapids, MI: Zondervan, 2006], 299). With a slightly different opinion, Hayyim Angel associates Ahab with a different weakness: the "hopping" of which the people were guilty (Hayyim Angel, "Hopping Between Two Opinions: Understanding the Biblical Portrait of Ahab," JBQ 35 [2007]: 6). Even if it is true that Ahab has a weak personality it seems contrived that the reason for Ahab's obedient response to Elijah is one of intimidation alone. Ahab's task of gathering hundreds of people onto a mountain is too difficult to be done out of fear of someone's strong words. There must be more behind Ahab's obedience than fear alone. Perhaps, as House suggests, Ahab feels that with so many prophets the odds are in his favour (House, /, 2 Kings, 218). 61

Elijah has not indicated the reason for assembling on Mount Carmel, the choice of location and the selection of the prophets of Baal must appeal to Ahab. Underlying the location is an image of fertility and growth. Karmel translates as "garden land" or

"orchard," and the mountain itself is lush and fruitful.25 The deity Baal is traditionally considered "the god of wind and weather" and is thus associated with features such as precipitation, clouds, storms, and lightning, and the seasonal and vegetation patterns generally.26 In the Baal religion, Mount Carmel, the lush mountain, functions as a home for Baal, the weather or storm god.27 Bringing the prophets of the storm god to the mountain of fertility foreshadows a rain-prompting call to Baal—the scene is at least set for such an occurrence. Elijah has made it abundantly clear that he is opposed to

Baalism and Ahab certainly knows this, but the location and the participants give Ahab a hope of overcome Elijah's drought-causing.28 Ahab has already indicated that he believes Elijah to be the reason for the drought. Whether Ahab thinks that Elijah's

Yahwism has given Baal cause for a punitive drought in Israel or that Elijah himself can start and stop the rain, Ahab knows that he must go through Elijah to end the drought.

That Elijah has proposed such an appealing setting for Ahab opens the door for him to agree to the command while still acting in his best interests. He is not weak and submissive to the commands of Elijah. He has recognized an opportunity and he is taking steps—albeit risky ones—toward seizing that opportunity.

25 See Woods, Water and Storm Polemics, 99; Beck, "Geography as Irony," 298-99.

26 Wolfgang Herrmann, "Baal," in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, 2n ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1999), 134.

27 Beck, "Geography as Irony," 298-99.

28 See Simon, Reading Prophetic Narratives, 178-79. 62

Elijah demonstrates that he is working strategically with the situation at hand.

He has diffused the confrontation between the two of them, recognized Ahab's continued Baalism, and proposed a solution to which he knows Ahab will agree. But even though he has demonstrated control over the course of events, he is taking an equal risk to Ahab. He puts himself on a stage in front of the whole nation, and while this adds drama to the contest,29 it also puts his life at risk.30 Hundreds of people surround him, none profess his beliefs, and at least one considers him the reason for the trouble on the land. Ahab will soon disappear as an active character in the plot, but the contest will carry on the disagreement between him and Elijah. Each has their innocence to prove and the contest will serve that end.

When the reader arrives at the stage that Elijah and Ahab have set on Mount

Carmel with the participants (the prophets) and audience (the people), it becomes subtly clear that Ahab has taken a liberty of his own. Simon explains that the narration of

Ahab's obedience in v. 20 repeats the words of Elijah's command in v. 19 indicating his complete obedience.3! Compare:

v. 19: "And now send, gather to me all Israel on Mount Carmel and 450 prophets of Baal and 400 prophets of Asherah who eat at the table of Jezebel." v. 20: And Ahab sent for all the sons of Israel and he gathered the prophets on Mount Carmel. But Walsh points out:

The vocabulary of the command is echoed in the compliance, but the construction is quite different. ... The narrator apparently avoids

29 Hauser, "Yahweh Versus Death," 35.

30 Kissling, Reliable Characters, 98-99.

31 Simon, Reading Prophetic Narratives, 179. 63

verbatim repetition. He sends to all Israel, but the text does not say that he gathers them; he gathers "the prophets," but does he gather all the prophets Elijah demanded? The effect is to depict Ahab as not submitting to Elijah's authority but as voluntarily (and as perhaps only grudgingly and imperfectly) cooperating with his wishes.3 The most noticeable discrepancy is not apparent immediately. The narration indicates ambiguously that Ahab brought "the prophets," but it is only through the continuation of the narrative that the reader notices that the prophets of Asherah are never again mentioned. Meanwhile, the prophets of Baal feature prominently in the story. It is likely that Ahab never brought the prophets of Asherah—who worship "the goddess of the earth" and wife of Baal33—because they did not figure directly into his desire to use this opportunity to call for rain.34 The sphere of Asherah's power is not sending rain or thunder, thus it is not in Ahab's best interests to bring these prophets as it is for him to bring the prophets of Baal. Ahab could leave them behind, bring the prophets of Baal to

Mount Carmel, and still be optimistic about obtaining rain. By doing this he would be protecting the prophets of Asherah from any risk Elijah might pose to them. The slaughter of the prophets of Baal at the end of the contest (v. 40) proves that he was right to be cautious {and that he was not cautious enough). Ahab's disobedience was a

32 Walsh, 1 Kings, 244.

33 Sweeney, / & II Kings, 226. Some ambiguity surrounds the role of the goddess Asherah. Most often Asherah is seen as the feminine counterpart to male deities (Nicholas Wyatt, "Asherah" in DDD, 2nd ed. [Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1999], 99-105). In the context of 1 Kgs 18 Asherah can thus be assumed to be the feminine counterpart, perhaps the wife, of Baal.

34 Provan suggests instead that Jezebel did not let her husband bring the prophets of Asherah (Provan, 1 and 2 Kings, 140). Dutcher-Walls hypothesizes that they may be collectively included under the title "prophets of Baal," but her opinion instead leans against this possibility and toward agreement with Provan's interpretation (Dutcher-Walls, Jezebel, 34). In contrast, Kissling suggests they are present at the contest but invisible in the background. He explains that they parallel the female figure of Jezebel whom Elijah is afraid to face (Kissling, Reliable Characters, 107-08). Long considers their presence to be "for good measure" in contrasting Elijah to the number of his opponents (v. 22), even though they are unmentioned at this point (Long, I Kings, 193). 64 subtle one and goes almost undetected by the reader, but it also indicates the adeptly played cards in the battle between these two opponents.

3.3 Elijah and the People (w. 21-24,30-35,39-40)

The people have a much more dynamic relationship with Elijah in this story than does Ahab. Ahab contrasts Elijah and battles with him through slyly played moves, but he also stays within the space of the narrative designated for him (w. 16-20). The people, who prove malleable over the course of the narrative, do not stay within such boundaries.35 Elijah dialogues with them specifically in w. 21-24, but they also are present when Elijah prepares his altar (w. 30-35) and again once the fire has fallen on the altar (v. 39-40). Even when they are not mentioned in the narrative the reader senses their presence witnessing the contest. A couple of factors support this. First, two occurrences of the action, "approach" (ngs)—once when Elijah first addresses the people (v. 21) and again when the people later approach Elijah (v. 30)—indicate a close proximity between Elijah and the people.36 Second, and perhaps more importantly,

Elijah has entered a dialogue with the people. In v. 24 they tell Elijah "The word is good" in response to his contest proposal.37 Even though their actual words are few, it is enough for the reader to sense two-way communication between them. This two-way

35 They are the audience in the demonstration, which is always present and watching even when they are not mentioned by the narrator. The implied reader is able to sit among this audience and observe the contest as well. The connection the reader has to the audience will be brought up in greater detail later.

36 The same sense of proximity also applies between Elijah and YHWH through the same verb "to approach" (v. 36). This will be discussed in more detail later.

37 An argument will be made later that the people's response to the fire in v. 39 ("YHWH, he is God") is also a response to Elijah's original confrontation to choose between the gods (v. 21). Their immediate response of silence (v. 21) can be understood as a negative response. This too will be discussed shortly. 65 dialogue is not seen in either the prophets of Baal or YHWH, and the dialogue with

Ahab (w. 17-19) was not continued forward through the change of scenes (v. 20). Thus it is with the people alone that the reader senses a close and continued presence implicit in the narrative even when they are not an acting character.38

Despite Elijah's concern for the people, his dialogue with them opens with harsh and derogatory words. In one breath he accuses them of indecisiveness and self-injury.

According to Elijah they are "limping on two crutches" (v. 21); wavering between one opinion and the other. Elijah is using imagery that makes the people seem awkward and clumsy. "Limping" (posehim) arouses the image of someone injured who cannot walk without hobbling. "Crutches" {seHppim) refers literally to branches (but metaphorically to their two opinions/gods), but also conjures the image of someone awkwardly dependent on two sticks to stay upright. The people think they are using two gods as support, but in fact they are handicapping themselves.40 According to Bar-Efrat,

"Speech directed at someone is sometimes intended to arouse a certain emotion or attitude in them, and can teach us about both the speaker and the interlocutor."41 This is obviously occurring when Elijah addresses the people. Ideally this would have evoked a conversion from the people, but even though Elijah "spells out the options" they give no

Furthermore, the portrait of YHWH as distant in this narrative corresponds with Amit's "observing deity who only supervises events" (see Amit, Reading Biblical Narratives, 83). The reader may then sense the continuous presence of YHWH, but not with the same proximity that the people have. This will factor into the analysis of YHWH in ch. 4.

39 BDB (p. 703) defines seUppim as "branch" (i.e. "of the fruit-tree"). It can also mean "crag," though this meaning does not fit the context of v. 21 well. The Hebrew root s*p meaning "to divide" perhaps explains the meaning in this context better; thus the people are split between two choices.

40 Walsh, J Kings, 245.

41 Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art, 70. 66 response.42 The silence of the people is ambiguous. Are they feeling guilty? Are they satisfied with their syncretism?43 Is their silence "a concession to the truth of Elijah's words?"44 According to Cynthia L. Miller's study on responses of silence in biblical

Hebrew, "we are to understand the silence of characters negatively, as the absence of an expected, appropriate response."45 In this case the people are dissenting from Elijah's command to choose between the gods, and "they are deferential to the prophet and using silence as an indirectness strategy."46

This silent response Elijah receives is exceptional because nowhere else in the contest narrative does Elijah fail to receive a positive response when he addresses a character.47 If Elijah is powerful enough to obtain responses from his opponents and even YHWH, then what is it that has deterred the people from responding to this important figure? Hauser explains:

Their silence is filled with anxiety and uncertainty. Given the persecution of Yahweh's prophets by Jezebel (w. 4, 13), which could easily lead any Israelite to fear that Jezebel might attack all worshippers of Yahweh, and given the perils to life posed by the drought and famine (17.7; 18.1-2, 5), the people's unwillingness to make a commitment indicates that what they fear most is death. Whether from Ahab and Jezebel, who may inflict it immediately and violently, or from the fickle

42 Hauser, "Yahweh Versus Death," 37.

43 They are "non-committal at best" according to House (House, 1, 2 Kings, 219).

44 Konkel, 1 & 2 Kings, 300.

45 Cynthia L. Miller, "Silence as a Response in Biblical Hebrew Narrative: Strategies of Speakers and Narrators," JNSL 32 (2006): 41.

46 Ibid., 34.

47 Even though Ahab's response has been demonstrated to be incomplete in his obedience, his response is still mostly positive. 67

and jealous gods, who can cause it slowly through hunger and starvation, death poses a powerful threat to the people.48 The choice to respond to Elijah and follow YHWH—the implied direction of his demand for a decision—would pit the people against the powerful figures of royalty and the storm god.49 But at the same time their present state is not very hopeful either.50

With this in mind, one has to wonder if Elijah's next statement comparing his aloneness to the numerous prophets of Baal (v. 22) is sympathetic to the people's anxiousness in the face of the perilous odds against them. The people are in a difficult and life- threatening situation, but, as Elijah pointed out, so is he; and in spite of the poor odds he will demonstrate the hope and possibility that comes from serving YHWH.51 Perhaps

Elijah foresaw that the people would not give him a positive response when he first addressed them, but Elijah does not let go of his command to them to choose when they fail to answer.52 His next series of words from then until the end of the contest work at

48 Hauser, "Yahweh Versus Death," 37-38.

49 Toward a different understanding of the silence of the people, Jobling reads the non-answer of the people as likening them to Baal. In the contest narrative Baal is the god who does not answer while YHWH is the God who does. When the people fail to give Elijah an answer they are acting like Baal (Jobling, The Sense of Biblical Narrative, 74-75). Jobling also considers the people "victims of Ahab's apostasy" because they have been "led away from Yahweh" (Ibid., 72). While Elijah has certainly found Ahab and the monarchy guilty of poor leadership in this regard (see w. 18-19), he is not completely absolving the people of their guilt in this matter.

30 They are demonstrating "helplessness" (Fritz, 1 & 2 Kings, 191).

51 As will be pointed out in ch. 4, and as traditionally understood, Elijah's statement, "I remain a prophet of YHWH by myself (v. 22), is part of Elijah's plan to stack the odds against YHWH in this contest—it is hyperbole (see Long, / Kings, 192; Cogan, J Kings, 440). Elijah makes this statement in spite of Obadiah's mention to him of 100 prophets of YHWH that are in hiding (v. 13). According to Simon, "the prophet of the Lord is proclaiming his readiness to contend with the massed power of the 450 prophets of Baal, against the background of their ferocious hostility toward the prophets of the Lord" (Simon, Reading Prophetic Narratives, 179-81). On the other hand, Olley (and others) suggest that Elijah is just plain wrong when he makes this statement (Olley, "YHWH and His Zealous Prophet," 37).

52 This contrasts Richard Nelson who states, "The proposal of verse 21 to the people is aborted when they do not answer." He is correct in noting, though, that the silence of the people "pushes the narrative into conflict" (Richard Nelson, First and Second Kings, Interpretation [Atlanta, GA: John Knox Press, 1987], 117). 68 obtaining the answer to his unanswered command. In one sense Elijah is subtle and scheming as he works toward that answer, but in another sense he is lenient toward the refusal of the people to respond to his command.53 He gives them another chance and proposes an appealing contest that will demonstrate to them the answer they should

54 give.

The contest that Elijah proposes is balanced: one bull will go to each side, each will prepare an altar, neither will light the sacrifice on fire, each will call on their god for fire, and whichever god responds with fire will be the true god.55 Elijah gives the terms of the contest directly to the people. He does not dictate the terms to Ahab with whom he is battling in order to be absolved of the "troubler" title. Neither does he give the terms to the prophets of Baal with whom he is directly battling for the responses of the gods.56 Rather, he dictates the terms to the people with whom he is battling for "their heart" (libbam, see v. 37) and so they need to judge the contest. They need to be the ones to agree to Elijah's terms because the opinions of Ahab and the prophets of Baal are not essential to Elijah's objective. He leaves the thoughts and beliefs of the people in their own hands, but he will control the events and actions that follow in order to influence the judgment the people will make. The detail and precision with which

Elijah works to extract this judgment is emphasized by slowing down the narrative 53 Simon, Reading Prophetic Narratives, 179.

54 More than likely the contest comes as a result of Elijah's idea and initiative (see Olley, "YHWH and His Zealous Prophet," 35-36; Kissling, Reliable Characters, 99; Gregory, "Irony and the Unmasking of Elijah," 104). However, all three of these scholars have also taken a negative view of Elijah's independent actions. This is not a necessary reaction to Elijah's choices, and it is not the stance this project uses.

55 Walsh, / Kings, 246.

56 He has gone "over their heads" (Simon, Reading Prophetic Narratives, 180). 69 pace.57 The reader can see the careful moves Elijah is making toward his desired end and the obstacles through which he manoeuvers. "Elijah's dominant concern is that

[the] people worship YHWH."58

When Elijah explains the process of the contest he says directly to the people,

"And you will call on the name of your god" (v. 24). This indicates that Elijah is associating the people with the Baalist position.59 They are not just observers as it first appeared, but also participants. It is a conflict of interest in which Elijah shows little concern. The balance of favour has again tipped toward Baal when Elijah gives the power of judgment to a collection of Baal's followers. The evidence that Elijah will have to provide must be extraordinary if he wants to receive a favourable verdict.

This second address to the people—the proposal of the contest—receives a positive response: "The word is good" (tob haddabdr, v. 24). But it is an ambivalent response because they can remain passive and leave the choice they are supposed to make up to the events that follow.60 It is not a choice yet but it moves in that direction because, as Jobling states, "Elijah's challenge presupposes that there will be a winner."c

Following this, the people move into the background of the story and the prophets of

Baal move into the foreground as they prepare and present their sacrifice to Baal.

Whether or not the people participate in calling to Baal for an answer as Elijah directed

See Hauser, "Yahweh Versus Death," 39.

58 Olley, "YHWH and His Zealous Prophet," 36.

59 Cogan, J Kings, 440.

60 Hauser, "Yahweh Versus Death," 40.

61 Jobling, The Sense of Biblical Narrative, 76. 70 is not indicated. Instead the narrator leaves out the thoughts, words, and actions of the people at this part of the narrative.

When the people next show up in the narrative they do so in obedience to

Elijah's command, "Approach me" (v. 30). Their obedience is important because they must see what Elijah is about to do.62 He is not just building the altar and preparing the sacrifice, but he is creating symbols. Elijah takes this opportunity to teach the people through his actions. Benjamin explains, '"The Elijah Stories' remember Elijah as a performer—an artist whose words and gestures riveted themselves into Israel's memory."63 Elijah's performance begins with the rebuilding of a broken altar of

YHWH (v. 30). Here the people see the old religion of Israel broken down, but Elijah takes stones with which to build the altar (v. 31) and to symbolically rebuild the worship of YHWH. The narrator equates the twelve stones with the "tribes of the sons of

Jacob,"64 renamed as Israel by YHWH (v. 31), implying that this people who now bear the name of Israel must turn back to their original God.65 This is not explained to the people as the narrator has done for the reader, but one can assume that the people understand the symbolism;66 that Elijah is recalling "their true identity as the LORD'S people.' Next he digs a trench around the altar (v. 32), which is more for drama than

62 Childs, "On Reading the Elijah Narratives," 132-33.

63 Benjamin, "The Elijah Stories," 29.

64 The use of "sons of Jacob" rather than the more common "sons of Israel" may serve to link the people with Jacob who wrestled with YHWH (Gen 32:22-32). Perhaps the implied author is trying to indicate that, like Jacob, the people are wrestling with YHWH (see also Walsh, / Kings, 250).

"Walsh, 1 Kings, 251

66 Ibid., 250.

Provan, 1 and 2 Kings, 138. 71 for symbolic purposes. Three times he asks the people to pour four jars of water over the altar and they are obedient every time (w. 33-35).68 Their obedience is significant.

When the land of Israel is experiencing a drought they show willingness to pour a precious resource over Elijah's sacrifice. It would appear that they are extinguishing their last hope for relief from the drought, but instead they are demonstrating a faith they did not show before.69 More significant is their participation in the first place. Earlier

Elijah had noted their participation in the Baal religion (v. 24), but now they are participating in Elijah's preparations. The reader can sense their loyalties shifting; can see their constant motion around the altar as they prepare it according to Elijah's instructions, yet never discern a limp.

For a moment the people move into the background again as Elijah approaches

YHWH with his prayer for fire (w. 36-37). When YHWH responds positively (v. 38) the people respond by falling and declaring, "YHWH, he is God! YHWH, he is God!"

(v. 39). At last Elijah receives the answer he could not get from the people when he first addressed them (v. 21), and he receives it twice. Their declaration is not just a confession but a proclamation eagerly given.71 The people no longer hold two opinions, as they did at the beginning of the contest narrative, but now only give one twice. It also holds some double meaning. Elijah's name, which can translate as, "YHWH is my

68 The symbolic number twelve shows up here as well.

69 In contrast, Kissling depicts the people as easily swayed and unwise by "wasting precious water on what may have appeared to be a prophet's whim" (Kissling, Reliable Characters, 105).

70 Again, Kissling uses this response to negatively portray the people as weak and easily persuaded. Their response uses the same words as Elijah used in v. 24, and according to Kissling this shows that their beliefs are malleable to the word (Kissling, Reliable Characters, 105-06).

Hauser, "Yahweh Versus Death," 52-53. 72

God" Cellyahu), resembles closely the exclamation, "YHWH, he is God!"

(yhwh hu ha'elohim), even though "YHWH" and "God" are reversed and abbreviated to form Elijah's name. In this way, Elijah is also, though subtly, declared the winner of the contest.72

The last action the reader sees from the people is their compliance with Elijah by seizing the prophets of Baal (v. 40). The people who have been healed of their limping now are sent to catch the real limpers. They catch them and bring them down to the

Kishon River where Elijah kills them (v. 40). Earlier in the narrative the people were afraid to betray Baalism because they were hoping in it for an end to the drought. Now they participate in the eradication of the prophets of Baal because they have learned what Ahab did not see, that the presence of these prophets under the monarchy was the real reason for the drought. The actions of the people go beyond the terms of the contest as dictated by Elijah,74 emphasizing their full conversion.

3.4 Elijah and the Prophets of Baal (w. 25-29)

Though Elijah's concern is over the people, he battles directly with the prophets of Baal. It may, however, be an embellishment to consider this a battle at all. Elijah exercises control over the attempt of the prophets of Baal to call down divine fire, and the prophets of Baal are completely submissive to the commands of Elijah. Though they never respond to him verbally, they always do as he instructs. The only struggle

72 Kissling, Reliable Characters, 122.

73 With this action, Jobling considers that the people are sharing the hero role with Elijah at the end of the narrative (Jobling, The Sense of Biblical Narrative, 75).

74 Childs, "On Reading the Elijah Narratives," 133. 73 that exists in this part of the narrative is not between Elijah and the prophets of Baal, but between the prophets of Baal and their god. It starts when Elijah directs them according to the same procedures that he has already cleared with the people: "Choose for yourselves one bull and prepare it first because you are many. Then call on the name of your god, but you will not set a fire" (v. 25).75 Elijah is immediately in the power position as he is able to dictate the commands while the prophets of Baal are bound to terms to which they did not agree. Kissling considers the prophets of Baal weak and acquiescent because they do not contest the terms Elijah gives,76 but they actually have little choice in the matter. The contest is not really directly about the gods or the prophets, but about the people and which god they will choose. The people have already accepted Elijah's proposed contest and if the prophets of Baal want to make an impression on the people then they need to do so within the current rules. Simon explains that Elijah is "imposing his own audacious level of faith on the prophets of

Baal,"77 and they respond positively; the prophets of Baal obey Elijah's directions almost to the word. When Elijah tells them to "choose" (Mr), "prepare" (csh), and

"call" (qr\ v. 25), they "take" (Iqh), "prepare" Csh), and "call" (qr\ v. 26). The one notable difference is when the prophets of Baal "took the bull which he gave to them"

Note that when Elijah explained the contest to the people he told them "you will call on the name of your god" (v. 24). Now he gives the command directly to the prophets of Baal. There is a clear association in worship interests made between the people and the prophets of Baal, but what it suggests about what is actually occurring in the contest is unclear. As the narrative continues it is the prophets of Baal that do the calling (v. 26). There is no notice of the participation of the people, but it is possible that the people did participate. At least they must be hoping (if not calling) for a response, and thus hoping for the end of the drought.

76 Kissling, Reliable Characters, 104-05.

77 Simon, Reading Prophetic Narratives, 180. However, in contrast, Simon also notes that "whereas [the prophets of Baal] need only to prove the substantiality of their deity, Elijah has a double mission to fulfill: he must prove both the reality of the God of Israel and the nothingness of Baal" (ibid.). In this sense Elijah's faith must be greater still. 74

(v. 26) rather than "choosing" as Elijah had instructed. This difference is subtle and may easily go unnoticed, but when it is noticed it raises some questions. The narrator's description of events differs from Elijah's directions ever so slightly without any explanation. Perhaps this works toward demonstrating Elijah's control of the contest.

The choice the prophets of Baal are given is immediately negated by the narrator: the prophets of Baal do not choose the bull, they only take one. Thus even when the prophets of Baal have an element of control within their grasp, they do not assume that control. Elijah, then, is the one who remains in full control. Regardless, even with the difference between Elijah's direction to "choose" and the narrator's description of

"took," the obedience of the prophets of Baal to Elijah is clear to the reader. The obedience is also ironic. Elijah and the prophets of Baal stand on opposing sides in the matter of which god the people will serve, but despite their opposing interests, the prophets of Baal always agree to the commands of Elijah, the prophet of YHWH.78

Thus the narrator has used the irony as a way to insult the prophets of Baal;79 they are not in control of their own worship, but even in this matter submissive to their opponent.

The prophets of Baal only maintain their independence in the contest by their choice to go beyond Elijah's instructions and take further action toward a response from Baal: they choose to "limp" (v. 26),80 and later they choose to "cut themselves" (v. 28).81

78 Walsh, / Kings, 247.

79 Ibid.

80 Note that the same word (psh) is used here to describe the dance of the prophets of Baal as was used by Elijah to describe the people's indecisiveness. The juxtaposition is twofold: (1) to compare the people to the prophets of Baal (discussed in ch. 4), and (2) to compare the dance of the prophets of Baal to a handicapped limp (discussed shortly).

81 Roland de Vaux sees this further action as a signal of discontent with the simple action ("call on the name of your god") prescribed by Elijah (Roland de Vaux, The Bible and the Ancient Near East, trans. Damian McHugh [Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Company, 1971], 240). 75

Why would it be important to Elijah for the display of the prophets of Baal to occur first? In Elijah's words, they can go "first because you are many" (v. 25), and according to Walsh, this is an entirely practical reason which recognizes that the large number of prophets allows them to complete their preparations first.82 This assumes that both the prophets of Baal and Elijah start their preparations at the same time and that the number of Baal prophets ensures they will be ready long before Elijah. But Walsh cannot be correct because Elijah does not even begin his preparations until after the prophets of Baal have taken their turn (see vv. 29-30). Instead it seems that Elijah carefully organizes the scene in order to build drama. He has faith that there will be no response from Baal and that he will get his chance afterward. He has the control to manage the events so that he can allow the prophets of Baal to be a part of the rising action toward his dramatic climax. The narrator has portrayed Elijah so that it is almost as if Elijah is standing outside the narrative in the place of the narrator, choosing what will happen and when, and through his words causing it to be so.83 Having the sacrifices in a different order would have led to a premature climax. Elijah is certain that YHWH will respond and that Baal will not, and it is his objective to prove both these beliefs to the people. Elijah must demonstrate the failure of the prophets of Baal before his own success, or he risks losing the attention of the people to the drama of YHWH's fire before he has the chance to disprove the power of Baal. Simon explains, "His insistence on extracting the maximum psychological impact from the two parts of the trial requires that the Lord's speedy response not precede the protracted endeavours of the prophets of

82 Walsh, 1 Kings, 247.

83 This provides a hint toward the conclusion of this thesis; that Elijah is the representative of YHWH. He stands on Mount Carmel in place of YHWH and with YHWH's power, and therefore his words bear the power of controlling events. 76

Baal nor coincide with them." Elijah intends to remove his opponents by the process of elimination, leading the people to recognize Elijah and YHWH as their last hope.

All morning the prophets of Baal call out, '"Baal, answer us!' but there was no voice and there was no answering one" (v. 26). The narrator describes them as participating in a dance with the word "limp," the same word used of the people in v. 21.

This has an insulting effect by comparing the worship style of the prophets of Baal to the people on crutches. Thus "their dance is ungainly and reveals them as unfit to offer sacrifice."85 Their mode of expression does not appear as if it would appeal to any god, but instead appears to indicate that they are lame. The morning passes in a brief sentence, and when no answer comes to the prophets of Baal, Elijah steps in to prompt them into a second round: "And at noon Elijah mocked them and said, 'Call with a loud voice! Surely he is a god. Either he is thinking, or relieving himself,86 or travelling.

Perhaps he is sleeping and must be awakened'" (v. 27). The prompting comes in the form of irony.87 On one hand he is giving advice to the prophets of Baal by suggesting different solutions for Baal's non-response. He tells them to yell louder. Maybe they can interrupt him from his thinking or travels or whatever it may be that is hindering

84 Simon, Reading Prophetic Narratives, 180.

85 Walsh, / Kings, 248.

86 "He is thinking, or relieving himself is a notoriously difficult phrase in the Hebrew (ki siah weki-sig). Part of the difficulty lies in the fact that sig is a hapax legomenon (John Gray, I &II Kings: A Commentary, OTL [Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1963], 354). Walsh makes the case that the two words {siah and sig) are simply "sound-play." Therefore he translates it as, "He's busy, in a tizzy," in order to reflect the similar sounds of the two words (Walsh, I Kings, 248-49). Similarly Gray suggests the two words are synonymous (Gray, / & II Kings, 354). James A. Montgomery notes the likely meaning of sig as "he is gone aside" and its use as a euphemism for relieving himself (James A. Montgomery, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Books of Kings, ed. Henry Snyder Gehman, ICC [Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1951], 302).

Lawrie, "Telling Of(f) Prophets," 168. 77 him from hearing them. Furthermore, Baalism believes that "Baal's rule guarantees the annual return of the vegetation; as the god disappears in the underworld and returns in the autumn, so vegetation dies and resuscitates with him."88 Thus when Elijah suggests he may be asleep and should be reawakened, he is suggesting they should raise Baal from the underworld. But on the other hand the narrator has pointed out with the verb

"to mock" (htl) that Elijah is teasing them into a further response.89 What Elijah is saying to them is sarcastic. He is teasing Baal for being hard of hearing, preoccupied with personal business, distant, or simply asleep (perhaps dead). It is derogatory, making Baal appear incompetent90 or at least unhelpful. Though Elijah's mock is directed at Baal it does not leave the prophets of Baal looking any better. They are the ones who serve this god and they have been unable to obtain any response. They look silly using their limping dance as they try to connect with a god that Elijah has implied is meandering, lazy, and unresponsive—Baal appears much more human than divine.

Thus Hauser describes Elijah's mocking as sarcastic. Elijah tells them to call out, but they have already been doing this; Elijah states, "Surely he is a god," but they have been unable to demonstrate this; Elijah suggests that he just needs to be awakened, but they tried this already.91

s* Herrmann, "Baal," 134.

89 Simon considers the root to be til rather than htl, thus it would be translated "to deceive" rather than to "to mock." This changes the meaning of what Elijah says to them. According to Simon's suggestion, Elijah is lying by using the language of the followers of Baal in order to prompt them to try harder. Simon further suggests that if Elijah is mocking Baal it could be conceived as a deterrent to Baal's response and would then counteract what Elijah is trying to prove in the contest (Simon, Reading Prophetic Narratives, 181 -82).

90 See Benjamin, "The Elijah Stories," 35.

Hauser, "Yahweh Versus Death," 43-44. 78

Despite being mocked, the narrator points out that the prophets of Baal "called with a loud voice" (v. 28), an exact response to Elijah's command, "Call with a loud voice!" (v. 27). Perhaps they are motivated by Elijah's taunting, or maybe they are ignorant of the mocking in Elijah's words, but most likely they are simply compliant to

Elijah's commands. Elijah has been the dominant character until this point and continues to demonstrate his power over the progress of the contest. The prophets of

Baal submit and intensify their calls to Baal. They scene appears more grave as it moves from their limping (v. 26) to their cutting of themselves, "according to their custom, with swords and spears until blood poured from them" (v. 28). Along with the increase in their intensity, the reader senses an equal increase in their futility.92 The prophets of Baal are redoubling their efforts for a response and the climax of their efforts appears to be a state of delirium,93 but at the same time the reader is seeing the approaching death of Baalism.94 The narrator winds up the efforts of the prophets of

Baal quickly with the words, "But there was no voice, and there was no answering one, and there was no attention" (v. 29). The narrator does not state specifically that Baal is not there, but it is implied that the prophets of Baal believe in a god that does not exist or simply has not the powers they credit to him. After they have given their best effort to rouse a deity that is groggy and hard of hearing, it turns out that there is actually no one there to pay them any attention at all.

de Vaux, The Bible and the Ancient Near East, 242-43. The verb used in v. 29 is "to act as a prophet" (nb *). A more accurate translation in this context would be: "to rave, to be in ecstasy."

See Hauser, "Yahweh Versus Death," 45. 79

The reader senses the failure of the prophets of Baal before it actually happens through the ominous depiction provided by the narrator. The prophets of Baal appear tactless in the picture the narrator has provided. Their dance is a limp, they cry aloud all day to no one, and they cut themselves. The scene is chaotic and the prophets of Baal appear unprofessional despite the fact they are the royal representatives. But most of all, the narrator dramatizes their struggle by moving the narration time extremely quickly.

Even though they have from morning until the evening sacrifice to achieve a response they appear frantic and short on time.95 The prophets of Baal cannot keep up with the pace at which the narrator is moving. In the morning all they manage to do is cry out

"Baal, answer us!" and limp around the altar. In the afternoon they cry out again, cut themselves, and induce delirium. But it seems their time runs out only moments after it has begun. Yet in the midst of the urgency the narrator nearly stops time so that Elijah can speak a lengthy mock of Baal. He is a contrastingly calm character to whom the narrator is granting special privileges. As a consequence, the reader sees Elijah as steady and in control and the prophets of Baal as clumsy and hopeless. The prophets of

Baal have been and continue to be duped by Elijah who subtly gives them certain expectations while pulling them away at the last moment, what Beck calls "ironic reversal."96 They stand on Mount Carmel but cannot call down either fire or rain from the storm god—in fact their own blood flows before the rain comes.97 Elijah tells them to yell louder to awaken Baal, but it does not work. Through Elijah's controlling of the prophets of Baal "he makes [them] active partners in proving the nonexistence of Baal,

95 See Lawrie, "Telling Of(f) Prophets," 168.

96 Beck, "Geography as Irony," 293.

97 Ibid., 297, 299-300. 80 since their unstinting efforts are the best possible warrant for the impotence of their god."98

The verb "to answer" (cnh) is used in w. 24 and 37, each an instance in which an answer comes quickly. But the attempt for a response from the prophets of Baal in w.

26-29 uses "to answer" three times in instances where no answer arrives." Even though the prophets of Baal have responded to Elijah quickly and accurately, there was no one there to give them the same courtesy.100 They appear as weak and are eventually killed because there is no one around to stand up for them.101 When Elijah slaughters them no one expresses any concern: the people lend Elijah a hand, Ahab still remains absent, and

Baal has since been forgotten. Even the reader offers no sympathy.102 The message to the people whose concern is for survival in the face of a drought is that Baalism is not the way for survival because no one stands up for the worshippers of Baal.

The 450 prophets of Baal show that numbers are no advantage. Elijah, a single prophet of YHWH, has command over all the prophets of Baal. On his own he defeats them, and in the end, he slaughters them.

98 Simon, Reading Prophetic Narratives, 181.

99 Hauser, "Yahweh Versus Death," 40.

100 Ibid., 42.

101 Walsh, J Kings, 249.

102 Walsh (ibid., 254) considers the slaughter of the prophets of Baal to have been depersonalized by the use of the verb "to kill" (sht) which is used for animals and "for the wholesale killing of large numbers of people." Kissling adds, "The narrator thus lets the reader in on a sort of joke; that is, the real sacrifice that day was to be the prophets of Baal, not the bulls that were sacrificed" (Kissling, Reliable Characters, 99 n. 9). 81

3.5 Elijah and YHWH (w. 30-38)

Once Elijah's opponents are eliminated from the contest, he begins his turn:

"And he repaired the altar of YHWH which was demolished" (v. 30). Elijah has to work from the ground up. The "demolished" (hrs) altar is indicative of the state of apostasy in Israel, but Elijah's action to rebuild the destroyed altar provides hope of a restored worship.103 Throughout the process of rebuilding the altar, preparing the sacrifice, and presenting it to YHWH, Elijah and the narrator both work at pairing together the names of Israel and YHWH.104 The twelve stones Elijah uses for the altar lead the narrator to recall YHWH's renaming of Jacob to Israel (v. 31). Elijah also calls

YHWH the "God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel" (v. 36). Normally this invocation is

"God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob," but Elijah changes Jacob to Israel to help emphasize that YHWH is Israel's God.105 Meanwhile, the narrator uses the phrases:

"the altar of YHWH" (v. 30), "the word of YHWH" (v. 31), and "the name of YHWH"

(v. 32). When Elijah prays he uses YHWH's name three times (w. 36-37) and Elijah asks that he demonstrate that he is God to the people (v. 36). The reason for these frequent references to both the people of Israel/Israel and YHWH is to demonstrate that

YHWH is the God of the people and that the people are the people of YHWH. The narrator, through narration and through the words of Elijah, builds an image in which

YHWH and Israel make a pair.

The sacrifice Elijah prepares is in accordance with the terms he set. Just as the prophets of Baal followed the command of Elijah according to the terms agreed to by

103 Simon, Reading Prophetic Narratives, 184.

104 Walsh, 1 Kings, 251.

105 Ibid., 252. 82 the people, Elijah also follows his own guidelines. The narrator uses many of the same words that Elijah originally used when he described the contest to both the people and then to the prophets of Baal, and these same words were also used by the narrator when describing the obedience of the prophets of Baal. Compare the words used in the following charts (first on Baal and then on Elijah):

"Elijah said to the people" "Elijah said to the The actions of the re: prophets of Baal (v. 22) prophets of Baal" (v. 25) prophets of Baal V. 23 V. 25 V. 26 Let them choose for Choose for yourselves one They took the bull themselves one bull bull which he gave to them weyibharii lahem happar hcfe baharu lakem happar ha eh wayyiqhu ^et-happar had ad ^aser-natan lahem V. 23 V. 25 V. 26 and let them cut it up and prepare it and they prepared it winattehuhu wa^asu wayya^asu V. 23 and put it on the wood weyasimu 'lal-haceslm

V. 23 V. 25 but set no fire but set no fire we^es lo^yasimu We'eslo' tasimu V.24 V. 25 V. 26 Then you call on the name Then call on the name of and they called on the your god your god name of Baal uqercCtembesem 'elohekem weqir^u besem ^elohekem wayyiqre'u besem- habbacal V. 27 V. 28 Call with a loud voice And they called with a qifit beqol-gadol loud voice wayyiqre'u beqol gadol Additional Actions: - limping (v. 26) - cutting themselves (v. 28) - raving (v. 29) 83

"Elijah said to the people" The actions of Elijah re: himself (v. 22) V. 23 V. 33 And I will prepare the other bull And he cut up the bull waarii ^e^eseh 'et-happar ha'ehad waynattah ^et-happar V. 23 V. 33 and put it on the wood and he put it on the wood wenatatti cal-ha'esim wayyasem lal-hacesim V.23 but set no fire we'eslo' ^a'sim. V. 24 Vv. 36-37 and I will call on the name of YHWH Elijah . . . said, ". . . Answer me, YHWH! ^eam besem-yhwh Answer me!" ^eliyyahu ... wayyo'mar... 'anerii yhwh 'anerii Additional actions: - repairing/building the altar (w. 30, 32) - digging a trench (v. 32) - arranging the wood (v. 33) - commanding the people to pour water on the altar (w. 33-34) - approaching the altar/YHWH (v. 36)

Both the prophets of Baal and Elijah also go beyond the rules first set down. The prophets of Baal "limped" and "cut themselves," both actions which were intended to increase the likelihood of a response. But Elijah's extra action is to build a trench and have water poured over the sacrifice until the trench is full (w. 32-34). This action decreases the likelihood of a response because the saturated altar is inflammable. In addition to making the fire of YHWH seem much more incredible, this action demonstrates the confidence of Elijah.106 When the prophets of Baal felt they needed to appease Baal to receive a response, Elijah challenges YHWH and still expects to win the contest. Furthermore, he shows little concern over his wasting of the water which is rare because of the drought. His power over the other characters in the story has now

Childs, "On Reading the Elijah Narratives," 133. 84 converted to an ability to access water even though others have been suffering because of its lack. The people have been looking for rain from the gods, but they see that Elijah has the power to call for water and receive it. It is a positive sign for the people. It foreshadows a victory for the prophet and his God, and it is a subtle signal of the water- providing power behind the real God.

All of Elijah's preparations are measured, slow, and repetitious. When Elijah prays to YHWH, the prayer seems stretched to an unnatural length. Nelson explains,

"The description of Elijah's preparations and prayer slows the narrative and prevents the climax from coming too quickly. The excitement builds slowly; every detail is savoured."107 However, this stretching is not only for dramatic purposes. It contrasts the prophets of Baal who had the majority of the day to prepare and present their sacrifice but were frantic nonetheless. In comparison, Elijah, a single prophet, moves about calmly, takes his time, works through his preparations in intentional detail, yet passes little time. The narration indicates that Elijah has not started his preparations until after the prophets of Baal quit at the "the offering of the evening sacrifice" (v. 29; cf. v. 30). Yet the narrator also writes that, after his preparations, Elijah brings his prayer before YHWH "at the offering of the evening sacrifice" (v. 36). The time of the offering is likely a period of the day rather than a single moment, but even with this as the case, Elijah appears to have defeated the constraints of time.108 He was not bound by the passing of time as the prophets of Baal were, and he was certainly not hurried in the same way.

107 Nelson, First and Second Kings, 118.

108 On Elijah as a figure who "breaks the barriers of space and speed," see Thomas L. Brodie, The Crucial Bridge: The Elijah-Elisha Narrative as an Interpretive Synthesis of Genesis-Kings and a Literary Model for the Gospels (Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 2000), 6-7. 85

Elijah finally approaches YHWH to offer his prayer (v. 36). This is another contrast to the prophets of Baal who were dramatic and active in their call to Baal.

Elijah is comparatively inactive and undramatic, with his subtle approach and spoken words. "In one sense Elijah achieves grandeur precisely by means of consistent understatement, set off against the overstated performance of the opposition."110

Elijah's approach also subtly enforces Elijah's position as YHWH's representative.

YHWH has been a distant figure throughout the story, but now Elijah is able to close the

gap through his approach. To reinforce this position, the narrator, for the first time in this narrative labels Elijah a "prophet" (v. 36).in The reader has been aware all along that Elijah will be judged by whether or not he elicits a response of fire from YHWH, but the narrator affirms this by noting his prophetic position under YHWH.112 It is likely for this reason that Elijah's prayer includes, "Today, let it be known that... I am your servant and by your command I did all of these things" (v. 36).113 At first this

The text does not state exactly what Elijah approaches; it simply says, "Elijah approached." There are two possibilities: the altar or YHWH. Simon argues that "in view of the prophet's demonstrative care to avoid any suspicion of sleight-of-hand on his part," Elijah did not approach the altar, but instead approached YHWH (Simon, Reading Prophetic Narratives, 185). In some sense, however, the altar and YHWH are similar. Elijah could approach the altar and be said to have approached YHWH. The ambiguous wording here should not be seen as a major difficulty.

110 Lawrie, "Telling Of(f) Prophets," 168.

111 Elijah uses it of himself once in v. 22. Also, Cohn suggests that the narrator's use of it at this point suggests that he is the one in control (Cohn, "Literary Logic," 340).

112 Hauser, "Yahweh Versus Death," 51-52.

113 The last part of this request, "by your command I did all of these things," seems somewhat ambiguous. To what does "these things" refer? At first it seems that all of Elijah's aforementioned actions have been done at YHWH's command, but this is not a necessary interpretation of the phrase. The only command of YHWH that the narrator has included is in v. 1 and only directs Elijah to see Ahab so that rain may come—though one should not preclude that the narrator is not simply leaving a command out. A range of opinions on this phrase exist. On one side is the suggestion that Elijah has run the contest at the unmentioned command of YHWH (i.e., Simon, Reading Prophetic Narratives, 189). On the other side is the suggestion that Elijah is untruthful in saying he has done these things at YHWH's command (i.e., Kissling, Reliable Characters, 119-20). This project takes a middle position that hinges on the 86 request seems selfish, but it is consistent with the content of the narrative. At the beginning Ahab considered Elijah the "troubler" (v. 17), setting the scene for this battle in the first place. Elijah needed to prove his innocence through a response from

YHWH. Also, the prophets of Baal were deemed ineffective because their god was ineffective, and if Elijah (who intends to support monotheism) does not get a response either, then he is ineffective and has essentially lost the contest. This is the opportunity for Elijah to set things straight. If YHWH is truly God, then Elijah has been his successful servant. He would not then be the "troubler" Ahab thought him to be, and he would not be a failure like the prophets of Baal. It would also contrast the doubt expressed in the people's silence when Elijah first addressed them (v. 21).114

Elijah has two concerns in his prayer to YHWH: his desire to demonstrate his role under YHWH (as above) and his desire to return the people to their worship of

YHWH. Elijah's prayer which consists of two larger parts has these two concerns as the end of each part. The structure of the prayer can be laid out as follows (with Elijah's concerns as C and C):

A. "YHWH, God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel" B. "Today let it be known that you are God in Israel" C. "And that I am your servant and by your command I did all these things" (v. 36) A'. "Answer me, YHWH! Answer me!" B'. "So this people will know that you, YHWH, are God" C\ "And you have turned their heart back" (v. 37)115 ambiguity of "these things." In this case Elijah is seen as honest and a servant of YHWH who follows his commands, but also as an independent figure who shows initiative and makes choices of his own.

n4DeVries, 1 Kings, 230.

U5This layout is adapted from Walsh who has only AB-A'B' as part of his diagram . On the last part of v. 37 ("And you have turned their heart back") Walsh points out that it may more accurately read: "You have turned their heart backwards." In this case it would mean that YHWH was responsible for the original turn of the people away from YHWH. Walsh figures that Elijah refuses to credit Baal with even turning the hearts of the people away in the first place (Walsh, 1 Kings, 252-53). 87

The emphasis in this prayer is Elijah's appeal for a response convincing enough to change the hearts of the people back toward YHWH. Repeated in this structure is the desire to demonstrate to the people who their God is, and this has been a major concern of Elijah who has aimed to get them to confess that YHWH is their God. Elijah's prayer is notably forward despite that he is addressing YHWH.116 He lays out exactly what he intends YHWH to mean by his sending of fire and he is not concerned that he will deter

YHWH by anything he says. Just as Elijah has had control throughout the narrative, he still holds it as he addresses his God.

YHWH's response to Elijah comes both immediately and powerfully (v. 38), contrasting the lack of fire from Baal. Elijah receives what he has asked for. The powerful response of YHWH not only lights the sacrifice on fire, but consumes it, the wood, the altar, the water, and the dirt. Elijah wanted YHWH to demonstrate that he was God, and YHWH did it convincingly.117 Left unstated is that Elijah is truly

YHWH's servant, but the reader has determined this already.

3.6 Some Concluding Remarks on the Character of Elijah

The above analysis of Elijah's interaction with the four other characters in the story reveals a subtle cycle. Through most of the narrative, each of Elijah's dialogues with another character consists of an address and response, which is then repeated once.

The first appearance of this cycle, in Elijah's dialogue with Ahab, is different because

116 "Elijah's prayer is far from timid or apologetic" (Kissling, Reliable Characters, 99). "His appeal is ardent, but its ardency is linked to a heritage which convinces Elijah his God will answer" (Hauser, "Yahweh Versus Death," 49).

117 See Simon, Reading Prophetic Narratives, 189-90. 88

Elijah is at first the addressee. The repetition of the address and response is reversed by

Elijah. Thus, the result is the following pattern:

A. Ahab calls Elijah the troubler (v. 17) B. Elijah responds by calling Ahab the troubler (v. 18) B'. Elijah commands Ahab to assemble the contest participants (v. 19) A'. Ahab complies (v. 20)

The initial chiastic form of the cycle functions simply as a reversal of positions. Ahab is moved from the position of command to the position of response by the narrator, while the narrator shifts Elijah from being the responder to be the one in command, a position

Elijah holds from this point forward. The permanence of the change is seen in the remainder of the pattern:

A. Elijah tells the people to choose a god (v. 21) B. The people do not respond (v. 21); or, their response is delayed (v. 39) A'. Elijah proposes a contest (w. 22-24) B'. The people agree to the contest (v. 24) A. Elijah commands the prophets of Baal as per the rules of the contest (v. 25) B. The prophets of Baal comply (v. 26) A'. Elijah mocks the prophets of Baal (v. 27) B'. The prophets of Baal respond more fervently (w. 28-29) A. Elijah commands the people to approach (v. 30) B. The people approach (v. 30) A'. Elijah commands the people to pour water over the altar (w. 33-34) B'. The people comply (v. 34)

The cycle stays relatively rigid throughout the body of the contest, but when Elijah addresses YHWH the cycle no longer includes its repetition. This is also the case in

Elijah's final command to the people. Consider the abbreviated cycle as diagrammed below: 89

A. Elijah prays to YHWH for an answer (w. 36-37) B. YHWH's fire falls on the altar (v. 38)118

A. Elijah commands the people to seize the prophets of Baal (v. 40) B. The people comply (v. 40)

An explanation for this abbreviation of the cycle is simple: it complements the dramatic shift in the narrative. Through most of the narrative the people are left waiting to see who is truly their god and provider of rain. The story progresses slowly and the drama builds by holding off the climax, thus each cycle of command and response is double.

In contrast, the climax comes with a speed that differs from the rest of the action.

Unlike his opponent, YHWH responds quickly. In the same sense, the above described cycle matches this quickened pace by shortening the cycle by half. Thus the story resolves quickly.

This cycle shows that Elijah is the figure in control in the narrative because in each part of the cycle he is the one who commands and to whom response is given. But not only is Elijah in control, he is larger-than-life. This is demonstrable in the fact that the limits of space and time seem not to apply to him. From the time that Ahab meets him in v. 16 until the end of the narrative Elijah's spatial presence is mystifying. He is already present upon Ahab's arrival in the scene; Elijah does not go to meet Ahab, but

Ahab comes to meet him (v. 16). When the contest moves to Mount Carmel, Ahab goes to collect the participants and bring them to the mountain (v. 20), but Elijah, without mention of him moving, is already present when the characters arrive there (see v. 21).

Note that the people's response to the fire ("YHWH, he is God!" in v. 39) is considered a delayed response to Elijah's demand that the people choose a god (diagrammed above). However, this should not prohibit one fromals o considering it a response to YHWH's fire. 90

Furthermore, in his approach to YHWH (v. 36), he is able to breach the barrier between the human and the divine.

In a similar sense, Elijah overcomes the hindrances of time. When Elijah is speaking or acting in the narrative, which is the majority of the story, the narrator practically stops time: narration time and narrated time are relatively equal.119 Nearly all the passing of time in the narrative occurs when the prophets of Baal are calling upon their god. Elijah is an intentional contrast to them. In the end, their time has come to an end at the Kishon River, signified by their death (v. 40), but Elijah, even though it is already after the evening sacrifice (see v. 36), almost mysteriously moves down to the

Kishon River (v. 40) with time to spare to do much more after the contest narrative closes (see w. 41-46).

Accordingly, Elijah is the hero who saves the people from their apostasy and gives them hope of an end to the drought. He winds up a series of conflicts that arose throughout the contest narrative. First, in his conflict with Ahab, each believed the other to be the cause of the trouble in Israel, but Elijah tactfully invalidated Ahab's Baalism.

When Elijah called down fire he revealed to Ahab that YHWH was the only God in

Israel, and thus only Ahab's Baalism was responsible for the trouble inflicted on the land and its inhabitants. Second, Elijah's conflict with the prophets of Baal was resolved when Elijah slaughtered them, both figuratively, by winning the contest, and literally, at the Kishon River. The prophets of Baal elicited no support from their god despite their dramatic appeals. Yet when Elijah asked YHWH to show that he was his servant, Elijah received an immediate response. Third, Elijah's conflict with the people

See ch. 1 (p. 38, n. 86) for brief descriptions of narration time and narrated time. 91 was resolved most skilfully of all. He spent the entire narrative working to turn their hearts to YHWH. Elijah's real quest, to convert them back to Yahwism, was tied directly into a conflict Elijah created between the gods. When YHWH won the battle, he was rewarded with the attention of the people. Finally, the one character with whom

Elijah does not have a conflict is YHWH. Rather, they are a team pitted against Baal.

Elijah has designed the contest, prepared the sacrifice, and called on YHWH. YHWH responded, definitively winning the contest for them both.

This analysis leads to a couple valuable results. First, the study of the character of Elijah allows a greater understanding of all the other characters in the narrative.

Ahab appears as more than just a character facilitating Elijah's need to gather all the participants to Mount Carmel. Instead his own interests are revealed, that is, achieving rain. The people appear as participants in the contest, genuinely wanting to know which god could end their drought. The prophets of Baal come across as failures, completely contrasting Elijah. And YHWH is revealed as the true God in Israel, served by Elijah but also ready to back him up. The second result is the revelation that Elijah is the hero of the narrative. He sets out on a quest, takes the necessary initiative to achieve his goal, and is consistently present as the dominant character. He takes action, shows power and control, and proficiently breaks down the faulty chain on which the apostasy of the nation is based; the people following their king who supports the prophets of Baal who worship Baal:

Baal 4r the prophets of Baal <- Ahab <- the people

Elijah proves that Baal does not exist, and consequently, this chain breaks apart. 92

The next question is: where is YHWH during all this? It is true the Elijah can rely upon him to respond at the climactic moment, but why is YHWH inactive through most of the narrative which seeks to show that he is God? This is the topic of the next chapter which reads the narrative with an emphasis on YHWH. CHAPTER 4: NARRATIVE ANALYSIS WITH AN EMPHASIS ON YHWH

This chapter is a narrative analysis with a specific emphasis on understanding the character of YHWH. The previous chapter noted that YHWH was a relatively minor actor in the contest narrative, but this is not the same as calling him a minor character.

Calling him a minor character would be akin to considering him insignificant to the overall narrative. This is surely not the case. YHWH acts only once and appears to be absent from the rest of the plot, but the contest is about him; it is about demonstrating that he is God. Therefore this analysis will study the narrative according to impact created by YHWH's absence. First, it will consider how the plot is about him, while at the same time he is mostly absent. Second, it will review how his absence affects the other characters of the narrative. And third, it will look at the spatial movement in the contest narrative and how this focuses the contest on the conversion of the people. This analysis will reveal that the narrative is not just about demonstrating YHWH's power as

God, but more so, it is about returning the people to their relationship with YHWH.

4.1 YHWH as the Subject of the Plot

YHWH appears as the subject of the plot, although he does not drive it forward in the same way the rest of the characters do. Elijah, Ahab, the people, and the prophets of Baal all provide actions and words that move the plot toward its resolution. YHWH appears at only one point in the narrative and provides a single action,1 yet the entire

1 Olley notes that apart from v. 1, YHWH never appears as "the subject of any word or action in the whole chapter" (Olley, "YHWH and His Zealous Prophet," 35). When YHWH sends fire (v. 38) the narrator uses the fire as the subject of the verb.

93 94 plot is about him. He is contrasted with Baal, his existence is questioned, he is tested, and he is declared God. He appears in the story upon request and in a form already chosen. In addition to this, the progression of the plot defines him through the actions and words of others,2 after which his moment of presence becomes the narrative moment to ultimately define him as God. Furthermore, even though Baal is called upon in the contest in similar ways as is YHWH, it is not about Baal in the same way that it is about YHWH. Baal's failure only serves to increase YHWH's success.

The scene is set on Mount Carmel. Elijah's choice to hold the contest on Mount

Carmel is important to the characterization of YHWH in the narrative. The mountain stands between Israel and Phoenicia; between YHWH's people and the homeland of

Jezebel's Baalism.3 It is neutral territory and a symbolic location for the battle between the two gods. The people, who are unable to make a decision, stand at the battle line on

Mount Carmel, waiting for the clash and the determination of the victor. In another sense, the mountain is more than just a battleground. As ch. 3 pointed out Karmel means "garden land," therefore the battle will determine who "gardens" at this location.

The image of fertility and growth is reminiscent of the drought in Israel and the need for rain, thus the observers of the contest also want to see which god it is that sends the rain.

In this, YHWH is still the subject of the plot. Elijah is the one who has brought the competition to this location; he has set YHWH opposite Baal and begun to define

YHWH as the sender of rain. It is not a battle that YHWH has actively pursued nor an opponent that he has chosen. He is being defined by the contest in which he must

2 The implied author uses this as a means of indirect characterization, while the reader picks up on these character-indicators and uses them to form a concept of YHWH. See ch. 1 on characterization.

3 See Benjamin, The Elijah Stories, 32; Woods, Water and Storm Polemics, 98. 95 partake, but not through his own actions. Elijah stands in on behalf of YHWH to build the scene for a demonstration of YHWH's divinity.

YHWH further becomes the subject of the plot (for the time being alongside

Baal) when the choice of gods is given to the people. They decide against making a choice, but this is indicative of Baalism, which is more inclusive than Yahwism. In

Baalism the people do not need to decide between one position and another but can accept both. Thus the requirements of YHWH's victory become very clear: YHWH must answer with fire, but Baal must also fail to answer. If Baal sends fire as well, then

YHWH will not be victorious even if he responds, because he requires exclusive worship.4 In the same sense, the number of prophets participating in this contest parallels the inclusivity and exclusivity of both religions. Baalism is represented by the inclusion of many prophets while Yahwism is represented by one. Elijah points this out specifically (v. 22), emphasizing the strength of YHWH's opponent, who is represented by so many, and demonstrating all the more the strength of YHWH should he win with only one prophet.5

Through every step of the narrative Elijah builds the opponent's chance at victory, in essence to define the very strength of YHWH should he be the victor. He gives the prophets of Baal the first choice of bulls (v. 25), ensuring they will have the better sacrifice, and he gives them the majority of the day to receive a response ("from morning" [v. 26] until "the offering of the evening sacrifice" [v. 29]). Yet the prophets of Baal fail to achieve a response despite their dancing, yelling, and self-mutilation (w.

4 Walsh, 1 Kings, 245-46;Brueggemann, 1 &2Kings, 223-24.

5 By the end of the contest, and through an ironic twist, the strength of the prophets of Baal in their large number will instead only emphasize their weakness. That they needed so many prophets in the first place and could still not succeed shows no strength at all. 96

26,28). Baal could not send fire even when Elijah allowed him every advantage, but could YHWH do it when he had every disadvantage? According to Dutcher-Walls, the struggle of the prophets of Baal serves "to intensify the drama and thus the final victory of God."6 The narrator slows down the narrated time during the actual contest to focus on the preparation and presentation of the sacrifice to Baal and the narrator does so again (and more so) for the sacrifice to YHWH. Through this the reader sees the work and effort of the prophets. Every effort is made to attain a response from Baal and he does not respond. If Baal could not send fire in this case, then YHWH's response of fire will demonstrate all the more the god-likeness he has.

When Elijah begins to prepare his sacrifice the actions construct a more favourable situation for YHWH, which contrasts the earlier stages of the contest where the advantages were given to Baal. Elijah rebuilds the destroyed altar, reminding the reader of the destructive forces against YHWH in Israel.7 He uses twelve stones

"according to the number of the tribes of the sons of Jacob" (v. 31), symbolizing

YHWH's original covenant with the people of Israel.8 YHWH is characterized as a God in a covenant relationship with the people and who remains faithful to the people even when they have not been faithful in return. Elijah then digs a trench around the altar, prepares the sacrifice, and asks the people to pour twelve jars of water over the offering

(w. 32-35). The drenching of the sacrifice and filling of the trench recalls and magnifies the difficulty of the task that Elijah has prepared for YHWH. This last touch

6 Dutcher-Walls, Jezebel, 34.

7 See Beck, "Geography as Irony," 299. Here Beck demonstrates that the destroyed altar indicates that Baal was king of the mountain.

8 Long, 1 Kings, 193; Simon, Reading Prophetic Narratives, 184. 97 on the preparations makes the task nearly impossible. Nonetheless, Elijah comes near and speaks a prayer to YHWH (w. 36-37). Baal never heard the continuous yelling of his prophets, but now Elijah approaches YHWH with contrasted quietness.9 How could

YHWH hear this single, temperate prophet? Yet Elijah continues confidently, labeling

YHWH the "God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel" (v. 36), indicating that he is the God of tradition and the proper God in Israel.10 This again emphasizes YHWH's covenant- character.

Elijah's direct address to YHWH indicates that YHWH is no longer only the subject of the plot in the narrative, but also an actor in the climax. The narrator cannot reach the climax of the story with Elijah alone and needs a divine action for the plot to continue moving. One god needs to respond for the narrative to resolve; Baal has not and now only YHWH remains. Battenfield explains that Elijah has designed the contest so that "a real miracle ... is necessitated" for victory.11 Something out of the ordinary is needed in the human realm to prove that YHWH is God, and in a narrative sense a parallel, out of the ordinary event must happen. Thus YHWH moves from his passive location behind the narrative to a forward and active location. He sends fire with promptness and excessiveness (v. 38). The sacrifice, wood, stones, water, and dirt are all consumed by the divine fire, and every challenge posed up until now appears as

9 Simon, Reading Prophetic Narratives, 185.

10 Olley, "YHWH and His Zealous Prophet," 36. Also, see the previous chapter noting the deviation from the more traditional, "God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob."

11 Battenfield, "YHWH's Refutation," 23-24.

12 Even here the narrator has subtly refrained from connecting YHWH directly to an action. In this verse it is actually the "fire of YHWH" that is the subject (Olley, "YHWH and His Zealous Prophet," 35). The action of YHWH is implied but not explicitly narrated. 98 minute and inconsequential. When Baal could not respond to the dancing and cutting of his prophets, YHWH responds to the simple approach of his prophet; when Baal could not hear the raised voices of his many prophets, YHWH heard the prayer of his one prophet; and when Elijah made his sacrifice inflammable, YHWH burnt it to the ground.

Finally, as quickly as YHWH arrives in the narrative, he also leaves. The narrator moves past the climax swiftly and in dramatic fashion, and once again YHWH is the subject of the plot rather than an actor in it. The people respond in amazement,

"YHWH, he is God! YHWH, he is God!" (v. 39). When earlier in the day they were dubious about choosing YHWH as their God, now they declare it fervently because it is undoubtedly true. The last matter of the narrative is the slaughtering of the prophets of

Baal. They are the remaining remnant of Baalism and must be removed because

YHWH alone is God.

Corresponding to the consistent absence of YHWH as an actor, the narrator keeps a distance from this character, avoiding direct characterization. The narrator's description of the meaning of the twelve stones Elijah uses for the altar (v. 31) is exceptional because the narrator has gone so far as to indicate the rightfulness of

YHWH's place as God in Israel. Otherwise the narrator refers to YHWH indirectly through Elijah and the people and occasionally in the genitival use of the divine name

(w. 30-32, 38).

Even when the fire falls on the altar (v. 38) the narrator does not identify the response as an "answer" from YHWH, which is the desired end of the contest (see v.

24). The repetition of the word "answer" here is expected13 but it is conspicuously

See Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative, 77; Berlin, Poetics and Interpretation, 64-65. 99 absent. The narrator, with this omission, remains vague in the depiction of YHWH:

YHWH is not specified as answering. It appears that here, as throughout the narrative, the narrator has undertaken to "show" rather than "tell" the power of YHWH.14 The narrator could spell out the conclusion of the contest, but instead the narrator allows for direct discourse to dramatize the events. The prophet Elijah stands in for YHWH. He guides the people through their choice in gods, challenges the presence of Baalism in the land, and builds a scene for YHWH's power demonstration. The reader, in a sense, observes the characters, sees the events build to the climax, and watches the demonstration of divine power. The narrator does not define the conclusion of the contest, but instead the people declare YHWH's divinity. All the while, the narrator remains silent on the character of YHWH.

4.2 The Effect of YHWH's Absence on the Other Characters

Amit explains that the absence of a deity from the story allows for characters that have more depth and development.15 After all, if YHWH were an active character early in the contest narrative then it would not have been plausible for Ahab, the people, or the prophets of Baal to be opposed to Yahwism. The remoteness of YHWH is an important element in the characterization and development of these characters and each is discussed briefly here.

First, Ahab is immediately characterized as misunderstanding the drought in the land. He calls Elijah the "troubler of Israel," indicating that Elijah "disturbs the well-

14 See Amit, Reading Biblical Narrative, 49-50; Powell, What is Narrative Criticism?, 52-53.

15 Amit, Reading Biblical Narratives, 84-85. See the introduction for a short summary on the presence and absence of YHWH in Hebrew narrative. 100 being of the community by acting for self against healthy social relationships."16

Perhaps, as Walsh argues, Ahab believes that Elijah has angered Baal because of his

Yahwism and now Baal is the one causing the drought punitively.17 Or as Russell H.

Dilday has commented, maybe Ahab is accusing Elijah of "arbitrary stubbornness,"18 inferring that Elijah is withholding the rain illogically. Maybe Ahab is confused over the reason for the drought and holds two contradictory beliefs: that Elijah has the power to cause the drought and that Baal is still god.19 In any case, it is clear that Ahab misunderstands the cause of the drought.20 YHWH has not factored into Ahab's equation of the problem. It is likely that Ahab has factored in Baal, and it is clear that he has factored in Elijah, but Ahab does not attribute the drought to YHWH. YHWH's absence allows Ahab to perceive of events as he has and to take the actions that he does.

Ahab remains a threat to Elijah but the contest is an opportunity to relieve the threat. It can prove YHWH's existence and absolve the effect of his absence. Thus both Ahab's actions and the resultant contest are precipitated by YHWH's absence.

Next, the people, who enter the scene as followers in the apostasy of Ahab, are conflicted over the choice of gods set before them by Elijah. On the one hand, they are

"not openly hostile to Yahweh,"21 but on the other, they are also open to Baal. This is a

16 Brueggemann, 1 & 2 Kings, 222. Also, Gray equates this use of "troubler" with an "infectious influence" (Gray, I & II Kings, 349).

17 Walsh, 1 Kings, 243. See also, Beck, "Geography as Irony," 296-97; Gene Rice, Nations Under God: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Kings, ITC (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1990), 149.

18 Russell H. Dilday, I, 2 Kings, CCom (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1987), 212.

19Konkel, I &2Kings, 290.

20 Provan, I and 2 Kings, 137.

21 Hauser, "Yahweh Versus Death," 36. 101 challenge to YHWH's presence in Israel. They show doubt, and YHWH's absence in the narrative serves to reinforce that doubt.

The people's conflict over the choice between the gods may be understandable because they are concerned about their present state.22 They are concerned about the drought and more so about not offending the god who will send the drought-ending rain.

Their leaning may be toward the Baalism of Ahab because not only is Baal the storm god, but because Baalism is healthy at present. The reader is made aware (and presumably the people are already aware) that 450 prophets of Baal are eating regularly under the care of the monarchy (v. 19), but a look outside this pericope reveals that the prophets of YHWH are being killed (v. 13).23 It appears as if YHWH is not present to save his own prophets; he is already limited to 100 prophets hidden in a cave, Obadiah who is secretly working to save them (w. 4, 13), and Elijah. Because of Obadiah's secrecy, the people are likely unaware that there are even this many prophets of YHWH.

As a consequence, they probably sense YHWH's absence significantly. Therefore, in doubt of YHWH's presence, they limp between the two gods.

The "limping" of the people does not prove an asset to them. Rather it finds its parallel in the prophets of Baal whose dance around the altar to entice Baal to a response is also described by the narrator as "limping" (v. 26). The position of the people actually equates them with a pathetic and desperate group of prophets that is unable to obtain any response. But the people are not entirely the same as the prophets of Baal.

They have a flexibility available to them that the prophets of Baal do not. The people

22 See Fokkelman, Reading Biblical Narrative, 67-68. He explains that narrative characters are concerned about the immediate issues they face.

23 Hauser, "Yahweh Versus Death," 37-38. 102 demonstrate a curiosity in the evidence the contest reveals (v. 24), participate in Elijah's preparations of the sacrifice (v. 34), and demonstrate an ability to be influenced by the outcome of the contest (v. 39). YHWH's absence heightens and sustains each of the dramatic elements. It is because YHWH is absent that their decision between YHWH and Baal is postponed for the length of the contest. YHWH's absence affects the people yet another way. The prophets of Baal are stock characters representative of the religion of Baal. Baalism can exist because YHWH is not present, but when YHWH makes his brief appearance Baalism is undermined. In the end, the religion is eradicated along with its representative prophets. The people, however, are not stock characters; they demonstrate their flexibility when they decide that YHWH is God.24

The reader's interests in the characters parallel this difference. The reader is sympathetic toward the people; sharing the concern of Elijah that they turn from Baal and toward YHWH. The reader wants the people to be corrected; to have their limp healed and their crutches made unnecessary. Therefore the reader is drawn into the suspense created by the absence of YHWH. The reader, like Elijah, knows that YHWH is God, but his sustained absence conflicts with the conversion of the people. Thus the reader's desire is that he show up. But the reader does not feel the same way toward the prophets of Baal. Rather the reader is antipathetic toward them, noting that they are the contrast of Elijah and a symbol of what is wrong in Israel.25 In the end, the reader's sympathies and antipathies have projected the outcome of the plot. The people choose

24 David Jobling analyzes the progression of the people's willingness to make a choice. He notes that it moves from unwillingness, to the choice to see the evidence, and then to the acceptance of one choice once the evidence has been seen (Jobling, The Sense of Biblical Narrative, 75-77).

See Powell, What is Narrative Criticism?, 57, for brief descriptions of sympathy and antipathy. 103

YHWH, and furthermore, they support their choice not just by the words they speak but by their action in helping Elijah seize the prophets of Baal for execution.26

In contrast to the well-developed image of the people, the prophets of Baal appear pathetic and flat. They are an image of a group that does not worship YHWH and that shows no interest in the presence of YHWH. They call on a different god and their image is developed in relation to the god they serve. The prophets of Baal are loud and vigorous, Baal is silent and unresponsive.27 The calls of the prophets of Baal appear as desperate and fanatical, and the response of Baal is correspondingly deficient. Both appear weak. Baal's absence infers his non-existence, and the prophets of Baal, in whom the people have trusted for rain (a product the fire-sending god can provide), have failed to obtain any response. They were depended upon by the king and the people to be the untroubling of Israel, but instead of bringing rain they pour blood.28 The blood which is supposed to ritualistically imitate and prompt the rain becomes instead a symbol of their coming death,30 and subsequently of their likeness to their unresponsive god. Furthermore, they reflect the utter absence of YHWH; they express no acknowledgment of him, no belief in him, and no desire to contact him or receive a response from him. In this way they are a contrast to Elijah who believes in YHWH and contacts him and for whom YHWH responds with his presence.

Dutcher-Walls, Jezebel, 35.

Hauser, "Yahweh Versus Death," 45-46.

Beck, "Geography as Irony," 296, 300.

Ibid., 300.

Walsh, 1 Kings, 249. 104

A review of the characters of Ahab, the people, and the prophets of Baal shows that their characters develop through the absence of YHWH in most of the narrative.

YHWH's absence allows the characters to take on perceptions of the world around them that they could not take if YHWH were present. Ahab's perception of the drought did not include the involvement of YHWH and it certainly did not include his abandonment of YHWH's commands as the cause. The people who desired rain were doubtful of directing their worship solely toward YHWH because they were struggling to perceive of YHWH as a deity who could be present. And the prophets of Baal simply perceive of the world as under the power of the wrong god.

4.3 Movement in the Contest Narrative (and a Note on YHWH in Narrated Time)

In the above studies of plot and characters YHWH's absence figures significantly and this phenomenon holds true when considering movement in the contest narrative. YHWH does not figure into the key points of spatial movement in the contest narrative. The verb "to approach" (ngs) appears four times to indicate three points of movement: Elijah approaches the people (v. 21), Elijah tells the people to approach and they approach (v. 30), and Elijah approaches the altar (v. 36). Around these three occurrences are the verbs "to assemble" (qbs; w. 19,20) and "to bring down" (yrd; v.

40) which both directly refer to the prophets of Baal. They create a subtle inclusio indicating the ascent and descent of the mountain, the arrival and departure of the prophets of Baal, and the beginning and end of the contest.31 All together the movements create a chiasm that centers on the people's approach to Elijah:

31 Noticeably, this inclusio omits the dialogue between Elijah and Ahab. Generally this dialogue is lacking any movement with the exception of v. 16 which includes the departure of Obadiah and the 105

A. Ahab assembles the prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel (w. 19, 20) B. Elijah approaches the people to speak to them (v. 21) (Movement A) C. The people approach Elijah (v. 30) (Movement B) B'. Elijah approaches the altar to speak to pray to YHWH (v. 36) (Movement C) A'. Elijah brings the prophets of Baal down Mount Carmel (v. 40)

However, the assembly on and descent from the mountain do not associate themselves with the key parts of the narrative in the same way as the occurrences of "to approach" do. Each time "to approach" appears a set of dramatic movements follows, dividing the plot into three large components: Movement A, the terms of the contest and presentation of the sacrifice to Baal (w. 21-29); Movement B, Elijah's preparation of the sacrifice to

YHWH (w. 30-35); and Movement C, Elijah's prayer to YHWH, YHWH's response, and the people's response (w. 36-39).

Movement B—the people's approach to Elijah—functions as a subtle but meaningful shift in the narrative.32 Before this movement the prophets of Baal are frantic in their presentation of the sacrifice, but after it Elijah prepares his altar and sacrifice in an unhurried and measured manner. Before it the people observe the prophets of Baal in anticipation of fire, and perhaps rain, but they now turn to Elijah with their expectations. Additionally, the other two sets of movement also effect a change of heart in the people. First, shortly after Elijah approaches the people

(Movement A), they confess willingness to follow whichever god can send fire. arrival of Ahab. The purpose of this verse as a change of scenes has already been discussed in the introduction.

32 See Walsh, 1 Kings, 250; Gregory, "Irony and the Unmasking of Elijah," 121-22.

33 Jobling considers this point the "pivot" in the narrative, noting that from this point on the reader knows what will happen (Jobling, The Sense of Biblical Narrative, 74). 106

Second, after Elijah approaches the altar (Movement C), the people finally fall on their faces and confess YHWH's divinity. Through three dramatic movements, each begun with an "approach," the people move from unresponsiveness to full conversion.

YHWH figures notably into Movement C where Elijah approaches the altar and offers a prayer to which YHWH responds, but otherwise the structure of the three movements is not centered on YHWH. It is centered on the people and it emphasizes the three stages of their development. This layer of the plot adds depth to the story. The conflict between YHWH and Baal would fall flat on its own because the reader knows already that YHWH is God and that Baal does not exist. However, the people do not know the same thing and the reader is not able to foresee the choices the people will make. The suspense in the plot is connected to whether or not the people can be returned to YHWH.

YHWH also does not figure into the passage of time in the narrative. He is only present for an instant. All the other characters have spent the entire day on Mount

Carmel and the narrated time speeds up and slows down around them. But YHWH cannot be figured into the narrated time; he has been absent except for an immeasurable moment. This is significant, though, in contrast to his opponent Baal. All morning and afternoon Baal had an opportunity to respond and did not, but YHWH's response took no time at all.

4.4 Preliminary Conclusions on the Character of YHWH

Until this point this narrative analysis has indicated a couple of contrasting aspects about the character of YHWH. In one sense, as the subject, he predominates in 107 the narrative. It is, after all, "the definitive portrayal of YHWH's power."34 Yet in another sense, he is mostly absent and inactive. Nothing in particular is revealed about his character to the reader (in contrast to the other characters in the story) because the reader, who empathizes with Elijah, is aware beforehand that YHWH is God and that he is capable of defeating Baal in this contest. In part his absence helps to heighten the suspense, but mostly, the narrator uses YHWH's absence to develop the other characters instead. Ahab produces conflict, the people exhibit change, and the prophets of Baal symbolize the failure of Baalism.

YHWH fits Amit's portrait of an "observing deity" which allows the other characters to become complex.35 The readers cannot identify with YHWH as they do to varying degrees with the other characters. YHWH is part of a greater plot that is deeper than a demonstration of his power as God. The narrative hints twice at the restoration of a covenant relationship between the people of Israel and YHWH (w. 31, 36),36 but

YHWH is hardly the acting character toward this end. Fokkelman defines the hero of a story as one who is "the subject of a quest," who is "mostly or permanently present in the text," and who shows "initiative."37 YHWH is emphatically none of these. This position is reserved for Elijah.

4 Dutcher-Walls, Jezebel, 34.

35 Amit, Reading Biblical Narratives, 83-84.

36 Simon, Reading Prophetic Narratives, 186.

37 Fokkelman, Reading Biblical Narrative, 82. Note that "subject of a quest" does not use "subject" in the same sense as it is used of YHWH in this chapter. In Fokkelman's sense it is the one acting toward the goal of the plot. When used of YHWH in this chapter it refers to the one whom the plot is about. CHAPTER 5: SYNTHESIS

Chapter 4 describes YHWH as principally passive and absent in the contest narrative. His presence and action comes at only one point—when he answers Elijah by sending fire on the sacrifice. Meanwhile, the actions and words of all the other characters (especially Elijah) serve to develop a portrait of YHWH as the only deity. In this way, YHWH dominates as the subject of the narrative. He is identified through the development of the plot as the divine being that provides for human life. However, even though YHWH is shown as the powerful, fire-sending deity, chapter 3 demonstrates that it is Elijah who stands out as the dominant character in the story. He is the one who directs the course of the events, who prompts the other characters to action, and who ultimately defines YHWH as God.

Given the dominant ways of both YHWH and Elijah, dual layers seem to be developing in the narrative. Both YHWH and Elijah act as the subject, but in significantly different ways. YHWH is the subject (though absent and passive) because the contest is about him and its plot serves to demonstrate his divinity. Elijah, however, is the dominant subject who is present and active in the narrative. Thus YHWH is the idea whereas Elijah is the idea-teller. It appears at first that the presence of Elijah as dominant and controlling would detract from the intent of the contest to demonstrate to the people the power of YHWH. After all, Elijah requests and receives a response from

YHWH, suggesting that Elijah's control extends over even his God. However, these two characters parallel each other in many ways without raising a conflict. Their interests and goals are similar, if not the same, and the input of one character really only

108 109 serves to characterize the other character as well. Perhaps this is why YHWH is absent in a narrative which is about him, and why Elijah stands out as a character bearing extraordinary power.

This chapter will function as the synthesis of the previous two chapters by comparing YHWH and Elijah in the many ways that they parallel each other. In part, they are on a team; they encounter similar struggles, they show similar interests, and they work toward the same end. However, they do not always take the same action.

Being on a team means that the actions of one individual can serve the purposes of both.

For example, they do not both need to be active in preparing the contest because the actions of Elijah are sufficient and representative. Therefore the two characters can work together in pursuit of a common goal, each contributing their own actions (i.e.,

Elijah calls, YHWH responds).

YHWH's active role (sending fire; v. 38) is small in comparison to Elijah's. It is

Elijah who serves as the active representative of YHWH before the people, often acting with YHWH's interests in mind and just as often going further than specifically instructed. Sometimes it seems as if Elijah's actions are for his own personal interests, but even in these instances a closer look will reveal that YHWH's interests are represented alongside Elijah's.1 Therefore this synthesis will aim to analyze the ways in which the characters of Elijah and YHWH are parallel and to show exactly how Elijah's actions function as representative for YHWH. The following comparisons will be made: (1) YHWH's opponent is Baal and Elijah's opponents are the prophets of Baal;

(2) YHWH desires to send rain and Elijah desires to demonstrate that YHWH is the

1 The most prominent example of Elijah serving his own interests is the line in his prayer where he asks YHWH to show that he is YHWH's servant. 110 sender of rain; (3) YHWH shows compassion by seeking to send rain and Elijah delays to run the contest; (4) YHWH is the authoritative deity and Elijah is the authoritative prophet; and (5) YHWH's existence is in question while Elijah's life is at risk. These comparisons will demonstrate fully the degree to which Elijah is working as YHWH's representative.

5.1 YHWH Versus Baal and Elijah Versus the Prophets of Baal

Elijah's representation of YHWH is part of the structure of the contest. The same structure is seen in the opponents of YHWH and Elijah: Baal is represented by his own prophets. Thus YHWH's direct opponent is Baal while Elijah's direct opponents are the prophets of Baal.2 These four contestants compose two teams which are competing "for the loyalties of the people of Israel."3 Reviewing the team of YHWH and Elijah in juxtaposition to the team of Baal and his prophets facilitates a greater understand of YHWH and Elijah in both their similarities and differences.

First, YHWH and Elijah are similar in that they completely contrast their opponents, as noted previously. YHWH contrasts Baal by his timely, altar-consuming fire while Baal gives no response, but the greater contrast is between Elijah and the prophets of Baal. The prophets of Baal are frantic, desperate, and pathetic in comparison to Elijah's calm, confident, and dominating character. Second, contrasting

2 Glover suggests that Elijah's opponent is Jezebel, which in the larger context of the narrative is true, but in the smaller contest narrative Elijah's immediate opponent is the prophets of Baal. However, when Jezebel is taken as Elijah's opponent, it is possible to make the connection that both Elijah's and YHWH's opponents (Jezebel and Baal) are absent in the narrative (Glover, "Elijah Versus the Narrative of Elijah," 451).

3 Walsh, 1 Kings, 244. Walsh thus finds three plot lines in the narrative: one between the gods, one between the prophets, and the third regards which god the people will serve (ibid., 254-56). Ill

YHWH and Elijah to their opponents also highlights a difference between the characters.4 YHWH's opponent proves powerless in the narrative—in fact, that is partially the point of the contest. The narrator is able to draw the contrast that YHWH is extraordinarily powerful compared to Baal's nonappearance, and he does this by narrating YHWH consuming an altar of water, dirt, and stone (in addition to the more flammable wood and flesh; v. 38). However, given the non-existence of Baal in the narrative, there is little concrete detail to which YHWH may be contrasted. Thus, the narrator is unable to develop a deeper characterization of YHWH because drawing detail out of a contrast from Baal's nothingness is impossible. Elijah's opponents, on the other hand, are very real in the narrative. It follows that Elijah is a far more developed character, who speaks, acts, interacts, and dominates in the narrative. Furthermore, the people observing the contest become directly engaged with Elijah because of his proximity. They doubt him at first, converse with him, follow his instructions, and eventually hope in him. Of YHWH they simply stand in awe and give their final praise.

They do not see him or hear his voice; they only see and hear the fire that comes from heaven. They cannot interact with him in the same way they can interact with Elijah.

This becomes an important feature of Elijah's representation of YHWH. Elijah exhibits power and control over his feeble counterparts, and through him the people can understand Elijah's divine battle against Baalism and the corresponding power and control inherent in Yahwism. Thus, while Elijah is the figure in control in the narrative, and the one with whom the people (and even the reader) engage, ultimately his actions serve to forward the interests of YHWH, his image, and his power over Baal.

4 For a description of contrast as a method of enhancing characterizations see Berlin, Poetics and Interpretation, 40-41. 112

5.2 YHWH's Rain and Elijah's Contest

The next comparison between the characters of YHWH and Elijah can be done with consideration of the two major plot lines evident in ch. 18. The plot of the contest narrative is the obvious plot line and it is inserted into the larger drought plot. The rain motif of the drought plot continues through the contest narrative, though at this point it only subtly underlies the plot.5 Baalism holds that Baal is the sender of the rain, therefore the contest in which he is called to participate will also test his ability to do as expected even though the winning action is only supposed to be fire. When YHWH is victorious by sending fire the belief in Baal's control over the rain is proven wrong.

That is, fire from heaven is linked to lightning which is linked to storms which consist of rain. Baal who is considered the storm god showed no power over these elements, but YHWH did. YHWH, then, is indeed the one who sends rain. The reader can see the rain and contest plots even without examining the characters of YHWH and Elijah, yet both characters are essential to the introduction and advancement of each plot. One can expect that both YHWH and Elijah have certain interests in the outcome of both issues, but in the narrative YHWH has a greater demonstrated interest in the return of rain then does Elijah and Elijah has a greater demonstrated interest in the contest than does

YHWH. YHWH's interest in rain is apparent when he tells Elijah to "Go, show yourself to Ahab and I will send rain on the surface of the land" (v. 1). In narration time this occurs a while before the start of the contest narrative but it is also YHWH's last direct action or speech until he sends fire near the end of the narrative. As far as the

5 On the continuation of the rain theme in the contest narrative see Tromp, "Water and Fire," 482-84, 494. 113 reader can be certain, the return of rain on the land is the reason that Elijah and Ahab have met.

Elijah's interest with the contest is apparent when he takes the narrative in a different direction by establishing the contest. Yet, while he appears to act independently, the contest reveals Elijah is concerned about proving that YHWH is God first. His plans are grand in comparison to the simple directive from YHWH (to send rain), but he will prove to be obedient in the end. When it all comes to a close, the link between Elijah's contribution and YHWH's original interests are clear. Walsh explains:

YHWH implies that the provision of rain is somehow contingent upon Elijah's appearance before Ahab, but does not spell out the causal connection more clearly. It is that small logical lacuna that the unexpected and dramatic 18:20-40 fills: Elijah's appearance before Ahab leads to a confrontation between YHWH, represented by Elijah, and the storm god Baal, represented by his prophets. YHWH's definitive victory over Baal proves YHWH's supremacy over the rain to withhold it (the three years' drought) or return it (18:41-45).6 Elijah fills a gap in the process between meeting Ahab and the return of rain on the land.

He takes action to address an issue (Ahab's apostasy) that remains despite the use of a drought to confront it. The drought was supposed to refute the idea that Baal was the god who supplied the land with rain, but even having entered the third year of the drought (v. 1) Ahab still had not changed his beliefs (see w. 17-18). Even still, YHWH wants to end the drought—to fulfill his duty as the rain-sending deity—but it is Elijah who seeks to correct Ahab's misguided understanding of the origin of rain through the direct confrontation of Baalism in the contest. When this is accomplished, then YHWH can send rain and receive due credit. Again, Elijah is the representative of YHWH before Ahab and the people who shows the interest and ambition to address the issue

6 Walsh, Style and Structure, 77-78. 114 underlying the drought before returning the rain. He acts according to the interests of

YHWH, bringing the larger drought plot to its climax in the contest. He demonstrates that YHWH is God, allowing rain to fall without letting the Baalists use it as reason to worship Baal.

5.3 YHWH's Compassion and Elijah's Delay

A hint of the motivations of YHWH and Elijah exists in the expected outcome for the people in ending the drought and holding the contest. What appears to be

YHWH's concern when he decides to end the drought is a compassionate one. Lawrie writes, "Yahweh's original commission had been one of unconditional grace—rain was to be sent."7 YHWH's desire to bring an end to the disastrous drought appears noble since Baalism still pervades Israel. Despite his concern for the worship of the people he shows compassion by moving the plot toward rain.

In the story it is Elijah who delays the coming of the rain to try to change the worship of the people. He proposes a contest which will test the gods and prove which one is real. He appears less sympathetic to the suffering that can be associated with the drought than he appears to value the true worship of YHWH. This concern is demonstrated both in Elijah's altar preparations, which symbolically associated the people with YHWH (w. 30-32), and Elijah's prayer, which asks for conversion- inducing fire (w. 36-37). Like YHWH, one assumes Elijah desires the ultimate end of his contest to include rain, but he also demonstrates the higher expectations that the people return to YHWH. His challenge by starting the drought (17:1) was against

7 Lawrie, "Telling Of(f) Prophets," 172. 115

Baalism, and he needed to complete and win this challenge so that Baal would gain nothing from the arrival of rain. Elijah wanted all credit to go to YHWH and so he stands up for him by taking further action than specifically requested.

This comparison between the compassion of YHWH and the greater expectations of Elijah is not to say that YHWH was not interested in defeating Baalism or that Elijah was not compassionate, because YHWH does provide the conclusive action in the contest (v. 38) and Elijah does go to meet Ahab (as he needed to do for rain; w. 1-2). Rather, their combined actions lead both to victory over Baalism and compassion regarding the drought. This is a feature of their pairing as a team. YHWH desired to end the drought and Elijah's representative actions sought that end through the defeat of Baalism.

5.4 YHWH's Authority and Elijah's Authority

Given that Elijah, in the narrative, takes the rain plot in a new direction, unauthorized by YHWH, perhaps Elijah has an underlying selfish concern in the contest.

An initial reading of the narrative would suggest this is not so. The reader believes that

Elijah is YHWH's prophet and enters the contest narrative bearing the authority of

YHWH (see 17:24). In the same way that Baal's failure in the contest is foreshadowed by the futility of the prophets of Baal, so YHWH's authority is foreshadowed—and reflected—through Elijah's own projection of confidence and authority. The reader senses that they are partners, that the presence of Elijah implies the proximity of 116

Q YHWH. Therefore, while Baal and his prophets will win or lose the contest together, so will YHWH and Elijah.

Yet, beyond this initial reading, Elijah is not just reflecting YHWH's power, but he has perceivably taken action beyond the exact commands of YHWH by hosting the contest in the first place. Elijah stands to gain something from this contest and this is revealed briefly in his prayer: "Today, let it be known that... I am your servant" (v.

36). DeVries explains, "This is not so much a story about a contest between Yahweh and Baal as a story demonstrating that Elijah is Yahweh's true, authorized prophet."9

Earlier in the narrative the people responded to Elijah's accusation (against their

"limping") with silence (v. 21). Elijah called them to take a stand on which god they will serve, but they were unwilling to respond to Elijah, and they were certainly unwilling to turn to YHWH which was the implied direction Elijah wanted them to take.

Their refusal to respond was indicative that they were skeptical of Elijah's authority, thus Elijah's concern that the people recognize him as YHWH's servant later in the narrative is legitimate and unsurprising. As a result, two layers of authority are present in the narrative and both are tested by the progression of the contest. YHWH's authority as God is most explicitly tested and found to be true—and it is easy for the reader to believe that this is the point of the story—but more implicit in the contest is Elijah's authority. He is clearly dominant, but it is not until he is proven to be the servant of

8 On the simultaneous presence and absence of Elijah and YHWH see Glover, "Elijah Versus the Narrative of Elijah," 450-51.

9 DeVries, 1 Kings, 226. Thomas W. Overholt further explains that such stories "serve to legitimate and enhance the authority of the persons about whom they are told. The story of Elijah's contest with the Baal prophets on Mount Carmel makes this explicit [in Elijah's prayer]" (Thomas W. Overholt, Cultural Anthropology and the Old Testament, GBS [Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1996], 40). 117

YHWH that his dominance is demonstrated as a product of his authority as YHWH's prophet. Part of the recognition that YHWH is God is that YHWH is truly represented by Elijah. This shows Elijah is not acting with selfish concern, but for YHWH's intents.

5.5 YHWH's Existence and Elijah's Life

There is more motivating Elijah to conduct the contest than simply recognition.

When Elijah poses the contest the people do not recognize YHWH or his prophet

(whose authority is from YHWH). The lack of recognition that precedes the conversion of the people at Mount Carmel is potentially fatal, not only to Elijah but also to YHWH.

YHWH's existence is at stake in the contest. The threat is evident before the contest even starts. When Elijah tells Ahab to gather the prophets to Mount Carmel he notes that it is the prophets of Baal and Asherah that are eating at Jezebel's table (v. 19).10

YHWH is apparently not represented in the prophets sponsored by the monarchy. In addition to Obadiah's previous mention of the slaughter of YHWH's prophets (v. 13), this shows YHWH's representation in Israel is severely limited in comparison to his rival. The dwindling number of his prophets is putting his existence as God in Israel on the line. Furthermore, YHWH's people respond skeptically to Elijah's demand to choose a god before the actual contest (v. 21). They express doubt, a further challenge to YHWH's place in Israel.11 The contest, then, is a risky move on Elijah's part because it will definitively prove or disprove YHWH's existence. Just as Baal's existence was

10 Hauser, "Yahweh Versus Death," 35.

11 See ibid., 38. 118 eliminated during the contest because of his silence, YHWH's existence is contingent on his ability to respond with fire.

Elijah also determines that the contest is necessary because his life, like that of the God he serves, is at risk. He must prove that he worships the right God because he is in hostile territory. The reader enters the story knowing that YHWH's prophets are being killed (v. 13) and that Ahab has been specifically looking for Elijah (v. 10).

Elijah's life is on the line even before the contest starts, and this threat continues throughout the contest narrative: Ahab's first comments to Elijah are accusatory (v. 17), and Elijah opposes himself against hundreds of the prophets of Baal (v. 22). Even more so, the slaughter of the prophets of Baal at the end of the contest narrative (v. 40) is a reminder to the reader of the threat death posed to Elijah before YHWH gave his response (v. 38). The threat of death appears to be a clear motivator for Elijah's action.

The contest is an opportunity to reduce the peril of his situation because Elijah needs others to know that he represents the real God.

In the end, Elijah's call for fire and YHWH's response saves Elijah from the threat of death at the same time that it proves YHWH's own existence. Elijah is the representative hero for both himself and YHWH. He acts in concern for his own life, which is motivation enough to run the contest, but YHWH is also in jeopardy alongside

Elijah. They are paired in their struggle against death/non-existence and Elijah stands on behalf of them both before Ahab, the people, and the prophets of Baal. 119

5.6 A Superimposition of YHWH and Elijah

Walsh notes that the contest narrative weaves together different strands to create the larger plot. But there is more happening in the narrative then the weaving of strands. The interests and concerns of YHWH and Elijah are superimposed upon one another. The similarities of each mingle together to exemplify their features with the consequence of making the two characters seem as one. Every move Elijah makes appears to be on behalf of YHWH with the result that Elijah's actions, words, and concerns for himself are hidden from the casual reader. At the same time YHWH is absent because it is through Elijah that his concerns are met.

This chapter has reviewed some of the clear parallels that can be identified between Elijah and YHWH. The benefit of examining the similarities of these two characters is to demonstrate the full degree to which Elijah represents YHWH. First, comparing them to their opponents (Baal and the prophets of Baal) shows that Elijah and YHWH work as a team and stand in stark contrast to their weak opponents. Second,

YHWH's desire for rain is drawn closer to fulfillment when Elijah stands before the people to demonstrate that YHWH sends the rain. Third, YHWH shows compassion toward the people's need of rain while Elijah shows interest toward the people's need of conversion. Fourth, Elijah represents YHWH with authority. Lastly, Elijah shares in

YHWH's struggle against death. In all these cases it is demonstrated that Elijah acts on behalf of YHWH by running the contest: he opposes Baalism directly, he shows that

YHWH is the sender of rain, he carries the authority of YHWH, and he challenges the threat doubt poses to YHWH.

12 Walsh, 1 Kings, 254. 120

The two characters are a team. They share many interests and can sympathize with each other's goals, but they also each contribute to the team in their own way.

YHWH's concern is with the big picture; he wants rain. But Elijah is working with the details of accomplishing that rain. In working out those details, he hopes to achieve several things: he wants the people to know that it is YHWH who provides for them; he wants Ahab to know that he is not a threat or a troubler to Israel, but an aid to the life- sustaining God; he also, as anyone would, wants to ensure the well-being of both of them. Because each outcome enhances YHWH's role, he is not usurping YHWH's power and authority when he initiates the contest even though YHWH has not requested it.

In the narrative YHWH still has his power and authority, and the contest demonstrates this. But Elijah demonstrates his own power and authority as the representative of YHWH. Furthermore, the reader already knows the authority that

YHWH holds, but the reader needs to see in the narrative the authority and control that belongs to Elijah, the representative of YHWH. The narrative does not disappoint the reader, because not only does Elijah hold authority from beginning to end, but his power appears to go beyond human expectations (see ch. 3). The reader can honestly conclude that Elijah is the servant of the real God and champion (alongside YHWH) of the contest. More, Elijah proves to be the hero of the people, the mediator in whom they can trust. This is something the larger context of the contest narrative supports and anticipates, and it is toward this larger context that this project will next turn. CHAPTER 6: ELIJAH IN THE LARGER CONTEXT

Elijah's prophetic role as YHWH's representative is evident long before the contest narrative. He holds this authority from the very first moment he appears in the narrative and it continues to exist after the contest has ended. Along with Elijah's authority comes his extraordinary power which quickly becomes a common part of

Elijah's character. Reviewing Elijah as a character within the narratives of chs. 17-19 will elaborate Elijah's role as YHWH's representative, and will provide support for the conclusions reached regarding Elijah's role in the contest narrative. Therefore the conclusion of the contest narrative study is shown not to be anomalous, but a piece of its context. Many examples exist that demonstrate the power Elijah wields on behalf of

YHWH, but only a few are discussed here.

6.1 Elijah's First Appearance (17:1)

Elijah appears in the narrative in 17:1 with nearly no introduction. He is described only briefly as "the Tishbite of the settlers of Gilead,"1 but beyond this little is known about him. His arrival is mysterious. No background is provided for him; nothing is said about his family and nothing is said about his career. The narrator's silence is significant. Normally the reader would expect at least a reference to a divine calling or a title to identify him as someone of importance. But nothing of this sort is included; there is no calling, no word from YHWH, no use of the title "prophet" (as in

1 The words "the Tishbite of the settlers" Qiattisbi mittosabe) are in question. Is hattisbi a reference to Elijah's local origin or is it a description of Elijah instead (i.e., his family or social background; see Walsh, 1 Kings, 225-26)? Also mittosabe in LXX (ho ek thesbdn) reads instead as "of Tishbe."

121 . 122

18:36), and no use of the phrase "man of God" (as in 17:18, 24). Anything to justify him as an authoritative figure is absent, but even so, his words are loaded with both the manner and the claim of authority. He tells Ahab, "As YHWH the God of Israel lives before whom I stand, there will not be dew or rain these years except by my word." It is a strong and surprising statement for a character with no proven authority, and Ahab must be just as surprised by it as the reader.3 He starts by claiming the authority of

YHWH, something the narrator has not made an effort to back up. And then, in confidence, he proclaims the beginning of a drought that will last "these years," and withholds for himself the power to return the rain. This is clearly a bold statement by

Elijah. His authority is unproven and it will take time—until the contest in ch. 18 in the third year (18:1)—to substantiate his authority and power before Ahab and all Israel.

His statement, however, is more than simply a claim to authority but is also a confrontation. It is immediately clear that he is confronting Ahab—and this appears risky enough—but a closer look reveals that Elijah is confronting a number of other characters too. One of these is Baal. Baal is the storm deity, the provider of rain, and this deity has now been established in Israel by Ahab (16:32-33). Elijah's claim to have stopped the rain and to hold the key to its return is a direct statement of power over

Baal. Elijah also confronts Jezebel who is at fault for introducing Baalism to Ahab through marriage (16:31). More importantly, though, is her name, 'izebel, which resembles closely a lengthened form of a title for Baal, zbl. Jezebel is the one who worships Baal and the narrator is using her as a symbol of Baalism's presence in Israel.

2 Kissling, Reliable Characters, 114.

3 SeeCogan,;««gs)431. 123

Elijah's sudden entrance into the story and the meaning of his name, "YHWH is my

God," is meant to contrast to Jezebel.4 Thus his presence itself, let alone his direct opposition toward Baal, is a direct challenge to Jezebel. He further confronts, though indirectly, the prophets of Baal. He, the prophet of YHWH (presumably at this point), is able to stop and start the rain. Now the prophets of Baal who worship the alleged provider of rain must either match Elijah's power or fail.5 This confrontation, along with the confrontation of Ahab and Baal, will reach its climax at the contest in a few years time. The confrontation with Jezebel is less obvious in most of the narrative, but is more protracted and will extend well beyond the contest.

The narrator includes no response from any of the characters to Elijah's sudden introduction. It is a one-verse scene with Elijah as the speaker and Ahab as the listener.

The absence of a response makes Elijah appear untouchable. The reader perceives a character of mystical proportions. Though the narrator describes Elijah's origins as "the

Tishbite of the settlers of Gilead," his entrance onto the stage is near to supernatural. He has little background yet he jumps into the scene with full authority and the ability to control the weather. He claims his authority is from YHWH and the reader is prepared to believe him.

6.2 Elijah and the Reviving of the Widow's Son (17:17-24)

The close connection between YHWH and Elijah's authority, which the reader assumed at first, is evidenced in a variety of ways in the verses that follow. At first

4 Trible, "Exegesis for Storytellers," 4-5.

5 Simon, Reading Prophetic Narratives, 161. 124

YHWH provides Elijah with sustenance during the early stages of the drought through ravens (17:4, 6), and later through the widow of Zarephath and the miraculous multiplication of her meal and oil (17:14-16). But it is when the widow's son dies

(17:17) that Elijah's prophetic status is tested. There is more than one plot line evident in this short story. One is clear: the death of the widow's son and the attempt to bring him back to life. Another is more subtle, but even more important within the larger context. This one is the preservation of Elijah's authority. Elijah's power as YHWH's representative is first tested when one of the lives he is preserving passes away. The challenge grows when the widow says, "What do I have to do with you, man of God.

You came to me to remind me of my sin and to kill my son" (17:18). At this point

Elijah's authority is in question. Despite the fact that the widow's and her son's lives have been sustained until now through the presence of Elijah (17:8-16), the widow now questions the real reason for his presence.6 For a time he saved both their lives, but now the boy is dead. Elijah's task is to convince the widow of his legitimate authority by raising her son.

Elijah takes the boy into the upper room and lays the boy on his own bed

(17:19). The spatial movement is significant because he has taken the boy closer to himself. Walsh explains, "The narrator contrasts 'the house,' that is, the family's ordinary space, with 'the upper chamber,' that is, a place of power where the prophet resides and encounters God."7 Furthermore, Elijah takes him from his mother's

"bosom" (17:19) and he lays his own body on top of the boy (17:21); a symbolic act of

6 The widow's doubt of Elijah's authority resembles the doubt of the people early in the contest narrative (see ibid., 166). This narrative, as the contest narrative does, is meant to show the authority and power of Elijah through his success in the face of the test.

7 Walsh, 1 Kings, 231. 125 transferring the prophet's life into the boy to raise him.8 Thus in two ways Elijah has moved the boy into proximity with his prophetic power. Any life that returns to the boy definitely results from the prophet himself. Then twice Elijah prays to YHWH regarding the death of the boy. In the first prayer Elijah questions YHWH's actions in allowing the boy to die (17:20), and in the second he requests that YHWH allow life to return to the boy (17:21). The action Elijah takes and the effort he puts into his prayers are important parts of the narrative. The reader must understand that Elijah is an essential part of the boy's recovery. The extra effort by Elijah demonstrates his power.

Even though it is to YHWH that he prays and from YHWH that he expects a response, it is Elijah himself who acts on behalf of YHWH to achieve the return of life. The narrator's description of YHWH's response reinforces the emphasis on the power of

Elijah: "And YHWH listened to the voice of Elijah, and the life of the boy returned to his body and he lived" (17:22). Elijah's voice features in the description, but more importantly YHWH "listened" to him. He appears as authoritative and he shows that he has the support of YHWH.

After the revival of the boy the narrator does not immediately resolve the plot.

Elijah's return of the boy to his mother (17:23) is described in detail, allowing the narrative to linger before the real climax and resolution. What remains to be seen is if the mother recognizes the authority in Elijah, something she previously doubted. Her response is clear: "Now I know that you are a man of God and that the word of YHWH in your mouth is truth" (17:24). With this the narrative comes to an end. The widow's confidence in Elijah's authority is renewed, and she recognizes that he has received that

Ibid., 232. 126 authority from YHWH. This statement by the widow functions as an inclusio with

Elijah's original claim of authority in 17:1.9 When Elijah first appeared in the narrative he claimed the authority of YHWH, but this was not immediately legitimated. Since then, through YHWH's support of him by providing sustenance and through Elijah's care for the widow and her son, Elijah has legitimated his claim for authority. The widow's statement at the end serves as a final confirmation.

6.3 Elijah as a Solution for Ahab's Drought

It has already been demonstrated that Elijah claimed the power to control the rain (17:1), and it has further been demonstrated that Elijah has the authority to do so

(17:24). The association of water with Elijah is strong in the narrative. Not only can he stop the rain so effectively that YHWH has to go through him to send rain again (18:1), but wherever he goes there is provision despite the drought in the land. In contrast Ahab is left searching for water from which feed can grow for his animals (18:5).

It is because of the drought that Ahab sets out on two searches. One search is for

Elijah and is explained briefly by Obadiah: "As YHWH your God lives, there is no nation or kingdom to which my lord did not send to search for you; and when they said,

'he is not here,' he made the kingdom or nation swear that they could not find you"

(18:10). Ahab's search is diligent and thorough, but Elijah is not found. The numinous quality of Elijah appears to the reader to be the reason for Elijah's successful disappearance. He continues to be untouchable. In fact, Obadiah fears this aspect of

Elijah because he suspects Elijah may disappear again when he leaves to contact Ahab,

9 Judith A. Todd, "The Pre-Deuteronomistic Elijah Cycle," in Elijah andElisha in Socioliterary Perspective, ed. Robert B. Coote, SBLSemSt (Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1992), 12. 127 stating specifically that "the spirit of YHWH will carry you" into hiding again (18:12).

The reason Ahab is searching for Elijah cannot be determined for certain but it is likely related to Jezebel's killing of the prophets of YHWH (18:4,13).10 Ahab's personal involvement in the case of Elijah likely ties it more specifically with Elijah's role in stopping the rain. Ahab later calls Elijah the "troubler of Israel" (18:17) and he probably has already assumed this about Elijah when he is first searching for him.

Ahab's plan is, in all probability, to find the troubler, get rid of him, and restore the land, but Ahab cannot find him.

Ahab's second search has the appearance of desperation, a search that follows from the failure of his first search. In this search he seeks to meet the most primitive needs of his animals. He enlists Obadiah's help in going "to all the springs of water and to all the valleys" in the hope of finding "grass" (18:5).H Obadiah and Ahab part ways

(18:6) and soon Elijah meets Obadiah (18:7). Elijah tells Obadiah to tell Ahab of his arrival (18:8), which Obadiah does hesitantly, and then Ahab goes to meet Elijah

(18:16). Similar to Ahab's search for Elijah the troubler, which was unsuccessful,

Ahab's second search does not yield what he set out to find (or at least not directly). In

Ahab's first search for the problem (Elijah) he finds nothing, but in his second search for the solution (water) he finds Elijah. The implications of these two searches are subtle but clear. Ahab's perception of Elijah as the troubler is mistaken—he cannot find such a form of Elijah—but when Ahab finds Elijah during his search for water it reveals that

10 See also Walsh, 1 Kings, 240.

11 Interestingly, when Ahab cannot findfoo d or water for his animals, the narrator has already noted that Obadiah has successfully supplied 100 prophets of YHWH with bread and water (18:4; ibid., 239). In this way Elijah is not the only prophet of YHWH with a miraculous connection to water. It appears that YHWH's provision extends to all his followers. Nonetheless, Elijah still remains the face of the drought as a challenge against Baalism. 128

Elijah is actually the solution to the drought. Ahab does not recognize immediately

Elijah's ties to the solution, but nonetheless, the narrator implicitly reveals that Elijah holds the key to the end of the drought. The two searches can be diagrammed in this way:

Ahab's search: the drought for Elijah (the problem^ yields ^nothing thus , /x continue.- s

for water (the solution) yields > Elijah thus } rain comes (18:45)

This reveals that Ahab's failure or success in finding Elijah is related to whether or not he has perceived Elijah correctly, or rather, as a form of Elijah that exists. A mistaken perception of Elijah does not bring him any results, and it certainly does not end the drought. However, his search for a solution, though he does not associate it with Elijah, brings him results and eventually rain.12 The subplot in the contest narrative demonstrates that YHWH was sender of rain, and therefore when Ahab's two searches identify Elijah as the solution to the drought the representative role Elijah plays becomes much clearer. The prophet of YHWH stands before Ahab to announce the drought

(17:1) and when Ahab seeks water he again comes into contact with the prophet of

YHWH (18:16). Thus Elijah's power over the rain results from the authority he receives from YHWH.

Elijah's return of the rain is his first priority after the contest has ended. Elijah tells Ahab that he can hear "the sound of heavy rain" (18:41) despite the fact that the sky

12 Konkel, on the other hand, suggests that "both the king's searches are pointless; Elijah appears as he wills, and he alone can make possible the life-saving provision of water" (Konkel, 1 &2 Kings, 299). 129 is clear (see 18:43). The scene that follows is filled with motion, much of it attributed to

Elijah. He climbs to the top of Mount Carmel and bows to the ground (18:42), tells his servant to look toward the sea once and then seven more times (18:43), sends the servant with a message to Ahab (18:44), and then, once the rain comes, runs ahead of Ahab's chariot all the way to Jezreel (18:46). Much of this motion serves to associate the coming of rain with the work of Elijah. It appears as if he has put much effort into achieving that result, and the reader easily assumes that Elijah deserves the credit. The narrator even refrains from using YHWH's name until after the rain has arrived (see

18:46). So even though it is clear that Elijah's authority comes from YHWH, it is easier to associate the return of the rain with Elijah. The scene is also filled with supernatural portraits of Elijah. Elijah hears rain before it comes, tells his servant the precise number of times he will need to look toward the sea before he will see a cloud in the sky, predicts the rain, and runs ahead of Ahab's chariot; but most importantly, his actions have the appearance of drawing rain out of the sky unnaturally fast.13 Furthermore, even though it is already evening (see 18:36), Elijah manages to scale the mountain (18:42), call rain out of a cloudless sky, and return to Jezreel on foot, presumably with what remains of the evening. However, it has already been demonstrated that time poses no limitations on Elijah (see ch. 3).

Nonetheless, despite a noteworthy image of Elijah, the reader is still aware of the relationship Elijah has with YHWH (further hinted at when Elijah "bows to the earth"

[18:42]). Even if the narrator has attributed the return of the rain to Elijah's efforts, the reader knows that Elijah is empowered by his God and his actions are representative for

13 On the speed of the arrival of rain, see Walsh, 1 Kings, 257. 130

YHWH. The widow's connection of Elijah with "the word of YHWH" (17:24) and the contest narrative (see esp. 18:36) have already demonstrated this to the reader. Thus when Elijah returns the rain without the narrator's mention of YHWH, it is still clear that Elijah is YHWH's representative.

6.4 Elijah's Resemblance to Moses

Still, there is a far subtler way in which the power and prophetic authority of

Elijah is revealed. Throughout his story the narrator is attentive to creating resemblances between Elijah and the historic prophet Moses. Without going as far as explicitly saying so, the narrator shows Elijah to be in the likeness of a hero in Israelite history, the model prophet. Elijah benefits from the narrator's effort to emphasize the likenesses between these two prophets—Elijah becomes a hero of historic proportions.

His resemblances to Moses occur throughout his story and it takes an insightful reader to notice many of them. The drought Elijah inflicts on Israel resembles the ten plagues

Moses inflicted on Egypt (Exod 7:14-12:30).14 Elijah receives miraculous provision during the drought as Moses and the Israelites were fed while they wandered the wilderness. Both Elijah and Moses intercede for the people who have turned away from

YHWH (Exod 32:31-32; 1 Kgs 18:36-37). These are just a few examples of the similarities between the two prophets.

The most notable resemblance between the two prophets comes through Elijah's journey to Mount Horeb.15 Much of what happens to Elijah on Mount Horeb and much

14 See Simon, Reading Prophetic Narratives, 161.

15 Walsh finds that Elijah's Mount Horeb experience contrasts Moses' experiences. Elijah is stubborn in contrast to Moses and thus this allusive story "is to depict Elijah as almost the equal of Moses, 131 of what he does match events in Moses' life. Elijah expresses a desire to die (1 Kgs

19:4) which resembles a similar desire in Moses who was overwhelmed with the needs of the people (Num 11:14-15). On Mount Horeb/Sinai they both have a theophany.

YHWH puts Moses in the cleft of a rock when he passes by (Exod 33:32) while Elijah hides in a cave (1 Kgs 19:9). YHWH covers Moses with his hand to protect him (Exod

33:32) while Elijah protects himself with his cloak (1 Kgs 19:13). Furthermore, Elijah experiences the passing of wind, an earthquake, and fire (1 Kgs 19:11-12) and Moses experienced similar events in the form of theophany throughout his career (e.g, Exod

3:1 -4:17; 20:18-19). The similarities Elij ah has to Moses are positive for him. They make him appear as the new hero in Israel, a resemblance of the historic hero Moses.

The resemblance especially recalls the words of Moses, "YHWH your God will appoint a prophet like me from among your brothers; you shall listen to him" (Deut 18:15; see also w. 16-20). Elijah appears to be this prophet like Moses. The similarities also legitimate him as the present prophet and representative of YHWH. Moses is "the preeminent prophet whom all other prophets would resemble as they serve as the indispensible means of Yahweh conveying his voice to his people."16 The narrator places Elijah in this position; in Moses' role as YHWH's representative before the people.

but as ultimately failing to meet the standards Moses set" (Walsh, / Kings, 288). However, this conclusion may be a bit strong. The resemblance between Elijah and Moses is seen more positively by Conn, "Literary Logic," 342, and Robert B. Coote, "Yahweh Recalls Elijah," in Traditions in Transformation: Turning Points in Biblical Faith, ed. Baruch Halpern and Jon D. Levenson (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1981), 117-18.

Coote, "Yahweh Recalls Elijah," 118. 132

6.5 Conclusion

In conclusion, the stories of Elijah that make up the context of the contest narrative support an image of Elijah as YHWH's representative. Elijah continues to be larger-than-life in many ways: he overcomes the challenge posed by the passing of time, he receives sustenance in the midst of the drought, he speaks the word of YHWH, he gives life to the dead, and he controls the rain. Normally one sees these abilities as possessed by YHWH, but now the reader sees them passed down to Elijah. Elijah has such power in these stories that YHWH is able to step back. Elijah can deal with the rain issues, the passing of the boy, and the confrontation with his opponents. YHWH demonstrates his support for Elijah by feeding him and responding to his calls. Lastly, the narrator develops an image of Elijah as the ideal prophet and new hero by comparing him to Moses.

The contest narrative is a reflection of what the surrounding context reveals about Elijah. As when Elijah first appeared before Ahab (17:1), Elijah continues to display authority in his demeanor in the contest. He speaks boldly, confidently, and with power, evidenced in the fact that the other characters always respond to Elijah.

YHWH himself supports Elijah's authority by sending fire on the altar (18:38). This replicates the story of Elijah raising the widow's son. There Elijah also prayed to

YHWH for a miracle (17:20-21) and he received YHWH's support (17:22). In the contest YHWH is shown to be almost entirely absent because Elijah is the active character working within YHWH's greater aim. Elijah is entrusted with the responsibility of facing Ahab, combating Baalism, and seeking conversion for the people, all on behalf of YHWH. The larger context reveals the same roles. Elijah 133 continues to be the active character who faces Ahab (17:1), revives the widow's son

(17:20-22), and returns the rain (18:35). YHWH's presence remains limited, entering the narrative to support the work of his prophet. Thus the conclusion that Elijah is

YHWH's representative in the contest narrative is supported by the same image of him in the context of chs. 17-19. CONCLUSION

A cursory reading of the Mount Carmel narrative reveals that Elijah is portrayed by the narrator as a dominant character. One can see this in the way he interacts with the other characters; always acting, commanding, or prompting the others to respond. A cursory reading will also reveal that the narrative is about demonstrating the power of

YHWH. Having two characters who show power in the narrative does not immediately pose a problem, but when one realizes that YHWH is absent from the narrative except for the single act of sending fire from heaven, and that YHWH's expression of power comes as a response to Elijah, then one has to question if YHWH's power is simply a subordinated response to Elijah. This is the issue that this thesis addressed. It analyzed the characters and roles of Elijah and YHWH to develop a picture of how the two powerful figures are harmonized in the narrative. It demonstrated that Elijah is YHWH's representative, empowered by YHWH himself so that Elijah's presence allows for

YHWH's absence.

7.1 A Review of the Method

This thesis worked toward its conclusion through the use of narrative criticism.

Ch. 1 explored and defined this method through reviewing its formation and its present setting within literary criticism. It further defined narrative criticism as an objective approach. That is, an approach that is centered on the final form of the text with no direct concern for details external to the text (such as historical details, theology, author, etc.). Narrative criticism instead analyzes the literary devices in use by the implied

134 135 author to communicate a story to the implied reader. Because this particular study focused on the characters of YHWH and Elijah, the devices of primary interest were plot, narrator, and time and space, each of which can reveal more information about characters.

Ch. 2 studied the recent research completed on the Elijah narratives. Much of the research concerned itself with the formation of the Elijah narratives from their origin as oral stories, to their inclusion into a larger group of prophetic narratives, and eventually to their use by Dtr in DH. A recent trend in research showed an interest in reading the narratives of DH as a coherent story brought to completion by Dtr. It is within this approach that narrative criticism belongs.

7.2 A Review of the Argument

Ch. 3 initiated the narrative reading of 1 Kgs 18:16-40 with a study of the character of Elijah. It reviewed Elijah as he interacts with each of the other characters present in the narrative, noting in particular the control he demonstrates at each stage.

With Ahab, Elijah is first challenged by an accusation, but Elijah promptly turns the accusation around and moves himself into the dominant position. Elijah remains in the dominant position throughout the narrative and this is indicated immediately by Ahab's positive response to Elijah's command to gather the prophets of Baal (though not the prophets of Asherah) and the people to Mount Carmel. Elijah's dialogue with the people at first includes a silent response from the people. But Elijah remains in control and works adeptly to receive the response he initially desired—their recognition that

YHWH is God. When Elijah commands the prophets of Baal it sets him in stark 136 contrast to them. They appear weak because they are unable to get any response from

Baal like Elijah does from YHWH. Lastly, Elijah's prayer to YHWH achieves a dramatic response. This chapter showed that Elijah was a powerful character in the narrative; powerful enough to stand in as the representative of YHWH.

Ch. 4 addressed a question that arises from ch. 3: where is YHWH? The question arises because the contest is about YHWH and his power, yet YHWH is not the one present in the narrative or actively controlling events. This study revealed that

YHWH is an absent character which allows the other characters in the narrative to develop and to hold perceptions of him that they could not otherwise hold if he were present. It further noted that YHWH remains absent from the spatial movement in the narrative which instead emphasizes the conversion of the people.

Subsequently, ch. 5 asked: why is YHWH absent? It sought an answer to this question through comparing YHWH with Elijah on a variety of levels: their opponents, goals, motivations, authority, and state of peril. The juxtaposition indicated that everything Elijah accomplishes is according to the interests of YHWH. That is, Elijah is functioning as YHWH's representative and he is empowered by YHWH to take action and initiative. Ch. 5 demonstrated that YHWH and Elijah work as a team; Elijah steps in and takes action toward the broader goals set by YHWH.

Ch. 6 tested this conclusion in the larger context of 1 Kgs 17-19. It showed that

Elijah's first appearance in 17:1 immediately demonstrated Elijah's power and authority. Following that, a study of Elijah's act of raising the widow's son back to life

(17:20-22) showed that the widow recognizes that Elijah represents YHWH (17:24).

Next, the rain theme in chs. 17-18 demonstrates that Elijah has the power over the 137 weather, an ability entrusted to him by YHWH. Lastly, it was noted that the narrator consistently makes allusions to Moses, the superlative prophet from Israelite history, while telling the stories of Elijah. All these factors showed that Elijah functions as the representative of YHWH in the larger context of chs. 17-19 as well, indicating that the contest narrative was not an anomaly.

7.3 Conclusion

It is clear that Elijah is a powerful character in the story of the contest on Mount

Carmel. He is a dominant personality that controls the events of the contest and compels the other characters to respond to him. Beyond this, his dominance reaches the level of miracle. He has defeated the passing of time so that he alone can do in no time what the prophets of Baal could not do with an entire day. He passes through space in a mystical fashion; moving from one place to another without any notice of movement, or covering great distances with little time or effort. He also reaches into the divine world to call upon YHWH for fire even when his opponents could not do likewise. This power is an authority he has received from YHWH as the prophetic representative.

With it he acts on behalf of YHWH, and he can use it to do more than YHWH specifically commands him to do. Elijah shows initiative according to the circumstances and takes action as he judges to be necessary. For all his actions he receives the support of YHWH.

One of the questions of this thesis regards a potential conflict between the authority demonstrated by Elijah and the divine authority of YHWH that Elijah proclaims in the contest. Elijah demonstrates that YHWH is God through a 138 demonstration of YHWH's power, but all the while Elijah acts in dominance over all the other characters, even being the one to call on YHWH. This thesis, having compared the characters of Elijah and YHWH has shown that no conflict exists between the power demonstrations of each. Elijah is YHWH's prophetic representative and thus they seek after the same goals. All Elijah does is on behalf of YHWH. In the larger context of 1

Kings 17-19 this is clearly the case. Elijah is a powerful figure who receives divine support for the actions he takes. Even other characters recognize that YHWH is behind

Elijah's work. YHWH proves to be significantly more absent from the narrative than does Elijah, but this is because Elijah stands in for him. Elijah is YHWH's face before

Ahab, the people of Israel, the prophets of Baal, and the other characters he encounters.

Furthermore, Elijah is the opponent of Baalism and the initiator of the drought. As

YHWH's representative Elijah combats the mistaken association of rain with Baal.

In conclusion, Elijah is rightfully a biblical hero. He bears the authority endowed upon him from YHWH, he seeks after YHWH's goals, and he battles for the hearts of the people. For both the reader and the characters of the narrative who encounter Elijah, Elijah is the character in whom one trusts and with whom one can empathize.1 YHWH, on the other hand, is theorized about and explained but rarely experienced. Thus it is Elijah who makes the story vivid; a benefit for YHWH, the characters, and especially the reader.

1 See Simon, Reading Prophetic Narrative, 225-26. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abrams, M. H. The Mirror and the Lamp: Romantic Theory and the Critical Tradition. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1958.

Ackroyd, Peter R. "The Historical Literature." In The Hebrew Bible and Its Modern Contributors, edited by Douglas A. Knight and Gene M. Tucker, 297-323. Society of Biblical Literature: The Bible and Its Modern Interpreters. Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1985.

Alter, Robert. The Art of Biblical Narrative. New York: Basic Books, 1981.

Amit, Yairah. "Narrative Art of Israel's Historians." Pages 708-15 in Dictionary of the Old Testament: Historical Books, edited by Bill T. Arnold and H. G. M. Williamson. Downers Grove, IL: Inter Varsity Press, 2005.

. Reading Biblical Narratives: Literary Criticism and the Hebrew Bible. Translated by Yael Lotan. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2001.

Angel, Hayyim. "Hopping Between Two Opinions: Understanding the Biblical Portrait of Ahab." Jewish Biblical Quarterly 35 (2007): 3-10.

Ap-Thomas, D. R. "Elijah on Mount Carmel." Palestine Exploration Quarterly 92 (1960): 146-55.

Bar-Efrat, Shimon. Narrative Art in the Bible. Translated by Dorothea Shefer-Vanson. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 70. Sheffield: Almond Press, 1989.

Battenfield, James R. "YHWH's Refutation of the Baal Myth through the Actions of Elijah and Elisha." In Israel's Apostasy and Restoration: Essays in Honor of Roland K. Harrison, edited by Avraham Gileadi, 19-37. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1988.

Beck, John A. "Geography as Irony: The Narrative-Geographical Shaping of Elijah's Duel with the Prophets of Baal (1 Kings 18)." Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament 17 (2003): 291-302.

Benjamin, Don C. "The Elijah Stories." In The Land of Carmel, edited by Paul Chandler, 27-41. Rome: Institutum Carmelitanum, 1991.

Berlin, Adele. Poetics and Interpretation of Biblical Narrative. Sheffield: Almond Press, 1983. Reprint, Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1994.

139 140

Booth, Wayne C. The Rhetoric of Fiction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961.

Britt, Brian. "Prophetic Concealment in a Biblical Type Scene." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 64 (2002): 37-58.

Brodie, Thomas L. The Crucial Bridge: The Elijah-Elisha Narrative as an Interpretive Synthesis of Genesis-Kings and a Literary Model for the Gospels. Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 2000.

Bronner, Leah. The Stories of Elijah andElisha as Polemics Against Baal Worship. Pretoria Oriental Series 6. Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1968.

Brueggemann, Walter. 1 & 2 Kings. Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary. Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys Publishing, 2000.

. "Response to Rickie Moore's 'The prophet as mentor.'" Journal of Pentecostal Theology 15 (2007): 173-175.

Campbell, Antony F. Of Prophets and Kings: A Late Ninth-Century Document (1 Samuel 1-2 Kings 10). The Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series 17. Washington, DC: The Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1986.

Chatman, Seymour. Story and Discourse: Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1978.

Childs, Brevard S. "On Reading the Elijah Narratives." Interpretation 34 (1980): 128- 37.

Clines, David J. A. The Theme of the Pentateuch, 2nd ed. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 10. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997.

Cogan, Mordechai. 1 Kings: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Anchor Bible 10. New York: Doubleday, 2001.

Cohn, Robert L. "The Literary Logic of 1 Kings 17-19." Journal of Biblical Literature 101 (1982): 333-50.

Collins, Terence. The Mantle of Elijah: The Redaction of the Prophetical Books. Biblical Seminar 20. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993.

Coomber, Matthew J. M. "Exegetical Notes on 1 Kings 17:8-16: The Widow of Zarephath." The Expository Times 118 (2007): 389-90. 141

Coote, Robert B. "Yahweh Recalls Elijah." In Traditions in Transformation: Turning Points in Biblical Faith, edited by Baruch Halpern and Jon D. Levenson, 115-20. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1981.

Cross, Frank Moore. Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973.

de Vaux, Roland. The Bible and the Ancient Near East. Translated by Damian McHugh. Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Company, 1971.

DeVries, Simon J. 1 Kings. Word Biblical Commentary 12. Waco, TX: Word Books, 1985.

. Prophet Against Prophet: The Role of the Micaiah Narrative (1 Kings 22) in the Development of Early Prophetic Tradition. Grand Rapids, MI.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1978.

Dilday, Russell H. /, 2 Kings. Communicator's Commentary. Waco, TX: Word Books, 1987.

Dutcher-Walls, Patricia. Jezebel: Portraits of a Queen. Interfaces, edited by Barbara Green. Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 2004.

Epp-Tiessen, Dan. "1 Kings 19: The Renewal of Elijah." Direction 35 (2006): 33-43.

Fensham, F. C. "A Few Observations on the Polarisation Between Yahweh and Baal in I Kings 17'-19." Zeitschrif t fur die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 92 (1980): 227- 36.

Flannery, Frances. '"Go Back by the Way You Came': An Internal Textual Critique of Elijah's Violence in 1 Kings 18-19." In Writing and Reading War: Rhetoric, Gender, and Ethics in Biblical and Modern Contexts, edited by Brad E. Kelle and Frank Ritchel Ames, 161-73. Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series 42. Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008.

Fokkelman, J. P. Narrative Art in Genesis: Specimens of Stylistic and Structural Analysis. Studia Semitica Neerlandica 17. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Van Gorcum, 1975.

. Reading Biblical Narrative: An Introductory Guide. Translated by Ineke Smit. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1999.

Freedman, Amelia Devin. God as an Absent Character in Biblical Hebrew Narrative: A Literary-Theoretical Study. Studies in Biblical Literature 82. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 2005. 142

Fritz, Volkmar. 1 & 2 Kings. Translated by Anselm Hagedorn. A Continental Commentary. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2003.

Gabel, John B, and Charles B. Wheeler. The Bible as Literature: An Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986.

Glover, Neil. "Elijah Versus the Narrative of Elijah: The Contest Between the Prophet and the Word." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 30 (2006): 449-462.

Gray, John. I&II Kings: A Commentary. Old Testament Library. Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1963.

Gregory, Russell. "Irony and the Unmasking of Elijah." In From Carmel to Horeb: Elijah in Crisis, 91-169. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 85. Sheffield: Almond Press, 1990.

Greidanus, Sidney. The Modern Preacher and the Ancient Text: Interpreting and Preaching Biblical Literature. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1988.

Gunkel, Hermann. The Folktale in the Old Testament. Translated by Michael D. Rutter. Edited by David M. Gunn. Historic Texts and Interpreters in Biblical Scholarship. Sheffield: Almond Press, 1987. Originally published as Das Marchen im Alten Testament (Tubingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1917).

. The Legends of Genesis: The Biblical Saga and History. Translated by W. H. Carruth. New York: Schocken Books, 1964.

Gunn, David M. "Narrative Criticism." In To Each Its Own Meaning: An Introduction to Biblical Criticisms and Their Applications, edited by Steven L. McKenzie and Stephen R. Haynes, rev. and exp. ed., 201-29. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1999.

. "New Directions in the Study of Biblical Hebrew Narrative." In Reconsidering Israel andJudah: Recent Studies on the Deuteronomistic History, edited by Gary N. Knoppers and J. Gordon McConville, 566-77. Sources for Biblical and Theological Studies 8. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2000.

Hauser, Alan J. "Yahweh Versus Death—The Real Struggle in 1 Kings 17-19." In From Carmel to Horeb: Elijah in Crisis, 11-89. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 85. Sheffield: Almond Press, 1990.

Herrmann, Wolfgang. "Baal." Pages 132-39 in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, 2n ed. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1999. 143

Hobbs, T. R. 2 Kings. Word Biblical Commentary 13. Waco, TX: Word Books, 1985.

House, Paul R. 1, 2 Kings. New American Commentary 8. Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995.

Humphreys, W. Lee. The Character of God in the Book of Genesis: A Narrative Appraisal. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001.

Jacobson, Howard. "Elijah's Sleeping Baal." Biblica 79 (1998): 413.

Jobling, David. The Sense of Biblical Narrative: Structural Analyses in the Hebrew Bible I, 2nd ed. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 7. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1986.

Kissling, Paul J. Reliable Characters in the Primary History: Profiles of Moses, Joshua, Elijah andElisha. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 224. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996.

Knoppers, Gary N. "Is There a Future for the Deuteronomistic History?" In The Future of the Deuteronomistic History, edited by Thomas C. Romer, 119-34. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 147. Leuven, Belgium: Leuven University Press, 2000.

Konkel, August H. 1 & 2 Kings. NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2006.

Lasine, Stuart. "Matters of Life and Death: The Story of Elijah and the Widow's Son in Comparative Perspective." Biblical Interpretation 12 (2004): 117-144.

Lawrie, Douglas. "Telling Of(f) Prophets: Narrative Strategy in 1 Kings 18:1-19:18." Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 23 (1997): 163-80.

Long, Burke O. / Kings: With an Introduction to Historical Literature. Forms of the Old Testament Literature 9. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1984.

Longman, Tremper, III. "Literary Approaches to Old Testament Study." In The Face of Old Testament Studies: A Survey of Contemporary Approaches, edited by David W. Baker and Bill T. Arnold, 97-115. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1999.

McConville, J. Gordon. Grace in the End: A Study in Deuteronomic Theology. Studies in Old Testament Biblical Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1993.

McKenzie, Steven L. "The Books of Kings in the Deuteronomistic History." In The History of Israel's Traditions: The Heritage of Martin Noth, edited by Steven L. 144

McKenzie and M. Patrick Graham, 281-307. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 182. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994.

. "Deuteronomistic History." Pages 160-68 in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, vol. 2. New York: Doubleday, 1992.

. The Trouble with Kings: The Composition of the Book of Kings in the Deuteronomistic History. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 42. Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1991.

Mead, J. K. "Elijah." Pages 249-54 in Dictionary of the Old Testament: Historical Books, edited by Bill T. Arnold and H. G. M. Williamson. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005.

Meyer, F. B. Elijah, and the Secret of His Power. New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1890.

Miller, Cythia L. "Silence as a Response in Biblical Hebrew Narrative: Strategies of Speakers and Narrators." Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 32 (2006): 23-43.

Montgomery, James A. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Books of Kings. Edited by Henry Snyder Gehman. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1951.

Moore, Rickie D. "The prophet as mentor: a crucial facet of the biblical presentations of Moses, Elijah, and Isaiah." Journal of Pentecostal Theology 15 (2007): 155-172.

Mrozek, Andrzej. "The Motif of the Sleeping Divinity." Biblica 80 (1999): 415-19.

Muilenburg, James. "Form Criticism and Beyond." Journal of Biblical Literature 88 (1969): 1-18.

Nelson, Richard. First and Second Kings. Interpretation. Atlanta, GA: John Knox Press, 1987.

Noth, Martin. The Deuteronomistic History. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 15. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1981. Originally published as Uberlieferungsgeschichtliche Studien, 2nd ed. (Tubingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 1957).

Olley, John W. "YHWH and His Zealous Prophet: The Presentation of Elijah in 1 and 2 Kings." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 80 (1998): 25-51.

Overholt, Thomas W. Cultural Anthropology and the Old Testament. Guides to Biblical Scholarship. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1996. 145

Polzin, Robert. Moses and the Deuteronomist: A Literary Study of the Deuteronomic History; Part One, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges. New York: The Seabury Press, 1980.

. Samuel and the Deuteronomist: A Literary Study of the Deuteronomic History; Part Two, 1 Samuel. Indiana Studies in Biblical Literature. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1993.

Powell, Mark Allen. "Narrative Criticism." In Methods of Biblical Interpretation, 169- 72. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2004. Excerpted from Dictionary of Biblical Interpretation, edited by John H. Hayes. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1999.

. What is Narrative Criticism? Guides to Biblical Scholarship. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1990.

Provan, Iain W. / and 2 Kings. New International Bible Commentary: Old Testament Series. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1995.

Reiss, Moshe. "Elijah the Zealot: A Foil to Moses." Jewish Bible Quarterly 32 (2004): 174-180.

Rendsburg, Gary A. "The Mock of Baal in 1 Kings 18:27." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 50 (1988): 414-417.

Rice, Gene. Nations Under God: A Commentary on the Book of I Kings. International Theological Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1990.

Richter, S. L. "Deuteronomistic History." Pages 219-30 in Dictionary of the Old Testament: Historical Books, edited by Bill T. Arnold and H. G. M. Williamson. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsit y Press, 2005.

Rimmon-Kenan, Shlomith. Narrative Fiction: Contemporary Poetics. London: Methuen & Co., 1983.

Robinson, J. The First Book of Kings. Cambridge Bible Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972.

Rofe, Alexander. The Prophetical Stories: The Narratives about the Prophets in the Hebrew Bible; Their Literary Types and History. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1988.

Romer, Thomas C, ed. The Future of the Deuteronomistic History. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 147. Leuven, Belgium: Leuven University Press, 2000. 146

Rosel, Hartmut N. "Does a Comprehensive 'Leitmotiv' Exist in the Deuteronomistic History?" In The Future of the Deuteronomistic History, edited by Thomas C. Romer, 195-211. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 147. Leuven, Belgium: Leuven University Press, 2000.

Ryken, Leland, and Tremper Longman III, eds. A Complete Literary Guide to the Bible. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.

Simon, Uriel. Reading Prophetic Narratives. Translated by Lenn J. Schramm. Indiana Studies in Biblical Literature. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1997.

Sternberg, Meir. The Poetics of Biblical Narrative: Ideological Literature and the Drama of Reading. Indiana Studies in Biblical Literature. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1985.

Sweeney, Marvin A. I & II Kings: A Commentary. Old Testament Library. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2007.

Todd, Judith A. "The Pre-Deuteronomistic Elijah Cycle." In Elijah andElisha in Socioliterary Perspective, edited by Robert B. Coote, 1-35. Society of Biblical Literature Semeia Studies. Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1992.

Tonstad, Sigve. "The Limits of Power: Revisiting Elijah and Horeb." Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament 19 (2005): 253-266.

Trible, Phyllis. "Exegesis for Storytellers and Other Strangers." Journal of Biblical Literature 114 (1995): 3-19.

. Rhetorical Criticism: Context, Method, and the Book of Jonah. Guides to Biblical Scholarship. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1994.

Tromp, Nicholas J. "Water and Fire on Mount Carmel: A Conciliatory Suggestion." Biblica 56 (1975): 480-502.

Uffenheimer, Benjamin. Early Prophecy in Israel. Translated by David Louvish. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1999.

Van Seters, John. In Search of History: Historiography in the Ancient World and the Origins of Biblical History. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1983. von Rad, Gerhard. Studies in Deuteronomy. Translated by David Stalker. Studies in Biblical Theology 9. Chicago, IL: Henry Regnery Company, 1953. Originally published as Deuteronomium-Studien, rev. ed. Gottingen: Vandenboek and Ruprecht, 1948. 147

Walsh, Jerome T. 1 Kings. Berit Olam: Studies in Hebrew Narrative & Poetry. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1996.

. "Elijah." Pages 463-66 in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, vol. 2. New York: Doubleday, 1992.

. Style and Structure in Biblical Hebrew Narrative. Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 2001.

Wiseman, Donald J. 1 and 2 Kings: An Introduction and Commentary. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries, ed. D. J. Wiseman. London: Inter-Varsity Press, 1993.

White, Marsha. The Elijah Legends and Jehu's Coup. Brown Judaic Studies 311. Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1997.

Wolff, Hans Walter. "The Kerygma of the Deuteronomic Historical Work." Translated by Frederick C. Prussner. In The Vitality of Old Testament Traditions, edited by Walter Brueggemann and Hans Walter Wolff, 2nd ed., 83-100. Atlanta, GA: John Knox Press, 1982. Orignally published as "Das Kerygma des deuteronomistischen Geschichtswerk," in Zeitschrift fur die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 73 (1961): 171-86.

Wood, Leon J. Elijah, Prophet of God. Des Plaines, IL: Regular Baptist Press, 1968.

Woods, Fred E. Water and Storm Polemics Against Baalism in the Deuteronomic History. American University Studies, Series VII: Theology and Religion 150. New York: Peter Lang, 1994.

Wray Beal, Lissa M. The Deuteronomist 's Prophet: Narrative Control of Approval and Disapproval in the Story of Jehu (2 Kings 9 and 10). Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 478. New York: T & T Clark, 2007.

Wyatt, Nicholas. "Asherah." Pages 99-105 in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1999.