Pot-Py

 POT.   A term used to translate a wide variety of Hebrew and Greek words. For 

        details, see Pottery.  

POTIPHAR (פוטיפר is the Hebrew spelling for the Egyptian word meaning “he

        to whom Re has given.”)  The Egyptian officer who purchased Joseph 

        from the Ishmaelites (or Midianites) when he 1st came to Egypt as a slave.

        Potiphar put him “in charge of all that he had”; Potiphar's unnamed wife 

        attempted to seduce Joseph.   The general outline of Genesis 39 is surpri-

        singly similar to the famous Egyptian tale of  Two Brothers. 

                   The form of “Potiphar” offers us additional information and diffi-

        culty. The name is that of the god Re, who was the Egyptian sun-god.  It is

        the same name as Joseph’s father-in-law.  It may be that the shorter form, 

        which developed as a faulty transcription, was intentionally preserved as 

        Potiphar to distinguish the captain of the guard from the priest who bore a 

        similar name.   The Egyptian names in the Joseph story are actually fami-

        liar and recent substitutes—from the 900s B.C.— for stranger, more archa-

        ic ones. 

                   The office held by Potiphar is described by the Hebrew words saris

        and sar hattabbahim  . The 1st originally meant “eunuch,” and was exten-

        ded to cover officials whose duties were similar to those of eunuchs.  Sar 

        hattabbahim (captain of the guard) was also used to describe a Babylonian

        post.  The position which Potiphar held was connected with the royal 

        prison.  

POTIPHERA (See Potiphar for meaning)  Joseph’s father-in-law.  He is de-

        scribed as a priest of On (Heliopolis), which was the cultic center of the 

        sun-god Re.   Names of this form don't appear in Egypt until the 900s B.C. 

POTSHERD (חרש (kheh res))  A piece of broken pottery.  Potsherds serve as 

        a symbol of dryness. The judgment on Israel is compared to the breaking 

        of a potter’s vessel smashed so ruthlessly that from among its fragments 

        no usable sherd is found.  

                  There was a city gate in the Hinnom Valley called the Potsherd Gate.

        This was the place where the potters could throw away their discards.  

        Potsherds were at times inserted into the clay on the outside of the oven, 

        thus giving a higher temperature within the oven. 

                   Job used a potsherd with which to scrape as he sat on an ash heap.

                   The armored under-parts of the mythological dragon, the Leviathan,

        are described in Job 41 as like sharp potsherds. 

POTSHERD GATE (שער החרסות (shah ‘ar  ha khar sooth))  A city gate in

        the southeastern section of Jerusalem, leading to the Valley of Hinnom and

        the Potter’s Field. 

POTTAGE (נזיד (naw tseed), something sodden) A thick vegetable soup, usual-

        ly made with lentils but also with herbs in general.  Occasionally meat was

        added, and the whole was boiled; apparently it was red in color. 

POTTER’S WHEEL (אבנים (‘aw beh nah eem))  A circular disk, fitted on a 

        vertical axis, on which it rotates, thus enabling the potter to fashion clay 

        vessels.  The potter’s wheel is not mentioned in the New Testament and 

        only once in the Old Testament (OT; Jeremiah 18). 

                   It is significant that in OT Hebrew the terms for “Creator” and “pot-

        ter” are expressed by the same word, yotsar.   Archaeological evidence 

        shows that the potter’s wheel came into use in Palestine in the 2000s B.C.  

        During the Middle Bronze Age a 2nd disk, or “fly wheel,” seems to have

        been added.  This 2nd wheel, which speeded the turning, was set in motion

        by the foot.  Potter’s wheels of stone were found in Megiddo, Lachish, and

        Hazor.  They are often made of wood or clay, and so were not found in 

        excavations. 

POTTERY (חרש (khaw rawsh), potsherd; keramion (keh rah me on))  A 

        synthetic stone produced by firing clay, which is hydrated silicate of alu-

        mina, to a sufficiently high temperature to change its physical characteri-

        stics and its chemical composition.  Pottery is now commonly thought of

        as earthenware dishes and other larger vessels, but the term had a much 

        wider usage in antiquity, more akin to our modern word “ceramics.”  

P-104

 

              List of Topics—1. Introduction/ Potter;    2. Ceramic

       Vocabulary (Hebrew and Greek):    a. Equipment and

       Supplies;    b. Pottery Vessels—Dining and Cooking; 

       c. Pottery Vessels—Containers/  Miscellaneous;    3. Ceramic 

       Forms— Bowl;    4. Ceramic Forms — Jar;   5. Making and 

       Biblical History of Pottery;    6.  Ceramics: Industry/ Canaa-

       nite Cult Objects/ Glass and Glaze;    7.Pottery in Ceremonial 

       Low and Figurative Language 

                   1. Introduction/ Potter—The exact identification of the 34 Hebrew

        and Aramaic terms applied to the vessels of the Old Testament is a difficult 

        task. But the Old Testament (OT) makes such wide and exact use of much 

        of the potter’s technical vocabulary that an expert ceramist can now re-cre-

        ate a good picture of the OT potter and his wares; the New Testament pre-

        sents only a small ceramic vocabulary.   

                   The potter worked either alone or with apprentices. There was a 

        royal guild, whose men doubtless made the government storage jars which

        bear the  inscription  “for the king.”  The king’s private estates also had 

        special jars whose handles had the name of the king and his treasurer 

        stamped upon them.  The potter’s house—workshop or factory—was not 

        only where he fashioned his wares on the wheel and set them  aside to dry,

        but where there would also be one or more kilns in his yard and plenty of 

        room to weather the raw clay.  

                   The Hinnom Valley, south of Jerusalem, was an ideal place for the 

        potters of that city. See also Potsherds.  3. Cereamic Forms: Bowl

           2. Ceramic Vocabulary (Hebrew and Greek)

                a. Equipment and Supplies                               

           Clay, dry עפר (aw fawr); אדמה      Potter יוצר (yo tsare),  

                (ah dam mah); ארץ (eh rets)              maker, creator

           Clay, wet טיט (teet)                            Potter’s wheel  אבנים 

           Clay, worked  חמר (kho mer)                 (‘aw beh nah eem)    

           Glaze סיגים כסף (keh sef                Pottery, fired כלי    

                see geem), “silver of dross”                   חרש (keh lay  kheh 

                                                                                resh),  crafted vessel;

           Kiln  תנור (tan nor), oven, furnace      Oven  תנור (tan nor),                                                                               furnace 

                b. Pottery Vessels—Dining and Cooking

           Bowl, banquet  צלחת (tsah lah          Cooking pots, wide mouth  
         khat); trublion (troo blee on)         סיר (seer); קלחת (kal 

                                                                                law khath)

           Bowl, bread משארת  (me sheh         Cups קבעת (koob bah 

               ‘eh ret )                                                   ‘at),  goblet; כוס (kos); 

           Bowl, small  כיור (kee or), firepan          גביע (geh bay ‘ah), 

                                                                                             goblet

           Bowl, small salt  לחיתצ (tseh lo         pothrion (po teh ree on), 

               kheet)                                                        cup

            Cooking pots, deep frying                     Dish, serving  סף (saf), 

                מרחשת (mah reh kheh sheth),        basin    

               boiling pot                                          Plate  מחבת (ma khah

            Cooking pots, narrow mouth                    bath), frying pan  

               דוד (dode)   

P-105

 

         c. Pottery Vessels—Containers/  Miscellaneous

                Canteen  צפחת (tsah fa khat)          Bottle  נבל (neh bel), jar; 

                 Jar, large  נבל (neh bel), bottle,            בקבק (bak keh book) 

                     skin-bottle

                 Jar, oil  אסוך (‘ah soke);                   Crucible (general); מצרפ 

              aggeion (ag gie on) bucket;                (mah tseh  rafe), refiner

              udria (ood ree ah)                          Crucible, jeweler  עליל 

           Jar, water כד (kad), pitcher                     (‘ah leel)  

                    antlhma (ant leh ma),                      Lamp  נר (nare), light; 

                  Juglet צפחת (tsah fa khat), flask;        lampaV  (lam pas);   

                       פך(fa keh), perfume flask                 lucnoV (luk nos), 

           Pitcher  כד (kad),                                   light, candle 

                 keramion (keh ra me on), cup     

                   3. Ceramic Forms:  Bowl—The most common ceramic form found

        by the archaeologist has been the bowl, and it ran in a great variety of pat-

        terns and sizes.   In the Divided Kingdom, the average size of a banquet 

        bowl (tsalakhat [Hebrew], trublion [Greek], would be something like 40 cm

        for the inside diameter at the rim and about half that in height.  This ban-

        quet bowl was also used as a crater for mixing wine.  A common size for 

        the meshe’eret (bread bowl) was about 25 cm wide and 7.5 cm deep; lar-

        ger bowls were needed for larger families. 

                   The cup (qubba’at, kos, geba’a [Hebrew], poterion [Greek] shape of 

        today was fairly rare in OT times, except in the days of the Divided King-

        dom.  The cup without a handle, a modification of the bowl, was more com-

        mon and was often form-fitted to the hand.  Other modifications of the bowl 

        form were cooking pots (syr, dod, marekhesheth).   The average syr was 

        about 30 cm with larger and smaller sizes.  

                   The dod varied in size from 10 to 35 cm in diameter, and was much 

        more common in the Divided Kingdom.  The cooking pot was constantly 

        subject to accident and to the expansion shock of heat and cold.  It there-

        fore required special skill in manufacture.  New Testament cooking pots fol-

        lowed something of the OT form but were smaller and much more delicate.

        The thin plate such as we use today was a difficult ceramic form to 

        manufacture. 

                   The OT lamp (nar [Hebrew], lampos, luchnos [Greek]) was part of 

        the bowl family.  While it was still soft, the potter pinched in the rim at one

        point to make a place for the wick.  In the intertestamental period the lamp 

        was quite small.   The sides were lapped over one another in such a way 

        that there was a large hole at 1 end for the oil, and a small hole at the other

        end for the wick. Later in that period a lamp was made in 2 pieces which 

        were struck together when they were leather hard.   The upper section co-

        vered the lower one except at the center, where a hole was left for the oil.  

        A spout was shaped and added to the bowl for the wick. 

                   4. Ceramic Forms:  Jar—The 2nd basic form in ceramic ware was

        the jar (kad, nebel, ‘asok, tsafkhat,).   In the earliest Israelite history there 

        was a water jar (kad) somewhat similar in form to the later nebel.  This 

        was a tall, cylindrical form like an old-fashioned crock but with thinner 

        walls.  It was a multi-purpose jar, as it also served for the storage of flour.

        The largest storage jar (nebel) was a pear-shaped vessel.   During the Di-

        vided Kingdom's days, a common size held 2 baths (46 liters, 11 gallons) 

        and was about 63 cm in height and 40 cm in diameter. These are the jars 

        that at times bore the stamp of the government or even of the king himself. 

                   ‘Asok was a special variety of storage jar used for oil.   It was com-

        mon in the days of the Divided Kingdom and is the jar used when Elisha 

        replenished the poor widow’s supply of oil.  This jar had something of an 

        egg shape and was a little more than 30 cm high.  It had 3 handles and a 

        specially designed spout.   The small oil juglets which ran from 7.5 to 15 

        cm in height are very common in all excavations.  This is the aggion of the

        wise and foolish virgins in Matthew 25; a small fakeh was used by Samuel 

        to anoint Saul.  

P-106

 

                   In spite of the low cost of pottery, some of the better pieces were 

        mended.   Cracked or broken ware had rivets or wires running through 

        small holes drilled in the pottery to hold them together. Even when pottery 

        was broken, it still had a little utilitarian value:  the larger sherds from sto-

        rage jars could be used for jar lids, or writing material.   Also, they were 

        used to carry coals from house to house and for dipping up water.  Job 

        used a potsherd as a scraper.  Finally, potsherds could be ground fine and 

        used in the waterproof plaster of cisterns.  Most sherds, however, became

        a part of the general household debris. 

                   5. Making and Biblical History of Pottery—In the Palestine of 

        Bible days pottery was usually made from a good grade of red clay, the 

        commonest of all clays.  It was weathered & washed in the potter’s yard 

        or near where it was dug.  The final step in the preparation of the clay was

        to mix the proper amount of water with the washed clay by treading until 

        the water had been evenly distributed and until all the air was removed. 

                   The true potter’s wheel was in use during almost all of the Bible 

        period.  The potter took a ball of clay and threw it at the center of the 

        wheel, which then was turned rapidly while the potter fashioned the clay.

        Later, when leather hard, vessel could be put back on the wheel and 

        turned into more delicate forms.  If the clay had been prepared well, it 

        would hold its form well while being thrown on the wheel and afterward 

        while drying.  A second method of fashioning clay was to use a press 

        mold.  The prepared clay was pressed down firmly into an open mold.  

        Astarte plaques of the Canaanite period were made in these press molds, 

        as were most of the lamps of New Testament times. 

                   The firing of the kiln was a professional’s task, for different clays 

        had to be handled differently.  The firing of the kiln was the ultimate test 

        of the potter’s art; the potter’s firing techniques were trade secrets.  In the

        field of decoration the Israelites did not use glaze but simply modified the 

        thrown form.  The best decorated Israelite ware was in the days of the Di-

        vided Kingdom.  In the days of the judges there was some painting, but it 

        was the Canaanite period that saw the widest use of painting. 

                   The earliest of all pottery came from Neolithic Jericho, where phe-

        nomenal progress was made with that craft.  Hand-molded pottery was re-

        placed by pottery thrown and molded on a potter’s wheel by Joseph’s time.

        In antiquity pottery found many and varied uses.  It was the major method

        of storage, for in those days metal, wood, and sack containers were too ex-

        pensive.  Pottery revolutionized cooking and improved the general health 

        level. 

                   The earliest tablet was made of wet clay into which a script was im-

        printed with a stylus.  A signature was made by rolling a signet seal into 

        this clay tablet.  In later years large pieces of broken jars often served as 

        economical stationery.  Pottery jars were the safety deposit vaults of anti-

        quity (e.g. “We have this treasure in earthen vessels” (II Corinthians 4)).  

        Most of the pottery the archaeologists have found in Palestine is native 

        ware.  Pottery is so indestructible and its styling so distinctive that it fur-

        nishes the archaeologists the tool by which they can date ancient history.  

                   Most of Palestine’s pottery was strictly utilitarian.  Some ware was

        so artistically designed as to be used for both dry and wet storage.  The 

        most artistic pottery forms in Bible times came out of the Hyksos period 

        (Middle Bronze Age or 2000-1500 B.C.), near the time of Joseph. In the 

        late Bronze Age (1500-1200), pottery lacked the fine lines of the prece-

        ding Hyksos phase, but it still revealed good craftsmanship. 

                   In the first part of the Iron Age (1200-900), the days of the jud-

        ges, there was a marked deterioration in pottery.  By David’s time, there

        was a quick up spring in craftsmanship.  Toward the end of that period 

        something entirely new appeared in ceramics.  The modern factory tech-

        niques, which we still use, were created at that time, and mass produc-

        tion appeared.  The new techniques permitted the use of cheaper clays, 

        cheaper labor, greater volume production, etc.  Yet the quality of the 

        work continued high.  

                   The late Iron Age (550-330), was roughly contemporaneous with 

        the Persian period.  In ceramics there was some modification of the old 

        forms and the introduction of new ones.  By the time of Alexander the 

        Great, international commerce brought much larger importations of 

        Greek pottery.  It is these constant changes in clays, forms, decorations, 

        techniques of manufacture, etc., which enable the archaeologist to date 

        the pottery he finds and thereby to date the cities he excavates. 

P-107

                   6.  Ceramics: Industry; Canaanite Cult Objects; Glass and 

        Glaze—The most important field for ceramics in industry was metallur-

        gy.  The high temperature required for smelting and refining metals made 

        the ceramic crucible a necessity.   Where limestone crucibles were used, 

        these had to be lined with clay.   

                    In the cloth industry cheap spindle whorls, were sometimes made

        of pottery. The loom weights which were used in the weaving of cloth in 

        the Divided Kingdom, were almost always made of pottery.  Feeding bot-

        tles for babies were imitations of both animals and birds.  For girls there 

        were small clay dolls and miniature dishes and lamps.  For boys there 

        were clay horses and cavalrymen.  

                    In the building trades of Palestine sundried brick was very com-

        mon, but it isn't pottery.  Fired brick was rare in Palestine but common 

        in Babylonia.  Ramses the Great's (possibly the Pharaoh of the Exodus)  

        palace, had glazed tile. 

                   The Canaanite cult was a user of ceramic material.  The Tera-

        phim or clay figures of Astarte were common before Joshua’s conquest.  

        At that time they had not only religious, but also legal significance.  The 

        Astartes of the Canaanite were plaques made in a press mold and were 

        smaller than the palm of the hand.  The goddess wore the heavy Egyp-

        tian wig and often held lotus blossoms in her hands.  

                   The Astartes of Jezebel’s time look like tiny “snow men” about 

        10-15 cm in height.   The body of the goddess was hand-modeled, and 

        her skirts flared out so as to form a solid pedestal. The 2 units were put 

        together when leather-hard.  There was also a stylized tree holding a 

        lamp in its branches which was used in this idol's household worship.  

        By Jeremiah’s time there was a special pottery incense altar used in this

        and other heathen cults. 

                   The most difficult field in ancient ceramics was glass and glaze, 

        and both were rare in Old Testament Palestine but not in New Testament 

        days.  Egypt was Palestine’s major source of glass; in that country glass 

        was a soda-lime silicate.  Their formulas produced an opaque glass at 

        low temperature.  By New Testament times new techniques were putting 

        glass on the market in ever-increasing quantities.   The Greeks were ex-

        perts on glaze, and by intertestamental times their wares were becoming 

        common among the rich in Palestine. 

                   7. Pottery in Ceremonial Law and Figurative Language 

        Most vessels used in the ceremonial law were metal; sometimes a pottery

        one was specified, as in the law of the cleansing of a leper and the law 

        concerning jealousy.  The most striking of all figurative language that 

        comes from the potter is that of God’s molding human personality.  The 

        creation story of Genesis 2 portrays God as a sculptor. 

                   The more common figure of God is that of the Master Potter at 

        his wheel fashioning people and nations as the potter fashions his wares 

        (e.g. Jeremiah 18; Isaiah 29, 64; Romans 9).  Among the specific pottery 

        vessels most strikingly and commonly used for figurative language are 

        the lamp and the cup (e.g. for lamp: Job 29; II Chronicles 21; Proverbs 

        20; Revelation 21).  For the figurative use of the cup, see Cup article.  

POUND (mnaa (meh nah) litra (lit rah))  The mnaa of John 12 and 19

        is equivalent to 100 drachmae (430 grams or 14 ounces).  The litra con-

        tained 12 ounces and was used both as a weight and as a measure of ca-

        pacity.  In Luke’s “parable of the talents” (Luke 19) the term “pound” evi-

        dently refers to money, as it does in some countries today. 

POVERTY.  The condition of having little or no wealth or material posses-

        sions.  Poverty is not the greatest evil in the world, any more than wealth

        is the greatest good; poverty is to be preferred to ill-gotten wealth.  Po-

        verty has many causes.  In most instances it is not truly fore-ordained by 

        God.  It may be the result of sloth and laziness, drunkenness, sumptuous

        living; or folly and stubbornness. 

                   Some were poor voluntarily.  The Levites may have been volunta-

        tarily poor; during the monarchy they were without land.  This may re-

        flect a religious ideal of nomadism.  Many prophets and rabbis had no 

        regular income.  Jesus became poor for humankind’s sake.  The rich 

        young ruler was advised to sell everything.   Jesus may not be calling for

        voluntary poverty for all his followers, but rather that idolatry of posses-

        sions had to be rooted out of the rich young man.  The sectarians of Qum-

        ran seem to have practiced voluntary poverty.   

P-108

                 Slavery was preferred by many to poverty.  The poor could sell them-

        selves to others; minor children could be sold.  It is probable that the minor 

        children were sold first before a man sold himself into slavery.  In the Jubi-

        lee year such voluntary slaves were to be released.   Creditors also seized 

        the children of debtors.   In the early history of civilization all people lived 

        under conditions we would consider poverty.  The bonds of brotherhood 

        and family interdependence averted extremes of poverty unless the whole 

        tribe became destitute. 

                   At the beginning of the Conquest the majority of families were land-

        owners, but it wasn't long before some became landed barons while others 

        were practically serfs.  Craftsmen were seldom wealthy.  In the Babylonian

        captivity all lost their wealth.   The farmers who were left behind in ra-

        vished Judah lived at a subsistence level.   In Babylon a few Israelites be-

        came wealthy merchants.  In the return only those who hadn't profited by 

        their Babylonian stay returned to Palestine.  In Rome itself most of the 

        Jews were poor and lived on the wrong side of the Tiber.  The early Chris-

        tian converts apparently came from this group also.  

                    It is possible that any time in history those who lost their land for 

        any reason would migrate.  Some think this is the explanation the gerim or 

        sojourners.   Hospitality was to be shown to these sojourners at all times.  

        In the 200s A.D., a Jerusalem synagogue had a hospice for housing needy 

        strangers, and the early Christians were always giving shelter to their 

        fellows. 

POWDERS OF THE MERCHANT (רוכל אבקת (‘ah beh kat  row kel))  The 

        litter of Solomon was perfumed with spices and the fragrant “powders of 

        the merchant” (Song of Songs [Solomon] 3). 

POWER (חיל (khah yil), strength, might, valor; כוח (ko akh), strength, ability; 

        עוז (‘oze), strength, might; dunamis (die na mis), strength, ability;     

         exousia (eks oo see ah), authority, jurisdiction)  By its very nature the 

        Hebrew language is concrete and colorful.  It made very little progress in 

        developing abstract concepts.   In a scientific and philosophical sense, bib-

        lical people did not attain a concept of nature.  One can read through the 

        Bible without encountering the concepts of natural forces.  There is little 

        understanding of physiology.  Laws of heredity were unknown; People of 

        the Bible lived in a pre-scientific world.  Greek is far more abstract, ten-

        ding to consolidate its thought into well-defined ideas; but its words pos-

        sess great flexibility. 

                   It follows that people had little in the way of implements and ma-

        chines to aid them in their work.  Power had to be supplied by the strength

        of people and animals, such as the ass and ox (the horse wasn't intro-

        duced until David and Solomon’s time).  The power of wind was exploited

        by sailing vessels.  Fire was used for refining metals and cooking. 

                   Throughout the Bible it is assumed that the will is free. “Humans in

        the image of God” means that they are like God in a spiritual sense.  One’s 

        moral character results from one’s own choice.  Biblical writers are familiar

        with the concept of political power, recognizing its importance and validity;

        it has a religious nature.  Father, chieftain, priest, prophet, or king derive 

        their power from God, and are responsible to God for the way they use it. 

                   Numerous vestiges of ancient animism and polytheism survive in 

        the Bible.   God manifests God’s power, not only by creation, but also by 

        providential control of the world.  While God grants autonomy, God’s own

        prerogative remains uncompromised.  In the earlier strata of the biblical 

        documents, the numerous spirits remain anonymous, but they are thought 

        of as servants of God.  Several dragons are mentioned in the Bible (Levia-

        than in Job 3; Psalm 74; and Isaiah 27; Rahab in Job 9, 26; Psalm 89; and 

        Isaiah 30; Belial in I Corinthians 6).  By the end of the Old Testament, evil 

        spirits or demons are called Satan’s subjects. 

                   In the New Testament Satan has become supreme as ruler of evil 

        spirits and people and beasts in opposition to God.  Satan appears first in 

        I Chronicle 21; Job 1; and Zechariah 3.  Late biblical writers held that 

        God and angels, on the one hand, were opposed by Satan and demons.  

        Biblical belief holds that God gains the ultimate victory, that good is 

        more powerful than evil. 

POWER OF KEYS.  The power entrusted to Peter by Jesus (i.e. Αι κλειδασ

        τεσ βασιλεαισ τον ουρανον (kleidas tes basileais ton ouranon), 

        “keys of the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 16).”  The keys are the symbol

        of rule and authority entrusted by the real holder.  The power of the keys 

        is thus the power over the house of the Lord.  It is the power to act as 

        Jesus did—i.e. to preach the gospel of grace and judgment, to forgive sins,

        and to gather the new people of God. 

P-109 

PRAETORIAN GUARD (praitwrion)  This word in Philippians 1 almost cer-

        tainly refers to persons although in the gospels and Acts it is always a 

        place, such as the official residence or palace of the governor.  In Philip-

        pians 1:13, does the whole “praitorion” refer to the praetorian guard or to

        the imperial high court?   If the letter was written in Rome, then the mea-

        ning is probably the imperial guard.  “All the rest” probably means the 

        menials and “those of Caesar’s household.” 

                   If Philippians was written from a provincial city, this verse could 

        refer to: the military and “all the rest”; all the palace”; or the imperial 

        high court.  Then “all the rest” would mean those who had no official re-

        sponsibility for the trial, but made up the audience, such as soldiers, by-

        standers, or observers of any sort.

PRAETORIUM (praitwrion)  1.  Originally the tent or headquarters of the

        praetor or general in a Roman camp; then the residence or palace of a pro-

        vincial governor, whether his title was praetor, proconsul, procurator, or 

        prince.  As for Mark 15, it is not wholly clear whether the text means that

        the praetorium is the palace or is part of the palace.  The presence of “the 

        whole battalion” suggests that it means “barracks.

                   In John, all the references are to one who “enters into” or “goes out

        from” the praetorium.  The inference in John 19 is that the mockery took 

        place within the praetorium.  “Herod’s praetorium” Acts 23 was the palace

        built by Herod the Great in Caesarea and used by the Roman procurators. 

        Luke probably suggests that Paul was treated by Felix as a gentleman-pri-

        soner and a special “guest.”  Opinion remains divided whether the praeto-

        rium in the gospels is to be located at Herod’s palace at the northwest cor-

        ner of the Upper City or in the Tower of Antonia at the northwest corner 

        of the outer court of the temple.   

                   2.  The military attached to the praetorium.  In this usage the word 

        could refer to:  the military council; the imperial high court; or the imperial

        bodyguard.  The imperial high court or supreme court was composed of the

        emperor or his delegate.  The court functioned both as a council or war and

        as a council of judgment. 

                   During the last 2 centuries of the Republic, generals normally had a 

        bodyguard.  When Augustus came to the throne in 27 B.C., he established 

        his praetorium in Italy, and out of the veterans available organized a perma-

        nent corps or guard of 9 cohorts of 1,000 men each; only some of the 

        troops were billeted in Rome.  They served for 16 years, received 3 times 

        the pay of legionaries and frequent and large donations.  

                   The political importance of the praetorian guard dates from the time

        of Sejanus, who stationed them just outside Rome.  On Caligula's death in 

        41 they were able promptly to put down the Senate’s endeavor to restore 

        the Republic and to proclaim Claudius emperor.  Although the number and 

        the make-up of the cohort shifted during the years, they remained a me-

        nace until finally abolished by Constantine. 

PRAISE (הלל (ha lal), celebrate; תהלה (teh hil law); ידה (yah dah), give 

        thanks).  A prominent part of a human’s many-sided response and ap-

        proach to God through worship; praise attempts a description of God.

                   The ideas connected with the activity of praise are best illustrated

        by the opening verses of Psalm 113.  1st, it is clear that the object of 

        praise may be described simply as the Lord, some label, such as “my 

        Strength,” “my Redeemer,” or some metaphorical description such as 

        “rock of our salvation.”  Next in this psalm, the 2nd topic is given—“O

        servants of the Lord.”  The 3rd topic of praise is its occasion, which is 

        to be continuous.   The 4th topic of praise is the place it is to be given 

        in, namely everywhere.   The 4th verse of this psalm gives the reason for

        praise.  The 5th topic of praising, not mentioned in Psalm 113, is the 

        “how” and involves sacrifices and offerings, physical activities, instru-

        ments, utterance, fasting,  meditation, silence, etc.   

PRAYER (תפלה (tef il law), intercession; proseuch (pros yoo kay); aitew

        (ahee teh o), ask, request, demand, desire, [used in the Gospel of John])  

        In the Bible prayer moves from the level of magic to the heights of spiri-

        tual communion and identification of will and activity with God.  

               List of Topics—1. Introduction;     2. Old Testament   

       Prayer Sources;     3. Development of Prayer in and After the 

       Exile;    4. New Testament Prayer;     5. Mechanics of Prayer; 

       6. Intercession and Unanswered Prayer;     7. God’s Initiative

       and Biblical Doctrine

P-110

                 1. Introduction—Prayer is attempted intercourse with God, with 

        or without mediation of priests or heavenly beings; it is usually, but not 

        necessarily, vocal.  It is designed to affect the nature and course of the 

        relationship through personal contact.  Its means and ends always de-

        pend upon how the nature of God is conceived.  Prayer can cover peti-

        tion, entreaty, expostulation, confession, thanksgiving, recollection, 

        praise, adoration, meditation, and intercession.  This article will deal 

        primarily with petition, intercession, and meditation, and with such other  

        features only as are related to these.

                   2. Old Testament Prayer:  Sources—The nature of biblical prayer

        is best understood in its development through the major sources.  The oral

        traditions reflect primitive Semitic religion, in which God is met with at 

        sacred sites and through the use of natural objects. The Y(J)ahwist (J) and

        Elohwist (E) writers add their editorial work, which traces the grace of 

        God in the promise to the patriarchs and the covenant with Israel. 

                   The fundamentals of prayer are found in the meetings with God, 

        often depicted as conversations.  Humans may respond to the meeting by 

        erecting a shrine, by obedience, by faith, or by a question or a request.  

        The God-appearances may involve an unrecognized visitor.  From the first, 

        personality is ascribed to God.  The nature of God is indicated by the 

        names ascribed to God—e.g. “Shield”; “Judge”; “Fear of Isaac”; “Mighty

        One of Jacob, . . . the Shepherd, the Rock of Israel.” 

                   Recollection of past acts of mercy as a basis for prayer already ap-

        pears in J and E edited together (JE).  The seeking of an oracle develops 

        into the prayer for guidance.  By working over a primitive river-night-

        demon myth, the J editors have suggested that prayer is a struggle which 

        may change a person’s character and mark him or her for life.  The predo-

        minant religious theme is the providence of God, but prayer plays little part

        in the earlier strands.  

                   God is a God of dread and therefore dangerous.  Intercession is illu-

        strated, though the later source questions whether intercession is possible.

        The result of Samuel’s concern for Saul is an early reflection of the prophe-

        tic emphasis that prayer must result in obedience.  In this source the gran-

        ting of the people’s request for a king brings trouble, so that answered 

        prayer can also be a problem. 

                   The great contribution of the prophets was their clarification of the 

        nature of Yahweh and Yahweh’s demands, necessarily affecting prayer.  In 

        Amos, prayer must consist of something more than ritual and ceremonial, 

        since God is not for Israel apart from Israel’s response.  For Hosea the in-

        tended intimacy of God and people has been broken by the unfaithfulness 

        of Israel.  Prayer's true basis is recollection, and to acknowledge God’s 

        favor and repent of its abuse.  Isaiah 6 is the first clear testimony to indivi- 

        dual experience in prayer, which leads from confession, to cleansing, to 

        commitment, to commission.  The creature before the holy God realizes the

        wonder of this God’s call to service.  Even when the Lord’s face is hidden, 

        such prayer leads to confident waiting.  

                   The basic interest of the Deuteronomic Writer (D) is the central 

        sanctuary; religious attitude and policy are more important than historical 

        chronicle.  God is near and the very formlessness of God makes prayer 

        more important than ceremony, material aids, or natural phenomena.  D 

        emphasizes the necessity of recollecting God’s mighty acts; the memory is

        to be stored in the heart to prompt proper prayer.  Prayer is always within 

        the covenant between God and people & can't be discussed apart from it. 

                   The D thesis in Judges is that God exposed Israel to their enemies 

        and sent them deliverers when they cried to God.  Solomon’s petition 

        comes at the end of a preamble which is a recollection of God’s grace.  The

        prayers of Paul and of the Christian liturgies follow this plan.  In spite of 

        God’s awesome omnipresence, God can be called on to hear the prayers 

        made in or toward the shrine, always provided that the need for forgiveness

        is recognized.  God‘s power to restore physically and spiritually is as-

        sumed.   The association of prayer and penitence is a permanent insight.  

        The proportion of approach to petition and the grounding of prayer in a re-

        collection of God’s nature is essentially biblical and contains the seed of 

        the New Testament teaching and of liturgical practice. 

                   The D viewpoint is evident in our edition of Jeremiah, but the pro-

        phet emerges as the first historical person whose life of personal prayer 

        can be known.  They are a form of prayer not strictly praise, confession, 

        or petition, but an intercourse with God in which all these blend.  It is the 

        reaction of the sensitive human soul to a God who is both above and near.

        Because Jeremiah is convinced God is righteous, he can debate the pro-

        blem of the success of the wicked and move beyond the oversimplification

        of D.  Jeremiah’s prayer of surrender produces an agonized sense of com-

        pulsion.  Jeremiah has no alternative but to commit himself to the Lord.  

        His meditations go far beyond simple petition, toward an expectation of a 

        covenant no longer external but graven on the heart.  

                   3. Development of Prayer in and After the Exile—With the loss of

        the temple, gatherings for prayer and reading the Scriptures prepared for 

        the development of the Synagogue.  The poems in Lamentations depict a 

        sorrowful corporate waiting upon God.  Ezekiel envisions restoration, and 

        the vision leads to a commission.  Ezekiel prophesies rather than peti-

        tions.   The vision of a new temple in chapters 40-48 indicates that worship

        is thought of as essentially corporate, organized under a priesthood.  The 

        personal prayers that emerge in other books are therefore more striking. 

P-111

                 Development in prayer awaits a new concept of God, and this new

        spirit is felt in the second and third portions of Isaiah.  Abundant pardon is

        offered to those who will seek the Lord, forsake their wicked ways, be-

        cause God’s thoughts are transcendent and God’s ways incontestable.  But

        daily prayer and periodic fasts do not avail unless there are also abstinence

        from tyranny and the performance of acts of mercy.  Though God seems to

        be absent, God is available, even when not called upon.  There is little at-

        tention to prayer in the minor prophets of the period. 

                   In spite of the insistence on the cult, personal prayer is not ignored 

        by the Priestly (P) editors.  Nehemiah mourns, fasts, and prays for days on

        end.  His prayer of individual and corporate penitence, reminding God of 

        God’s promises, is probably a liturgical expansion of a prayer for personal

        guidance.  The Chronicler’s historical interpretation is concerned about the

        function of the priests with emphasis on liturgical music.  In the P redac-

        tion of the first five books of the Old Testament, holiness and separation 

        are emphasized, as well as offering and sacrifice as a dramatic form of 

        prayer.  Prayer falls within the setting of observance of the Sabbath as the 

        climax of creation and reverence for the sanctuary. 

                   The height of this development is found in the Psalms, which have 

        a liturgical origin and reflect only slightly the emergence of individual piety 

        from corporate devotion.  The joy in many of them testifies to the feeling 

        and personal participation of temple worshipers.   Prayer, praise, and 

        thanksgiving must arise from a whole and ready heart.  Many of the bles-

        sings that are asked are material, but throughout, the important thing is the 

        relationship which can express itself in these burst of praise and prayerful 

        meditations.   

                    The problem for prayer of the distance between God and human is

        responsible for the book of Job and for the idea of Wisdom.  In the poem a

        tortured Job seeks to reach God in order to vindicate himself and repre-

        sents the distress of Israel.  The poem passes constantly from debate to 

        appeal to God, but there is no answer.  In the end Job can only surrender 

        to God.  Job learns to “Be not rash with your mouth, nor let your heart be 

        hasty to utter a word before God, for God is in heaven, and you upon earth;

        therefore let your words be few.”  The piety of the period is summed up in

        Daniel, written for the Maccabean time of trials.

                   See also the entry in the Old Testament Apocrypha/Influences Out-

        side the Bible section of the Appendix. 

                   4. New Testament Prayer—The crux of all prayer in the Bible is 

        Jesus' prayer in Gethsemane, where surrender is addressed to God as Fa-

        ther.  Mark records that Jesus prayed at critical moments.  Jesus does not

        call on God for help to heal or to exorcise demons or to raise the dead.  

        Mark tells us that Jesus retired from Capernaum to pray before announcing

        his preaching tour.  From this we may deduce a custom of prayer in emer-

        gencies.  We may assume that retreat, especially to the hills also indicates 

        prayer.  Mark gives no prayers of Jesus except in Gethsemane and from 

        the cross. 

                   Luke is interested in prayer and has edited Mark to supply the im-

        pression usually attached to the gospels.  As Mark makes no reference to 

        prayer for power to heal, Luke explains that the Lord’s power was with 

        Jesus.  Luke 11 tells us that it was the example of Jesus’ own prayers that 

        prompted the Lord’s Prayer.  In place of   “. . . My God, why have you for-

        saken me,” Luke alone has:  “Father into thy hands I commend my spirit.” 

                   In Mark there is little teaching on prayer.  Jesus requires forgiveness

        before prayer.  The assurance that faith will produce an answer is connec-

        ted with removal of the mountain.  The disciples in Gethsemane are urged

        to pray against testing.  The teaching comes largely from the source com-

        mon to Matthew and Luke (Q).  Prayer is best made in seclusion without 

        piling up empty phrases; anxiety is a hindrance to prayer.  Verbal expres-

        sions of allegiance do not assure entrance to the kingdom, but only a con-

        forming will.  Communion rather than the distraction of business is desired,

        and trust rather than seeking for signs. 

                   The Lord’s Prayer is given a different setting by Matthew and Luke. 

        In this Jesus supplies a guide for prayer and convenient summary of the 

        prayers required both by Jewish piety and by his own teaching.  The tea-

        ching of Jesus is that God will respond to need expressed in the prayer of

        faith.  As children ask their father and are not rebuffed, all that is needful 

        will be added. 

                   In Paul we see a Christian at prayer and the Christian practice of 

        prayer.  Paul not only petitions but also gives thanks, and states the ground

        and aim of a particular request.  His principal prayers are Romans 15; Phi-

        lippians 1; Colossians 1;  I Thessalonians 3, 5; II Thessalonians 1, 2, & 3. 

        Notably in Paul, the Holy Spirit is prayer’s motivating power.  Only Spirit 

        can teach one to say “Lord,” and it is Spirit who cries in us:  “Abba.”  In 

        God’s nature is found the cause of thanksgiving and praise for God’s grace

        and comfort.  Paul also gives thanks for faith and growth in love.  The ob-

        jects of Paul’s prayers are determined in the same way.

P-112

                   Paul’s prayers, grounded in the faith, have a purpose.  He seeks the

        glory of God and of Christ, in which anxiety will, through prayer, give way

        to peace.  Paul urges constant prayer and thanksgiving.  He deals with

        the use of prayer in worship in I Corinthians 11-14.  Paul refers to the litur-

        gical use of “Amen.”  Except for his intercessions, he says little of his own

        prayers. 

                   Ephesians serves as a summation of Paul’s teaching.  The “Pasto-

        ral Letters” mention the varieties of prayer known in the post-apostolic 

        church:  supplications; prayers; intercessions; thanksgivings; and the 

        duty of prayer for rulers.  Unanswered prayer arises from wrong requests

        which seek selfish ends.  The author of Acts has reconstructed the prac-

        tice of the primitive church and Paul’s experience and gives us pictures 

        of the first disciples at prayer in the temple.  

                   The Holy Spirit comes to a praying church.  By prayer with the 

        laying on of hands it chooses and appoints its ministers.   The early 

        church’s all night vigil culminating in the breaking of bread is found in 

        Acts 20.  Frequently in Acts visions are the means by which God communi-

        cates with humans.  The liturgy of the early 100s church is reflected in Re-

        velation and its mode of worship idealized in heaven.  The salutation which
   begins the book becomes an ascription of praise ending with the Amen. 

                   The prominent development of the basis for prayer occurs when the 

        Letter to the Hebrews grounds it firmly in Jesus’ experience.   Because he 

        can mediate our needs, this makes him a unique and definitive high priest.

        Prayer is approaching God in and through Christ.  We draw near with confi-

        dence, by a new and living way, with a true heart.  Faith is essential, for to 

        draw near means to believe God exists and that God rewards those who 

        seek God.  The vital thing is to look to Christ.  

                   The Gospel of John makes explicit the heavenly intercession of 

        Christ as the living core of Christian prayer.  For John it is essential that the

        Christian abides in Christ, thus experiencing a living union.  This organic 

        union implies unity of will and purpose, with Christ as the basis for prayer.

        The Father loves us because of our love for Christ and faith in him. 

                    In the Fourth Gospel, Jesus has no emergencies in which he prays.

        The subordination of other gospels is not in keeping with the Johannine pic-

        ture of Christ who is at one with God and aware of God’s will.  For prayer 

        John uses chiefly the verb aiteo (meaning given at beginning of article), 

        which suggests intimacy with God.  Jesus’ own life of prayer and concern 

        for his disciples is summed up in one chapter of John.  The essence of 

        Jesus’ prayer is that the oneness between himself and God may be shared 

        by the disciples. 

                    5. Mechanics of Prayer—Except for public worship the Bible 

        knows no regulation of time, place, or attitude.  Prayer may be offered in

        any place, even in prison.  When people pray apart from Jerusalem, they 

        orient themselves toward it.   Prayers were proper in the home.   Jesus 

        sought solitude out of doors in the hills or a secluded grove.  Elijah was 

        discouraged from seeking God in the manifestations of the past, heard 

        God in his own mind, and was sent back to find answers in the midst of 

        problems. 

                   While the needs of people dictate the time, the preferred occa-

        sions coincided with the sacrifices in the temple.  Three times a day is 

        recognized as appropriate, with the 6th and 9th hour especially noted.

        The prayer in Gethsemane occurred late in the evening.  Standing is the

        normal attitude assumed; kneeling is also described.  The head may be 

        bowed between the knees or toward the ground in humble thanksgiving.

        Hands were characteristically spread abroad toward heaven.   In peni-

        tence or sorrow the eyes may be downcast and the hands used to smite 

        the breast.  The biblical attitude tends to move away from the frenzy 

        that is described in I Kings 18. 

                   6. Intercession and Unanswered Prayer—Christ as the ultimate

        intercessor is the climax of a growing interest in the function of those who

        pray as mediators.  Abraham and Moses stand between God and humans 

        as prophets; David also intercedes.   As offenders humans stand alone 

        when they pray and must direct their hearts to God.  Samuel intercedes for

        his people because it is a corporate matter.  It is part of the prophetic func-

        tion of Amos also to plead for his wayward people in emergencies.  Solo-

        mon’s prayer for himself at Gibeon is as intermediary between God and 

        people. 

                   Jeremiah pleads for a people who rely too much on the covenant 

        before a God who seems to be indifferent.  Though Ezekiel as a son of 

        man is called to stand before God, he recognizes that even great interces-

        sors like Moses and Samuel, Noah, Daniel, and Job cannot atone for the 

        failures of a faithless people, but only for themselves.  In Judaism the 

        priests take over the prophet’s function as intercessors.  Only the high 

        priest can represent the people in the Holy of Holies.  The writer of Isai-

        ah’s second part visualizes a new possibility.  Israel as Yahweh’s Servant 

        might by vicarious suffering become an act of intercession for others. 

P-113

                   Paul practiced constantly the function of intercession.  According 

        to Luke, Jesus interceded for Peter.  Jesus as intercessor is primarily set 

        forth by Hebrews.  In this New Testament understanding of the function 

        of Christ all Christian prayer becomes intercession through Christ and by

        him to God.  The Holy Spirit is “Paraclete”—i.e., counselor and advocate

        in prayer. 

                   The problem of unanswered prayer receives no formal treatment 

        but is not unknown with the great biblical men of prayer.  Saul twice 

        failed to receive an answer, once because a ban had been broken and 

        once when in his fear the lack of response drove him to seek a medium.  

        Failure to recall God’s past acts prevents a favorable response (Jeremiah 

        2).  Job’s failure to reach God, is because there is an adversary at work 

        (Job 1).  The New Testament answer to the problem is that prayer must 

        be in accord with the will of God. 

                   7. God’s Initiative and Biblical Doctrine—Prayer is not initiated

        entirely by man but depends ultimately on a prior activity of God.  It is 

        the Lord who restores people to themselves and seeks out prophets like 

        Amos, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel.  In the New Testament, apart from 

        the interpretation of Christ as God’s personal act of initiative, it is the 

        Spirit of God who prompts and gives meaning to prayer.  The Spirit inter-

        prets the mind of the God, who knows what we need before we ask. 

                   Biblical Prayer begins when it is clearly detached and indistingui-

        shable from magic, and it ends as a part of complete communion with 

        God in freely rendered obedience.   It rises to heights of self-offering, 

        without ignoring life’s mundane and practical aspects.  Biblical prayer 

        has complaint and expostulation, for it is always part of a close and natu-

        ral relationship with God, but its true basis is in God’s acts of revelation.

                   Prayer begins with recollection to establish the grounds for a re-

        quest, and states the end that is sought.  Jesus’ life is itself a prayer.  Paul

        prays for love in terms of growth in discernment.  A lifelong and whole-

        person response to divine reality is prayer’s essence.   Biblical Prayer 

        tends to move more and more toward thanksgiving and praise and con-

        sists more of adoration rather than petition, in contemplation more than 

        confession, and fellowship rather than mystical absorption.  For the 

        Christian, Jesus himself is the final act of prayer. 

                   This overall understanding gained from the biblical development 

        is of more importance than the piece-meal application of isolated passa-

        ges.  The biblical teaching implies that the heart oriented toward God 

        will cause the body to act appropriately.  If those who draw near to maje-

        stic holiness have nothing to say, they may still be truly at prayer, for in 

        the end it is God who must inform our prayers. 

PRAYER, PLACE OF (proseuch (pros yoo keh))  The Greek word for 

        “prayer” was often used by Greek-speaking Jews to denote a synagogue. 

        But it does not mean necessarily either existence of a building, or confor-

        mity to the Jewish requirement that places of worship be located near 

        streams of water. 

PREACHER, THE (קהלת (ko heh leth), one who summons)  The customary

        but doubtful translation of Eccl. 1:1. 

PREACHING (khrussein (keh roos sine), proclaim; euaggelizesqai (ee vag 

        geh liz es thie), to address with good tidings; diaggellein (die ag gel line), 

        announce)  In New Testament (NT) terms, a public proclamation of this 

        good news: God has accomplished a work of salvation in Jesus Christ. 

                   Christian preaching is the public proclamation of the “good news.”

        A herald may be more or less indifferent to the news he proclaims.   

        Christian preachers have themselves been “laid hold on by Christ Jesus”;

        they personally believe in the good news.  The NT writers draw a clear 

        distinction between “to preach” and “to teach.”  Preaching is the procla-

        mation of the gospel to those who have not yet heard it.  Teaching is an 

        instruction or exhortation on various aspects of Christian life. 

                   The Old Testament (OT) writers scarcely use the term “preaching”

        to describe the mission of the prophets; their commission was to exhort 

        the chosen people to remain faithful.  Prophets asked for a better and 

        stricter obedience to the given law.  “Preaching” has its early Christian 

        meaning in only 2 cases.  1st, Jonah must “proclaim the message” of God

        to non-Jews.  2nd, the terms “to evangelize” and “to preach” are used by

        Isaiah to announce the good news of salvation at the end of this age.

P-114

                   In the Synoptic gospels we see Jesus “preaching God's gospel.”  In

        the Pauline letters we commonly read of “preaching Christ.”  These 2 ex-

        pressions mark the development of the message from the days of Jesus to

        the apostolic age.  By his proclamation that “the time is fulfilled, and the 

        kingdom of God is at hand,”   Jesus did not simply continue the ministry 

        of John the Baptist.  He rather accomplished it.  The belief in the gospel 

        which Jesus requires is loyalty to him as to the representative of the king-

        dom.  The kingdom begins to be realized in Jesus; after Jesus’ days the 

        kingdom of God is still to be announced. 

                   The preaching of the apostles is known by the discourses attribu-

        ted to Peter in the Acts of the Apostles, first on the day of Pentecost in 

        Jerusalem (Acts 2), and second before Cornelius at Caesarea (Acts 10).  

        The content of this preaching was that God has realized the promises of 

        the OT and brought salvation to his people.  The Church's Holy Spirit is 

        the sign of Christ’s present power and glory.  The apostles are witnesses 

        of the ministry of Jesus and above all of his resurrection.  They address to

        their hearers an appeal for repentance and offer to the believer’s forgive-

        ness of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit.

                   Paul’s preaching does not essentially differ from the common prea-

        ching.   Paul adds to the preaching of Christ an appeal for faith in the li-

        ving God who made the heaven and the earth.  Jesus preached the gospel

        openly to the crowds, but he reserved his teaching to his disciples.  The 

        largest part of the New Testament letters is not preaching but teaching.  

        The teaching develops the fullness of the gospel message in order that the 

        believers may become mature in Christ and live a right Christian life.   

PREDESTINATION (proorizein (pro or ih zine), ordain beforehand)  A view of 

        historical events which attributes their cause to a previously established 

        plan or decision of God.  Ancient paganism had concepts of divinely 

        established patterns of institutions and actions which were predestined to

        become historical.   The Old Testament (OT) also very strongly emphasi-

        zes divine control over nature and history from creation on.  

                   Biblical predestination differs radically from determinism in assig-

        ning ultimate religious value to historical events themselves, by assigning

        their cause to one personal deity rather than to a conflict of opposing 

        wills of multiple deities.  The same is true of one aspect of determinism in

        the human order.   God predetermines certain groups for a specific rela-

        tionship to God; this predestination of persons appears in prophecy.  In 

        Jeremiah and the writer of the 2nd part of Isaiah such people are formed 

        and set apart for a specific purpose before birth. 

                   Predestination of events is also important.  In the 2nd part of Isaiah

        this public proclamation of future events is extremely important.  It is the 

        means by which people know the cause of specific events.  The New Tes-

        tament (NT) entirely rejected biological lineage as a basis for the relation-

        ship to God.  Christ is seen as the heir of the OT promises.  The NT com-

        munity is then predestined to be “conformed to the image of Christ,” not 

        because of a biological lineage, but because of a free act of God. 

PRE-EXISTENCE OF SOULS.  The doctrine that souls have an existence

        prior to and even apart from the material to which they are joined at con-

        ception or birth.   Since belief in the pre-existence of souls was widely 

        held in the ancient world, it has been argued that the disciples of Jesus 

        shared this belief.  The Jewish historian Josephus writes that the Essenes

        believed that the souls of humans are immortal.  We may well think that 

        in this account Josephus pictured Essene belief much more in terms of 

        Greek thought than truth would warrant.  The Dead Sea Scrolls support 

        his description of Essene belief.  

                   In the Old Testament, humans are regarded as a “psychosomatic”  

        whole.   The idea of a disembodied spirit, or a soul separated from its 

        body, was not congenial to Jewish thought.  It was not until the Persian 

        and Greek periods that Jewish writers were able to entertain a doctrine 

        of pre-existence, not of the soul, but of whole people.  One scholar 

        attempted to distinguish between Jewish and Greek conceptions of pre-

        existence.  The first had a religious origin, the second a cosmological 

        and psychological; the first glorifies God, the second the created spirit.

PREFECT (סגן (seh gan), chiefs among Babylonians, Persians, and post-exi-

        lic Jews)   A person appointed to a position of authority and command 

        (Daniel 2, 3 and 6).

PRE-HISTORY, ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN.  The stages of society in Egypt,

        Palestine, Syria, Anatolia, Iraq, and Iran down to the period in which 

        written records appear.

P-115

                   Paleolithic chipped stone implements have been found in Pale-

        stine, Anatolia, and the mountainous northern and eastern Iraq.  The most

        important Paleolithic discovery in the Near East was the skeletal material

        from the Mount Carmel region of a type of early human unknown in Eu-

        rope and now called Homo palestinenisis.  For the Neolithic Period (6000-

        4000 B.C.) we have evidence of ground stone implements, and more im-

        portantly, evidence of the domestication of plants and animals.   In the lat-

        ter half of this period, we have handmade pottery making up the bulk of 

        the finds.  Clay figurines, usually crudely modeled, represent animals or 

        human beings. 

                   Architecture in most areas was confined to simple hut structures of

        mud or rough stone.  Jericho shows some human occupation around 8000 

        B.C., some 2,000 years before the Neolithic period, and the astonishing 

        architectural development of rectangular brick houses in the Neolithic be-

        fore the invention of pottery.  Several successive city walls bear witness to

        a high degree of civic organization and to a need for protection against 

        large-scale warfare.  There is little evidence for religious beliefs and prac-

        tices but the careful burial of the dead with objects of use or adornment 

        suggests the concept of an afterlife.  The anomaly of highly developed 

        Neolithic Jericho has not been explained. 

                   The succeeding age is generally known as Chalcolithic (4000-

        3200), because of the introduction of copper.  It supplemented, rather than

        replaced, stone as material for tools and weapons.  Copper appeared first 

        in very small quantities and not everywhere at the same time.   Regional 

        specialization was highly developed, but there was an increasing amount 

        of contact between regions.  

                   This contact came in the form of commerce, warfare, and migration,

        with commerce most likely being the most important form of contact.  Set-

        tlements sufficiently large to be called cities are known before the end of 

        the period, especially in southern Iraq.  Cults multiplied, numerous and 

        sometimes elaborate temples appeared, and burial gifts increased in num-

        ber and value.  The growing number and complexity of finds indicates a 

        corresponding growth in specialization of function among the population. 

                   The easternmost region of the near East is the least known.  The re-

        latively few excavated sites are scattered over a wide area.  None is large 

        enough to be called a city, and architectural remains are confined to simple

        brick houses.  Elaborately painted pottery was characteristic through most 

        of the Chalcolithic period.   Some of these styles traveled westward and 

        strongly influenced the pottery of Iraq. 

                   Through the entire Chalcolithic Age there was a distinct difference 

        between the cultures of northern Iraq (Assyria) and southern Iraq (Babylo-

        nia).   Settlement began earlier in the north.   The Halaf culture was con-

        fined to Assyria.  The potters now produced lustrous painted pottery, with 

        some very fine pieces in many brilliant colors, spread over a considerable 

        area.  Stamp seals, often similar in shape and design to the Iranian ones, 

        indicate some concept of private property.

                   Fragments of mud brick houses are known throughout the area; of 

        greater interest are circular brick or stone buildings called tholoi.  The use

        of the tholoi is unknown save that they were not tombs, and were probably

        public buildings of some sort, possibly shrines.   Before the end of the 

        Halaf culture in the north the earliest Ubaid culture began in Babylonia.  

        The linear designs and shapes were, on the whole, simpler than those of 

        Halaf pottery.  Little metal has been found in Halaf and Ubaid levels, cer-

        tainly in part because of the inclement climate, which makes preservation 

        difficult.   The most important feature of the Ubaid culture is the appea-

        rance of monumental architecture, chiefly temples built of mud brick divi-

        ded into 3 sections.

                   In the late Prehistoric Age the north and the south diverged almost 

        completely, and there was little contact between them.  Irrigation methods

        permitted agriculture away from the rivers.  Relations between towns must

        have attained some organized form, since co-operative effort was neces-

        sary to build and maintain the irrigation canals.  Mesopotamian products 

        are dispersed all across Western Asia. 

                   Temple architecture became very impressive, and the buildings in-

        creased in size and ornamentation.  Metal became increasingly common, 

        and metallurgical technique was highly developed; stone-cutting made 

        equal progress.   Monumental sculpture both in relief and in the round 

        made its appearance just at the end of the pre-historic era.  Pottery clearly 

        ceased to be regarded as a medium of art, but the use of the foot-turned 

        potter’s wheel allowed considerable expansion in the variety of shapes that

        were used. 

                   Chalcolithic sites in Anatolia are rare, but a few are known in the 

        high central plateau and others in the Cilician plain.   Here too there is 

        some evidence of more advanced organization of towns.   Chalcolithic re-

        mains in Syria are best represented in the Amuq (plain of Antioch).  Halaf-

        style pottery develops a style using many colors, and Ubaid painted ware 

        was imported from Iraq.

P-116

                   The Chalcolithic towns in Palestine were less spectacular than the 

        much earlier Neolithic Jericho, including Chalcolithic Jericho itself.  Pot-

        tery might bear simple painted geometric patterns, but there were no elabo-

        rate styles.   Copper became steadily more common through the period, 

        especially for weapons; but stone was still in common use.

                   Egypt remained outside the sphere of Western Asia, and developed

        its own very distinctive culture.   The earlier pottery was dark, often of a 

        fine thin fabric with a rippled surface.  Light ware appeared with a type of 

        wavy handle known to be of Palestinian origin.  The Egyptian painted deco-

        ration, however, was unlike any Asiatic style.  Ivory was in common use 

        and stonecutting an important industry.   Human figurines were pre-domi-

        nantly female.  Copper was used in steadily increasing amounts, but metal-

        lurgy was not so highly developed as in Mesopotamia.  Religion is known 

        only from the burial customs.  To the end of the prehistoric period there is 

        no trace of the pre-eminence of a single leader, so it seems that the Egyp-

        tian concept of the divine king had not yet been developed. 

                   Thus the stage was set for the beginning of the historic age.   It is 

        clear that the brilliant crystallization of Mesopotamian culture at the end of

        the prehistoric age was matched nowhere else in the Near East, except for 

        an equally brilliant phase occurring in Egypt.  These 2 countries were and

        remained the great focuses of civilization until the Greek Classical Age. 

PREPARATION DAY (Paraskeuh (par ah skoo eh))  The day preceding the 

        sabbath.   The strict sabbath in Judaism demanded great foresight.   To 

        avoid all risk of infraction, observance began well before the sunset. 

                   In the gospels the Crucifixion occurs on a Day of Preparation.  The 

        Synoptic writers describe it as the day before the sabbath.  The Gospel of 

        John does not identify the Last Supper as the Passover.   John 19 de-

        scribes the Crucifixion as on the day of Preparation for the Passover, 

        which was a day of intense preparation.

PRESBYTER (presbuteroV (pres bih teh ros), elder)  Literally, “older man,” 

        in contrast to “younger man”; but in a technical sense, either a member of

        Jewish Sanhedrin or a leader in a Christian church.  The word presbyte-

        rion for a council or assembly of elders is used of the Jewish Sanhedrin, 

        and once of Christian elders.

PRESENCE OF GOD.  Until recently biblical study's modern movement has 

        largely neglected the Israelite mythology of the presence of God in the 

        Bible.  The terminology centers in such concepts as face, glory, name, 

        tabernacle, etc.  The verb shakan (to dwell, rest, abide, continue) is also 

        central.  There are formulas of good will and blessing, visitation and god- 

        appearance passages.  None of this belongs to the theme of this article.  

        Likewise the biblical material relating to the omnipresence of God does 

        not rightly belong here.

                   Separation of the material discloses various passages and ideas

        relevant to the presence theme.   Exodus is one of the books of this pre-

        sence idea.  The presence in the cloud in the Jahwistic writing precedes 

        and guides Israel, in the Elohwistic writing the cloud of the presence oc-

        casionally descends to stand by the door to the tent of meeting.

                   The cloud is only one of the images of the presence in Exodus.  

        Yahweh dwells in the heavens but manifests himself on earth.  In Exodus

        this place is Sinai-Horeb.   Since Yahweh will not go with Israel from 

        Sinai, the tent of meeting and presumably the ark are provided.  The holy

        of holies of Exodus is certainly the vision of the elders, and especially 

        Moses’ vision of Yahweh as he passed by; Moses saw only God’s back.  

        There is a basis of fact and faith in the tradition which would suggest that

        the idea of the presence is original to the desert period of Israel’s religion.

        It is possible to explain presence material in Exodus in many ways, but 

        the core is certainly Mosaic.

                   Certainly in and after Exodus the presence is bound with the sanc-

        tuary.   It has been shown that this sanctuary-presence is represented in 

        Deuteronomy.  The same is true of the ideas of the ark and of the tent of 

        meeting.  The material of the presence theme is so complex, that attempts

        to trace various stages in the development of the doctrine have not been 

        successful.  In the same way no single explanation of the tabernacling-

        presence theme adequately expounds this portrayal, for the presence may 

        be described in reference to Yahweh in terms of a curious kind of pre-

        sence-in-absence. 

                   The prophets undoubtedly witness to the tabernacling presence.  

        Their testimony is corroborated by their portrayal of the renewal of the 

        presence in the new Israel that is to be.   Alike then in history, cult, and 

        promise, the presence is clearly central to the faith and hope of Israel.  

        The classical literature of the Jews shows that they still wait for the re-

        turn of the Shekinah. 

      

P-117

                   In the New Testament it is Jesus Christ who is the spiritual, perso-

        nal, incarnate heir and fulfillment of the tabernacling presence.  The Incar-

        nation is thus a new and final dimension of the theme.  In his birth and 

        baptism, his ministry and miracle, his teaching and transfiguration, and in

        his passion and resurrection, they beheld the glory of the divine presence.

        The incarnate presence is, of course, the center of all the New Testament 

        and governs all the aspects of life, thought, and institution which spring 

        from it. 

                   The problem of the presence is most acute in the cry of dereliction 

        on the cross, and may only be understood in the light of the Old Testament

        categories of the presence.  There is also the presence-absence theme, 

        where Christ speaks of the necessity and desirability of his departure from

        the disciples, but promises also his abiding presence.  This paradox is also

        seen in Christ at the right hand of God and in the experience of Christ in 

        the heart and life of the Christian believer, a paradox resolved in the theo-

        logy of the Holy Spirit.

PRESIDENT (סרך (saw rake), superintendent)  An appointed governor or

        chief in the Persian kingdom.  Daniel was one of 3 presidents who were 

        appointed by Darius over the 120 satraps.  The envy of the satraps and the

        presidents led to the decree which put Daniel in the lion’s den (Daniel 6).

PRIDE (גאה (ga ‘eh), haughty; גבה (go bah) or גוה (ga vaw), arrogance; זדון

        tsaw doan); insolence, haughtiness; alazoneia  (al az on ahee ah), 

        haughtiness; tufow (too foe oh), conceit, puffed up; uperhfania 

        (hoop er ef an eeah), arrogance)  Although  there are occasional  passages

        in the Old Testament (OT) and New Testament (NT) which seem to accept

        various forms of natural pride, the distinctive biblical thrust is overwhel-

        mingly against human presumption. 

                   More importantly, certain OT passages point toward pride as the 

        virtual ground of all sin.  Pride and boastfulness characterize the “wicked”

        in the Psalms.  Yahweh alone is glorious and exalted, and achieves victory

        over the proud.  Thus the tangible landmarks of pride in the land must be 

        destroyed.  Abasement of the proud and exaltation of the humble is most 

        clearly expressed in the relatively late hymn.

                   While false pride is equally condemned in the New Testament, the

        distinctive forms are spiritual pride and its opposite, boasting in the re-

        demptive work of God in Jesus Christ.  Paul rejects self-commendation 

        because every human boast has been destroyed in Jesus Christ, but he is 

        able to boast of his ministry, because, in different ways, “Jesus Christ as 

        Lord” is the content of his ministry.

PRIEST AND LEVITES (כהן (ko hen), from the verb “to stand” (i.e. before the

        Lord); לוי (leh vie), from the verb “to be joined to”; iereuV (he er eh oos) 

        priest offering sacrifice; LeuithV (leh yih tes)  The priesthood in biblical 

        thought represents Israel’s union with God.  The Hebrew word isn't limited 

        to priests of Yahweh; in fact, it is likely a Canaanite loan word.  The sanc-

        tity required of the people for the service of God is symbolized in the priest-

        hood.  The Levites are regarded as being originally either foreigners who 

        joined the Israelites or Hebrew cultic attendants who acted as an escort to 

        the ark or were attached to a local sanctuary.  The reference to Levi in the 

        blessing of Moses would seem to imply that the term had its origin in a tri-

        bal name. 

                   In the 2nd temple there is a 3-fold hierarchy of cultic officials—high

        priest, priest, and Levite.  Their origin and development, together with the 

        relationship of priests and Levites, constitute one of the major problems of 

        Old Testament (OT) scholarship.  The traditional view regards this hierar-

        chy as being instituted by Moses during the wilderness wanderings.  A 

        more recent school of biblical scholarship sees it as a distinctively postexi-

        lic institution.  This view is now seen to be an oversimplification of the 

        problem. 

                  List of Topics—1. Theological Significance of Levitical

       Priesthood;    2. Postexilic Cult:  Priests;    3. Post-Exilic      

       Cult: Levites;    4. Origin and Development: Exodus;    

       5. Origin and Development: Sacrifice, Monarchy, Josiah's     

       Reforms;    6. Origin and Development: Ezekiel and Exile;    

       7. Origin and Development: Post Exile;    8. Origin and 

       Development: Jerusalem Cult and Priestly Code;    9. Origin 

       and Development: Chronicles;    10.  Reconsideration of 

       Past Theories:  Ezekiel and the Priestly Code   

       

P-118

 

                   1. Theological Significance of Levitical Priesthood Priesthood 

        and Covenant are closely related in biblical thought.  As the covenant peo-

        ple of God, Israel is to be a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.  Because

        God is holy, the people that is to be God’s own possession must also be 

        holy.  Since the covenant is made with the whole nation, the rest of the 

        people also have a special relationship with God.

                   The Levitical priesthood has therefore a representative character: it 

        embodies the duty, as well as the honor and privileges of the whole nation

        as the covenant people of God.  In public and national worship the priests 

        act as the representatives of the people.  The priesthood was necessary 

        not only for practical reasons; underlying it is a great moral and spiritual 

        principle.  Likeness to God was lacking in people as a whole: the “holy 

        nation” possessed only a very imperfect holiness.  The true requirements 

        of serving God were continually kept before the eyes of God’s covenant 

        people, and the covenant relationship with God was vicariously main-

        tained by the priesthood on behalf of the nation as a whole.

                   The representative sanctity of the priesthood is expressed in the 

        3-fold hierarchy.  The Levites represent the people of Israel as substitutes

        for the first-born sons.  Above them are the sons of Aaron, who are con-

        secrated for the specific office of priest; they alone may approach the 

        altar.  And the high priest, by bearing the names of the twelve tribes of 

        Israel on his breastplate, represents the people as a whole.  He alone can 

        enter the holy of holies—and that only once a year—to take atonement 

        for the nation’s sin. 

                   The essential function of the Levitical priesthood is therefore to 

        assure, maintain, and constantly reestablish the holiness of the elect peo-

        ple of God.  It is through the priesthood that a purified and sanctified Isra-

        el is able to serve God and receives God’s blessing.  The Levitical priest-

        hood finds its culmination and fulfillment in Christ.  He is the great High

        Priest, one with the Father through his eternal sonship.  He is the perfect 

        Mediator of the New Covenant, who has once for all made atonement for

        sin. 

                   At the head of the hierarchy is the high priest, who occupies a posi-

        tion of increasing splendor and power.  The restored community of Judah 

        was more a church than a state.  The high priest, therefore, acquired much

        of the dignity that had formerly belonged to the king.  In 520 B.C., the 

        high priest Joshua and the Davidic governor together begin rebuilding the

        temple.  When this double rule comes to an end with the disappearance of

        the house of David, the high priest becomes the undisputed head of the 

        Jewish state. 

                  (See also the entry in the Old Testament Apocrypha / Intertesta-

        mental section of the Appendix)  

                   2. Postexilic Cult:  Priests—The high priest traced his descent 

        from Eleazar the son of Aaron.  He was consecrated with an elaborate 

        ceremonial consisting of purification, vesting in his robes of office, anoin-

        ting with oil, and sacrificial rites in which the blood of the ram of ordina-

        tion was applied.  

                   The distinctive high-priestly vestments consisted of a blue woven 

        robe on the hem of which hung golden bells alternating with blue, purple 

        and scarlet pomegranates.   There was an ephod of blue, purple, and scar-

        let material and fine linen interwoven with threads of gold, with each of 

        its 2 shoulder clasps carrying a precious stone engraved with the name of 

        6 of the 12 tribes of Israel; a square breastplate or breast piece of the 

        same materials as the ephod, having 4 rows of 3 precious stones each, on 

        which were inscribed the names of the 12 tribes.  These vestments symbo-

        lize the mediatory office of the high priest.  When the high priest enters 

        the holy of holies on the Day of Atonement, he lays aside his ceremonial 

        robes and wears only linen garments. 

                   The ceremonies of the annual Day of Atonement are the most im-

        portant of the high priest’s duties.  Only he may enter the holy of holies 

        and sprinkle the mercy seat with the blood of the sin offerings.  It would 

        seem that the high priest is expected to share in the general duties of the

        priesthood.  Because he is the spiritual head of Israel, a greater degree of 

        ceremonial purity is required of the high priest than of ordinary priests.  

        According to the holiness code, he shall not defile himself by contact with

        any dead body, even those of family members.  For the same reason spe-

        cial gravity attaches to any sin committed by the high priest.  It brings guilt

        on the people and requires a specially prescribed sin offering.  

                   Associated with the high priest are the ordinary priests.  In its final 

        organization the priesthood was divided into 24 priestly families, which at-

        tended the temple in turn.  16 families traced their descent through Zadok 

        to Eleazar, and to Aaron’s other son, Ithamar.  

P-119

                   Priests were consecrated by ceremonies similar to those used for 

        the high priest, although less elaborate, such as the vestments, which 

        were a tunic, breeches, turban, and girdle of white linen; the girdle was 

        embroidered with blue, purple, and scarlet.  

                   The requirements of the priest were such that the priest had to be 

        free from physical defects.  He must conform to regulations for ceremonial 

        purity similar to those of the high priest, although less stringent.  Any viola-

        tion of this priestly sanctity resulted in amends being made by the high 

        priest and the whole priesthood together.

                   The chief functions of the postexilic priesthood are the care of the 

        vessels of the sanctuary and the sacrificial duties of the altar.  As the cus-

        todian of sacred tradition, the priest had always been the authority par ex-

        cellence in all matters relating to the law.  The revelatory experience of the 

        priest was collective and mediated.  In postexilic times the written word su-

        persedes oral tradition and ethical teaching passes into the hands of the 

        scribes; the emphasis of priestly instruction comes to be in the cultic 

        sphere.

                   The priests are the custodians of medical lore and so play an impor-

        tant part in safeguarding the health of the community.  They retain their tra-

        ditional role of administrators of justice.  The fiscal administration of Judah

        after the Exile was concentrated in the hands of the temple authorities.  Fi-

        naly, it is the priests who are responsible for blowing the trumpets.

                   3. Post-Exilic Cult:  Levites Since the tribe of Levi had no particu-

        lar territory assigned to it, the priests are entitled to live on certain specified

        parts of the offerings which the people bring to God.   1st, a substantial part

        of it consists of the first fruits of the field and the first-born of animals, toge-

        ther with the redemption money paid for first-born sons.  2ndly, they re-

        ceive specified sacrificial dues: the bread of the Presence, the cereal offe-

        rings, the sin offerings; the breast and thigh of the peace offerings.  3rdly, 

        from the Levites they receive a tenth of the people’s tithe.  13 of the 48 

        Levitical cities are assigned to them. 

                   The third order of the hierarchy is that of the Levites; they are subor-

        dinate cultic officials.  Levites were installed by a ceremony consisting of 

        purification, shaving the body, sacrifice, the laying on of hands, and so-

        lemn presentation to God.  They are responsible for the care of the courts 

        and chambers of the sanctuary, the cleansing of sacred vessels, cereal 

        offerings, and the service of praise.  The Levites have also a teaching func-

        tion as interpreters of the law.

                   Numerically the Levites appear to have been a much smaller body 

        in the second temple than were the priests; only 74 Levites returned, as op-

        posed to 4,289 priests.  Even if the 148 singers and 138 porters are to be 

        included in the Levitical order, this would bring their numbers to only 360.  

        There are a further 392 “temple servants,” foreigners who were “given” as 

        assistants to the Levites.  The period of service of the Levites seems to 

        have varied from 30 to 50 years old.  I Chronicles 23 says they are to serve

        from 20 years old and upward, with no set retirement age.

                   Provision for their subsistence is made by the people’s tithe, a

        tenth of which must be shared with the priests.  As the tribe of Levi pos-

        sessed no territory, 48 cities, and the surrounding pasture lands, are given 

        to the Levites.  There is no convincing reason for regarding these Levitical

        cities as essentially utopian with little basis in fact.  On the other hand, 

        these cities cannot have been inhabited just by Levites, but seem rather to 

        have been cities which contained some Levitical families.  Like the priests,

        the Levites of the second temple served in courses and only came to the 

        sanctuary at their appointed times.  Their symbolic sanctity is expressed in

        the purification rites.  Levites, like priests, must make amends for any vio-

        lation of their sanctity.

                   4. Origin and Development: Exodus—In no other field of OT 

        scholarship do the conclusions of modern study stand in such marked con-

        trast to the traditional view.  The problem of the origin and development of 

        priests and Levites is far from being solved, as differences of view among 

        critical scholars clearly indicate.  The 20^th century view of this problem is 

        increasingly being modified by further research. 

                   Before the rise of historical criticism it was assumed that the ac-

        count of the Priestly Writer (P) was to be taken as an accurate historical 

        record of the Levitical priesthood in the wilderness.  According to this ac-

        count the Hebrew priesthood originates with Moses, who consecrates his 

        brother Aaron and Aaron’s sons as priests.  Moses himself temporarily dis-

        charges the function of priest.  On the 8^th day Aaron and his sons under-

        take the sacrificial duties, thus becoming the first accredited Israelite 

        priests.  

P-120 

                   Aaron occupies a unique position as the only fully accredited priest, 

        distinguished by special robes of office.  At his death, the symbols of the 

        office are transferred to his son Eleazar.  Aaron was by descent a Levite.  

        Hence the Israelite priesthood which was invested in him and in his de-

        scendants was exclusively Levitical.  It was only after the consecration of 

        Aaron that the remainder of the tribe of Levi was separated, as substitutes 

        for the first-born. 

                   After the rebellion of Korah, in which a group of Levites attempt to

        gain admittance to the priesthood, the divine choice of Aaron and his fami-

        ly is vindicated in the destruction of the rebels.  The traditional view of the 

        history of the Levitical priesthood is thus quite simple.  The 3-fold hierar-

        chy of high priest, priests, and Levites goes back to the institution of the 

        priesthood by Moses in the wilderness.  A closer examination of the rele-

        vant literature has led OT scholars to conclude that the history of the priest-

        hood is in fact highly complex.  There is evidence in the older literature 

        that the priesthood was not limited to Levites in the early period, but it was 

        narrowed down to Levites by the end of the 600s B.C. 

                The tradition that the Hebrew priesthood originated with Moses and

        Aaron finds support in the fact that only foreign priests are mentioned in 

        Genesis.   Exodus gives contradictory evidence, with chapter 19 implying 

        that the Y(J)ahwist tradition recognized a Hebrew priesthood prior to 

        Moses, while chapter 32 implies that the Levites were given priesthood as

        a reward for their faithfulness in executing 3,000 apostates.

                   5. Origin and Development: Sacrifice, Monarchy, Josiah's Re-

        forms—In the early period the priest was not just concerned with sacrifice;

        he was an organ of revelation and as such gave direction and guidance in 

        the ordinary affairs of life (“They teach Jacob your ordinances and Israel  

        your laws.”  Deuteronomy 33:10).  As the successor of Moses, the priest 

        gave oracular direction through the sacred lot and by reference to a legal 

        code embodying both the revealed will of Yahweh and the accumulated ex-

        perience of the past.  The priest was the custodian of past revelation and 

        legal precedent before any written word was available for the guidance of 

        the people of God.

                   Sacrifice wasn't the priest's exclusive prerogative in early times.  In 

        Noah, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, we find priestly functions discharged by 

        the head of a household.  The priests, it seems, were associated with parti-

        cular shrines where they gave oracles and officiated at sacrifices.   The 

        priesthood in this early period was not in practice exclusively Levitical; but

        the priest who was a Levite was preferred to a non-Levitical priest.   The 

        period of the judges has two official Levitical priestly families—the priest-

        hood of Dan and the priesthood of Shiloh.  It is possible that persons, and 

        perhaps families, who were not Levitical by descent were incorporated into

        the priestly tribe of Levi, such as Samuel, who was an Ephramite. 

                    In the early monarchy, we find references to non-Levitical priests 

        existing side by side with the accredited Levitical order.  The Mosaic priest-

        hood of Dan continued until the end of the northern kingdom of Israel in 

        721 B.C.  The priesthood increasingly settled into families.  The house of 

        Eli apparently moved from Shiloh to Nob, where they were massacred by 

        Saul; only Abiathar escaped.  

                    During the reign of David, Abiathar officiated at Jerusalem along 

        with Zadok.  But because of his support of Adonijah, he was deposed by 

        Solomon.  Thus the house of Zadok replaced the house of Eli as the most 

        prominent priestly family, and the Zadokite priesthood continued in Jerusa-

        lem until the destruction of the temple in 586 B.C.  Zadok may have been 

        the former Jebusite king of Jerusalem, or a member of the Jebusite royal 

        priesthood, but that is extremely unlikely.    

                   The list of David’s chief officers ends with the statement:  “and 

        David’s sons were priests.”  We also read of Ira the Jairite’s being priest to 

        David.   And in the list of Solomon’s high officials, Zahud the son of 

        Nathan was priest and king’s friend.  Here and in the reference to David’s 

        sons, the Hebrew kohen may mean “minister of civil affairs.” The outstan-

        ding example of a non-Levitical priesthood during the monarchy is when 

        Jeroboam appointed them along with the Levites “to be priests of the high 

        places.”

                   The king himself appears to have exercised priestly functions at 

        great national religious festivals, at least during the early years of the mo-

        narchy.  Saul offers the burnt and peace offerings, David wears the priestly

        ephod, and Solomon officiates as priest at the dedication of the temple, 

        while the priests and Levites merely bring up the ark.  Jeroboam of Israel 

        also offers sacrifices and burns incense.  King Ahaz of Judah has a replica

        of the Damascus altar built and offers sacrifice upon it. 

   

P-121

                   The reforms of Josiah in 621 B.C. put an end to the high places 

        and centralized worship at Jerusalem.  Sacrifice is now the prerogative of

        the priesthood, since it may only be offered at the Jerusalem sanctuary.  It 

        may well be that the Levitical priesthood, like other hereditary guilds was

        able to exercise the right of adoption.  Prior to Josiah’s reform, the priest-

        hood was widely distributed.  In general every town appears to have had 

        its local sanctuary, or high place with at least one Levitical priest in atten-

        dance.  

                   The abolition of the local sanctuaries meant the loss of their reve-

        nues for these country clergy.  Josiah brought them all to Jerusalem, and 

        he seems to have intended that they should share in the full duties of the 

        Jerusalem priesthood.  In fact, however, the priests of the high places did 

        not officiate at the Jerusalem altar.  Josiah may have separated the priests 

        of the high places from other provincial priests, who had not taken part in

        idolatrous practices.  Those “other priests” were admitted to the full privi-

        leges of the Jerusalem priesthood.

                   6. Origin and Development: Ezekiel and Exile—The Exile is the

        great watershed of Hebrew religion; it marks the boundary between two 

        periods.  The priesthood was narrowed down to Levites by the latter part 

        of the 600s B.C.  Between these two periods, the pre-exilic and post-exilic,

        stands Ezekiel.   He supplies the link between the cultic organization of 

        the 600s B.C. and that of the second temple.

                   Ezekiel’s vision of a new temple is a symbolic representation of 

        Yahweh dwelling in holiness in the midst of his people.  His basic principle

         is holiness through separation, which is reflected in his scheme for a dra-

        stic reorganization of the priesthood.   Since the place of Yahweh’s pre-

        sence is protected from ceremonial defilement with areas of graded sanc-

        tity, it follows that different degrees of ceremonial purity must be deman-

        ded of those who minister in different parts of the temple, access to the 

        most sacred places being restricted to those possessing a greater degree 

        of holiness. 

                   Ezekiel’s scheme demands the exclusion of uncircumcised foreig-

        ners.  Their place is to be taken by the Levites who had gone astray after 

        their idols.  The most they are permitted to do is to slay the burnt offering

        and the sacrifice for the people.  The actual service of the altar is to be re-

        stricted to the Zadokite priests of Jerusalem, who remained faithful in a 

        period of national apostasy.  Identifying the straying Levites with priest of

        the Judean local sanctuaries isn't so convincing as it first appears.  Rather

        the national apostasy in which the Zadokite priests didn't take part in was

        the calf-worship which Jeroboam of Israel had instituted.   Ezekiel’s con-

        demnation is against the northern priests.

                   7. Origin and Development: Post Exile—The decree of Cyrus in 

        538 B.C. marks the end of the Babylonian exile and the beginning of the 

        restored Jewish community.  The restoration of the cult meant the restora-

        tion of the priesthood.  Ezekiel’s scheme for restricting the priesthood to 

        the Zadokites was not carried out.  The priesthood was indeed restricted, 

        but the restriction was on a wider basis than mere Zadokite descent. 

                   A clear distinction between priests and Levites is made in the lists 

        of the first returning exiles.  Representatives of two priestly families ac-

        companied Ezra—the family of Gershom, descended through Phinehas 

        from Zadok, and the family of Daniel, belonging to Ithamar’s house.  It is

        noteworthy that in the post-exilic literature the priests are consistently re-

        ferred to as Aaron’s house.  This is in accordance with the priestly docu-

        ment, which gives the fullest information that we have about the priest-

        hood.  The P document sees the priests/Levites division as absolute.  The 

        story of Korah’s rebellion is a warning to the non-Aaronic Levites not to 

        attempt to usurp the Aaronic priesthood.  All priests were required to 

        prove their descent.

                   The reasons for the rejection of Ezekiel’s scheme are obscure.  It 

        no doubt had to do with the actual situation with which the priestly writer

        was faced.   The first view that has been suggested is that there was, in 

        fact, no substantial difference between Ezekiel’s Zadokites and the Aaro-

        nites of the Priestly Code (PC). Perhaps Ezekiel uses “sons of Zadok” as 

        a general term, or the Zadokite priesthood uses “sons of Aaron” after the 

        Exile to enhance their prestige.  This is highly improbable.

                   Another view is that after Jerusalem’s Zadokite priests had gone 

        into exile, the people who remained in the city appealed to Bethel’s Aaro-

        nic priesthood.  Aaronite priests migrated from there and other northern 

        shrines, to Jerusalem. When the Zadokites returned, they were unable to 

        regain their ancient monopoly at first.  When they did, the leading Aaro-

        nites returned to the north, where they instigated the Samaritan Schism.  

        The Zadokites—later known as Sadducees—regained possession of the 

        Jerusalem priesthood but retained the Aaronic name.  This theory is 

        based upon mere supposition and does violence to the existing evidence.

P-122

                   Any reconstruction of the situation can only be tentative.  There 

        were priests officiating at the ruined temple in Jerusalem.  Aaronic priests

        of the house of Abiathar lived at Anathoth, only 4 km north of Jerusalem. 

        Aaronic priests of Ithamar’s line, from whom Abiathar was descended, 

        are mentioned along with the Zadokites.  As we have seen, in the postexi-

        lic literature the priests are referred to as the sons of Aaron.

                   8. Origin and Development:  Jerusalem Cult and Priestly Code

        It seems highly probable that there was the established practice of main-

        taining the cult at Jerusalem.   And there's evidence that conditions at Jeru-

        salem were known to the exiles.  The mention of non-Zadokites as well as 

        Zadokite priests would seem to indicate an agreement reached before the 

        return.  It seems unlikely that the 4,289 priests who came back with Zerub-

        babel were all descended from the Zadokites.  The small number of Levites

        who returned may indicate that those of Aaronite descent had been admit-

        ted to the priesthood. 

                   4 other groups of temple personnel besides priests and Levites are

        mentioned in the lists of returning exile.  The singers and gatekeepers 

        either were of Levitical descent or later became incorporated into the Levi-

        tical order.  The temple servants and sons of Solomon’s servants, how-

        ever, were of foreign origin.  It was to the presence of such uncircumcised 

        foreigners in the temple that Ezekiel objected.  The end of Nehemiah 10 

        implies that Ezekiel’s uncircumcised foreigners had during the Exile be-

        come proselytes by submitting to circumcision.  By the Chronicler’s time 

        (300 B.C.), the temple servants as a group seem to have disappeared. 

                   There is a noticeable change of emphasis in the functions of the 

        priesthood in the restored Jewish community; the priest is now associated 

        almost exclusively with the cult.  The priest shall give instruction in both 

        ceremonial and moral matters, the ceremonial is given priority of place. It 

        is part of Malachi’s complaint against the priests of his time that they have

        failed to give the moral instruction for which they are responsible.  At 

        Ezra’s announcement of the law, it is the Levites who instruct the people. 

                   The high priest has been generally regarded by some scholars as 

        a purely post-exilic figure.  Since there is no mention of a high priest in 

        Ezekiel’s scheme, it has been argued that his office was unknown to Eze-

        kiel and was not therefore in existence before the Exile.  The description 

        of the high-priestly functions of Aaron given in the priestly document is 

        said to be the work of the post-exilic, priestly writer placing the high 

        priesthood as he knew it back into Aaron’s time.  This view now appears

        to be an oversimplification which does not do justice to the biblical data.

        Whether or not the name or the office of high priest was known in earlier 

        times, the post-exilic high priest occupied a unique position from that of 

        any priest in pre-exilic days.

                   9. Origin and Development: Chronicles—Chronicles has been 

        called both a sequel and a supplement to the Priestly Code (PC).  It ena-

        bles us to see something of the development of the institutions of Judaism

        2 centuries after the return from Babylon.  The separate groups of singers,

        gatekeepers, temple servant, and sons of Solomon’s servants have disap-

        peared.  We may infer that the two groups of temple servants were finally

        incorporated into the Levitical order. 

                   The Chronicler gives special prominence to the Levites and empha-

        sizes their high status.  No one but the Levites may carry the ark.  It was 

        because this requirement was neglected that David’s first attempt to bring

        the sacred symbol to Jerusalem ended in tragedy.  It was the Levites who 

        carried the ark into Solomon’s temple.  They assist in the administration 

        of justice.  The sanctuary and its holy vessels are in their care.

                   Although the Chronicler emphasizes the prestige of the Levites, he 

        does not do this at the expense of the specific rights of the priesthood.  

        Each of the 24 groups of priests came up to the temple in turn for its ap-

        pointed period of duty.  In the time of the Chronicler the temporal as well

        as the spiritual authority of the high priest was firmly established in the 

        Jewish community.   In the judicial tribunal set up at Jerusalem by Jeho

        shaphat, the presidency was shared by the high priest and governor of the 

        house of Judah.  Here we may see a reflection of the high priest’s presi-

        ding over an early form of the Sanhedrin.

                  10.  Reconsideration of Past Theories:  Ezekiel and the Priestly

        Code (PC)—The reconstruction of the history of the Levitical priesthood is 

        closely linked with the analysis of the first 5 books of the Old Testament

        into four documentary sources—Y(J)ahwist, Elohwist, Deuteronomist, 

        and Priestly Writer (P).  The early presuppositions of this theory resulted 

        in an oversimplification.   It was assumed that primitive ideas must be 

        early and more advanced conceptions  late.  In the early  postexilic books

        of Haggai  and Zechariah, Joshua the high  priest occupies a position of 

        equal authority to the governor Zerubbabel; they are joint heads of state. 

        It is quite inconceivable that such a powerful office was created in the 50

        years between Ezekiel (572 B.C.) and the second return (520).

P-123

 

                   Much has been made of the fact that the high priesthood is not 

        mentioned by Ezekiel.  But an argument from silence can be used only 

        with great caution.   There is a close relationship between the PC and 

        Ezekiel, but there is evidence that Ezekiel was familiar with the PC.  

        Ezekiel was unquestionably acquainted with the Law of Holiness.  It is 

        here that we find regulations concerning the ceremonial purity of the 

        high priest.  The PC references to the high priest do not suggest that the 

        office was new. 

                   There are many indications of rank in the priesthood during the 

        monarchy and even earlier.  The book of Kings, together with the Law 

        of Holiness provides strong evidence for the antiquity of the high priest-

        hood.  With the disappearance of the Davidic line, it was inevitable that 

        the postexilic high priest should acquire much of the power and prestige 

        which belonged to the king.

                   Ezekiel is concerned particularly with the degraded priests, but 

        his reorganization does not preclude the existence of a Levitical order.  

        Ezekiel himself appears to be familiar with two recognized grades of 

        Levitical cultic officials.  The distinction between the 2 groups appears

        as something of long standing.  There is not in Deuteronomy the clear-

        cut distinction between priests and Levites that we find in the PC.  But 

        the distinction is there.  The characteristic Deuteronomic phrase is "the

        Levitical priests."

                   Levites are mentioned some 14 times.  Deuteronomy 18 distin-

        guishes between the provision made for the priest ministering at the 

        sanctuary and that available for the unattached Levite in company with

        the serving Levites.  A further indication of the implicit distinction be-

        tween priest and Levites is in the reference to the setting apart of Elea-

        zar the son of Aaron to the priesthood and the subsequent separation of

        the whole tribe of Levi.  In actual fact the term “Levite” is not used 

        anywhere in the Old Testament as the exact equivalent of “priest.”

                   It has long been recognized that the PC preserves much early 

        material and usage.   It is generally conceded that the ritual of the Day 

        of Atonement was of very ancient origin.  Some of the regulations of 

        the PC appear to have been observed more rigidly in the early period 

        than in later times.  There are indications that the PC itself was in exi-

        stence before the Exile.  Ezekiel’s law is more systematic than that of 

        the PC, which indicates that Ezekiel was acquainted with the PC.  The   

        widely distributed Levitical cities of the priestly document recall the 

        conditions of pre-exilic times.

                   If the existence of a separate order of Levites in pre-exilic times 

        is to be admitted, it becomes apparent that the cultic personnel of the PC

        is that of the old temple rather than that of the return from Babylon.  Not 

        only are there clear indications that the PC is pre-exilic; there is also evi-

        dence that it is pre-Deuteronomic.   Once the implicit distinction between

        priests and Levites in Deuteronomy is recognized, the affinities between

        Deuteronomy and the priestly legislation become apparent.  

                   Peculiarities of style link Leviticus with PC rather than with Deu-

        teronomy, thus indicating the priority of the former.  The priestly legisla-

        tion is frequently pre-supposed when it is not explicitly referred to.  The

        regulations for the centralized celebration of the Passover in Deuterono-

        my 16 presuppose and modify the domestic Passover law of Exodus 12. 

                   While there are indications of the dependence of Deuteronomy 

        upon the PC, there is no evidence of any acquaintance of the priestly wri-

        ter with Deuteronomy.  Hence the priority of the PC is clearly implied.  If

        an early date for the PC is be accepted, it could no longer be maintained 

        that the priestly writer has read back the organization of the 2nd temple 

        into early times. 

PRIESTS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT (NT) (iereuV (hee er yoose)  arciereuV

        (ar kee er yoose), high priest)   The Greek words for “priests” and “high 

        priest”are used in the gospels and Acts almost always with reference to 

        Jewish priests.  In Judaism, priesthood was hereditary in the tribe of Levi.

        A Jewish priest was born, not made.  Among pagan cults, some priest-

        hoods were hereditary; others were voluntary or civil.  The responsibili-

        ties of pagan priests were extremely varied, depending upon whether the

        cult was state-run or a voluntary religious association, and upon the fame 

        of the shrine or oracle.

P-124

                   The essential concept underlying priesthood in the ancient world 

        was that of mediator between the divine and human.  The priest was the 

        director, if not the actual performer of sacrifices.   The antagonism of 

        Christians to all pagan priesthoods was a legacy from the Jewish con-

        tempt for idolatry.  The bitterness between the early Christians and the 

        Jewish priesthood reflects the actual persecution of Jesus and his follo-

        wers by the high priests.  The rejection by the Sadducean priesthood of 

        any doctrine of resurrection served to exacerbate its antagonism to the  

        preaching of the early apostles and evangelists.    

                   It is likely that many of the humbler priests did not agree with the  

        "chief priests.”   Among such must be counted John the Baptist.  The do-

        cuments of the Khirbet Qumran Essenes confirm that the Essenes rejected

        all animal sacrifices in the temple.   Neither Jesus nor his orthodox Jewish

        disciples were so radical as to repudiate the priesthood or sacrifice.  What-

        ever Jesus may have thought about individual priests, he was loyal to the

        system.  In Mark 1, he directed lepers to show themselves to the priests. 

                   The process of separation of the church from the priestly and sacri-

        ficial institution began at a very early time.  After the destruction of the 

        temple in 70 A.D., the Jewish Christians exalted the prophetic over the 

        priestly traditions of the Old Testament.  Christianity made a positive and

        creative development of the concept of priesthood in the Letter to the He-

        brews, where Christ is presented as an unblemished, sacrificial Victim, 

        and sinless High Priest.  The authority, honor, and effect of Christ’s priest-

        hood supplant forever the Aaronic priesthood of the Old Covenant.

                   This theology of Christ’s priesthood was not an original creation of

        the author of Hebrews.   The concept is rooted in Christ’s own interpreta-

        tion of his atoning mission as a “ransom for many.”   In Paul’s letters the 

        sacrificial character of Christ’s death is clearly marked.  Likewise in Paul

        one finds the doctrine of Christ’s mediation.  A corollary of the doctrine of

        the priesthood of Christ is the NT application of “priesthood” to the whole

        company of the faithful in the church. 

                   I Peter 2 speaks to the people of the church:  “Like living stones be

        yourselves built into a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spi-

        ritual sacrifices acceptable to God.  In Revelation it says Christ has “made

        us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father.”  Such expressions as these 

        were a natural outcome of the promises made to the people of the Old Co-

        venant:  “You shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.”

                   In no instance does any NT writer ascribe the title of priest to any 

        individual member or order of ministry in the church.  I Clement, written

        95-96 A.D., employs the three-fold hierarchy of high priest, priests, and 

        Levites, as an analogous Christian ministry.  The Didache orders its Chris-

        tian communities to give first fruits of their produce to the prophets who 

        ministered to them. 

                  These trends were perhaps only 1 step beyond the metaphor Paul

        uses to denote his own work of evangelizing as a “priestly service” in or-

        der that the sacrificial offering of the Gentiles might be acceptable.  He-

        brews 13 and I Peter 2 speak of Christian worship and service in sacrifi-

        cial terms.   Even so, the primitive prejudice against sacerdotal term lin-

        gered throughout the 100s A.D.   The first Christian writers to use the 

        words “priest” and “high priest” were Tertullian and Hippolytus.

PRINCE ( נגיﬢ (naw geed), leader, chief; בנﬢי (naw deeb), a noble; שיאנ 

        (naw see), chief; שר (shawr), commander, chief; archgoV (ark eh gos), 

        chief, leader;  arcwn (ar kon), one invested with power; hgemwn (he 

        geh moan), leader, chieftain)  The translation or possible translation of a  

        number of words designating a ruler.  The Bible does not use the word 

        in the limited sense of the direct heir of a monarch; “sons of the king”

        are quite distinct from the “princes” in Israel.

                   Nagid is the term for a leader who is pre-eminent, and is used for 

        kings and military officers.  The word nadib designates a man of noble 

        birth or one who is worthy of honor.   Nasi is one who is lifted up; tribal lea-

        ders are so designated.  The term shar is the most popular word for “ruler” 

        or “leader” in any capacity.  The angels are the “princes” of God’s host.  

        The prefect of a city or province is designated with this familiar title.  

                  In the New Testament, archegos may be translated “prince” and is 

        used to designate the leader who goes before and blazes a trail like a pio-

        neer.  An archon is commander or ruler in any nation and is also used for 

        the members of the Sanhedrin.  Hegemon refers to the Roman legate, pro-

        curator, or proconsul.  The Messiah is Prince of Peace, Princes of princes, 

        and prince of kings.  Beelzebub is the prince of demons.

P-125

 

PRINCIPALITY.  A term used in the plural form, referring to the organized po-

        wer of angels.  A “principality” is thought of as an extra group of spirits 

        which may interfere and hinder the salvation in Christ.  The underlying pat-

        tern is mythological and not entirely clear.

PRISON (בית הסהר (bet  haw saw hawr), house of the round-tower; אﬤל 

        (keh leh), from the root “to be shut up”; מטרא (mat taw raw); desmwth-

        rion (des moh teh ree on); fulakh (foo lah keh) a place of custody)  As a

        legal punishment imprisonment is not found in ancient law, and does not 

        appear in the Bible until the Persian period.  Under the monarchy persons 

        regarded as dangerous were put into custody, and a private home was 

        often used.  Less severe was detention in a palace area called the “court 

        of the guard.”

                   Bet hasahar was the term for Joseph’s prison.  Confinement to a 

        specific city is found twice:  Solomon confines  Shimei  ben Gera to Jeru-

        salem on pain of death; the accidental  homicide is confined  to the  city 

        of refuge until the death of the high priest.  The city of their confinement 

        has at once the attributes of a prison and of an asylum. 

                   Jewish prisons mentioned in the New Testament serve for the de-

        tention under custody of persons awaiting trial.  Roman authorities were 

        empowered to imprison as a coercive measure.  The carcer was made up

        of several cells, of which the interior, being without light, were the worst.

PRIZE (brabeion (bra bie on))  A detail of the foot-race imagery which Paul 

        borrows from the stadium to illustrate the Christian life.   In I Corinthians

        9, “prize” is used literally in the full picture of the foot race.  Some com-

        mentators consider the “upward calling” the content of the prize.  It is 

        more likely that God has called Paul to this destination and prize.   In 

        Phillipians 3 Paul has rejected all pride in birth, religious standing, and 

        attainment.  Here, the prize is, among other things: to have standing with

        God through faith; to have the power of his resurrection; and to attain the

        resurrection from the dead.  The figure of the foot race should not be used

        as though Paul’s effort and his success in surpassing other men will bring

        the possession of the prize.  

PROCHORUS (ProcoroV)  One of the 7 “Greek-lovers” chosen to perform

        certain administrative tasks in the Jerusalem community.  Prochorus ap-

        pears in Byzantine art as the secretary to whom John dictated his gospel.

PROCONSUL.  In the Roman Empire the civil and military administration of

        the provinces was carried on by senator.  The proconsul was himself an ex-

        consul and usually held office for one year about 17 years after his consul

        ship.  His actions were subject to review by the Senate.

PROCURATOR.  Financial and military official responsible to the Roman em-

        peror, and representing him most notably in the provinces.  Members of the

        equestrian order were entrusted with offices in the prefects of Egypt, as po-

        lice, in charge of the grain supply in Rome, and in charge of the praetorian 

        guard.  There were also civil servants called procurators. 

                   It is a question whether Pontius Pilate and other early Roman mili-

        tary governors should be called procurators.  Three such administrators in

        Palestine are mentioned: Pontius Pilate (26-36 A.D.); Antonius Felix (52-

        58); and Porcius Festus (58-62).  Most of the 14 procurators that served 

        from 6-66 issued local coinage.  Josephus tells us that Coponius could in-

        flict the death penalty.  In pacifying Palestine the procurators avoided pla- 

        cing human or animals figures on their coins.

PRODIGAL SON.  A narrative parable of Jesus (Luke 15) vividly and drama-

        tically describing repentance. Confession and return to the Father are es- 

        sential and concrete expressions of the son’s desire for renewal.

PROFANE  (חלל (khaw lal), common; חנף (khaw nafe))  To treat a holy per-

        son, place, or institution as if it were not holy.  Any sacred institution of 

        Israel could be profaned by disregard of the divinely given laws governing

        the institution.  Hence, “profane” shades over into “defile,” “pollute.”  Pro-

        fanation in Israel is really an assault on the holiness of God.

P-126

PROMISE (For Hebrew words, see first paragraph; epaggelomai (ep ag gel oh

        mahee)).  The concept of promise is prominent in the Old Testament (OT), 

        since God’s word to Israel is considered the very source, support, and des-

        tiny of this people.  There is in the OT no single, distinctive term used to 

        convey the basic concept.  The OT employs quite ordinary words to refer to

        the pivotal promises of God.  When God is the subject of the verbs and 

        God’s chosen people are the recipients, then the translator rightly gives to 

        them the sense of a binding promise or oath.

                   Pre-eminent among OT promises is that which God gave to Abra-

        ham, namely that God would give to him a son and would make of him a 

        mighty nation.  This promise is directly linked to God’s later call of Moses

        to lead God’s people from Egypt.  This promise guided them throughout 

        their weary pilgrimage, providing the source of their endurance and the 

        object of their rebellions.   This promise was proof of God’s steadfast love.

                   After they were settled in the Land of Promise, their history re-

        ceived its continuity through this same promise.  The assurances given to 

        David were both a fulfillment of earlier pledges and steps towards their 

        fulfillment.  To each of David’s successors, God gave specific pledges 

        covering the duty and destiny of each, but each pledge was oriented to-

        ward the initial vow to the patriarchs.      

                   Discontent with God’s promise was the root sin of Israel; confidence

        in it was the essence of hope.  The promise had implication for contempo-

        rary decisions by national leaders, and it was the prophets’ task to make 

        these implications clear.  Confidence in God’s mercy and power meant for

        them the expectation of coming salvation, for destiny was determined, not 

        by external probabilities, but by God’s covenant pledge.   The prophets re-

        cognized in humans a creature who makes and breaks promises; but God 

        guides human history with a promise which God has made and will not 

        break. 

                   “Promise” in the New Testament refers to God’s pledge given freely 

        to God’s people.  It represents a complex of ideas in which can be found: 

        purpose and power of promise-maker; response of recipients; act of giving

        the promise; conditions; effects on the life of the covenant people; mediator

        who enacts the covenant.

                   Although Paul is aware of multiple promises which belong to Israel, 

        he thinks of the promise to Abraham as the decisive one.  In rejecting it, the

        people of the Covenant do not destroy it, but underscore its validity and 

        God’s eternal vigilance to maintain it.  The word of promise begets those 

        who are “children of the promise.”   In a singular sense, Jesus Christ is 

        Abraham’s seed, but in him are incorporated all Abraham’s sons.

                    God’s act in giving the promise is a supreme example of unmerited 

        mercy.  The gratitude with which God’s people receive the promise be-

        comes a matter of prime importance.  If people assume that the promise 

        depends upon the law, they nullify grace and empty faith of its significance.

        If they limit the range of the promise to those who merit it, that is narrower

        than God’s intention and they no longer live by the promise.  Where the 

        promise produces faith, there too it communicates God’s righteousness. 

                   Paul’s understanding of the promise centers in the figure of Jesus 

        Christ.  It is in him that all God’s promises are affirmed as true.  The spirit 

        of promise begets new sons and daughters, and fulfills in them the promise

        of the spirit.  The spirit guarantees this inheritance “until we acquire pos-

        session of it.”  

                   Paul doesn't try to describe this future “possession.”  Paul sees 

        these promises as realities being fulfilled among the covenant community, 

        where God lives and moves, and makes God’s self known. The book of 

        Hebrews speaks throughout of God’s promise as the ground of the unique 

        covenant relationship.  Understanding the promise centers in the work of 

        Christ. The promise discloses the steady, inexorable intention of God and 

        thereby releases the faithful patience and the enduring hope of God’s Son 

        and God’s sons and daughters. 

                   God’s gift of the new promise in Christ is related to his gift of the 

        promise to Abraham and Moses.  These events are related to each other 

        through God’s purpose.  Hebrews notes the difference between receiving 

        the promise and receiving what is promised.  In between lies their life as 

        pilgrims; the promise creates the “now,” which gives to every decision its

        immediate and ultimate significance. Jesus as the mediator of new promi-

        ses gives to this “now” an awesome decisiveness.  The promise is as near 

        and as distant as its mediator.  The promised inheritance becomes at once 

        a future certainty, an immediate access to God’s throne, and an active par-

        ticipation in a kingdom which cannot be shaken. 

127

                   Of the 10 occurrences of “promise” in Luke-Acts, only one is with-

        out special significance.  In all of these the Maker and the Keeper of the 

        promise is God.  All appear in the context of the family—as God’s gift to 

        God’s family, or as a promise to the fathers fulfilled among the sons, thus 

        binding together many generations.  

                  Interest in the promise centers in the work of the risen Lord.  It is 

        he who sends the “father’s promise” upon the apostles.  The coming of the

        promise is inseparable from their being clothed with heavenly power.  The 

        coming of the promise on them is directly coordinated with their response 

        to the preaching of repentance and their empowerment for preaching re-

        pentance to all nations.  By conveying the power for preaching, the pro-

        mise produces repentance and forgiveness.  At Pentecost” what is seen 

        and "heard” is due to the actualized power of the promise. 

                   The apostles call all to repentance with the assurance that those 

        who respond will receive the Holy Spirit as a gift.   Christ is linked to 

        God’s promise to Abraham.  Fulfillment of Abraham's promise in the time

        of Moses is a type of fulfillment of the promise to Moses in Jesus' life.  

                   Christ is also a fulfillment of the promise to David.  Luke stresses 2

        things:  the promise made to the fathers is now fulfilled for their sons; and

        Israel’s rejection of the promise does not nullify the promise itself.   In II 

        Peter the word “promise” is more closely identical with the expected re-

        turn of Christ.  The desire for evident signs is an index of human bondage 

        to corruption.   

                   In James the substance of promise is the crown of life which awaits

        the endurance and love of believers.  In I John, what God has promised is 

        eternal life, and this life is described as mutual indwelling.  The promise is 

        the life which “was made manifest,” and which constitutes fellowship in 

        and with God.  

PROPHET, PROPHECY (נביא (naw bee), we do not know and can't deter-

        mine the root’s original meaning)  Is nebiyim’s source to be taken in an ac-

        tive sense, with those so named announcing God’s purpose and activity, or 

        is the passive sense primary?   Is the prophet the recipient of God’s an-

        nouncement, and is he then the one who is called?  The Hebrew word for 

        “prophet” is a common noun; it appears more than 300 times.  It is applied

        to a wide range of characters appearing from Genesis 20 to Malachi, and 

        to very different personalities. 

List of Topics—1. Introduction;     2. Relationships of the Prophet 

        to: Seer and Ecstatic Prophecy;     3. The Prophesying 

        Process;     4. Relationships of the Prophet to the Cult;      

        5. Relationships of the Prophet to the OT's Prophetic Books;

        6. Prophecy and God’s Effect on History: Pre-Monarchic 

        Prophets;     7. Prophecy and God’s Effect on History:  

        Loyalty to Yahweh;     

                8. Prophecy and God’s Effect on History: Word of 

        Yahweh;     9. Content of Faith in Classical Prophecy:  

        Word and Symbol;     10. Content of Faith in Classical 

        Prophecy:  Word and Vocation;     11. Content of Faith in 

        Classical Prophecy:  Covenant and Rebellion;    12. Content 

        of Faith in Classical Prophecy:     Judgment, and Compas-

        sion;     13. Content of Faith in Classical Prophecy:     

        Redemption and Consummation

                   1. Introduction—When narrowly defined, the age of the prophet is  

        the function of a concentrated succession of men (Amos Hosea, Isaiah, 

        Micah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the writer of the second part of Isaiah—ap-

        pearing in a brief span of about 200 years.  The biblical record of this 

        epoch of prophets has passed through the hands of editors standing in and

        after that prophetic epoch, so in all likelihood it has been modified and the 

        interpretation altered. 

                   In the New Testament (NT) the term appears commonly in referen-

        ces to the prophets of the Old Testament (OT).  Both Jesus and John the 

        Baptist are regarded as prophets.  The early Christian community at Anti-

        och knows the presence of “prophets and teachers.”  The NT prophet is in

        essential function like that of the OT:   he conveys to them who will be-

        lieve the divinely imparted meaning of history. The prophet’s person and 

        his function in the history of Israel has unparalleled significance in Juda-

        ism and in Christianity.   The age of the Hebrew prophet begins with the 

        historical Moses.  It may legitimately be defined as that understanding of 

        history which accepts meaning only in terms of divine concern, divine pur-

        pose, and divine participation. 

P-128

                   The broader definition is presupposed in the arrangement of the He-

        brew scripture, where the central category of the Prophets is placed be-

        tween the Law and the Writings.  Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings are 

        the “Former Prophets,” and Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the 12 prophets 

        from Hosea to Malachi are the “Latter Prophets.”  Even if we could be cer-

        tain of the original meaning of the Hebrew noun’s root, the evolution and 

        variations in meaning of the word over its long history must be taken into 

        account.  It is necessary that we see the prophet as he appeared and func-

        tioned in the community and throughout the history of ancient Israel.  

                   2. Relationships of the Prophet to: Seer and Ecstatic Prophecy

        What are the significant connections, associations, and relationships of 

        the prophet within the institutions of Israelite society? 

                   The Hebrew words khozeh and ro’eh are both properly translated 

        “seer,” and both suggest some parallel in function with the prophet, name-

        ly that of “seeing” a vision.   In II Samuel 24 “the prophet Gad” is 

        “David’s seer.”  In II Kings 17 it is the role of the prophet and seer alike 

        to warn Israel and Judah.  Micah 3 couples seers and diviners.   

                   In Amos 7, the word “seer” is in reference to Amaziah, the priest of

        Bethel in the northern state of Israel after the kingdom split apart.  He says

        to Amos: “O seer, go, flee away to the land of Judah, and eat bread there 

        and prophesy there.”  In Amos’ response it is clear that he means to repu-

        diate Amaziah’s implicit charge of prophesying for pay.  In all these occur-

        rences of the 1st term khozeh, with the exception of Micah 3, “seer” and 

        “prophet” are descriptive of very similar functions.   

                   The 2nd term for “seer,” ro’eh, appears in Isaiah 30.  There is no 

        significant distinction between it and khozeh in the OT.  In I Samuel 9, 

        where it states that “he who is now called a prophet was formerly called a

        seer,” we have evidence that prophet and seer were understood as exerci-

        sing in common the function of “seeing”—i.e., apprehending that which is

        not normally accessible and “speaking [it] forth.”  The seer-prophet sees 

        not necessarily that which is smooth, but emphatically that which is right.  

        It may be that the “office” of seer was chronologically prior to that of pro-

        phet as an indigenous institution in Israel.

                   The institution of Israelite prophets was appropriated from Canaan 

        and did not clearly emerge until the 900s B.C. at the earliest.   The ele-

        ments of Israel’s prophetic beliefs were present from the beginnings of Is-

        rael’s existence, and was then modified by Canaanite forms.  Something 

        significant of the essence of established Israelite prophets was present 

        from the Mosaic era.  The evidence we have just surveyed points to a con-

        tinuing coexistence of seer and prophet. It also points to an unmistakable 

        descent from Canaanite prophets.  

                   Prophets in their Canaanite expression first appears in I Samuel 9.

        In the hope of locating his father’s lost asses, Saul and servant have con-

        sulted the seer Samuel, who anointed Saul “to be prince over his people 

        Israel.”  Saul is informed in advance of what is to take place as proof of 

        the validity of the anointing.  “When they came to Gibeah, behold, a band

        of prophets met him; and the spirit of God came mightily upon him, and 

        he prophesied among them.  Later, when Saul was in pursuit of David, 

        “. . . the Spirit of God came upon the messengers of Saul, and they also 

        prophesied, . . . and the Spirit of God came upon [Saul] also, and as he

        went he prophesied until he came to Naioth in Ramah." 

                  Both passages may be taken, regardless of relationship and date, as

        valid commentary on the phenomenon of Canaanite prophets.  The seer 

        appears as a familiar office, thoroughly at home in Israel.  This earliest 

        reference to contagious prophecy conveys the atmosphere of the alien.  

        And it is popularly interpreted as indicative of seizure by the Deity.  It pro-

        duces apparently a total transformation in personality.  This institution is 

        not yet integrated into the pattern of familiar Israelite existence.  This is, 

        in any case a different kind of seizure from the charisma, the more or less

        permanent endowment of a chosen person by Yahweh’s Spirit. 

                   The brilliant description of the frantic performance of Baal’s pro-

        phets on Carmel gives further definition to the prophesying phenomenon.

        They “cut themselves after their custom with swords and lances, until the

        blood gushed out upon them. . . They raved on.”  These are Canaanite pro-

        phets and this is Canaanite “prophecy.”  It is far different from the prophet

        and the prophecy exemplified even in Ezekiel, to say nothing of Isaiah.  It 

        cannot legitimately be argued that later prophecy perpetuates Canaanite 

        prophecy. 

                   3. The Prophesying Process—The interpretation of OT prophecy 

        as an essentially ecstatic phenomenon continues to be advocated especi-

        ally by those who are persuaded of prevailing ancient Eastern institutional

        uniformity.  If “ecstasy” applies to the OT prophets, it is concentrated in 

        form, attentive to details, and has to do with a suspension of normal con-

        sciousness and a brief interruption of normal sense perception.  This is in 

        contrast with the more common ancient Eastern type of introspective, 

        vague, and mystical piety. 

P-129

                   Form-critical studies in the books of the Prophets helps us answer

        the question of the nature and extent of the ecstatic factor in prophecy.  

        It points out a characteristic prophetic utterance in two intimately related 

        parts:  the passionate and bitter speech of denunciation, portraying the 

        mind and disposition and personality of the prophet; and the brief, poin-

        ted, and powerful word of judgment.  This pattern can be illustrated most

        clearly in Isaiah 10, beginning with:  “Ah, Assyria, the rod of my anger!” 

        The invective is remarkably extended and continues with eloquent vigor 

        through verse 15. 

                    "Against a godless nation I send him, and against the people of

            my wrath I command him. . . As my hand has reached to the king-

            doms of the idols . . . shall I not do to Jerusalem and her idols what

            I have done to Samaria and her images? 

                    When the Lord has finished all the Lord’s work on Mount 

            Zion and on Jerusalem, the Lord will punish the arrogant boasting

            of the king of Assyria and his haughty pride, . . . [After all,] Shall 

            the ax vaunt itself over the one who wields, or the saw against the 

            one who handles it?"

                   If there is any ecstasy involved, it is in the word of judgment.  Thus,

        in the relationship between these two primary and inseparable parts of 

        prophetic preaching, the controversy over the role and nature of ecstasy

        is resolved.  The prophet receives the real Word of Yahweh as revelation.

        But the Word is not always precisely intelligible, and the prophet feels

        himself called upon by means of the denunciation to interpret and direct,

        to point and apply the revealed word of Yahweh. 

                   The compact and certainly, on occasion, enigmatic divine Word is 

        mulled over, reflected upon, wrestled with.  How was the revealed word 

        perceived—is it heard, or seen, or must we say simply that it is sensed?   

        In Isaiah 10 the prophet interprets the above verses this way:  “Therefore 

        the Sovereign, the Lord of hosts, will send wasting sickness among his 

        stout warriors, and under his glory a burning will be kindled . . .”  

                   Whose warriors? Whose pride?  Why is this so?  If the wasting and

        the burning come out of ecstasy, it is the prophet’s hard task by sweat and

        tears to define the symbols of vision and to declare their meaning.   It is 

        his own obligation to determine how, when, and to whom this word of 

        judgment is delivered.  The OT prophet no doubt underwent what his own

        generation, would see as outside the limits of normal experience. 

                   4. Relationships of the Prophet to the Cults—Prophet groups or

        guilds are positively attested over the whole range of the kingdoms’ his-

        tory from the time of Saul until the fall of Jerusalem.   Functionaries 

        known as prophets were certainly made part of a cultic institution pre-

        cisely as were the priests and other sanctuary personnel.   An important 

        question has to do with the extent of this association and the possibility 

        that we actually have traces in the canonical OT of the work of such a 

        cultic institution. 

                   Is it possible that the great prophets of the OT lived out their ca-

        reers in such associations?  The question of the relationship of the great 

        OT prophets to cultic prophecy remains complex and difficult of defini-

        tion.  One basic assumption of uniform religious practices over the an-

        cient East leads ultimately to the conclusion that the great prophets are 

        to be placed in the common category of cult personnel.  The interpreta-

        tion of the great prophets as cult functionaries has been considerably sti-

        mulated by studies of cult festivals.  The call of the prophet Isaiah has 

        been analyzed in such a way as to make of the prophet a cult functionary

        whose calling can be understood in terms of the annual festival of the 

        enthronement of the sacral king. 

                   The evidence in support of such identity is impressive, but its 

        structure appears at points to be rather insubstantial; simpler interpreta-

        tions of Isaiah’s call are more natural.  Jeremiah 29:26 is cited as proof 

        that the associations of kohanim (priests) and nebiyim (prophets) had a 

        common leader entitled kohan.  It is also presumed that Jeremiah is to be 

        professionally identified simply as one of the associated cult prophets. 

                   The verses in question comes in and after an extended letter from 

        Jeremiah, prophesying, and then describing the words of Shemaiah in 

        Babylonia to Zephaniah, the senior priest.  Jeremiah says:  “Thus says the

        Lord   . . . Do not let the prophets . . . deceive you . . . for it is a lie that 

        they are prophesying to you . . .   Only when Babylon’s 70 years are com-

        pleted will I visit you  . . . and I will bring you back . . . (Jeremiah 29: 

        8, 9)”  Shemaiah is reported to have written to Zephaniah:  “The Lord has

        made you priest . . . to control any madman who plays the prophet    . . .  

        So now why have you not rebuked Jeremiah of Anathoth who plays the 

        prophet for you? (Jeremiah 29: 26, 27)”  

P-130

 

                   This has been seriously submitted as one of the weightiest pieces 

        of evidence to identify Jeremiah with the prophesying cult.   On the con-

        trary, this passage would much rather appear to be a repudiation of any 

        theory placing Jeremiah with any “prophesying madmen.”  They stand 

        for madness, while Jeremiah stands for “the Word of the Lord.”  We must

        reject identifying the authentic prophecy with most of the cultic prophecy,

        although some great prophets may have been affiliated with the cult pro-

        phets. The biblical prophetic literature deals with the great contemporary 

        events in the world as part of a process willed by God.  It is, therefore, the

        content of prophecy that defines the contrast between the great prophet 

        and the cult prophet. 

                   Scholarship of an earlier generation characterized Old Testament 

        (OT) prophecy as strongly anti-cultic.  Passages from Amos 5 and Isaiah 1

        were frequently cited in support of this interpretation. 

                   “I hate, I despise your festivals, and I take no delight in your 

            solemn assemblies.     Even though you offer me your burnt offe-

            rings . . . I will not accept them . . . I will not look upon them]. . . I 

            will not listen to the melody of your harps.   But let justice roll down 

            like the waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream." 

            (Amos 5:21-25).” 

                   “What to me is the multitude of your sacrifices? says the Lord.  

            I have had enough ... I do not delight in the blood of bulls lambs, or

            goats.   When you come . . . before me, who asked this from your 

            hand?  Trample my courts no more.   Your new moons and your ap-

            pointed festivals my soul hates.   Wash yourselves; make yourselves 

            clean; remove the evil . . . from my eyes.  Cease to do evil, learn to 

            do good     (Isaiah 1: 11, 12, 14, 16-17).”

                   One popular theory based on the above verses is that the OT pro-

        phet despised the institution’s expression of Israel’s ancient religion as a

        vile malignancy; the prophets became the giant antagonist of any and all 

        institutional religion.   The drawback of this theory is that it separates pro-

        phets from both the religious institution and any theology, as the Lord is 

        reduced to the Ethical Imperative.   The now prevailing and almost ortho-

        dox critical convention looks in broader and more realistic perspective at 

        the whole structure of Israel’s life.   Expressions of prophetic impatience 

        are now seen as condemning the enthusiastic performance of formalized, 

        prescribed outward acts of piety unsupported by the qualities of justice 

        and righteousness. 

                   In the broad perspective of Israel’s history and the role of prophecy,

        it becomes exceedingly difficult to maintain anti-cult and anti-institutional

        prophecy in Israel.   From the beginning Israel would be Israel only 

        through her cults.  She interpreted her prehistory in cultic form and con-

        tinued to embrace it through the cult ritual of circumcision.   The David-

        Zion covenant was celebrated and renewed in the great fall festival of New

        Year and Enthronement.  The cult was a rehearsal of God’s mighty deeds,

        bring past and present together. 

                   The OT prophets almost certainly remained in close rapport with the

        cult.   It is obvious that prophets were familiar with the ritual and 

        meaning of the cult; that they sometimes borrowed from it.   But it doesn't

        necessarily follow that the great OT prophet was a “cult” or “guild” pro-

        phet.   Most likely prophet and priest weren't so consistently opposed as 

        has sometimes been assumed.  Moses and Elijah, are both remembered 

        and recorded in the dual role of prophet-priest.  Jeremiah and Ezekiel both 

        came out of priestly background.  

                   As a rule the OT prophets saw themselves as essentially allied to 

        the priesthood.  Several shorter prophetic writings (Habakkuk, Nahum, 

        and Joel) have been interpreted as produced out of cultic influence.   

        Doubts that the great prophets belonged to the guild of cult prophets does

        not cut the prophet off from interrelationship in the cult.  The OT prophet

        can and does appropriate the liturgy known and in common use in the cul-

        tic exercise. 

                   5. Relationships of the Prophet to the OT's Prophetic Books

        An interpretation prevailing in a past generation of the great OT prophet 

        was the term “writing prophets,” to distinguish OT prophets with a “book”

        from those without (e.g. Elijah was a prophet; Amos was a writing pro-

        phet).  It was taken for granted that writings in prophetic books contained 

        the written words of the prophet, who carefully cast the utterances into writ-

        ten form, or reduced a remembered episode to writing.  

131 

 

                   In the second half of the 1900s, the earlier assumption gave way be-

        fore an increasing emphasis on the role of oral composition and transmis-

        sion and the use of disciples as recorders.  In the ancient Near East, the 

        great prophet played the role of master among a number of more or less 

        formally organized disciples.  Responsibility for the original, basic form of 

        the present prophetic writings was credited to these disciples.    

                   Form criticism has demonstrated that much of the profoundest mea-

        ning in the OT is related to cultic activity which was largely sustained by 

        the mouth and memory of successive generations of participants.   It also 

        confronts us repeatedly with the fact that in the ancient East the role of writ-

        ten transmission remained sometimes and for long periods of time subordi-

        nate to that of oral transmission.  

                   We need to seek the middle ground between an exclusively oral tra-

        dition and an exclusively written tradition, i.e. written and oral formulation 

        and transmission which paralleled one another, with oral organization and 

        preservation of material dominating but not used exclusively.  There exists 

        no real question that some of the “book” prophets lived and taught and pro-

        claimed a message in the company of disciples.  To what extent is the 

        book of Isaiah “genuine Isaiah,” and to what extent is the content the pro-

        duct of the machinery of transmission? 

                   It is wrong to picture the great prophet as his own scribe.  Probably

        wrong too is the assumption that the form in which we now receive the

        words of the prophets is precisely the form in which it was initially writ-

        ten.  On the other hand, the evidence hardly justifies the conclusion that 

        no prophet ever wrote anything himself, but we cannot make contact with

        and define what is specifically the prophet’s words, because of the effect 

        of decades and even centuries of a fluid, oral process. 

                   In the case of the prophet Isaiah there is the strongest evidence 

        both that the prophet himself wrote, and that he committed his message in 

        oral form to a circle of disciples.  Oral communication and preservation 

        of the words of Isaiah through disciples is made explicit in the text and 

        almost certainly confirmed in Isaiah's second part.  Isaiah 8 reads:  “Bind

        up the testimony, seal the teaching among my disciples.”  The message 

        was thus sealed among Isaiah’s disciples and brought forth publicly 

        some 2 centuries later in Isaiah's second part, as indicated in Isaiah 50.  

        It is clear that the writer of Isaiah's second part wished to be numbered 

        with Isaiah's disciples. 

                   In view of the representation of a span of centuries within the pre-

        sent book of Isaiah, one wonders if the book in its present form does not 

        constitute an effective testimony to a long-continuing discipleship to the 

        prophet.  Subsequent prophets commonly betray the influence of Isaiah.  

        In the little book of Micah, we sense in chapters 4, 5, 6, 7, a strong affi-

        nity with Isaiah and the circle of his disciples.   If this material fairly re-

        presents the prophetic mind of Micah, we should have to deduce a rela-

        tionship between Isaiah and Micah.   The affinity between the book of 

        Micah and the Isaiah circle is further marked by the presence of an ora-

        cle, the so-called “floating oracle,” common to both books (compare the  

        first part Micah 4 to the first part of Isaiah 2). 

                   Most likely there are two types of canonical prophecy: that which 

        is strongly influenced by established, written liturgy (e.g. Nahum, Habak-

        kuk, Joel, and the second part of Isaiah); and that which comes out of a 

        process of largely oral transmission.  Or the important distinction may be 

        chronological.  The role of oral transmission may have been more promi-

        nent in Amos or Isaiah because they were farther removed from the terri-

        ble events of the 500s B.C.  Whatever the circumstances of transmission 

        were, it is important to recognize the parallel development of written litur- 

        gy and oral transmission.  The prophet’s own words, whether passed on 

        in writing or orally was far more frequently communicated from tongue 

        to ear than from scroll to eye.  

                   6. Prophecy and God’s Effect on History: Pre-Monarchic Pro-

        phets—In distinguishing the prophecy before the rise and development of

        the classical prophecy of the 700s and that which follows, we assume a 

        core tradition of worshiping Yahweh from Moses to Malachi.   OT prophe-

        cy always presupposes Yahweh’s decisive effect upon history.  The classi-

        cal prophet was no doubt conscious of a core tradition that was long esta-

        blished.  

                   Here we shall define the essentially prophetic quality in the Israel

        before Amos by the standards of classical prophecy.   To do this, we are 

        dependent on what that past became after 700 B.C.   Down to the 700s, 

        the term “prophet” appears linked to the names of a considerable number 

        of persons:  Abraham, Aaron, Miriam, Deborah, and Moses.  Even though 

        the term was hardly then in use, these 5 are awarded the title. 

P-132

                   Any person who not only stands in awareness of Yahweh’s radically

        effective activity in history, but also understands themselves in an absolute-

        ly central role deserves the title of prophet.  Using the title for Aaron con-

        veys the definition of “prophet” as one who articulates the nature and me-

        aning of the divine activity from a remarkably intimate position.  “Aaron 

        shall speak for you [Moses] to the people; and he shall be a mouth for you

        and you shall be to him as God (Exodus 4).”  

                   Miriam is credited with two lines that convey the prophetic theology 

        of Exodus:  “Sing to the Lord, for he has triumphed gloriously; horse and 

        rider he has thrown into the sea.”   Tradition also names Deborah as a pro-

        phetess.  Miriam and Deborah both are represented in celebration of what 

        Yahweh is doing in concrete relationship to the historical existence of 

        Israel. 

                   In the case of Moses, the Yahwistic writer (J) does not anywhere ap-

        ply the term “prophet” to him.  The term “prophet” is not applied by J to 

        Moses because it was simply not used that way in J’s day.  The Elohwist 

        (E) does use it to express his fundamental conviction, namely that “Never

        since has there arisen a prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew 

        face to face.  He was unequaled for all the signs and wonders that the 

        Lord sent him to perform . . .”  The prophecy which Moses represents is 

        of a special sort; he's the performing prophet, actively intervening in events.

                   In the Deuteronomic (D) perspective Moses is the model, the ideal, 

        prophet.  “I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their bre-

        thren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all 

        that I command him.”  Both E and D are concerned with the critical inter-

        action of divine life with human history.  They both inform us about the 

        expectations for the prophet in the 700s and around 650 B.C., respective-

        ly.  The real issue is to comprehend the true nature and function of prophe-

        cy in ancient Israel.   The Moses of our biblical narrative is a Moses who 

        is the first of a line of prophets who in the present are continuing to bring 

        Israel up from Egypt into existence under God. 

                   The time span between the “present” of a particular biblical writer 

        and the past he writes about varies from the narrow gap between David’s 

        time and II Samuel 9-20, to the long time span between Moses and when 

        Deuteronomy was written.  The Moses event lives in faith, memorialized 

        and re-experienced in the cult.  As it was kept constantly present and “up-

        dated,” the “historical Moses” is forever beyond recovery. 

                   The general presumption for the Yahwist is that he is an individual

        who lived before the death of Solomon and, at the earliest in the final 

        years of David’s reign.   We picture a historian who expands his present 

        into a past which is constantly present in the existing ritual, and in rare, 

        involuntary bursts, into a future equally present but relatively impercepti-

        ble.  By proclaiming Yahweh’s critical interaction with history through 

        the prophet Moses in his present he becomes a prophet in his own right. 

                  The Yahwist is known to us as one who moves from the present to 

        the past and back again.  By and large he reproduces what has already 

        earlier been produced, and achieves by an inspired arrangement a theolo-

        gically unified “history.”   His place in the tradition of Israelite prophecy 

        is sure and even essential.  The Yahwist and Moses are both confronted 

        by the interaction of the divine life upon history which ruthlessly frus-

        trates any exclusive concentration upon the life of Israel.   While the cen- 

        tral thesis of the Yahwist’s work is Yahweh’s interaction upon Israel, it 

        also has to do with Yahweh’s involvement in the whole world. 

                   7. Prophecy and God’s Effect on History:  Loyalty to Yahweh

        The institution of prophecy as a group phenomenon in Israel apparently 

        has its origin immediately before and during the creation of monarchy. 

        1st, Prophets, beginning with Samuel had a radical and fierce loyalty to 

        Yahweh.  He may have been known as a prophet in his own time, but Sam-

        uel was never primarily identified with the early Israelite institution of 

        group prophecy.   There can be no doubt, of course, that Samuel was in 

        accord with the radical political implication of their fierce loyalty to 

        Yahweh. 

                   David brought the institution into the court, on how large a scale 

        we do not know.  The regularity of the designation “Nathan the prophet” 

        suggests an official title.  If Ahijah the Shilohite (I Kings 11, 14, 18) was

        called a prophet by his contemporaries, it was because of his status as a 

        professional, associated with the prophets of Shiloh.  In the case of Elijah, 

        the evidence is strongly against his having been in his own day commonly

        termed a prophet.  

P-133

                   Neither Ahijah or Elijah was closely identified with any form of 

        professional prophetic organization.   In I Kings 19, the narrator under-

        stands that Elijah assumes professional status when he is cast in 

        direct opposition to the group of Baal prophets.  The epoch which Elijah 

        shared with Ahab and Jezebel (875-850), had its prophets, adherents both

        of Baal and of Yahweh, in both sanctuary and at court. 

                   In the case of Micaiah (I Kings 22) and Elisha (II Kings 2-9; 13), 

        there is no reason to doubt that they were so designated by their contem-

        poraries, and were in prophetic associations:   Micaiah with Ahab’s offi-

        cial court prophets, and Elisha with the probably cult-related “sons of the

        prophets” at Bethel.   These “sons of the prophets” are in direct descent 

        from the “band of prophets” in the Saul narratives.  Samuel, Ahijah, and 

        Elijah were prophets, but they were not identified as such in their own 

        day.  Nathan, Micaiah, and Elisha on the other hand were known as pro- 

        phets in their own time.  

                   Amos in the 700s reflects the common definition of “prophet” as 

        denoting professional association, and the title at the time carried neither

        a good or bad connotation.  When asked to leave the northern kingdom 

        of Israel, Amos answered: “I am not a prophet, and I am not a son-of-a-

        prophet.  Amos denies that he represents any professional association of

        prophets.  

                   His action at Bethel is inspired out of personal confrontation with

        Yahweh, not in any group apprehension.  Evidently a change in the con-

        tent of the term “prophet” occurs with Amos, and men of prophetic tem-

        perament who preceded him.   With Amos in regard of earlier prophets, 

        the term and office of “prophet” was expanded to include him who with-

        out benefit of group stimulation heard the Word of Yahweh and had to 

        prophesy; those earlier prophets first came to be called prophets in Amos’

        time.                    If these remarkable prophetic figures from the 900s and 800s B.C.

        instruct us on the development of the term “prophet,” they also inform us 

        about the evolution of classical prophecy.  These prophets from Samuel to

        Elisha brilliantly testify to their passionate conviction that Yahweh’s exis-

        tence interacts with the political institution and with the king. 

                   8. Prophecy and God’s Effect on History: Word of Yahweh

        The 2nd consistently prophetic quality is their relationship and responsibi-

        lity to the Word of Yahweh.  The divine interaction with history is made 

        articulate and interpreted the same Word (“my word that goes out from my

        mouth shall not return to me empty, but shall accomplish that which I pur-

        pose” (Isaiah 55:11)).  At the same time one must insist that this definition 

        of the concept of the Word is possible only as the result of an extended pe-

        riod during which it was understood in this way.   There is no justifiable 

        reason for questioning the central function of the Word in the succession 

        of prophets beginning with Samuel and Nathan.  

                   Samuel appears in the narratives which bridge the epoch of the jud-

        ges and the time of the established monarchy.  He played the most instru-

        mental single role in the ascendancy and demise of Saul as first king in Is-

        rael; and Samuel bears responsibility for the inauguration of David and the

        Davidic dynasty.  Samuel and Moses are in a unique class as performers 

        on behalf of Yahweh.  One is instrumental in the creation of a people; the 

        other in the establishment of a political state.  

                   Samuel’s historical performance is also recorded for its effects in 

        the continuing present.  The earlier and later traditions are now combined, 

        giving us both an assessment of the present monarchy as in divine intent 

        beneficial, while at the same time seeing it as a negative divine judgment.  

        The tradition has created an image from a life model and interpreted it.  

                   There can be no doubt that Yahweh’s Word made Samuel what he 

        was, and that tradition’s interpretive artistry has at areas in the portrait coin-

        cided with what would be the photograph.   In I Samuel 15, the prophet re-

        lates directly to the king: “Because you have rejected the Lord’s word, God

        has rejected you from being king.”  This defines another decisive turning 

        point in history.  If we have doubts of the precise vocabulary, we do not 

        question the functioning of the Word in Samuel’s life and time. 

                   Nathan appears in Samuel and King in only 3 scenes, but each time

        in immediate relationship to King David.  1st, he responds to the King’s 

        desire to build an appropriate “house for the ark of God” (II Samuel 7).  

        2nd, he confronts David with the King’s heinous performance in the 

        Bathsheba affair (II Samuel 12).  3rd, Nathan appears in that crowded 

        scene of David’s last recorded official day, to play a decisive role in Solo-

        mon’s accession (I Kings 1).  The Word of Yahweh is prominently featured

        in the first 2 scenes, and conspicuous in its absence from the third scene.  

        The failure to affirm Solomon’s accession by the Word must constitute at 

        least an editorial indictment of Solomon and the conspiracy which made 

        him king. 

P-134

                   Still in the 900s, it is king and Word brought into radically effective

        concord through the prophetic function of Ahijah the Shilohite.  The seces-

        sion of the northern tribes to form the Kingdom of Israel is instigated by 

        the Word through the prophet Ahijah to the king-to-be, Jeroboam I.  The 

        imposition of Word upon king is sharply attested again in that brilliant 

        scene immediately preceding the death of Ahab. 

                   King and Word are brought into most moving conflict in the colli-

        sion of Ahab and Elijah in the second quarter of the 800s.  In Elijah for the

        first time we suspect a contemporaneous apprehension of the Word by a 

        prophet that is in substance the Word of classical prophecy.  Note first the

        relative frequency and consistency of the term “Word of Yahweh” in the 

        Elijah narratives, 8 times in I Kings 17-19, 21.  Note also that the Word 

        here conveys the sense of a formula, a known formula.  It creates and ter-

        minates the drought, a judgment up-on people as well as king.   And the 

        Word sends the prophet back from Horeb to minister again to the nation, in

        the good company of multitudes still faithful to Yahweh. 

                  Elijah alone of all prophets properly belongs both to the company of

        pre-classical prophets (e.g. Samuel, Elisha) and to classical prophets.  In 

        Elijah the Word has attained most of the prophetic definition and form.  

        Yahweh’s Word interacts now decisively with the history of Israel with 

        such force as implicitly to involve all history; the divine life confronts 

        history.  

                   To repudiate, control, and attempt to compromise with it is not mere 

        folly, but unqualified disaster.  In the passionate intensity of Elijah all men 

        and all history are implicitly embraced.  About a half-century later, another

        king-to-be, this time Jehu, is confronted by the Word.  Since Jehu did not 

        obey the Word, Elisha is possibly acting on his own in dispatching one of 

        the prophets to Jehu. 

                   9. Faith's Content in Classical Prophecy:  Israel's Present seen 

        in the Light of its Past—In that succession of prophets after Elijah there 

        is that which is distinctly new, history which emerged out of the actual 

        course of events, history which shifted in a way that could not have been 

        anticipated.  For the classical prophets, Israel’s historical existence is seen 

        not to be turning back again into that same essential abyss from which they

        began in Egypt.  

                   For Moses, Elijah and Elisha, Egypt lay only behind.   Now for that

        same prophetic intuition, it was both before and behind.  In Israel’s core of

        Yahweh loyalists, the present was appraised in terms of Yahweh’s partici-

        pation in Israel’s past, Yahweh’s interaction with the present.  But until the

        700s the future could be seen as in continuum with the present, expecting 

        more of the same.

                   But of the 3 promises to Abraham—nation, land, and universal bles-

        sing—the third proved to be the most difficult to sustain in faith.  The new,

        both of the external history and of the related internal prophetic mind of 

        classical prophecy, was initially produced simply by Assyria’s aggressive 

        ambition.  Tiglath-pileser III assumed Assyria’s throne in 745 B.C., as the 

        first of a series of great soldiers on the throne of Assyria.  By 721, when 

        the northern kingdom of Israel fell to Assyria, any hopes of political exis-

        tence independent of Assyria were pure fantasy; from 745-669, Assyria’s 

        position of world domination was beyond serious challenge. 

                   The succeeding reign of Ashurbanipal (669-632) was the begin-

        ning of the undoing of the Assyrian world rule.  Assyria succumbed to the

        Chaldeans, the Medes, and the Umman-manda.  The long death agony of 

        Assyria was finally ended in decisive battles of 612 and 610, but these 59

        years provided only a brief respite.   In regards to Judah, Assyria’s posi-

        tion in the world was simply taken over by the rising Neo-Babylonian 

        power.  The sentence of political death continued to be carried out in the 

        first two decades of the 50s by Nebuchadnezzar.  Israel, having gone from

        un-creation to creation, was now relegated again to the uncreated. 

                   Classical prophecy rises first in the consciousness that Israel now 

        stands between Egypts.  The present relatively ordered existence is the 

        creation of God out of former disorder and is to be understood and accep-

        ted as God’s creative gift in fulfillment of God’s free promise to the patri-

        archs.   The pre-classical prophet understands the past and present chiefly 

        in terms of Yahweh’s positive action on behalf of Israel.   The prophets 

        from Amos on are forced to reinterpret the meaning of the present in terms

        of an immediate future to be charged with tragedy—but a tragedy no less 

        the result of divine action than the redemption from Egypt. 

P-135

                   Yahweh, who redeemed the nation for his own purposes, will now 

        for the same essential purposes commit the nation to its pre-redeemed sta-

        tus.  “Why?” and “What next?” were the questions addressed by the clas-

        sical prophets, using the concepts of: Word and symbol; election and cove-

        nant; rebellion; judgment; compassion; redemption; and consummation. 

                   10. Content of Faith in Classical Prophecy:  Word and Vocation

        The concept underlying the use of the Word in the Elijah narratives sug-

        gests that by the 700s the prophetic understanding of the Word was ma-

        tured and substantially established.  In the classical prophets it appears in

        a new relationship with the prophet himself, his call and sense of vocatio-

        nal commitment.   The great classical prophets display a self-conscious-

        ness in vocation characterized by feelings of having been overpowered 

        by the Word of Yahweh. 

                   Yahweh’s Word works in essentially the same way in the remark-

        able call narratives of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel.  The sense of profes-

        sional bondage to the Word appears most eloquently in the “Confessions 

        of Jeremiah.”  The prophetic sense of the entity and power of the Word ex-

        plains in great part the concentrated emotional character of the prophets 

        and their sometimes deep anguish in proclaiming the negative message.   

        The prophetic anguish is the product of the prophets’ inevitable sense of 

        participation in and consequently responsibility for the negative Word.   If 

        this negative Word carries within itself a conditional destruction based on 

        the faithlessness of the covenant, this makes the prophetic call to repen-

        tance much more intense. 

                   The devices of symbolism employed by the prophet are simply gra-

        phic, pictorial extension of the Word, possessing both for the prophet and 

        for his observer-hearer a quality of realism probably unfathomable to the 

        Western mind; this word is initiated by God.  It breaks through human life,

         human time, and into human history.   It possesses and releases its own 

        power, with or without the consent and/ or approval of the human instru-

        ment proclaiming the Word.  

                   The symbolic act or performance of the prophet was regarded in 

        ancient Israel as an even more intense and effective phenomenon than the 

        spoken Word.  These sometimes strange and always dramatic actions are 

        never merely symbols.  The dramatized Word, even more than the uttered

        Word, deemed to be charged with the power of performance. 

                   We need to recall the normative sense of corporate personality 

        among the people of Israel.  In Word and symbol they become in a sense

        executioners acting at the command of Yahweh.  In the destructive Word 

        and symbol directed at the people they are themselves profoundly and rea-

        listically destroyed.  From this sense, none of the great classical prophets 

        is totally free.  

                   Amos and Ezekiel are commonly charged with the successful sup-

        pression of any instincts of compassion.  We recognize that the intensity 

        and frequency of his destructive symbolism must have made a self-in-

        duced and deliberate callousness imperative.   The prophetic understan-

        ding of the effective, dynamic Word and symbol may be and probably is 

        an item of survival out of primitive magic.   But the prophet is over-

        whelmed by the sense of Yahweh’s coerciveness and the prophetic sym- 

        bol, so far from aiming at control of the deity, is inspired by the Word of

        Yahweh. 

                   11. Content of Faith in Classical Prophecy:  Covenant and 

        Rebellion—The notion of Israel as a chosen people elected by Yahweh 

        for special reasons and for a particular purpose is by no means peculiar 

        to the classical prophets.  In fact, the actual term of covenant, berith, ap-

        pears rarely if at all in the classical, pre-exilic prophets.  It may be that 

        the word “covenant” was deliberately avoided by the great prophets be-

        cause of its widespread popular misunderstanding of covenant as the 

        basis for a narrow, prideful, exclusive nationalism.  But election with re-

        ference to Israel is perpetuated and realized in covenant, and covenant is

        in the Old Testament (OT) the working contract between unequal parties. 

                   This condition of having been chosen is, of course, given expres-

        sion in the Prophets in a variety of analogies.   In classical prophecy the 

        interpretation of Israel’s existence is everywhere dependent upon the con-

        cept of election/covenant.  The meaning of Israel’s historical life is pro-

        claimed upon what is deemed to be this absolutely fundamental reality.  

                   The sense of the prophetic ethic and morality is always something

        like this: You shall refrain from this practice, or you shall do thus-and-so.

        The motivation of the prophetic ethic is election.   The nature of the ethic

        is determined by the covenant.   As the prophet addresses himself to his 

        own generation, he indicts on behalf of the Deity, proclaims God’s nega-

        tive response and anguish, and effects its resolution with the declaration 

        of the love of God for Israel. 

P-136

                   It is important to observe that the prophetic castigation embraces, 

        if sometimes incidentally, not simply Israelite people, but all people.   In 

        the prophetic faith, all people and nations are in rebellion against God, 

        denying the appropriate terms of human existence under the rule of the 

        actively righteous Yahweh.  Israel stands immovable as the very hub of 

        human existence, the precise nucleus of the vast area of God’s concern.  

        She is the elected of God, the covenanter with God.  Prophecy as a whole

        can't mean to exclude non-Israelite from the same essential relationships. 

                   But the prophet does assume a different quality in the God-Israel 

        relationship.  There is an intensity and intimacy uniquely present.  Israel’s

        rebellion is conditioned by the quality of her relationship with God and is

        in consequence the more heinous.   Her rebellion against Yahweh is fla-

        grantly displayed in her whole life.  Extended and bitter indictments make

        it clear that no distinction existed for the prophet between the rebellious-

        ness in the social-economic-political sphere on the one hand and cultic-re-

        ligious-theological deviation on the other.   The totality of Israel’s rebelli-

        ousness is the shocking betrayal of Israel’s pride and arrogance.  Israel’s 

        rebelliousness is infidelity; her infidelity, pride.  Israel’s unholy pride is 

        fully shared by all people. 

                   12. Content of Faith in Classical Prophecy:  Judgment, and 

        Compassion—In Hebrew “to judge,” sephat conveys considerably more

        than corresponding English terms.   The act of judging is one in which 

        wrong is righted by punishment, restitution, or both.  The prophets from 

        800 to 500 are all predominantly oriented in catastrophe, either the nor-

        thern kingdom’s fall in 722 or the surviving southern state’s end in 587.  

        For them this is divine judgment, the creation and establishment of justice,

        the rebalancing of the scales between Yahweh and Israel.  If this is a re-

        turn to a formless, meaningless existence, it nevertheless rights the wrong

        and provides for a resumption of the relationship between Yahweh and 

        Israel which existed after the first Egypt. 

                   The prophets, from Amos and Isaiah before the catastrophes to the

        later Isaiahs and other prophets after the final catastrophe, proclaim the 

        judgment with staggering power and stunning language.  The judgment’s 

        character is conditioned by the form of Israel’s rebellion; it rectifies the 

        nation’s willful and arrogant rejection of Yahweh.  For all their own invect-

        ive, the prophets’ proclamation is misunderstood if it is interpreted as an 

        arbitrary or vindictive action of Yahweh; it is judgment, the setting right of

        the woefully wrong.  

                   One may strongly doubt that any classical prophets pronounced a 

        divine verdict of unconditioned doom.  Obviously, much more originated 

        with an Amos than what is brought down to us as prophetic utterance under

        his name.   Even in what we have, there is reflected the prophet’s compas-

        sion, that the very catastrophe which Yahweh visits upon his people is itself

        an expression of his love and faithfulness, meant to bring about a reconcili-

        ation with prideful, rebellious Israel.

                   The mood and language, the faith, hope, and love of the classical 

        prophets as a whole, testify in eloquent passion that rebellion and judg-

        ment call forth compassion and redemption.  Khesed is subject to several 

        different English translations: kindness, mercy, meaning well towards 

        someone.   Its fundamental root sense conveys the quality of sustaining 

        strength.  Khesed is the strength of faithfulness which constitutes the rela-

        tionship’s very life.  

                   In the prophetic use of the term, khesed quite escapes the confines 

        of covenant; covenant becomes something much more than that covenant

        which it was in its inception.  Khesed becomes operative in this covenant

        to such a transforming degree that covenant-with-khesed now becomes 

        khesed-with covenant.   The same essential expansion of khesed beyond 

        the limits of covenant is to be seen also in the second part of Isaiah, Jere-

        miah, and Hosea.

                   The character of Yahweh’s compassion is the khesed character—

        the steady, enduring strength of fidelity, devotion, and commitment 

        which partakes of grace precisely because it is more than the convention 

        of covenant can appropriately command; it is greater than the relation-

        ship which first produced it.  Or as Jeremiah 31:3 puts it: I have loved 

        you with an everlasting love; therefore I have continued my faithfulness 

        to you.  

P-137

                  13. Content of Faith in Classical Prophecy:  Redemption and 

        Consummation—We have been speaking of prophecy, a movement spec-

        tacularly witnessed in concentrated power from 800-500 but actually in 

        development since Israel’s birth.  This prophecy found its very being in 

        Yahweh’s Word, and it could comprehend Israel’s arrogant and tragic pos-

        turing.  This prophecy was unshakable in its faith in khesed.   Prophecy 

        thus reveals the fullness of its faith; but it also betrays the depth of its 

        unfaith, since prophets are unable to envisage any establishment of divine

        sovereignty apart from historical Israel.  Faith is the victor over unfaith 

        even in this regard, since it is through and still within the prophetic move- 

        ment that Israel is seen as expendable. 

                   Prophecy, which exploded into vocal, self-conscious maturity in the 

        historical era “between Egypts,” added a 3^rd and 4^th part to the older two-

        part theme: Out-of-Egypt, Into-this-Land, Back-to-Egypt, and Redemption.

        If Isaiah’s 1^st part shows conviction of his people’s destruction, he was also

        and at once persuaded of God’s compassionate purpose in judgment.  If 

        judgment is wrath, it wrath-with-purpose and not vengeance. 

                   We need to understand that the prophetic declaration of a surviving 

        remnant beyond the coming catastrophe is positive in its import. It is all the

        more positive when we recall Israel’s habitual identification of one and 

        many, her sense of total participation as a people in that which was actually

        experienced by individuals within her number.  The understanding of histo-

        rical judgment as positive appeared in Amos, but it is most warmly expoun-

        ded in Hosea.  

                  Jeremiah 31: 33-34 presents the most well-known description of the

        aftermath of judgment:  “I will put my law within them, and I will write it on

        their hearts; and I will be their God and they shall be my people.  No longer

        shall they teach one another . . . for they shall all know me, from the least 

        of them to the greatest, says the Lord; for I will forgive their iniquity, and 

        remember their sins no more.” 

                   In Ezekiel that redemption purposed in the very judgment is given 

        vivid expression in the description of the prophet’s vision of the valley of 

        death:  “Thus says the Lord God to these bones:   I will cause breath to en-

        ter you, and you shall live . . . and you shall know that I am the Lord.” 

        (Ezekiel 37: 5).   We need not wonder that prophetic utterance seldom pre-

        sents the single, unmitigated word of doom.  The very positive ending of 

        Amos may not be true to that particular prophet, but it is certainly true to 

        the structure of prophecy. 

                   So it is, on the very eve of Israel’s second historical redemption, 

        that Isaiah’s 2nd part shows the belief that the second exodus signals the 

        fulfillment of the Word of Yahweh.  It speaks words moving and profound 

        in consolation, but words which are just barely validated in the actual his-

        tory of Israel’s second redemption: 

                   Awake, awake, put on strength, O arm of the Lord! Awake, as in 

            days of old, the generations of long ago! . . .Was it not you who dried

            up the sea . . . who made the sea's depths a way for the redeemed

            to cross over?  So the ransomed of the Lord shall return, and come 

            to Zion with singing . . . and sorrow and sighing shall flee away.  

            (Isaiah 51: 9, 10, 11) 

                   Faith in such a measure of passion and proclaimed in such rapture 

        cannot of course, finally be contained in any concept merely of Israel’s 

        historical redemption.  Prophecy produces a theology out of meditation, 

        and if that theology soars out of the plane of ordinary history, it is always

        brought back again sharply to the realities of a historical existence.  It is 

        the tension between the alternating experiences of flight and the grim 

        march which produces a prophetic view of a new age. 

                   From any point of view other than faith, prophetic affirmations poin-

        ting to a history radically transformed are simply unbelievable.  But if Isra-

        elite prophecy is not logical, it is still reasonable; it adheres to its own 

        “logic.”  If life appears hard, it remains a God-given, God-ruled existence.

        The totality of existence is Yahweh’s and Yahweh is “gracious and merciful,

        slow to anger, and abounding in khesed.”  Yahweh has spoken a promise, 

        and Yahweh’s word cannot but accomplish that purpose to which Yahweh 

        sends it. 

P-138

                  Prophecy as a movement was compelled to abandon any and all no-

        tions of divine purpose fulfilled in terms limited to Israel.   The idea of a co-

        ming Day of the Lord as somehow Israel’s day of justification was violent-

        ly exploded.   Within the movement of prophecy it becomes that Day when

        Yahweh “will become king over all the earth.”   The structure of faith as 

        seen even by the prophets themselves was hardly without its contradic-

        tions, but faith in a final consummation or completion of God’s promise, is 

        still eloquently put forth. 

PROPHET IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.  Long before the time of Jesus, pro-

        phecy had ceased to appear in Israel.   The Jews, however, fully expected 

        its revival in the coming age of the Messiah.   In the centuries right before 

        Jesus, John Hyrcanus and others claimed that they were prophets.  Among

        the pious Jews who nurtured hopes of prophetic renewal, are to be inclu-

        ded the Essenes. 

                   The contemporary Christian church’s cult is that of ancient Israel. 

        Any latter-day “prophet” might cry out “Thus says the Lord, ‘I hate, I repu-

        diate your feasts,’ ” in referring to Easter and Christmas.  But it is perfectly 

        clear that the preservation of Christian faith requires the cultic enactment 

        of birth, death, and resurrection.   Jesus declares that “all the law and the 

        prophets” depend upon God’s love and love of neighbor.   In reality he rea-

        ches back to Elijah, in whom in biblical record these 2 propositions find ex-

        pression in a single life. 

                   It is with prophetic renewal in mind that the references to prophecy 

        in the infancy narratives of Luke 1-2 must be interpreted.  It was the prea-

        ching of John the Baptist that excited the Jews with an awareness of the 

        return of authentic prophecy; Jesus himself paid tribute to John as a pro-

        phet.   Similarly Jesus was acclaimed as a prophet both by the nature of 

        his preaching and teaching and by the miracles that he performed.  The 

        Gospel of John employs the title of Jesus as “the prophet” virtually as a

        synonym for “messiah.”  The messianic interpretation of Deuteronomy 

        18: 15, 18 seems to have been original to the church. 

                   From its inception, prophesying was a characteristic mark of primi-

        tive Christianity.  The gift of prophecy was not, however, a possession of 

        all Christians.  The author of Acts mentions a few: Agabus (chs. 11, 21); 

        Judas (ch. 15); Silas (ch. 15); 4 daughters of Philip (ch. 21); some of the 

        Antioch church leaders (ch.13).  Acts’ author seems to have been mainly 

        interested in the predictive features of the prophets’ activities, and the out-

        ward manifestations of their behavior.   For Paul, prophecy was one of 

        God’s greatest gifts to his church for edification.  Paul understands intelli-

        gible preaching that builds up the church in faith.  The entire book of reve-

        lation is a classic example of Christian prophecy, the proclamation of a 

        man “in the Spirit.” 

                   Prophecy continued to exert a potent influence in the church 

        throughout the post-apostolic period.  At Rome, a prophet named Hermas

        imparted persuasively his visions that taught a second repentance after 

        baptism (See Hermas, Shepherd of, in the Old Testament Apocrypha/Influ-

        ences Outside the Bible section of the Appendix).   Ignatius has left us an 

        example of his own Spirit-inspired utterance about the ministry in his Let-

        ter to the Philadelphians; the church of Smyrna described Polycarp, as an 

        “apostolic and prophetic teacher.”  Nevertheless, the ministry of prophet 

        exhibited a noticeable decline in effectiveness in the post-apostolic age.  

        Warnings against false prophets occur in the Synoptic traditions of Jesus’ 

        teaching. 

                   The Didache, a document from the early years of the 100s A.D. on 

        church discipline, discusses at some length the problem of false prophets, 

        and provides simple tests for true prophets.   The “new prophecy” of the 

        Montanist movement of the latter half of the 100s did much to discredit 

        the ministry of prophets, not only because of exaggerated claims but be-

        cause it was not amenable to the discipline of the church’s hierarchy. 

PROPHETESS  (נביאה (neh be yaw); profhtiV (pro feh tees), a divinely

        gifted female teacher)  A female interpreter speaking for the deity.  In the 

        Old Testament the term is applied to:   Miriam, the sister of Moses (Exo-

        dus 15); Deborah (Judges 4); Huldah (II Kings 22); Noadiah (Nehemiah 

        6); and Isaiah’s wife (Isaiah 8). 

PROPITIATION (חלה (khee law), to weaken, soften down; the word “propitia-

        tion” does not occur in any of the English versions, but the idea is ex-

        pressed by the Hebrew word.  ilasmoV (il as mos), expiation, making 

        amends) A means of placating or pacifying displeasure due to an offense;

        an atoning action toward God.  The idea of propitiation is not prominent 

        in the Old Testament (OT).  The word as a religious term expresses pagan 

        conceptions of influencing and appeasing the Deity and is inappropriate to

        Israel’s religion.  The verb khelah, when used of human relationships has 

        the sense of entreating a favor rather than appeasing anger. 

P-139

                   Some have regarded Hebrew Scripture as essentially a gift by 

        which the wrath of God is appeased.   The only clear instance of such a 

        propitiatory conception of sacrifice is Mesha’s offering of his son to Che-

        mosh.  In Israel the burnt offering is probably an expression of devotion to

        God.  In general, at least, OT sacrifices did not seek favorable treatment 

        from God (propitiation) but sought atonement (expiation).  This is in line 

        with the prophetic teaching that God’s favor cannot be bought. 

                 Nowhere in the New Testament does the idea of propitiation occur.  

        Therefore, the use of the word “propitiation” in the King James Version is 

        erroneous and misleading.  The more accurate term is “expiation.” 

PROSELYTE  (גר (geer), sojourner; proshlutoV (pro seh lih tos))  

        The original meaning of the Hebrew ger designated a person associated 

        with a community not his own, one who, through some misfortune, has 

        had to leave his home and take refuge with a foreign people.   In the Mish-

        na, ger designates a convert of Judaism. 

                   List of Topics—1. Ger:  Original Sense and Greek   

       Translation;       2. Evolution of Term;     3. Isaiah, Ezekiel 

       and the Attitude Towards Ger (Proselytes);     4. Successes 

       of Jewish Proselytizing;     5. Decline of Jewish Proselytizing; 

       6. Rabbinic Attitudes Toward Proselytes;     7. Conclusion

                   1. Ger:  Original Sense and Greek Translation—The term in the 

        Old Testament (OT) designates an alien or immigrant in the process of be-

        coming assimilated.  A displaced person with kin to defend him might gain

        protection by attaching himself as a client to a chieftain or a clan.  The 

        practice harkens backs to nomadic life and its code of hospitality.   The 

        honor of the chieftain and the clan was the only sanction to this obligation.

        Violation of the duty of hospitality was a heinous crime.   Permanent sanc-

        tuary might be had, granted by one member of the clan, and it obligated 

        the entire clan. 

                   Such an agreement might be confirmed by a covenant oath at the 

        shrine of a god.  The God in whose name the oath was taken became the 

        patron and protector of the client who, although he might not relinquish 

        his old religion, still had to acknowledge some degree of allegiance to the 

        protecting deity.  Foreigners who lived among the Israelites were anxious 

        to learn the law of the god of the land.  Since political and religious rights 

        were inseparable, the client couldn't be admitted to full rights in the host’s

        tribe apart from participation in the cult.  Thus the immigrant would tend 

        to become an adherent of his patron’s cult. 

                   A fugitive who found asylum at a shrine would naturally take the 

        god of the sanctuary as his patron deity.  The Gibeonites lived among the 

        Israelites as “hewers of wood and drawers of water . . . for the altar of the 

        Lord.”  The Levites who assisted but were not allowed to enter the sanctu-

        ary and look upon the holy things were a displaced group who managed to

        achieve and retain status and security as menials in the cult service. 

                   Besides the relatively small number of immigrants who found a 

        lowly place in the service of the cult, there were numerous other non-Isra-

        elites in the land.  Solomon took a census of all the aliens and he found 

        their number to be 153,600; more than half of them did periodic forced la-

        bor in the corvee.   The remainder were Canaanites, second-class citizens

        who occupied a position between the freeborn Israelite and the slave. 

                   The ger is often mentioned along with the poor, widows, and or-

        phans.  His usual livelihood was as a worker for wages.  Israel is enjoined 

        to remember that they were once sojourners in Egypt and ought to treat 

        the sojourner as an equal and love as themselves.   The foreigner was ap-

        parently regarded as a transient, while the ger was accepted as a semi-

        permanent or permanent resident.   The word proselytos is used in the Pri-

        mary Greek OT as the translation of the Hebrew ger. 

                   2. Evolution of Term—The change of meaning which the terms ger

        underwent reflects the missionary spirit which developed in Judaism in 

        the post-exilic period.   From the latter part of the 700s B.C. onward, in-

        creasing numbers of Israelites came to live outside the borders of Pale-

        stine.  The Dispersion occurred not only through exile and deportation, 

        but also by the trade and commerce which Solomon initiated.  In the 400s

        there was a colony of Jewish military mercenaries at Elephantine in Egypt. 

P-140

                   The Jews took with them into foreign lands their monotheistic faith;

        there it became a doctrine of the universal brotherhood of man.  The author

        of Isaiah’s second part stressed the idea that Israel’s mission was to bring 

        other peoples to worship the true God.   There is no indication that Israel 

        will effect mass conversions on her own.  Solomon’s prayer of dedication 

        beseeches the Lord to hear the foreigner’s prayer (I Kings 8).  The story of

        Naaman the Syrian (II Kings 5) presents an story of partial conversion of a

        non-resident foreigner.   Naaman’s experience was a step toward the 

        achievement affirmed in the last book of the prophetic canon:  “My name

        is great among the nations, and in every place incense is offered to my 

        name.”  (Malachi 1) 

                   There is a lot of evidence that in the post-exilic period many foreig-

        ners were attracted to the Jewish religion.  Marriage with foreigners hap-

        pened so often that it alarmed the leaders of the restored community and 

        they tried to undo what they considered a great evil and treason to their 

        God.  Elements of nationalism and racism were mixed with religious con-

        cerns; not everyone agreed with the reformers.   The book of Ruth is gene-

        rally regarded as a protest against the above-mentioned attitude found in 

        Ezra.   A Moabite woman’s assumption of full religious obligations in Isra-

        el mocks the discrimination that would exclude her kind to the tenth gene-

        ration.  Jonah’s parable also mocks this attitude and is a sort of manifesto 

        of Judaism’s foreign mission.  

                  3. Isaiah, Ezekiel and the Attitude Towards Ger (Proselytes)—In 

        Isaiah 56, the foreigners “who have joined themselves to the Lord” are as-

        sured that the Lord will not separate them from the Lord’s people.   They 

        have the assurance that all those who keep the sabbath and hold fast to 

        the Lord’s covenant will have a place in the Lord’s worship on the Lord’s 

        holy mountain; the eunuch is promised a memorial better than the children 

        they can't have.   

                   The defense of the foreign worshiper seems likely to have been 

        called forth by attacks on them brought on by the words of Ezra and Nehe-

        miah.  While nothing is said here of circumcision, foreigners who hold 

        fast the covenant may not have been circumcised.   Comparing the passa-

        ges in Isaiah 56 and Ezekiel 44 reflects the conflicting attitudes toward the

        foreigner, 

                   Since the 500s B.C., there has been no period when most of the 

        Jewish people were concentrated in Palestine.   When the remnant inclu-

        ding Jeremiah fled to Egypt, they could have easily begun the exchange 

        of ideas between Jews and Greeks which led to the developments in Alex-

        andria, where Alexander established a Jewish colony.   The natural pro-

        cess of cultural syncretism had its effects on the uprooted Jew.   The con-

        flict of the Ptolemies and the Seleucids caused more Jews to seek asylum

        in less turbulent places.   Onias, the Jewish high priest took refuge in 

        Egypt and there built a temple in the Delta district of Heliopolis.   Like the

        older colony at Elephantine, this Jewish community influenced the Egyp-

        tians and in turn was influenced by them. 

                   In the book of Esther, we meet for the first time a specific term for 

        conversion.  After Mordecai obtained a royal decree allowing the Jews to 

        avenge themselves on their enemies, many of the people of the land “be-

        came Jews.”  The rabbis understood the “Esther proselyte” and the “lion 

        proselyte” as false converts.   The use of a special term for real or preten-

        ded conversion is an indication that the practice was common enough to 

        need a term to describe it.  The mere profession of Judaism would not be 

        considered conversion.  The term used to designate the new adherents is 

        the same applied to the foreigners who join themselves to the Lord, ex-

        cept that in Esther it is the Jewish people to whom they adhere.   

                   The impact of Greeks on Jews was much greater than Judaism’s 

        impact on the Greek.  Jews were drawn into the mainstream of paganism

        and let their ancestral religion lapse.   Tiberius Alexander, a nephew of 

        Philo, forsook his ancestral religion.   From 46-48 A.D. he slaughtered 

        50,000 Jews.  He later took part in the destruction of Judea and Jerusalem

        as a general of the Roman army.  Researches of Jewish use of pagan sym-

        bolism show that the degree of syncretism was much greater than previ-

        ously thought.  

                   (See also the entry in the Old Testament Apocrypha/Influences Out-

        side the Bible section of the Appendix) 

                   4. Successes of Jewish Proselytizing—Women appear to have 

        predominated among the converts and near-converts, and some of them 

        were noblewomen.  One such woman was defrauded by 4 unscrupulous 

        Jews, and that resulted in the Jews being banished from Rome in 19 A.D.

        The size of the Roman Jewish community at that time may be judged by

        the fact that 4,000 Jews were deported to Sardinia.  In 31 A.D., Sejanus 

        was removed from office, and the Jews returned to Rome. 

 P-141

                   The Emperor Claudius began his reign (41 A.D.) with an edict of 

        toleration for the Jews.   Titus Flavius Coemens and his wife, Flavia Domi-

        tilla, cousins of emperors Titus and Domitian, embraced Judaism.  The spe-

        cial susceptibility of women to Jewish proselytizing, was doubtless due in 

        large part to the fact that circumcision was not required of women.   The 

        conversion of the royal family of Adiabene shows the vitality of Babylo-

        nian Judaism.  The king, Izates, had great difficulty deciding whether to be

        circumcised, but finally submitted to the rite. 

                   For every pagan who became a true convert to Judaism there were 

        many more who accepted the theological and ethical teaching of Judaism. 

        Though there were Jews who were inclined to waive circumcision, the ma-

        jority remained firm on this point.  Thus many remained on the outside as 

        only partial converts, who were referred to as oi phoboumenoi/ sebomenoi 

        ton Theon (those who fear with reverence/ worshipers of God).   

                   It comes from the Hebrew expression yire’ay yahweh [“adonai” spo-

        ken in place of “Yahweh”].   Some have taken the expression in certain 

        passages of the Psalms to refer to converts or near-converts.   The pro-

        blem is whether “those that fear the Lord” are a separate category from the 

        priests, Levites, and lay Israelites, or whether the term is simply a collec-

        tive designation for pious Israelites in general. 

                   Some scholars have understood the terms “God-fearers” and “pro-

        selyte” as synonymous.  The term oi phoboumenoi/ sebomenoi ton Theon 

        does not designate a proselyte in the sense of a true convert.  Paul went to

        the house of Titius Justus who is called a sebomenoi ton Theon, although 

        he was uncircumcised.   According to the strict view, one who rejected a 

        single word of the law was not to be admitted as a proselyte.

                   The centurion of Capernaum who loved the Jewish nation and built

        the local synagogue is not termed a God-fearer, though he certainly must 

        have been in this category.  Jesus’ statement that he hadn't found so great

        a faith even in Israel shows that the centurion was not a true proselyte, for

        the full convert was a part of Israel.  The many devout Greeks whom Paul 

        persuaded in the synagogues at Thessalonica and Athens were called 

        “those that fear /worship God.”  They were drawing near to Judaism, but 

        they were not full Jews.   Most continued in a state between pagans and 

        Jews, chiefly because of the requirement of circumcision.  

                   5. Decline of Jewish Proselytizing—The Christian congregation 

        at Jerusalem inclined to the traditional treatment of the uncircumcised.  

        Some of the pagan practices most offensive to Jews were prohibited.   The

        proper Jew could not associate with even the best of God-fearing Gentiles

        as shown by the story of Cornelius.

                   The Holy Spirit poured out on the Gentiles convinced the circum-

        cised with Peter at Caesarea that they couldn't denying baptism and equa-

        lity to Gentiles so possessed.  Peter went back and forth on circumcision, 

        or even allowing the uncircumcised as part of the congregation.  

                   Paul was vexed with the issue of circumcision throughout his mini-

        stry, but his clearest and best answer is In Galatians 5, that “in Christ 

        Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but only 

        faith working through love.” 

                   Opposition to proselytizing is probably to be attributed to the inten-

        sified anti-foreign feelings generated during the rebellions against Rome.  

        Even in ordinary times, there must have been a fairly high rate of defection

        among converts and near converts.  It was a cause of complaint that prose-

        lytes were often improperly schooled in the intricacies of the ceremonial 

        laws.  Proselytes were blamed for delaying the advent of the Messiah be-

        cause of their sexual improprieties.  Proselytes came to be regarded as a 

        disease, a scab on the body politic.  

                   After the second ill-starred revolt, when many proselytes became 

        turncoats, Judaism’s missionary ardor was considerably weakened.  An ab-

        solute ban on circumcision was relaxed for Jews, but conversion to Juda-

        ism was forbidden under Domitian, Hadrian, Antonius Pius, and Septimus 

        Severus. 

                   Though the Jew was doubly disqualified by circumcision and inabi-

        lity to participate in the state cult, Judaism was recognized as a legal cult.  

        Christians blamed Jews as instigators of Roman persecutions.  The conflict

        with Rome and competition with its offspring Christianity proved too 

        much for Judaism.  Jews increasingly withdrew into segregated communi-

        ties.  Beyond the Roman Empire’s reaches, Jewish proselytism retained 

        some of its vigor and succeeded in converting some Arab tribes near Me-

        dina, and a tribe in the Crimea. 

P-142

                   6. Rabbinic Attitudes Toward Proselytes—Among the rabbis 

        there were conflicting attitudes toward proselytes.   Hillel, the outstanding

        liberal of his day, was especially eager to receive proselytes and made the

        requirements easy for them, while his stricter colleague, Shammai, subjec-

        ted the candidate to a triple induction:  circumcision; immersion; and 

        sacrifice. 

                   It has been argued that there was no proselyte baptism before the 

        temple’s destruction, but there is agreement among most scholars that it 

        was a part of the proselytes’ reception from the beginning.  The baptism 

        was appropriate, for it symbolized a status change.   Many of the prose-

        lytes displayed the usual zeal of the convert and even outdid their mentors.

        The Pharisaic zeal for proselytizing was accompanied by rigid segregation

        of the ritually impure.  Some of Israel’s eminent scholars were said to be 

        proselytes, or proselytes’ descendants. 

                   On the issue of circumcision for the convert, the rabbinic authorities

        were not of one mind.  The conservatives considered circumcision the 

        main act of conversion, while there were several liberal sayings that basi-

        cally said “He who rejects idolatry acknowledges the whole Law.”  In gene-

        ral however, the rabbis of the 100s and 200s A.D. had a rather unsympa-

        thetic attitude toward the half convert.  

                   7. Conclusion— The convert, then as now, was often in an awk-

        ward position, subject to ambivalent and contradictory attitudes.   Jews, 

        both in Palestine and in the Diaspora expected the convert to embrace 

        their religion, and also to promote the cause of Jewish nationalism.   

        True religion was inextricably bound up with the ideal of the chosen peo-  

        ple.   A priest could not marry a proselyte, but he could marry the daugh-

        ter of a proselyte.  The children of proselytes became full Jews by marri-

        age with a Jew.  

                 Judaism’s propaganda assault on polytheism and idolatry and its pro-

        selytizing activities prepared the way for the phenomenal successes of 

        Christianity.  When Paul nullified the ritual laws and made baptism suffi-

        cient, God-seekers and God-fearers welcomed the new faith. Christianity, 

        in proclaiming a universal faith, fulfilled the purpose for which God had 

        scattered Israel among the nations.

PROSTITUTION (זונה (tso naw), harlot; קדשה (keh day shaw), religious prosti-

        tute; נתינים (neh tie neem), devoted temple servants; pornh (por neh), 

        whore)  A term which signifies sexual intercourse from which ensues no 

        binding or enduring relationship, and indicating the practices and activities

        which involve intercourse with prostitutes; it may be either mercenary or 

        religious.  The context in which these words appear in the sources indicate

        whether such a person is a common harlot or a sacred prostitute. 

                   The common harlot, whose body was for hire, appeared at an early 

        period in Israel’s life.   Her social function was well established and gene-

        rally recognized, and she was evidently accepted as a part of the commu-

        nity, without objection or condemnation.  The subsequent anger of Judah, 

        her father-in-law, was not her prostitution, but because she had caused him

        to commit incest unknowingly.  Other passages (e.g. Genesis 34; Amos 7; 

        and Matthew 21) suggest a different attitude toward harlotry.   Both grain 

        and wine are offered in payment for a harlot’s services; they may not be 

        used to pay vows in the temple.  

                    The ancient sources are contradictory as to the distinguishing 

        marks of a harlot.  Some say she is veiled, some say unveiled.  Jeremiah 

        declared that Israel has a harlot’s brow, which opens the possibility that the

        harlot had a special mark on her brow, or a special hair arrangement.   The

        common harlot might function as an innkeeper.  She might use persuasive

        language, describing her couch.   

                   Since her skill may have included singing, men were advised not to 

        associate with women singers.  While harlotry of the secular type was at 

        times unrebuked, at others times it came under severe condemnation or 

        strict control by law.  In Deuteronomy 22, if a girl has been found to be 

        guilty of harlotry she is to be stoned to death.  The practice of cult prostitu-

        tion was far more serious in the view of biblical writers than common 

        harlotry. 

                   The prostitute who was an official in ancient Palestine’s cult exer-

        cised an important function.  Projecting their understanding of their own 

        sexual activities the worshipers of these deities engaged in sexual inter-

        course with devotees of the shrine.  Only by sexual relations among the 

        deities could a person’s desire for increase in herd, fields, and family, be 

        realized.   

P-143

                   The tsona as a prostitute common to baalism may be distinguished 

        from qadesh, which possibly derives from non-Palestinian cults.   The Baal

        cults competed with Yahweh the God of Israel and, in some cases, may 

        have produced hybrid Yahweh-Baal cults.  It has been conjectured that cult

        children were the “orphans” for whom special concern is manifested.  The 

        Israelites engaged in sexual intercourse so frequently that the prophet 

        Hosea opposed it by marrying one of its prostitutes. 

                   The word for “male prostitute,” qadesh, appears in a passage that 

        describes the building of high places, pillars and Asherim.   Apart from allu-

        sions, the Bible tells us nothing about their function.   It is clear that they 

        served the sanctuary’s needs.  Deuteronomy’s law prohibits practicing cult 

        prostitution in reaction to the Canaanite and Babylonian fertility cult.  

                   The sparse data regarding cult prostitution’s practices is in contrast 

        to the great amount of material denouncing it.   Israel’s sense of election 

        caused a revulsion against the agricultural, pastoral nature cults encoun-

        tered in Palestine.   In II Kings 23, the temple was purged of the “vessels 

        made for Baal, Asherah, and all the host of heaven.”   The prophets angrily 

        accuse the people of behaving like harlots, and then describe the harsh 

        punishment that will follow.  Prophets condemn them for cultic wailing. 

                   The Bible’s attack which uses the language of harlotry is strongly 

        directed toward that inner harlotry of the spirit of Israel, which amounts to 

        a rejection of her Redeemer and the Lord.  Under the control of this spirit 

        land is filled with evildoers.  Babylon is called the mother of harlots, who 

        will be made naked and desolate, and then burned with fire (Revelation 

        17).  Babylon probably represents Rome in these verses. 

PROTO-LUKE.  A hypothetical source of the Gospel of Luke. 

PROVENDER (מספוא (mih seh po), fodder)  Grains and grasses used for fee-

        ding domestic animals.   Typical fodder was chopped straw and chaff, 

        grasses such as sorghum, and grains such as barley and millet. 

PROVERB (משל (maw shawl), parable; parabolh (par ab oh leh), compa-

        rison, parable) A saying, usually giving brief, but sometimes extended, co-

        lorful expression to commonly observed facts or bits of homely wisdom.  

        They appear in the book of Proverbs, elsewhere in the Bible, but especially

        in the wisdom literature of the Apocrypha.  The Hebrew and Greek terms 

        designate longer compositions, as well as pithy sayings. 

                   The biblical data presents the proverb in both simple and more com-

        plex forms.  The art forms had probably developed already in pre-biblical 

        times.  There are several biblical examples of popular proverbs.   The 

        phrase “Like mother, like daughter,” from Ezekiel is a proverb.  This and 

        “The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on 

        edge” were ready at hand for quotation when circumstances warranted. 

                  The circumstances surrounding the origin of a proverb are hazy; cer-

        tain biblical narratives owe their existence to someone’s guess at the 

        source of a current proverb.   The 1st time we see the question, “Is Saul 

        also among the prophets? (I Samuel 10),” the question is called a proverb.

        The 2nd time we see this question it is introduced by the words “Hence it 

        is said.”  It is hard to say how many more proverbs are quoted in biblical 

        literature.  Many sayings were adopted for their present context out of a 

        fund of folk wisdom, because of their familiarity.   In form these “primi-

        tive” proverbs are characterized by an economy of words. 

                 Biblical proverbs are poetic in form.  Production of proverbs of this 

        more artistic form was a conscious literary activity of the sages in wisdom

        circles.  Proverbs are not limited to the single balanced line; longer occur 

        as well.  A popular, more extended art form is the “numbers” proverb. 

                   Another form, the discourse or exposition includes such things as a

        warning against the “loose woman” (Proverbs 7), Wisdom’s invitation 

        (Proverbs 8), and the acrostic poem in praise of the “good wife” (Proverbs

        31).  Related in content to discourses in Proverbs are those so termed in 

        Job 27 and 29, and in the didactic Psalms 49 and 78.  Ezekiel’s meshalim 

        are allegories; the balanced-line proverb is often a simile or comparison.  

        Among Solomon’s accomplishments may be the art of composing the 

        Fable. 

P-144

                   The term mashal has another special meaning as the equivalent of

        the English “byword” (e.g. You shall become an object of horror, a pro-

        verb, and a byword among all the peoples where the Lord will lead you.—

        Deuteronomy 28).  Just as persons may become “proverbial” as eminently 

        blessed, even so calamity can make such a horrible example of persons 

        that to be likened to them is to be called accursed indeed.  To be a mashal

        of this sort is to be the proverbial object of scorn or derision.   Related is 

        its use to designate a song of derision (e.g. “. . . you will take up this taunt

        [mashal] against the king of Babylon. . .” Isaiah 14).  So lively in biblical 

        society was the belief in the effective power of the word that the taunt 

        song was in and of itself a weapon. 

                 The proverb is not one form but several; what is commonly meant is

        a single short saying.  With the passing of the generations the race accu-

        mulates a certain amount of experience, some of which is found in small 

        packages known as proverbs.  Apparently intelligence was not only neces-

        sary for the coining of proverbs, but also for understanding them.  Occasio-

        nally reference is made to a proverbial figure out of the past or to a time-

        less phenomenon of common experience.  Then as now, one could reward 

        or damn with a slogan, but the ancient tradition attached an almost magi-

        cal power to the effects of such slogans. 

PROVERBS, BOOK OF.  The 20^th book of the Old Testament (OT) canon ac-

        cording to the order adopted by the New Revised Standard Version 

        (NRSV); it is one of the books of wisdom literature.  Attributed to King So-

        lomon, it was compiled and composed during the 400s and 300s by mas-

        ters in academies for young men of the “better” families; it contains much 

        of worldly wisdom.  

                  Proverbs is a store of human experience condensed into adages and

        ancient wisdom.  Like a modern book, it has a title page complete with title

        and author’s name and “degrees,” as well as a subtitle that is both a state-

        ment of purpose and advertisement, and takes up five lines; it begins with: 

        “That men may know wisdom.” 

                   The book of Proverbs is included among the Kethubhim (Writings).

        In rabbinic tradition it follows Psalms and Job.  The King James Version-

        NRSV order may be a presumed chronological arrangement.  It belongs to 

        the general class of Wisdom literature, which it shares with Job and Eccle-

        siastes.  The wisdom literature served an educational purpose. 

                   Classical Hebrew is the original language of Proverbs.  The Greek 

        version differs considerably, with omissions, additions, variants, and a dif-

        ferent order among the parts.  The differences testify that the text of Pro-

        verbs was still somewhat fluid when this translation was made.  According

        to the Mishna, Proverbs’ place in the OT was still a subject of controversy

        at the end of the first Christian century.  Though the “Solomonic” books 

        were suspect, it may well have been their attribution to Solomon that 

        helped.

                   Contents, Parts, Literary Forms, and Influences—Even a curso-

        ry reading suggests that the book is composite—not the product of a single

        author; several of the different parts, have their own titles (e.g. “The pro-

        verbs of Solomon,” “The words of Agur son of Jakeh of Massa”).  Other 

        internal evidence supports the evidence of the headings.  The presence of 

        a variety of literary forms adds to the impression that the book is compo-

        site.   Also, sayings are repeated both within the single parts and from part

        to part.

                   The evidence permits the conclusion that the book is a compilation 

        of originally independent collections of maxims, observations, and dis-

        courses.  The following larger literary units may be distinguished: 

            I.  Title page with advertisement and motto (first 7 verses)

            II.  Discourses and cautions I (through chapter 9)

            III.  “Proverbs of Solomon I” (10- first part of 22)

            IV.  “Sayings of the wise I (second half of 22-first half of 23)

            V.    Discourses and cautions II (second half of 23 to first half of 24)

            VI.   “Sayings of the wise” II (second half of 24)

            VII.  “Proverbs of Solomon II (25-29)

            VIII.  “The words of Agur” (30)

            IX.   “The words of Lemuel” (first third of 31)

            X.   “The good wife (last two-thirds of 31) 

                   In the 2 parts of the “Proverbs of Solomon”, the proverb is a single

        balanced line, each proverb a unit in itself, wholly independent of its neigh-

        bors.  The one-line proverb exhibits parallelism—its halves are balanced 

        in antithesis or synonymity.  In chapters 10-15; 28-29, the antithetic form 

        heavily predominates.  Approximately half the proverbs in chapters 25-26 

        are graphic similes.  These one-line proverbs are probably not primitive 

        folk sayings, but rather maxims phrased with conscious art from originally

        simpler popular proverbs.  The units which make up IV, V, and VI are often

        couplets, and somewhat longer units.  In I and II the discourse is the rule.  

        The number proverb occurs in 6. 

P-145

                   The evidence of foreign literary influence on parts of Proverbs lends

        further support to this view.  Part IV depends upon the “30 chapters” of the 

        Egyptian Amen-em-opet.  There is no topical arrangement in either compo-

        sition.  The contacts are too close and too many to be coincidence.  Once it

        is observed that Amen-em-opet set forth his instructions in “30 chapters,” it

        became apparent that in the Hebrew version it says: “Have I not written for

        you 30 sayings . . .?”  The contacts with the late Syriac and the older, frag-

        mentary Aramaic texts are less obvious.  Israel was no cultural island, and 

        the book of Proverbs did not grow in a vacuum. 

                   Authorship, Purpose, Date, and Value of the Book—We should 

        not take seriously the tradition that Solomon wrote the Proverbs.   Attribu-

        ting it to him is the result of a convention by which famous men were ho-

        nored in Israel.  This convention was observed particularly in the late pre-

        Christian centuries.  The canonical Proverbs of Solomon need have no 

        more claim to genuine Solomonic authorship than the apocryphal Wisdom

        of Solomon.  

                   Giving Solomon credit for writing Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Song

        of Songs [Solomon], and the Wisdom of Solomon, was done to build up 

        the glory of Solomon.  Solomon may have been the author of some of the 

        proverbs.  At the very least, he cultivated the proverbial art and was re-

        sponsible for the kernel of the book ascribed to.  Professional “wise men,” 

        teachers in schools for young gentlemen, are a much more likely source 

        for such a book than any busy monarch.  

                   The purpose the book was designed to serve reveals the nature of

        its authors.  Proverbs was designed as a school book for instructing young

        men only.  Furthermore, Proverbs addresses itself only to the upper-class 

        young males.  Only sons of gentry could afford to pursue either the follies

        or virtues cited in Proverbs, or even find the time to attend such a school.

        The background and philosophy of the book are decidedly upper-class. 

                   The father and occasionally the mother seem to offer parental coun-

        sel.  “Dame Wisdom” and the schoolmaster serve figuratively as parents.  

        It is safe to assume the existence of academies where the sons of patrici-

        ans studied the ways of success; Proverbs could have served as its text.   

        The wise men of the academies probably shaped it and formed it for their 

        purpose. 

                   If the book is composite, the question of date is 3-fold: How old are

        the oldest materials?  What was the period of the schoolmen’s activity? 

        When did someone put the parts together?   The Canaanite and the “30 

        chapters of the Egyptian Amen-em-opet may be from 1000-2000 B.C.  

        The “Solomonic” parts may come from the 900s B.C.  The editor here 

        reveals his belief that he has before him something with a long tradition.  

                   The date of the later stages, when in fact the book was taking 

        shape, will then be the time when the wise men taught in Israel.   Al-

        though wise men were known in Israel since the judges, it appears to be 

        only in the postexilic period that they functioned as teachers in academies

        for youths.  As to when the process of collecting, copying, adapting, and 

        expanding the earlier material began, parts IV and VI may offer a clue.  

                   The editor identified certain collections with Solomon and others 

        with foreigners.  Parts IV and VI on the other hand, were “sayings of the 

        wise,” perhaps men like himself, who were creating new wisdom litera-

        ture while they were collecting and editing the old.  The place of Proverbs

        within the wisdom literature, would suggest the 400s or 300s B.C.   One 

        may suspect further that the last stage in the growth of the book created 

        the “title page.”  Proverbs was certainly complete with title page before 

        190 B.C.  

                   The book of Proverbs isn't the highest height to which in the Bible

        the human spirit soars; it is neither profound nor dramatic; it is a manual 

        of prudence, a guide to right living.  Proverbs says almost nothing about 

        worship, and does not mention Israel’s past or its popular heroes.  Unlike 

        the books of the prophets, Proverbs has nothing to say of the nation’s fate,

        catastrophe, or destined glory.  Prudent and moral behavior is the concern 

        of Proverbs; it is a “how-to” book.  The book of Proverbs is a moral book 

        and a fund of human wisdom.  It relates sensible living inextricably with 

        walking humbly.  The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. 

PROVIDENCE (pronoia (pro noy ah), forethought) The Greek word occurs

        twice in the New Testament, where God is spoken of as “taking thought” 

        for great and small alike.  “The divine providence” was a common enough 

        substitute for “God” in Greek writings.   But whereas in the non-Jewish 

        writers it tended to be cosmic and impersonal, for the Hebrew thinker it 

        needed to be closely associated with the plan and election of a personal 

        God.  Use of it by pagan philosophers may be part of the reason it was not

        used much in the Bible. 

P-146

PROVINCE (מדינה (meh dee naw), jurisdiction, region; eparceiai (eh par

        khie ah ee), jurisdiction) An  administrative term originally designating a 

        sphere of action or duty exercised by an appointed magistrate over a con-

        quered territory.  In the Old Testament, medinah was used for the divisions

        of Israel under governors during the time of Ahab.   Administrative divi-

        sions of the Roman Empire were termed eparcheiai.   In the Republic the 

        overseas provinces were assigned by lot to magistrates who would be sub-

        missive to the Senate while they administered the military and civil affairs

        of a region. 

                   In 27 B.C., Augustus assigned certain provinces to the Senate, and 

        reserved for direct imperial control others which were more difficult to 

        manage.  In the senatorial provinces ex-consuls or ex-praetors held office 

        normally for only a year as proconsul.   These governors had small gar-

        risons of auxiliaries for maintaining and preserving order:  legions were 

        stationed only in the imperial provinces.  In both types of province, finan-

        cial administration was delegated to equestrian procurators. 

                   In provinces like Syria, which were supervised by the emperor, go-

        vernors were chosen from among those who had once held consular or 

        praetorian office.  They differed from those serving in senatorial provinces

        in the military authority and the indefinite term of office they enjoyed.   A 

        special form of provincial administration was demanded by those districts 

        of rugged terrain or of an undeveloped culture.   Judea, Palestine, and 

        Egypt furnish examples of this third type of imperial province, governed 

        by an imperial procurator.  Under a special commission, the Syrian legate 

        Vitellius intervened in Judea to depose Pontius Pilate in 36 A.D.  

                   The following provinces, listed in order of admission to the Empire,

        are of special interest to students of the New Testament:  

                Senatorial provinces:  Macedonia (146 B.C.); Achaea (146 B.C.); 

            Asia (133); Crete and Cyrenaica (74); Bithynia (74, with Pontus added

            in 64); Cyprus (22) 

                Imperial provinces:  Pamphylia (101 B.C.); Cilcia (67); Syria (64); 

            Egypt (31); Galatia (25); Judea (6 A.D.); Cappadocia (17); Lycia and 

            Pamphylia combined (43).

PRUNING HOOK (מזמרה (mah tseh mah raw)) A blade attached to a handle,

        used for removing twigs.  The 2 familiar references to beating spears into

        pruning hooks (Is. 2:4; Mic. 4:3), and the less familiar reference recom-

        mending the opposite (Joel 3:10), might indicate a long handle and so sug-

        gest trellising.  An iron head made like a heavy sickle and to be attached to

        a handle was found at Tell Jemmeh and dated by the excavator around 800

        B.C.  To reforge a spear point into a pruning knife is plausible and techno-

        logically possible.  

PSALMS, BOOK OF (תהלים (teh hee leem), praise, glory) The first book of 

        the third group of books, the Writings,” in the Masoretic Text.   It is be-

        lieved to the most important book among the Writings. 

                   List of Topics—1. Origins and Divisions;     2. Poetic

       Forms:  Verse and Strophes;     3. Poetic Forms:  Northern

       Israelite Poems and Royal Psalms;     4. Poetic Forms: 

       Hymns and Enthronement Psalms;      5. Poetic Forms:

       Thanksgiving Songs and Laments;     6. Poetic Forms:

       Pedagogic Types;     7. Psalms’ Religion and Piety:  Yahweh’s

       Deeds;     8. The Psalms’ Religion and Piety:  Yahweh’s

       Commandments

                   1. Origins and Divisions—Probably the first Christian congrega- 

        tions sang hymns from the Psalter in their public services, most likely in 

        Greek.  This practice follows the example given by the services in the Je-

        rusalem temple, where the Levite sang every week.  The use of at least 

        some psalms in the temple service already in the 300s B.C. is attested by 

        I Chron. 16.   The temple’s tradition was probably followed by the 

        synagogues. 

                   The heading before the start of 73 psalms contain David’s name in

        the form ledavid (“from or concerning David”).  The main difficulty con-

        sists in the fact that even the Greek translators of the 100s B.C. did not 

        understand this or other terms appearing before the Psalms.   Much clea-

        rer are some allusions to certain events in David’s life.  Some of them fol-

        low a tradition which is not preserved in the Old Testament (OT). 

                   The headings referring to Asaph, and to Heman and Ethan, reflect

        the intention to connect the Levitical guilds, whose heads they should 

        have been, with the time of David.   Psalms 72 and 127 are associated 

        with Solomon; Psalms 39, 62, and 77 are connected with the name of 

        Jeduthun with a choir of his time.  The heading of Psalm 90 refers even 

        to Moses, and those of Psalms 42, 44-49, 84-85, and 87-88 to a choir in- 

        stituted by Levi’s legendary grandson Korah.   The historical value of 

        these headings is contested by the majority of modern scholars, who be- 

        lieve that they reflect musical life in the 300s B.C. 

                   The book of Psalms as we have it contains 150 units in the He-

        brew and primary Greek OT, but the material is divided up differently 

        (e.g. The Masoretic or Hebrew Psalms 114-115 become 113 in the Greek

        OT; the 2 halves of 116 and 147 become 114-115 and 146-147, respec-

        tively in the Greek.) 

                   These 150 psalms are divided into 5 books by doxologies:  1-41; 

        42-72; 73-89; 90-106; 107-50.  The 1st collection, except for 1 and 2 

        are bound together by ladavid and by “Yahweh” being used for “God.”  

        Ps. 42-72 prefers to use “Elohim” for God.  Ps. 42, 43, and 71 are songs 

        of a man persecuted by his enemies and may have been together at one 

        time; as they are placed now, they form the framework for this collection. 

                   The 3rd collection is in its main part Elohistic too.  It contains the

        Asaph collection (73-83), four Korah psalms (84, 85, 87, 88), and one 

        David psalm (86).  The division between the 4th and 5th collections is 

        purely artificial; the 4th includes hymn-like canticles, the 5th includes

        Hallel and songs of ascent (some Davidic), and both of them include 

        Davidic and Hallelujah psalms. 

                   These 2 are clearly not the work of a single redactor but result from

        a slow growing together of smaller collections with single songs.  It may 

        be that an older book of Psalms contained 3-110, with Psalm 2 as a later 

        addition describing the actions of the “kings of the earth,” and addressed 

        in part to them, while 110 describes the consequences of their actions.  

        Psalm 1 forms an even later Introit to the whole collection.  

P-147

                   Determining the age of these smaller collections depends upon 

        interpretation, especially of the songs mentioning the king.  The fact that 

        the primary Greek OT has the same order and number of psalms shows 

        that the collection was finished between the division of the early OT into 

        5 books (i.e. before the Samaritan schism in the 300s B.C.) and the Greek

        translation, (i.e. no later than 200 B.C.).   The dating of the collection of 

        course has no effect on having a much earlier dating of its smaller units.  

        In liturgical texts there is a double tendency:  on the one side to preserve 

        or reuse archaic expressions, and on the other to use modern language. 

                   The artificial uniformity which exists throughout the whole OT 

        makes it impossible to discern by their language the ancient songs from 

        the latest texts.   This uniformity is also a very serious obstacle to all me-

        trical researches.  The history of the psalm in Israel has to be written by 

        interior criteria and by comparison with the religious poetry in the sur-

        rounding countries and not on the basis of linguistic arguments.  Compa-

        rison with texts outside of Psalms and outside of Israel shows that the 

        main types of psalms are pre-exilic, and that even the younger poems con-

        tained in it are much older than the hymns from Qumran. 

                   The Hebrew text of the Psalms has many corruptions and altera-

        tions, with the alterations most likely having theological reasons.  In spite 

        of such indisputable alterations, and the possibility of errors on occasion 

        of the transcription, the uncertainties that result rarely affect the religious 

        sense.  There must have been in the temple and later in the synagogue a 

        strong tradition which preserved the text from greater mistakes. 

                   2. Poetic Forms:  Verse and Strophes—The smallest unit of He-

        brew poetry is the line divided into 2 half lines.  The poetic form of paral-

        lelism that uses these half-lines belongs more to lyricism than to appeal, to

        descriptions rather than to commandment.   It allows the painting of a situa-

        tion, but retards the flow of an action.  The strophes or stanzas are formed 

        by 3 or 5 half-lines, all but one of which are parallels. 

            Synonymous parallelism is found    Antithetic parallelism is found 

                       in Psalm 19 (below);                         in Psalm 20 (below):

            The heavens are telling of the glory     Some take pride in chariots, 

                of God;                                                 and some  in horses

            and the firmament proclaims his          but our pride is in the name of 

                handiwork.                                            the Lord our God.

            Day to day pours forth speech,            They will collapse and fall, but

                and night to night declares                   we shall rise and stand 

                knowledge.                                           upright.

        Incomplete parallelism is found later in Psalm 19, with the first line remai-

        ning outside the parallel: 

                In the heavens he has set a tent for the sun,

            which comes out like a bridegroom from his wedding canopy,

            and like a strong man runs its course with joy.

                   Even these simplest forms have behind them a history in the old 

        oriental literature long before the OT. These smallest units do not stay un-

        related side by side; they start to become combined into stanzas; some 

        psalms are in an acrostic arrangement.  The stanzas so formed contain 

        from 2 to 8 lines, all lines within the stanza starting with the same letter 

        or each first line beginning with the next letter of the alphabet.  

                   There is no certain leading strophic principle in the book of Psalms.

        Even where a psalm is clearly divided by a refrain, the stanzas are some-

        times not completely regular in the Hebrew text.  The regularity of the 

        stanzas isn't a ruling principle in the text as we have it, and we don't know

        if it ever was.   It may be that in the service of the temple the music done 

        by the instruments secured the regularity of the stanzas by interludes. 

                   The same care has to be observed in all questions of meter.  The 

        1/2 lines generally have the same number of words.  In other cases the 

        second half line is shorter than the first.  There is no unanimity among 

        scholars about the metrical system transforming words into metrical beats,

        because we know so little about Hebrew grammar and pronunciation in 

        older times.   The system of the Hebrew text we use today is an artificial 

        one coming from the 900s A.D.  For this reason changes in the Hebrew 

        text on account of the meter are tolerable only in some exceptional cases. 

                   3. Poetic Forms:  Northern Israelite Poems and Royal Psalms

        Northern Israelite poems are psalms that belong to the Northern Kingdom.

        The marriage of a king with a princess from Tyre in Psalm 45 could only 

        have been Ahab to Jezebel.   Only northern figures are mentioned in 

        Psalm 77 and 81 (Jacob and Joseph); Psalm 80 (northern tribes, the Assy-

        rian invasion in 734); and Psalm 133 (northern mountains).  Northern Isra-

        elite poetry is also attested by its influence on the book of Hosea.  

P-148

                   Northern Israelite songs are a very valuable help for the dating of 

        psalms in general, for they let us see forms living in the 700s B.C.  Unfor-

        tunately, only a small fraction of the psalms we have are from the northern

        kingdom, partly because the southern kingdom of Judah lasted a century 

        and a half longer than that of Israel, and partly because Jerusalem was a 

        kind of common shrine for the tribes united in Yahweh’s covenant. 

                   The Jerusalem sanctuary, being the royal shrine from the beginning

        of its Israelite history, is the place in which the royal psalms (2, 18, 20, 21,

        72, 101, 110, 132, and 144) were sung.   Royal psalms are prayers of the 

        king assuring that he observes the ordinances of his God.  They are pra-

        yers for the king asking that Yahweh may hear his voice, accept his offe-

        ring, and let his reign be a period of peace, well-being, and justice for the 

        poor.  They praise Yahweh for what he has done and will do for the king.

        The royal psalms give good oracles to the king.  The great political crisis 

        during which this special psalm is written will be finished soon, because 

        Yahweh adopted the king on the day of his enthronement. 

                   These hopes and traits are the root of the later, “messianic” expecta-

        tions, the desire for the coming of the great king at the end days.   This

        transformation of the hopes confessed in the royal psalms makes explic-

        able the astonishing fact that they survived the catastrophe of the Judean 

        monarchy in 587.  These and other psalms were reintroduced into the tem-

        ple service after 516.   

                   What is promised at the end of the royal psalm 20 is the content of 

        the hymns celebrating Yahweh’s overwhelming greatness and power.  The 

        introduction to these psalms admonishes their audiences to sing his glory 

        by using a Hebrew imperative: 

                  Praise the Lord!

                      Praise the name of the Lord; give praise, 

                  O servants of the Lord;

                      you that stand in the house of the Lord,

                      in the courts of the house of our God.

                  Praise the Lord, for the Lord is good;

                      sing to his name, for he is gracious.   (Psalm 135:1-3)

        The end of the hymn returns sometimes to the forms of the introduction:

                  O house of Israel, bless the Lord! 

                  O house of Aaron, bless the Lord!

                  O house of Levi, bless the Lord!

                  You that fear the Lord, bless the Lord!

                      Blessed be the Lord from Zion, he who resides in Jerusalem.

                      Praise the Lord!   (Psalm 135: 19-21) 

                   4. Poetic Forms:  Hymns and Enthronement Psalms—Israelite  

        music was, as we know from Assyrian sources, famous throughout the old

        oriental world.  The age of the hymn as a cultic form is attested by the fact

        that it is used in a purely literary manner in the northern psalm 29.   Ano-

        ther literary use of the hymn form is to be found when the poet addresses 

        his own soul (Psalms 103, 104, 146).  We do not know when this develop-

        ment of the form took place, but seems that we have before us a late 

        development. 

                 The introduction of the hymn is generally followed by the “body” of

        the hymn.   Sometimes the body is distributed between two choirs.   Yah-

        weh is the great god who is king forever above all other gods.   The cele-

        bration of the overwhelming strength of a god shown by the Creation is a

        theme frequently used in foreign psalms.   The creator is greater than all 

        other gods, and they have to adore him who would be able to destroy what

        he has made.  A specifically Israelite theme is that Yahweh is primarily the

        God of history, and that history not only attests his power but even more 

        his “justice.” 

                   The enthronement psalms celebrate Yahweh’s kingdom using the 

        perfect and imperfect tenses.  Does this mean that the future event is in 

        some sense already done, or does it mean that in the moment in which 

        they are sung, Yahweh becomes king?  Every civil new year is virtually 

        the day of the new creation.   The god who became king by this deed 

        ascends again to the throne when he enters in great procession into his 

        sanctuary.  

                   Opposite to this interpretation, more recent research tries to show

        that there was in pre-exilic times in Jerusalem a feast in which David’s 

        election as king was celebrated, but that Yahweh’s proclamation to be 

        king is younger.   Neither Ezra nor Nehemiah as the Persian king’s servi-

        tors, show faith in Yahweh’s kingdom present in their time.  It is likely 

        that in pre-exilic times Yahweh was greeted on New Year’s Day as king.  

P-149

                   Neither Marduk nor Assur, but Yahweh, became king and is now 

        king and will be king when all other powers vanish.  It may be that after 

        the Babylonian model the creation myth was celebrated in the cult not 

        only by songs but also by dramatic performances.   It may be that after 

        the Babylonian model the creation myth was celebrated in the cult not 

        only by songs but also by dramatic performances.  The hymns celebrate 

        the God who is present in the midst of the congregation.  The apocryphal

        writings show that the great god is praised when the high priest came 

        down from the altar to bless the congregation. 

                   5. Poetic Forms:  Thanksgiving Songs and Laments—The over-

        whelming influence of the hymns upon thanksgiving songs is to be seen 

        in the imperative in the beginning of them.  The body of these psalms 

        contains the narrative of a deed of God in the recent past of Israel or in 

        the private life of the singer: 

                Bless our God, O peoples, let the sound of God’s praise be heard,

            who has kept us among the living, and has not let our feet slip.

                Come and hear, all you who fear God, and I will tell you what 

            God has done for me.    I cried aloud to God, and God was extolled

            with my tongue.

                If I had cherished iniquity in my heart, the Lord would not have 

            listened. But truly God has listened; he has given heed to the words

            of my prayer.  (Psalm 66: 8-9; 16-19)  

                   Much more developed than national thanksgivings is the thanksgi- 

        ving song by the individual.  There is no thanksgiving without praising 

        God for what God did and without confessing in public God’s greatness  

        or uniqueness.  And there is no such confession or such praise without 

        the element of personal experience. 

                   (See also the entry in the OT  Apocrypha / Influences Outside the 

        Bible section of the Appendix) 

                   In the lament of both the people and the individual, it is of the first 

        importance to say exactly who is the god whom they implore; so they start

        with Yahweh’s name.  This majestic God is not to be addressed without 

        preparation by fasting and sacrifice.   But sacrifice and recitation of sta-

        tutes is meaningless without obedience to them, glorification of Yahweh, 

        and the teaching of sinners.  The prophetic faith’s influence is clearly to be

        seen in this attitude.  But it is astonishing to see that later psalms of this 

        type do not mention sacrifices.  It is likely that the destructions mentioned 

        in them may be associated with the catastrophe of Jerusalem 485 B.C. 

                   For these psalms sacrifices are no more the indispensable condition

        for a lament which Yahweh will listen to, nor is the temple the only place 

        in which they may be prayed.  They are not confined to the one who is in 

        trouble, but they may pray for a friend who is ill.  Their aim is, of course, 

        liberation from the cruelties of this life, from persecution by enemies, but 

        never salvation after death.   The poets of the laments know that death 

        means separation from the god of life; after death there is no more any 

        possibility to praise him. 

                 This fact is the strongest argument to convince Yahweh of the neces-

        sity to help now and quickly; otherwise God’s pride will be violated when

        the question “Where is their God?” is asked.  It belongs to the style of the 

        laments not only to describe the actual need as terrible as possible in order

        to enhance God’s pity, but also to commemorate before him the iniquity 

        and the wickedness of the enemies.  It is Yahweh’s own “profit” to help, 

        and the pious will be satisfied if only Yahweh will give a favorable oracle.

        For in contrast to Christian liturgies in which the word of forgiveness is as

        sure as the prayer’s “Amen,” neither the priest nor the congregation in an-

        cient times knew what would be the answer given by an inspired word. 

                   The language and the imagery of psalms like Psalms 21 and 72,

        their promises of everlasting life and world dominion, is that of the old 

        oriental kingship ideology which arose in the great empires. 

                [The king] asked you for life; you gave it to him—length of days  

            forever and ever. . . Your hand will find out all your enemies;

                Your right hand will find out those who hate you.

                You will make them like a fiery furnace when you appear

                The Lord will swallow them up in the Lord’s wrath,

            and fire will consume them.   (Psalm 21: 4; 8-9)

                May [the king] have dominion from sea to sea,

            and from the River to the ends of the earth.

                May his foes bow down before him,

            and his enemies lick the dust.  (Psalm 72: 8-9)

P-150

        They remember the oath Yahweh has sworn to David.  It was sworn with-

        out any condition to the anointed.  And the best the enemies can do is to 

        renounce their plan to burst Israel’s bonds asunder and to cast their cords 

        from them. 

                 In the laments of the layman, the poet may be guilty of having acted

        against the commandments of his god.   The wrath of his God is then right 

        and just.   But in other cases he may be accused and persecuted by his 

        enemies without cause. Then Yahweh is obliged by his justice to demon-

        strate his innocence by helping him.  What then is the matter with this jus-

        tice in the cases in which the poet feels himself, in all sincerity, to be not 

        guilty?   The appeal in this case is the greatest contrast against the confes-

        sion of sins.  

                   Both confessions are of innocence and of sins, some of which may 

        be hidden.  There is in the laments no mention of other gods who may 

        have more power than Yahweh, but it may be that the enemies possess 

        magic qualities which cause the unlucky situation of the poet.  During the 

        history of Israelite psalmody the Israelite faith in Yahweh the mighty God 

        overcame the fear of such formulas and doings. 

                   6. Poetic Forms: Pedagogic Types—The psalms which try to influ-

        ence God have a teaching value or even an intention of trying to influence

        people, using their ancestors as a negative example.   The liturgies which 

        list the qualification of those allowed to enter the sanctuary regulate the 

        daily life of the congregation’s members. 

                   In the context or at the end of the lamentation, the blessing for the 

        faithful and the curses against their enemies depict the person who acts 

        according to Yahweh’s will and stimulate the listeners to act as Yahweh de-

        mands.   Such blessings are given outside these special liturgies in the 

        form of religious admonitions at the beginning or end of a psalm.  They are

        influenced by the wisdom literature and its teachings.

                   Several psalms give wise sayings in alphabetical order, with every 

        line (Psalms 25, 34, 111, 112, 145), every other verse (Psalm 9 and 10 to-

        gether, with verses altered or missing in the middle, Psalm 37) starting with

        a consecutive letter of the alphabet, or as in the case of Psalm 119 and its 

        22 stanzas, every line of a stanza begins with the same letter, and each 

        stanza begins with a consecutive letter of the alphabet.  

                   As in the wisdom literature, some humorous formulations are used 

        in the pedagogic psalms.  The wicked are depicted as ridiculous beings at 

        whom the Lord laughs, and who will destroy and negate themselves. On 

        the other hand, the love of the godly for their God is highly prized by God.  

               How they are destroyed in a moment, swept away utterly by terrors.

               They are like a dream when one awakens; on awaking you despise 

            their phantoms (Psalm  73:19-20)

                   It must be said that such humorous pictures are much rarer in the 

        Psalms than in Proverbs, because a part of these teaching psalms partici-

        pates in the great crisis of the Hebrew wisdom.  Life does not follow the

        prescription set forth by the teaching of Yahweh’s just retribution.   The 

        faithful console themselves by the belief in God’s reasons for leading 

        them through calamities to a better insight into their own sinfulness.  

        Even the hope of being received into glory afterward wouldn't be strong

        enough to overwhelm the crisis if there were not the personal experience 

        of being held here and now by God’s hand. 

                   7. Psalms’ Religion and Piety:  Yahweh’s Deeds—Faith in the 

        greatness and the uniqueness of Yahweh found its adequate expression in

        hymns celebrating his adoration.   It is necessary to deal with some spe-

        cial problems given by the description of Yahweh’s deeds. 

                 Yahweh’s deeds are believed to be Yahweh’s actions in the history 

        of Israel—e.g. the promises given to Abraham; the liberation from Egypt;

        the entrance into Canaan; the Davidic kingdom (Taken together they 

        have been called the “history of salvation.”).   The cultic confessions 

        which remember them, and which are repeated whenever the son asks his

        father about the reason of some rites, stand at the root of the great narra-

        tive sources within the Pentateuch or first 5 books of the Old Testament 

        (OT). 

                  It is not easy to say whether one of the biblical sources or all of the

        Pentateuch was used in the Psalms, or if there have been independent tra-

        ditions and creeds underlying its confessions.  The Psalms differ from the

        Pentateuch in their description of the miracles in Egypt and the wilder-

        ness, and in the weight given to single personalities in the Pentateuch and

        in our Psalms. 

P-151

                 Abraham is mentioned in only two psalms, but Jacob is used as the 

        name of the whole people in more than 11 Northern and Judean Psalms.  

        Isaac is mentioned only in Psalm 105, Moses is mentioned in only 5 

        psalms, and Aaron is mentioned in only 6.  Psalm 106 is related, together

        with the wisdom Psalm 78 to Nehemiah 9.  Both examples combine the 

        creation of the world with the election of Abraham.   The complete ab-

        sence of Noah, Joshua, any of the judges (except Samuel), Elijah, or Eli-

        sha seem to indicate that there was an older cultic pattern of the historical

        tradition demonstrated in the Psalms, which was superseded by the Penta-

        teuch only in exilic times, when the cult and its living traditions were 

        interrupted.  

                   By his deeds in Israel’s history Yahweh has demonstrated himself 

        as the mighty God who is worthy to be the Most High or El Shaddai.  The

        difference between this God and the El of Ugarit, is the fact that the Most 

        High does not grow older and weaker; El Shaddai’s force isn't in El Shad-

        dai’s sexual life, but in the Most High’s overwhelming “political” and 

        “military” power assuring El Shaddai’s victory over all enemies. 

                   With the increasing power of Israel’s enemies, Yahweh’s own 

        power had to expand to embrace the universal outlook necessitated by the

        wars against the worldwide Assyrian Empire.  Also, history and nature are

        not to be separated; the lord of both has to be the same.  But the majority 

        of the texts preserved in the Psalter as we have it show clearly how diffi-

        cult it was for Israel to gain and retain such faith.  Her history was mainly

        the history of disasters and great needs.  It seems to a rule in history, 

        which was proved to be true in Israel too, that wars between brethren are 

        the most cruel and bloody of all. 

                   The lack of prayers against Judah or Ephraim shows that the faith 

        in Yahweh as the God of an indivisible Israel was stronger and more alive

        than any narrow tribal loyalty.  There were Judean prophetic utterances 

        against the northern kingdom and hymns celebrating victories, but they 

        were left beside by the congregation of the second temple when they 

        formed the Psalter.  The sin of the northern sanctuaries of Bethel and Dan

        —the golden calf—is confessed as a sin of the nation in its totality.  

                   The temple’s destruction and all the other calamities combined 

        with it are in sharp contrast with the former actions of God’s power.  The

        former proofs of the strength of Yahweh’s hand were so great that there 

        should be no doubt:   If Yahweh was willing to help, Yahweh could save 

        Yahweh’s people.   In this light, the question ceases to be a question of 

        might and becomes one of morals.  The only question would be if it was 

        wise for God to act so severely, for it would be the god’s honor to be im-

        mutable in steadfast love, not to permit anger to overwhelm love.  The 

        tension between a holiness of “justice” or a holiness of “grace,” is aggra- 

        vated by Israel’s faith in the covenant.  

                   When the people were confronted by God’s promise of steadfast 

        love (Psalm 89) and immense suffering, without any sense of sinfulness, 

        doubts arose and they had to complain of injustice to God (Psalm 44).  

        But in spite of all these doubts the spiritual miracle happened, with 2 

        main points remaining unshaken:  it is Yahweh who acts in the calamities; 

        and by this faith the hope did not fail that the future deeds of the God of 

        the covenant will return to grace and morality. 

                   The same problem arises for individual experiences, especially in 

        the laments.  Yahweh made Israel a laughingstock, and Yahweh’s hand 

        was heavy upon the poet of Psalm 32.   The poet’s feeling no temptation 

        to become untrue, may be caused by a deeper insight into the poet’s own 

        sinfulness.  More important than this is the personal experience of a deed 

        of Yahweh making an end to the scoffing ones and the deed in the poet’s 

        personal life by which he held and holds the pious right hand. 

                   8. The Psalms’ Religion and Piety:  Yahweh’s Commandments

        Among Yahweh’s deeds one of the most important is the giving of sta-

        tutes and commandments to God’s people.   For the psalmists these sta-

        tutes and commandments are given, not to push men into deeper cove-

        tousness, but to be fulfilled in order that the one who is obedient may be-

        come revived, wise, and rejoiced.  As important as these commandments 

        are, it is interesting to note the most famous ones, the 10 Commandments,

        receive little mention in the Psalms.  

                   In the ancient Eastern mind-frame, the god asks for certain ani-

        mals, the firstlings from the flock, and orders the first-born son and the first-

        born of the most important animal to be redeemed.  Having this in mind, it 

        is astonishing that never in the Psalms are such cultic statues mentioned.  

        How are the lack of positive utterances about divinely ordered rites to be 

        explained? 

P-152

                   1st, the conditions under which the pilgrim may enter the temple 

        are ethical and ritualistic.  The best fulfillment of any vow is in the desire 

        to call upon Yahweh in the day of trouble and to bring thanksgiving as 

        one’s sacrifice.  2nd, the conditions that existed after Jerusalem’s fall in

        587 B.C. made sacrifices impossible.  It may be that the sacred formula by

        which the pious is able to protect one’s self (“Yahweh, Most High, Almigh-

        ty”) belongs to this time and replaces the sacrifices and other rites which 

        could not be performed. 

                   A 3rd reason is that the feeling of sinful people is not bound to sin-

        gle misdeeds, but finds its cause in a weakness in the character of Israel 

        (Indeed, I was born guilty, a sinner when my mother conceived me (Psalm 

        51:5)).  Only a deed of Yahweh is able to change these conditions, such as 

        that asked for in Psalm 51:10-12: 

                   Create in me a clean heart, O God, and put a new and right spirit 

               within me

                   Do not cast me away from your presence, and do not take your 

               holy spirit from me.

                   Restore to me the joy of your salvation, and sustain in me a wil-

               ling spirit.     

                   For the psalmists, the deeds of Yahweh the God of Israel do not in-

        clude the rise of “humanitarian” religion or piety outside the limits of Isra-

        el.  The psalmists know of men “fearing the Lord,” but both Psalms 115 

        and 135 show that such “fear” is connected with the negation of heathen 

        gods.  The root of Yahweh’s law is not some “natural law” but the revela-

        tion of Israel’s God.  The same is true of the cultic observances.  In Israel 

        they have their importance because they are given by Yahweh.  

                   A congregation living in the religion of the Psalms had to feel that 

        the liberty of Jesus toward the sabbath and ritual purity was a danger for 

        the congregation.  But in other parts of their content the Psalms prepared 

        the way for him, especially those which proclaim his comforting, preser-

        ving, and saving nearness in the soul of the pious, the “epiphany” within 

        a person’s mind. 

                   In the light of this faith, it is not hard to understand the importance

        the Psalms had in early Christianity.  This position of importance has con-

        tinued through the ages, in private prayer as well as in the official daily 

        prayer of the clergy.  They deeply influenced the religious poetry in the 

        Lutheran and Anglican countries and churches.   As Luther said, “Here 

        you look into the heart of all saints."

PUAH (פועה, splendid)  One of 2 Hebrew midwives ordered by the king of 

        Egypt to kill all male children.  Later Jewish legends identify Puah with 

        Miriam. 

PUBLIUS (PoplioV (poh plee os)  Probably the highest Roman official on the

        island of Malta on which Paul and others were shipwrecked on their way 

        to Rome; the word could be the title of a non-Roman officer. 

PUDENS (PoudhV)  Christian in Rome’s church who sends greetings to Timo-

        thy.  Some identify him as the Pudens who was the Latin poet Martial’s 

        friend.  He could have been a soldier whose wife, Claudia was British. 

PUL (פול, meaning obscure) The Assyrian name under which Tiglath-Pileser III

        ruled as Babylon’s king 729-727 B.C.  Similar names have to do with 

        months of the year, but Pul doesn’t appear as the name of a month at all. 

PULPIT (מגדל עץ (me ged dal  ayts), tower of wood)  A raised wooden plat-

        form reached by steps.  The purpose of the pulpit was for reading of the

        law and for prayer. 

PULSE  (עניםﬧז (zay reh ‘oh neem), legumes, vegetables)  King James Ver-

        sion translation of Hebrew word (New Revised Standard Version uses 

        “vegetables.” Daniel and his companions refuse to defile themselves 

        with the king’s rich food and wine; they ask for and receive vegetables 

        and water. 

P-153

 

PUNITES (פוני, distracted)  The name given to the descendants of Puvah of 

        Issachar. 

PUNON  (פונן, perplexed)  An important mining center in Edom, and possibly

        the home of one of the Edomite  chiefs.   Punon is a large, abundantly 

        watered site on the Arabah’s eastern side, near two large copper smel-

        ting sites.   The first period of occupation was from around 2200 to 

        1800, when copper was presumably first smelted here.  When Israel 

        camped at Punon during the Exodus, the city was just recovering from

        500 years of no established occupation.  Around 700 or possibly later,

        Punon was again abandoned.   The mining and smelting operation 

        were taken up by the Nabateans and continued probably through the 

        Roman period and beyond.   Eusebius reports that Christians were 

        forced to work in the copper mines and smelters at Punon. 

PURAH (פרה, bough) The servant who accompanied Gideon in a nocturnal

        reconnaissance of the enemy camp of the Midianites. 

PURIFICATION  (טהרה (taw hah raw), cleansing; החטא (khat taw 

        ‘ah), sin-offering; תמריק (tah meh roak), cleansing; agnismoV

        ag nees mos), abstinence; kaqarismoV (kath ah rees mos), cere-

        monial cleansing.)  The act of ritual cleansing. 

PURIM (פורים, lots)  A Jewish festival on Adar 14-15, celebrating the Jews’ 

        deliverance by Esther and Mordecai.  Throughout Purim is a gay and 

        noisy feast; mourning is forbidden; Purim is not prescribed in the law.

        Its non-religious character, its name, and the character-names all point

        to the conclusion that its ultimate origins are non-Jewish.  “Pur” is a 

        foreign term.  Esther 3 and 9 interpret it as “lot.”  This meaning is sup-

        ported by the Babylonian “puru.” “Purim” is the Babylonian word 

        with a Hebrew plural ending and refers to festal days. 

                   It is impossible to speak with complete certainty about the early

        history of Purim in Judaism.  There is no evidence for a critical perse-

        cution of Jews in the Persian Diaspora.   The book of Esther is con-

        fused about the Persian royal chronology and in error about court cus-

        toms.  The names in the Purim drama seem to point to a mythological 

        legend about the triumph of Babylonian deities.   The Greek title, the 

        date, and the character of Purim hint at connection with Farwardigan, 

        the Persian feast of the dead.  The feast honored the spirits of the dead

        as “guardians,” and there was a common meal to which rich and poor 

        were invited.  First celebrated by Diaspora Jews, its assimilation into 

        Jewish history perhaps occurred in Palestine. 

P-154

PURPLE (ארגמן (ar gaw mawn); porfura (por foo ra))  The most valued

        of ancient dyes, encompassing various shades within the red-purple 

        range.  It was obtained from Mediterranean mollusks. 

                   The purple industry developed early in the Mediterranean area 

        and reached its greatest heights in the classical period.   The name Ca-

        naan was derived from the dye; the name Phoenicia comes from the 

        Greek foinos, meaning “red purple.” Wool dyed “purple” was avail-

        able in Ugarit around 1500 B.C.  For a considerable time Phoenicians

        monopolized the industry.   The primary source of the dye was the se-

        cretion produced by a mollusk gland.  The shade desired was achieved

        by using different species of mollusks in combination with other ingre-

        dients, and by varying exposure time in the process.  Tyrian purple was  

        produced by “double-dying.”  

                   The Hebrews had to import purple goods.  Purple was used in com-

        bination with blue and scarlet in dying linen, in the tabernacle furnishings.

        Solomon had to get skilled help from Tyre, center of the Phoenician purple

        industry, for purple temple furnishings.  Great value was placed on purple 

        by Hebrews and purple garments were seen as a sign of royalty and 

        wealth.   Part of Daniel’s reward was said to be purple apparel.  

                   References to purple in the New Testament (NT) suggest its econo-

        mic importance and symbolic character.   Jesus was dressed in purple, 

        mocking his claim to be king of the Jews.  The purple and scarlet dress of 

        the harlot Babylon symbolized imperial rank.  Many inscriptions and vari-

        ous historical references outside the NT testify to the wide extent of the in-

        dustry in the Mediterranean and the significance of wearing the purple.  

PURPOSE. See Will of God.

PURSE (כיס (kees), bag; zwnh (tsoh neh), belt; Ballantion (bal lan tee on))

        No material for purses are given in the Bible, but from later sources it ap- 

        pears that they were woven with a netlike effect, of cotton or of rushes.  

        Others were made of leather; all were drawn together at the neck with lea-

        ther straps. 

PURSLANE (חלמות (khal lah mooth), slime [white] of yolk)  A gummy plant. 

        The word appears only in Job 6 in a figure implying repulsive good. 

PUT (פוט, afflicted) In the portions of Genesis dealing with ethnic groups, Put is 

        named with Cush, Egypt, and Canaan as a son of Ham.  There is no fur-

        ther mention of Put in Genesis; it is possible that some of the names asso-

        ciated with Egypt may properly belong to it.  

                 Several prophets mention Put.  Jeremiah speaks of the “men of Ethi-

        opia and Put who handle the shield.”  Ezekiel names Put in armies against 

        Tyre, Egypt, and Gog.   Little information about Put’s location can be ob-

        tained except that an African location is suggested.  In Genesis and I Chro-

        nicles the name is merely transliterated, but in all the prophetic passages 

        cited above, except in Ezekiel, Put is translated as “Libyans.”  It also ap-

        pears in Nahum, but there is disagreement whether it is a noun meaning 

        flight, or refers to a people. 

                   The only clear identification of Put is one with Libya or possibly 

        some neighboring area.  In inscriptions of Darius and Xerxes we find a re-

        gion Putaya mentioned in association with Ethiopia.  The Babylonian form

        of the name favors a more specific identification of Put with Cyrene; lack 

        of evidence does not allow certainty.  The older identification of Put with 

        the land of Punt must now be dropped as not being supported by the exis-

        ting evidence. 

PUTEOLI (oi Potioloi)  A city on the Bay of Naples where Paul landed on

        the way to Rome.  Since Paul stayed seven days with the “brethren” at Pu-

        teoli, there were already Christians there.   The name comes from either 

        the Latin putei, referring to the wells found there, or from puteo, referring 

        to the foul and sulphurous smells of the district.  Ruins of ancient Puteoli 

        include:   the market hall; the Serapeum; the temple of Augustus, later re-

        placed by the cathedral of San Proculo; the older amphitheater; and the 

        later amphitheater.  (See also the entry in the Old Testament Apocrypha /

        Influences Outside the Bible section of the Appendix.)   

P-155

 

PUTHITES (פותי, from the root meaning “to be spread open”)  A family of the 

        tribe of Judah from Kiriath-jearim on the northern border of Judah (I Chro-

        nicles 2). 

PUTIEL (פוטיאל, afflicted of God)  Father-in-law of Aaron’s son Eleazar, and 

        grandfather of Phinehas.  Putiel is a name partly of Egyptian derivation.  

PUVAH (פוה) The second son of Issachar.  Puvah went with Jacob into Egypt 

        and became the head of a family there (Genesis 46; Numbers 26). 

PYGARG (דישון (die son), gazelle, antelope)  The pygarg is a white-rumped

        antelope, a description appropriate to those common in North Africa and 

        Arabia. 

PYRE (מדורה (meh doe raw), pile of fuel)  A circular pile of wood for human 

        sacrifice; the word is used in the context of Moloch-worship. 

PYRRHUS (PurroV (pire ros), fiery red)  The father of Sopater, a companion 

        of Paul.  

PYTHON (puqwn) A divining spirit.  “Python” is not used in the Bible, but the

        Greek word occurs in Acts 16.  According to Greek belief the Python was 

        first the dragon which guarded the oracle at Delphi, slain by Apollo when 

        he took over the oracle.  Then the dragon spirit inspired the priestess of 

        the shrine.  Acts 16 reports that this spirit bore true testimony to Paul and 

        his companions.  This is an authentic story of a mental illness understood 

        according to the ancient concept of a demon possession, probably the psy-

        chosis of hysteria.

P-156