K

    

     K

KAB (קב)  A measurement of capacity mentioned only in II Kings 6, about a li-

        ter or slightly more than a quart.

KABZEEL (קבצאל, God shall gather)  A city in the extreme southeast part of

        Judah, near the border of Edom.  It was the native town of Benaiah, one of

        the chief officers of David and Solomon.  It was one of the towns reoccu-

        pied by the Judeans after Babylonian exile.

KADESH, KADESH-BARNEA (קדש ,קדש ברנע, kadesh means “holy” or 

        “sanctuary”)   An oasis in the Wilderness of Zin, where the Israelites en-

        camped for a lengthy period during their travels from Egypt to Canaan.  

        The name Kadesh and Kedesh are used for cities that were ancient sanc-

        tuaries in the land of Canaan.  The meaning of the word “Barnea” is un-

        known.  Kadesh-barnea is located just south of the western extremity of 

        the Israelite border.   Ezekiel’s Meribath-kadesh (waters of strife at Ka-

        desh) is located here also.  There are 3 springs presently located in this 

        area.   ‘Ain el-Qudeirat is the largest and the only one which flows all 

        year. There are also the remains of an Israelite fortress maintained there 

        between the 900s and 700s B.C. 

                   The first reference to Kadesh-barnea is in Genesis 14, where it is

        mentioned together with its old name Enmishpat; it was the point farthest

        west that was reached in Chedorlaomer’s raid.  After Moses and the Isra-

        elites left Mount Sinai, they journeyed northwestward across the “great 

        and terrible wilderness.”   It was from Kadesh that the Israelites, rejec-

        ting the counsel of Moses, made a hasty attempt to force their way into 

        the hill country of the Amorites and were beaten back with great slaugh-

        ter; they remained at Kadesh “for many days.”  It is not certain how long

        this first sojourn in Kadesh lasted.  From Numbers 15-20, it might be in-

        ferred that almost all of the wilderness sojourn was spent there.

                   The above chapters are from the Priestly segment or source of this

        story, and it is in the middle of the story created from the Jahwist and Eloh-

        wist sources.  Numbers 33 has a list of stations which follows closely the 

        account of the leaving Egypt, journey to Sinai and trip northwestward as 

        far as Hazeroth.  The first sojourn at Kadesh-barnea is left out; it is possible

        that the list is wrong or that Kadesh is the same as Rithmah. 

                    According to Numbers 20, it was at Kadesh that the people mur-

        mured because of lack of water; Moses brought forth a supply from the 

        rock, but was punished for some lack of faith, not clearly defined, by being

        forbidden to enter the Promised Land.   Numbers 20 says that Moses sent 

        messengers to the king of Edom, but Deuteronomy knows nothing of such 

        an embassy and indicates that the Israelites passed through the Seir terri-

        tory of the Edomites.  The final reference to Kadesh-barnea is when Eze-

        kiel makes it a part of the southern border of his idealized land of Israel.   

        In some older accounts Kadesh was regarded as much nearer the mount 

        revelation than the later narratives have it.  

KADESH ON THE ORONTES.  A town south of the Lake of Hums, where the 

        famous battle between the Egyptians under Ramses II and the Hittites 

        took place in 1288 B.C.

KADMIEL  (קדמיאל, God goes before)  A Levite name connected with post-

        exilic reconstruction (Ezra 2,3).

KADMONITES (קדמני, easterners) The Semitic people, nomadic or pastoral 

        who inhabited the Syro-Arabian Desert between Palestine-Syria and the 

        Euphrates River.  The Kadmonites are among those whose land God gave

        to Abram and his descendants (Genesis 15).

KAIN (קינ, lance, spear)  1.  Singular collective form of the clan name equiva-

        lent to the Kenites.  The same word designates Cain, the son of Adam 

        and Eve; some scholars view Cain as the ancestor and the origin of the 

        name of the Kenite tribe, but this is very doubtful (Numbers 24; Judges 4).

                   2.  A city in the south of the hill country of Judah; identified with 

        Khirbet Yaquin.  According to Arab tradition, Abraham witnessed the de-

        struction of Sodom and Gomorrah nearby.

K-1

KALLAI (קלי, swift) A priest in the time of Joiakim (Nehemiah 12).

KAMON (קמון, standing firm)   A city of Gilead where the judge Jair died and

        was buried (Judges 10).  It has been identified as Qamm, a village about 

        5 km north of Taiyibeh; another possibility is the village of Qumeim.

KANAH (קנה, place of reeds)    1. The brook Kanah was an important feature 

        of the Ephraim-Manasseh border. Some of Manasseh’s cities were south

        of the brook in Ephraim.  Most commentators identify the brook Kanah 

        with Wadi Qanah, which flows into the modern Yarkon before reaching 

        the Mediterranean (Joshua 17, 19).

                   2.  The city of Kanah on the northern border of the territory of Asher,

        about 10 km southeast of Tyre. 

KAREAH (קרה, bald one) The father of Johanan, who was a Judean contem-

        porary of Jeremiah and one of the captains of the forces in the open coun-

        try who escaped deportation by Nebuchadnezzar (II Kings 25).

KARKA  (הקרקע, bottom)  A city on the southern border of Judah near Az-

        mon; the site is unknown (Joshua 15).

KARKOR (קרקר, foundation) A place up in the mountains in eastern Gilead,

        site unknown, where Gideon for the second time surprised and defeated 

        the Midianites (Judges 8).

KARNAIM (קרנים, horns) A city in northern Trans-jordan; same as Asteroth-

        Karnaim (See entry).  Amos apparently makes a word play on the meaning 

        of Karnaim (Amos 6).

KARTAH (קרתה, city) A Levitical town in the territory allotted to Zebulun. Its 

        location is unknown (Joshua 21).

KARTAN (קרתן, double-city) A Levitical town in Naphtali; it is perhaps in up-

        per Galilee (Joshua 21).

KATTATH (קטת, small) A town in Zebulun (Joshua 19); probably the same as 

        Kitron.

KEDAR (קדר, dark-skinned) The second son of Ishmael, the ancestor and ori-

        gin of the name of an important Arab tribe.  The Kedarites were desert-

        dwellers, living alone in tents, or in unwalled villages.  They were known 

        for their fighters and particularly their archers.   Evidently the Kedarites 

        occupied a position of power and “glory” in the ancient Near East.

                   Kedar is associated with 11 other Ishmaelites tribes.  Arab tribes and

        places mentioned in connection with Kedar include Dedanites and Tema, 

        Sela, Midian, Ephah, Sheba, and Nebaioth, and Hazor.   Kedar and his bro-

        thers settled between Havilah and Shur.   The territory of Kedar was east 

        of Transjordan, and at least part of the tribe wandered in this area seeking 

        pasture like modern Bedouin.   

                   The Assyrian campaign records of the 600s B.C. refer to the Keda-

        rites; at that time Kedarite was almost synonymous with Arabs.  Kedarites 

        were among the soldiers of Abiate, the leading Arab general in the wars 

        against Ashurbanipal.  The tribute & booty taken by the Assyrians from 

        Kedar include gold, precious stones, aromatic spices, beasts of burden & 

        cattle.  The Babylonian Nebuchadnezzar (605-562) also conquered Kedar.

                 Geshem the Arabian, king of Geshem, was one who obstructed the 

        work of Nehemiah in rebuilding the wall.  Kedarite influence in the latter 

        400s B.C. extended from Transjordan to northern Arabia, to the border of 

        Egypt.  Assyrian records tell of the shrine of King Hazail at Adumatu, a 

        shrine which includes the gods and goddesses Atarsamain, Dai, Nahai, 

        Ruldaiu, Abirillu, and Atarquruma.

KEDEMAH (קדמה, eastward) A son of Ishmael, and the name of a Arabian 

        tribe (Genesis 25; I Chronicles 1).

KEDEMOTH  (קדמות, origin)   A priestly city in Reuben apparently situated 

        on the upper Arnon.  It was from the wilderness nearby that Moses sent a 

        message to Sihon, king of the Amorites, requesting passage through his 

        country.  It was one of the Levitical cities, assigned to the Merarites (Deu-

        teronomy 2; Joshua 13, 21).

K-2

KEDESH (קדש, sanctuary)  1.  A town on the southern border of Judah; same

        as Kadesh (Joshua 15).

                  2.  A Canaanite town in eastern Galilee, the king of which was defea-

        ted by Joshua (Joshua 12); it was allotted to Naphtali.  It was set apart as 

        one of the cities of refuge and allotted to the Gershonite Levites.  Kedesh 

        in Naphtali was the home of Barnak and was where Deborah and Barak 

        gathered their followers for the battle with Sisera, who met his death at the

        hands of Jael near there.  Tiglath-pileser captured the town.

                3. According to I Chronicles 6, a city in Issachar, allotted to the Ger-

        shonite Levites.

KEEPER (שר (sar), commander, chief; שמר (sha mar); desmofulax (des

        mof oo lax), jailer  fulax (foo lax), watchman, guard).  A guard or watch-

        man, especially over cattle, vineyards, and orchards.  In Egypt the keepers 

        were the lowest class, but in Israel theirs was an honorable profession.  As 

        urbanization increased, the prestige of this class declined.   Amos may 

        have been a keeper of cattle.   Abel was a shepherd.   Symbolically, a per-

        son is to be keeper of his tongue and lips.

KEHELATHAH  (קהלתה, assembly)  One of the stopping places of the Israe-

        lites after Hazeroth.  

KEILAH  (קעלה)  A fortified city of Judah in the district of Libnah-Mareshah, 

        13.6 km northwest of Hebron. 

                   The possession of Qilti (Keilah) during the turbulent Amarna per-

        iod in Palestine (1369-1353 B.C.), seems to have been in dispute between

        Jerusalem and Hebron.  David rescued Keilah from a Philistine attack, but

        when Saul heard that David was at Keilah, he sent a detachment of troops 

        to take David and his men; David withdrew into the wilderness of Ziph.  

        Keilah was one of a number of places at which the prophet Habakkuk was 

        said to be buried.   Centuries later, Keilah was occupied and rebuilt by 

        Jewish returnees from the Exile.

KELAIAH (קליה, dwarfish)  A Levite compelled by Ezra to give up his foreign  

        wife; identified with Kelita.  

KELITA  (קליטא, dwarfish)  A Levite who assisted in interpreting the law when it

        was read at the great assembly in the time Ezra.   Kelaiah, a Levite com-

        pelled by Ezra to give up their foreign wives, was also called Kelita; most

        likely it refers to one man with 2 different names.

KEMUEL (קמואל, assembly of God)  1. The father of Aram, and the son of 

        Nahor Abraham’s brother (Genesis 22).       2.  A leader of the tribe of 

        Ephraim, and its commissioner for the allotment of Canaan (Numbers 34).

              3.  A Levite; father of Hashabiah, who is listed as a contemporary of 

        King David (I Chronicles 27).                

KENAN  (קינן, smith)  Son of Enosh (Genesis 5).

KENATH  (קנת, possession)  A city in eastern Gilead which was taken by No-

        bah and given his own name.

KENAZ  (קנז)  1. Son of Eliphaz the first-born of Esau; Edomite clan chief; the

        ancestor and origin of the name of the Kenizzites.      2.  The father of Oth-

        niel (Joshua 15; Judges 1).       3.  Grandson of Caleb through Elah.

KENITES  (קיני, smith, forge)  A nomadic or semi-nomadic tribe of smiths, who

        as early as the 1200s B.C. appear to have made their livelihood as metal 

        craftsmen on the western slopes of the mineral-rich Wadi ‘Arabah above 

        Tamar.   It is probable that they somewhat resembled the Sleib, who are 

        traveling smiths today.   The ancient Kenites were probably more prosper-

        ous than the Sleib.   Nomadic tribes of metal workers in the ancient Near 

        East are known from 2000-1700 B.C.  It is possible that Tubal-cain is con-

        nected to the Kenites.   Both copper and iron are known to have been 

        mined at a very early date in the Jordan Valley.

K-3

                   In the earliest biblical reference the Kenites appear at the head of a 

        list of peoples living in Canaan whom God had promised Abram to dispos-

        sess.  From the 1200s there is another mention of the Kenites in the ora-

        cles of Balaam; Kenites are consigned to destruction.   Most often the Ke-

        nites are seen in close association with Hebrews, or at least holding a re-

        cognized place in Israelite society.  

                   Since the Israelites had no smiths of their own, by order of the Phili-

        stines, the Kenites may have been living among the Midianites.  I Samuel 

        15 acknowledges that the Kenites “showed kindness” to Israel during the 

        Exodus, so these traveling craftsmen were associated with the Mosaic 

        movement.  Some scholars assert that Moses was introduced to Yahweh 

        and his worship through Kenite mediation.  Our present evidence doesn't

        support this.

                   After reaching the Negeb near Arad in southern Palestine, the Ke- 

        nites apparently settled among the Amalekites, and were closely associa-

        ted with them in Saul’s time.   In the judges’ period, the Kenite’s nomadic 

        branch, apparently under Heber’s leadership, lived in Galilee.   The fact 

        that Kenites are mentioned in biblical tradition suggests that they weren't

        absorbed by any other people.  The Kenites’s last mention in connection 

        with Israel’s history is during David’s time before he became Israel’s king.

        We hear no more of the Kenites in Israel’s later history.  Presumably they 

        disappeared or lost their identity sometime from 1000 to 700 B.C. 

KENIZZITE.  Kenizzites were a non-Israelite people who moved into the Negeb

        before the main body of the Conquest.   They were composed of the clans 

        of the Calebites, who occupied Hebron, the Othnielites, and perhaps the 

        Jerahmeelites.   Later all these became politically related to the group ge-

        nerally termed Judah.

KENOSIS (kenwsiV , empty, deplete)  A term used in Christian theology from

        the 200s or 300s A.D., to describe the idea of Phillipians 2, which says that

        the pre-existent Christ “emptied himself,” or laid aside his equality with 

        God, in order to become human.   The point of the apostle Paul must be 

        that Christ stripped himself of the prerogatives of deity, & that God wasn't

        just masquerading as human, but that Christ actually suffered all the conse-

        quences of his humanity.  

                   There is some reason to think that the passage in this chapter had 

        as its source an early Christian hymn or proclamation of the gospel and 

        thus is older than the Pauline letters.  The word “kenosis” is employed in 

        modern theology to describe a wider doctrine—namely, that Christ volunta-

        rily gave up some or all of his divine attributes, including divine knowledge.

        The Gospel of John appears to take a different position.   It portrays the 

        earthly Jesus as possessing miraculous power and knowledge.   

KEREN-HAPPUCH (קרן הפוך, paint-horn) The youngest of the daughters who

        were born to Job after the restoration of his fortunes (Job 42).

KERIOTH (הקריות, cities)  A city in the tableland of Moab, apparently strongly 

        fortified and containing a sanctuary of Chemosh (Amos 2).   See also 

        Kerioth-Hezron.

KERIOTH-HERZON  (קריות הרצון, protected cities)  A village of Judah in

        the Negeb district of Beer-sheba, about 7 km south of Maon.

KEROS  (קירס, weaver’s comb)  Head of a family of postexilic temple servants.

KERYGMA  (khrugma, proclaiming)  The general term for preaching.  See

        Preaching; Gospel.

KETHIBH  (כתיב, that which is written)  The Masoretic Text to which consonant 

        markings have been added.

KETTLE  (דוד (dode), pot, cauldron; סיר (seer), pot)  A vessel in which the sa-

        crifice might be boiled I Samuel 2), or a pot in which meat is cooked 

        (Michah 3)

KETURAH  (קתורה, incense)  The 2nd wife of Abraham, who bore him 6 sons.

        It was presumably after Sarah’s death that Keturah became Abraham’s 

        wife and gave birth to Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak, and 

        Shuah.   The Keturah tradition seems to reflect the belief of the Hebrews

        that they were related to these 6 Arab tribes.  The number 6 suggests that 

        they were organized into a loose tribal confederation.

K-4

KEY  (kleiV (klice)) Literally, an instrument for locking or unlocking doors or

        gates, that which controls entrance or exit.  Symbolically, Jesus as the

        Messiah receives power to admit or exclude people from the kingdom 

        of David. In Revelation 20, the key is used to release plagues from the

        Abyss.   Open gates signify unrestricted access to God’s forgiveness 

        and community (Revelation 21; 22).

KEZIAH  (קציעה, cassia (cinnamon)) The 2^nd of Job’s daughters who were

        born to him when good fortune was returned to him.

KEZIZ, VALLEY OF (עמק קציץ (‘em ek  keh zeez), valley of cutting) King

        James Version translation (Josh. 18).

KHIRBET KERAK See entry in Old Testament Apocrypha/Influence Outside the

        Bible section of the Appendix.

KHIRBET QUMRAN.  The ruins of an Essene monastery which was the center

        of the community of the Dead Sea Scrolls, about 13.5 km south of Jericho.

        See Dead Sea Scrolls entry in this section.

KIBROTH-HATTAAVAH (קברות התאוה, tombs of lust)  The first stopping

        place of the Israelites after they left Sinai and before they came to Haze-

        roth, about a 10-hour journey by foot from Jebel Musa (Mount Sinai?).  

        Here the Israelites ate too many quail and an epidemic broke out in 

        which many people died (Numbers 11).

KIBZAIM  (קבצים, two heaps)  A city in Ephraim, one of the 48 cities allotted to

        the Levites after the conquest of Canaan (Joshua 21).   Its location is 

        uncertain.

KID  (גדי (ged ee))  A young goat.  In the husbandry of ancient Israel a young

        male kid was the most expendable of the animals, being less valuable

         than either its mother or a young lamb; it therefore served admirably 

        as a small present or as the meat basis for a special meal.  A year-old 

        kid is suitable for Passover.   In the picture of the future age of peace, 

        marked by amity among even the animals, the kid is grouped with the 

        leopard.  The thrice-repeated injunction against boiling a kid in goat’s 

        milk has long been suspected of being directed against some popular 

        Canaanite ritualistic practice, perhaps to ensure good crops.

KIDNEYS (כליות (kel ee oth), inward, secret parts)  The word “kidneys” has 

        both a literal & metaphorical sense.  Where the King James Version trans-

        lates this word as “reins,” the Revised Standard Version in these passages 

        renders “mind,” “heart,” “soul,” or “inward parts.”

                   The kidneys of animals are mentioned only in connection with sacri-

        ficial regulations.  The kidneys, together the fat attached to them, were the 

        special parts to be burned upon the altar as a gift to Yahweh.  Because of 

        their color and density, the kidneys may have been regarded as in a spe-

        cial sense the seat of life, and therefore the choicest part of an animal.

                 The reasons which led to the attaching of special value to the kidneys

        in animal sacrifice may have led also to the view that they are an important

        center of psychic and moral life in humans.  They are associated with the 

        heart as constituting the innermost sanctuary of the human personality.  

        More characteristic are the passages which seem to connect the kidneys 

        with the moral life (Psalm 16; Proverbs 23).

KIDRON, BROOK OF (קדרון, silty)  The name attached to a valley east of

        Jerusalem, dividing the eastern parts of the city from the Mount of Olives. 

                   The brook of Kidron bears to the southeast from Jerusalem, winds 

        through the wilderness of Judah, and drains into the Dead Sea.   The Ki-

        dron is described as a nachal, a valley down which a stream of water may

        flow sporadically.  The actual bed of the valley in its suburban portions is 

        from 3 to 15 meters above the primitive level, because of the accumula-

        tion of rubbish.   No water runs in it except right after heavy rainfalls.  

        During the earlier monarchy period the waters of the spring of Gihon were

        flowing freely into the Kidron. 

                   Orchards and gardens were watered from the brook or from irriga-

        tion channels dug along the lower slopes of the valley beneath the city of 

        David.  The Davidic kings owned some property in the Kidron, which on 

        account of this came to be known as the King’s Valley.  The irrigation of 

        the Kidron gardens must have been drastically reduced when Hezekiah 

        sealed off Gihon and the waterspouts of the old aqueduct.

K-5

                   The Kidron is commonly regarded as the boundary of Jerusalem.  It 

        has been the setting for struggles between the religion of the Hebrew God, 

        Yahweh, and foreign cults, like those practiced on the high places of the 

        Mount of Corruption.   The rocky slopes on the eastern side of the valley 

        have been used for the burial of the dead until our days.   The four monu-

        ments surrounded today by a modern Jewish cemetery may date from the 

        200s B.C.   All these tombs have been looted, and have been used as shel-

        ters by Christian anchorites. 

                   The Fourth Gospel mentions explicitly the Valley of Kidron, which 

        Jesus crossed with his disciples after leaving the Upper Room.  Some 

        scholars of the 300s A.D. identified the Valley of Kidron with the Valley of 

        Jehoshaphat or Decision based on a passage from Jeremiah 31.   

KILN (תנור (tan ure), oven, furnace; מלבן (mal bane), brick mold) A large fur-

        nace used for processing various materials.  In Hebrew, tanur is used both 

        for the small bread oven and for the large pottery kiln.   The firing of the 

        kiln was the key trade secret in ancient ceramics.   In Nahum 3 and II Sa-

        muel 12, the old translation of malban was brickkiln, but the Revised Stan-

        dard Version translates it as “brick mold,” as most Palestine brick was sun-

        dried.   The smoking furnace of Genesis 19 and Exodus 19 was probably a 

        charcoal kiln, although it could be a smelting furnace.  In later Israelite his-

        tory it could have been a lime kiln.   

KINAH (קינה, lamentation)  A city in southeastern Judah, near Edom.   The 

        name indicates a Kenite settlement.

KINE.  The King James Version plural of Cow.

KING, KINGSHIP  (מלך (meh lek);משל (mah shal), to rule, have dominion

        over; basileuV (bah see leh oos))  “King” is the designation applied to  

        a male sovereign, who usually exercised power over an independent na-

        tion.  The ancient Near Eastern monarchies were of 3 types.  The 1^st 

        group was the petty kings of the Palestine cities who were of foreign origin

        and ruled over the city-state’s population.   The biblical period’s Egyptian &

        Mesopotamian kings represented a 2^nd type, whose kingship was regar-

        ded as a political order divinely ordained.  A 3^rd class of kingship might be 

        seen in Trans-jordanian kings, who were ethnically related to Hebrews.  

        These kings started out as part of the native army’s military leadership.

                   In the earliest times, the Israelites of the settled country were under 

        the leadership of tribal or clan chieftains, charismatic leaders (judges) who 

        rallied a number of the tribes into a united military force.  The only tie effec-

        tively joining the people was their faith.  They entered into a covenant with

        Yahweh and recognized Yahweh as their king.  

                   The first attempt to introduce a kingship in Israel is associated with 

        Gideon, who was offered the rule over the people of Israel.  Gideon’s refu-

        sal of the offer clearly witnesses to the recognition of the Lord’s kingship.  

        But after Gideon’s death, his son Abimelech eliminates all other “rivals for

        the throne,” and claimed the kingship of the city of Shechem.  

                   Scholars either deny that Gideon’s refusal was a historical fact, in-

        terpret his words as a shrewd diplomatic rejection of the external signs 

        while retaining actual royal power, or understand it as Gideon’s oath pled-

        ging to preserve, undisturbed, the continuity of the theocracy during his 

        rule.  In any case, the kingship of Gideon and Abimelech were limited in 

        importance and scope.

                   The institution of the kingship in Israel was prepared by the slow set-

        tlement of the nomadic people and the embracing of a sedentary lifestyle.  

        The final impetus came from a desperate political situation.  Most Israelites 

        were under a heavy Philistine yoke; those who were not suffered at the 

        hands of the Ammonites.   So the introduction of kingship was a historical 

        necessity.  Those biblical writers against the monarchy stamped the peo-

        ple’s wish to have a king as an apostasy and rejection of the Lord’s king-

        ship.  Saul was selected and anointed by the Lord to be king over Israel.   

        Saul appeared to be a charismatic leader, so his reign represents a transi-

        tion between the tribal kingship of the past and the national monarchy of 

        the present.

                   In the beginning, there were no clearly defined provisions for the 

        transmission of the royal power.   Israelite kingship was dependent on a 

        special divine designation as to who would be the king, which put the here-

        ditary and charismatic principle of selection into immediate tension.  The 

        southern Judah accepted the charismatic David, while the north and Trans-

        jordanian tribes accepted the hereditary title of Ishbosheth, Saul’s son. 

K-6

                   Even though the kingship’s hereditary character was recognized, 

        this right wasn't a rule of law in the Near East.  In the struggle for David’s 

        throne, between Solomon and Adonijah, the first-born’s rights and the fa-

        ther’s right to designate his heir conflicted.  The fact that the names of the 

        mothers of the kings of Judah are preserved indicates that the maternal 

        side of the king’s forbears plays some role in the royal succession.  

                   The duties of the king were 3-fold: military leader; supreme judge;

        and officiating priest.  The king was the first military leader of the nation, 

        and his duty was to lead the army and to fight the battles of the nation.  

        The king’s duties in the ancient Near East included the obligation to up-

        hold the concept of justice within the nation.   Also the kings of both Israe-

        lite kingdoms had the duty & power for judging occasional disputed cases.

        The king’s legal function must not be interpreted as a kind of supreme tri-

        bunal, for the administering of justice was normally practiced by the el-

        ders, without provision for further appeal.

                   For the execution of his power, the king needed officials who helped 

        him to secure the revenue necessary for the maintenance of the royal po-

        wer.  The pre-monarchic Israelite concept of kingship was seriously influ-

        enced by some bitter experiences with the kings of Canaan.  There was op-

        position to the introduction of kings, and the despotic excesses of kings 

        were depicted as the “ways of the king.” 

                   The rights and duties of the king were codified and deposited in the

        central sanctuary.  The king was not exempt from the regulations of ancient

        civil laws.  Kings acquired property by buying it.  Undoubtedly, kings had 

        the right to seize and appropriate the estate of a conspirator.  The king was 

        not the absolute lord of life of his subjects.  While there were laws of king-

        ship which outlined and limited the royal power, these didn't prevent fla-

        grant disregard for the law by some powerful rulers such as Solomon and 

        Manasseh. 

                    The royal entourages members were those who “saw the king’s 

        face”.  The bodyguard, composed of foreign mercenaries, was in constant 

        company of the king during military enterprises.   The commander of the 

        body guard and the commander of the army belonged to the royal court.  

        There was the recorder or announcer, the secretary, the chief administrator,

        who was over the 12 administrative district officers, a kind of major-domo,

        and an overseer of the forced labor.  Besides these secular officers, priests 

        were attached to the royal court.   Prophets were also associated with the 

        court.

                   Saul didn't subject the people to taxation; his followers brought him 

        occasional gifts.   David had considerable spoil from his many wars and 

        thus there was no urgent need for taxation.  The census of the people was 

        most likely preparatory to a system of taxation.  During the reign of Solo-

        mon, the territory of the northern tribes was divided into twelve administra-

        tive and revenue districts.  The same administrative and revenue districts 

        remained in existence, even after the north-south split of the kingdom.  The

        king also had his own estate.  The royal landholdings grew considerably at

        the expense and to the detriment of the people.

                   The bond service or corvee might be regarded as a royal revenue.  

        This form of forced labor was introduced under the reign of David.  Seve-

        ral of the Fertile Cresecnt'smost important trade routes passed through

        Israel, and Solomon secured an income from the road toll paid by the mer-

        chants.   The merchant fleet of Solomon took up trade connections with 

        some Arabian and African ports.  The vivid interest of the kings in mercan-

        tile enterprise is also documented in the agreement of Ben-hadad of Syria 

        and Ahab of Israel.  

                   Religious Aspects of the Israelite Kingship—In the ancient Near 

        East, kingship was nowhere a purely secular institution.  The Lord was the

        original King of Israel.  But there is sufficient evidence to substantiate the 

        claim that the Covenant of Israel with Yahweh was a royal covenant.  Even

        in circles favorable toward human kingship, the Lord’s kingship over Israel

        was maintained as an article of faith. 

                  The fact that the Lord was absolute ruler didn't exclude the demo-

        cratic acceptance of the king by the elders and chieftains.  This democratic

         recognition appeared in the making of a covenant before the Lord.  The 

        most essential part of the enthronement ceremony was the anointment of 

        the king.  Solomon was brought on the mule of his father to the Gihon, ac-

        companied by the foreign mercenaries.   A sacrifice was made at Gihon, 

        and then he was anointed by the priest Zadok.  A festival procession then 

        accompanied the new king from the holy place to the throne.  Somewhere 

        within this ceremony the king received a new name, a throne name.  Jedi-

        diah was the private name of Solomon, and Elhanan was probably the ori-

        ginal name of David. 

K-7

                   The kings were believed to be superhuman in the ancient Near East;

        the Canaanite vassals addressed their Egyptian sovereign as “my god.”  

        Egyptians believed that the king was the very son of the gods by nature.

        He did not merely uphold justice; he was the very source of justice.   The 

        Egyptian kings, being divine, were worshiped in their life and death. 

                   The Mesopotamian concept of kingship was compatible with the 

        divinity of the king.  Sumerians most often looked upon the king as being 

        a human who reigned as a vice-regent. The early Babylonian kings freely 

        used the title “god.”   The Babylonian king was the gods divine servant, 

        chosen to maintain the reign of the gods.  The relationship of the Babylo-

        nian king to the gods was by adoption, not by nature.   The election en-

        dowed the king with “divine,” superhuman qualities, but his divinity was 

        “functional” rather than meta-physical; the king was never worshiped. 

                   The Babylonian king was a “divine” intermediary between the 

        gods and the people.  One of his main functions was to participate in the 

        most important religious rites, especially during the New Year festival, 

        when he helped the gods establish for a year the cosmic order.  Occasio-

        nally the king took part in the rite of “sacred marriage,” from which bles-

        sing and fertility stemmed for the land and the people. 

                   The Hittites never recognized the living king as a god.  Neverthe-

        less, the divinity of the dead was an established relief.  In Canaan, as the 

        Ugaritic documents indicate, kings of the legendary past like Keret were 

        recognized as demigods.   The prevalent variations in the Near Eastern 

        concept of kingship militate against the contention that there was a gene- 

        ral Near Eastern belief in the divinity of the kings. 

                   The problem of divine kingship in Israel must be viewed within the 

        context of Israel’s monotheism.  By being anointed, the king of Israel be-

        came sacrosanct.  God and the king were equally to be feared & obeyed. 

        It was an article of faith in Judah that God made a covenant with David 

        concerning his dynasty.   Judah’s kings were heirs to the divine promise 

        that the Davidic king would be the “son” of God through his adoption by 

        God.  Because of such intimacy with God, the king embodied the Lord’s 

        blessing.  Through adoption, the king became God’s heir and could ask for 

        universal dominion over the nations of the earth. 

                   The king’s sacred nature was shared with the priests.  Some of the 

        exaggerated expressions must be seen as stylistic borrowings from the 

        royal courts of the great empires.  Kings apparently did not assume their 

        own divinity.   The Davidic king was a channel of blessing, but the Lord 

        was the source.   The king of Israel was close to God, but his proximity to 

        the deity must not be interpreted as him being a deity in any sense.

                   The king’s importance in Israel’s religion was enhanced by his asso-

        ciation with the cult.  On important occasions the kings offered sacrifices 

        and supplications to God.   David danced in the ark procession, and after-

        ward he blessed the people in the Lord’s name.  The king had authority 

        over the priests and, at least to some extent, over the cult.   Noteworthy is 

        the important part David played in the preparations for building the temple

        and in the cult’s musical aspects.  The importance of the king’s cultic role 

        must be measured by the fact that, in the pre-monarchic period and proba-

        bly later, any head of family had the right to offer sacrifices. 

                   The most important cultic function of the reigning monarch of Judah

        was his participation in the ritual of the New Year festival.   The so-called 

        “myth-and-ritual school” of the history of religions endeavors to establish 

        that myth and ritual stood in organic relationship within the religions of 

        the ancient Near East.   There is sufficient evidence supporting the exis-

        tenceof ritual drama of the same kind in Ugarit.   The New Year ritual in 

        Israel itself complied with the general Near Eastern ritual pattern. 

                  The proposed reconstructions of the Israelite New Year ritual have 2 

        constant elements: a sham battle in sacramental re-enactment of God’s 

        struggle against and victory over the forces of chaos; and the procession of

        the ark-throne and the king’s annual enthronement.  Whatever be the case 

        in regard to the existence of the pre-exilic New Year ritual, this much can 

        be convincingly established:  the king didn't represent the Deity in the Isra-

        elite ritual.   The king’s function was that of a priestly intermediary who re-

        presented the people in penitence and supplication before God in accord 

        with his office as the “priest after the order of Melchizedek.”

KINGDOM OF GOD, OF HEAVEN  (h basileia tou qeou, twn ouranwn

        (eh  ba see lee ah  too  thay oo, ton  oo ra non))   The Bible regards the 

        kingly rule of God in 3 different ways: as eternal fact; as something mani-

        fested upon earth in its acceptance by men; and in its final form, some-

        thing to be hoped for in the future. 

                   List of Topics—1. Terminology and Meaning;     2. The 

       Jewish Background;     3. God' Present, Eternal, and Univer-      sal Kingship;     4. The Teaching of Jesus: Gospel of Mark;     

        5. The Teaching of Jesus: Gospels of Matthew and Luke;     

        6. Jesus' view vs. Jewish apocalypses;     7. The Kingdom of 

        God in the Rest of the New Testament 

                   1. Terminology and Meaning—The nearest equivalent phrase in 

        the Old Testament is malkuth Yahweh, “kingdom of the Lord” in I Chroni-

        cles 28.  The phrases “thy kingdom,” “his kingdom,” and “my kingdom” 

        appear several times in relation to God.  “Thine is the kingdom, O Lord,” 

        is found in I Chronicle 29.  There is no difference in meaning between 

        “kingdom of God,” and “kingdom of heaven,” since the word “heaven” 

        was frequently used by the Jews as a reverent substitution for “God.”   In

        Jewish prayers there are phrases such as the one in the Kaddish:  “may 

        he establish his kingdom during your life.”  Kingdom here means “reign.” 

8

   

                In the New Testament, the use of “kingdom of heaven” was confined

        to the Gospel of Matthew, which, in keeping with its Jewish-Christian cha-

        racter, mirrors the Old Testament use of “heaven” to mean God.  Evidence

        suggests that “kingdom of God” was the form of the expression normally 

        used by him.   In a few passages the kingdom is spoken of as belonging to 

        the “Son of man.”   In the Gospel of John the term “kingdom of God” oc-

        curs twice.  In Acts “kingdom of God” occurs six times and “the kingdom”

        twice.  “Kingdom of God” is found in Romans 14.  In the New Testament 

        where “kingdom” is used, the Greek word is always basilei, and its most 

        accurate meaning is “reign” (i.e. the act rather than the place). 

                   2. The Jewish Background—If  the actual term “kingdom,” in rela-

        tion to God, is of comparatively rare occurrence in the Old Testament, the 

        concept in which the idea of God’s kingdom is rooted—namely, the con-

        cept of God as king—is everywhere present.   In the early period of Israe-

        lite religious history,   Yahweh’s kingship over Israel, like that of other 

        gods, was regarded as something similar to human kingship.   To leave 

        Israel was to leave the jurisdiction of Israel’s God, & to be unable to wor-

        ship God.  A further limitation of the god’s sovereignty was the fact that

        God’s people & his land were as essential to God as God was to them. 

                  If the kingship of Yahweh was at first the same as that of other gods, 

        the way in which the idea developed in Israel was very different from how 

        it developed elsewhere.  This was due to the work of the great prophets of 

        the 700s and subsequent centuries B.C.   The prophets brought a new in-

        sight into the nature and character of Yahweh.    The insistence that Yah-

        weh’s essential nature was absolute holiness, righteousness, & love, made

        impossible the restriction of his functions as king to those of a mere helper.

        All human affairs and dealings with one another must come under God’s 

        jurisdiction. 

                   For the prophets, Yahweh was not so much the champion of Israel 

        as the champion of righteousness; and the natural corollary of this develop-

        ment was the extension of Yahweh’s sovereignty to include other nations 

        besides Israel.  Thus Amos proclaimed that not only Israel but many other 

        nations also were accountable to Yahweh for their transgressions.  The bit-

        ter experiences of the Babylonian exile, which the prophets regarded as 

        Judah's punishment for her sins, gave added force to this spiritualizing and 

        universalizing of Yahweh’s kingship.  The other gods cease to be regarded 

        as rival deities and become mere nonentities. 

                   This degradation of other deities involved not only the tribal and 

        national gods, but also nature and fertility gods and goddesses.   With the 

        rise of this monotheistic faith, the relation between Yahweh and Israel 

        could no longer be one of mutual dependence.  Thus all limitations came to

        be removed from the idea of Yahweh’s kingship.   God is eternally and uni-

        versally king.

                   3. God' Present, Eternal, and Universal Kingship—This new con-

        ception of Yahweh’s kingship as eternal & universal raised new problems.

        The conviction that the whole world was subject to one God had to be re-

        conciled with the hard facts of experience.   The attempt to solve this pro-

        blem led to the development of a sense that God’s complete and absolute 

        sovereignty was not yet manifested.  Prophets were primarily preachers to 

        their own day, warning people of God's just demands & of the consequen-

        ces of behavior and policies at variance with God’s rule. 

                   The prophets also looked forward to a great day of the Lord.  In con-

        trast to popular expectation, this day wasn't to be one of divine deliverance

        for Israel, but rather a day of judgment for Israel as for every other nation.  

        Beyond the day of the Lord, the prophets saw the coming of a new and gol-

        den age of universal peace and harmony under the sovereign rule of God. 

                   Belief in a violent end to this age really arose out of the attempt to 

        reconcile a faith in the sovereignty of a good God with the experience of 

        evil and suffering in this world.  The sufferings and disasters which were 

        mounting with such rapidity, to the consternation of the faithful, were 

        merely the signs of the approaching end.  The time and the nature of the 

        final consummation of the reign of God are variously described in the dif-

        ferent apocalypses.  Of special importance for the background of the New 

        Testament doctrine of the kingdom of God is the vision of Daniel. 

                   Underneath all the differences of form which the conception takes 

        in the apocalyptic writings, there lies the common conviction that God's 

        reign is shortly to become effective over all the world.   Such was the hope

        cherished by the faithful in Israel through all of the centuries preceding the

        Christian era.   The gospels themselves afford an occasional glimpse of 

        such faithful souls who were “looking for the kingdom of God.”`

                   The Gospel of Matthew reports that John the Baptist preached:   

        “Repent, for the kingdom of God is at hand.”   The burden of John’s pro-

        phetic message was the announcement that the day of the Lord was immi-

        nent.  The Messiah would come, not so much as a national deliverer, but as

        the judge, whose “winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his thre-

        shing floor and gather his wheat into the granary, but the chaff he will burn

        with unquenchable fire.”  In spite of this harsh element in his message, the 

        preaching of John the Baptist met with a considerable response.

                   While the rabbis of the Christian era certainly shared John’s hopes, 

        they were equally concerned with the idea of God’s sovereignty; it was a 

        divine discipline to be accepted by individuals by obedient submission to 

        God’s will.  The kingdom of God is sometimes spoken of as something to 

        be “taken upon” oneself.   And for the Jew, the daily recitation of the She-

        ma is regarded as a continually repeated “taking upon oneself of the yoke 

        of the kingdom of God.”   The kingdom of God is thought of as a reality 

        that is present and effective wherever the rule of God is submitted to by 

        perfect obedience to the law. 

                   4. The Teaching of Jesus: Gospel of Mark—We are expressly 

        told by the evangelists that God’s kingdom was the theme of Jesus’ public

        preaching during the Galilean ministry.   The term “kingdom of God” oc-

        curs frequently.   It is found in 13 sayings in Mark, some 13 in Luke’s 

        source apart from Mark, some 25 in the source unique to Matthew, and 

        some 6 in Luke’s source.  

                   Jesus himself was fully aware of the different ways in which the 

        idea of God’s kingdom could be conceived: God as eternally king; God’s 

        sovereignty as a present reality wherever individuals acknowledge it; and 

        the kingdom as the focus of human hope at the end of this age.  Whereas 

        much of Jesus’ teaching envisions God’s kingdom as coming into being 

        in the near future, there are also sayings which clearly imply that the king-

        dom has already come in the person and ministry of Jesus himself. 

                   Jesus began his public ministry with the Proclamation, “The time is 

        fulfilled and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gos-

        pel.”  Many scholars prefer the translation “has come” to “at hand” and so 

        include it among the sayings in which Jesus speaks of the kingdom as al-

        ready present. 

                   The same emphasis on the kingdom of God as an event which is to 

        take place in the near future is to be seen in the important saying in Mark 9.

        Some scholars interpret the saying “some . . .will not taste death” as imply-

        ing the actual presence of the kingdom, the promise being that some by-

        standers would come to see that the kingdom of God had already come in 

        the person and ministry of Jesus.   It is much more likely that Jesus was 

        here speaking of the final consummation of the kingdom of God. 

                   5. The Teaching of Jesus: Gospels of Matthew and Luke—Ano-

        ther indication of Jesus’ future expectations is seen in his saying at the Last

        Supper:  “. . . drink it new in the kingdom of God; there is a similar saying 

        in Luke 13 and 22 and Matthew 8.  The imagery of a marriage feast is also 

        a feature of the wise and foolish maidens’ parable (Matthew 25).   

                   The thought of an impending crisis of judgment appears in the follo-

        wing 2 parables of the talents in Chapter 25.  Other parables stressing the 

        need of being prepared for an impending crisis include:  the absent house-

        holder (Mark 13; Luke 12);   the faithful and unfaithful servants (Matthew 

        24; Luke 12); and the thief at night (Matthew 24; Luke 12).   All these para-

        bles may be understood as implying the expectation that God’s kingdom 

        was to come in the future.

                   Another group of parables describe processes of growth: the “se-

        cret” seed (Mark 4); the tares (Matthew 13); the mustard seed (Matthew 13;

        Mark 4; Luke 13); and the leaven (Matthew 13; Luke 13).  Though it does 

        not explicitly refer to the kingdom, the parable of the sower belongs to the

        same group.  While these parables may rightly be claimed to imply an actu-

        al presence of the kingdom, the fact that the process of growth culminates 

        in a climax suggests that the future consummation of the kingdom is also in

        mind.   Finally, we mention the clearest reference to the future kingdom, 

        namely “Thy kingdom come.” 

                   God is seen most clearly in sayings in which he explains the signifi-

        cance of his own mighty works (e.g. “If it is by the finger of God that I cast

        out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.”  Jesus’ exor-

        cisms then become an indication that the kingdom, in a real sense, has al-

        ready arrived.   A similar interpretation of the significance of his mighty 

        works appears in Jesus’ reply to the question of John the Baptist. “Kingdom

        of God” doesn't occur in this context, but Jesus refers to his miracles in lan-

        guage that clearly echoes the prophetic description of the messianic last 

        days.  And the actual plundering of Satan’s house implied by Jesus’ exor-

        cisms is thus an indication of the coming of the kingdom is already in 

        operation.  

                  The actual presence of the kingdom is again implied in a saying from

        the source common to Matthew and Luke (but not Mark) which is found in 

        the widely different forms in Matthew 11 and Luke 16.  There is widespread

        agreement that neither evangelist has preserved the saying in its original 

        form.  The original saying was probably something like: “The law and the 

        prophets were until John; since then the kingdom of God comes suddenly, 

        and men of violence take it by force.”  The saying clearly distinguishes be-

        tween 2 periods, that of the law and the prophets on the one hand and that 

        of the kingdom of God on the other, & makes the ministry of John the Bap-

        tist the dividing line between them. 

K-10

                   In Luke 17:20-21, the first problem in interpretation concerns the 

        meaning of the Greek expression entos umon, which can be translated 

        either “in the midst of you” or “within you.” The first meaning better suits

        the context of this saying and the general tenor of Jesus’ teaching.   With 

        this meaning it is possible to understand the statement as referring to a 

        future coming of the kingdom.

                   The parables of growth, although they point forward to a completion

        that still lies in the future, nevertheless imply that the kingdom is, in a real 

        sense, already present.  The present activity of Jesus, during his ministry, 

        corresponds to the sowing of the seed.  The kingdom itself is likened to the 

        act of sowing in the parables of the seed growing secretly.  

                  These parables of growth point the way to the solution of the problem

        of reconciling the 2 divergent emphases which have been noted in the tea-

        ching of Jesus about the kingdom of God, namely of being present and still 

        yet to come at the same time.  Evidence suggests that Jesus held both 

        ideas in his mind, sometimes emphasizing the one and at other times the 

        other.  In the person and ministry of Jesus the kingdom is already present

        in principle.  But it is not yet seen in its complete fulfillment. 

                   6, Jesus' view vs. Jewish apocalypses—Jesus’ view of the New 

        Age was a radical departure from that of the Jewish apocalypses; it was a 

        new era-in-process rather than a world-ending manifestation of God's po-

        wer.  This meant that God had begun to rule in the world in a fuller sense

        than God once did; in other words, God's kingdom had begun to come

        Jesus expressly disclaimed any precise knowledge as to the time of the fu-

        ture consummation.  Evidence suggests that he expected it to take place

        in the near future, which is in keeping with the foreshortening of the future

        that was characteristic of Hebrew prophecy.  

                   There is no saying of Jesus in which he explicitly connects the co-

        ming of the kingdom of God with his own death.  There is ample evidence,

        however, that he regarded his death and resurrection as the necessary ful-

        fillment of his messianic mission.  If the kingdom had already come during

        the ministry of Jesus, then the Cross couldn't be said to be the condition of

        its coming.  The fact that the thought of the coming completion of the king-

        dom was present in Jesus’ mind as he faced his death does suggest that 

        he regarded it as a necessary step toward the completion of the kingdom.  

        The Cross was, in fact, an essential part of Jesus’ ministry.

                   The kingly rule or sovereignty, of God, which is the basic meaning 

        of the term “kingdom of God” implies the further idea of a realm or com-

        munity in which the rule is exercised.   The sayings about the messianic 

        banquet clearly imply a community.  The conditions upon which entry into 

        the completed kingdom may be obtained are to be fulfilled in the present.  

        They are: obedience to God’s will; the displaying of a righteousness that 

        “exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees”; the willingness to sacrifice any

        possession that might constitute a hindrance or stumbling block; and the 

        readiness to receive the kingdom in a spirit of childlike trust and humility, 

        as a gift from God. 

                   This evidence, taken as a whole, suggests that the kingdom may be 

        received by individuals, as a gift of divine grace, in the present.  To receive

        it means humbly and loyally to submit to God’s rule.   Those who receive 

        the kingdom this way make up the present community of God’s kingdom, 

        and to them is promised entrance.  There are other sayings which clearly 

        point to the kingdom’s community and describe the greatness of one within

        the kingdom as opposed to one not in the kingdom.  It is in this idea of a 

        community of those who have submitted to God’s rule that the connection 

        is to be found between God’s kingdom and the church. 

                   The kingdom of God is a gift of divine grace offered to all who can 

        receive it.   To receive it, however, means to submit to a discipline that 

        makes absolute demands upon a person’s loyalty and devotion.  The king-

        dom is the one thing of supreme value and importance for everyone, to be 

        sought over all else.   Service given to the kingdom is to take precedence 

        over even the most sacred of other duties.  The ethical demands of the 

        kingdom involve a standard of righteousness that exceeds even Jewish 

        law.  This standard constitutes a way of life to which those who belong to

        the present community of the kingdom of God are called.   Actual entry 

        into the kingdom depends, not upon any kind of formal acknowledgement,

        but upon active obedience. 

                   7. The Kingdom of God in the Rest of the New Testament—The

        subject of the church’s preaching in the apostolic age was not so much the 

        kingdom of God as such, but rather Christ himself, because the idea of the 

        kingdom stands close to his own person and work.  That the church did not

        lose touch with actual terms of Jesus’ own message, however, is proved by

        the fact that it presented the message in the gospel tradition.

K-11

                  According to Acts 1, Jesus continued during his post-resurrection ap-

        pearances to his disciples, to speak to them about the kingdom of God.  

        They were still slow to understand and they continued to think of the king-

        dom in nationalist terms.   Philip’s preaching in Samaria is described as 

        “good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ.”   

        Paul himself addresses the Ephesian elders as “all you among whom I 

        have gone about preaching the kingdom.”  The biblical references to the

        kingdom are all very general, and tell us nothing about the content of the 

        apostles’ preaching of the kingdom.

                   The evidence of Acts is confirmed by the occurrence of the term 

        “kingdom of God” in a number of passages in Paul’s letters.   The same 

        emphasis that Jesus placed on the kingdom as a present reality and at the 

        same time a future hope is found in Paul.   He describes the present life as 

        one in which what matters “is not eating and drinking, but righteousness, 

        peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.” 

                   The moral demands of the kingdom are also stressed in passages in

        which Paul lists vices which preclude someone from inheriting the kingdom

        of God.   In a few passages Paul speaks of the kingdom as Christ’s 

        (Ephesians 5; I Corinthians 15).   The latter passage seems to mean that 

        he thought of Christ as ruling over the kingdom, in the capacity of vice-

        regent.  It seems that when Paul speaks of the kingdom   of Christ, he is 

        thinking of the present kingdom. 

                   In the Gospel of John the term “kingdom of God” occurs twice in 

        the words of Jesus to Nicodemus (John 3).   The two statements taken to-

        gether mean that entrance into the kingdom is dependent upon the experi-

        ence of regeneration.   The fact that “life” in John’s thinking is primarily 

        a present possession of believers suggest that in John 3 the kingdom of 

        God is thought of as present rather than future.  

                   The word “king” is used of Jesus frequently in this gospel.   This 

        implies the idea of a spiritual sovereignty which Jesus is already exerci-

        sing as Messiah.   The book of Revelation looks forward to the completed

        kingdom of God.  In Revelation 1, John claims to share with his readers 

        in “the tribulation and kingdom and patience which are in Jesus,” which 

        implies that the kingdom is a present experience.

                   The Letter to the Hebrews contains a lot of material regarding the 

        las t days, which are regarded as having arrived.  The idea of the kingdom

        of God as such is not prominent.  The Letter of James contains one refer-

        ence to “the kingdom” which God “has promised to those who love him.” 

        Clearly, the future kingdom is meant by this passage.   Finally, in II Peter 

        1, there is a late reference to the future kingdom as the “eternal kingdom 

        of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ,” into which zealous Christians are 

        promised entrance.

KINGS, I AND II (מלכים (meh lek eem))  The 11^th and 12^th books in the Eng-

        lish Bible, and the 5^th and 6^th books of the Former Prophets in the Hebrew 

        Bible.  They report the events of Solomon’s monarchy and the divided king-

        doms, from the anointment of Solomon to the exilic episode of the captive 

        King Jehoiachin’s admission to the court of Babylon as a guest of the royal 

        table, a period of some 350 years.  These 2 books were originally one, but

        the primary Greek Old Testament first introduced the division, grouped

        them with the 2 books of Samuel, and named them the 3^rd and 4^th books 

        of the “Kingdoms.”

                   Contents of I Kings—The books’ contents can be divided into 3 

        parts: Solomon’s ascension to the throne and his reign (I Kings 1-11); the

        difficulties of the 2 kingdoms (I Kings 12-II Kings 17); the surviving king-

        dom of Judah (II Kings 18-25).   This narrative complex begins with the de-

        piction of David’s senility.   When David’s eldest son Adonijah, was unex-

        pectedly proclaimed king, Bathsheba, (Solomon's mother) & Nathan the  

        prophet asked David to designate Solomon as his successor to the throne.

                   When the news reached Adonijah and his followers, they scattered.  

        The dying King David charged Solomon to be pious and gave him advice 

        on how to consolidate his throne.  Solomon had his brother Adonijah killed.

        Abiathar the priest, one of Adonijah’s supporters was banished to Anathoth,

        and Joab was executed.   At the high place of Gideon, Solomon offered sa-

        crifice to the Lord, who granted Solomon’s request for wisdom (I Kings 1-3).

                  Lists of Solomon’s court officials and provincial administrators are fol-

        lowed by a depiction of the splendor of Solomon’s court.  The preparation 

        for the building of the temple and the treaty with Hiram of Tyre precede the 

        erection of the temple building.   The listing of the temple furnishings closes

        chapter 7.  The dedication of the temple is related in considerable length 

        (chapter 8). In a second vision, the Lord appeared to Solomon and warned 

        him to remain faithful (chapter 9).  The narrative of the visit of the Queen of 

        Sheba is in chapter 10.  Solomon’s riches are also seen in the number of 

        wives and concubines, but the foreign wives led him astray into worshiping 

        strange gods.  Solomon's death of  is reported at the end of chapter 11. 

K-12

                   After Solomon’s death, Rehoboam, his son and successor, entered 

        into negotiations with Shechem’s elders.  Rehoboam’s ill-advised rigidity

        led to the northern tribes’ secession from Judah and Jeroboam’s election 

        to Israel’s throne.  An anonymous man of God from Judah foretold to Jero-

        boam the Josianic reform and the resulting destruction of Bethel’s sanc-

        tuary.   When her child was sick, the wife of Jeroboam visited Ahijah the

        prophet, who foretold the death of the child and condemned Jeroboam for

        his apostasy (chapters 12-14).

                   The accounts of Abijam of Judah’s reign and his son, Asa, include 

        Asa’s cultic reforms, and his war against Baasha of Israel.  Nadab, the son

        of Jeroboam, reigned over Israel for 2 years but was assassinated by Baa-

        sha.  Baasha’s reign and that of his son, Elah are shortly related.   Zimri
   murdered Elah and the whole house of Baasha.  He, in turn, was defeated 

        by Omri in the ensuing civil war (chapters 15-16). 

                   During Ahab's reign, Elijah the prophet announced the coming of a

        drought.  During the famine, he was fed by the ravens first, and later by 

        the jar of meal and cruse of oil, which belong to a widow of Zarephath.  

        The prophet appeared before King Ahab to announce the drought's end 

        and to extend a challenge to prophets of Baal, which brought victory to 

        Elijah and the drought’s end (chapters 17-18).

                   Afterwards, Elijah had to flee for his life through the wilderness of

        Judah to the mount of Horeb.  Following the divine command, he called 

        Elisha into his service as his successor.  Ben-hadad of Syria besieged Sa-

        maria during the reign of Ahab of Israel, but Ahab succeeded in repelling

        the Syrian force.  The next year Israel triumphed by crushing the Syrian 

        army at Aphek.   The releasing of the Syrian king brought severe repri-

        mand upon Ahab from an anonymous member of the prophetic guilds 

        (chapters 19-20). 

                   Naboth, an Israelite farmer, refused to sell his vineyard to Ahab.  

        Jezebel, the wife of Ahab, plotted the death of Naboth, after which Ahab 

        took possession of the coveted vineyard.  Ahab planned a military attack 

        upon Syria and was encouraged by 400 prophets.  Micaiah the son of Im-

        lah prophesied disaster; Ahab died in the battle.  The account of the reign

        of Jehoshaphat of Judah and the introduction to the reign of Ahaziah of 

        Israel close the first book of Kings (chapters 21-22).

                   Contents of II Kings—The report on Ahaziah’s reign is continued

        with the miracle of Elijah’s calling fire from heaven upon royal troops.

        When Elijah was taken up to heaven, Elisha became the heir of his spirit.  

        Jehoram, son of Ahab, and Jehoshaphat of Judah went on a united cam-

        paign against Moab.  Elisha also healed Naaman, the commander of the 

        Syrian army, of his leprosy.  Ben-hadad again besieged Samaria and the 

        king of Israel blamed Elisha.   Elisha’s insistence that the famine would 

        end the next day saved his life.  Elisha went to Damascus and foretold to 

        Hazael that he would become the king of Syria (chapters 1-8).

                   Jehu, the commander in chief of Joram of Israel’s army, was anoin-

        ted to be king by a disciple of Elisha.  In the subsequent revolution, Jehu 

        killed his king, Joram, and Ahaziah, the king of Judah.  After the death of 

        Ahaziah of Judah, his mother, Athaliah, seized the throne of Jerusalem; he

        reign was overthrown seven years later.  Jehoash, during his reign, regula-

        ted the use of the temple income; he was killed by conspirators in a palace

        revolt.  Elisha’s deathbed scene and his symbolic acts follow this story.  

        Elisha’s death did not mean the end of his miraculous power for a dead 

        man rose as soon as his corpse touched Elisha’s bones (chapters 9-13).

                 Amaziah, the king of Judah executed the murderers of his father and

        challenged Israel to war and was defeated by Jehoash of Israel. Summary 

        notices appear on Azariah of Judah, and Jeroboam II, Zechariah, Shallum, 

        Menahem, Pekahiah, and Pekah, all kings of Israel.  The reign of Ahaz of 

        Judah took up a whole chapter and included the Syro-Ephraimitic War.  

        The end of Israel is narrated in chapter 17 by the presentation of the ac-

        count of Hoshea’s reign, the fall of Samaria, and a recapitulation of Isra-

        el’s apostasy.  The Assyrians brought to Samaria a variety of people from 

        the four corners of the empire (chapters 14-17).

                   In connection with Hezekiah’s reign several details are related: his

        reform of the cult, the fall of Samaria, & Sennacherib’s expedition against 

        Judah.   The evil reigns of Manasseh and his son Amon, precede King Jo-

        siah, under whose reign the Book of the Law was found in the temple.  

        Josiah’s untimely death at Megiddo was the prelude to the short reigns of 

        Jehoahaz and Jehoiakim.  

                   Jehoiachin’s abortive reign, his surrender to Nebuchadnezzar, & his

        exile to Babylon follow in quick succession.  Zedekiah's reign as Judah's 

        last king, the siege of the city of Jerusalem, the execution of the people’s 

        leaders, and Gedaliah’s assassination by Ishmael brought Judah's fate to 

        its end.  In the 37^th year of his exile, Jehoiachin was accepted as a guest 

        of the royal table of Evil-merodach, king of Babylon (chapters 18-25). 

K-13

                   Composition—The books of Kings show clear signs of several 

        distinct sources, joined together by a stereotyped framework.  Multiple

        authors and editors were involved in the writing, collection, and editing

        of the independent sources.   The reports on the kings of Israel & Judah  

        are enclosed in a framework of introductory and concluding formulas.  

        The introductory formulas includes: king’s name; father’s name; king’s 

        age and length of reign; and mother’s name. 

                   The concluding formula includes: “. . . slept with his fathers . . .”;  

        “and [son’s name] his son reigned in his stead.”  The same introductory 

        and concluding formulas serve as a frame for the reports on the kings of 

        Judah.   The framework for the reign of Israel’s kings differs in that nei-

        ther the kings’ ages at the time of their ascension to the throne nor their 

        mothers’ name are in the formulas.

                   The authors of the books used a synchronistic interrelating me-

        thod for the establishment of the data of the kings of Israel and Judah.  In

        the formula a reference to the other monarch is present, including the year 

        of his reign in which the new reign began.  This synchronization of reigns 

        is, unfortunately, not always reliable.   The time elapsed from the revolu-

        tion of Jehu to the fall of Samaria is 170 years according to the synchroni-

        stic system,  165 years if computed by the years of reign in Judah, and 

        143 years and 7 months according to the years of reigns in Israel.  

                   According to Assyrian documents, only 121 years passed by in this

        period.  Modern-day scholars are inclined to accept the essential validity 

        of the synchronistic system, but they also recognize the presence of many 

        inaccuracies, most likely from errors in copying from the sources or the 

        copying of the books of Kings.  Some scholars proposed that the chrono-

        logy of the books is the result of the mingling of several chronological sys- 

        tems.  See Chronology of the Old Testament.

                   Another characteristic feature of these books is the judgment pro-

        nounced on the kings of Israel and Judah.  These judgments clearly reveal 

        the Deuteronomist’s point of view (e.g. “Judah did what was evil in the 

        sight of the Lord, . . .”).   The judgments pronounced are totally positive 

        only for Hezekiah and Josiah.   The favorable decisions on Asa, Jehosha-

        phat, Jehoash, Azariah, and Jotham are qualified by mention of other cults 

        during their reigns.  All the other kings of Judah are summarily condemned 

        with the phrase mentioned earlier. 

                    Besides the high places, the northern shrines were especially de-

        nounced by the authors as being contrary to the will of the Lord.   All the 

        kings of Israel, with the exception of Shallum, who reigned for only one 

        month, were condemned for not doing what was right in the eyes of the 

        Lord.  Some of the kings were further denounced because of the worship of

        foreign gods.

                   Sources of the Books of Kings—There are 3 sources mentioned

        by title in the books of Kings: the Book of the Acts of Solomon; the Book 

        of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel; and the Book of the Chronicles 

        of the Kings of Judah.

                   At the end of the Solomon narratives, there appears the reference: 

        “Now the rest of the acts of Solomon and his wisdom, are they not written 

        in the Book of the Acts of Solomon?”  The mentioning of the “wisdom” of 

        Solomon most likely means that the original source included much legen-

        dary and folklore material.  Besides the apparently legendary material on 

        Solomon’s wisdom, contemporary lists of court officials and administrators 

        were utilized by the compiler of the source.  The description of the building

        and furnishing of the temple might have come from the temple archives.  

        Thus, the Book of the Acts of Solomon must be recognized as a late collec-

        tion of archival material which included some legendary biographical 

        information.

                   The Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel is referred to in 

        the closing formulas of the authors, beginning with Jeroboam I and ending

        with Pekah’s reign; altogether the book is mention 17 times.   The assump

        tion sometimes was that the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel 

        and that of the kings of Judah were a single history.  This view cannot be 

        maintained under critical scrutiny.  The references to the source offer occa-

        sional glimpses of the real nature of the original Chronicles.  They reveal 

        the annalistic nature of the source.   These annals were concluded shortly 

        before Samaria’s fall around 724 B.C. 

                   The Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah is mentioned first

        in the account of the reign of Rehoboam and last in that of Jehoiakim, 15 

        times altogether.  It was not mentioned in the case of Ahaziah, Jehoahaz, 

        Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah, most likely because the way they died did not 

        fit the standard formula of the book.  These annals, like the Book of the 

        Chronicles of the Kings of Israel, are court annals and were in the royal

        archives of Jerusalem.  The last pages were written around 590 B.C.

                   Besides these three sources, there were also other sources upon 

        which the Deuteronomic editor had drawn.  The main theme of fidelity to 

        the Lord in the unity and purity of the cult seems to join the different mate-

        rials in such a way that their incorporation must have been completed by 

        the Deuteronomic author.  I Kings 1-2 is the direct continuation of II Sa-

        muel 9-20, and is a product of the time shortly after David’s reign.

K-14

                   The Elijah stories embrace I Kings 17-19, 21, and II Kings 1.  They

        are interrupted by the story of Ahab’s war against the Syrians in chapter 20.

        The Elijah cycle might be recognized as a narrative written in the northern 

        kingdom of Israel.  The admiration paid to the prophet Elijah and the noti-

        ceable enhancement of the memories of his power & greatness are likely 

        motivated by the disciples’ veneration of their master.  The Elijah cycle is s

        ecurely anchored in history, but nevertheless, its transformation into le-

        gends had started.  The narratives in I Kings 17-18 are joined by the link of 

        the disastrous drought and the eventual coming of the rain.  

                   The great reverence of the narrator for the prophet does not hinder 

        him in the consideration of many important problems, such as the revela-

        tions of God and the responsibilities of a prophet.  The Naboth story repre-

        sents a historical episode which throws light upon the tyrannyof Ahab and

        Jezebel.  It is more important that the Naboth story also reveals the ethical 

        integrity, social responsibility, and unfailing courage of the prophet Elijah.

        The story in II Kings 1 shows a measure of affinity with Elisha’s legends.

        There is probably a historical kernel preserved within this narrative.  The 

        story of the destruction of 100 men by heavenly fire is a legendary over-

        growth of the original narrative.

                   The Elisha stories represent a circle of tradition which was indepen-

        dent from that of the Elijah cycle.  There is such a marked difference in lite-

        rary expression and religious outlook that it is unlikely that the Elijah and 

        Elisha stories were written by the same author.   Common themes do indi-

        cate some connection, and the image of the transfer of Elijah’s mantle to 

        Elisha is common to both sets of stories. 

                   The Elijah narrative complex embraces a wide variety of literary 

        pieces ranging from miracle narratives to historical reporting.   As litera-

        ture, all these stories are deeply rooted in folk tale; their aim is to glorify 

        the prophet by the means of an emphasis on the prophetic power.   In all 

        these legends and miracle stories, the prophet Elisha is surrounded by 

        the prophetic schools of Bethel, Jericho, and Gilgal, and he seems to be 

        their leader.  There are other narratives of the Elisha cycle in which Elisha

        has with him only his servant Gehazi. 

                    No consecutive narrative can be constructed from these stories.  

        Their common traits are outweighed by some discrepancies.   There are 

        other narratives with the Elisha cycle which present Elisha in the middle 

        of political and military activity.   The relationship of Elisha toward the 

        royal court shifts from definite friendliness to open animosity.   In the 

        anointment of Hazael, the Jehu revolution, and the death of Elisha, a his-

        torical core is viewed from the angle of prophetic tradition.  

                   The Ahab narratives differ greatly from the Elijah source in Ahab’s 

        portrayal.  These Ahab narratives are interwoven with Northern Kingdom’s 

        prophetic tradition.  The Ahab source must have been written in the late 

        800s or early 700s B.C.   The Elijah, Elisha, and Ahab sources all have a 

        definite interest in the Northern Kingdom’s (Israel’s) destiny and in the n

        orth’s prophetic traditions, which is indicates a northern origin. 

                    Placed between the introductory and concluding formulas on Heze-

        kiah’s reign, a literary complex appears which might be designated as the 

        Isaiah source.  This source was incorporated in the books of Kings from an 

        independent collection of Isaiah legends.  This source represents the mix-

        ing of historical narratives with prophetic legends.  Two versions of the 

        miraculous deliverance of Jerusalem in accord with the encouraging pro-

        phecy of Isaiah, bear the stamp of the prophetic legends.  

                    The whole complex of Isaiah legends originated in Jerusalem 

        among Isaiah’s disciples and was transmitted by the same prophetic circle 

        and could have been put in written form around the middle of the 600s 

        B.C.  There is one more source present in the books of Kings which con-

        tains independent prophetic legends which might still have been in the for-

        mative process of oral transmission when the Deuteronomic author incor-

        porated them into his work.  These prophetic legends include prophecies 

        of Ahijah, Shemaiah, and an anonymous condemnation of Manasseh. 

                   Some scholars propose that a book of Kings was written before the 

        Deuteronomic editor put together his version.  He used it together with the 

        Book of the Acts of Solomon, the Chronicles of Judah, and that of Israel.  

        The possibility of the existence of a pre-Deuteronomic book of Kings can't

        be disproved, but its existence is in no way needed to explain the forma-

        tion of the books of Kings. 

                   The Editing and Purpose of the Deuteronomic Author—The au-

        thor of the framework of the books of Kings is definitely influenced by Deu-

        teronomic thought.  If this is so, it is justifiable to speak of a Deuteronomic 

        editor or author.   The authors and editors of Deuteronomic thought were 

        concerned with bringing the old religious and legal traditions back into use 

        during their own time.   Those to whom they addressed themselves had 

        nearly outgrown the old Israelite regulations.   These preachers are con-

        cerned with a broad range of topics which included: arrangement of festi-

        vals; institution of kingship; support of the priests; stipulations of the holy 

        war; and laws concerning marriage and family.  They must have held some

        religious office.

K-15

                   There are discrepancies within the books which are explained one 

        of two ways. In the first, there seems to be two Deuteronomic editors, one

        before the death of Josiah, and another who writes of the destruction of the

        temple and of the Exile.  In the second way, there is only one Deuterono-

        mic editor who was responsible for a great historical work embracing Deu-

        teronomy-II Kings 25.  Those passages that seem unaware of the Exile 

        could be from the incorporation of unchanged older documents into his 

        work.  Of the two theories, the assumption of two Deuteronomic editors is 

        better able to explain the discrepancies. 

                   The 2nd Deuteronomic editor (550 B.C.) apparently wrote during 

        the Exile.  He was confronted with the crux of the Deuteronomic theology 

        in the untimely death of the pious Josiah, but he thought to solve this by 

        the assumption that the Lord’s wrath was so fierce that not even the righte-

        ous reign and pious reforms of Josiah could quench the Lord’s anger.  The 

        2nd editor maintains that Samaria deserved destruction because of the em-

        bracement of the Canaanitish idolatry. 

                   The 1^st Deuteronomic editor was motivated by his theology of the 

        unity and purity which recognized only the Jerusalem temple.  Therefore 

        he condemned all of Israel’s kings, for they all shared in the calf-worship.  

        In his eyes, the cult was one expression of Israel’s allegiance to the Lord 

        which hadto be manifest in the whole life of the holy people.  The Deute-

        ronomic author did not conceive of “Kings” as a historical work, but as a 

        history of the Lord’s dealings with the Lord’s chosen people.  The author 

        recognized the prophets as the Lord’s spokesmen in history and therefore

        used a lot of prophetic narratives from the Elijah and Elisha cycles.   The 

        Ahab source was used because it aroused the author’s interest with its pro-

        phetic implications. 

                   The works of the Deuteronomic editor cannot be compared with any

        Western historical writing because the goal was not merely to report the 

        events of the past, but to give an evaluation and criticism of the past as ad-

        monition for contemporaries.  The work of the Deuteronomic author is like

        a long sermon using the history of the chosen people for illustration, admo-

        nition, and instruction, both in Deuteronomy 5-11 and in “Kings.” 

                   The books of Kings in the Hebrew of the Masoretic text do not repre-

        sent the best text.  Fragments of the book of Kings were among the Dead 

        Sea Scrolls, and they seem to support the theory of the existence of a He-

        brew text which, on the whole, was closer to the Primary Greek Old Testa-

        ment than to the Masoretic Text, and in some cases was superior to both.

KING’S GARDEN (גן המלך (gan  ha meh lek))  A royal estate near Jerusa-

        lem, mentioned in connection with the Pool of Shelah (Nehemiah 3), just 

        south of the city walls.

KING’S HIGHWAY  (דרך המלך (deh rek  ha meh lek))  A road mention 3 

        times in the Bible, twice by this name.  Moses promised that the Israelites 

        would stay on it while passing through Edom and Sihon (Numbers 20; 21).

        This is a well-known highway which ran from Damascus to the Gulf of 

        Aqabah along eastern Palestine.  Archaeological investigation has shown 

        that there was a line of fortresses along it.  After roughly 1700 B.C., the re-

        gion was uninhabited for about 600 years.  The road was used by the Na-

        bataean traders; Trajan had it rebuilt after 106 A.D.  The modern road in 

        Jordan closely follows the original course.

KING’S POOL (ברת המלך (beh roth  ha meh lek))  Presumably the same as

        the Pool of Shelah, a reservoir of the king’s garden in Jerusalem 

        (Nehemiah 2).

KIR  (קיר, wall)    1. A city of Moab, mentioned in connection with Ar in Isaiah’s

        oracle against Moab; it is probably the same as Kir-Hareseth, an ancient

        capital of Moab about 27 km south of the Arnon and 18 km east of the 

        Dead Sea.      2.  A Mesopotamian place from which Arameans had migra-

        ted to Syria and to which their descendants were exiled by the Assyrians.

KIR-HARESETH  (קיר הרשת, wall of potsherds)  An ancient capital of Moab

        about 27 km south of the Arnon and 18 km east of the Dead Sea.   It 

        stands 940 meters above the Mediterranean, and so 1300 meters above 

        the Dead Sea, and is isolated from the surrounding hills by valleys more

        than 90 meters deep.

K-16

                   In Elisha’s time, while Mesha was king of Moab, the kings of Israel, 

        Judah, and Edom attacked Moab from the south.   The Moabites fled and 

        the allied armies pursued and besieged Kir-hareseth.  Mesha sacrificed his 

        oldest son upon the wall.  After that “there came great wrath upon Israel.”  

        A tunnel, a cul-de-sac about 180 meters long runs toward the citadel from 

        the wadi below; it was probably an abortive water passage.

KIRIATH  (קרית, city of)  The King James Version uses the spelling Kirjath.     

        See Kiriath-Jearim.

KIRIATH-ARBA  (קרית ארבע, city of four)  Hebron’s ancient name, near which

        the cave of Machpelah, burial place of the patriarchs was located.  It was 

        the chief city of a hill-country district.   The tradition of Hebron’s ancient 

        name, Kiriath-arba, persisted throughout the biblical period.   The King 

        James Version uses “Kirjath.”

KIRIATH-HUZOTH  (קרית הצות, city of courts)  A Moabite city, the first place

        to which Balak took Balaam.   Its precise location is uncertain.   The King 

        James Version uses the spelling Kirjath.

KIRIATH-JEARIM   (קרית יערים (,city of forests); also  BAALAH, 

        BAALE-JUDAH, KIRIATH-ARIM  and KIRIATH-BAAL. The King James

        Version uses the spelling Kirjath )  A city of Judah about 13 km north of  

        Jerusalem.  It lies on a commanding hill just to the west of Abu Ghosh.  

        Pottery from the Late Bronze and Early Iron periods (1550 and 900) can 

        be picked up on the surface of the tell.  Later the city seems to have moved

        from the hill to the site of Abu Ghosh.  

                   Kiriath-jearim first appears as a member of the Gibeonite confede-

        racy of four strategically located fortress cities occupied by Hivites; it was

        then called Kiriath-Baal.  In the description of Judah’s northern boundary it

        appears as Baalah, a shortened form of the name.   In the course of their 

        northward migration, the Danites camped near Kiriath-jearim. 

                   After the Battle of Ebenezer (1050), the Philistines carried the cap-

        tured ark of the covenant to Ashdod.  When the Philistines believed that 

        the cause of a plague was the ark, they sent the ark away; it eventually 

        ended up at Kiriath-jearim, where it stayed until David brought it to Jeru-

        salem.  The ill-fated prophet Uriah, son of Shemaiah, a contemporary of 

        Jeremiah, came from Kiriath-Jearim.   In the Roman period a fort was 

        built over the ruins of Kiriath-jearim as a military post.

KIRIATH-SEPHER  (קירת ספר, city of the book)  The older name for Debir 

        (Joshua 15; Judges 1).

KIRIATHAIM  (קריתים, two cities)    1.  A city of the Moabite tableland, as-

        signed to the tribe of Reuben.  It was in Moabite hands in Mesha’s time, 

        since he spoke of building Qarvaten. 

                   2.   A city of the tribe of Naphtali given to the Gershomites, probably 

        the same as Kartan (I Chronicles 6).

KISH  (קיש, bow)     1.  A Benjaminite of Gibeah in the Matrite clan; the father

        of King Saul.   He appears to be the son of Abiel.  Kish is described as a 

        man of wealth.  The representation of Saul that his family was the hum-

        blest of all Benjamin must have been an illustration of oriental modesty.

        Kish was doubtless present at the selection of the king at Mizpah, when 

        the Matrites obtained the lot (I Samuel 9,10). 

                  2.   A Benjaminite who is included among the sons of Jeiel and pro-

        bably not Saul’s father. 

                  3.  Son of Mahli, a Levite of the family of Merari.  His sons married 

        the daughters of his brother Eleazar. 

                  4.  Son of Abdi, a Levite of the family of the Merarites.  He assisted in

        the cleansing of the temple in the reign of Hezekiah. 

                  5.  A Benjaminite who is described as an ancestor of Mordecai, the 

        uncle of Esther (Esther 2).   

KISHI  (קישי, short for Kushaiah, bow of the Lord)

KISHION (קישון, hardness)  A Levitcal town in Issachar (Joshua 19, 21).  The 

        Chronicler’s list reads “Kedesh.”  Kishion is mentioned in the Thutmose III 

        list of conquered towns.

K-17

KISHON  (קישון, winding)  A brook draining the western part of the Valley of

        Jezreel.  The major sources of the Kishon are located at the eastern end of 

        the Plain of Esdraelon.  The Wadi en-Nusf flows northward from the vicinity

        of Jenin; Wadi Muweili rises from springs west of the foot of Mount Tabor.  

        From the southwest, the waters from several springs in the vicinity of Me-

        giddo join & flow northeastward.   These sources meet in the center of the 

        plain about 6 km northeast of Megiddo.  Wadies from the Galilean hills on 

        the north and the Carmel Range of the south, feed into the Kishon.  Most 

        of these wadies are dry except during the winter, when heavy rains fill their 

        courses and rush down to collect in the Kishon. 

                  In the Valley of Jezreel, the Kishon is no wider than 6 meters in the 

        spring.  Its width increases near the western end of the plain to more than 9

        meters and a meter deep.  In spite of its small size, it is a formidable geo-

        graphical barrier during the rainy months, when its bed is boggy and the 

        plain on both sides is marshy.  As it crosses the plain, the Kishon gradually

        descends from an elevation of 90 meters at its source to 25 meters above 

        sea level at the point where it leaves the plain. 

                 The Kishon leaves the Valley Jezreel and enters the Plain of Acco 

        through a narrow pass.  After entering the Plain of Acco, the Kishon hugs 

        the foot of Mount Carmel, and empties into the Mediterranean Sea just 

        south of the sand dunes along the coast; its total length is about 37 km.  In

        the Plain of Acco, the Kishon receives the waters of many tributaries.  

        These sources supply enough water to make the Kishon a perennial 

        stream for the remainder of its length, and is 20 meters wide in this plain. 

                The Kishon is chiefly remembered as the scene of Sisera’s defeat by 

        Barak and Deborah.   The exact place where this battle was fought isn’t 

        known.  The battle was apparently waged when the Kishon was flooded 

        after a heavy rainstorm, with the result that Sisera’s chariots became mired

        in the boggy plain.   To the later Israelites, the victory at the Kishon was 

        God’s providence.  The Kishon is also mentioned in the contest between 

        Baal’s prophets and Elijah; the discredited prophets of Baal were taken to

        the river and put to death.

KISS  (נשק (naw shak); filew (fil ee oh))  A touch of the lips to another per-

        son’s lips, cheek, hands, feet, as a gesture of affection or homage, fre-

        quently in greeting or farewell, and usually without erotic meaning.

                   Most commonly family members kiss one another.   Also be-

        yond the circle of the family but without erotic overtones, one man 

        may kiss another as friend, as David does Jonathan.  It appears that 

        biblical man showed his feelings with less reserve than we; other ges-

        tures, such as hugs, accompanied the kiss. 

                   The gestures do not seem always to have been an expression of

        genuine emotion; they were part of a ceremony.  Kissing and weeping

        together may be compared to the ceremonious weeping on similar oc-

        casions among other cultures.  Sargon and Sennacherib boast that con-

        quered kings kissed their conqueror’s feet in abject surrender.  There 

        was also the kiss that Samuel gave Saul as he anointed him.  The kiss 

        is frequently associated with greeting, especially when persons meet 

        after an extended absence, and when they part. 

                   The New Testament material largely parallels that of the Old 

        Testament.  The Judas kiss of Luke 22 is proverbial for betrayal; it has

        its Old Testament equivalent in Joab’s treachery to Amasa.  Several of

        the Pauline letters concluded: “Greet one another with a holy kiss.”

KITCHEN  (בית המבשלים (bet  ha meh baw sheh leem), house of 

        cooks)  One of the four small oblong subcourts at the corners of the 

        outer court of Ezekiel’s ideal temple (Ezekiel 46).  The sin, guilt, and

        cereal offerings were cooked in kitchens within the priests’ chambers.

KITE  (איה (‘ah yaw), vulture; דאה (daw ‘aw); דיה (da yaw), black 

        vulture)  A medium sized bird of prey, best described as the scavenger

        of the hawk family.  The common red kite is found Palestine, as is the 

        black-winged one.  As the latter eat not only refuse, but also various 

        small birds and mammals, there is nothing improbable in the associa-

        tion of these birds with a deserted human habitation (Isaiah 34).

K-18

KITRON  (קטרון, knotty) A town in Zebulun, from which Israel could not expel

        the Canaanites (Judges 1). 

KITTIM (כתים, Cyprus) Kittim was used at first in the Old Testament for the 

        island of Cyprus.  The name derived from the city-state of Kition on the 

        southeast coast of the island.  Kition was the important Phoenician esta-

        blishment on Cyprus.  Although there was still a large native population,

        the island was by the 700 B.C. essentially Greek in population.  For the 

        Israelite, Kittim was a land across the sea and associated with ships.  Cy-

        prus served for awhile as a haven for Tyrians and Sidonians fleeing from

        the Assyrians.  Under Sargon, Assyrian rule spread to Cyprus.  This rule 

        was maintained under Sennacherib and Esarhaddon.

                   To the Judean, Kittim was a familiar place.  Jeremiah used Kedar for

        the east and the coasts of Kittim for the west as geographical poles.  After 

        the Assyrian Empire’s fall the close ties of Phoenician Cyprus to its mother

        cities remained.  Ezekiel lists Kittim as the source for the decks of Phoeni-

        cian ships.  Since Cyprus was increasingly under Greek influence & main-

        tained strong contact with the Greek mainland, it is not at all surprising that 

        the name Kittim came to be used generally for areas beyond the seas.  

                   Alexander the Great is described as one “who came from the land of

        Kittim.”  In Daniel, Kittim was used as a label for the Romans, as in: “ships

        of Kittim shall come against him.”  The Greek translators of Daniel 11 used

        “Roman” to translate “Kittim.”  Based on this usage, various Old Testament 

        passages were interpreted as applying to the Romans.

KNEAD (לוש (loosh)) The process of kneading consisted of mixing flour with

        water in a kneading trough containing a small piece of the previous day’s 

        batch.  The dough was then allowed to stand until it fermented.  During the

        plagues of Exodus the frogs invaded even the Egyptian kneading bowls.

KNEEL (ברך (baw rak))  The Hebrew word is the same root as that for “bles-

        sing.”  This suggests that the blessing was received in the kneeling posi-

        tion.   “Upon the knees” is figure of adoption, where by a handmaid’s 

        child is recognized as a child of her mistress.   Children were sometimes

        placed “between the knees”—i.e. as near as possible to the seat of life—

        for blessing.   Kneeling is the posture of petition, doing homage to a su-

        perior, and worship.  Most instructive is Psalm 95, where kneeling suc-

        ceeds prostration.  The kneeling suggests that there was something for 

        him to see, so he did not remain prostrate.

KNIFE  (מאכלת (mah ah kah leth)) A small single- or double-edged cutting

        instrument of flint, copper, bronze, or iron, used mainly in the home.  

        The knife resembles the dagger or short stabbing sword, but is smaller 

        and more cheaply made.   Almost every archaeological expedition in Pa-

        lestine has produced some knives.  Flint knives were used from about 

        3500 B.C. until they were replaced by metal.  Joshua was ordered to 

        make flint knives for circumcision.   This implies an ancient ritual to 

        which an old form of knife was appropriate.  The copper knife was used

        from the patriarchal period to the Early Monarchy.  The most common 

        was 15 to 25 cm long.  The handles were sometimes made in one piece 

        with the blade. 

                   When introduced, iron knives followed the same general pattern 

        as their copper forerunners.   The knife served to prune trees, kill and 

        skin animals and slaughter sacrifices.   The knife might be used as a 

        razor.   Once, in Proverbs 30, “knife” is used as a metaphor for 

        rapaciousness.

KNOP  (כפתר (kaf eh tor), capital of a lampstand; פקעים (feh kaw ah yeem),

        wild cucumber)    1.  King James Version translation of the Hebrew 

        word meaning a detail of the lampstand in the tabernacle as described 

        in Exodus.      2.  The King James Version translation of the Hebrew 

        word meaning gourd or wild cucumber.

KNOWLEDGE (ידע (yaw dah))  The verb “to know” is used in an everyday

        sense, and in a scientific sense, where knowledge is concerned with the

        general features or the “essence” of things.  The former usage implies a

        personal relationship between knower & thing known; the latter implies

        an understanding of the object, simply as something which affects one’s

        self-consciousness.  Failure to differentiate between the Old Testament 

        (OT) personal and subjective view of knowledge and the scientific and 

        objective view of knowledge has often resulted in faulty OT interpreta-

        tions.  The fact that yada’ can be used to designate sexual intercourse 

        implies that knowledge is awareness of the relationship in which indivi-

        dual stands with that object.

                   Knowledge in the OT—In accordance with the Hebrew view of 

        humankind, knowledge is an activity in which the whole individual is 

        engaged, not his mind only.  The heart is sometimes mentioned as the 

        organ of knowledge, because this kind of knowledge is always accompa-

        nied by an emotional reaction, and by actions which reflect the relation-

        ship as understood by the knower.  Israel’s lack of knowledge is her fail-

        ure to realize and practice the relationship in which they stand with God.  

K-19

                 What the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” discloses is the dif-

        ference between good and evil to the first couple through the eating of the 

        fruit.  The OT shows no interest in the possible limitation of knowledge, but

        it does recognize that to know a person is more difficult than to know a 

        thing, because a person must disclose his will.   Further, it recognizes that 

        the original encounter with the object does not immediately yield full and 

        true knowledge.  It is through practical tests that the individual is taught 

        what the true nature and significance of the object is.  The fool is the man 

        who is satisfied with the primary impressions.

                   In the field of religion, “knowledge” is the term used to describe a 

        person’s right relation to God.  The knowledge of God is thought of as origi-

        nating in encounters with God.  Unlike pagan religions, the OT derives the 

        knowledge of God from those outstanding historical events in which God 

        shows interest in the event’s subject.  

                   Since God does not enter into every person’s experience directly, 

        knowledge of God is dependent on the witness of those privileged persons 

        to whom God revealed God’s self.  Guided by their message, people are 

        advised “to seek” God, which is an effort of the will to comprehend the sig-

        nificance which God’s dealing with God’s peoplehas for the individual and

        nation.  God’s role in knowledge is that God teaches people, & tests them.

        The “Fool” is therefore the person who refuses to be taught by God.

                   Thus, knowledge of God implies knowledge of oneself; one is “to 

        know God’s ways” or “precepts” instead of “God.”  Because knowledge of 

        God means experiencing the reality of God and not merely knowledge of 

        propositions concerning God, it frightens people.   This fear is not a mere 

        sentiment.  It shows itself in a way of life, in which a person respects God’s

        majesty & power.  Only the righteous person can therefore be said truly to

        know God.  The person who does not act in accordance with what God de-

        sires to do has but a fragmentary knowledge, which will eventually lead to 

        moral disintegration.   However, since the knowledge of God rests upon 

        God’s self-disclosure, humankind will never know more of God than God 

        chooses to reveal. 

                   The OT God wants to be known.  And in view of the Bible’s personal

        character, it isn't surprising that God’s knowledge of humankind is personal.

        More than omniscience, God’s knowledge is primarily that of people, and 

        like all knowledge, implies an interest taken in those whom God knows; 

        those known by God are chosen ones.  See also the entry in the OT  Apo-

        crypha/Influence Outside the Bible section of the Appendix.

                   Knowledge in the New Testament (NT)—NT writers continue the 

        OT usage, and particularly in John’s Gospel knowledge of God & faith are

        nearly synonymous.  However, knowledge of God has been modified.  True

        knowledge expresses itself in action.  Whereas in the OT knowledge of 

        God was focused upon God’s past deeds, the NT looks primarily toward 

        the goal which the Lord is about to realize & concentrates upon God’s final 

        redemptive purpose.  The Christian’s knowledge of God carries finality 

        within it. 

                   While in the NT the subject matter of knowledge can be described in

        OT fashion as the way or will of God, what is being talked about here is 

        God’s redemptive purpose & goal, which is found in Jesus.  Knowledge of 

        God requires a special revelation which comes to humankind through the 

        life and teachings of Jesus.  Even with this communication, there will still

        be misunderstandings, and the communication doesn't immediately give 

        one full knowledge of God.  God has to work the understanding of God’s 

        revelation by imparting the Holy Spirit to those who accept God’s reve-

        lation.   Failing to teach that God is capable of revealing God’s self afresh, 

        the scribes have taken away from the people the “key of knowledge.”

                   Among the NT writers, John and Paul have given special thought to

        the problem of knowledge.  John emphasizes that Jesus has perfect know-

        ledge of God’s purpose, and that he desires through his ministry to dis-

        close the Father to all.  Humankind’s actual or “natural” knowledge of the

        divine revelation is useless and misleading, because of their sin.  The first 

        step of true knowledge consists in receiving Jesus’ message; on this road 

        his followers will be led to the full Truth. 

                   This message consists in actions, which are signs.  Only those who 

        are willing to believe that in his actions Jesus is doing the will of the Fa-

        ther, receive the Light which enables them to discern the Son of God in his 

        hiddenness.  Thus knowledge isn't a mere acceptance of God’s revelation, 

        but rather that a relationship with God has been established.   The proof 

        that one has attained to this knowledge is found in assurance that Jesus 

        came from God, in readiness to follow his example, and in the public pro-

        fession of faith.  Even without personally seeing the works of Christ, one 

        is able to believe by accepting the eyewitnesses’ testimony.

K-20

                   The knowledge brought by Jesus is contrasted with that of the rab-

        bis, who from the commandments formed both their image of God and 

        life’s aim.  Jesus reminds his disciples than in him they know the goal and

        thus the way.  What they ought to do they will learn as they love Jesus and

        the Father who sent him.  John shares the individualistic concept of know-

        ledge with the Pharisees.  John uses Greek mysticism in order to present 

        in an apologetic way what is a typically Hebraic concept of knowledge.  

                   According to John, knowledge does not lead to a gradual merger of

        the knower’s mind with that of God but rather to a harmony of their wills. 

        While John shares with Greeks the distinction of levels of Knowledge, the

        development from receiving the message to the union of the wills is not so 

        much from the individual’s efforts as of the message’s intrinsic challenge.

        Even the concept of the Logos, is understood as the Hebrew dabar.   It 

        interprets the universe as a divine communication destined to lead people 

        to personal fellowship with God. 

                   A somewhat different picture is offered in Paul’s letters.  For Paul 

        knowledge is primarily the experience of the risen Lord’s operation in his 

        church’s life.  The Christian transcends all other knowledge, for in Jesus 

        Christ for the first time the glory of God has been manifested in human 

        life.  Hence there can be no true knowledge of God except in his manife-

        station in Christ.  Paul focuses his attention upon the moral and spiritual 

        character of Jesus; knowledge of Christ is the realization of his saving 

        significance.

                   The knowledge of Christ is given to those only in whom the Holy 

        Spirit operates.  Truly spiritual knowledge originates in the hearing of the

        message in which God’s revelation in Christ is proclaimed.  Paul points 

        out that even the richest spiritual knowledge remains fragmentary here on

        earth.   Progress in spiritual knowledge can, nevertheless, be accom-

        plished by means of mental discipline and willingness to listen to God. 

                   Since spiritual knowledge is dependent upon verbal communica-

        tion, it can easily be mistaken for theological correctness.  Spiritual know- 

        ledge is intended to lead to experience of the crucifixion of our “old self.”  

        Such progress of knowledge is the fruit of a deepened insight.  The level of

        spiritual knowledge is not due to one’s having larger or smaller portions of

        the Spirit, but to a person’s willingness to follow his promptings. 

                   Paul insists that God wants to be known.  God’s purpose in granting

        spiritual knowledge is to let humans be formed into Christ’s likeness.   By 

        making knowledge available to humans, God indicates that God takes hu-

        mans seriously and that God will arrange all for our good.  Developments 

        in the Corinth church made Paul aware that the experiential character of 

        spiritual knowledge brings enthusiastic and ecstatic experiences which 

        have nothing to do with faith.  He indicated 4 criteria by which genuine spi-

        ritual knowledge could be tested: it must agree with the Lord; it must 

        agree with the OT witness; it must agree with God’s manifestations in the 

        universe; and it should confirm our deepest aspirations and overcome our 

        reluctance to follow them.

                   A further test is the collective character of spiritual knowledge.  The

        nucleus of spiritual knowledge is formed by the church’s traditions.  There 

        is also a special spiritual gift of knowledge by which certain members of the

        church can discern the implication & applications of its message.  A genu-

        ine gift of discernment is to be found in genuine humility and love.  Like the

        OT writers,  Paul, too, in some passages used the phrase “being known by

        God.”  God’s “knowledge” isn't God’s omniscience, but those special events

        in which the truth or falsehood of people’s attitude toward God is brought to

        the light.  This indicates that in all God’s works God acts with a purpose &

        thus uses those best fit for the desired end.  

                   Consequently, the Christian knowledge of God is not the result of 

        speculative insight, but rather is based upon the experience of being used 

        by God for his saving work.  Believers know from inner experience that 

        they are Christ’s not their own.  God knows all things directly in God’s self,

        and arranges everything exactly as with God’s ultimate goal.  

                   Conversely, our knowledge remains fragmentary, because in this life

        we apprehend God only indirectly in our experience of being known by 

        God.   The reason for the limited character of human knowledge of God 

        isn't found in the limitation of human knowledge, but rather in the condition

        of God being everything and in everything.  Since it is God in Christ who is 

        apprehended in Christian knowledge, there is divine truth even in its provi-

        sional, earthly stage.

                   The believer’s knowledge of God is radically contrasted by Paul with

        a human’s natural wisdom.  The natural religious knowledge of the Gentiles

        is a perverted one, because they interpret the data in the wrong way.   The 

        wrongness of their religious knowledge can be seen most clearly in their 

        lack of reverence for God’s transcendence.  Thus, no matter how bright &

        keen their intellect may be, their wisdom is futile, foolish, and blind.  

                   Paul doesn't teach that human reason is worthless, nor does he hold

        that the believer is privileged by having a special ability to perceive God, 

        but rather he contends that apart from faith all human knowledge operates 

        in a wrong frame of reference.  Failing to see the consistency of God’s ope-

        rations, it sees the gospel as an absurdity; only God’s Spirit is able to lead 

        a person to an acceptance of the truth. 

K-21

                   A word should finally be said about Paul’s relation to Gnosticism.  It

        is certain that the Apostle, more than any other NT writer, shows the influ-

        ence of Greek thought by employing Greek philosophic terms and by his in-

        sistence upon “systematic” thought.   He wants to show how Christ is rela-

        ted to everything in the universe.  Similarly he discusses the human’s 

        place in the universe, the Christian faith’s place among world’s religions, 

        the diversity and relative value of the Spirit’s various gifts, and the final 

        events of this age.

                   But when all is said about Greek influences upon Paul’s mind, we 

        are still worlds apart from Gnosticism.  Paul’s thinking is opposed to Gnos-

        tic thought.  Gnostics believe that intellectual knowledge of the universe al-

        lows initiates to map out their own way of salvation.  Paul will say that the 

        better we get to know Christ, the more deliberately we shall cling to him as 

        our only salvation.  Christians are enriched by the knowledge of Christ and 

        can, in fact, be “in Christ.”

                   Furthermore, whereas the Gnostic knowledge is a faculty with prac-

        tically unlimited applicability, Paul points out that Christ is the limit of all 

        knowledge.  Beyond what God has done in a person, there is nothing con-

        cerning salvation that humankind can know.  Divine purpose is completely

        absent from Gnostic systems, & while the Gnostic systems search for com-

        prehensiveness, they don't start with the experience of a redeemer.  Ra-

        ther, by means of a Gnostic analysis of the universe, the “mechanics” of 

        being  are interpreted.  In lieu of the basic conflict between sin and salva-

        tion, we find in Gnosticism only gradual differences of being. 

                   It is true that Paul knows a special gift of knowledge (gnosis).  But

        whatever he may have meant, it can't be the esoteric knowledge of Gnos-

        ticism, because he fights so fiercely against false knowledge.   The argu-

        ment in I Corinthians 8 suggests that this special knowledge is the ability to

        discern the function of Christ in the universe, which is proclaimed to all, for 

        Paul said, “I do not want you to be ignorant.” 

KOA (קוע, prince)  A gentilic mentioned in the sequence of ethnic groups in 

        Ezekiel 23.  Shoa refers to the Sutu people and Koa corresponds to the 

        Guti, but more likely “Shoa and Koa” is simply a rhyming pair. 

KOHATH  (קהת, assembly)  Second son of Levi.  He was the father of Amram,

        Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel, who became heads of Kohathite branches.   Ko-

        hath was the grandfather of Aaron, Moses, and Miriam.  All information 

        about Kohath as a person and the Kohathite families descended from him 

        comes through either the priestly writer or the Chronicler.

                   When the tabernacle was constructed in the wilderness, the Koha-

        thites were stationed around it and charged with its care and transit.  Their 

        station was on the tabernacle’s south side; and their “charge” was the ark 

        table, lamp stand, altars, sacred vessels, and screen.  Aaron and his sons 

        would cover the holy things and fit them with poles, by which the Koha-

        thites could then carry upon their shoulders.  At Palestine’s occupation the 

        Kohathites, who were Aaron’s descendants received by lot 13 cities from 

        the tribes of Judah, Simeon, and Benjamin.  The remaining Kohathite fami-

        lies received ten cities from Ephraim, Dan, and Manasseh.  Thus, thee Ko-

        hathite families possessed, significant territory in the hill country of south 

        and central Palestine. 

                   When David “prepared a place for the ark of God, and pitched a tent

        for it,” he gathered 120 Kohathites, under Uriel as chief, to bring the ark up

        into Jerusalem.  When Jehoshaphat sought the Lord for the deliverance of 

        Israel from Moab and Ammon, Levites of the Kohathite line functioned as 

        sacred ministers.  And when Josiah undertook to repair the temple in 621 

        B.C., the Kohathites Zechariah and Meshullam were among the supervi-

        sing Levites.   Upon the return from exile in Babylon, when ministers were

        appointed their tasks in the temple, some of the Kohathites were in charge 

        of preparing the showbread every Sabbath.

KOHELETH.  Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes.

KOLAIAH (קוליה, voice of the Lord)    1.  Ancestor of some Benjaminites living

        in Jerusalem after the Exile (Nehemiah 11).    2. The father of the false pro-

        phet Ahab (Jeremiah 29).

KOPH  (ק)  The 19th letter of the Hebrew Alphabet as it is placed in the King 

        James Version at the head of the 19^th  section of the acrostic Psalm 119, 

        where each verse of this section of the psalm begins with this letter.

K-22

KORAH  (קרה, bald)  1. A son of Esau (Genesis 36); chief of a clan of Edom. 

               2.  A grandson of Esau; son of Elihphaz; chief of a clan of Edom 

        (Genesis 36).

               3.  A leader of rebellion in the wilderness.  Numbers 16 interweaves 4  

        versions of a revolt story.   The 1^st is a revolt led by Dathan and Abiram 

        against the civil authority claimed by Moses, where the Yahwist (J) and 

        Elohwist (E) sources were combined.  These in turn were combined with a 

        Priestly story of a revolt led by Korah.  The last version is the revision of 

        Korah’s revolt by someone revising the Priestly writings.   The Dathan/

        Abiram revolt and the first version of Korah’s revolt were subsequently 

        combined.  The two versions of Korah’s revolt are to be understood in the 

        context of the struggles over religious leadership.

                   Moses invited Korah and those with him to a trial by ordeal: the next

        day they were to bring fire pans with incense, and Yahweh would choose 

        who was holy.  Fire came from Yahweh & consumed the rebels.  The next

        day the people spoke for Korah and his associates and protested the ac-

        tion of Moses and Aaron.  Yahweh proposed instant destruction of the peo-

        ple.  In this story Korah and the others protesting were non-Levites.  The is-

        sue was the prerogatives of the Levites in religious affairs. 

                   In the material by a later Priestly reviser, the struggle was within the 

        tribe of Levi.  Korah was a Levite and led other Levites in a protest against 

        the monopoly of the priesthood by Aaron.  The censers of Korah and his 

        company were hammered into a covering for the altar, as a warning that 

        none but priests should come near to Yahweh's altar.   This later Priestly re-

        vision may indicate that the Levites were assigned a lower position relative

        to the priesthood.   The Priestly story and the Priestly revision suggest that 

        developments in the leadership of the cult occurred with considerable in-

        ner opposition. 

                  4. A Levite, a descendant of Izhar, of the family of Kohath.  The Kora-

        hite were one of 4 or 5 families of Levite priests located around Hebron.

        This Korah may be the figure of that name in the Priestly revision in Num-

        bers 16.  At some time the “sons of Korah” and Asaph were the two great 

        guilds of temple singers.  The Korahites are named alongside the Koha-

        thites as singers.  The Korahites were gatekeepers and bakers of sacrifi-

        cial cakes.

                   5.  A son of Hebron in a Calebite genealogy; possibly a geographi-

        cal name of a town near Hebron.

KORE  (קורא)    1.  A Levite of the house of Korah (I Chronicles 9, 26).      

        2.  King James Version form of Korah (I Chronicles 26).     3. A Levite, son 

        of Inmah; in charge of the freewill offerings in the reign of King Hezekiah.

KOZ  (קוץ, thorn)   1.  A descendant of Judah; perhaps an ancestor of the 

        priestly house Hakkoz.  It is also the King James Version form of Hakkoz.

KUE  (קוה, a cord) Probably an ancient name of Cilicia in Asia Minor.  The 

        name is found in I Kings 10.  The New Revised Standard Version has ren-

        dered maque as “from Kue,” while the King James Version has “linen 

        yarn.”    Kue is mentioned as a country from which King Solomon impor-

        ted horses.  Cilicia is situated on the fertile coastal plain in the southern 

        part of Asia Minor.   Cilicia was famous for its horses, which were bred 

        here in great numbers.  The king of this country was one of Shalmaneser’s

        opponents who had to pay tribute.

KUSHAIAH  (קושיהו, bow of the Lord)  A Merarite Levite, listed as one of the

        singers for the sanctuary in reign of King David (I Chronicles 15).

K-23