Esther 9-10 - The Day of Reckoning and Rejoicing

9:1-4 – The day arrives.  After all that had been done and the joy of chapter eight, the actual day for the struggle of the Jews had yet to be decided though things were increasingly in the favor of the Jews.  The Jews had been authorized to defend themselves against anyone taking aggression against them on the thirteenth of the twelfth month.  Not only could they take action against such persons, but they also had the support of the government officials and so “the tables were turned” (cf. Jer.30:16).  The rise of Mordecai lent tremendous support to the upsurge of Jewish support by the various government personnel including those who were earlier mentioned as caring for the monies that Haman would have contributed to the coffers of Persia (9:3-4; cf. 3:9). 

9:5-17 – The defeat of the Jewish enemies and the end of Haman.  Rather than this being a Jewish killing spree, it was an organized and authorized response to aggression against the Jews.  In fact, the author of Esther repeats three times that the Jews did not take any plunder as they had been authorized to do by the edict from Mordecai (9:10, 15, 16; cf. 8:11).  It is stated that the Jews “did what they pleased” which would be a reversal of what Xerxes had told Haman he could do to the people he plotted against (cf. 3:11).  What they “pleased” was not the same level of destruction that had been plotted against them though.  However, the sons of Haman were all put to death and thus their names were listed in order to signify the complete destruction of Haman’s family line.  As an aside, the names of his ten sons are listed in the Hebrew text with the name to one side and the definite direct object marker to the other creating a clearly distinct list-type following the pattern of the list of defeated kings in Joshua 12:9-24 and cities gifted by David after defeating his enemies at Ziklag in 1 Samuel 20:27-31.  There was a clear accounting to the king of all those killed in the citadel of Susa (9:11-12), Susa proper (9:15) and throughout the empire (9:16).  After reporting to the king the initial slaughter of the Jewish enemies in the citadel of Susa he asked what more could be done for Esther giving her a sort of carte blanche to do as she desired.  So Esther requested that the enemies in Susa proper be dealt with the next day.  Were they expected to try to continue to attack the Jews?  Why should she ask for another day of killing?  The text does not answer this.  The killing that lasted an extra day in the city of Susa became the reason that the celebration of Purim was observed on two different dates by Jews in the cities and those in the country (9:18-19).  Esther also asked that Haman’s ten sons that were killed be hung on gallows for a public display of their shame (cf. 1 Sam.31:1-13 – the public display of the bodies of King Saul and his sons by hanging).  The numbers reported killed (500; 300; 75,000) have been considered nothing more than items of farcical comedy by some (Berlin 81-82), but records of factual history by others (Jobes 199) despite the excessive numbers. 

9:18-32 – The institution of Purim.  The “day of feasting and joy” was not observed on the days of killing and battle, but on the day after when things were peaceful finally.  Also, the “celebration is…different from the feasts prescribed by the Torah.  Rather than being imposed on the people from above as God’s command met, Purim began as the spontaneous response of God’s people to his omnipotent faithfulness to the promises of the covenant” (Jobes 214).  The institution of this day (though celebrated on different days in different locations) became one of celebration for having gained “rest” from enemies (contrast how Haman plotted to take “rest” from Jews by their enemies – 3:8).  It was not a celebration of battle or destruction.  It was a celebration of joy having come from sorrow and rest from enemies and thus a day for blessing others including particularly the poor (9:19, 22).  Thus, Mordecai wrote and sent letters about these events to all of the Jews throughout the empire and described what should be done concerning this celebration that it should be carried out in perpetuity (9:27-28; cf. Exo.17:14).  The Jews received this gladly (9:23, 27).  As part of the closing remarks the story was written in summary fashion (9:24-25) as an “‘official version’ of the story…simplified and sanitized” to make the king seem to be the one responsible for saving the Jews from wicked Haman and thus leading to the reversal of events (Berlin 90).  This all was used for an etiological explanation for the name “Purim” as the casting of the pur (an Akkadian term that had the Hebrew plural affixed to it for unknown reasons in naming the festival) or lot which would otherwise apparently be lost to the readers of the book since it was some time after the initial events.  Esther also wrote a letter of commendation for this celebration.  Both of their letters were sent to all of the provinces of the empire as a message of “goodwill and assurance” (Heb. shālôm w^ə’ĕmet “peace and truth”; cf. Isa.39:8; Jer.33:6; and the reverse order in Zech.8:19).  Not only was there to be feasting, but this appears to have been preceded by a time of fasting (likely over the days of conflict leading to the celebration with rest and feasting).  Why should Esther have written something more than what Mordecai had written and what might this have added to the credibility of that writing?  Perhaps this adds to the established authority of Esther who earliest in the story was submissive and now was one who acted the part of the queen as one with authority.

10:1-3 – The continued rise of Mordecai.  The conclusion of the book (technically 9:18-10:3) acts as a sort of appendix to summarize what happened after the events of the victory of the Jews against their enemies where the Lord had turned their “lot” from sorrow and destruction into one of joy and blessing.  The final few verses enumerate how Mordecai continued to exercise authority throughout the empire as well as to be recorded in the annals of Persia for all he did (following the identical pattern for recordings of the kings of Israel and Judah, for example: 1 Kings 14:29; 15:7, 23, 31; 16:14; 1 Chron. 27:24; 2 Chron.25:26).  Mordecai was exalted among the Jews because of all he did on their behalf (cf. the celebration of “Mordecai’s Day” in 2 Macc.15:36).  Why should Mordecai be so exalted in the conclusion of a book named after Esther?

Daniel 9 - The Vision of the Seventy Sevens

9:1-2 – Understanding the date.  This chapter occurs some time after chapter five and perhaps after chapter six.  If this “Darius” the Mede (which seems likely) is “Cyrus” as explained in earlier notes (6:28) then the year would be 538BC and Daniel would be approximately 82 years old.  The NIV has curiously followed the LXX reading for Darius’ father’s name “Xerxes” instead of the Hebrew reading “Ahasuerus” (both of which appear to be titles rather than proper names according to Miller 240 and Goldingay 239) as most of the English translations do (but see NIV footnote).  In what sense was he “made ruler” over the Babylonian (lit. “Chaldean”) kingdom?  Who might have made him ruler?  The Hebrew is pointed as a Hophal which is passive (he was “made ruler”), but Theodotian, the Syriac and the Vulgate all suppose an active (Hiphil) verb meaning “became ruler” perhaps in order to smooth out the reading. 

Note that Daniel refers to Jeremiah’s book as among the other “Scriptures” (lit. “books” but implying “sacred books”) even though Jeremiah was a near contemporary who wrote his prophecy during Daniel’s youth.  The text Daniel was reading seems to refer to Jeremiah 25:11-12 written in 605BC which was the year Daniel was taken to Babylon and also the Jeremiah 29:10 written in 597BC the year Ezekiel was taken to Babylon (cf. 2 Chron.36:21; and compare Lev.25:8; 26:18).  Daniel read how the desolation of Jerusalem would last only seventy years according to Jeremiah and knew that meant the time was nearing for it to be complete, but he also understood that this did not simply mean that God would accomplish the restoration apart from His people.  How should we understand Daniel taking time to reflect upon the Scriptures in light of his own circumstances and what he felt it required of him?  What might this suggest about the process of the formation of the Scriptures and their early acceptance as authoritative by (at least some of) the community?

9:3-19 – The Prayer of Daniel.  Daniel fully commits himself to humility and sincerity before the Lord as he prays concerning what he has read in Jeremiah about the restoration of Jerusalem.  This prayer finds parallel in the prayer of 1 Kings 8; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh.1:5-11; 9:5-38; Baruch 1:15-38; 1QS 1.22-2.1; 4QWords of the Luminaries.  That he fasted implies this did not happen immediately.  Further, he put on “sackcloth” which was non-traditional clothing that was irritable and was a sign that one was in mourning.  This was also the purpose of the ashes. This is the only chapter in Daniel where LORD (the Hebrew Yahweh) occurs.  There are also many Hebrew manuscripts that read LORD in place of Lord (Heb. ’adōnāy) in verses 3, 15, 16, 17 and 19.  Daniel pleads with the LORD not only as the God of his people, but as his own God.

It is important to note that Daniel begins his prayer with praise and adoration of who God is as well as acclaiming the covenant and the faithful-love (Heb. hesed ; the two should not be read as “covenant of love” like the NIV since they are differentiated in the Hebrew) of God for those who love Him and keep the covenant.  However, Daniel then immediately moves to confession of the failure to live up to the covenant on the part of God’s people and he includes himself in this with the “we”.  He lists six things as confessions: “sin” (Heb. hāttā’) as a general category of disobedience, “wrong” (Heb. ‘āwôn) or crooked, “wicked” (Heb. rāsa‘), “rebelled” (Heb. mārad), turned away from the LORD’s commands and laws and not listened to the LORD’s servants the prophets.  This is quite a litany of charges that Daniel lays out against all of the leadership of his people and, indeed, all of the people themselves including himself.

He ascribes righteousness (Heb. s^ədāqâ) to the LORD, but justified shame to all of the people who are exiled including the ten tribes of Israel, the people of Judah and specifically His city Jerusalem because of unfaithfulness.  It is because of sin that shame covers them and this is not only shame for themselves but in some sense it is a shame for the LORD whose name they bear.  Daniel moves at times between the second person and third person in his address to the LORD as if to call himself and his people to this joint confession and to faithfulness to the LORD having pleaded with the LORD for his mercy and forgiveness.  Daniel is emphatic about the personal failure of the LORD’s people despite the LORD’s unfailing goodness and despite the clarity of the promise of the covenant concerning the judgment for disobedience (Deut.28:15-68).  In what sense could the disaster brought on Jerusalem be considered worse than that brought on other cities that also were destroyed and/or exiled?  Because Jerusalem was especially chosen of the LORD for His dwelling and personal revelation as opposed to all other cities.  Yet, despite the judgment against their sins there was still no repentance and turning to the truth according to Daniel.  This is not to suggest that there were none who did this, but that the people by and large did not and so as a nation they suffered together under the justified judgment of the LORD.

Daniel reminds the LORD of His deliverance of His people from Egypt which serves as THE sign of the LORD’s faithfulness to His people and of His self-revelation.  He calls on the LORD to hear his prayer for the people, “your city, your holy hill” knowing that the LORD cares and will act according to His own Name.  He prays that the LORD would restore all of this for the sake of the LORD’s name and glory, because the LORD is righteous and merciful and this is the revelation of His very character to the whole world and not because of anything inherently worthy about the people of Israel or the place of Israel or Jerusalem.

9:20-27 – The Vision of the Seventy Sevens.  In the very middle of Daniel’s praying, confessing of sins and concern for the restoration of Jerusalem Gabriel arrives with a message.  The statement about coming to him “in swift flight” in the English suggests that Gabriel flew to him and follows the popular notion of angels with wings despite that this messenger is never described as having wings.  The Hebrew actually may suggest “in my extreme weariness” (Heb. mu‘āp bî‘āp ; see the NASB, NET; Goldingay 228; Miller 250-1) which would fit the context better of one who has been fasting and in intense prayer and given his earlier weariness over revelations from the Lord (cf. Dan.7:28; 8:27; 10:8-9, 16-17). The time of the arrival was the time of the evening sacrifice which places it about 3-4PM even though there would not have been any sacrifices because there was not as yet any rebuilt temple to sacrifice in, but this was a normal time of prayer (Ezra 9:5; Ps.141:2).

The message was released for Daniel as soon as he had begun praying even though he was just now receiving it.  He would receive special insight into what he had been praying about because the LORD considered him “highly esteemed”.  What might constitute this estimation by the LORD?  Whereas Daniel understood correctly that the seventy years were upon him for the end of the exile, yet there were to be seventy ‘sevens’ (that is: 490 years broken into three groups…see the notes below) in order to deal with the sins of Israel completely (“finish…”, “put an end…” and “atone…”) and to fulfill all righteousness (“to bring in…”, “to seal up…” and “to anoint…”).

The decree to “restore and rebuild Jerusalem” could either be the one to Ezra in 458BC (Ezra 7:11-26) or to Nehemiah in 445BC (Neh.2:1ff) and would then be the first seven sevens (49 years) to approximately 409BC or 396BC when the project was completed, but in “times of trouble” (cf. Neh.4:1ff; 9:36-37).  The sixty-two sevens to the “Anointed one, the ruler” would be 434 years or approximately (Jesus baptism in) 26AD or (Palm Sunday) 32/33AD.  Though precision of dating the latter in such matters depends upon the highly questionable 360 day Jewish prophetic calendar with a thirteenth month included occasionally to offset for the lack of days that results.  Just who is the “anointed one” which lacks the definite article in the Hebrew as does the “ruler”?  While this could just as easily refer to any king or priest it seems most likely to refer to Jesus as our dating suggests.  Especially since this “anointed one” will be “cut off” that is to say that he will be killed or die and be left with nothing some time after the allotted years noted above.  So who are the “people of the ruler who will come” that destroys the city and the sanctuary?  The antecedent would almost seem to be whomever this “anointed one” was and his “people”, but rather than taking this “ruler” with the “anointed one” that precedes it would seem best to take it with the individual that follows who makes a seven year covenant with Israel and breaks it midway and sets up abominations of desolation until his end.  Between these two rulers there appears to be wars and desolations. 

While it was not readily apparent in Daniel’s day that there would be a gap of time between the last ‘seven’ and the other sixty-nine sevens history suggests otherwise and Jesus own interpretation of the abomination causing desolation suggests otherwise (Matt.24:15; Mark 13:14).  In other words, there appears to still be a future date where the last ‘seven’ years will be accomplished by one who makes and breaks covenant with Israel, putting an end to the sacrifices and offerings three and half years into the covenant and setting up abominations that causes desolation (“on a wing of the temple” should not be read with the NIV, but should read “on the wing of abominations”) until his end.  This means that the temple must still be rebuilt at some time in the future and the sacrifices be reinstituted and Israel will wrongfully make covenant with one who will not be faithful just as they were unfaithful and who will be abominable just as they were abominable.  But the LORD is faithful and merciful and He will use this to bring Israel back to Himself and bring an end to sin as has already now been done through our Lord Jesus Christ, but shall be fulfilled at his glorious appearing from heaven.

Daniel 6 - Delivered From Lions

Cyrus the Great Cylinder

6:1-5 – The kingdom of Darius the Mede.  Joyce Baldwin argues rather persuasively that “Darius” may have been Cyrus’ enthronement name used only in his first year (29-31; 141fn107; cf. Dan.5:31; 9:1; 11:1).  At the very least, it seems very probable that the two names “Darius the Mede” and “Cyrus the Persian” refer to the same individual (without further evidence forthcoming to demonstrate just who this “Darius” might otherwise be…since the conjectures of Gobryas, Ugbaru or even a mythical composite character seem untenable at best).  The “and” in the NIV and other translations (Aram. conjunctive waw) can in fact be read as “even” or “that is” in Dan.6:26 (see the NIV footnote) reading “during the reign of Darius, that is, the reign of Cyrus the Persian”.  This proposal seems more probable than that this individual was only a king of Babylon and not the ruler of the empire whose decision would be irrevocable. 

Darius is said to have appointed 120 satraps to give oversight to the kingdom.  A satrap was a sort of governor and over these he chose three individuals to give specific oversight…Daniel being one of the three.  The 120 would not necessarily each oversee one satrapy, but may have simply shared duties over various regions.  The numbers listed for satrapies elsewhere range in the twenties (though Esther 1:1 lists 127 during the later reign of Xerxes).  The special appointment of Daniel due to his exceptional qualities made him a target for those who were jealous of his position.  This does not necessarily mean that all 122 men were involved in the conspiracy against Daniel, but only that there was a significant group that was leading the way against him.  They were forced to admit that any accusations against him would not be successful unless it pertained to the “law of his God” because Daniel was above any sort of reproach, and was a faithful Jew.

6:6-9 – The decree.  The plan was to convince the king that there was agreement among all of his officials that he should issue a 30-day decree demanding that all prayers be offered to (through?) him for that time period.  The Medo-Persian (Achaemenid dynasty) were Zoroastrians more clearly under the later named Darius I though possibly as early as our king Cyrus (here called “Darius”).  Under Zoroastrianism, there was a single god that was worshipped, Ahura Mazda, whom the king was the earthly representative of and so it would not be a far stretch for Darius in Dan.6 to receive prayers or be a mediator of prayers.  Besides it would be supposed that this may serve to unite a newly gathered empire in their whole-hearted service of their new king.  They further clarify that this decree should be put in writing so that, according to Medo-Persian law, it will be unalterable (cf. Esther 1:19). 

The punishment that they surmised would be appropriate was to be “thrown into the lions’ den.”  This “den” would have been some sort of pit where lions would have been kept for just such punishments.  There likely would have been two compartments to this pit with a divider between them.  The lions would be in one part for attacking their victims and that portion would also have an opening for throwing in the victims from the top and sealing it with a stone.  The other portion perhaps would also have some hole for enticing the lions into it in order to move them and replace the divider so that any scraps, feces and bones could be removed as needed from the pit where the lions would be kept.

6:10-15 – Daniel’s prayers.  It was not a matter of Daniel’s ignorance of the law that led to his violating it, but with his full knowledge of it he went home and did as he had always done…he prayed three times a day (cf. Ps.55:17, 18; Didache 8; though Psalm 119:164 mentions seven times a day).  “It is not, as with his three companions [in chapter 3], a question of a positive sin which he will not commit, but of a positive duty which he will not omit” (Miller 182, citing Driver).  Daniel apparently had a room on top of his home built with a window specifically facing towards Jerusalem so that he could pray facing in that direction (cf. 1 Ki.8:35, 38, 44, 48; 2 Chron.6:34).  Not only was Daniel praying as was his custom, but he was “asking God for help.”  What kind of help?  Was he asking for help for himself or for the king or for Jerusalem?  “To Daniel…this was subterfuge, and he did not swerve whatever from his usual customs in prayer….What a testimony Daniel had that even his enemies knew he would be faithful to God although it would cost him his life” (Walvoord 138).  Daniel’s enemies went out of their way to spy on Daniel and report as a group to the king what Daniel had done and make sure the king would enforce his edict.  They made sure to mention that he was one of the “exiles from Judah” perhaps in order to emphasize that even though he had been brought as an exile over 70 years prior, he still remained Jewish in his religious practices of prayer (among other things) and was not integrated into the society as they were.

6:16-24 – Daniel in the lion’s den.  The king begrudgingly followed through with his edict and had Daniel thrown into the lions den even at his old age and even though he was among those most reliable in his new kingdom.  Darius stated “May your God…rescue you” (an imperfect verb and not a jussive as the RSV translated it) meaning that this was not simply a wish, but that Darius was committing Daniel to the hands of Daniel’s God knowing that only Daniel’s would have to be the one to rescue Daniel.  The KJV translation suggests too strongly that it certainly will happen which Darius does not seem so convinced about and so he called to Daniel in “an anguished voice” the next morning.  Darius is convinced that if anyone will rescue Daniel it must be Daniel’s God, because Daniel has given himself so completely to his God that there could be no other outcome that could be positive and perhaps Darius had heard the stories of deliverance that Daniel recounted for him.  The king was so distressed about having Daniel thrown into the lion’s den that he could not even do what he would normally do – whether eating or entertainment (whatever the Aramaic dahăwān seems to signify—which is difficult to define), or even to sleep.

It was a custom that once the sun began to dawn a sentence had been served if the individual had survived the night and so the king rushed to the lions’ den even if not fully convinced that he would find Daniel alive or well.  Did he call out to Daniel expecting a reply or was this more rhetorical?  Note Darius’ use of “the living God” in reference to the God of Daniel (cf. Deut.5:26; Josh.3:10; 1 Sam.17:26; 2 Ki.19:4; Jer.10:10; 23:36; Hos.2:1; Ps.42:3; 84:3).  “This rich OT title for God suggests not merely that God is alive rather than dead, but that he is active and powerful, awesome and almighty, involved in bringing judgment and blessing” (Goldingay 133).  At any rate, he received the reply of Daniel wishing him long life. 

Daniel also testified that God had sent an angel to shut the mouths of the lions (Heb.11:33), because of his innocence before God and the king.  As Daniel’s three friends has bodily testified to their deliverance in the fire, here Daniel’s body gave testimony once it was lifted out of the den that it was in no way harmed (Ps.91:9-16).  Is this intended to be a universal promise of deliverance for all of God’s people?  Certainly not.  Many have paid with their lives as Hebrews testifies and as our Lord Jesus Himself testified.  But our God is able and no law of man can over-rule the obedience that is due the Lord.  How might we understand his deliverance?  (cf. Isa.11:6; 65:25; Hos.2:18)  “In the man of God the powers of the world to come have broken in, in anticipation of what will be when the king comes to reign” (Baldwin 145).

The king then commanded all those who had conspired against Daniel to be thrown into the lion’s den.  Was it all of the 120 or considerably less?  The LXX states it was the two other administrators, but this seems a gross re-adjustment to try to downplay how many were involved.  While this punishment may be understandable (Gen.12:3; Deut.19:18-19; Esther 7:9-10) for those specifically involved, how should we understand throwing the wives and children of the conspirators in as well? (cf. Num.16:27-33; Deut.24:16; Josh.7:24-25; Esther 9:25; Isa.13:15-16)  There is not really any condoning of this practice by mentioning it, but only a record that it was carried out (on this being something carried out elsewhere among the Medo-Persians, see Herodotus Histories 3.119).  The account also notes that those who were thrown in did not even reach the floor of the den before the lions killed them and “crushed all their bones” thus demonstrating the miraculous nature of Daniel’s deliverance and the judgment against those who tried to harm Daniel.

6:25-28 – The decree of Darius to all peoples concerning the God of Daniel.  Whereas Nebuchadnezzar had issued a decree against anyone who should speak a word against the God of the three in Dan.3:29, Darius actually commands people everywhere to “fear and reverence the God of Daniel”.  This is not a command against, but a command for.  Does this command exclude the worship of other Gods?  By no means, though it does make clear that Daniel’s God endures when other’s do not and that Daniel’s God performs the miraculous and delivers.  This will be poignant for those who face what is revealed in the chapters that lay ahead in Daniel…particularly as other kingdoms and kings are named that are off in the future who will seem to have authority and power that are unlimited.  However, God is sovereign and able to deliver His people through whatever they will suffer if they will endure and remain faithful.  This chapter closes with the note that Daniel then prospered under the Medo-Persians in an era when God would restore Jerusalem, return the captives and rebuild the Temple.  It could be said of Daniel that in his old age as he “prospered” in Babylon that he had indeed become a light to the Gentiles by the mouth of Darius (cf. Isa.42:1-12; 49:1-7; Zech.2:11; 8:20-23).

John Goldingay notes the similarity and contrast between Jesus final days and Daniel 6, when he writes how Jesus, “too, is the victim of conspiracy and betrayal from people whose position is threatened by him and who seek occasion to manipulate higher authorities into executing him, professing that they have no king but Caesar.  They, too, will eventually pay for their hostility, along with their children.  He, too, is arrested at his customary place of prayer.  These higher authorities, too, find no fault in him and labor to free him, but are reminded that the law forbids it.  He, too, has to rely on God to deliver him as his tomb is sealed.  Indeed, he actually dies, and injury can be found on him after he comes back from the dead: more extraordinary is it, then, that very early, at sunrise, he, too, is discovered to be alive after all” (136).

Daniel 1 - When In Exile....

Brief Introduction to the Book – Daniel was taken into captivity in the summer of 605BC while Jehoiachim son of Josiah was king of Judah some time after the Babylonians defeated the Egyptians at Carchemish.  Jehoiachim had actually been placed upon the throne by Egypt and thus it seemed only fitting that the defeat of the Egyptians spelled the defeat of Judah.  Nebuchadnezzar, son of Nabopolassar, was officially made king of Babylon later that summer upon the death of his father (Miller 56).  Daniel and his friends were among those initially taken and he survived until some time after the Babylonian captivity ended with the defeat of the Babylonians by the Perians in 539BC.  The book of Daniel was included in the Hebrew canon among the writings because he does not belong particularly to the prophets (as in the LXX canon and our own), but this does not mean the book was regarded as non-prophetic.  Daniel contains several additions in the Catholic canon (Song of the Three, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon; and in the original KJV[!]), but this was not received into the Protestant canon of Scripture (these will be briefly discussed at the conclusion of this series).  Many reject Daniel as being written in the 6^th century and instead date it to the Maccabean period (250-167BC), but Archer (421-448) Baldwin (14-80), Walvoord (11-25), and Miller (22-41) have argued rather persuasively for a 6^th century date of authorship perhaps shortly after the date of the Babylonian exile in 539BC.  The book has been variously divided between the Hebrew sections (Dan.1:1-2:4a; 8:1-12:13) and Aramaic section (Dan.2:4b-7:28), but the most helpful distinction is between the stories (Dan.1-6) and the visions (Dan.7-12).  “This biblical witness challenges the faithful to be awake for the unexpected intervention of God in wrapping up all of human history.  The stories of Daniel and his friends picture men who bear eloquent testimony is both word and deed to an unswerving hope in God’s rule.  As a consequence, they were made free to hang loosely on the world because they knew their hope rested elsewhere” (Childs 622).

1:1-2 – The beginning of captivity.  The time note that Daniel provides refers to the year 605BC and though there are no records of any actual siege of Jerusalem, it is not necessary that Jerusalem was laid siege so much as taken captive in that year.  Nebuchadnezzar is called “king” because either it refers to his functioning role in the very end of his father’s reign or because it refers to him this way as one who later was king of Babylon.  Who is emphasized as responsible for the victory of Nebuchadnezzar over Jerusalem and what is the significance in relation to the book of Daniel?  The Lord rules all the nations…great and small.  The “temple articles” were promised to be taken to Babylon because of the sin of Hezekiah in showing the Babylonians his treasures (cf. 2 Chron.36:7, 10, 18, 20-23; Isa.39:2, 4, 6; Ezra 1:7-11 and comes into play later in Daniel 5:2-4).  Literally, the articles were carried off to “Shinar” (cf. Gen.10:10) which was an ancient name of a city recognized to be a place of opposition to God (Gen.11:1-9; Zech.5:11).  What is the significance of putting the articles of the temple of God into the temple of Nebuchadnezzar’s gods? (cf. 1 Sam.4-5)  “To all appearances, the God of Jerusalem has been defeated by the gods of Babylon” (Goldingay 21), but Daniel will point in a radically different direction.

1:3-7 – The training of the best of the young exiles.  The descriptions of those who were to be trained were that they were taken from the best families (royal and/or nobility; cf. Isa.39:7) and of fine appearance and high aptitude.  The terms used are those of the wisdom literature (cf. Prov.1:1-6) with regard to the acumen of these young men (Heb. yělādîm which “covers men from birth to marriage” – Goldingay 5).  The literature and language of the “Babylonians” (lit. “Chaldeans” Heb. kaśdîm, Aram. kaśdāy) included magical, astrological, medicinal, temple, wisdom, and legal texts among others.  How could Daniel and his friends spend three years of intensive training in such things and yet remain true to the LORD?  John Goldingay astutely notes that the “wise person knows how to learn from the wisdom of other peoples without being overcome by it” (24).  The food and wine they were assigned came directly from the king’s table and thus was luxurious but would also have been offered to the god/s of the king (cf. Oppenheim 188-92) before they received it.  Four of the chosen young men are named as particularly faithful and deserving of mention: Daniel (“God is my judge”; became Belteshazzar “Bel, protect his life!”), Hananiah (“The LORD has been gracious”; became Shadrach “Command of Aku” the moon god), Mishael (“Who is what God is?”; became Meshach “Who is what Aku is?”), and Azariah (“The LORD has helped”; became Abednego “Servant of Nebo” the god of Nebuchadnezzar’s namesake) – on name changes see Gen. 41:45; Esther 2:7.  Why were their names changed and why did they not protest this and the learning of the Chaldeans, but did protest the diet that follows?

1:8-16 – The ten day test of food and faith.  What might have been Daniel and his friend’s motivation for refusing the food and wine of Nebuchadnezzar and choosing to have “vegetables” (technically refers to “vegetables, grain, and non-mean products generally” Goldingay 6) and water instead?  One suggestion has been that they were not “kosher” (cf. Lev.11, 17) and thus would “defile” them, but this would only pertain to meats and not to wine. As was previously mentioned it had been offered to the god/s (cf. 1 Cor.8-10; Rom.14), but so would the “vegetables” have been (cf. Bel and the Dragon 3; Oppenheim 192; those who denied consuming even the “vegetables” for this reason: cf. Judith 10:5; 12:2; Add. Esther 14:17; Tobit 1:10-11).  It is also notable that Jehoiachin was recorded to have eaten daily at the kings table according to 2 Kings 25:29.  Goldingay proposes that they refused as symbols of “avoiding assimilation” (19).  They had taken the names, learned the wisdom, worn the clothes and by outward appearances become “Babylonians”, but they would hold this one thing as to the LORD.  Though Daniel’s request found favor with the chief official, the official was too afraid to grant it directly so the “guard” (or more properly the one given direct responsibility over them) exchanged portions with them thus relieving the chief official of responsibility.  This act of Daniel and his friends was an outright act of faith on their part.  At the end of the ten days they were found to be in much better appearance than the rest of those who ate the royal food so they were permitted to continue with their diet of faith.  This is not in any way offered as a vegetarian command since the Law specifically commanded certain sacrifices of meat to be made and eaten every year (though the temple was destroyed at this time and thus the sacrifices could not be made then).  “Even a small act of self-discipline, taken out of loyalty to principle, sets God’s servants in the line of his approval and blessing.  In this way actions attest faith, and character is strengthened to face more difficult situations in the future” (Baldwin 92-3).

1:17-21 – An insight into the end before getting to the end.  It is stated the God Himself gave the four young men understanding of all the things they were studying during their three years of Babylonian tutelage.  How might this be understood in light of the contents of what they studied?  What relation does God’s wisdom and knowledge have to the world’s?  It is specifically noted that Daniel was blessed with being able to understand and interpret dreams (cf. Num.12:6) which comes into play later in the book (though it is not something inherent to him, but something he still prays and seeks).  When they finally made their appearance before the king it was noticeable that these four far surpassed all the others, but they would still have opportunities to demonstrate the superiority of their God.  The note in verse 21 concerning King Cyrus (see the prophecy in Isa.44:24-45:7) maintains that while Daniel when into captivity he lived to see the end of it under the Persians (cf. Deut.30:3-5; the “seventy years” of Jer.25:12).

Bibliography

Archer, Gleason.  “Daniel,” A Survey of Old Testament Introduction.  Chicago,

IL: Moody Press, 1994.  pp. 421-448.

Baldwin, Joyce G. Daniel. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries vol. 23,

Downers Grove, IL: Inter Varsity Press, 1978.

Childs, Brevard S.  “Daniel,” An Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture.  

            Philadelphia, PA: Augsburg Fortress Press, 1979.  pp. 608-623.

Goldingay, John. Daniel. Word Biblical Commentary vol. 30, Nashville, TN:

            Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1989.

Miller, Stephen R. Daniel. The New American Commentary vol. 18, Nashville,

TN: B&H Publishing, 1994.

Oppenheim, A. Leo.  Ancient Mesopotamia: Portrait of a Dead Civilization. 

Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1977.

Walvoord, John F.  Daniel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation. Chicago, IL: Moody

Press, 1971.

Ezekiel 43-44 - The Glory of the LORD and the Temple Torah

43:1-5 – The glory returns.  Why does the glory of the LORD approach from the east? (cf. Eze.11:23)  There is no ignoring the approaching glory which radiates the land and comes with a great tumult of sound.  This vision is likened to the appearing of the glory in chapters 8-11, but also to the appearing in the very beginning of the book.  Note that the reference is to the vision by the Kebar River when the glory had first come to destroy Jerusalem.  Ezekiel’s posture is as it was before when the glory appeared: prostrate.  And just as the Spirit had previously lifted Ezekiel up for action, here the same thing occurs.  Note what the glory of the LORD does. (cf. Isa.6:4)

43:6-12 – The temple torah is given.  Ezekiel hears an undisclosed person’s voice that gives him the temple instructions (torah).  Contrast the presence of the LORD in this temple to the one which Solomon built (1 Kings 8:48-49; Isa.66:1).  It was always the LORD’s design to live with His people Israel.  However, His continuing presence depends upon the holiness with which His people live.  The LORD promises that Israel and her kings will no longer do what they had done before in defiling the temple and rejecting Him.  In particular are the sins of the kings against the sanctity of the temple of the LORD when they set up idols for themselves (NIV’s “their high places” Heb. bāmôtām should likely read Heb. b^emôtām “at their death”; see Duguid NIVAC 490fn5) and fornicated themselves.  It is notable that the glory of the God of Israel no longer is enthroned upon the ark of the covenant, but upon Jerusalem itself and His temple (Jer.3:16-17; Block NICOT II:581).  How might the plan of this temple cause Israel to feel shame for their sinfulness?  It would appear that the whole of this temple area is designed for guarding the holiness of the LORD.  The torah of Ezekiel and his function in the process of sanctifying the temple likens him to a second Moses (cf. Exo.29; Block NICOT II:606-7).

43:13-27 – The altars design and sanctifying.  Why might the dimensions of the altar be of significance to Ezekiel’s audience?  This altar area was approximately 1100 sq. ft. while the alter itself was nearly 600 sq. ft. and stood some 15 feet high.  The trench on the outside of the altar could handle nearly 3800 gallons! (see Block NICOT II:601).  This made it actually smaller than the one in Solomon’s temple (1 Kings 1:50-53; 2:28-29; 8 ½H x 17W x 17L) and much smaller than the one in Herod’s temple (Josephus JW 5.5.6§§222-226; 15H x 50W x 50L).  The steps (against Mosaic instruction in Exo.20:26) to the altar notably face east when traditionally all of the altars had the officiating priest facing east.  The altar still needed dedication through purifying (Heb. hattā’t traditionally read as “sin offering”; see Duguid NIVAC 491fn10) sacrifices and burnt offerings that were supposed to last the course of a week for atonement and then on the eighth day the priests would begin making regular offerings upon it.  The animals were to be salted (cf. Lev.2:13; the “covenant of salt” in Num.18:19; 2 Chron.13:5; and see Mark 9:49-50) and their bodies disposed of outside the sanctity of the temple.  How will the LORD treat this sanctifying work and what will be His response?

44:1-4 – The eastern gate was shut permanently once the glory of the LORD had entered through it.  The prince (Heb. nāsî’) was the only one permitted into the gate to eat a fellowship offering before the LORD, but not through the gate.  While this would offer some special blessing to the prince, he was still excluded (as the rest of Israel) from entering the temple itself and could not enter through the gate which the LORD had entered.  Again, note Ezekiel’s response to seeing the glory of the LORD as the glory fills the temple.

44:5-9 – The entrances and exits of the temple.  It was not only the priests and the kings of Israel that were responsible for the defiling of the temple, but the whole of the house of Israel.  They were responsible for bringing foreigners into the temple (cf. 2 Kings 11:14-19) when the Levitical priests were supposed to have guarded the sanctity of it (Num.18:7, 21-23).  It was not that foreigners weren’t allowed, it was that these foreigners were not a part of the covenant people of God and had not purified themselves.

44:10-14 – The restoration of the Levites.  While the Levites had sinned they were promised to receive restoration as those responsible for the gates and certain of the sacrifices on behalf of the people of Israel.  However, their idolatry was not without repercussions.  They would not be given responsibility to actually approach the LORD, but instead would represent the people’s presence in the temple itself.

44:15-31 – The Zadokites priest’s blessings and responsibilities.  It was not because the Zadokites were sinless, but they were more faithful than the Levites in general (cf. 1 Sam.3:11-14; 1 Kings 1:5-8; 2:26-27, 35).  Therefore, they would be given the particular blessing and responsibility of serving directly before the LORD and making the necessary sacrifices.  Their clothing was regulated in order to avoid both contaminating it with sweat (i.e. body fluids; see Deut.23:11-13) and to not “consecrate” the people when they leave the inner court before the LORD.  On holiness as a dangerous contagion see Lev.10:1-3; Num.4:15; 1 Sam.6:19; 2 Sam.6:6-9.  Their hair was never to be either unkempt or shaved off (cf. Lev.21:5, 10; 19:27), they were never to have alcohol when ministering (Lev.10:9), nor were they to marry any woman that might allow for the common Israelites to share in their inheritance.  They were to teach the people, to serve as judges and to celebrate all that the LORD had commanded.  They were to be kept from that which was dead (Lev.21:1-3) and to receive their inheritance in the LORD (Num.18:20) enjoying the sacrifices given by Israel (Exo.22:31; Lev.22:8; Num.15:20-21; 18:8-20).

Ezekiel 12-13 - Blind and Deaf Leaders

12:1-2 – The key to the following prophecies in Ezekiel is found in these two verses. “They have eyes to see but do not see and ears to hear but do not hear, for they are a rebellious people” (see Isaiah 6:9; 43:8; Jeremiah 5:12; and the same thing stated concerning idols in Psalm 115:57). According to this passage, why can’t Israel see or hear?

12:3-7 – A living sermon “as they watch” – pack an exile bag in the daylight, dig a hole in the wall in the evening, and carry out the belongings with covered face at dawn. What does it all mean? Did they understand what Ezekiel was doing? What might an exile’s bag contain? How is Ezekiel a “sign to the house of Israel”? How does this relate to verse 2? Note that Ezekiel did exactly as he was commanded.

12:8-14 – In the morning Ezekiel is to explain the living sermon of the previous day. Who is the “prince in Jerusalem”? Zedekiah (2 Kings 24:18-25:7; 2 Chronicles 36:11-14; Jeremiah 52:1-11) is the “prince” as a semi-derogatory title (rather than “king”). He was the last king of Judah and was rebellious against the LORD and Nebuchadnezzar. He fled Jerusalem when it fell to the Babylonians, but was captured and given a trial where he was punished by slaughtering his sons in front of him and then gouging out his eyes. There is a possible slight allusion to the blinding of Zedekiah by the references to not seeing the land again. The “prince” (as ruler of the people) is also indicative of the people of Judah left in Jerusalem. Who carried out the judgment of the “prince”?

12:15-16 – “They will know that I am the LORD” once the LORD scattered and dispersed Israel among the nations and preserved the remnant for Himself.

12:17-20 – Why did Ezekiel have to eat with trembling and drink with shuddering? What does this signify? Why would Israel eat and drink in fear? Note that violence against others leads to a final violent judgment of the perpetrators.

12:21-28 – Three issues concerning prophecy: 1) All prophecy should not be rejected, 2) it must not be falsely given, and 3) it must be done with the certainty that it is the word of the LORD. The way of removing false prophecy from Israel was to remove the false prophets themselves from Israel. “Flattering (or slippery) divinations” were manipulative and not simply an attempt to discern the will of the LORD (see Block NICOT 390 and 390fn31-32). Is the LORD slow in keeping his promises? (see 2 Peter 3:3-10)

13:1-9 – What does it mean for the LORD to say there were some who “prophecy out of their own imagination”? Does this still go on today? How is this contrasted with the word of the LORD? In what ways are false prophets “like jackals among ruins” (cf. Nehemiah 4:3; Lamentations 5:18)? They don’t repair the breaks in the walls or defend against the enemy, but instead they live only for themselves and prey on the weak and use the breaks for their own advantage. Is “divination” always wrong? What would be the difference between divining the will of God and lying divination? Is there a difference? Does using the LORD’s name give absolute assurance that what we say or pray will be done? What does it mean to not belong to the council of God’s people or not be “listed in the records of the house of Israel”? “The records of the house of Israel” seems to refer to the official records of those who would survive to return to Israel (Ezra 2:62; Nehemiah 7:64; see also the books which the LORD keeps in Exodus 32:32-33; Psalm 69:28; Isaiah 4:3; Daniel 12:1; Luke 10:20; Revelation 3:5; 20:12; 21:27). Ezekiel was sent to Israel so they would “know that a prophet had bee among them” (Eze.2:5). Where the LORD declares that His “hand will be against them” there is an allusion to inspiration in order to subtly express that “those who never felt the reality of the divine hand in inspiration will now feel it in judgment” (Duguid NIVAC 173fn11).

13:10-16 – What does it mean to be white-washed flimsy walls? The flimsy wall will be exposed and destroyed and the white-wash shown to have been worse than worthless since it was used to simply cover up what should have been repaired as if everything was alright. How is this related to those who were prophesying “peace”? (cf. 1 Thessalonians 5:3)

13:17-23 – Who are “the daughters of your people”? They were false prophetesses who used magic to control and manipulate. Magic charms were worn on their wrists and (magic?) veils on their heads (or around their necks). These seem to refer to something like a phylactery that functioned as a talisman or charm. Why did they practice their magic? What does the LORD accuse them of doing? They “disheartened the righteous” and “encouraged the wicked”. The false prophet/esses had ensnared the LORD’s people, but the LORD would deliver “his people” and ensure and destroy the false prophet/esses.

Ezekiel 10-11 - The Glory of the LORD Departs

10:1 – How does this vision compare and contrast with the vision of chapter one?

10:2-8 – The “man dressed in linen” previously marked the righteous of Jerusalem and at this point was told to gather coals of fire from under the divine chariot and scatter them over Jerusalem (for “fire” in Jerusalem see 2 Kings 25:9; 2 Chron. 36:19; for an angel who will use the “fire” from the altar in final judgment see Rev. 8:3-5; and God as a “consuming fire” see Deut. 4:24). Why does a cloud fill the inner court as the coals of fire are taken? Why are the glory of the LORD and the wings of the cherubim moving? What does it mean for a sound to be “like the voice of God Almighty (Heb. El Shadday)”? (Exo. 6:3; cf. Ps. 29:3; Eze. 1:24; Heb. 12:18-19; Rev. 10:3-4)

10:9-17 – What do we make of the further description of the wheels and cherubim? Why are the cherubim suddenly described as covered with “eyes”? Why is the order and description of the cherubim’s faces (10:14) different than in 1:10? Daniel Block thinks because of the different direction Ezekiel is facing in relation to the cherubim affects the different ordering and he also proposes that the bull and cherubim faces are just two ways of describing the same face (NICOT 324-5).

10:18-19 – Why does the glory of the LORD and the chariot rise? Notice that there is a pause while leaving Jerusalem. What is the possible significance of this? Why should it be emphasized that the cherubim (and the wheels) go straight ahead? Also, why repeatedly remind the reader that these are the very same creatures as in chapter one’s vision (10:15, 20, 22)?

11:1-6 – Why does Ezekiel mention Jaazaniah (who is different than the man with the same name in 9:11) son of Azzur and Pelatiah son of Benaiah among the 25 leaders noticed? Likely because he knew them and the people he was prophesying to knew them and he was specifically exposing their sins (which were plotting evil and giving wicked advice – cf. Micah 2:1). What is the meaning of the “cooking pot”? Why do they think it will soon be time to build houses? “Prophesy against them, prophesy” places particular emphasis upon the demands of the LORD to Ezekiel. What does the Spirit of the LORD say? He knows their hearts and their violence against the people of Jerusalem (see Eze. 22:27).

11:7-12 – The leaders of Jerusalem are “not the meat” in the pot? How is this bad? What does it mean that they are the refuse outside the pot? (refer to the entire prophesy of Eze. 8-11) Note again the reason given repetitively, “You will know that I am the LORD” (11:10, 12) and therefore the covenant responsibilities this places upon them (11:12). How has the pot motif changed in this vision? It was no longer a safe place, but now the place where they have been consuming the people of Jerusalem (cf. Micah 3:1-3). They are the refuse from the pot and as such are going from the frying pan and into the fire. Why is the judgment of them said to occur “at the borders of Israel”? Who should Israel have been conformed to? (11:12)

11:13 – While Ezekiel was prophesying Pelatiah (“the LORD has delivered”) son of Benaiah (“the LORD has built up”) died. According to Daniel Block (NICOT 338), he “symbolized the hope of Jerusalem” and so his death would signal the end of Jerusalem’s hope that they would be delivered. Ezekiel’s exclamation following Pelatiah’s death seems to be the answer to his parallel statement in 9:8.

11:14-15 – “Your brothers, your brothers”? Why is this doubled? It is emphatic about who will be redeemed. “Your blood relatives” is literally “men of your redemption” which is a reference to the next of kin responsible for redeeming you if needed (see the “kinsman-redeemer” of Ruth; Lev. 24:47-55; 25:23-34; Num.35:19-28).

11:16 – What does it mean that the LORD has become “a sanctuary” (Heb. miqdash; cf. 8:6; 9:6 – where it refers to the Temple) for “a little while” (or less likely “of a lesser degree”) for the exiles who have been removed from Jerusalem? (see also John 2:19-22; 3:21-23)

11:17-21 – When was the promise of the exiles returning fulfilled? Who is the promise addressed to – the people of Jerusalem or the exiles? Who will bring Israel back and who exiled them to begin with? What does this say about the LORD’s involvement in the affairs of people? Who was responsible for cleansing the land? Who will give them a new heart and new spirit (but compare Eze. 18:31)? Contrast the new hearts of 11:19 with the hearts of 14:3 and 20:16. What was the heart change expected to accomplish? The key statement here is “They will be my people, and I will be their God” (Exo. 6:7; Lev. 26:12; Jer. 7:23; 11:4; 24:7; 30:22; 31:33; Eze. 14:11; 36:28; 37:27; Hosea 2:23; Zech. 13:9; 2 Cor. 6:16; Heb. 8:10; Rev. 21:3).

11:22-25 – Why does the glory of the LORD stop over the Mount of Olives east of Jerusalem? Apparently the glory departs for twenty years until Ezekiel 43 speaks of the glory of the LORD returning. Suddenly Ezekiel is returned from the vision to the exiles whom he immediately informs about what he just saw (chapters 8-11). How did they respond? We aren’t told what their immediate response was. Iain Duguid describes the connection between the “glory” of Ezekiel 10-11 and Jesus as mentioned in Matthew 23:37-24:3: “There Jesus laments Jerusalem’s history of hard-heartedness towards the prophets and her refusal to come to him (23:37). As a result, her house will be left desolate (23:38), and Jerusalem will not see Jesus again until they are willing to welcome his coming (23:39). He then prophesies the forthcoming destruction of the temple (24:1) and removes himself to the mount of Olives, leaving behind a magnificent but doomed structure” (NIVAC 153).

Ezekiel 8-9 - The Mark of the LORD

8:1 – The date of this revelation is September 18, 592 BC (Ezekiel’s first vision was on July 31, 593 BC). How should we understand this in light of his laying his sides for 430 days? He was sitting at home with the elders of Judah around him (to inquire of the LORD through him? cf. Eze.14:1-3; 20:1). Note that the hand of the LORD did not simply “come” upon him, but “fell” upon him. What is the significance of this?

8:2 – “A figure like a man”? (Eze.1:26-28) How should we understand his appearance?

8:3-5 – “Taken by the hair” and “lifted by the Spirit”? (cf. Bel and the Dragon 36) The term translated “idol” here (Heb. semel) is only referenced two other times (Deut.4:16; 2 Chron.33:7, 15; for explanation see Block NICOT 281) and here it is labeled “that provokes to jealousy” (cf. Deut.4:15-24). This idol is visible from one of the doorways to the Temple (as if to guard?). He sees the glory of the God of Israel (the Living God) which is contrasted with the idol that does nothing.

8:6 – “Do you see”? (8:12, 15, 17; note the wheel within a wheel covered in “eyes” in 1:18; Duguid NIVAC 132fn10). If the prophet is shown these things then surely the LORD has seen far more than He has shown. Why is this asked repeatedly? It serves a rhetorical effect for the prophet (and the readers) to take notice and not turn a blind eye to the surrounding sins. How could the LORD be driven from His sanctuary?

8:7-9 – Why is there a hole in the wall of the inner court of the temple that leads to a secret chamber for Ezekiel to dig through? It may demonstrate that though the secret remains (i.e., Ezekiel goes in through the hole and not the door), yet the LORD sees all.

8:10-12 – What kinds of things are being worshipped and how? Who is represented by the seventy worshippers? (see 8:1; contrast with Ex.24:1, 9; Num.11:24-25) He focuses on Jaazaniah son of Shaphan. Who is this fellow? Shaphan, his father, was a scribe in the days of King Josiah’s reforms (2 Ki.22:3-14; 2 Chron.34:8-20) and his brothers were Ahikam who assisted Jeremiah (Jer.26:24), Elasah who delivered Jeremiah’s letter to the exiles (Jer.29:3), and Gemariah who tried to stop Jeremiah’s scroll from being burned by King Jehoiakin (Jer.36:10, 25). He was apparently not deported with Ezekiel and became defiled in idolatry (despite or even ironically in relation to his name’s meaning “the LORD hears”). Note that each elder representative worshipped a separate image of a creature. The seventy seems to refer to the totality. “The LORD does not see us”? What might this mean? Possibly (1) that the LORD has abandoned them or (2) that the LORD is ignorant of their idolatry (cf. Ps.10:1-11; 94:1-7). Does He in fact see? (Gen.16:13-14; Deut.4:28; Ps.115:4-8) Has He utterly “forsaken the land”?

8:13 – “More detestable” things will be shown (and 8:15)? What could be more detestable?

8:14 – Ezekiel was shown women “mourning for Tammuz” (lit. “weeping the Tammuz”)? Tammuz was the name given to an ancient Sumerian king who was divinized after dying and returning (not necessarily resurrected). The Mesopotamians annually worshipped Tammuz through a (particularly) women’s mourning ritual. Why is this being practiced in the Temple and what is its significance?

8:16-18 – Idolatry in the inner court. Why are the worshippers backs to the Temple and their faces to the east? It demonstrates a rejection of the LORD and worship of the sun (cf. 2 Ki.21:5; 23:11-12; condemned in Deut.4:19; 17:2-5). “The essence of idolatry is not so much denying the reality of God but the relevance of God” (Duguid NIVAC 140). Worse yet they are oppressive, violent and cruel to one another. What does “the branch to their nose” (or “my nose”) mean? Somehow it is insulting, though how is unclear.

9:1-2 – The statements about no pity (8:18) are immediately followed by the call for the executioners of the city of Jerusalem. Six executioners (much like the Levite temple guards in Eze.44:11) and one scribe arrive to carry out the judgment. Who is the scribe or who does the scribe represent? Suggestions have included Gabriel and the Christ.

9:3 – “The glory of the God of Israel went up”? “Above the cherubim” refers to the holy of holies and the ark of the covenant (Ex.25:18-22). Who commissions the scribe?

9:4-7 – “A mark on the forheads”? What was the mark and who was marked? (cf. Rev.7:3; 13:16) The ‘taw’ is the last letter of the Hebrew alphabet and at that time looked like an X (represented in English still in the ‘T’). This was perhaps like a signature (see Block NICOT 307). Who was to be judged by execution? Is there any gender or age discrimination? Why not? The list in 9:6 is of “the defenseless, the frail, and the innocent” (Block NICOT 308). The holy was profaned by idolatry and so was no longer holy and therefore the wicked could be slaughtered there. Iain Duguid (NIVAC 134-135) has noted the parallels to Passover in Exodus 12, but here it is Israel that is judged.

9:8-11 – “Left by myself”? Will the LORD destroy everyone? Note the reasons for the LORD’s judgment. Does he spare the righteous? (cf. Gen.18:23) Robert Chandlish (cited in Duguid NIVAC 137) astutely wrote, “The Lord waits long to be gracious, as if he knew not how to smite. He smites at last as if he knew not how to pity.”

The KNP ("corner"): Reflections Related to Ruth 3.9

(NAS) “He said, ‘Who are you?’ And she answered, ‘I am Ruth your maid. So spread your covering over your maid, for you are a close relative.’”
(NET) “He said, ‘Who are you?’ She replied, ‘I am Ruth, your servant. Marry your servant, for you are a guardian of the family interests.’”
(NIV) “‘Who are you?’ he asked. ‘I am your servant Ruth,’ she said. ‘Spread the corner of your garment over me, since you are a kinsman-redeemer.’”
(NKJV) “And he said, ‘Who are you?’ So she answered, ‘I am Ruth, your maidservant. Take your maidservant under your wing, {Or Spread the corner of your garment over your maidservant} for you are a close relative.’”

The Hebrew knp occurs 109 times in the Hebrew Bible in 86 verses in 21 of the books [most of the prophets and writings and each of the books of the Law] but only once in any verbal form [Niphal] in Isaiah 30:20 with the denominative meaning of “hide; enclose; assemble”. (TWOT 446-447)

Most of the uses of knp refer specifically to wing(s). Nearly half (51 times) of the occurrences deal with angelic beings and emphasize the traditional translation of “wing(s)”: primarily the cherubim (in visions [18 times in Ezekiel 1, 3, 5, 7, 10, 11, 16, 17, 39] and “covering” the Ark of the Covenant [22 times in I Kings 6:24, 27; 8:6-7; II Chron. 3:11-13; 5:7-8]) and seraphim. Twenty-two actually refer to birds “wing(s)” whether literally or as figurative examples.

Sixteen occurrences pertain to the clothing of a man and are typically translated as “corner; edge; border”. Four of the uses are in the account of David’s cutting off the corner of Saul’s garment as a witness to Saul that he held Saul’s life in his hands (1 Samuel 24:4, 5, 11) and perhaps the reason for this is to be found in the following analysis. Of special note are the two references in the Law to placing tassels ("tzitzith") on the four corners of garments “to look at and remember all the commandments of the LORD, so as to do them and not follow after your own heart and your own eyes, after which you played the harlot” (Numbers 15:38-39; and Deuteronomy 22:12). 

This seems to bear out in relation to the NAS95 translational footnote of Matthew 9:20 ("tassle fringe with a blue cord") in reference to Jesus healing of the woman with the issue of blood by her touching the corner of his clothes (the Syriac Peshitta has knp!).  Was she actually reaching out to touch the tassles at the corner? Jesus would certainly have had tassles there indicative of his faithfulness to the covenant and so this seems likely to have been her reason for wanting to touch the knp of Jesus clothes...to somehow lay hold of this wonder-working covenantly faithful prophet and be healed...even if only by the visible symbol of his covenant faithfulness. 

Nine times knp occurs with God as the reference – three illustratively use wings explicitly (Exodus 19:4; Deuteronomy 32:11; Psalm 91:4). While the other six may in fact refer not necessarily to wings, but simply to his covering (garments?) even in one verse finding the specific comparison to being in his “tent”. Six also very specifically connect the phrase “in the shadow” to God's knp where one may take “refuge”. In Ezekiel 16:8 there is a very noteworthy reference to the LORD’s covenanting with Israel by his throwing his covering over her to declare her as his own.

The Targums primarily understand the meaning to be “that which curves or bends; thus wing(s) or something that covers”. As to the Ruth 2:12 reference, the Rabbis understand knp to refer to the “faith” – that is the true and Jewish faith (Jastrow 651) and this would appear to be with reference to the tassles on the knp as indicative of covenant faithfulness. While Gesenius translates this particular verse in Ruth 3:9 as “throw thy coverlet over thy handmaid” and takes it to mean “take me to thy couch as thy wife” (Gesenius 406). He places it within the framework of the Deuteronomic law (22:30; 27:20; incorporating the prophetic picture of Ezekiel 16:8) of not violating one’s “father’s bed” by “uncovering his father’s coverlet” placing both under the primary definition of “edge, extremity”.

There is considerable ambiguity in translating this particular term as can be seen by the various translations of Ruth 3:9 in the opening paragraph. The vast majority of the time the simple translation of “wing(s)” is to be preferred, but in the context of humanity (and possibly the references to God himself in most of the cases) this translation is untenable. knp in this context of Ruth should therefore be understood in reference to the corner of his clothing with special reference to the covenant reminder of the tassels and the later prophetic claim to God’s covering Israel in “taking her in marriage”.

The use of knp offers great theological insight into Ruth 3:9 over against a simple “covering” of Ruth to keep her warm, she has asked Boaz to enter into the covenant of marriage with her and reminded him to be true to the covenant of the LORD in doing so...to which Boaz assents and follows through in becoming the kinsman-redeemer of Naomi through his marriage of Ruth.

Bibliography

Gesenius, H.W.F. Gesenius Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament Samuel Prideaux Tregelles trans. (Grand Rapids: MI, Baker Book House Co., 2000). Harris, R. Laid, Gleason L. Archer Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament “KNP” (2 Vols. Chicago, Moody Publishers, 1980). Jastrow, Marcus (Compiler), A Dictionary of the Targumim, The Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature (New York,G.P.Putnam’s Sons, 1903).

Ezekiel 1 – The Calling and Vision

Yahweh is by definition a God who acts…. Indeed, this collection of prophecies leaves the impression that when Yahweh acts in judgment against his people it is not primarily to punish them but that they and the world might know him (Block NICOT 49).

1:1 – Ezekiel recorded his prophecies which were given after being taken into exile to the Babylonian region of the “Chebar river (or canal)” near Nippur in 599 BC (cf. Psalm 137:1-8). He was the son of Buzi the priest and was from Jerusalem (1:3). The date of his calling by the LORD into the prophetic ministry was July 31, 593 BC. One particularly peculiar thing about the book of Ezekiel is its autobiographical style that is not found in the other prophets on such a wide scale. Perhaps this is related to the obscure mention of the “thirtieth year” which some (beginning with Origen) take to refer to his age when he was taken into exile (Block NICOT 82). Age thirty was age for entering the priesthood according to Numbers 4:30.

1:2 – Ezekiel dates his prophecies (1:2; 33:21; 40:1) according to the exile (in relation to Jehoiachin’s exile) rather than according to Zedekiah the last king of Judah. Why the precise dating of each prophecy? (see 3:16; 8:1; 20:1; 24:1; 26:1; 29:1; 29:17; 30:20; 31:1; 32:1; 33:21; 40:1) It allows for verification of the prophetic message and provides historical notation for context. Why is Jehoiachin’s reign and exile the basis for counting the years, months and days considering he only reigned for three months and ten days (2 Kings 24:8; 2 Chron.36:9)? He was the last acknowledged Davidic king of Judah (see 2 Kings 25:27-30) and he also went into exile in the year Ezekiel went into exile along with many others of Jerusalem.

1:3 – Ezekiel means “May God strengthen or toughen” or “God strengthens or toughens” (Block NICOT 9). Does his name carry significance for the ministry which he would be called to carry out? What are we to make of the “hand of the LORD” being on him? Was this an easy thing or difficult? Was Ezekiel willing or reticent?

1:4 – Ezekiel saw a great windstorm of flashing lightning and brilliant light coming from the “north” or “Zaphon” – which is the name of the mountain of Baal who was the god of storms – what is the significance? If there is any it is not suggested in the text itself other than to signify that the LORD comes and goes wherever He pleases.

1:5-14 – Who or what are the“four living creatures”? (these are explained further in Ezekiel 10) They have four faces: human (Gen.1:28), lion (Gen.49:9), ox (Psalm 106:19-20), and eagle (Deut.28:49); four wings: two touching each of the other living creatures (Exodus 25:18-22) and two covering their bodies; feet like calves but also like burnished bronze; human hands under the wings; human bodies; and they move without turning in any way and without use of either their legs or wings. Their movement is strictly powered by the Spirit (1:12) where they have free movement in any direction. What are we to make of these strange creatures? Daniel Block (NICOT 96) explains the four distinctive faces: “the four-headed cherubim declare that Yahweh has the strength and majesty of the lion, the swiftness and mobility of the eagle, the procreative power of the bull and the wisdom and reason of humankind.”

1:15-18 – What is the “wheel within a wheel”? These wheels are brilliant and sparkling and covered in “eyes”. What are we to make of the wheels within wheels? This implies utterly free movement in any direction. The wheels are associated directly to the living creatures. How should we picture these wheels? The “eyes” may either refer to the all-seeing eyes of God or simply to what appears as eyes but are really just the brilliance of some form of gems in the wheels.

1:19 – The power of movement in the creatures and wheels is the same…the “Spirit of life”. What is the significance for us and for the rest of the prophecies to Ezekiel?

1:24 – The sound of the cherubim’s wings were like “many waters,” the “voice of Shaddai,” and an “army camp” (see Psalm 18:7-15). Why these metaphors and the nature of the divine chariot from heaven?

1:25 – Whose "voice" is heard by Ezekiel? Does it matter?

1:16-28 – On the throne of lapis lazuli sits one “like a man”, but glowing, brilliant and full of fire and compared to a rainbow. He has the appearance of the glory of Yahweh. Who is this one “like a man”? (see Rev.1:12-18) What is Ezekiel’s response?

We should not get lost in the details, but always keep the big picture before us. Daniel Block (NICOT 106-109) helps by offering seven points to this first (difficult) passage: 1-the transcendent glory of God; 2-the transcendent holiness of Yahweh; 3-the sovereignty of Yahweh; 4-the proclamation of Yahweh’s interest in His people; 5-the proclamation of Yahweh’s presence among the exiles; 6-hints of the impending judgment of Yahweh; and 7-that whoever follows God’s calling must know God and have a clear vision of Him. Iain Duguid (NIVAC 59) sees this opening vision (and those that follow) as reminiscent of Genesis and the theme of “creation-uncreation-recreation”.

Bibliography

Block, Daniel I. Ezekiel (New International Commentary on the Old Testament. volumes 1-2. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1997 & 1998). Duguid, Iain M. Ezekiel (New International Version Application Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1999).

2 Kings 23:30-25:30 – The End is Near or A Glimmer of Hope

23:31 – Jehoahaz – son of Josiah. He reigned for 3 months (609 BC) over Judah and did evil in the sight of the LORD. He surrendered to Pharaoh Neco and was taken to Egypt in chains and Neco placed another of Josiah’s sons (Eliakim/Jehoiakim) on the throne of Judah in order to collect his levies against Judah.

23:34 – Eliakim (Jehoiakim) – son of Josiah. He reigned for 11 years (609-598 BC) over Judah and did evil in the sight of the LORD. Pharaoh Neco placed him on the throne in place of his brother Jehoahaz and changed his throne name from Eliakim to Jehoiakim. Jehoiakim paid large levies to Egypt by taxing the leadership of Judah. Jeremiah tells us Jehoiakim also did many oppressive and wicked things to raise money during difficult economic times for building himself a new palace (Jer.22:13-17), threatened and killed true prophets (Jer.26:1-24), and rejected the prophetic word of the LORD best demonstrated by burning a scroll from Jeremiah (Jer.30:20-26). Jeremiah also prophesied as judgment that Jehoiakim would have “the burial of a donkey” (Jer.22:19). Jehoiakim changed allegiance in 605BC from Egypt to Babylon because of a major defeat of the Egyptians by Babylon at Carchemish and in order to placate Babylon who had already taken some exiles from Judah (including Daniel and his friends – Dan.1:1-5). Three years later he rebelled and Babylon enlisted Syria, Ammon and Moab to oppose Judah. He then died and Jehoiachin his son took the throne.

24:2, 4 – What does it mean that “the LORD sent” oppressors against Judah and “was not willing to forgive”?

24:8 – Jehoiachin – son of Jehoiakim. He reigned for 3 months (598-597BC) and 11 days (2 Chron.36:9) over Judah and did evil in the sight of the LORD. Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon threatened the destruction of Jerusalem and so Jehoiachin surrendered and was taken into exile to Babylon along with all his officials, all the treasuries and articles of the Temple of the LORD, and all the soldiers and artisans of Jerusalem (including Ezekiel – Eze.1:1-3). Nebuchadnezzar made Jehoiachin’s uncle Mattaniah king in his place and changed Mattaniah’s throne name to Zedekiah.

24:18 – Zedekiah – son of Josiah. He reigned for 11 years (597-587BC) over Judah and did evil in the sight of the LORD. Jeremiah records that Zedekiah wanted the LORD to deliver Jerusalem from the Babylonians, but was unwilling to worship the LORD (Jer.21:1-1), heard the word of the LORD through prophetic warnings, but would not obey that word (Jer.34:1-22). Zedekiah was convinced by Egypt to rebel against Babylon. This was specifically opposed to the word of the LORD (Jer.27:1-11), but he preferred to listen to the false prophets who spoke of blessing and victory (Jer.5:12; 14:13). Jeremiah was sent by the LORD to make one final plea to Zedekiah to surrender to Babylon and avoid further destruction for Jerusalem, but Zedekiah refused (Jer.38:14-38). In Zedekiah’s 9th year (589 or 588) he was besieged by Babylon and held out for over a year before the food in Jerusalem ran out. Shortly thereafter Babylon breached the walls and Zedekiah fled with his soldiers, but was captured. He was then forced to watch his sons slaughtered in front of him and then his eyes were gouged out and he was taken into exile in chains to Babylon. Afterwards Nebuchadnezzar sent his commander to Jerusalem where he burned down every building of importance including particularly the Temple of the LORD and the king’s palace. Then he carried off everything of value from the Temple and executed the remaining leading officials (religious, military and political) and tore down the walls of the city. Jeremiah was surprisingly spared the killing (Jer.40:1-6).

24:20 – Who was against Judah? Could Judah have possibly defeated the vastly superior military of Babylon? Why couldn’t Judah win?

25:21 – Was it surprising that Judah went into exile? (Dt.28:15-68; 2 Kings 21:10-15; 22:15-20; also see 2 Chron.36:14-16)

25:22 – Gedaliah (a prominent man of Judah) was made governor of Judah by Babylon. He counseled the few remaining leaders to settle down and wait. However, seven months later, Ishmael, one of the leaders, assassinated him and also killed the Babylonian representatives. Ishmael then fled to Egypt because of the influence of Ammon (Jer.40:13-14) taking Jeremiah with them against Jeremiah’s wishes (Jer.42-43).

25:27 – Thirty-seven years into Jehoiachin’s imprisonment and exile he was suddenly favored by the new king of Babylon and released from prison. From then on he was cared for by Evil-Merodach king of Babylon.

25:27-30 – Why does this book end this way? It offers Judah hope and reminds them of the Davidic covenant (Dt.30:1-10; 2 Sam.7:1-17; 1 Kings 8:46-53). Zerubbabel the grandson of Jehoiachin eventually was made governor of Judah (Haggai 1:1). Also, the promise of a king to sit on the throne of David forever is found to be fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see the genealogy of Matt.1:1-17).

2 Kings 22-23:30 – Josiah – Is There Still Hope?

22:1 – Josiah – son of Amon. He reigned for 31 years (640-609BC) over Judah doing what was right in the sight of the LORD as David had done – he was the ideal king (Deut.17:20) and fulfilled the prophecy given by the unnamed prophet of Judah (1 Ki.13:2). He became king while only 8 years old. The Babylonians with the Medes found freedom from Assyria at the death of Ashurbanipal in 626BC. They conquered the Assyrian capital of Ninevah in 612 and finally destroyed the Assyrians in 609. When Josiah turned 16 (in 632BC) he began to make certain religious reforms in Judah (2 Chron.34:3). In his 12th year as king (at age 20 – or 628BC), he began removing idolatry from Judah (2 Chron.34:3). His 18th year as king of Judah (age 26 and year 622) led to the repairs and restoration of the Temple of the LORD (2 Ki.22:3; 2 Chron.34:8). Hilkiah the High Priest oversaw the repairs of the Temple and “found” the “Book of the Law” (2 Ki.22:8; apparently it had been removed from beside the Ark of the Covenant – Deut.31:26) which after being read was then read in the presence of King Josiah (2 Ki.22:10). When Josiah heard the “Book of the Law” he tore his robes in repentance and sent his administration to Huldah the prophetess to inquire of the LORD concerning the Law. In response to the message of impending judgment given by Huldah, Josiah initiated full-fledged reform in Judah and even Israel. He called all the people, the priests, and the prophets (this last one is not found in 2 Chron.34:30) together to hear the reading of the Book of the Covenant (and thereby renew the Covenant – Deut.31:9-13), and to cleanse the land and the Temple, and to celebrate the Passover in an unprecedented scale (2 Ki.23:21). In his reforms, he had the aid of the writing prophets: Jeremiah, Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah. In 609BC, Pharaoh Neco of Egypt on his way to the Euphrates to engage the Babylonians (as ally or enemy?), Josiah challenged him to fight at Megiddo. Neco declared that God had sent him and that Josiah should not fight, but Josiah attempted to disguise himself and was shot with an arrow. He was returned to Jerusalem where he died and was buried.

22:8 – What “Book of the Law (22:8) / Covenant (23:2)” was “found”? Many believe it was at least a portion of Deuteronomy if not the whole book or even possibly the whole Torah. How is it possible that it should be “found”?

22:14 – Huldah the Prophetess? She appears to have been a relative (his aunt?) of Jeremiah (Jer.32:7). Huldah was not the only prophetess known to Israel/Judah – see Miriam in Exodus 15:20; and Deborah in Judges 4:4). The prophet Joel (2:23) would later declare by the word of the LORD that the Spirit would be poured out on all persons irregardless of gender, age, or status; and Peter on the Day of Pentecost would declare that the prophecy of Joel was fulfilled in the Baptism in the Spirit (Acts 2:14-21). What do we make of the contents of Huldah’s prophecy (see Deut.28:15-68).

22:20 – How could he be “buried in peace” in light of his violent end in 1 Ki.23:29?

23:3 – The pledge of the covenant is comprehensive. It involves heart and soul to all of the commandments, regulations and decrees and involves everyone (much as the renewal in Josh.24:1-27).

23:4-25 – Josiah’s Reforms: removed and destroyed all the utensils in the Temple of the LORD used to worship other gods; removed the pagan priests from the Temple; burned the Asherah pole Manasseh had put in the Temple; destroyed the quarters used by the male shrine prostitutes and the women who made clothes for Ashtoreth; desecrated all the high places in all of Judah; broke down the shrines at the gates of Jerusalem; desecrated Topheth where children had been offered to Molech; removed the horses dedicated to the sun and destroyed the accompanying chariots; removed the altars for astral deities installed by Manasseh and Ahaz; destroyed and desecrated the high places Solomon had built for his many foreign wives (see 1 Ki.11:7); destroyed and desecrated the high places and altars in Israel set up by Jeroboam in Bethel (see 1 Ki.12:25-13:5); removed the spiritists and mediums in Judah (see Lev.19:31; 20:27; Deut.18:11); removed the idols and tools for divination; and slaughtered the priests in Israel (see Ex.22:20; Deut.13:6-11; 18:20). He also commanded Judah (and Israel) to “celebrate the Passover” (see Ex.12:1-11; Deut.16:1-8).

23:13 – The “mount of corruption” (har hammashith;) is a Hebrew play on words with the name of the “mount of anointing (‘olives’)” (har hammisha) – (Konkel NIVAC 637).

23:22 – What made this Passover celebration so utterly unique? What would be the difference between the Passover celebrated by Hezekiah (2 Chron.30:1-27) and this one (2 Chron.35:18)? According to 1 Esdras (1:1-20) and Josephus (Ant.10.70-72) it was the sheer volume of sacrifices and the scope of uniting Israel and Judah in this celebration.

23:25 – What does it mean for Josiah to turn to the LORD with his whole “heart”, “soul”, and “strength”? (see Deut.6:4-5) Why should this be followed by a “nevertheless” concerning the judgment of the LORD (2 Ki.23:26)? Also, why would the LORD reject the place he has chosen and what is the significance of removing His Name from there (23:27)?

23:29-30 – Why did Josiah go to fight Neco of Egypt given the message to do otherwise by God (compare 2 Chron.35:20-25)? Also, why did he wear a disguise (compare Ahab in 1 Ki.22:30)? This was considered such a national tragedy that Jeremiah is reputed to have penned a lasting lament to be sung annually in memoriam (2 Chron.35:25). According to 1 Esdras 1:28, Jeremiah had warned Josiah not to fight against Neco, and according to Josephus (Ant.10.76) “fate” drove him that Judah might be judged by the LORD.

2 Kings 20-21 - Hezekiah and Manasseh: Room for Repentance and Restoration?

20:1 – The LORD says Hezekiah will certainly die…but then Hezekiah prays and the LORD sends Isaiah back to Hezekiah to tell him that the LORD will actually heal him and he will live another 15 years (20:6; Isa.38:10-20). Has the LORD changed His mind?

20:8 – What is the significance of Hezekiah asking for a sign? (contrast with Ahaz in Isa.7:12)

20:12 – Why was Merodach-Baladan of Babylon visiting Hezekiah? (Isa.39:1)

20:13-15 – Why did Hezekiah show the Babylonians everything? According to 2 Chronicles 32:31 this moment was a test of the LORD. Did Hezekiah pass the test?

20:19 – How should we understand Hezekiah’s response to the LORD’s promise of plundering and exile by Babylon (20:17-18)? Does Hezekiah not care as long as it does not happen while he is king? Does Hezekiah simply acknowledge what will be no matter what and is thankful that the LORD has granted that it not occur sooner? (see the context for understanding this response as given in Isa.40ff)

20:20 – What is the significance of mentioning “the tunnel” that Hezekiah had dug? This tunnel is nearly 1600 feet long and allowed for water access in case of a siege.

21:1 – Manasseh – son of Hezekiah. He reigned for 55 years (697-642BC) over Judah (10 years the throne was shared with his father Hezekiah) doing what was evil in the sight of the LORD. According to Assyrian records, he supported Assyria as a vassal state with only one brief rebellion (2 Chron.33:10-13). He led Judah into idolatry that was worse than the nations driven out by Israel (21:3-5). He rebuilt the “high places” (like Jeroboam in 1 Kings 12:31; which his father Hezekiah had removed in 2 Kings 18:4), erected altars to Baal and made an Asherah (like Ahab in 1 Kings 16:31; see Deut.16:21) which he even placed in the temple of the LORD, built altars to the starry hosts (like Ahaz in 2 Kings 16:10-16; see Deut.4:19; Jer.7:18), he also practiced child sacrifice (like Ahaz 2 Kings 16:3), practiced sorcery, divination, consulted mediums and spiritists (see Lev.18:21; Deut.18:9-13). He violated the Davidic covenant (2 Sam.7:7-17), the Temple of the LORD (Deut.12:1-32; 1 Kings 9:1-9), and the Mosaic Law (Deut.28:49-63). He rejected the word of the LORD through the prophets (2 Kings 21:10-15) and reputed to have killed Isaiah (see 21:16 below). According to 2 Chronicles 33:10-17 during his brief rebellion against Assyria he was taken as an exile (by himself?) in chains with a ring through his nose to Babylon (?) until he repented to the LORD (see the apocryphal Prayer of Manasseh) and the LORD restored him to his throne in Jerusalem. He even removed many of the idols and shrines he had built, but this appears to not have lasted long and the writer of Kings never mentions this positive note about Manasseh.

21:10 – What do the “prophets” signify? They signify that the LORD has not utterly abandoned His people. They are grace and mercy, righteousness and justice calling to His people to repent. They are representative of the faithful who hear the word of the LORD and obey. They are the testimony to the covenant and to the responsibility inherent in the covenant in order to experience the blessings of the covenant.

21:12 – “the ears of everyone who hears of it will tingle”? (see Jer.15:1-4) The judgment of a plumb-line like the one used against Samaria will be used against Jerusalem (Amos 7:7-9) as well as like the washing of a dish that is turned over, but what does all of this mean? It means that the judgment which is coming will be beyond repair and will be utterly devastating even to the nations who are witness to this judgment.

21:16 – What does it mean that Manasseh “filled Jerusalem from one end to the other” by shedding so much innocent blood? Tradition says that Manasseh had Isaiah sawn in two (this account is given in the Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah 5.1; several Targumim and many Early Church Fathers like Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and Origen; see also Heb.11:37). Josephus wrote that Manasseh had prophets killed daily in Jerusalem as well as slaughtering any righteous persons he found (Ant.10.37-38).

21:18, 26 – What is the reference to Manasseh and Amon being “buried in the garden of Uzza”? Konkel suggests that the “garden of Uzza” may be referring to “an enclosed space constructed in honor of a Canaanite astral deity” named Attar-melek, which was the star Venus, in Arabic named “Uzza” (NIVAC 623).

21:19 – Amon – son of Manasseh. He reigned for 2 years (642-640BC) over Judah doing what was evil in the sight of the LORD just like his father Manasseh. He was assassinated (by whom?) and the assassins were put to death by those loyal to the family of David.