Sermon and Worship Resources (2024)

The OT employs thirty-five different words for birds (both wild and domestic), but the identification of these words with known species has proved to be very difficult. Like other words for animals, terminology for birds often is employed in personal names (e.g., Jonah, Oreb, Zippor, Zipporah). There is significant evidence for fowling practices in ancient Israel, usually by means of nets and snares (Pss. 124:7; 140:5; Prov. 6:5; 7:23; Lam. 3:52; Hos. 7:12; Amos 3:5). Small birds and chickens are occasionally even depicted on Iron AgeII (1000586 BC) seals and vessels from sites such as el-Jib (Gibeon) and Tell en-Nasbeh (Mizpah).

Like other animals in the Bible, birds are depicted as agents of God. Divine agency is especially evident in instances such as the ravens feeding Elijah (1Kings 17:4–6) and the dove bringing an olive leaf to Noah (Gen. 8:11). The Bible also employs bird-related imagery such as in descriptions of divine judgment (Prov. 30:17; Jer. 12:9). Birds may also serve as ominous signs of impending judgment (Hos. 8:1). God’s “wings” can offer both healing (Mal. 4:2 KJV, RSV) and protection (Ruth 2:12; Pss. 17:8; 36:7; 57:1; 61:4; 63:7; 91:4). The metaphor of the soul or spirit as a bird is referenced in the description of the Holy Spirit descending like a dove (Matt. 3:16; Mark 1:10; Luke 3:22; John 1:32). The observation that birds “do not sow or reap” is employed as an image of worry-free living (Luke 12:24; cf. Job 38:41; Ps. 147:9). Jesus’ reference to “when the rooster crows” (Mark 13:35) is not strictly literal but rather refers to a watch of the night: the quarter of the night after midnight.

The prominence of sacrificial birds (especially doves and pigeons) in ritual literature indicates that they were likely raised for such purposes in ancient Israel. All birds could be eaten except those listed as unclean in Lev. 11:13–19 (twenty species) and Deut. 14:12–18 (twenty-one species). Generally speaking, birds of prey and those that feed on carrion or fish were considered unclean. Birds often served as food for the poor (Matt. 10:29–31; Luke 12:6–7). Poor people could offer birds as a substitute for expensive livestock (Lev. 5:7; 12:8; 14:21–22; cf. Luke 2:24), while the poorest of the poor were permitted to bring grain (Lev. 5:11). Finally, in one purgation ritual a live bird is used to carry away impurities (Lev. 14:52–53; cf. 16:22).

Israel shared the cosmology of its ancient Near Eastern neighbors. This worldview understood the earth as a “disk” upon the primeval waters (Job 38:13; Isa. 40:22), with the earth having four rims or “corners” (Ps. 135:7; Isa. 11:12). These rims were sealed at the horizon to prevent the influx of cosmic waters. God speaks to Job about the dawn grasping the edges of the earth and shaking the evil people out of it (Job 38:1213).

Israel’s promised land was built on the sanctuary prototype of Eden (Gen. 13:10; Deut. 6:3; 31:20); both were defined by divine blessing, fertility, legal instruction, secure boundaries, and were orienting points for the world. Canaan was Israel’s new paradise, “flowing with milk and honey” (Exod. 3:8; Num. 13:27). Conversely, the lack of fertile land was tantamount to insecurity and judgment. As Eden illustrated for Israel, any rupture of relationship with God brought alienation between humans, God, and the land; this could ultimately bring exile, as an ethically nauseated land “vomits” people out (Lev. 18:25, 28; 20:22; see also Deut. 4; 30).

For Israel, land involved both God’s covenant promise (Gen. 15:18–21; 35:9–12) and the nation’s faithful obedience (Gen. 17:1; Exod. 19:5; 1Kings 2:1–4). Yahweh was the earth’s Lord (Ps. 97:5), Judge (Gen. 18:25), and King (Ps. 47:2, 7). Both owner and giver, he was the supreme landlord, who gifted the land to Israel (Exod. 19:5; Lev. 25:23; Josh. 22:19; Ps. 24:1). The land was God’s “inheritance” to give (1Sam. 26:19; 2Sam. 14:16; Ps. 79:1; Jer. 2:7). The Levites, however, did not receive an allotment of land as did the other tribes, since God was their “portion” (Num. 18:20; Ps. 73:26). Israel’s obedience was necessary both to enter and to occupy the land (Deut. 8:1–3; 11:8–9; 21:1; 27:1–3). Ironically, the earth swallowed rebellious Israelites when they accused Moses of bringing them “up out of a land flowing with milk and honey” (Num. 16:13). As the conquest shows, however, no tribe was completely obedient, taking its full “inheritance” (Josh. 13:1).

For the biblical Israelites and their ancestors, agriculture was one of the primary expressions of subsistence in their economy and life. The priority of agricultural pursuits for Israel’s worldview is indicated in the fact that it was among the first mandates given by God to man in the garden (Gen. 1:2829).

The primary produce of the biblical farmer included cereals (wheat, barley, millet), legumes (beans, peas), olives, and grapes. Less predominant crops included nuts (almonds, walnuts, pistachios), herbs (cumin, coriander, sesame), and vegetables (cucumbers, onions, greens). The production of the various crops was largely limited to certain geographic regions of Israel (such as the coastal plain or the plains of Moab) because much of the land was ill suited for agriculture, being rocky and arid.

The actual craft of agriculture involved the three steps of sowing, reaping, and threshing/production. The fields typically were plowed following the first autumn rains, and sowing lasted about two months. Harvest season lasted seven months in all. Cereal products went through the process of threshing, whereas fruits were immediately produced into wine or dried. The practice of threshing the grains mostly took place on threshing floors located adjacent to the fields. The threshing floors were designed as a circle, generally twenty-five to forty feet in diameter. Typically animals such as donkeys or oxen were driven around the floor as the grains were fed into their paths and subsequently crushed. The resulting broken husks were then thrown into the air, allowing the wind to carry away the chaff and producing a separated grain that could then be cleaned and processed for home use.

Besides playing a significant role in the practical matters of life, agricultural practices found numerous applications in the images and ideals of the biblical writers (Judg. 8:2; 9:8–15; Ezek. 17:6–10). The medium could be used to express both blessings and curses. Several texts point to the cursing of agricultural endeavors as a punishment from God. Ceremonial defilement was a possibility if proper methodology in sowing seeds was not followed (Lev. 19:19; Deut. 22:9). Similarly, Yahweh’s assessment of Israel’s failure to uphold the covenant commitments could lead to disease, locust attacks, crop failure, and total loss of the land (Deut. 28:40; Joel 1:4; Amos 7:1). Conversely, agricultural bounty and blessings were also a part of covenant stipulations. Indeed, many of the offerings themselves were centered on agriculture (Lev. 2; Num. 18:8–32). Even the Sabbath rest itself was extended to matters of agriculture and care for the land (Lev. 25:1–7). Finally, the covenant saw some of the greatest benefits of life before Yahweh as being blessed through agricultural bounty (Deut. 28:22; Amos 9:13). In a few cases, agricultural imagery cut both ways. For instance, the vine was an image that could express judgment, care, and restoration in both Judaism and Christianity (Isa. 5:1–8; John 15:1–11). Despite the link between agricultural realities and the covenant, the Scriptures are very careful to distinguish Israel from the fertility cults of its Canaanite neighbors (1Kings 18:17–40; Hos. 2:8–9). This distinction also seems to have found expression in certain NT texts (1Cor. 6:15–20).

Literally, fruit is the seed-bearing part of a plant. It constitutes an important part of the diet in the ancient Near East. Common fruits are olives, grapes, and figs, though many other varieties of fruit are also available, including apples, apricots, peaches, pomegranates, dates, and melons. Fruit trees play a prominent role as a food source in God’s creation and preparation of the garden of Eden (Gen. 13). The law prohibits the Israelites from cutting down their enemy’s fruit trees (Deut. 20:19). The abundance of fruit trees characterizes the land that God has prepared for Israel (Deut. 8:8; Neh. 9:25) as well as the final restoration (Ezek. 47:12; Joel 2:22; Rev. 22:2).

One aspect of fruit is that it grows from a plant. This use of the term is often extended to represent what emerges from something else. Thus, fruit may represent offspring, whether human or animal (Deut. 7:13; 28:4), one’s actions (Matt. 7:16–20), the result of one’s actions or choices (Prov. 1:31; 10:16; Jer. 17:10), or words coming from one’s mouth (Prov. 12:14; Heb. 13:15). In the NT especially, producing much fruit symbolizes performing deeds that are pleasing to God (Matt. 3:8; 13:23; Mark 4:20; John 15:16; Rom. 7:4; Col. 1:10). Those who live by the Spirit produce the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23). The apostle Paul speaks of the first converts in a particular region as being firstfruits, probably referring to their conversion as the result of the gospel being preached in the area (Rom. 16:5; 2Thess. 2:13).

A kingdom signifies the reality and extent of a king’s dominion or rule (Gen. 10:10; 20:9; Num. 32:33; 2Kings 20:13; Esther 1:22). Some kingdoms were relatively small; others were concerted attempts to gain the whole world.

A kingdom presupposes monarchy, rule by an individual, human authority. Although kings only have as much authority as their armies and the general populace allow, they nevertheless exercise an almost absolute power, which invites either profound humility or hubris. Royal arrogance, unfortunately, is the primary motif characterizing kings in the Bible (e.g., Dan.3).

God originally intended Israel to be governed as a theocracy, ruled by the one, true, living God (but see Gen. 17:6; Deut. 17:1420). Israel was to be a “kingdom of priests” (Exod. 19:6), but the people demanded a king (1Sam. 8:1–22). However, even when God granted their request, God remained King over the king and even retained ownership of the land (Lev. 25:23, 42, 55). The Israelite king was nothing more than God’s viceroy, with delegated authority. With few exceptions, most of the kings of Israel and Judah were corrupted by authority and wealth and forgot God (1Sam. 13:13–14; 15:28; Matt. 14:6–11). But God made a covenant with David, so that one of his descendants would become a coregent in a restored theocracy, the kingdom of God (2Sam. 7:1–29; Pss. 89:3; 132:11). In contrast to David’s more immediate descendants, this coming king would return to Jerusalem humble and mounted on a donkey (Zech. 9:9; cf. Isa. 62:11). The Gospels present Jesus Christ as this king (Matt. 21:1–9 pars.). Those who are likewise humble will inherit the land with him (Matt. 5:5).

A mystery entails knowledge that is disclosed to some but withheld from others. Nothing is mysterious to God (Heb. 4:13), and he alone understands the full purpose of his will (Job 38:140:24; Isa. 46:10), but he also condescends to reveal portions of his will to those whom he chooses (John 16:15).

Jesus’ parables make known the character and future of God’s coming kingdom to his chosen servants, while also concealing it from those outside the circle (Matt. 13:18–23). Paul, by contrast, used “mystery” to refer to the disclosure of God’s plan for the redemption of humanity—namely, the inclusion of Gentiles within “Israel” (Rom. 11:25). This plan, foreshadowed in the OT but nevertheless hidden in essentials, had only recently been fully revealed in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (Rom. 16:25; Eph. 1:9; 1Tim. 3:16; cf. 1Pet. 1:10–12). The gospel message is therefore the revelation of this mystery, the proclamation of the truth about Jesus Christ, now made public to the world (Eph. 3:3–9).

In Gen. 3 the serpent entices humankind to sin. Not until Rev. 12:9 are we told explicitly that the serpent is Satan.

In the OT, “evil spirit” may be a heavenly being sent by God (1Sam. 16:1423; 18:10; 19:9; cf. 1Kings 22:22–23). The OT engages in extensive rebuke of the superstitions of the surrounding nations that included belief in demons (Deut. 32:17; Ps. 106:37; perhaps Isa. 13:21; cf. Rev. 18:2).

Jesus’ encounter with the devil in the wilderness recalls Adam and Eve’s encounter with the serpent in Eden. The setting, significantly, is now a wasteland. The second man to walk the earth with no sin claims the right to take back the dominion that Adam passed to the serpent. Jesus can have the whole world (without the cross) if only he will submit to the devil’s rule (Luke 4:5–7). Jesus rejects the offer. Later, he sees Satan’s fall from heaven to earth (Luke 10:18; cf. Rev. 12:5–12). Whereas once the devil had access to God’s courtroom, now his case is lost. His only recourse is murderous persecution. Between the ascension of the Son of Man (Acts 1:9) and the final judgment, this is understood to be the experience of Christ’s people (Dan. 7:25; Rev. 12:17; cf. 1Pet. 5:8).

Whereas the OT provides sparse information about Satan and his angels/demons, the NT opens with an intensity of activity. Demons are also called “evil spirits,” and they are associated with physical illness, madness, and fortune-telling. In Acts 17:22 Paul describes his pagan Athenian listeners as “demon-fearers” (NIV: “religious”). Jesus’ miracles demonstrate his lordship over Satan’s regime as the demons flee in terror before him (Mark 1:23–26; 5:1–15). According to Paul, Christians are temples of the Holy Spirit (1Cor. 6:19), and John urges believers to “test the spirits to see whether they are from God” (1John 4:1), assuring them that they need not fear Satan or his forces, “because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world.” (1John 4:4). On judgment day Satan will be cast into the lake of fire (Rev. 20:14–15) along with all of God’s enemies.

The sun was worshiped as a god or goddess in all the nations around Israel in OT times, and the polemic against sun worship in Deut. 4:19; 17:3; Jer. 8:2; Job 31:2628 suggests that sun worship also made inroads into Israel. By way of contrast, the OT attests to the sun’s created status (Gen. 1:16) and counts it as subject to God’s control (e.g., Josh. 10:12–13).

In the OT, the sun often is associated with and symbolic of life (e.g., Eccles. 7:11; cf. Ps. 58:8) or justice (Ps. 19:6; Job 38:13; Mal. 4:2; cf. 2Sam. 23:3–4). The darkening of the sun is presented as a sign of judgment heralding the day of the Lord (Isa. 13:10; Ezek. 32:7; Joel 2:10, 31; 3:15; Amos 8:9; Matt. 24:29; Mark 13:24; Rev. 6:12; 9:2), which many associate with the darkness that fell during the crucifixion (Matt. 27:45; Mark 15:33; Luke 23:44).

Water is mentioned extensively in the Bible due to its prevalence in creation and its association with life and purity. The cosmic waters of Gen. 1 are held back by the sky (Gen. 1:67; cf. Pss. 104:6, 13; 148:4). God is enthroned on these waters in his cosmic temple (Pss. 29:10; 104:3, 13; cf. Gen. 1:2; Ps. 78:69; Isa. 66:1). These same waters were released in the time of Noah (Gen. 7:10–12; Ps. 104:7–9).

Water is also an agent of life and fertility and is therefore associated with the presence of God. Both God himself and his temple are described as the source of life-giving water (Jer. 2:13; 17:13; Joel 3:18; cf. Isa. 12:2–3). Ezekiel envisions this water flowing from beneath the temple and streaming down into the Dead Sea, where it brings life and fecundity (Ezek. 47:1–12; cf. Zech. 14:8). The book of Revelation, employing the same image, describes “the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb” (22:1). This imagery is also illustrated in archaeological remains associated with temples. Cisterns are attested beneath the Dome of the Rock (presumably the location of the Jerusalem temple) and beneath the Judahite temple at Arad. Other temples, such as the Israelite high place at Tel Dan, are located close to freshwater springs. The Gihon spring in the City of David may also be associated with the Jerusalem temple (Ps. 46:4; cf. Gen. 2:13).

This OT imagery forms the background for Jesus’ teaching regarding eternal life in the writings of the apostle John. Jesus claims to be the source of living water, and he offers it freely to everyone who thirsts (John 4:10–15; 7:37; Rev. 21:6; 22:17; cf. Rev. 7:17). This water, which produces “a spring of water welling up to eternal life” (John 4:14), is the work of the Holy Spirit in the believer (John 7:38–39).

Water is also described in the Bible as an agent of cleansing. It is extensively employed in purification rituals in the OT. In the NT, the ritual of water baptism signifies the purity and new life of the believer (Matt. 3:11, 16; Mark 1:8–10; Luke 3:16; John 1:26, 31–33; 3:23; Acts 1:5; 8:36–39; 10:47; 11:16; 1Pet. 3:20–21; cf. Eph. 5:26; Heb. 10:22).

Finally, the NT also reveals Jesus as the Lord of water. He walks on water (Matt. 14:28–29; John 6:19), turns water into wine (John 2:7–9; 4:46), and controls water creatures (Matt. 17:27; John 21:6). Most important, Jesus commands “the winds and the water, and they obey him” (Luke 8:25; cf. Ps. 29:3).

“Word” is used in the Bible to refer to the speech of God in oral, written, or incarnate form. In each of these uses, God desires to make himself known to his people. The communication of God is always personal and relational, whether he speaks to call things into existence (Gen. 1) or to address an individual directly (Gen. 2:1617; Exod. 3:14). The prophets and the apostles received the word of God (Deut. 18:14–22; John 16:13), some of which was proclaimed but not recorded. The greatest revelation in this regard is the person of Jesus Christ, who is called the “Word” of God (John 1:1, 14).

The psalmist declared God’s word to be an eternal object of hope and trust that gives light and direction (Ps. 119), and Jesus declared the word to be truth (John 17:17). The word is particularized and intimately connected with God himself by means of the key phrases “your word,” “the word of God,” “the word of the Lord,” “word about Christ,” and “the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17; Col. 3:16). Our understanding of the word is informed by a variety of terms and contexts in the canon of Scripture, a collection of which is found in Ps. 119.

The theme of the word in Ps. 119 is continued and clarified in the NT, accentuating the intimate connection between the word of God and God himself. The “Word” of God is the eternal Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:1; 1John 1:1–4), who took on flesh and blood so that we might see the glory of the eternal God. The sovereign glory of Christ as the Word of God is depicted in the vision of John in Rev. 19:13. As the Word of God, Jesus Christ ultimately gives us our lives (John 1:4; 6:33; 10:10), sustains our lives (John 5:24; 6:51, 54; 8:51), and ultimately renders a just judgment regarding our lives (John 5:30; 8:16, 26; 9:39; cf. Matt. 25:31–33; Heb. 4:12).

OldTestament

Phoeniciansand Philistines. Asa people whose ancestral territory lay in the landlocked andtimber-poor highlands of Ephraim and Judah, the Israelites ofbiblical times never achieved prominence in seafaring orshipbuilding. Instead, they relied for their maritime enterprises onalliances with their coastal neighbors, particularly the Phoenicianstates to the north of Israel, who excelled in seafaring and hadaccess to the abundant timber forests of Lebanon. The Phoenicians(the Punics of classical antiquity) were famous in antiquity fortheir seafaring. In biblical times, they traded heavily betweenSyria-Palestine and Egypt and also sailed throughout theMediterranean, establishing colonies as far away as Tunisia(Carthage) and Spain (Cadiz).

Anotherseagoing people prominent in the OT were the Philistines, whose baseof power was to the west of Judah, along the Mediterranean coast. TheBible associates the Philistines with the five cities of Ashdod,Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza. The Philistines were among the SeaPeoples, who came to the Levant from the Aegean beginning in thetwelfth century BC (Amos 9:7; Jer. 47:4).

Theperennial enmity between the Philistines and the Israelites precludedjoint maritime ventures of the sort shared by Israel and thePhoenicians, and the Bible does not describe Philistine maritimeactivities in any depth. Nevertheless, the seagoing nature of thePhilistines is reflected by the fact that their settlements remainedconfined to the coastal region. They never made a systematic attemptto take over the traditionally Israelite and Judahite highlands. Whenthey did venture into the Judean mountains, it was to assert amilitary and political presence among the agrarian Israelites andJudahites rather than to establish permanent settlements andPhilistine population centers. Twelfth-century BC reliefs at MedinetHabu (in the mortuary temple of RamessesIII) depict a navalbattle between the Sea Peoples and the Egyptians. The reliefs includepictures of Philistine ships and sailors.

Israeliteseafaring.One of the rare references to Israelite seafaring describes theDanites and the Asherites in connection with ships and harbors (Judg.5:17; see also Ezek. 27:19). Traditional Danite territory overlappedwith the area of Philistine settlement. Asherite territory overlappedsubstantially with Phoenician territory. It is possible that Judg.5:17 refers to the fact that the Danites and the Asherites worked inthe port cities serving Philistine and Phoenician shipping. Inanother passage, Zebulun is associated with ports (Gen. 49:13). It isnoteworthy that the Israelite coast between Jaffa and Dor (roughlybetween Philistia and Phoenicia) does not have an abundance ofnatural harbors. Later, Herod the Great would build the artificialharbor at Caesarea in the first century BC. The great expense of sucha project—including the construction of over 2,500 feet ofbreakwaters made of underwater concrete, mostly imported fromItaly—suggests the extent of the need for secure harbors inthis region.

Solomon’sfleet.The zenith of Israelite seafaring occurred during the reign ofSolomon. Solomon built a fleet of ships at “Ezion Geber, whichis near Elath in Edom, on the shore of the Red Sea” (1Kings9:26). The purpose of these ships was to bring back gold from Ophir(1Kings 9:28), possibly a location in the Arabian Peninsula, towhich a port on the Red Sea would have offered ready access. Thestory confirms the aforementioned dependence on the Phoenicians inthe area of seafaring: although the ships belonged to Solomon, “Hiram[the Phoenician king of Tyre] sent his men—sailors who knew thesea—to serve in the fleet with Solomon’s men”(1Kings 9:27). The timber for the ships would also have beenimported by Israel from Phoenicia (see 1Kings 9:11). Even atthe height of its power, Israel lacked the human resources to embarkon sea voyages independently of the Phoenicians.

Thesuccess of Solomon’s project, of course, depended not only onwarm relations with the Phoenicians but also on territorial controlof the historically Edomite lands between Judah and the Red Sea. Thisfavorable combination of conditions would come and go throughout thebiblical period, and with it, Israel’s modest presence on theseas. From the Phoenician point of view, cooperation with Israel wasan essential component of gaining access to a Red Sea port, and withit to the products of Arabia, the Horn of Africa, and India. ThePhoenicians, as expansive as their travel was in the Mediterranean,could never independently control the long overland route fromPhoenicia to the Red Sea, since it ran through the territory ofIsrael and Edom. Their best hope was a friendly and powerfulIsraelite ally. This explains the cordial relationship and why Hiramsent not only his sailors to serve Solomon but also craftsmen andsupplies for the construction of the temple (1Kings 5:10–12).Solomon and Hiram jointly operated “a fleet of trading ships”that would return to port every three years bringing “gold,silver, and ivory, and apes and baboons” (1Kings 10:22).

Jehoshaphat.In the mid-ninth century BC, King Jehoshaphat of Judah attempted torepeat Solomon’s feat of launching a fleet from Ezion Geber(1Kings 22:48–49; 2Chron. 20:35–37).According to both accounts, the ships were wrecked before they couldset sail. On several other points, however, the two versions of thestory disagree in ways that bear on questions of the political andeconomic conditions of Israelite seafaring.

Bythis time, Israel and Judah had split into separate kingdoms, withthe northern kingdom of Israel being geographically and politicallycloser to the Phoenicians. The powerful King Ahab of Israel,Jehoshaphat’s contemporary through much of his reign, marriedJezebel, the daughter of the Sidonian (Phoenician) king Ethbaal(1Kings 16:31). According to 1Kings, King Ahaziah ofIsrael (Ahab’s son) proposed to cooperate with Jehoshaphat bysending his own men on the voyage, much as Hiram had assisted Solomonin the previous century. Jehoshaphat rejected the suggestion,possibly indicating a bid for Judean autonomy in an era of northerndominance. According to 2Chronicles, however, Jehoshaphat didcooperate willingly with Ahaziah, and this was the reason that theships foundered in port: God punished the righteous Jehoshaphat fortoo close a relationship with his wicked northern counterpart. In1Kings 22:47 it is mentioned that at the time of Jehoshaphat’sventure there was no king in Edom. As noted, control of the overlandroute between Judah and the Red Sea was necessary for the success ofany voyage originating from Ezion Geber.

Howeverthe contradiction between 1Kings and 2Chroniclesregarding the involvement of Ahaziah is resolved, both versions ofthe story highlight the fact that the port at Ezion Geber commandedthe interest of the Judeans, the Israelites, and the Phoenicians, andits successful operation probably depended on the cooperation of allthree.

Shipsof Tarshish.Several biblical texts, including the stories of Solomon andJehoshaphat, mention “ships of Tarshish” (1Kings10:22 NIV mg.). In a number of contexts, such ships are associatedwith the transportation of metals and metal ores, including iron,lead, tin, gold, and silver (1Kings 10:22; Ezek. 27:12; Jer.10:9). The exact derivation of the term “ships of Tarshish”is uncertain, though it is clear from the descriptions of theircargoes that such ships could travel over long distances. As Ezekielobserves, “The ships of Tarshish serve as carriers for yourwares. You are filled with heavy cargo as you sail the sea. Youroarsmen take you out to the high seas” (Ezek. 27:25–26).

Inthe Table of Nations, Tarshish is listed as a descendant of Javan(Gen. 10:4), along with a number of other seafaring peoples of theeastern Mediterranean (“Javan” indicates the peoples ofthe Aegean and is linguistically equivalent to “Ionia”[see also Ezek. 27:12–22]). Some have suggested, then, that theships of Tarshish should be associated with Tarsus in southeasternTurkey, an area containing silver mines (also the birthplace of Paul[Acts 9:11]). Others have suggested the Phoenician colony ofTartessus in Spain, another metal-producing area. This locationfigures in the interpretation of the identification of thedestination of Jonah as Tarshish (Jon. 1:3): presumably, if he wereavoiding Nineveh and departing from Joppa, he would head towardSpain, in the exact opposite direction, rather than toward Tarsus inCilicia.

Inaddition to these two geographical options, some have attempted toexplain the expression “ships of Tarshish” as derivingfrom the Akkadian term for smelting or refining: perhaps the manyreferences to cargoes of metals indicate that the ships were used totransport metal ore to refining centers. Finally, one scholar hasproposed that the term is related to the Greek word tarsos,meaning “oar.”

Descriptionsof ships and seafaring.Ezekiel, in his lament concerning the Phoenician city of Tyre (Ezek.27), relates a number of details related to Phoenician seafaring. Thepicture largely confirms the descriptions of how Solomon built andmanned his fleet with the assistance of his Tyrian ally. Timber forthe construction of the ship came from Lebanon and Cyprus, amongother places (vv. 5–6). Sails were made from Egyptian linen(v.7), and as noted above, the oarsmen and sailors were fromthe Phoenician city-states (vv. 8–9). Ezekiel goes on to list alarge number of ports of call as well as a dazzling variety ofcargoes (vv. 12–24). Notably, Ezekiel has the Judahites and theIsraelites offering the products of their agrarian economy—“wheatfrom Minnith and confections, honey, olive oil and balm”(v.17)—thus filling out the picture of what theIsraelites gave in exchange for the precious metals and luxury itemsimported by their country from elsewhere.

In1999 archaeologists explored two eighth-century BC Phoenician shipsthat had sunk thirty miles west of Ashkelon. The ships, eachmeasuring about fifty feet in length, contained large cargoes of wineand were headed either for Egypt or for the Phoenician colonies inthe western Mediterranean.

Shipsand sailing figure prominently in the story of Jonah, who boarded aship bound for Tarshish (see discussion above) at Joppa on theMediterranean coast. In the story we see a number of features ofancient sea travel. Jonah paid a fare for his voyage (Jon. 1:3). Notonly the biblical author (see 1:4), but also the presumablynon-Israelite sailors, believed that the great storm was the doing ofa god, and that it could be calmed by appealing to that god(1:6)—although cargo was thrown overboard for good measure.When Paul was caught in a storm in the first century AD, the samestrategies were still in use (Acts 27:38). The religious habits ofancient sailors, particularly their reverence for the gods whocontrolled the stormy seas and thus held their lives in the balance,are illuminated by the discovery of stone anchors in several temples(presumably left by sailors as offerings), including at the portcities of Ugarit, Kition, and Byblos.

Psalm107:23–32 speaks of God’s care of sailors from anIsraelite perspective. In the psalm, those who “went out on thesea in ships,” the “merchants on the mighty waters”(i.e., the deep, open sea), witness firsthand the works of the God ofIsrael, which include both the raising and the quieting of the storm.This passage vividly expresses the terror of being caught in a stormand the great relief and gratitude felt by sailors who reached safehaven.

Noah’sArk

Accordingto the biblical account, Noah’s ark was 450 feet long, 75 feetwide, and 45 feet high (300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits [Gen.6:15]). It had three decks, a roof, and a window. By comparison, theship of Uta-napishti in the Epic of Gilgamesh is described as havingsix decks (and thus seven stories), edges of 180 feet (ten dozencubits) in each dimension, and occupying the space of an acre (arough approximation of the dimensions given). Both ships aredescribed as providing space for the builder’s family and everyliving creature. In the Atrahasis Epic, the boat is roofed, but itsdimensions are not given.

Becauseof the character of Gen. 6–8, it is inappropriate to drawconclusions from the story regarding shipbuilding in historicalantiquity. According to the specifications given in the biblicaltext, Noah’s ark would have been the largest wooden ship inhistory, equaled only by the United States schooner Wyoming,completed in 1909. While the overall length of the Wyoming was also450 feet, nearly 100 feet of length was accounted for in the fore andaft booms, so that the hull length was only 350 feet. Even with earlytwentieth-century shipbuilding technology, its extravagant lengthrendered the Wyoming unseaworthy, and the ship foundered in 1924. Thelargest documented wooden ships of antiquity include the GreekSyracusia(third century BC; 180 feet), described by Athenaeus; the Roman Isis(second century AD; 180 feet), described by Lucian; Caligula’s“Giant Ship” (first century AD; 341 feet), recovered inmodern times and possibly corresponding to a ship described by Plinythe Elder; and PtolemyIV’s Tessarakonteres (third centuryBC), reported by Plutarch to have been about 425 feet long. This lastship was not designed for cruising in open water.

NewTestament

Fishingin the Sea of Galilee. Severalof Jesus’ disciples worked as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee,and the Gospels document their use of small boats for fishing andtraveling across the sea. Fishing was done with nets thrown both fromboats and from the shore (Mark 1:16, 19). The boats used by fishermenon the Sea of Galilee may have been small enough to pull up onto thebeach (Luke 5:2), or to be nearly capsized by a large catch of fish(Luke 5:7) or by a violent storm (Mark 4:37). They were large enoughto transport several men and even to sleep in (Mark 4:38). Such boatscould be rowed or sailed; in Mark 6:48 the disciples had to resort torowing because of an unfavorable headwind. On one occasion, Jesusstood in a boat to preach to a crowd gathered on the shore (Mark4:1). The Sea of Galilee is about eight miles wide and thirteen mileslong. On several occasions, Jesus traveled by boat across the sea toavoid having to walk long distances around its circumference (e.g.,Matt. 9:1; 14:22; 15:39).

In1986 archaeologists recovered a fishing boat dating to the mid-firstcentury AD on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. The boat had beenscuttled near the shore and was preserved under mud. The “JesusBoat,” as it was dubbed, measures twenty-seven feet in lengthand has a beam seven and a half feet long. Numerous species of woodwere used in its construction and repairs throughout its useful life.While there is no evidence to link the boat to Jesus or hisdisciples, radiometric dating places it in the correct period, and itprovides a likely model of the type of boat portrayed in the Gospels.

Asecond source of information regarding ships and sailing in the NT isthe account in Acts of Paul’s many sea voyages. As in the caseof Jehoshaphat, the Tyrians, Jonah, and Jesus’ disciples, Paullearned firsthand the perils of seafaring in small wooden boats:among his many traumas, along with beatings and stonings, herecalled, “Three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and aday in the open sea” (2Cor. 11:25).

Paul’sjourneys.A survey of Paul’s sea travels on his four journeys gives someidea of the routes that could be taken by a paying traveler in theeastern Mediterranean and Aegean.

1.Paul’s first missionary journey included voyages from Seleuciain Syria to the port of Salamis in Cyprus (Acts 13:4) and from Cyprus(Paphos) to Perga on the southern coast of Asia Minor (13:13). Afterjourneying through the interior, Paul returned to Attalia, where heembarked for the return trip to Syria, presumably passing againthrough the port at Salamis (14:26).

2.The second missionary journey began not with a sea voyage but ratherwith a trek through the interior of Syria and Cilicia, illustratingthat although sea travel was by far a more rapid means of travel, theoverland routes were by no means impossible (Acts 15:39). Paul wouldrepeat this land route during his third journey (19:1). Sea travelwas fast, but when one had plenty of friends along the alternativeland route, a sea journey was considerably less enjoyable. It isduring the second journey that we have the first recorded accounts ofPaul sailing in the Aegean. From Troas in Asia Minor, he sailed theshort distance to Macedonia (16:11), putting in midway at the islandof Samothrace. Apparently, Paul traveled by sea down the coast fromBerea to Athens (17:14). At the conclusion of his second journey,Paul sailed from Corinth to Caesarea, with a stop at Ephesus(18:18–22). Not counting any intervening ports of call notmentioned in the text, this would be the longest single leg of seatravel so far mentioned.

3.The third missionary journey once more began with a long overlandtrip from Syria through Asia Minor; by this time, Paul had manyassociates along the way to visit. Again, he sailed in the Aegean,from Ephesus to Macedonia (Acts 20:1) and back (20:6). At one point,Paul opted to travel overland, from Troas to Assos, while hiscompanions sailed down the coast (20:13). Meeting up with them, hesailed on, hugging the coast of Asia Minor, then sailing south ofCyprus along an open-water route to Tyre. From Tyre, the ship againhugged the Palestinian coast, stopping in several ports before Pauldisembarked at Caesarea (21:7). Paul’s journeys illustrate thevariety of itineraries taken by ships. They were capable of sailingin deep water, but they would also hug the coast when there werereasons to make frequent stops.

4.Paul’s fourth journey, which he made in custody on his way to atrial before the emperor at Rome, was to be the most dangerous. Fromthe account in Acts we can glean a number of details of life at seain the first century AD. The ship bound for Italy was large, and itcarried 276 passengers and crew (Acts 27:6, 37), including soldiersand prisoners, at least one companion of a prisoner (Paul’sfriend Aristarchus [27:2]), a ship’s pilot, and the ship’sowner (27:11). Sailors used celestial navigation (27:20) and tooksoundings in shallow water (27:28). We see also that the ship’scourse could be determined by the direction of the prevailing winds:twice during the journey Paul’s ship was forced to sail to thelee of large islands (Cyprus and Crete)—a longer journey, butthe only option for a ship that was not rigged to sail close-hauled.

Whenextended periods of unfavorable weather were forecast, one option wassimply to put in at a port until conditions improved, preferably in aharbor that was in the lee of an island (Acts 27:12). We learnsomething of the measures that were taken in heavy weather, many ofwhich are still used in modern times: ropes were tied around the hullof the ship to prevent it from breaking up in rough seas (27:17), thelifeboat was brought onto the deck and made fast (27:17), sea anchorswere deployed to keep the bow of the ship oriented into the oncomingwaves (27:7), the rudder was lashed amidships (27:40), valuable cargoand gear were jettisoned (27:19, 38), and, as in the days of Jonah,sailors and passengers prayed for divine deliverance (27:29; see alsothe protective emblems in 28:11).

Whenall other means had been exhausted, a ship could be run aground on asandy beach (Acts 27:39), a measure that would have risked damage tothe boat but saved lives. In the case of Paul’s ship, thedecision to run aground ultimately resulted in the destruction of theship (27:41).

Metaphorsand illustrations.Several NT authors draw illustrations from the nautical world. Jameslikens the harmful power of evil speech to the rudder of a ship:although it is a small device, by it the pilot can control a greatship (James 3:4–5). Elsewhere, he compares the doubting of theunwise person to being lost at sea in a storm (James 1:6; cf. Eph.4:14). In 1Tim. 1:19 the loss of faith and good conscience islikened to a shipwreck. Hebrews 6:19 describes the assurance of God’sfaithfulness as an anchor for the soul.

Literally, fruit is the seed-bearing part of a plant. Itconstitutes an important part of the diet in the ancient Near East.Common fruits are olives, grapes, and figs, though many othervarieties of fruit are also available, including apples, apricots,peaches, pomegranates, dates, and melons. Fruit trees play aprominent role as a food source in God’s creation andpreparation of the garden of Eden (Gen. 1–3). The law prohibitsthe Israelites from cutting down their enemy’s fruit trees(Deut. 20:19). The abundance of fruit trees characterizes the landthat God has prepared for Israel (Deut. 8:8; Neh. 9:25) as well asthe final restoration (Ezek. 47:12; Joel 2:22; Rev. 22:2).

Oneaspect of fruit is that it grows from a plant. This use of the termis often extended to represent what emerges from something else.Thus, fruit may represent offspring, whether human or animal (Deut.7:13; 28:4), one’s actions (Matt. 7:16–20), the result ofone’s actions or choices (Prov. 1:31; 10:16; Jer. 17:10), orwords coming from one’s mouth (Prov. 12:14; Heb. 13:15). In theNT especially, producing much fruit symbolizes performing deeds thatare pleasing to God (Matt. 3:8; 13:23; Mark 4:20; John 15:16; Rom.7:4; Col. 1:10). Those who live by the Spirit produce the fruit ofthe Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23). The apostle Paul speaks of the firstconverts in a particular region as being firstfruits, probablyreferring to their conversion as the result of the gospel beingpreached in the area (Rom. 16:5; 2Thess. 2:13).

The word “parable” is used to speak of a particular literary form that communicates indirectly by means of comparative language, often for the purpose of challenging the listener to accept or reject a new way of thinking about a particular matter. Parables regularly incorporate concrete and accessible images from the daily life of the audience, and often they are terse and pointed, mentioning only the details relevant for an effective comparison. However, any attempt to define the term “parable” in a clear and concise way is complicated by the fact that both the Hebrew (mashal) and the Greek (parabolē) words regularly translated by the English word “parable” have much broader connotations. For instance, in the OT mashal can designate proverbs (Prov. 1:1), riddles (Ezek. 17:2), prophetic utterances (Num. 23:7, 18; 24:3, 15, 20, 21, 23), and sayings (1Sam. 10:12); similarly, in the NT parabolē denotes proverbs (Luke 4:23), riddles (Mark 3:23), analogies (Mark 7:17), and more. Therefore, no comprehensive definition of parables is agreed upon by biblical scholars, and very little said about parables in general will apply to every parable.

Parables in the Bible

Although not designated with the Hebrew word mashal, the story of the trees (Judg. 9:7–15) and the story of the ewe lamb (2Sam. 12:1–4) may be considered to be parables. Like many parables, the story about the ewe lamb told by Nathan prompts its audience, in this case David, to condemn the actions of a character in the parable before being confronted with the fact that the character and his conduct are symbolic of David himself. The parable is the vehicle used to bring about self-condemnation of its audience.

Although Jesus is not the only speaker of parables in the ancient world, the Gospels narrate a tremendous number of parables within his teaching. The major parables of Jesus are listed in table 4. The diversity of form represented in this list is striking. Some of the parables consist of short, relatively simple comparisons that lack the development of any significant story line. This is true, for instance, of the parables of the mustard seed, yeast, hidden treasure, and the pearl. Each of these offers a simple simile to explain some feature of the kingdom of God, a frequent topic in Jesus’ parables, and may include an additional sentence of clarification.

Table 4. Major Parables of Jesus

Wise and foolish builders (Matt. 7:24-27; Luke 6:46-49)

Sower and the soils (Matt. 13:3–8, 18–23; Mark 4:3–8, 14–20; Luke 8:5–8, 11–15)

Weeds (Matt. 13:24-30, 36-43)

Mustard seed (Matt. 13:31–32; Mark 4:30–32; Luke 13:18–19)

Yeast (Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:20-21)

Hidden treasure (Matt. 13:44)

Pearl (Matt. 13:45-46)

Net (Matt. 13:47-50)

Lost sheep (Matt. 18:12-14; Luke 15:4-7)

Unmerciful servant (Matt. 18:23-35)

Workers in the vineyard (Matt. 20:1-16)

Two sons (Matt. 21:28-32)

Wicked tenants (Matt. 21:33–44; Mark 12:1–11; Luke 20:9–18)

Wedding banquet (Matt. 22:2-14)

Faithful and wise servant (Matt. 24:45-51; Luke 12:42-48)

Ten virgins (Matt. 25:1-13)

Talents (Matt. 25:14–30; Luke 19:12–27)

Sheep and goats (Matt. 25:31-46)

Growing seeds (Mark 4:26-29)

Money lender (Luke 7:41-47)

Good Samritan (Luke 10:30-37)

Friend in need (Luke 11:5-8)

Rich fool (Luke 12:16-21)

Unfruitful fig tree (Luke 13:6-9)

Lowest seat (Luke 14:7-14)

Great banquet (Luke 14:16-24)

Cost of discipleship (Luke 14:28-33)

Lost coin (Luke 15:8-10)

Lost (prodigal) son (Luke 15:11-32)

Shrewd manager (Luke 16:1-8)

Rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31)

Persistent widow (Luke 18:2-8)

Pharisee and tax collector (Luke 18:10-14)

Parables such as the good Samaritan and the prodigal son, on the other hand, are significantly longer, contain developed plots, and present several central characters. Stories of this sort may use the characters as examples of behavior to be either emulated or avoided, as in the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector. Such parables may remain open-ended in an attempt to force the listeners into a decision about what should happen (the unfruitful fig tree), or they may include a clear, concluding explanation that leaves no doubt as to how the audience should change their belief or behavior as a result of the parable’s teaching (the moneylender). The degree to which each of these parables directly addresses the intended audience and the intended topic can vary greatly. For instance, although the parable of the rich fool directly addresses the subject matter of material wealth, the anonymity of the rich man in the story does not openly condemn any particular member of Jesus’ audience. Alternatively, a parable may treat a subject that differs from the intended one and expect the listener to transfer the lesson to another topic. This is the case with the parable of the weeds, which speaks explicitly about farming. Nonetheless, when the disciples seek an explanation of this parable, Jesus indicates that it is to be understood as speaking about that feature of the kingdom of heaven whereby the sons of the kingdom and the sons of the evil one intermingle in the world until the end of the age, when the sons of the evil one will be separated to face a fiery judgment (Matt. 13:36–43).

Other parables, such as that of the lost sheep, revolve around a central question posed to the listeners. By asking “who among you” would behave in the way described, the parable anticipates a negative response that asserts that no one would act in the manner detailed in the parable. The NIV frequently inserts the phrase “suppose one of you” in places where the introductory question “who among you” appears in Greek.

Purpose of Jesus’ Teaching in Parables

It is quite clear that Jesus regularly employed parables in his teaching, but his reason for doing so is less evident. Jesus’ own somewhat perplexing statement in Mark 4:10–12 indicates that his parables have the dual purpose of both revealing and concealing the secret of the kingdom, but one may wonder how it is that parables perform both functions simultaneously. If the goal of comparative language is to make clearer a concept or idea that is difficult, then certainly Jesus’ parables function in this way. Through the simple, accessible, and concrete word pictures that are his parables, Jesus discloses many characteristics and features of the kingdom of God, which is at best something of an enigma to his audience. By speaking to the crowds, albeit at times in an exaggerated fashion, about the things that they know, such as farming, banquets, baking, and other elements of everyday life, Jesus expands their understanding of what they do not know. However, the indirect quality of parables simultaneously blocks spontaneous understanding and therefore requires the audience to engage in additional reflection to ensure that they have truly grasped what is being taught. Likewise, the ability to address an issue by slyly sneaking up on it from behind results in parables that initially conceal their true purpose of convincing the listeners of a new way of thinking or behaving such that the conviction they are meant to induce comes with a surprise kick at the end.

Interpretation of Parables

Interpretation over the centuries. Throughout church history until the nineteenth century, parables were widely interpreted by means of the allegorical method. That is, all the surface details of parables were identified as symbols of some deeper spiritual truth. A classic example of allegorizing is Augustine’s interpretation of the parable of the good Samaritan, whereby he interpreted surface details of the text according to allegorical equations (see table 5). Allegorical interpretations of the same parable by other Christians, however, did not always result in the same interpretations of the symbols. For this reason, most scholars today reject the excessive allegorization of Augustine and others throughout church history. However, how many details in a parable, if any, are to be interpreted allegorically remains a central question in parable interpretation. For instance, in the parable of the mustard seed, are the mustard seed and the plant that it produces allegories for the unobtrusive beginnings yet manifest results of the kingdom? If so, what then of the man and the birds also mentioned in the parable? Are they symbols of a deeper spiritual truth suchthat the man is to be equated with God, or are they included only to augment the teaching of the parable such that the birds merely highlight the extreme size of the tree into which the seed has grown?

Table 5. Augustine’s Allegorical Interpretation of the Good Samaritan

Details in the Parable and its Allegorical Equivalent:

The man = Adam

Jerusalem = The heavenly city

Jericho = The moon (a symbol of mortality)

The robbers = The devil

Beating the man = Persuading him to sin

Priest and Levite = The Old Testament priesthood

Samaritan = Christ

Binding of wounds = Restraint of sin

Oil = Comfort of hope

Animal = Incarnation

Inn = Church

Innkeeper = Apostle Paul

The work of the German scholar Adolf Jülicher at the end of the nineteenth century has widely affected parable interpretation since that time. Jülicher asserted that parables are not allegories and therefore should not be interpreted allegorically at all. Instead, he argued that parables have only one main point, normally a general, religious statement. Interpreters since Jülicher continue to debate how much of a parable is significant and how many points of correspondence are intended. More-recent views have posited that Jülicher went too far in maintaining a strict distinction between parable and allegory, and many interpreters believe that allegorical elements are present in parables, with perhaps the main characters in a parable being the most likely candidates for allegorical interpretation. This renewed openness to allegorical features in parables is due in part to the recognition that the Gospels record Jesus’ own tendency to offer allegorical interpretations of his parables when his disciples inquire as to their meaning. This is most clearly seen in the parable of the sower and the soils, which includes details such as seed, birds, the sun, and thorns. Jesus reveals that the seed is to be interpreted as the message about the kingdom, the birds stand for the evil one, the sun is representative of persecution because of the gospel, and the thorns indicate worries and wealth (Matt. 13:18–23).

Guidelines for interpreting parables. It is generally best to recognize that not all parables are identical, and that one should consider several possible interpretive strategies before determining which approach best fits any given parable. Nonetheless, some broad guidelines for the interpretation of parables include the following:

1.The characters and plots within parables are literary creations and are not historical. The parable of the lost sheep is not a historical rec-ord of a certain shepherd whose sheep went missing. No actual invitation was issued for the great banquet in the parable. Rather, in a parable the listener is brought into a narrative world controlled by the storyteller and by implication has no need for details that the speaker fails to provide. Therefore, it does not matter whether the shepherd himself was at fault in the loss of the sheep, and the choice of food set before the banquet guests is inconsequential.

2.Parables often follow the principle of end stress. Interpreters should carefully consider how the parable ends when determining the meaning the parable is intended to convey. At times an explanatory conclusion to the parable is included and may be helpful in directing the reader toward the topic that is really being addressed. This is the case in the parable of the two sons, in which Jesus’ concluding explanation identifies tax collectors and prostitutes as those who are entering the kingdom ahead of those who have received John’s prophetic message but failed to accept it.

Recent studies on parables that reflect issues raised by two fields of study respectively known as form criticism and redaction criticism are likely to question the accuracy of such concluding statements as well as any introductory comments to parables that may also be presented in the Gospel text. Many scholars ask if and to what extent the Gospel writers made changes to the parables that they record. They wonder whether it is possible to discern the original context and circ*mstance in which Jesus relayed his parables, or whether the details of the original context had been forgotten by the time that the evangelists wrote. Could it be that any introductory and concluding comments included with some parables are not authentic to Jesus’ ministry but instead reflect issues that arose in the early church? In spite of the doubts of some, more-conservative scholars have presented arguments for the continued trustworthiness of the Gospel accounts about Jesus’ teaching including introductory or concluding statements associated with his parables.

3.Look for the use of OT symbols in Jesus’ parables. The parables of Jesus and the parables recorded in other rabbinical literature are replete with similar figures and images. Kings, banquets, weddings, farmers, debtors, and more appear with frequency; they perhaps developed into stock images to be used in stories in the ancient world. If such details appear in a parable, the interpreter should consider strongly whether some allegorical meaning is intended whereby a kingly figure represents God, a son represents the people of God, and a banquet indicates a time of coming judgment or reward.

4.Interpreters should exercise extreme caution regarding doctrinal teaching drawn from a parable, particularly if such doctrine cannot be confirmed by the theological teaching found in a nonparabolic portion of Scripture. For instance, in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, is one to conclude that conversations can occur between the dead who reside in hell and those who reside in heaven? Likewise, should one learn that it is possible for the deceased human to be sent back to the living with a message from God? These doctrinal issues seem to be outside the range of teaching intended by the parable, and support for these ideas cannot be found in other biblical texts.

5.In recognition of the indirect nature of the communication in parables, some interpreters question whether a parable’s meaning can be reproduced in propositional language. In other words, can the meaning of a parable be expressed in nonparabolic language, or is some necessary component lost when one changes the form? Similarly, is it possible for people who have heard the story of the good Samaritan repeatedly to be struck by the confrontational force that was central to its initial reception? Not only are the images of Samaritans and Levites foreign to the modern listener, but also the familiarity with the story that has resulted from its retelling over time has domesticated the parable such that the details that were meant to shock and surprise are now anticipated and predictable. In this way, are parables like jokes that have been repeated too many times until one becomes inoculated against the punch line? Because of these concerns about the inability of today’s listeners to truly hear the parable as it was meant to be heard, some interpreters may wish to consider how it could be recast with images common to today’s audience and retold in such a way that the listeners experience the surprising twist that the initial audiences felt.

OldTestament

Phoeniciansand Philistines. Asa people whose ancestral territory lay in the landlocked andtimber-poor highlands of Ephraim and Judah, the Israelites ofbiblical times never achieved prominence in seafaring orshipbuilding. Instead, they relied for their maritime enterprises onalliances with their coastal neighbors, particularly the Phoenicianstates to the north of Israel, who excelled in seafaring and hadaccess to the abundant timber forests of Lebanon. The Phoenicians(the Punics of classical antiquity) were famous in antiquity fortheir seafaring. In biblical times, they traded heavily betweenSyria-Palestine and Egypt and also sailed throughout theMediterranean, establishing colonies as far away as Tunisia(Carthage) and Spain (Cadiz).

Anotherseagoing people prominent in the OT were the Philistines, whose baseof power was to the west of Judah, along the Mediterranean coast. TheBible associates the Philistines with the five cities of Ashdod,Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza. The Philistines were among the SeaPeoples, who came to the Levant from the Aegean beginning in thetwelfth century BC (Amos 9:7; Jer. 47:4).

Theperennial enmity between the Philistines and the Israelites precludedjoint maritime ventures of the sort shared by Israel and thePhoenicians, and the Bible does not describe Philistine maritimeactivities in any depth. Nevertheless, the seagoing nature of thePhilistines is reflected by the fact that their settlements remainedconfined to the coastal region. They never made a systematic attemptto take over the traditionally Israelite and Judahite highlands. Whenthey did venture into the Judean mountains, it was to assert amilitary and political presence among the agrarian Israelites andJudahites rather than to establish permanent settlements andPhilistine population centers. Twelfth-century BC reliefs at MedinetHabu (in the mortuary temple of RamessesIII) depict a navalbattle between the Sea Peoples and the Egyptians. The reliefs includepictures of Philistine ships and sailors.

Israeliteseafaring.One of the rare references to Israelite seafaring describes theDanites and the Asherites in connection with ships and harbors (Judg.5:17; see also Ezek. 27:19). Traditional Danite territory overlappedwith the area of Philistine settlement. Asherite territory overlappedsubstantially with Phoenician territory. It is possible that Judg.5:17 refers to the fact that the Danites and the Asherites worked inthe port cities serving Philistine and Phoenician shipping. Inanother passage, Zebulun is associated with ports (Gen. 49:13). It isnoteworthy that the Israelite coast between Jaffa and Dor (roughlybetween Philistia and Phoenicia) does not have an abundance ofnatural harbors. Later, Herod the Great would build the artificialharbor at Caesarea in the first century BC. The great expense of sucha project—including the construction of over 2,500 feet ofbreakwaters made of underwater concrete, mostly imported fromItaly—suggests the extent of the need for secure harbors inthis region.

Solomon’sfleet.The zenith of Israelite seafaring occurred during the reign ofSolomon. Solomon built a fleet of ships at “Ezion Geber, whichis near Elath in Edom, on the shore of the Red Sea” (1Kings9:26). The purpose of these ships was to bring back gold from Ophir(1Kings 9:28), possibly a location in the Arabian Peninsula, towhich a port on the Red Sea would have offered ready access. Thestory confirms the aforementioned dependence on the Phoenicians inthe area of seafaring: although the ships belonged to Solomon, “Hiram[the Phoenician king of Tyre] sent his men—sailors who knew thesea—to serve in the fleet with Solomon’s men”(1Kings 9:27). The timber for the ships would also have beenimported by Israel from Phoenicia (see 1Kings 9:11). Even atthe height of its power, Israel lacked the human resources to embarkon sea voyages independently of the Phoenicians.

Thesuccess of Solomon’s project, of course, depended not only onwarm relations with the Phoenicians but also on territorial controlof the historically Edomite lands between Judah and the Red Sea. Thisfavorable combination of conditions would come and go throughout thebiblical period, and with it, Israel’s modest presence on theseas. From the Phoenician point of view, cooperation with Israel wasan essential component of gaining access to a Red Sea port, and withit to the products of Arabia, the Horn of Africa, and India. ThePhoenicians, as expansive as their travel was in the Mediterranean,could never independently control the long overland route fromPhoenicia to the Red Sea, since it ran through the territory ofIsrael and Edom. Their best hope was a friendly and powerfulIsraelite ally. This explains the cordial relationship and why Hiramsent not only his sailors to serve Solomon but also craftsmen andsupplies for the construction of the temple (1Kings 5:10–12).Solomon and Hiram jointly operated “a fleet of trading ships”that would return to port every three years bringing “gold,silver, and ivory, and apes and baboons” (1Kings 10:22).

Jehoshaphat.In the mid-ninth century BC, King Jehoshaphat of Judah attempted torepeat Solomon’s feat of launching a fleet from Ezion Geber(1Kings 22:48–49; 2Chron. 20:35–37).According to both accounts, the ships were wrecked before they couldset sail. On several other points, however, the two versions of thestory disagree in ways that bear on questions of the political andeconomic conditions of Israelite seafaring.

Bythis time, Israel and Judah had split into separate kingdoms, withthe northern kingdom of Israel being geographically and politicallycloser to the Phoenicians. The powerful King Ahab of Israel,Jehoshaphat’s contemporary through much of his reign, marriedJezebel, the daughter of the Sidonian (Phoenician) king Ethbaal(1Kings 16:31). According to 1Kings, King Ahaziah ofIsrael (Ahab’s son) proposed to cooperate with Jehoshaphat bysending his own men on the voyage, much as Hiram had assisted Solomonin the previous century. Jehoshaphat rejected the suggestion,possibly indicating a bid for Judean autonomy in an era of northerndominance. According to 2Chronicles, however, Jehoshaphat didcooperate willingly with Ahaziah, and this was the reason that theships foundered in port: God punished the righteous Jehoshaphat fortoo close a relationship with his wicked northern counterpart. In1Kings 22:47 it is mentioned that at the time of Jehoshaphat’sventure there was no king in Edom. As noted, control of the overlandroute between Judah and the Red Sea was necessary for the success ofany voyage originating from Ezion Geber.

Howeverthe contradiction between 1Kings and 2Chroniclesregarding the involvement of Ahaziah is resolved, both versions ofthe story highlight the fact that the port at Ezion Geber commandedthe interest of the Judeans, the Israelites, and the Phoenicians, andits successful operation probably depended on the cooperation of allthree.

Shipsof Tarshish.Several biblical texts, including the stories of Solomon andJehoshaphat, mention “ships of Tarshish” (1Kings10:22 NIV mg.). In a number of contexts, such ships are associatedwith the transportation of metals and metal ores, including iron,lead, tin, gold, and silver (1Kings 10:22; Ezek. 27:12; Jer.10:9). The exact derivation of the term “ships of Tarshish”is uncertain, though it is clear from the descriptions of theircargoes that such ships could travel over long distances. As Ezekielobserves, “The ships of Tarshish serve as carriers for yourwares. You are filled with heavy cargo as you sail the sea. Youroarsmen take you out to the high seas” (Ezek. 27:25–26).

Inthe Table of Nations, Tarshish is listed as a descendant of Javan(Gen. 10:4), along with a number of other seafaring peoples of theeastern Mediterranean (“Javan” indicates the peoples ofthe Aegean and is linguistically equivalent to “Ionia”[see also Ezek. 27:12–22]). Some have suggested, then, that theships of Tarshish should be associated with Tarsus in southeasternTurkey, an area containing silver mines (also the birthplace of Paul[Acts 9:11]). Others have suggested the Phoenician colony ofTartessus in Spain, another metal-producing area. This locationfigures in the interpretation of the identification of thedestination of Jonah as Tarshish (Jon. 1:3): presumably, if he wereavoiding Nineveh and departing from Joppa, he would head towardSpain, in the exact opposite direction, rather than toward Tarsus inCilicia.

Inaddition to these two geographical options, some have attempted toexplain the expression “ships of Tarshish” as derivingfrom the Akkadian term for smelting or refining: perhaps the manyreferences to cargoes of metals indicate that the ships were used totransport metal ore to refining centers. Finally, one scholar hasproposed that the term is related to the Greek word tarsos,meaning “oar.”

Descriptionsof ships and seafaring.Ezekiel, in his lament concerning the Phoenician city of Tyre (Ezek.27), relates a number of details related to Phoenician seafaring. Thepicture largely confirms the descriptions of how Solomon built andmanned his fleet with the assistance of his Tyrian ally. Timber forthe construction of the ship came from Lebanon and Cyprus, amongother places (vv. 5–6). Sails were made from Egyptian linen(v.7), and as noted above, the oarsmen and sailors were fromthe Phoenician city-states (vv. 8–9). Ezekiel goes on to list alarge number of ports of call as well as a dazzling variety ofcargoes (vv. 12–24). Notably, Ezekiel has the Judahites and theIsraelites offering the products of their agrarian economy—“wheatfrom Minnith and confections, honey, olive oil and balm”(v.17)—thus filling out the picture of what theIsraelites gave in exchange for the precious metals and luxury itemsimported by their country from elsewhere.

In1999 archaeologists explored two eighth-century BC Phoenician shipsthat had sunk thirty miles west of Ashkelon. The ships, eachmeasuring about fifty feet in length, contained large cargoes of wineand were headed either for Egypt or for the Phoenician colonies inthe western Mediterranean.

Shipsand sailing figure prominently in the story of Jonah, who boarded aship bound for Tarshish (see discussion above) at Joppa on theMediterranean coast. In the story we see a number of features ofancient sea travel. Jonah paid a fare for his voyage (Jon. 1:3). Notonly the biblical author (see 1:4), but also the presumablynon-Israelite sailors, believed that the great storm was the doing ofa god, and that it could be calmed by appealing to that god(1:6)—although cargo was thrown overboard for good measure.When Paul was caught in a storm in the first century AD, the samestrategies were still in use (Acts 27:38). The religious habits ofancient sailors, particularly their reverence for the gods whocontrolled the stormy seas and thus held their lives in the balance,are illuminated by the discovery of stone anchors in several temples(presumably left by sailors as offerings), including at the portcities of Ugarit, Kition, and Byblos.

Psalm107:23–32 speaks of God’s care of sailors from anIsraelite perspective. In the psalm, those who “went out on thesea in ships,” the “merchants on the mighty waters”(i.e., the deep, open sea), witness firsthand the works of the God ofIsrael, which include both the raising and the quieting of the storm.This passage vividly expresses the terror of being caught in a stormand the great relief and gratitude felt by sailors who reached safehaven.

Noah’sArk

Accordingto the biblical account, Noah’s ark was 450 feet long, 75 feetwide, and 45 feet high (300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits [Gen.6:15]). It had three decks, a roof, and a window. By comparison, theship of Uta-napishti in the Epic of Gilgamesh is described as havingsix decks (and thus seven stories), edges of 180 feet (ten dozencubits) in each dimension, and occupying the space of an acre (arough approximation of the dimensions given). Both ships aredescribed as providing space for the builder’s family and everyliving creature. In the Atrahasis Epic, the boat is roofed, but itsdimensions are not given.

Becauseof the character of Gen. 6–8, it is inappropriate to drawconclusions from the story regarding shipbuilding in historicalantiquity. According to the specifications given in the biblicaltext, Noah’s ark would have been the largest wooden ship inhistory, equaled only by the United States schooner Wyoming,completed in 1909. While the overall length of the Wyoming was also450 feet, nearly 100 feet of length was accounted for in the fore andaft booms, so that the hull length was only 350 feet. Even with earlytwentieth-century shipbuilding technology, its extravagant lengthrendered the Wyoming unseaworthy, and the ship foundered in 1924. Thelargest documented wooden ships of antiquity include the GreekSyracusia(third century BC; 180 feet), described by Athenaeus; the Roman Isis(second century AD; 180 feet), described by Lucian; Caligula’s“Giant Ship” (first century AD; 341 feet), recovered inmodern times and possibly corresponding to a ship described by Plinythe Elder; and PtolemyIV’s Tessarakonteres (third centuryBC), reported by Plutarch to have been about 425 feet long. This lastship was not designed for cruising in open water.

NewTestament

Fishingin the Sea of Galilee. Severalof Jesus’ disciples worked as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee,and the Gospels document their use of small boats for fishing andtraveling across the sea. Fishing was done with nets thrown both fromboats and from the shore (Mark 1:16, 19). The boats used by fishermenon the Sea of Galilee may have been small enough to pull up onto thebeach (Luke 5:2), or to be nearly capsized by a large catch of fish(Luke 5:7) or by a violent storm (Mark 4:37). They were large enoughto transport several men and even to sleep in (Mark 4:38). Such boatscould be rowed or sailed; in Mark 6:48 the disciples had to resort torowing because of an unfavorable headwind. On one occasion, Jesusstood in a boat to preach to a crowd gathered on the shore (Mark4:1). The Sea of Galilee is about eight miles wide and thirteen mileslong. On several occasions, Jesus traveled by boat across the sea toavoid having to walk long distances around its circumference (e.g.,Matt. 9:1; 14:22; 15:39).

In1986 archaeologists recovered a fishing boat dating to the mid-firstcentury AD on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. The boat had beenscuttled near the shore and was preserved under mud. The “JesusBoat,” as it was dubbed, measures twenty-seven feet in lengthand has a beam seven and a half feet long. Numerous species of woodwere used in its construction and repairs throughout its useful life.While there is no evidence to link the boat to Jesus or hisdisciples, radiometric dating places it in the correct period, and itprovides a likely model of the type of boat portrayed in the Gospels.

Asecond source of information regarding ships and sailing in the NT isthe account in Acts of Paul’s many sea voyages. As in the caseof Jehoshaphat, the Tyrians, Jonah, and Jesus’ disciples, Paullearned firsthand the perils of seafaring in small wooden boats:among his many traumas, along with beatings and stonings, herecalled, “Three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and aday in the open sea” (2Cor. 11:25).

Paul’sjourneys.A survey of Paul’s sea travels on his four journeys gives someidea of the routes that could be taken by a paying traveler in theeastern Mediterranean and Aegean.

1.Paul’s first missionary journey included voyages from Seleuciain Syria to the port of Salamis in Cyprus (Acts 13:4) and from Cyprus(Paphos) to Perga on the southern coast of Asia Minor (13:13). Afterjourneying through the interior, Paul returned to Attalia, where heembarked for the return trip to Syria, presumably passing againthrough the port at Salamis (14:26).

2.The second missionary journey began not with a sea voyage but ratherwith a trek through the interior of Syria and Cilicia, illustratingthat although sea travel was by far a more rapid means of travel, theoverland routes were by no means impossible (Acts 15:39). Paul wouldrepeat this land route during his third journey (19:1). Sea travelwas fast, but when one had plenty of friends along the alternativeland route, a sea journey was considerably less enjoyable. It isduring the second journey that we have the first recorded accounts ofPaul sailing in the Aegean. From Troas in Asia Minor, he sailed theshort distance to Macedonia (16:11), putting in midway at the islandof Samothrace. Apparently, Paul traveled by sea down the coast fromBerea to Athens (17:14). At the conclusion of his second journey,Paul sailed from Corinth to Caesarea, with a stop at Ephesus(18:18–22). Not counting any intervening ports of call notmentioned in the text, this would be the longest single leg of seatravel so far mentioned.

3.The third missionary journey once more began with a long overlandtrip from Syria through Asia Minor; by this time, Paul had manyassociates along the way to visit. Again, he sailed in the Aegean,from Ephesus to Macedonia (Acts 20:1) and back (20:6). At one point,Paul opted to travel overland, from Troas to Assos, while hiscompanions sailed down the coast (20:13). Meeting up with them, hesailed on, hugging the coast of Asia Minor, then sailing south ofCyprus along an open-water route to Tyre. From Tyre, the ship againhugged the Palestinian coast, stopping in several ports before Pauldisembarked at Caesarea (21:7). Paul’s journeys illustrate thevariety of itineraries taken by ships. They were capable of sailingin deep water, but they would also hug the coast when there werereasons to make frequent stops.

4.Paul’s fourth journey, which he made in custody on his way to atrial before the emperor at Rome, was to be the most dangerous. Fromthe account in Acts we can glean a number of details of life at seain the first century AD. The ship bound for Italy was large, and itcarried 276 passengers and crew (Acts 27:6, 37), including soldiersand prisoners, at least one companion of a prisoner (Paul’sfriend Aristarchus [27:2]), a ship’s pilot, and the ship’sowner (27:11). Sailors used celestial navigation (27:20) and tooksoundings in shallow water (27:28). We see also that the ship’scourse could be determined by the direction of the prevailing winds:twice during the journey Paul’s ship was forced to sail to thelee of large islands (Cyprus and Crete)—a longer journey, butthe only option for a ship that was not rigged to sail close-hauled.

Whenextended periods of unfavorable weather were forecast, one option wassimply to put in at a port until conditions improved, preferably in aharbor that was in the lee of an island (Acts 27:12). We learnsomething of the measures that were taken in heavy weather, many ofwhich are still used in modern times: ropes were tied around the hullof the ship to prevent it from breaking up in rough seas (27:17), thelifeboat was brought onto the deck and made fast (27:17), sea anchorswere deployed to keep the bow of the ship oriented into the oncomingwaves (27:7), the rudder was lashed amidships (27:40), valuable cargoand gear were jettisoned (27:19, 38), and, as in the days of Jonah,sailors and passengers prayed for divine deliverance (27:29; see alsothe protective emblems in 28:11).

Whenall other means had been exhausted, a ship could be run aground on asandy beach (Acts 27:39), a measure that would have risked damage tothe boat but saved lives. In the case of Paul’s ship, thedecision to run aground ultimately resulted in the destruction of theship (27:41).

Metaphorsand illustrations.Several NT authors draw illustrations from the nautical world. Jameslikens the harmful power of evil speech to the rudder of a ship:although it is a small device, by it the pilot can control a greatship (James 3:4–5). Elsewhere, he compares the doubting of theunwise person to being lost at sea in a storm (James 1:6; cf. Eph.4:14). In 1Tim. 1:19 the loss of faith and good conscience islikened to a shipwreck. Hebrews 6:19 describes the assurance of God’sfaithfulness as an anchor for the soul.

The NT conception of tribulation is perhaps best summarizedin Paul’s pastoral reminder, “We must go through manyhardships to enter the kingdom of God” (Acts 14:22). The Greekterm used here for “hardship” is thlipsis.

Inthe NT, thlipsis may refer generally to the sufferings andafflictions that occur in the normal course of human living (John16:21; Acts 7:11; 1Cor. 7:28; James 1:27). In its more commonand specific usage, “tribulation” relates directly to theexperience of the people of God as a consequence of their faithfulproclamation of the gospel. Thus, in the parable of the sower,“tribulation or persecution arises on account of the word”(Matt. 13:21; Mark 4:17 ESV).

Oneof the primary aspects of the biblical view of tribulation relates tothe tribulation and suffering of Christ as the pattern for the church(Rev. 1:9). That his followers would suffer tribulation was madeexplicit by Jesus to his followers in the Farewell Discourse (John14–17). There he informs them, “In the world you willhave tribulation” (John 16:33 ESV).

Closelyrelated to the impending tribulation that confronts all believers isthe NT affirmation that the sufferings of Christ serve as the modelfor the tribulation of the people of God. Jesus thus warns thedisciples, “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hatedme first” (John 15:18; cf. 15:20). Paul continues this conceptin Col. 1:24 (cf. 2Cor. 1:5; 4:10–12; Phil. 3:10; 1Pet.4:13). The tribulation that the people of God experience serves toequip them in a variety of ways. Most significantly, tribulationresults in the transformation of the people of God into the likenessof Christ (Rom. 5:3–5; 2Cor. 4:8–12).

Thebook of Acts records the fulfillment of Jesus’ warning to hisfollowers: it was because of persecution that the church wasscattered (Acts 8:1). Later, Paul notes that he has experiencedtribulation (2Cor. 1:8), as did the church in Thessalonica(1Thess. 1:6) and the recipients of Hebrews (Heb. 10:33). Thereality of “tribulation” is seen in the exhortation ofJohn to the church in Smyrna (Rev. 2:9).

Anotherimportant aspect of the tribulations that await the people of God inthe NT era is the relationship of tribulation to the kingdom of God(cf. Matt. 24:9–14; Rev. 1:9; 7:14). Many hold to the notionthat there will be an intensification of tribulation immediatelyprior to the return of Christ (Matt. 24:31; Mark 13:24).

The“great tribulation” of Rev. 7:14 has been interpreted ina variety of ways. Some understand this as a future event limited toseven or three and one-half years. Many others, however, associatethis event with the tribulation, suffering, and affliction of thepeople of God throughout the entire era from the resurrection to thesecond coming. The expression “great tribulation” alludesto Dan. 12:1. The Danielic context incorporates a time of persecutionand suffering among the people of God. The use of “tribulation”in Revelation (Rev. 1:9; 2:9–10, 22; 7:14) corresponds with thepersecution of the people of God. A comparison with Matt. 24:21confirms this conclusion. Therefore, regardless of how one reads the“great tribulation” in Rev. 7:14, as present or futurereality, it appears that this tribulation refers to the suffering ofGod’s people and not to an exemption from it (cf. John 17:15).

Hermeneutics is the science and practice of interpretation. It can refer more generally to the philosophy of human understanding, or more specifically to the tools and methods used for interpreting communicative acts.

Human communication takes place in a variety of ways: through the use of nonverbal signs, through speech, and through writing. Effective communication requires some degree of shared belief, knowledge, and background between the participants. If the communicators have a significant amount of common ground, they will be able to successfully understand one another with little extra effort. Conversely, individuals with vastly different backgrounds will need to take extra steps to communicate effectively, such as defining special terms, avoiding jargon and colloquialisms, appreciating details about the other’s cultural assumptions, or learning a foreign language.

The Bible is not exempt from this process of communication. The Scriptures are meant to be read, understood, and put into practice (Luke 8:4–15; James 1:18), a task that requires effort and study on the part of its readers (Acts 17:11; 2 Tim. 2:15). Everyone who reads the Bible is involved in this interpretative process, though readers will vary in their hermeneutical self-consciousness and skill. Thus, although readers are able to understand and appropriate much of the Bible without any special training in hermeneutical principles, such training is appropriate and helpful, both in attaining self-consciousness in interpretation and in acquiring new skills and insights in the effort to become a better reader.

The Development of Hermeneutics

The church has benefited from a long history of thinking about the nature and purpose of interpreting its Scriptures, and that reflection has resulted in a wide variety of hermeneutical theories and practices. How does one determine the meaning of a text? Is meaning the truth embedded within the passage? Or is it the original author’s intention in writing? Or does the text act independently of its author and history, either because it stands on its own terms or because it only “means” anything in interaction with readers? The answers to these questions will determine how readers approach a text, the questions they expect that text to answer, and the tools they use in interpretation.

From the early church to the Enlightenment. The early church emphasized the ability of the biblical text to convey heavenly truth, whether that truth was conceived as doctrinal teaching or absolute ethical rules. While the “literal meaning” of many texts could often supply simple truths and maxims, such a reading was at other times inadequate and could appear incompatible with what were considered basic and fundamental beliefs. Various allegorical techniques were therefore employed to explain such problematic texts. Interpreters often viewed the literal and historical features of the text as a starting point in the search for fuller meaning, as symbolic pointers to moral principles, absolute truths, or eternal realities. These practices were systematized throughout the Middle Ages and resulted in an extensive development of tradition. Church tradition, in turn, provided a degree of protection from the potential for arbitrariness in allegorical techniques, insisting that interpretation must be guided by the “rule of faith,” the traditional teaching and faith of the church.

Beginning in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, scholarship moved to distance itself from such tradition. The Protestant Reformers, dissatisfied with the rule of church tradition, sought to displace its authority with the direct rule of Scripture. They therefore returned to the original biblical text, engaging in critical study of the text itself and translating the Bible into the vernacular to make it more widely accessible. In the centuries that followed, Enlightenment scholars went a step further in their rejection of the church as the sole repository of knowledge. Instead, they asserted, knowledge was acquired through scientific inquiry and critical study. Such inquiry could be applied to any field: the forces of nature, human anatomy, or the interpretation of texts. The meaning of a text was not some abstract truth or heavenly principle; rather, meaning was determined by the human author’s original intention in writing and was therefore a historical matter. The intention of an author could be better exposed and understood through a more complete study of both the language in which a text was written and the historical circ*mstances that surrounded it. Many of these same emphases had been championed by the Protestant Reformers; yet the Enlightenment thinkers differed on one key point: the Reformers never questioned that the text was the word of God.

From the Enlightenment to the present. This favorable attitude toward historical research dwindled over the centuries. In its place authors emphasized the primacy of the text as text, apart from any connection to its origin and history. Literature, it is argued, ultimately operates independently from its author’s intention. All that matters is the text, and it is the reader’s job to understand the text on its own terms, apart from the contingencies surrounding its creation. To that end, interpreters should pay careful attention to the text’s literary features, including its plot structure, characterization, themes, and use of imagery. An interesting example of this hermeneutical dynamic is found in John 19:22, where Pilate asserts, “What I have written, I have written.” Pilate’s words quickly take on significance far beyond their author’s intention, primarily because they are juxtaposed with other themes in John, such as testimony and the kingship of Christ.

More recent approaches have emphasized the role of the reader in the construction of meaning. Interpretation, it is argued, is determined by the interaction between reader and text; readers bring their own presuppositions to the task of interpretation, and such assumptions determine meaning. The author and the historical context of the text will exert some influence, but the primary determinant of meaning is the present reader in his or her present environment. This is not to say that the text “means” whatever a reader wants it to mean; rather, it makes meaning contingent upon the contemporary environment and not subject to anything external to individual readers. On the one hand, readers must“actualize” the text by applying and appropriating it within an environment alien to the original. On the other, readers have the right, and in some cases the responsibility, of undermining the text, particularly if that text assists in the oppression of others.

Elements of an Effective Hermeneutic

An effective hermeneutic requires keeping each of these elements in constant balance with one another. God’s word is truthful and fully trustworthy, yet it is given to his people through individual human authors, authors who wrote in a particular context to a particular audience at a particular time. Understanding the Bible therefore requires knowledge of the purposes of these authors in their specific historical contexts. Nevertheless, our primary access to authorial intention is through the biblical text itself. Finally, understanding always requires personal interaction with, and application of, the text of Scripture to each person’s own life and circ*mstances. Thus, hermeneutics involves the simultaneous interaction of a variety of perspectives—truth, author, text, and reader—each of which cannot function properly without the others. What follows here is an outline of the most important hermeneutical tools required for such a weighty endeavor.

Linguistics

An appreciation of the nature, structure, and function of language is fundamental to any interpretative endeavor. Obviously, this applies first of all to the specific languages in which the books of the Bible were originally composed. Each language has its own unique vocabulary, grammar, and syntax, and structures available to a writer in one language often are absent in another. Thus, while it is often necessary and acceptable to rely on translations (Neh. 7:73–8:12), readers should be aware that translation itself involves a degree of unavoidable interpretation.

A more general analysis of language is also useful. Understanding the typical patterns by which authors will string sentences together is necessary for following a writing’s train of thought. This tool, called “discourse analysis,” operates above the sentence level, attempting to understand and explain how sentences function in conjunction with one another in order to produce meaningful paragraphs, and how those paragraphs in turn operate within the overarching purpose of the discourse. These patterns of discourse can vary on the basis of book, author, language, culture, and literary genre, but there are also features of effective discourse common to all communication. Thus, while the principles and rules of communication are often intuitively grasped, understanding language, both generally and specifically, is foundational to the task of interpretation.

Literature and Literary Theory

The biblical writers are concerned not only with the informational content of their writing, but also with the manner in which that content is communicated. The words, patterns of speech, style, and imagery of any text provide significant insight into its purpose and message, apart from that text’s specific propositional content. The diversity of language used in the Gospels provides an example of this. Each of the four Gospel authors has a slightly different concern in his writing. John’s purpose, “that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31), explains his frequent use of courtroom language, such as “testimony” and “witness” (e.g., John 21:24). Mark, by contrast, sweeps the reader along a fast-paced and intensely personal exposition of Jesus’ life and death through the terseness and immediacy of his narration. Attention to these literary details allows the reader to more fully participate in the world of the text.

Such decisions will often depend upon a thorough analysis of genre. A reader naturally interprets historical narrative differently from poetry and didactic material. Furthermore, the conventions of different genres change over time. The book of Acts, for example, despite its essentially historical character, does not appear concerned with recording an exact dictation of the many speeches it reports, despite modern expectations that historical writing should be as precise as possible. The classification of ancient genres and the description of their respective conventions therefore require a good deal of analysis and sensitivity, but often such insights are provided by a careful and open reading of the text.

History

As the product of a particular author at a particular time, each book of the Bible is situated within its own unique historical context. Paul, for example, while perhaps conscious of the importance of his letters for posterity, wrote to specific churches or individuals with a singular purpose. This particularity of author, audience, and circ*mstance can often cause interpretative problems. Thus, while background studies are not always necessary to get the general idea of the author’s message, they can be invaluable in protecting readers from anachronism and enabling them to better appreciate the author’s purpose and perspective.

Historical study is assisted by specialized disciplines. Archaeology, for example, focuses on the beliefs, habits, practices, and history of ancient cultures, harnessing a wealth of evidence to that end. Similarly, anthropology and other social sciences are able to explore facets of modern cultures in order to better assess cross-cultural presuppositions and behaviors, many of which provide insight into ancient civilizations that shared similar attitudes. These methods provide the reader with the information necessary to understand a text in terms consistent with its cultural backdrop, highlighting both the similarities and the differences between the Bible and its environment. Recent discoveries of ancient Hittite treaties, for example, shed light on the “cutting ceremony” recorded in Gen. 15. These treaties detail similar ceremonies in which the vassal of a king would walk between hewed animal carcasses as a symbol of allegiance; if disobedience occurred, the vassal would share the fate of the animals. A similar ceremony occurs in Genesis, but with an interesting twist at the end: God, not Abram, passes through the pieces (15:17).

Humility and the Attitude of the Reader

Careful attention in interpretation requires a great deal of humility. It is difficult to overstate the importance of the attitude of the reader for an effective hermeneutic. Being a good reader requires willingness to share and participate in the world of the author and the text, a willingness that postpones judgment and expects personal change. This, in turn, requires a spirit of self-criticism, a commitment to defer one’s own presuppositions in favor of those of the text. Although readers are never able to fully distance themselves from their cultural situation and assumptions, the study of hermeneutics, among other things, can provide tools and skills for self-criticism and self-awareness, skills that enable the reader to better understand, appreciate, and appropriate the meaning of a text. Even a peripheral understanding of the complexities of interpretation can help readers develop an attitude of humility, imagination, and expectation as they approach the Scriptures.

Such humility is a prerequisite for application. The depth of meaning embedded in any text, and especially within the Bible, provides the humble reader with a rich and powerful tool for personal growth. Having better understood the world of the text on its own terms, readers are able to “project” that world onto themselves and their environment, to appropriate its meaning in a new and possibly foreign context. Thus, Jesus promises that those who hear, understand, and put his word into practice will yield a crop “some thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times what was sown” (Mark 4:20).

Unique Features of Biblical Interpretation

Certain unique features of the biblical text can create special opportunities and challenges for the Christian interpreter. These challenges are at work in the Bible’s own interpretation of itself. The Bible was written by many different authors over the course of a long period of history; it is therefore not surprising to find later authors reflecting on earlier periods. This innerbiblical interpretation offers the Christian insights into the unique nature of biblical hermeneutics and therefore provides a foundational model in approaching the Bible as the word of God.

The common and preeminent assumption that grounds innerbiblical interpretation is the commitment to ultimate divine authorship. Thus, the writer of Hebrews, though affirming the diversity of human authorship in the Bible (1:1), regularly introduces OT quotations with statements such as “God says” (1:5), “he spoke through David” (4:7), and “the Holy Spirit says” (3:7). Other writers tend to prefer the formula “it is written,” but each of these reflects a common presupposition that the Scriptures are ultimately delivered by God (2 Pet. 1:21).

Divine authorship means, at the very least, that there is a depth of meaning and purpose to the text, a depth often hidden even from the human author (1 Pet. 1:10–12). Psalm 2, for example, probably originally served as a coronation hymn used to celebrate the appointment of a new king in Israel. Yet the NT understands this psalm as a prophecy fulfilled in the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:33; Heb. 5:5). The intention of the original speaker can even be at odds with God’s intention, such as when Caiaphas claims, “It is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish” (John 11:50; cf. Acts 5:35–39). In this case, the irony of Caiaphas’s statement creates a powerful testimony, contrary to his intent, and is used by John to promote confidence in Jesus.

Furthermore, because the Scriptures are from God, they have a consistent and central focus. The NT unhesitatingly views all of Scripture, in all its diversity, as focused, by virtue of divine inspiration, on the person and work of Jesus Christ. This is seen in, for example, Luke 24:13–35, where the resurrected Jesus, “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” explains to his disciples “what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself” (cf. John 5:39; 12:41). This central focus on Christ requires the Christian interpreter to understand any individual verse in light of its context within the canon, to operate with the same assumption as the NT apostles, that all the Scriptures are concerned with testifying to Jesus the Christ.

Additionally, Paul views both Testaments as the special possession and once-for-all foundation of God’s church (Eph. 2:19–20; cf. Acts 2:42). The church, from a NT perspective, is the primary audience of the entirety of Scripture (1 Pet. 1:12) and is therefore uniquely entrusted with understanding and proclaiming its message (Matt. 28:18–20). While the Scriptures themselves are the only infallible guide for interpretation, believers should not forsake the teaching and tradition of the church (2 Thess. 2:15).

Finally, full understanding of the Bible requires the work of the Holy Spirit in conjunction with the faith of the reader. Belief and understanding go together (John 10:38), and both are the result of the unique work of the Holy Spirit (16:13). The proof that such understanding has taken place is the godly life of the believer (Rom. 2:13; James 1:22–25). The reverse is also true: disobedience works against understanding the riches of God’s Word (James 1:21). Such considerations underline the importance of the hermeneutical task. The tools and principles of hermeneutics are valuable only insofar as they enable the reader to better understand and appropriate the biblical message, to hear the word of God and respond appropriately.

The Greek term for “disciple,” mathētēs,means “student.” Like other rabbis and religious figuresof the time, Jesus taught a group of such students (Matt. 9:14;22:16; Mark 2:16; John 1:35; 4:1). The forms of address that Jesus’disciples used for him reflect the nature of the relationship:“rabbi” (Mark 9:5), “teacher” (Mark 9:38),and “master” (Luke 5:5). In addition to receivinginstruction from Jesus, his disciples took care of his physical needs(Matt. 21:1; John 4:8), ate with him (Matt. 9:10; 26:18), performedexorcisms and healings (Matt. 10:1; Luke 10:17), baptized (John 4:2),controlled access to Jesus (Matt. 19:13; John 12:21), and traveledwith him (Luke 8:1; John 2:12). On one occasion Jesus visited thehouse of Peter and healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt. 8:14),which suggests that although the Gospels do not generally depict theprivate lives of Jesus or his disciples apart from their publicministry, the relationship among these men did not prevent thedisciples from maintaining their own homes, families, and, probably,occupations.

Inthe Gospels Jesus is depicted with variously sized groups ofdisciples and followers. A prominent tradition in the Gospelsindicates that there was an inner group of twelve (Matt. 10:1; 26:20;Mark 3:14; 4:10; 6:7; John 6:70), each of whom is known by name. Thisis the group most traditionally understood as “the disciples”of Jesus. As an authority, the group of twelve persisted beyond theascension of Jesus (Acts 6:2). Following the death of Judas Iscariot,Matthias was chosen to take his place among the Twelve (Acts 1:26).Other passages specify a group of seventy or seventy-two (Luke 10:1,16), and often the number of disciples is indeterminate. Severalpassages name disciples beyond the Twelve (Matt. 27:57; Luke 24:18;Acts 9:10; 9:36; 16:1; 21:16), and some later authors attempted tolist the names of the seventy by drawing names from the book of Acts,the Epistles, and other early Christian traditions (e.g., thethirteenth-century Syriac compilation The Book of the Bee). The bookof Acts often refers to any follower of Christ as “disciple,”including those in cities throughout the Roman Empire.

TheGospels tend to present Jesus as a charismatic teacher who couldattract adherents with little overt persuasion. The calling ofseveral disciples is narrated, including that of the brothers SimonPeter and Andrew, the brothers James and John the sons of Zebedee(Mark 1:16–20; John 1:40–41), Philip and Nathanael (John1:44–45), and Matthew/Levi (Mark 2:13–17 pars.). TheGospel of John presents Andrew as a former disciple of John theBaptist.

TheTwelve

Eachof the Synoptic Gospels has a list of the Twelve (Matt. 10:1–4;Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16; cf. the list of eleven inActs 1:13), and the Gospel of John mentions “the Twelve”several times without providing a list. With some slightharmonizations, it is possible to come up with a single list oftwelve disciples based on the three Synoptic lists.

(1)Allthree Synoptic Gospels agree in placing Simon Peter first in thelist. (2)His brother Andrew is second, though Mark has placedAndrew farther down the list and does not identify him as Peter’sbrother. (3)James the son of Zebedee and (4)John thebrother of James are next. Mark adds that the two were also named“Boanerges,” meaning “sons of thunder.” Theplacement of Peter, James, and John at the head of the listcorresponds with the prominence of these three disciples in the storyof Jesus’ arrest at Gethsemane, where these three were present(Matt. 26:37// Mark 14:33). Perhaps the order of Mark’slist reflects the prestige of these three disciples, with Matthew andLuke bringing Andrew to the head of the list not because of anyparticular importance but so that he is listed with his brotherPeter.

Thelists continue with (5)Philip, (6)Bartholomew, and(7)Matthew, further identified in Matt. 10:3 as a “taxcollector.” The calling of Matthew is narrated in Matt. 9:9–13and also in Mark 2:13–17; Luke 5:27–32, where Matthew iscalled “Levi.” (8)Thomas is next (Matt. 10:3 listsThomas before Matthew; in John 20:24 he is also called “Didymus”),followed by (9)James the son of Alphaeus (Mark 2:14 also callsLevi “son of Alphaeus”), so named to avoid confusion withJames the son of Zebedee. (10)Simon the Cananaean (Matt. 10:4;Mark 3:18 NRSV) or Zealot (Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13) is so designated toavoid confusion with Simon Peter. The precise meaning of the term“Cananaean” is uncertain (see Cananaean). (11)Thaddaeus(who precedes Simon the Cananaean in Matthew and Mark) probablyshould be identified with the eleventh disciple in Luke’s list,Judas the son of James. The names of Thaddaeus and Judas son of Jamesrepresent the greatest single discrepancy among the three lists, butit may be mitigated somewhat by the fact that some manuscriptsidentify “Thaddaeus” as a surname (though they give thisdisciple’s other name as “Lebbaeus,” not “Judas”).All three lists agree in listing (12)Judas Iscariot as the lastdisciple in the list, and all note that he betrayed Jesus or became atraitor. The fact that Judas Iscariot bears a second name(“Iscariot”) may suggest that there was another Judasamong the Twelve from whom it was necessary to distinguish him, as inthe case of the two Simons and the two Jameses. This observationlends some weight to the notion that Thaddaeus was also named“Judas.”

TheDisciples as Apostles

Atvarious points in his ministry Jesus sent out his disciples to preachand perform miracles, hence they are also referred to as “apostles”(i.e., emissaries). The connection between these two terms is madeclear in Luke 6:13: “When morning came, he called his disciplesto him and chose twelve of them, whom he also designated apostles.”In the NT Epistles the title “apostle” is applied toseveral individuals who were not among Jesus’ twelve disciples,most notably Paul. In sum, both “disciple” and “apostle”have narrow and broad meanings in the NT, though there is substantialcontinuity between “the Twelve” disciples or apostles ofJesus and the narrow definition of “apostle” in the earlychapters of Acts.

TheLater Careers of the Disciples

Afterhis resurrection, Jesus told his disciples (“the apostles hehad chosen” [Acts 1:2]) that they would be his witnesses “inJerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of theearth” (Acts 1:8). Stories about the subsequent careers of theTwelve exist in both the NT and other early Christian sources. Thefirst half of Acts largely focuses on the career of Simon Peter,before attention shifts to the career of Paul in the eastern RomanEmpire. Extracanonical books and local legends trace the latercareers of Jesus’ twelve disciples, placing them in Rome(Peter), Scythia (Andrew), Spain (James), Ephesus (John), Phrygia(Philip), Armenia (Bartholomew and Thaddaeus), India (Thomas),Ethiopia (Matthew), and North Africa (Simon the Cananaean). Piouslocal traditions attribute martyrdom to a number of the Twelve,though in the NT we know only of the deaths of Judas Iscariot (Matt.27:3–10; Acts 1:16–20) and James the son of Zebedee (Acts12:1–2).

Hermeneutics is the science and practice of interpretation. It can refer more generally to the philosophy of human understanding, or more specifically to the tools and methods used for interpreting communicative acts.

Human communication takes place in a variety of ways: through the use of nonverbal signs, through speech, and through writing. Effective communication requires some degree of shared belief, knowledge, and background between the participants. If the communicators have a significant amount of common ground, they will be able to successfully understand one another with little extra effort. Conversely, individuals with vastly different backgrounds will need to take extra steps to communicate effectively, such as defining special terms, avoiding jargon and colloquialisms, appreciating details about the other’s cultural assumptions, or learning a foreign language.

The Bible is not exempt from this process of communication. The Scriptures are meant to be read, understood, and put into practice (Luke 8:4–15; James 1:18), a task that requires effort and study on the part of its readers (Acts 17:11; 2 Tim. 2:15). Everyone who reads the Bible is involved in this interpretative process, though readers will vary in their hermeneutical self-consciousness and skill. Thus, although readers are able to understand and appropriate much of the Bible without any special training in hermeneutical principles, such training is appropriate and helpful, both in attaining self-consciousness in interpretation and in acquiring new skills and insights in the effort to become a better reader.

The Development of Hermeneutics

The church has benefited from a long history of thinking about the nature and purpose of interpreting its Scriptures, and that reflection has resulted in a wide variety of hermeneutical theories and practices. How does one determine the meaning of a text? Is meaning the truth embedded within the passage? Or is it the original author’s intention in writing? Or does the text act independently of its author and history, either because it stands on its own terms or because it only “means” anything in interaction with readers? The answers to these questions will determine how readers approach a text, the questions they expect that text to answer, and the tools they use in interpretation.

From the early church to the Enlightenment. The early church emphasized the ability of the biblical text to convey heavenly truth, whether that truth was conceived as doctrinal teaching or absolute ethical rules. While the “literal meaning” of many texts could often supply simple truths and maxims, such a reading was at other times inadequate and could appear incompatible with what were considered basic and fundamental beliefs. Various allegorical techniques were therefore employed to explain such problematic texts. Interpreters often viewed the literal and historical features of the text as a starting point in the search for fuller meaning, as symbolic pointers to moral principles, absolute truths, or eternal realities. These practices were systematized throughout the Middle Ages and resulted in an extensive development of tradition. Church tradition, in turn, provided a degree of protection from the potential for arbitrariness in allegorical techniques, insisting that interpretation must be guided by the “rule of faith,” the traditional teaching and faith of the church.

Beginning in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, scholarship moved to distance itself from such tradition. The Protestant Reformers, dissatisfied with the rule of church tradition, sought to displace its authority with the direct rule of Scripture. They therefore returned to the original biblical text, engaging in critical study of the text itself and translating the Bible into the vernacular to make it more widely accessible. In the centuries that followed, Enlightenment scholars went a step further in their rejection of the church as the sole repository of knowledge. Instead, they asserted, knowledge was acquired through scientific inquiry and critical study. Such inquiry could be applied to any field: the forces of nature, human anatomy, or the interpretation of texts. The meaning of a text was not some abstract truth or heavenly principle; rather, meaning was determined by the human author’s original intention in writing and was therefore a historical matter. The intention of an author could be better exposed and understood through a more complete study of both the language in which a text was written and the historical circ*mstances that surrounded it. Many of these same emphases had been championed by the Protestant Reformers; yet the Enlightenment thinkers differed on one key point: the Reformers never questioned that the text was the word of God.

From the Enlightenment to the present. This favorable attitude toward historical research dwindled over the centuries. In its place authors emphasized the primacy of the text as text, apart from any connection to its origin and history. Literature, it is argued, ultimately operates independently from its author’s intention. All that matters is the text, and it is the reader’s job to understand the text on its own terms, apart from the contingencies surrounding its creation. To that end, interpreters should pay careful attention to the text’s literary features, including its plot structure, characterization, themes, and use of imagery. An interesting example of this hermeneutical dynamic is found in John 19:22, where Pilate asserts, “What I have written, I have written.” Pilate’s words quickly take on significance far beyond their author’s intention, primarily because they are juxtaposed with other themes in John, such as testimony and the kingship of Christ.

More recent approaches have emphasized the role of the reader in the construction of meaning. Interpretation, it is argued, is determined by the interaction between reader and text; readers bring their own presuppositions to the task of interpretation, and such assumptions determine meaning. The author and the historical context of the text will exert some influence, but the primary determinant of meaning is the present reader in his or her present environment. This is not to say that the text “means” whatever a reader wants it to mean; rather, it makes meaning contingent upon the contemporary environment and not subject to anything external to individual readers. On the one hand, readers must“actualize” the text by applying and appropriating it within an environment alien to the original. On the other, readers have the right, and in some cases the responsibility, of undermining the text, particularly if that text assists in the oppression of others.

Elements of an Effective Hermeneutic

An effective hermeneutic requires keeping each of these elements in constant balance with one another. God’s word is truthful and fully trustworthy, yet it is given to his people through individual human authors, authors who wrote in a particular context to a particular audience at a particular time. Understanding the Bible therefore requires knowledge of the purposes of these authors in their specific historical contexts. Nevertheless, our primary access to authorial intention is through the biblical text itself. Finally, understanding always requires personal interaction with, and application of, the text of Scripture to each person’s own life and circ*mstances. Thus, hermeneutics involves the simultaneous interaction of a variety of perspectives—truth, author, text, and reader—each of which cannot function properly without the others. What follows here is an outline of the most important hermeneutical tools required for such a weighty endeavor.

Linguistics

An appreciation of the nature, structure, and function of language is fundamental to any interpretative endeavor. Obviously, this applies first of all to the specific languages in which the books of the Bible were originally composed. Each language has its own unique vocabulary, grammar, and syntax, and structures available to a writer in one language often are absent in another. Thus, while it is often necessary and acceptable to rely on translations (Neh. 7:73–8:12), readers should be aware that translation itself involves a degree of unavoidable interpretation.

A more general analysis of language is also useful. Understanding the typical patterns by which authors will string sentences together is necessary for following a writing’s train of thought. This tool, called “discourse analysis,” operates above the sentence level, attempting to understand and explain how sentences function in conjunction with one another in order to produce meaningful paragraphs, and how those paragraphs in turn operate within the overarching purpose of the discourse. These patterns of discourse can vary on the basis of book, author, language, culture, and literary genre, but there are also features of effective discourse common to all communication. Thus, while the principles and rules of communication are often intuitively grasped, understanding language, both generally and specifically, is foundational to the task of interpretation.

Literature and Literary Theory

The biblical writers are concerned not only with the informational content of their writing, but also with the manner in which that content is communicated. The words, patterns of speech, style, and imagery of any text provide significant insight into its purpose and message, apart from that text’s specific propositional content. The diversity of language used in the Gospels provides an example of this. Each of the four Gospel authors has a slightly different concern in his writing. John’s purpose, “that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31), explains his frequent use of courtroom language, such as “testimony” and “witness” (e.g., John 21:24). Mark, by contrast, sweeps the reader along a fast-paced and intensely personal exposition of Jesus’ life and death through the terseness and immediacy of his narration. Attention to these literary details allows the reader to more fully participate in the world of the text.

Such decisions will often depend upon a thorough analysis of genre. A reader naturally interprets historical narrative differently from poetry and didactic material. Furthermore, the conventions of different genres change over time. The book of Acts, for example, despite its essentially historical character, does not appear concerned with recording an exact dictation of the many speeches it reports, despite modern expectations that historical writing should be as precise as possible. The classification of ancient genres and the description of their respective conventions therefore require a good deal of analysis and sensitivity, but often such insights are provided by a careful and open reading of the text.

History

As the product of a particular author at a particular time, each book of the Bible is situated within its own unique historical context. Paul, for example, while perhaps conscious of the importance of his letters for posterity, wrote to specific churches or individuals with a singular purpose. This particularity of author, audience, and circ*mstance can often cause interpretative problems. Thus, while background studies are not always necessary to get the general idea of the author’s message, they can be invaluable in protecting readers from anachronism and enabling them to better appreciate the author’s purpose and perspective.

Historical study is assisted by specialized disciplines. Archaeology, for example, focuses on the beliefs, habits, practices, and history of ancient cultures, harnessing a wealth of evidence to that end. Similarly, anthropology and other social sciences are able to explore facets of modern cultures in order to better assess cross-cultural presuppositions and behaviors, many of which provide insight into ancient civilizations that shared similar attitudes. These methods provide the reader with the information necessary to understand a text in terms consistent with its cultural backdrop, highlighting both the similarities and the differences between the Bible and its environment. Recent discoveries of ancient Hittite treaties, for example, shed light on the “cutting ceremony” recorded in Gen. 15. These treaties detail similar ceremonies in which the vassal of a king would walk between hewed animal carcasses as a symbol of allegiance; if disobedience occurred, the vassal would share the fate of the animals. A similar ceremony occurs in Genesis, but with an interesting twist at the end: God, not Abram, passes through the pieces (15:17).

Humility and the Attitude of the Reader

Careful attention in interpretation requires a great deal of humility. It is difficult to overstate the importance of the attitude of the reader for an effective hermeneutic. Being a good reader requires willingness to share and participate in the world of the author and the text, a willingness that postpones judgment and expects personal change. This, in turn, requires a spirit of self-criticism, a commitment to defer one’s own presuppositions in favor of those of the text. Although readers are never able to fully distance themselves from their cultural situation and assumptions, the study of hermeneutics, among other things, can provide tools and skills for self-criticism and self-awareness, skills that enable the reader to better understand, appreciate, and appropriate the meaning of a text. Even a peripheral understanding of the complexities of interpretation can help readers develop an attitude of humility, imagination, and expectation as they approach the Scriptures.

Such humility is a prerequisite for application. The depth of meaning embedded in any text, and especially within the Bible, provides the humble reader with a rich and powerful tool for personal growth. Having better understood the world of the text on its own terms, readers are able to “project” that world onto themselves and their environment, to appropriate its meaning in a new and possibly foreign context. Thus, Jesus promises that those who hear, understand, and put his word into practice will yield a crop “some thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times what was sown” (Mark 4:20).

Unique Features of Biblical Interpretation

Certain unique features of the biblical text can create special opportunities and challenges for the Christian interpreter. These challenges are at work in the Bible’s own interpretation of itself. The Bible was written by many different authors over the course of a long period of history; it is therefore not surprising to find later authors reflecting on earlier periods. This innerbiblical interpretation offers the Christian insights into the unique nature of biblical hermeneutics and therefore provides a foundational model in approaching the Bible as the word of God.

The common and preeminent assumption that grounds innerbiblical interpretation is the commitment to ultimate divine authorship. Thus, the writer of Hebrews, though affirming the diversity of human authorship in the Bible (1:1), regularly introduces OT quotations with statements such as “God says” (1:5), “he spoke through David” (4:7), and “the Holy Spirit says” (3:7). Other writers tend to prefer the formula “it is written,” but each of these reflects a common presupposition that the Scriptures are ultimately delivered by God (2 Pet. 1:21).

Divine authorship means, at the very least, that there is a depth of meaning and purpose to the text, a depth often hidden even from the human author (1 Pet. 1:10–12). Psalm 2, for example, probably originally served as a coronation hymn used to celebrate the appointment of a new king in Israel. Yet the NT understands this psalm as a prophecy fulfilled in the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:33; Heb. 5:5). The intention of the original speaker can even be at odds with God’s intention, such as when Caiaphas claims, “It is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish” (John 11:50; cf. Acts 5:35–39). In this case, the irony of Caiaphas’s statement creates a powerful testimony, contrary to his intent, and is used by John to promote confidence in Jesus.

Furthermore, because the Scriptures are from God, they have a consistent and central focus. The NT unhesitatingly views all of Scripture, in all its diversity, as focused, by virtue of divine inspiration, on the person and work of Jesus Christ. This is seen in, for example, Luke 24:13–35, where the resurrected Jesus, “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” explains to his disciples “what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself” (cf. John 5:39; 12:41). This central focus on Christ requires the Christian interpreter to understand any individual verse in light of its context within the canon, to operate with the same assumption as the NT apostles, that all the Scriptures are concerned with testifying to Jesus the Christ.

Additionally, Paul views both Testaments as the special possession and once-for-all foundation of God’s church (Eph. 2:19–20; cf. Acts 2:42). The church, from a NT perspective, is the primary audience of the entirety of Scripture (1 Pet. 1:12) and is therefore uniquely entrusted with understanding and proclaiming its message (Matt. 28:18–20). While the Scriptures themselves are the only infallible guide for interpretation, believers should not forsake the teaching and tradition of the church (2 Thess. 2:15).

Finally, full understanding of the Bible requires the work of the Holy Spirit in conjunction with the faith of the reader. Belief and understanding go together (John 10:38), and both are the result of the unique work of the Holy Spirit (16:13). The proof that such understanding has taken place is the godly life of the believer (Rom. 2:13; James 1:22–25). The reverse is also true: disobedience works against understanding the riches of God’s Word (James 1:21). Such considerations underline the importance of the hermeneutical task. The tools and principles of hermeneutics are valuable only insofar as they enable the reader to better understand and appropriate the biblical message, to hear the word of God and respond appropriately.

Hermeneutics is the science and practice of interpretation. It can refer more generally to the philosophy of human understanding, or more specifically to the tools and methods used for interpreting communicative acts.

Human communication takes place in a variety of ways: through the use of nonverbal signs, through speech, and through writing. Effective communication requires some degree of shared belief, knowledge, and background between the participants. If the communicators have a significant amount of common ground, they will be able to successfully understand one another with little extra effort. Conversely, individuals with vastly different backgrounds will need to take extra steps to communicate effectively, such as defining special terms, avoiding jargon and colloquialisms, appreciating details about the other’s cultural assumptions, or learning a foreign language.

The Bible is not exempt from this process of communication. The Scriptures are meant to be read, understood, and put into practice (Luke 8:4–15; James 1:18), a task that requires effort and study on the part of its readers (Acts 17:11; 2 Tim. 2:15). Everyone who reads the Bible is involved in this interpretative process, though readers will vary in their hermeneutical self-consciousness and skill. Thus, although readers are able to understand and appropriate much of the Bible without any special training in hermeneutical principles, such training is appropriate and helpful, both in attaining self-consciousness in interpretation and in acquiring new skills and insights in the effort to become a better reader.

The Development of Hermeneutics

The church has benefited from a long history of thinking about the nature and purpose of interpreting its Scriptures, and that reflection has resulted in a wide variety of hermeneutical theories and practices. How does one determine the meaning of a text? Is meaning the truth embedded within the passage? Or is it the original author’s intention in writing? Or does the text act independently of its author and history, either because it stands on its own terms or because it only “means” anything in interaction with readers? The answers to these questions will determine how readers approach a text, the questions they expect that text to answer, and the tools they use in interpretation.

From the early church to the Enlightenment. The early church emphasized the ability of the biblical text to convey heavenly truth, whether that truth was conceived as doctrinal teaching or absolute ethical rules. While the “literal meaning” of many texts could often supply simple truths and maxims, such a reading was at other times inadequate and could appear incompatible with what were considered basic and fundamental beliefs. Various allegorical techniques were therefore employed to explain such problematic texts. Interpreters often viewed the literal and historical features of the text as a starting point in the search for fuller meaning, as symbolic pointers to moral principles, absolute truths, or eternal realities. These practices were systematized throughout the Middle Ages and resulted in an extensive development of tradition. Church tradition, in turn, provided a degree of protection from the potential for arbitrariness in allegorical techniques, insisting that interpretation must be guided by the “rule of faith,” the traditional teaching and faith of the church.

Beginning in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, scholarship moved to distance itself from such tradition. The Protestant Reformers, dissatisfied with the rule of church tradition, sought to displace its authority with the direct rule of Scripture. They therefore returned to the original biblical text, engaging in critical study of the text itself and translating the Bible into the vernacular to make it more widely accessible. In the centuries that followed, Enlightenment scholars went a step further in their rejection of the church as the sole repository of knowledge. Instead, they asserted, knowledge was acquired through scientific inquiry and critical study. Such inquiry could be applied to any field: the forces of nature, human anatomy, or the interpretation of texts. The meaning of a text was not some abstract truth or heavenly principle; rather, meaning was determined by the human author’s original intention in writing and was therefore a historical matter. The intention of an author could be better exposed and understood through a more complete study of both the language in which a text was written and the historical circ*mstances that surrounded it. Many of these same emphases had been championed by the Protestant Reformers; yet the Enlightenment thinkers differed on one key point: the Reformers never questioned that the text was the word of God.

From the Enlightenment to the present. This favorable attitude toward historical research dwindled over the centuries. In its place authors emphasized the primacy of the text as text, apart from any connection to its origin and history. Literature, it is argued, ultimately operates independently from its author’s intention. All that matters is the text, and it is the reader’s job to understand the text on its own terms, apart from the contingencies surrounding its creation. To that end, interpreters should pay careful attention to the text’s literary features, including its plot structure, characterization, themes, and use of imagery. An interesting example of this hermeneutical dynamic is found in John 19:22, where Pilate asserts, “What I have written, I have written.” Pilate’s words quickly take on significance far beyond their author’s intention, primarily because they are juxtaposed with other themes in John, such as testimony and the kingship of Christ.

More recent approaches have emphasized the role of the reader in the construction of meaning. Interpretation, it is argued, is determined by the interaction between reader and text; readers bring their own presuppositions to the task of interpretation, and such assumptions determine meaning. The author and the historical context of the text will exert some influence, but the primary determinant of meaning is the present reader in his or her present environment. This is not to say that the text “means” whatever a reader wants it to mean; rather, it makes meaning contingent upon the contemporary environment and not subject to anything external to individual readers. On the one hand, readers must“actualize” the text by applying and appropriating it within an environment alien to the original. On the other, readers have the right, and in some cases the responsibility, of undermining the text, particularly if that text assists in the oppression of others.

Elements of an Effective Hermeneutic

An effective hermeneutic requires keeping each of these elements in constant balance with one another. God’s word is truthful and fully trustworthy, yet it is given to his people through individual human authors, authors who wrote in a particular context to a particular audience at a particular time. Understanding the Bible therefore requires knowledge of the purposes of these authors in their specific historical contexts. Nevertheless, our primary access to authorial intention is through the biblical text itself. Finally, understanding always requires personal interaction with, and application of, the text of Scripture to each person’s own life and circ*mstances. Thus, hermeneutics involves the simultaneous interaction of a variety of perspectives—truth, author, text, and reader—each of which cannot function properly without the others. What follows here is an outline of the most important hermeneutical tools required for such a weighty endeavor.

Linguistics

An appreciation of the nature, structure, and function of language is fundamental to any interpretative endeavor. Obviously, this applies first of all to the specific languages in which the books of the Bible were originally composed. Each language has its own unique vocabulary, grammar, and syntax, and structures available to a writer in one language often are absent in another. Thus, while it is often necessary and acceptable to rely on translations (Neh. 7:73–8:12), readers should be aware that translation itself involves a degree of unavoidable interpretation.

A more general analysis of language is also useful. Understanding the typical patterns by which authors will string sentences together is necessary for following a writing’s train of thought. This tool, called “discourse analysis,” operates above the sentence level, attempting to understand and explain how sentences function in conjunction with one another in order to produce meaningful paragraphs, and how those paragraphs in turn operate within the overarching purpose of the discourse. These patterns of discourse can vary on the basis of book, author, language, culture, and literary genre, but there are also features of effective discourse common to all communication. Thus, while the principles and rules of communication are often intuitively grasped, understanding language, both generally and specifically, is foundational to the task of interpretation.

Literature and Literary Theory

The biblical writers are concerned not only with the informational content of their writing, but also with the manner in which that content is communicated. The words, patterns of speech, style, and imagery of any text provide significant insight into its purpose and message, apart from that text’s specific propositional content. The diversity of language used in the Gospels provides an example of this. Each of the four Gospel authors has a slightly different concern in his writing. John’s purpose, “that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31), explains his frequent use of courtroom language, such as “testimony” and “witness” (e.g., John 21:24). Mark, by contrast, sweeps the reader along a fast-paced and intensely personal exposition of Jesus’ life and death through the terseness and immediacy of his narration. Attention to these literary details allows the reader to more fully participate in the world of the text.

Such decisions will often depend upon a thorough analysis of genre. A reader naturally interprets historical narrative differently from poetry and didactic material. Furthermore, the conventions of different genres change over time. The book of Acts, for example, despite its essentially historical character, does not appear concerned with recording an exact dictation of the many speeches it reports, despite modern expectations that historical writing should be as precise as possible. The classification of ancient genres and the description of their respective conventions therefore require a good deal of analysis and sensitivity, but often such insights are provided by a careful and open reading of the text.

History

As the product of a particular author at a particular time, each book of the Bible is situated within its own unique historical context. Paul, for example, while perhaps conscious of the importance of his letters for posterity, wrote to specific churches or individuals with a singular purpose. This particularity of author, audience, and circ*mstance can often cause interpretative problems. Thus, while background studies are not always necessary to get the general idea of the author’s message, they can be invaluable in protecting readers from anachronism and enabling them to better appreciate the author’s purpose and perspective.

Historical study is assisted by specialized disciplines. Archaeology, for example, focuses on the beliefs, habits, practices, and history of ancient cultures, harnessing a wealth of evidence to that end. Similarly, anthropology and other social sciences are able to explore facets of modern cultures in order to better assess cross-cultural presuppositions and behaviors, many of which provide insight into ancient civilizations that shared similar attitudes. These methods provide the reader with the information necessary to understand a text in terms consistent with its cultural backdrop, highlighting both the similarities and the differences between the Bible and its environment. Recent discoveries of ancient Hittite treaties, for example, shed light on the “cutting ceremony” recorded in Gen. 15. These treaties detail similar ceremonies in which the vassal of a king would walk between hewed animal carcasses as a symbol of allegiance; if disobedience occurred, the vassal would share the fate of the animals. A similar ceremony occurs in Genesis, but with an interesting twist at the end: God, not Abram, passes through the pieces (15:17).

Humility and the Attitude of the Reader

Careful attention in interpretation requires a great deal of humility. It is difficult to overstate the importance of the attitude of the reader for an effective hermeneutic. Being a good reader requires willingness to share and participate in the world of the author and the text, a willingness that postpones judgment and expects personal change. This, in turn, requires a spirit of self-criticism, a commitment to defer one’s own presuppositions in favor of those of the text. Although readers are never able to fully distance themselves from their cultural situation and assumptions, the study of hermeneutics, among other things, can provide tools and skills for self-criticism and self-awareness, skills that enable the reader to better understand, appreciate, and appropriate the meaning of a text. Even a peripheral understanding of the complexities of interpretation can help readers develop an attitude of humility, imagination, and expectation as they approach the Scriptures.

Such humility is a prerequisite for application. The depth of meaning embedded in any text, and especially within the Bible, provides the humble reader with a rich and powerful tool for personal growth. Having better understood the world of the text on its own terms, readers are able to “project” that world onto themselves and their environment, to appropriate its meaning in a new and possibly foreign context. Thus, Jesus promises that those who hear, understand, and put his word into practice will yield a crop “some thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times what was sown” (Mark 4:20).

Unique Features of Biblical Interpretation

Certain unique features of the biblical text can create special opportunities and challenges for the Christian interpreter. These challenges are at work in the Bible’s own interpretation of itself. The Bible was written by many different authors over the course of a long period of history; it is therefore not surprising to find later authors reflecting on earlier periods. This innerbiblical interpretation offers the Christian insights into the unique nature of biblical hermeneutics and therefore provides a foundational model in approaching the Bible as the word of God.

The common and preeminent assumption that grounds innerbiblical interpretation is the commitment to ultimate divine authorship. Thus, the writer of Hebrews, though affirming the diversity of human authorship in the Bible (1:1), regularly introduces OT quotations with statements such as “God says” (1:5), “he spoke through David” (4:7), and “the Holy Spirit says” (3:7). Other writers tend to prefer the formula “it is written,” but each of these reflects a common presupposition that the Scriptures are ultimately delivered by God (2 Pet. 1:21).

Divine authorship means, at the very least, that there is a depth of meaning and purpose to the text, a depth often hidden even from the human author (1 Pet. 1:10–12). Psalm 2, for example, probably originally served as a coronation hymn used to celebrate the appointment of a new king in Israel. Yet the NT understands this psalm as a prophecy fulfilled in the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:33; Heb. 5:5). The intention of the original speaker can even be at odds with God’s intention, such as when Caiaphas claims, “It is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish” (John 11:50; cf. Acts 5:35–39). In this case, the irony of Caiaphas’s statement creates a powerful testimony, contrary to his intent, and is used by John to promote confidence in Jesus.

Furthermore, because the Scriptures are from God, they have a consistent and central focus. The NT unhesitatingly views all of Scripture, in all its diversity, as focused, by virtue of divine inspiration, on the person and work of Jesus Christ. This is seen in, for example, Luke 24:13–35, where the resurrected Jesus, “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” explains to his disciples “what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself” (cf. John 5:39; 12:41). This central focus on Christ requires the Christian interpreter to understand any individual verse in light of its context within the canon, to operate with the same assumption as the NT apostles, that all the Scriptures are concerned with testifying to Jesus the Christ.

Additionally, Paul views both Testaments as the special possession and once-for-all foundation of God’s church (Eph. 2:19–20; cf. Acts 2:42). The church, from a NT perspective, is the primary audience of the entirety of Scripture (1 Pet. 1:12) and is therefore uniquely entrusted with understanding and proclaiming its message (Matt. 28:18–20). While the Scriptures themselves are the only infallible guide for interpretation, believers should not forsake the teaching and tradition of the church (2 Thess. 2:15).

Finally, full understanding of the Bible requires the work of the Holy Spirit in conjunction with the faith of the reader. Belief and understanding go together (John 10:38), and both are the result of the unique work of the Holy Spirit (16:13). The proof that such understanding has taken place is the godly life of the believer (Rom. 2:13; James 1:22–25). The reverse is also true: disobedience works against understanding the riches of God’s Word (James 1:21). Such considerations underline the importance of the hermeneutical task. The tools and principles of hermeneutics are valuable only insofar as they enable the reader to better understand and appropriate the biblical message, to hear the word of God and respond appropriately.

Hermeneutics is the science and practice of interpretation. It can refer more generally to the philosophy of human understanding, or more specifically to the tools and methods used for interpreting communicative acts.

Human communication takes place in a variety of ways: through the use of nonverbal signs, through speech, and through writing. Effective communication requires some degree of shared belief, knowledge, and background between the participants. If the communicators have a significant amount of common ground, they will be able to successfully understand one another with little extra effort. Conversely, individuals with vastly different backgrounds will need to take extra steps to communicate effectively, such as defining special terms, avoiding jargon and colloquialisms, appreciating details about the other’s cultural assumptions, or learning a foreign language.

The Bible is not exempt from this process of communication. The Scriptures are meant to be read, understood, and put into practice (Luke 8:4–15; James 1:18), a task that requires effort and study on the part of its readers (Acts 17:11; 2 Tim. 2:15). Everyone who reads the Bible is involved in this interpretative process, though readers will vary in their hermeneutical self-consciousness and skill. Thus, although readers are able to understand and appropriate much of the Bible without any special training in hermeneutical principles, such training is appropriate and helpful, both in attaining self-consciousness in interpretation and in acquiring new skills and insights in the effort to become a better reader.

The Development of Hermeneutics

The church has benefited from a long history of thinking about the nature and purpose of interpreting its Scriptures, and that reflection has resulted in a wide variety of hermeneutical theories and practices. How does one determine the meaning of a text? Is meaning the truth embedded within the passage? Or is it the original author’s intention in writing? Or does the text act independently of its author and history, either because it stands on its own terms or because it only “means” anything in interaction with readers? The answers to these questions will determine how readers approach a text, the questions they expect that text to answer, and the tools they use in interpretation.

From the early church to the Enlightenment. The early church emphasized the ability of the biblical text to convey heavenly truth, whether that truth was conceived as doctrinal teaching or absolute ethical rules. While the “literal meaning” of many texts could often supply simple truths and maxims, such a reading was at other times inadequate and could appear incompatible with what were considered basic and fundamental beliefs. Various allegorical techniques were therefore employed to explain such problematic texts. Interpreters often viewed the literal and historical features of the text as a starting point in the search for fuller meaning, as symbolic pointers to moral principles, absolute truths, or eternal realities. These practices were systematized throughout the Middle Ages and resulted in an extensive development of tradition. Church tradition, in turn, provided a degree of protection from the potential for arbitrariness in allegorical techniques, insisting that interpretation must be guided by the “rule of faith,” the traditional teaching and faith of the church.

Beginning in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, scholarship moved to distance itself from such tradition. The Protestant Reformers, dissatisfied with the rule of church tradition, sought to displace its authority with the direct rule of Scripture. They therefore returned to the original biblical text, engaging in critical study of the text itself and translating the Bible into the vernacular to make it more widely accessible. In the centuries that followed, Enlightenment scholars went a step further in their rejection of the church as the sole repository of knowledge. Instead, they asserted, knowledge was acquired through scientific inquiry and critical study. Such inquiry could be applied to any field: the forces of nature, human anatomy, or the interpretation of texts. The meaning of a text was not some abstract truth or heavenly principle; rather, meaning was determined by the human author’s original intention in writing and was therefore a historical matter. The intention of an author could be better exposed and understood through a more complete study of both the language in which a text was written and the historical circ*mstances that surrounded it. Many of these same emphases had been championed by the Protestant Reformers; yet the Enlightenment thinkers differed on one key point: the Reformers never questioned that the text was the word of God.

From the Enlightenment to the present. This favorable attitude toward historical research dwindled over the centuries. In its place authors emphasized the primacy of the text as text, apart from any connection to its origin and history. Literature, it is argued, ultimately operates independently from its author’s intention. All that matters is the text, and it is the reader’s job to understand the text on its own terms, apart from the contingencies surrounding its creation. To that end, interpreters should pay careful attention to the text’s literary features, including its plot structure, characterization, themes, and use of imagery. An interesting example of this hermeneutical dynamic is found in John 19:22, where Pilate asserts, “What I have written, I have written.” Pilate’s words quickly take on significance far beyond their author’s intention, primarily because they are juxtaposed with other themes in John, such as testimony and the kingship of Christ.

More recent approaches have emphasized the role of the reader in the construction of meaning. Interpretation, it is argued, is determined by the interaction between reader and text; readers bring their own presuppositions to the task of interpretation, and such assumptions determine meaning. The author and the historical context of the text will exert some influence, but the primary determinant of meaning is the present reader in his or her present environment. This is not to say that the text “means” whatever a reader wants it to mean; rather, it makes meaning contingent upon the contemporary environment and not subject to anything external to individual readers. On the one hand, readers must“actualize” the text by applying and appropriating it within an environment alien to the original. On the other, readers have the right, and in some cases the responsibility, of undermining the text, particularly if that text assists in the oppression of others.

Elements of an Effective Hermeneutic

An effective hermeneutic requires keeping each of these elements in constant balance with one another. God’s word is truthful and fully trustworthy, yet it is given to his people through individual human authors, authors who wrote in a particular context to a particular audience at a particular time. Understanding the Bible therefore requires knowledge of the purposes of these authors in their specific historical contexts. Nevertheless, our primary access to authorial intention is through the biblical text itself. Finally, understanding always requires personal interaction with, and application of, the text of Scripture to each person’s own life and circ*mstances. Thus, hermeneutics involves the simultaneous interaction of a variety of perspectives—truth, author, text, and reader—each of which cannot function properly without the others. What follows here is an outline of the most important hermeneutical tools required for such a weighty endeavor.

Linguistics

An appreciation of the nature, structure, and function of language is fundamental to any interpretative endeavor. Obviously, this applies first of all to the specific languages in which the books of the Bible were originally composed. Each language has its own unique vocabulary, grammar, and syntax, and structures available to a writer in one language often are absent in another. Thus, while it is often necessary and acceptable to rely on translations (Neh. 7:73–8:12), readers should be aware that translation itself involves a degree of unavoidable interpretation.

A more general analysis of language is also useful. Understanding the typical patterns by which authors will string sentences together is necessary for following a writing’s train of thought. This tool, called “discourse analysis,” operates above the sentence level, attempting to understand and explain how sentences function in conjunction with one another in order to produce meaningful paragraphs, and how those paragraphs in turn operate within the overarching purpose of the discourse. These patterns of discourse can vary on the basis of book, author, language, culture, and literary genre, but there are also features of effective discourse common to all communication. Thus, while the principles and rules of communication are often intuitively grasped, understanding language, both generally and specifically, is foundational to the task of interpretation.

Literature and Literary Theory

The biblical writers are concerned not only with the informational content of their writing, but also with the manner in which that content is communicated. The words, patterns of speech, style, and imagery of any text provide significant insight into its purpose and message, apart from that text’s specific propositional content. The diversity of language used in the Gospels provides an example of this. Each of the four Gospel authors has a slightly different concern in his writing. John’s purpose, “that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31), explains his frequent use of courtroom language, such as “testimony” and “witness” (e.g., John 21:24). Mark, by contrast, sweeps the reader along a fast-paced and intensely personal exposition of Jesus’ life and death through the terseness and immediacy of his narration. Attention to these literary details allows the reader to more fully participate in the world of the text.

Such decisions will often depend upon a thorough analysis of genre. A reader naturally interprets historical narrative differently from poetry and didactic material. Furthermore, the conventions of different genres change over time. The book of Acts, for example, despite its essentially historical character, does not appear concerned with recording an exact dictation of the many speeches it reports, despite modern expectations that historical writing should be as precise as possible. The classification of ancient genres and the description of their respective conventions therefore require a good deal of analysis and sensitivity, but often such insights are provided by a careful and open reading of the text.

History

As the product of a particular author at a particular time, each book of the Bible is situated within its own unique historical context. Paul, for example, while perhaps conscious of the importance of his letters for posterity, wrote to specific churches or individuals with a singular purpose. This particularity of author, audience, and circ*mstance can often cause interpretative problems. Thus, while background studies are not always necessary to get the general idea of the author’s message, they can be invaluable in protecting readers from anachronism and enabling them to better appreciate the author’s purpose and perspective.

Historical study is assisted by specialized disciplines. Archaeology, for example, focuses on the beliefs, habits, practices, and history of ancient cultures, harnessing a wealth of evidence to that end. Similarly, anthropology and other social sciences are able to explore facets of modern cultures in order to better assess cross-cultural presuppositions and behaviors, many of which provide insight into ancient civilizations that shared similar attitudes. These methods provide the reader with the information necessary to understand a text in terms consistent with its cultural backdrop, highlighting both the similarities and the differences between the Bible and its environment. Recent discoveries of ancient Hittite treaties, for example, shed light on the “cutting ceremony” recorded in Gen. 15. These treaties detail similar ceremonies in which the vassal of a king would walk between hewed animal carcasses as a symbol of allegiance; if disobedience occurred, the vassal would share the fate of the animals. A similar ceremony occurs in Genesis, but with an interesting twist at the end: God, not Abram, passes through the pieces (15:17).

Humility and the Attitude of the Reader

Careful attention in interpretation requires a great deal of humility. It is difficult to overstate the importance of the attitude of the reader for an effective hermeneutic. Being a good reader requires willingness to share and participate in the world of the author and the text, a willingness that postpones judgment and expects personal change. This, in turn, requires a spirit of self-criticism, a commitment to defer one’s own presuppositions in favor of those of the text. Although readers are never able to fully distance themselves from their cultural situation and assumptions, the study of hermeneutics, among other things, can provide tools and skills for self-criticism and self-awareness, skills that enable the reader to better understand, appreciate, and appropriate the meaning of a text. Even a peripheral understanding of the complexities of interpretation can help readers develop an attitude of humility, imagination, and expectation as they approach the Scriptures.

Such humility is a prerequisite for application. The depth of meaning embedded in any text, and especially within the Bible, provides the humble reader with a rich and powerful tool for personal growth. Having better understood the world of the text on its own terms, readers are able to “project” that world onto themselves and their environment, to appropriate its meaning in a new and possibly foreign context. Thus, Jesus promises that those who hear, understand, and put his word into practice will yield a crop “some thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times what was sown” (Mark 4:20).

Unique Features of Biblical Interpretation

Certain unique features of the biblical text can create special opportunities and challenges for the Christian interpreter. These challenges are at work in the Bible’s own interpretation of itself. The Bible was written by many different authors over the course of a long period of history; it is therefore not surprising to find later authors reflecting on earlier periods. This innerbiblical interpretation offers the Christian insights into the unique nature of biblical hermeneutics and therefore provides a foundational model in approaching the Bible as the word of God.

The common and preeminent assumption that grounds innerbiblical interpretation is the commitment to ultimate divine authorship. Thus, the writer of Hebrews, though affirming the diversity of human authorship in the Bible (1:1), regularly introduces OT quotations with statements such as “God says” (1:5), “he spoke through David” (4:7), and “the Holy Spirit says” (3:7). Other writers tend to prefer the formula “it is written,” but each of these reflects a common presupposition that the Scriptures are ultimately delivered by God (2 Pet. 1:21).

Divine authorship means, at the very least, that there is a depth of meaning and purpose to the text, a depth often hidden even from the human author (1 Pet. 1:10–12). Psalm 2, for example, probably originally served as a coronation hymn used to celebrate the appointment of a new king in Israel. Yet the NT understands this psalm as a prophecy fulfilled in the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:33; Heb. 5:5). The intention of the original speaker can even be at odds with God’s intention, such as when Caiaphas claims, “It is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish” (John 11:50; cf. Acts 5:35–39). In this case, the irony of Caiaphas’s statement creates a powerful testimony, contrary to his intent, and is used by John to promote confidence in Jesus.

Furthermore, because the Scriptures are from God, they have a consistent and central focus. The NT unhesitatingly views all of Scripture, in all its diversity, as focused, by virtue of divine inspiration, on the person and work of Jesus Christ. This is seen in, for example, Luke 24:13–35, where the resurrected Jesus, “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” explains to his disciples “what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself” (cf. John 5:39; 12:41). This central focus on Christ requires the Christian interpreter to understand any individual verse in light of its context within the canon, to operate with the same assumption as the NT apostles, that all the Scriptures are concerned with testifying to Jesus the Christ.

Additionally, Paul views both Testaments as the special possession and once-for-all foundation of God’s church (Eph. 2:19–20; cf. Acts 2:42). The church, from a NT perspective, is the primary audience of the entirety of Scripture (1 Pet. 1:12) and is therefore uniquely entrusted with understanding and proclaiming its message (Matt. 28:18–20). While the Scriptures themselves are the only infallible guide for interpretation, believers should not forsake the teaching and tradition of the church (2 Thess. 2:15).

Finally, full understanding of the Bible requires the work of the Holy Spirit in conjunction with the faith of the reader. Belief and understanding go together (John 10:38), and both are the result of the unique work of the Holy Spirit (16:13). The proof that such understanding has taken place is the godly life of the believer (Rom. 2:13; James 1:22–25). The reverse is also true: disobedience works against understanding the riches of God’s Word (James 1:21). Such considerations underline the importance of the hermeneutical task. The tools and principles of hermeneutics are valuable only insofar as they enable the reader to better understand and appropriate the biblical message, to hear the word of God and respond appropriately.

The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesusfollowers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christembodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in humanhistory.

Introduction

Name.Early Christians combined the name “Jesus” with the title“Christ” (Acts 5:42; NIV: “Messiah”). Thename “Jesus,” from the Hebrew Yehoshua or Yeshua, was acommon male name in first-century Judaism. The title “Christ”is from the Greek christos, a translation of the Hebrew mashiakh(“anointed one, messiah”). Christians eventually werenamed after Jesus’ title (Acts 11:26). During the ministry ofJesus, Peter was the first disciple to recognize Jesus as the Messiah(Matt. 16:16; Mark 9:29; Luke 9:20).

Sources.From the viewpoint of Christianity, the life and ministry of Jesusconstitute the turning point in human history. From a historicalperspective, ample early source materials would be expected. Indeed,both Christian and non-Christian first-century and earlysecond-century literary sources are extant, but they are few innumber. In part, this low incidence is due to society’s initialresistance to the Jesus followers’ movement. The ancient Romanhistorian Tacitus called Christianity “a superstition,”since its beliefs did not fit with the culture’s prevailingworldview and thus were considered antisocial. Early literary sourcestherefore are either in-group documents or allusions in non-Christiansources.

TheNT Gospels are the principal sources for the life and ministry ofJesus. They consist of Matthew, Mark, Luke (the Synoptic Gospels),and John. Most scholars adhere to the so-called Four SourceHypothesis. In this theory, Mark was written first and was used as asource by Matthew and Luke, who also used the sayings source Q (fromGerman Quelle, meaning “source”) as well as their ownindividual sources M (Matthew) and L (Luke). John used additionalsources.

Theearly church tried to put together singular accounts, so-calledGospel harmonies, of the life of Jesus. The Gospel of the Ebionitesrepresents one such attempt based on the Synoptic Gospels. Anotherharmony, the Diatessaron, based on all four Gospels, was producedaround AD 170 by Tatian. Additional source materials concerning thelife of Christ are provided in the NT in texts such as Acts, thePauline Epistles, the General Epistles, and the Revelation of John.Paul wrote to the Galatians, “But when the time had fully come,God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law” (Gal. 4:4).The first narrative about Jesus by the Christian community was apassion narrative, the account of his death and resurrection. Thefirst extant references to this tradition are found in Paul’sletters (1Cor. 2:2; Gal. 3:1). The resurrection was recognizedfrom the beginning as the cornerstone of the Christian faith (1Cor.15:13–14).

Amongnon-Christian sources, the earliest reference to Jesus is found in aletter written circa AD 112 by Pliny the Younger, the Roman governorof Bithynia-Pontus (Ep. 10.96). The Roman historian Tacitus mentionsChristians and Jesus around AD 115 in his famous work about thehistory of Rome (Ann. 15.44). Another Roman historian, Suetonius,wrote around the same time concerning unrest among the Jews in Romebecause of a certain “Chrestos” (Claud. 25.4). Somescholars conclude that “Chrestos” is a misspelling of“Christos,” a reference to Jesus.

TheJewish author Josephus (first century AD) mentions Jesus in a storyabout the Jewish high priest Ananus and James the brother of Jesus(Ant. 20.200). A controversial reference to Jesus appears in adifferent part of the same work, where Josephus affirms that Jesus isthe Messiah and that he rose from the dead (Ant. 18.63–64). Themajority of scholars consider this passage to be authentic butheavily edited by later Christian copyists. Another Jewish source,the Talmud, also mentions Jesus in several places, but thesereferences are very late and of little historical value.

NoncanonicalGospels that mention Jesus include, for example, the Infancy Gospelof Thomas, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel ofJames, the Gospel of Judas Iscariot, the Gospel of the Hebrews, theEgerton Gospel, and the Gospel of Judas. Although some of these maycontain an occasional authentic saying or event, for the most partthey are late and unreliable.

Jesus’Life

Birthand childhood. TheGospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehemduring the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesuswas probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’sdeath (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of avirginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18;Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governorQuirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place inBethlehem (2:1–5). Both the census and the governorship at thetime of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars.Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to eitherconfirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must bedetermined on the basis of one’s view regarding the generalreliability of the Gospel tradition.

Onthe eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keepingwith the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus”(Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home ofhis parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel ofLuke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth instrength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke alsocontains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).

Jesuswas born in a lower socioeconomic setting. His parents offered atemple sacrifice appropriate for those who could not afford tosacrifice a sheep (Luke 2:22–24; cf. Lev. 12:8). Joseph, Jesus’earthly father, was a carpenter or an artisan in wood, stone, ormetal (Matt. 13:55). From a geographical perspective, Nazareth wasnot a prominent place for settling, since it lacked fertile ground.Jesus’ disciple Nathanael expressed an apparently commonfirst-century sentiment concerning Nazareth: “Nazareth! Cananything good come from there?” (John 1:46).

Jesuswas also born in a context of scandal. Questions of illegitimacy weresurely raised, since his mother Mary was discovered to be pregnantbefore her marriage to Joseph. According to Matthew, only theintervention of an angel convinced Joseph not to break his betrothal(Matt. 1:18–24). Jesus’ birth took place in Bethlehem,far from his parents’ home in Nazareth. According to kinshiphospitality customs, Joseph and Mary would have expected to stay withdistant relatives in Bethlehem. It is likely that they were unwelcomebecause of Jesus’ status as an illegitimate child; thus Maryhad to give birth elsewhere and place the infant Jesus in a feedingtrough (Luke 2:7). A similar response was seen years later inNazareth when Jesus was identified as “Mary’s son”(Mark 6:3) rather than through his paternal line, thereby shaming himas one who was born an illegitimate child. Jesus was likewiserejected at the end of his life as the crowds cried, “Crucifyhim!” (Matt. 27:22–23; Mark 15:13–14; Luke 23:21;John 19:6, 15). When Jesus was arrested, most of his followers fled(Matt. 26:56; Mark 14:50–52), and a core disciple, Peter,vehemently denied knowing him (Matt. 26:69–74; Mark 14:66–71;Luke 22:55–60; John 18:15–17, 25–27). His ownsiblings did not believe in him (John 7:5) and were evidently ashamedof his fate, since from the cross Jesus placed the care of his motherinto the hands of “the disciple whom he loved” (19:26–27)rather than the next brother in line, as was customary.

Baptism,temptation, and start of ministry.After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring tohim as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22).Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instantministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into thewilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11;Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that thetemptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Lukeidentify three specific temptations by the devil, though their orderfor the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesuswas tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine interventionafter jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’skingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation,quoting Scripture in response.

Matthewand Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum inGalilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13;Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirtyyears of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity orperhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of theLevites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning ofJesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples andthe sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).

Jesus’public ministry: chronology.Jesus’ ministry started in Galilee, probably around AD 27/28,and ended with his death around AD 30 in Jerusalem. The temple hadbeen forty-six years in construction (generally interpreted as thetemple itself and the wider temple complex) when Jesus drove out themoney changers (John 2:20). According to Josephus, the rebuilding andexpansion of the second temple had started in 20/19 BC, during theeighteenth year of Herod’s reign (Ant. 15.380). The ministry ofJohn the Baptist had commenced in the fifteenth year of Tiberius(Luke 3:1–2), who had become a coregent in AD 11/12. From thesedates of the start of the temple building and the correlation of thereign of Tiberius to John the Baptist’s ministry, the onset ofJesus’ ministry can probably be dated to AD 27/28.

TheGospel of John mentions three Passovers and another unnamed feast inJohn 5:1. The length of Jesus’ ministry thus extended overthree or four Passovers, equaling about three or three and a halfyears. Passover, which took place on the fifteenth of Nisan, came ona Friday in AD 30 and 33. The year of Jesus’ death wastherefore probably AD 30.

Jesus’ministry years may be divided broadly into his Galilean and hisJudean ministries. The Synoptic Gospels describe the ministry inGalilee from various angles but converge again as Jesus enters Judea.

Galileanministry.The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and aroundGalilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that thekingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment ofprophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ firstteaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30);the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for hiscalling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection andsuffering.

AllGospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in hisGalilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioningof the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers isrecorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministryis the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, inparticular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synopticsfocus on healings and exorcisms.

DuringJesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with hisidentity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority(Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family(3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner ofBeelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesustold parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growingkingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humblebeginnings (4:1–32).

TheSynoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful.No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority orability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized manydemons (Mark 5:1–13), raised the dead (Mark 5:35–42), fedfive thousand (Mark 6:30–44), and walked on water (Mark6:48–49).

Inthe later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew andtraveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are notwritten with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns toGalilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey toJerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fearresolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee,where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ discipleswith lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed thePharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents(7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demandinga sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, whoconfessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus didprovide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).

Jesuswithdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician womanrequested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sentonly to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans hadlong resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality thatallotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere“crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Eventhe dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,”Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-muteman in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’sconfession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The citywas the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.

Judeanministry.Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry ashe resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually ledto his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem intothree phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27).The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of thejourney. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, andthe demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem(Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45;Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journeytoward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvationand judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase ofthe journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are themain themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).

Socialconflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposteinteractions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel(Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomicfeathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who hadlittle value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16;Luke 18:15–17).

PassionWeek, death, and resurrection. Eachof the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with thecrowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Lukedescribes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during whichJesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).

InJerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17).Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because thewhole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “beganlooking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segmentof Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions(12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation(12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s owndestruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, JudasIscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’arrest (14:10–11).

Atthe Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a newcovenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29;Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned thedisciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and laterhe prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agonyand submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42;Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial,crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15;Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18).Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission bymaking disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8)and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return(Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).

TheIdentity of Jesus Christ

Variousaspects of Jesus’ identity are stressed in the four NT Gospels,depending on their target audiences. In the Gospels the witnesses toJesus’ ministry are portrayed as constantly questioning andexamining his identity (Matt. 11:2–5; 12:24; 26:63; 27:11; Mark3:22; 8:11; 11:28; 14:61; Luke 7:18–20; 11:15; 22:67, 70;23:39; John 7:20, 25–27; 18:37). Only beings of the spiritualrealm are certain of his divinity (Mark 1:34; 3:11; Luke 4:41). AtJesus’ baptism, God referred to him as his Son, whom he loved(Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Likewise, when Jesus wastransfigured in the presence of Peter, James, and John, a voiceaffirmed, “This is my Son, whom I love” (Matt. 17:5; Mark9:7). At the moment of his death, the questioning of Jesus’identity culminated in a confession by a Roman centurion and otherguards: “Surely he was the Son of God!” (Matt. 27:54; cf.Mark 15:39).

Miracleworker.In the first-century setting, folk healers and miracle workers werepart of the fabric of society. Jesus, however, performed signs andmiracles in order to demonstrate the authority of the kingdom of Godover various realms: disease, illness, the spiritual world, nature,and even future events. Especially in the Gospel of John, Jesus’signs and miracles are used to show his authority and thus hisidentity.

Nochallenge superseded Jesus’ authority. Among his ample miraclesand signs, he changed water into wine (John 2:7–9), calmed astorm in the sea (Matt. 8:23–27; Mark 4:35–39; Luke8:22–25), exorcized demons (Matt. 9:32–34; Mark 5:1–13;Luke 9:42–43), healed the sick (Mark 1:40–44), raised thedead (Matt. 9:23–25; Mark 5:35–42; Luke 7:1–16;8:49–54; John 11:17, 38–44), performed miraculousfeedings (Matt. 14:17–21; 15:34–38; Mark 6:30–44;8:5–9; Luke 9:10–17; John 6:8–13), and walked onwater (Matt. 14:25–26; Mark 6:48–49; John 6:19).

ThePharisees requested miracles as evidence of his authority (Mark8:11–12). Jesus refused, claiming that a wicked and adulterousgeneration asks for a miraculous sign (Matt. 12:38–39; 16:1–4).The only sign that he would give was the sign of Jonah—hisdeath and resurrection three days later—a personal sacrifice,taking upon himself the judgment of the world (Matt. 12:39–41).

Rabbi/teacher.Jesus’ teaching style was similar to other first-century rabbisor Pharisees (Mark 9:5; 10:51; John 1:38; 3:2). What distinguishedhim was that he spoke with great personal authority (Matt. 5:22, 28,32, 39, 44; Mark 1:22). Like other rabbis of his day, Jesus gathereddisciples. He called these men to observe his lifestyle and to joinhim in his ministry of teaching, healing, and exorcism (Matt. 10:1–4;Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16).

Jesusused a variety of teaching methods. He frequently spoke in parables(Matt. 6:24; 13:24–52; 18:10–14, 23–35;21:28–22:14; 24:32–36, 45–51; 25:14–30; Mark4:1–34; 12:1–12; 13:28–34; Luke 8:4–18;12:41–46; 13:18–21; 14:15–24; 15:1–16:15,19–31; 18:1–14; 19:11–27; 20:9–19; 21:29–33),used figures of speech (John 10:9), hyperbole (Matt. 19:24; Mark10:25; Luke 18:25), argumentation (Matt. 26:11), object lessons(Matt. 24:32), frequent repetition (Matt. 13:44–47; Luke13:18–21), practical examples, and personal guidance.

Majorthemes in Jesus’ teaching include the kingdom of God, the costof discipleship, internal righteousness, the end of the age, hisidentity, his mission, and his approaching death. In his teachings,observance of Torah was given new context and meaning because God’skingdom had “come near” (Matt. 3:2). Jesus had come tofulfill the law (Matt. 5:17).

Jesus’teaching ministry often took place amid social conflict. Theseconflicts were couched in so-called challenge-riposte interactions inwhich the honor status of those involved was at stake. Jesus usedthese interactions as teachable moments. When questioned, Jesus gavereplies that reveal omniscience or intimate knowledge of God’swill, especially in the Gospel of John. In the Synoptic Gospels,Jesus’ answers are both ethical and practical in nature. TheSynoptics portray Jesus as challenged repeatedly with accusations ofviolating customs specified in the Jewish law. Jesus’ answersto such accusations often echoed the essence of 1Sam. 15:22,“To obey is better than sacrifice,” phrased by Jesus as“I desire mercy, not sacrifice” (Matt. 9:13; 12:7). Anoverall “better than” ethic was common in Jesus’public teaching.

TheSermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7) contains a “better than”ethic in which internal obedience is better than mere outwardobedience. For example, Jesus said that anger without cause is equalto murder (Matt. 5:21–22), that looking at a woman lustfullyamounts to adultery (Matt. 5:28), and that instead of revengingwrongs one must reciprocate with love (Matt. 5:38–48). Jesusvalued compassion above traditions and customs, even those containedwithin the OT law. He desired internal obedience above the letter ofthe law.

Jesus’teachings found their authority in the reality of God’simminent kingdom (Matt. 3:2; 10:7; Mark 1:15; Luke 10:9),necessitating repentance (Matt. 3:2), belief (Mark 1:15), dependence(Matt. 18:3–5; Mark 10:15), and loyalty to a new community—thefamily of Jesus followers (Mark 3:34; 10:29–30). Jesus urged,“Seek first [God’s] kingdom and his righteousness”(Matt. 6:33). Preaching with such urgency was common among propheticteachers of the intertestamental period. Jesus, however, had his owngrounds for urgency. He held that God deeply valued all humans (Matt.10:31) and would bring judgment swiftly (Matt. 25:31–46).

Examplesof a “greater good” ethic in the Synoptics include theoccasions when Jesus ate with sinners (Mark 2:16–17). Jesusused an aphorism in response to accusations about his associationswith sinners, saying, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor,but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners”(Mark 2:17). He advocated harvesting and healing on the Sabbath (Mark2:23–28; 3:1–6), and when he was accused of breaking thelaw, he pointed to an OT exception (1Sam. 21:1–6) todeclare compassion appropriate for the Sabbath. Jesus also appliedthe “greater good” ethic in the case of divorce, sincewomen suffered the societal stigma of adultery and commonly becameoutcasts following divorce (Matt. 19:8–9; Mark 10:5–9).

Jesus’kingdom teachings were simultaneously spiritual, ethical, andeschatological in application. The teachings were aimed at internaltransformation (Matt. 5:3–9; 18:3; Mark 10:15) and spurring onlove (Matt. 5:44; 7:21). The Spirit of the Lord had called Jesus tobless the hurting ones as they aspired to a godly character. Jesustaught, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father isperfect” (Matt. 5:48), and “Be merciful, just as yourFather is merciful” (Luke 6:36). The “blessed” onesin Jesus’ teachings are poor of spirit, peace driven, mournful,and hungry for righteousness, consumed with emulating godlycharacter.

Somescholars believe that Jesus promoted an “interim ethic”for the kingdom, intended only for a short period prior to the end oftime. However, he was explicit regarding the longevity of histeachings: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words willnever pass away” (Matt. 24:35; Luke 16:17).

Messiah.The concept of an anointed one, a messiah, who would restore theglories of David’s kingdom and bring political stability wascommon in Jewish expectation. Both before and after the Babyloniancaptivity, many Jews longed for one who would bring peace andprotection. Israel’s prophets had spoken of a coming deliverer,one who would restore David’s kingdom and reign in justice andrighteousness (2Sam. 7:11–16; Isa. 9:1–7; 11:1–16;Jer. 23:5–6; 33:15–16; Ezek. 37:25; Dan. 2:44; Mic. 5:2;Zech. 9:9). Isaiah’s description of the servant (Isa. 53) whosesuffering healed the nation provided a slightly different angle ofexpectation in terms of a deliverer.

Jesus’authority and popularity as a miracle worker called up messianicimages in first-century Jewish minds. On several occasions hearerscalled him “Son of David,” hoping for the Messiah (Matt.12:23; 21:9). Simon Peter was the first follower who confessed Jesusas the Christ, the “Messiah” (Matt. 16:16; Mark 8:29). Inline with Isaiah’s model of the Suffering Servant, Jesusfocused not on political ends but rather on spiritual regenerationthrough his own sacrificial death (Mark 10:45).

Eschatologicalprophet.Many scholars claim that Jesus is best understood as a Jewishapocalypticist, an eschatological prophet who expected God tointervene in history, destroy the wicked, and bring in the kingdom ofGod. Central in this understanding are Jesus’ propheciesconcerning the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem (Matt. 24:1–2,15–22; Mark 13:1; Luke 21:5–24; John 2:19; Acts 6:14). Inaddition, it is noted that Jesus had twelve disciples, representativeof the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:2–28; Luke 22:23–30).Certain of Jesus’ parables, those with apocalyptic images ofcoming judgment, present Jesus as an eschatological prophet (Matt.24:45–25:30; Luke 12:41–46; 19:11–27).

SufferingSon of God.Jesus’ first recorded teaching in a synagogue in Nazareth wasparadigmatic (Luke 4:16–21). He attributed the reading, Isa.61:1–2, to his personal calling to serve, and in doing so herevealed a trajectory of suffering. The Gospel of Mark likewise aptlyportrays Jesus as the suffering Son of God. Jesus’ ownteachings incorporated his upcoming suffering (Mark 8:31; 9:12–13,31; 10:33–34). He summarized his mission by declaring, “TheSon of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give hislife as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). His earthly careerended with a trial in Jerusalem consisting of both Roman and Jewishcomponents (Matt. 26:57–68; 27:1–31; Mark 14:53–65;15:1–20; Luke 22:54–23:25; John 18:19–24;18:28–19:16). He was insulted, scourged, mocked, and crucified.

Jesus’suffering culminated in his humiliating death by crucifixion (Matt.27:33–50; Mark 15:22–37; Luke 23:33–46; John19:16–30). Crucifixion was a death of unimaginable horror,bringing shame and humiliation to the victim and his family. Anyonehanging on a tree was considered cursed (Deut. 21:23; Gal. 3:13).Thus, especially in a Jewish society, anyone associated with acrucified person bore the shame of following one who was executed asa lowly slave and left as a cursed corpse. The apostle Paul referredto this shame of the cross when he stated, “I am not ashamed ofthe gospel” (Rom. 1:16).

ExaltedLord.Jesus had prophesied that he would rise again (Matt. 16:21; 17:9, 23;20:19; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:34; Luke 9:22; 18:33; 24:7, 46).The testimony of the Synoptics is that the resurrection of JesusChrist indeed occurred on the third day, Christ having died on Friday(Mark 15:42–45; Luke 23:52–54; John 19:30–33) andrisen again on Sunday (Matt. 28:1–7; Mark 16:2–7; Luke24:1–7; John 20:1–16). The resurrected Jesus waswitnessed by the women (Matt. 28:8–9), the eleven disciples(Matt. 28:16–17; Luke 24:36–43), and travelers on theroad to Emmaus (Luke 24:31–32). According to Paul, he appearedto as many as five hundred others (1Cor. 15:6). He appeared inbodily form, spoke, showed his scars, and ate (Luke 24:39–43;John 20:27; Acts 1:4). After forty postresurrection days, Jesusascended into the heavenly realm (Acts 1:9).

Asmuch as Jesus’ death was the epitome of shame, his victory overdeath was his ultimate exaltation (Phil. 2:5–11). At Pentecost,Peter proclaimed that in the resurrection God fulfilled OT promises(Ps. 16:10) by raising his Son from the grave (Acts 2:30–31).Furthermore, Christ provided freedom from the law through hisresurrection (Rom. 5:13–14), God’s approval of his lifeand work (Phil. 2:8–9), and God’s designation of him asLord over all the earth, the living and the dead (Acts 17:30–31;Phil. 2:10; Heb. 1:3), and over all his enemies (Eph. 1:20–23).

Jesus’exaltation commenced the beginning of forgiveness and justification(Luke 24:46–47; Acts 13:30–39; Rom. 4:25) and hisintercession for the people of God (Rom. 8:34). His ascensionsignaled the coming of the Holy Spirit as comforter and teacher (John14:26; Acts 2:33) and was accompanied by the promise of his return inglory (Luke 24:51), at which time he will render judgment (Matt.19:28; 24:31; Rev. 20:11–15) and establish his eternal kingdom(1Cor. 15:24; 2Tim. 4:1; Rev. 11:15; 22:5).

Jesus’Purpose and Community

Inthe Gospel of Matthew, Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah, whopreaches the good news of the kingdom, urging people to repent(4:17–23). Repentance and belief allow one to enter thekingdom. The call into the kingdom is a call into a new covenant, onemade in Jesus’ blood (26:28).

Inthe prologue to the Gospel of Mark, the narrator reveals the identityof Jesus (1:1). Jesus is presented as the one who brings good tidingsof salvation (cf. Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1). The centrality of thegospel, the good news (Mark 1:14–15), is evident.

Lukelikewise presents the preaching of the good news as a main purpose ofJesus’ ministry (4:43). The content of this good news is thekingdom of God (4:43; 8:1; 16:16). When the disciples of John theBaptist asked Jesus if he was the one who was to come (7:20), Jesusanswered, “Go back and report to John what you have seen andheard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosyare cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good newsis proclaimed to the poor” (7:22). The kingdom of God, aspresented in Luke, brings freedom for the prisoners, recovery ofsight for the blind, and release for the oppressed (4:18). Jesus’healings and exorcisms announce the coming kingdom of God alreadypresent in the ministry of Jesus (4:40–44; 6:18–20;8:1–2; 9:2; 10:8–9).

Inthe Gospel of John, Jesus testifies to the good news by way of signsthroughout his ministry. These signs point to Jesus’ glory, hisidentity, and the significance of his ministry. Jesus is the Messiah,the Son of God, who offers eternal and abundant life. This abundantlife is lived out in community.

Inthe Gospel of John, the disciples of Jesus represent the community ofGod (17:21). The disciples did not belong to the world, but theycontinued to live in the world (17:14–16). Throughout hisministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a callto loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38;Luke 9:23–26), a call to the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50;Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock Iwill build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call tocommunity. Jesus’ presence as the head of the community wasreplaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).

Jesus’ministry continued in the community of Jesus’ followers, God’sfamily—the church. Entrance into the community was obtained byadopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and through theinitiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26;Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–62; John 1:12; 3:16;10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9).

TheQuests for the Historical Jesus

Thequest for the historical Jesus, or seeking who Jesus was from ahistorical perspective, is a modern phenomenon deemed necessary byscholars who claim that the NT Gospels were written long after Jesus’death and were heavily influenced by the post-Easter understanding ofthe church.

Thebeginning of this quest is often dated to 1770, when the lecturenotes of Hermann Samuel Reimarus were published posthumously.Reimarus had launched an inquiry into the identity of Jesus thatrejected as inauthentic all supernatural elements in the Gospels. Heconcluded that the disciples invented Jesus’ miracles,prophecies, ritualistic religion, and resurrection. Reimarus’sconclusions were not widely accepted, but they set off a flurry ofrationalistic research into the historical Jesus that continuedthroughout the nineteenth century. This became known as the “firstquest” for the historical Jesus.

In1906 German theologian Albert Schweit-zer published The Quest of theHistorical Jesus (German title: Von Reimarus zu Wrede: EineGeschichte der Leben-Jesu-Forschung), a scathing indictment of thefirst quest. Schweitzer’s work showed that nineteenth-centuryresearchers re-created Jesus in their own image, transforming thehistorical Jesus into a modern philanthropist preaching aninoffensive message of love and brotherhood. Schweitzer’sconclusions marked the beginning of the end for this first quest.Schweitzer himself concluded that the historical Jesus was aneschatological prophet whose purposes failed during his last days inJerusalem.

Withthe demise of the first quest, some NT scholars, such as RudolfBultmann, rejected any claim to being able to discover the historicalJesus. This trend continued until 1953, when some of Bultmann’sformer students launched what has come to be known as the “newquest” for the historical Jesus (1953–c. 1970). Thisquest created new interest in the historical Jesus but was stilldominated by the view that the portrait of Jesus in the Gospels islargely a creation of the church in a post-Easter setting.

Asthe rebuilding years of the post–World WarII era wanedand scholars started to reap academic fruit from major archaeologicalfinds such as the DSS, research on the historical Jesus moved on towhat has been called the “third quest.” This quest seeksespecially to research and understand Jesus in his social andcultural setting.

OldTestament

Phoeniciansand Philistines. Asa people whose ancestral territory lay in the landlocked andtimber-poor highlands of Ephraim and Judah, the Israelites ofbiblical times never achieved prominence in seafaring orshipbuilding. Instead, they relied for their maritime enterprises onalliances with their coastal neighbors, particularly the Phoenicianstates to the north of Israel, who excelled in seafaring and hadaccess to the abundant timber forests of Lebanon. The Phoenicians(the Punics of classical antiquity) were famous in antiquity fortheir seafaring. In biblical times, they traded heavily betweenSyria-Palestine and Egypt and also sailed throughout theMediterranean, establishing colonies as far away as Tunisia(Carthage) and Spain (Cadiz).

Anotherseagoing people prominent in the OT were the Philistines, whose baseof power was to the west of Judah, along the Mediterranean coast. TheBible associates the Philistines with the five cities of Ashdod,Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza. The Philistines were among the SeaPeoples, who came to the Levant from the Aegean beginning in thetwelfth century BC (Amos 9:7; Jer. 47:4).

Theperennial enmity between the Philistines and the Israelites precludedjoint maritime ventures of the sort shared by Israel and thePhoenicians, and the Bible does not describe Philistine maritimeactivities in any depth. Nevertheless, the seagoing nature of thePhilistines is reflected by the fact that their settlements remainedconfined to the coastal region. They never made a systematic attemptto take over the traditionally Israelite and Judahite highlands. Whenthey did venture into the Judean mountains, it was to assert amilitary and political presence among the agrarian Israelites andJudahites rather than to establish permanent settlements andPhilistine population centers. Twelfth-century BC reliefs at MedinetHabu (in the mortuary temple of RamessesIII) depict a navalbattle between the Sea Peoples and the Egyptians. The reliefs includepictures of Philistine ships and sailors.

Israeliteseafaring.One of the rare references to Israelite seafaring describes theDanites and the Asherites in connection with ships and harbors (Judg.5:17; see also Ezek. 27:19). Traditional Danite territory overlappedwith the area of Philistine settlement. Asherite territory overlappedsubstantially with Phoenician territory. It is possible that Judg.5:17 refers to the fact that the Danites and the Asherites worked inthe port cities serving Philistine and Phoenician shipping. Inanother passage, Zebulun is associated with ports (Gen. 49:13). It isnoteworthy that the Israelite coast between Jaffa and Dor (roughlybetween Philistia and Phoenicia) does not have an abundance ofnatural harbors. Later, Herod the Great would build the artificialharbor at Caesarea in the first century BC. The great expense of sucha project—including the construction of over 2,500 feet ofbreakwaters made of underwater concrete, mostly imported fromItaly—suggests the extent of the need for secure harbors inthis region.

Solomon’sfleet.The zenith of Israelite seafaring occurred during the reign ofSolomon. Solomon built a fleet of ships at “Ezion Geber, whichis near Elath in Edom, on the shore of the Red Sea” (1Kings9:26). The purpose of these ships was to bring back gold from Ophir(1Kings 9:28), possibly a location in the Arabian Peninsula, towhich a port on the Red Sea would have offered ready access. Thestory confirms the aforementioned dependence on the Phoenicians inthe area of seafaring: although the ships belonged to Solomon, “Hiram[the Phoenician king of Tyre] sent his men—sailors who knew thesea—to serve in the fleet with Solomon’s men”(1Kings 9:27). The timber for the ships would also have beenimported by Israel from Phoenicia (see 1Kings 9:11). Even atthe height of its power, Israel lacked the human resources to embarkon sea voyages independently of the Phoenicians.

Thesuccess of Solomon’s project, of course, depended not only onwarm relations with the Phoenicians but also on territorial controlof the historically Edomite lands between Judah and the Red Sea. Thisfavorable combination of conditions would come and go throughout thebiblical period, and with it, Israel’s modest presence on theseas. From the Phoenician point of view, cooperation with Israel wasan essential component of gaining access to a Red Sea port, and withit to the products of Arabia, the Horn of Africa, and India. ThePhoenicians, as expansive as their travel was in the Mediterranean,could never independently control the long overland route fromPhoenicia to the Red Sea, since it ran through the territory ofIsrael and Edom. Their best hope was a friendly and powerfulIsraelite ally. This explains the cordial relationship and why Hiramsent not only his sailors to serve Solomon but also craftsmen andsupplies for the construction of the temple (1Kings 5:10–12).Solomon and Hiram jointly operated “a fleet of trading ships”that would return to port every three years bringing “gold,silver, and ivory, and apes and baboons” (1Kings 10:22).

Jehoshaphat.In the mid-ninth century BC, King Jehoshaphat of Judah attempted torepeat Solomon’s feat of launching a fleet from Ezion Geber(1Kings 22:48–49; 2Chron. 20:35–37).According to both accounts, the ships were wrecked before they couldset sail. On several other points, however, the two versions of thestory disagree in ways that bear on questions of the political andeconomic conditions of Israelite seafaring.

Bythis time, Israel and Judah had split into separate kingdoms, withthe northern kingdom of Israel being geographically and politicallycloser to the Phoenicians. The powerful King Ahab of Israel,Jehoshaphat’s contemporary through much of his reign, marriedJezebel, the daughter of the Sidonian (Phoenician) king Ethbaal(1Kings 16:31). According to 1Kings, King Ahaziah ofIsrael (Ahab’s son) proposed to cooperate with Jehoshaphat bysending his own men on the voyage, much as Hiram had assisted Solomonin the previous century. Jehoshaphat rejected the suggestion,possibly indicating a bid for Judean autonomy in an era of northerndominance. According to 2Chronicles, however, Jehoshaphat didcooperate willingly with Ahaziah, and this was the reason that theships foundered in port: God punished the righteous Jehoshaphat fortoo close a relationship with his wicked northern counterpart. In1Kings 22:47 it is mentioned that at the time of Jehoshaphat’sventure there was no king in Edom. As noted, control of the overlandroute between Judah and the Red Sea was necessary for the success ofany voyage originating from Ezion Geber.

Howeverthe contradiction between 1Kings and 2Chroniclesregarding the involvement of Ahaziah is resolved, both versions ofthe story highlight the fact that the port at Ezion Geber commandedthe interest of the Judeans, the Israelites, and the Phoenicians, andits successful operation probably depended on the cooperation of allthree.

Shipsof Tarshish.Several biblical texts, including the stories of Solomon andJehoshaphat, mention “ships of Tarshish” (1Kings10:22 NIV mg.). In a number of contexts, such ships are associatedwith the transportation of metals and metal ores, including iron,lead, tin, gold, and silver (1Kings 10:22; Ezek. 27:12; Jer.10:9). The exact derivation of the term “ships of Tarshish”is uncertain, though it is clear from the descriptions of theircargoes that such ships could travel over long distances. As Ezekielobserves, “The ships of Tarshish serve as carriers for yourwares. You are filled with heavy cargo as you sail the sea. Youroarsmen take you out to the high seas” (Ezek. 27:25–26).

Inthe Table of Nations, Tarshish is listed as a descendant of Javan(Gen. 10:4), along with a number of other seafaring peoples of theeastern Mediterranean (“Javan” indicates the peoples ofthe Aegean and is linguistically equivalent to “Ionia”[see also Ezek. 27:12–22]). Some have suggested, then, that theships of Tarshish should be associated with Tarsus in southeasternTurkey, an area containing silver mines (also the birthplace of Paul[Acts 9:11]). Others have suggested the Phoenician colony ofTartessus in Spain, another metal-producing area. This locationfigures in the interpretation of the identification of thedestination of Jonah as Tarshish (Jon. 1:3): presumably, if he wereavoiding Nineveh and departing from Joppa, he would head towardSpain, in the exact opposite direction, rather than toward Tarsus inCilicia.

Inaddition to these two geographical options, some have attempted toexplain the expression “ships of Tarshish” as derivingfrom the Akkadian term for smelting or refining: perhaps the manyreferences to cargoes of metals indicate that the ships were used totransport metal ore to refining centers. Finally, one scholar hasproposed that the term is related to the Greek word tarsos,meaning “oar.”

Descriptionsof ships and seafaring.Ezekiel, in his lament concerning the Phoenician city of Tyre (Ezek.27), relates a number of details related to Phoenician seafaring. Thepicture largely confirms the descriptions of how Solomon built andmanned his fleet with the assistance of his Tyrian ally. Timber forthe construction of the ship came from Lebanon and Cyprus, amongother places (vv. 5–6). Sails were made from Egyptian linen(v.7), and as noted above, the oarsmen and sailors were fromthe Phoenician city-states (vv. 8–9). Ezekiel goes on to list alarge number of ports of call as well as a dazzling variety ofcargoes (vv. 12–24). Notably, Ezekiel has the Judahites and theIsraelites offering the products of their agrarian economy—“wheatfrom Minnith and confections, honey, olive oil and balm”(v.17)—thus filling out the picture of what theIsraelites gave in exchange for the precious metals and luxury itemsimported by their country from elsewhere.

In1999 archaeologists explored two eighth-century BC Phoenician shipsthat had sunk thirty miles west of Ashkelon. The ships, eachmeasuring about fifty feet in length, contained large cargoes of wineand were headed either for Egypt or for the Phoenician colonies inthe western Mediterranean.

Shipsand sailing figure prominently in the story of Jonah, who boarded aship bound for Tarshish (see discussion above) at Joppa on theMediterranean coast. In the story we see a number of features ofancient sea travel. Jonah paid a fare for his voyage (Jon. 1:3). Notonly the biblical author (see 1:4), but also the presumablynon-Israelite sailors, believed that the great storm was the doing ofa god, and that it could be calmed by appealing to that god(1:6)—although cargo was thrown overboard for good measure.When Paul was caught in a storm in the first century AD, the samestrategies were still in use (Acts 27:38). The religious habits ofancient sailors, particularly their reverence for the gods whocontrolled the stormy seas and thus held their lives in the balance,are illuminated by the discovery of stone anchors in several temples(presumably left by sailors as offerings), including at the portcities of Ugarit, Kition, and Byblos.

Psalm107:23–32 speaks of God’s care of sailors from anIsraelite perspective. In the psalm, those who “went out on thesea in ships,” the “merchants on the mighty waters”(i.e., the deep, open sea), witness firsthand the works of the God ofIsrael, which include both the raising and the quieting of the storm.This passage vividly expresses the terror of being caught in a stormand the great relief and gratitude felt by sailors who reached safehaven.

Noah’sArk

Accordingto the biblical account, Noah’s ark was 450 feet long, 75 feetwide, and 45 feet high (300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits [Gen.6:15]). It had three decks, a roof, and a window. By comparison, theship of Uta-napishti in the Epic of Gilgamesh is described as havingsix decks (and thus seven stories), edges of 180 feet (ten dozencubits) in each dimension, and occupying the space of an acre (arough approximation of the dimensions given). Both ships aredescribed as providing space for the builder’s family and everyliving creature. In the Atrahasis Epic, the boat is roofed, but itsdimensions are not given.

Becauseof the character of Gen. 6–8, it is inappropriate to drawconclusions from the story regarding shipbuilding in historicalantiquity. According to the specifications given in the biblicaltext, Noah’s ark would have been the largest wooden ship inhistory, equaled only by the United States schooner Wyoming,completed in 1909. While the overall length of the Wyoming was also450 feet, nearly 100 feet of length was accounted for in the fore andaft booms, so that the hull length was only 350 feet. Even with earlytwentieth-century shipbuilding technology, its extravagant lengthrendered the Wyoming unseaworthy, and the ship foundered in 1924. Thelargest documented wooden ships of antiquity include the GreekSyracusia(third century BC; 180 feet), described by Athenaeus; the Roman Isis(second century AD; 180 feet), described by Lucian; Caligula’s“Giant Ship” (first century AD; 341 feet), recovered inmodern times and possibly corresponding to a ship described by Plinythe Elder; and PtolemyIV’s Tessarakonteres (third centuryBC), reported by Plutarch to have been about 425 feet long. This lastship was not designed for cruising in open water.

NewTestament

Fishingin the Sea of Galilee. Severalof Jesus’ disciples worked as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee,and the Gospels document their use of small boats for fishing andtraveling across the sea. Fishing was done with nets thrown both fromboats and from the shore (Mark 1:16, 19). The boats used by fishermenon the Sea of Galilee may have been small enough to pull up onto thebeach (Luke 5:2), or to be nearly capsized by a large catch of fish(Luke 5:7) or by a violent storm (Mark 4:37). They were large enoughto transport several men and even to sleep in (Mark 4:38). Such boatscould be rowed or sailed; in Mark 6:48 the disciples had to resort torowing because of an unfavorable headwind. On one occasion, Jesusstood in a boat to preach to a crowd gathered on the shore (Mark4:1). The Sea of Galilee is about eight miles wide and thirteen mileslong. On several occasions, Jesus traveled by boat across the sea toavoid having to walk long distances around its circumference (e.g.,Matt. 9:1; 14:22; 15:39).

In1986 archaeologists recovered a fishing boat dating to the mid-firstcentury AD on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. The boat had beenscuttled near the shore and was preserved under mud. The “JesusBoat,” as it was dubbed, measures twenty-seven feet in lengthand has a beam seven and a half feet long. Numerous species of woodwere used in its construction and repairs throughout its useful life.While there is no evidence to link the boat to Jesus or hisdisciples, radiometric dating places it in the correct period, and itprovides a likely model of the type of boat portrayed in the Gospels.

Asecond source of information regarding ships and sailing in the NT isthe account in Acts of Paul’s many sea voyages. As in the caseof Jehoshaphat, the Tyrians, Jonah, and Jesus’ disciples, Paullearned firsthand the perils of seafaring in small wooden boats:among his many traumas, along with beatings and stonings, herecalled, “Three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and aday in the open sea” (2Cor. 11:25).

Paul’sjourneys.A survey of Paul’s sea travels on his four journeys gives someidea of the routes that could be taken by a paying traveler in theeastern Mediterranean and Aegean.

1.Paul’s first missionary journey included voyages from Seleuciain Syria to the port of Salamis in Cyprus (Acts 13:4) and from Cyprus(Paphos) to Perga on the southern coast of Asia Minor (13:13). Afterjourneying through the interior, Paul returned to Attalia, where heembarked for the return trip to Syria, presumably passing againthrough the port at Salamis (14:26).

2.The second missionary journey began not with a sea voyage but ratherwith a trek through the interior of Syria and Cilicia, illustratingthat although sea travel was by far a more rapid means of travel, theoverland routes were by no means impossible (Acts 15:39). Paul wouldrepeat this land route during his third journey (19:1). Sea travelwas fast, but when one had plenty of friends along the alternativeland route, a sea journey was considerably less enjoyable. It isduring the second journey that we have the first recorded accounts ofPaul sailing in the Aegean. From Troas in Asia Minor, he sailed theshort distance to Macedonia (16:11), putting in midway at the islandof Samothrace. Apparently, Paul traveled by sea down the coast fromBerea to Athens (17:14). At the conclusion of his second journey,Paul sailed from Corinth to Caesarea, with a stop at Ephesus(18:18–22). Not counting any intervening ports of call notmentioned in the text, this would be the longest single leg of seatravel so far mentioned.

3.The third missionary journey once more began with a long overlandtrip from Syria through Asia Minor; by this time, Paul had manyassociates along the way to visit. Again, he sailed in the Aegean,from Ephesus to Macedonia (Acts 20:1) and back (20:6). At one point,Paul opted to travel overland, from Troas to Assos, while hiscompanions sailed down the coast (20:13). Meeting up with them, hesailed on, hugging the coast of Asia Minor, then sailing south ofCyprus along an open-water route to Tyre. From Tyre, the ship againhugged the Palestinian coast, stopping in several ports before Pauldisembarked at Caesarea (21:7). Paul’s journeys illustrate thevariety of itineraries taken by ships. They were capable of sailingin deep water, but they would also hug the coast when there werereasons to make frequent stops.

4.Paul’s fourth journey, which he made in custody on his way to atrial before the emperor at Rome, was to be the most dangerous. Fromthe account in Acts we can glean a number of details of life at seain the first century AD. The ship bound for Italy was large, and itcarried 276 passengers and crew (Acts 27:6, 37), including soldiersand prisoners, at least one companion of a prisoner (Paul’sfriend Aristarchus [27:2]), a ship’s pilot, and the ship’sowner (27:11). Sailors used celestial navigation (27:20) and tooksoundings in shallow water (27:28). We see also that the ship’scourse could be determined by the direction of the prevailing winds:twice during the journey Paul’s ship was forced to sail to thelee of large islands (Cyprus and Crete)—a longer journey, butthe only option for a ship that was not rigged to sail close-hauled.

Whenextended periods of unfavorable weather were forecast, one option wassimply to put in at a port until conditions improved, preferably in aharbor that was in the lee of an island (Acts 27:12). We learnsomething of the measures that were taken in heavy weather, many ofwhich are still used in modern times: ropes were tied around the hullof the ship to prevent it from breaking up in rough seas (27:17), thelifeboat was brought onto the deck and made fast (27:17), sea anchorswere deployed to keep the bow of the ship oriented into the oncomingwaves (27:7), the rudder was lashed amidships (27:40), valuable cargoand gear were jettisoned (27:19, 38), and, as in the days of Jonah,sailors and passengers prayed for divine deliverance (27:29; see alsothe protective emblems in 28:11).

Whenall other means had been exhausted, a ship could be run aground on asandy beach (Acts 27:39), a measure that would have risked damage tothe boat but saved lives. In the case of Paul’s ship, thedecision to run aground ultimately resulted in the destruction of theship (27:41).

Metaphorsand illustrations.Several NT authors draw illustrations from the nautical world. Jameslikens the harmful power of evil speech to the rudder of a ship:although it is a small device, by it the pilot can control a greatship (James 3:4–5). Elsewhere, he compares the doubting of theunwise person to being lost at sea in a storm (James 1:6; cf. Eph.4:14). In 1Tim. 1:19 the loss of faith and good conscience islikened to a shipwreck. Hebrews 6:19 describes the assurance of God’sfaithfulness as an anchor for the soul.

The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesusfollowers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christembodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in humanhistory.

Introduction

Name.Early Christians combined the name “Jesus” with the title“Christ” (Acts 5:42; NIV: “Messiah”). Thename “Jesus,” from the Hebrew Yehoshua or Yeshua, was acommon male name in first-century Judaism. The title “Christ”is from the Greek christos, a translation of the Hebrew mashiakh(“anointed one, messiah”). Christians eventually werenamed after Jesus’ title (Acts 11:26). During the ministry ofJesus, Peter was the first disciple to recognize Jesus as the Messiah(Matt. 16:16; Mark 9:29; Luke 9:20).

Sources.From the viewpoint of Christianity, the life and ministry of Jesusconstitute the turning point in human history. From a historicalperspective, ample early source materials would be expected. Indeed,both Christian and non-Christian first-century and earlysecond-century literary sources are extant, but they are few innumber. In part, this low incidence is due to society’s initialresistance to the Jesus followers’ movement. The ancient Romanhistorian Tacitus called Christianity “a superstition,”since its beliefs did not fit with the culture’s prevailingworldview and thus were considered antisocial. Early literary sourcestherefore are either in-group documents or allusions in non-Christiansources.

TheNT Gospels are the principal sources for the life and ministry ofJesus. They consist of Matthew, Mark, Luke (the Synoptic Gospels),and John. Most scholars adhere to the so-called Four SourceHypothesis. In this theory, Mark was written first and was used as asource by Matthew and Luke, who also used the sayings source Q (fromGerman Quelle, meaning “source”) as well as their ownindividual sources M (Matthew) and L (Luke). John used additionalsources.

Theearly church tried to put together singular accounts, so-calledGospel harmonies, of the life of Jesus. The Gospel of the Ebionitesrepresents one such attempt based on the Synoptic Gospels. Anotherharmony, the Diatessaron, based on all four Gospels, was producedaround AD 170 by Tatian. Additional source materials concerning thelife of Christ are provided in the NT in texts such as Acts, thePauline Epistles, the General Epistles, and the Revelation of John.Paul wrote to the Galatians, “But when the time had fully come,God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law” (Gal. 4:4).The first narrative about Jesus by the Christian community was apassion narrative, the account of his death and resurrection. Thefirst extant references to this tradition are found in Paul’sletters (1Cor. 2:2; Gal. 3:1). The resurrection was recognizedfrom the beginning as the cornerstone of the Christian faith (1Cor.15:13–14).

Amongnon-Christian sources, the earliest reference to Jesus is found in aletter written circa AD 112 by Pliny the Younger, the Roman governorof Bithynia-Pontus (Ep. 10.96). The Roman historian Tacitus mentionsChristians and Jesus around AD 115 in his famous work about thehistory of Rome (Ann. 15.44). Another Roman historian, Suetonius,wrote around the same time concerning unrest among the Jews in Romebecause of a certain “Chrestos” (Claud. 25.4). Somescholars conclude that “Chrestos” is a misspelling of“Christos,” a reference to Jesus.

TheJewish author Josephus (first century AD) mentions Jesus in a storyabout the Jewish high priest Ananus and James the brother of Jesus(Ant. 20.200). A controversial reference to Jesus appears in adifferent part of the same work, where Josephus affirms that Jesus isthe Messiah and that he rose from the dead (Ant. 18.63–64). Themajority of scholars consider this passage to be authentic butheavily edited by later Christian copyists. Another Jewish source,the Talmud, also mentions Jesus in several places, but thesereferences are very late and of little historical value.

NoncanonicalGospels that mention Jesus include, for example, the Infancy Gospelof Thomas, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel ofJames, the Gospel of Judas Iscariot, the Gospel of the Hebrews, theEgerton Gospel, and the Gospel of Judas. Although some of these maycontain an occasional authentic saying or event, for the most partthey are late and unreliable.

Jesus’Life

Birthand childhood. TheGospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehemduring the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesuswas probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’sdeath (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of avirginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18;Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governorQuirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place inBethlehem (2:1–5). Both the census and the governorship at thetime of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars.Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to eitherconfirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must bedetermined on the basis of one’s view regarding the generalreliability of the Gospel tradition.

Onthe eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keepingwith the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus”(Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home ofhis parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel ofLuke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth instrength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke alsocontains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).

Jesuswas born in a lower socioeconomic setting. His parents offered atemple sacrifice appropriate for those who could not afford tosacrifice a sheep (Luke 2:22–24; cf. Lev. 12:8). Joseph, Jesus’earthly father, was a carpenter or an artisan in wood, stone, ormetal (Matt. 13:55). From a geographical perspective, Nazareth wasnot a prominent place for settling, since it lacked fertile ground.Jesus’ disciple Nathanael expressed an apparently commonfirst-century sentiment concerning Nazareth: “Nazareth! Cananything good come from there?” (John 1:46).

Jesuswas also born in a context of scandal. Questions of illegitimacy weresurely raised, since his mother Mary was discovered to be pregnantbefore her marriage to Joseph. According to Matthew, only theintervention of an angel convinced Joseph not to break his betrothal(Matt. 1:18–24). Jesus’ birth took place in Bethlehem,far from his parents’ home in Nazareth. According to kinshiphospitality customs, Joseph and Mary would have expected to stay withdistant relatives in Bethlehem. It is likely that they were unwelcomebecause of Jesus’ status as an illegitimate child; thus Maryhad to give birth elsewhere and place the infant Jesus in a feedingtrough (Luke 2:7). A similar response was seen years later inNazareth when Jesus was identified as “Mary’s son”(Mark 6:3) rather than through his paternal line, thereby shaming himas one who was born an illegitimate child. Jesus was likewiserejected at the end of his life as the crowds cried, “Crucifyhim!” (Matt. 27:22–23; Mark 15:13–14; Luke 23:21;John 19:6, 15). When Jesus was arrested, most of his followers fled(Matt. 26:56; Mark 14:50–52), and a core disciple, Peter,vehemently denied knowing him (Matt. 26:69–74; Mark 14:66–71;Luke 22:55–60; John 18:15–17, 25–27). His ownsiblings did not believe in him (John 7:5) and were evidently ashamedof his fate, since from the cross Jesus placed the care of his motherinto the hands of “the disciple whom he loved” (19:26–27)rather than the next brother in line, as was customary.

Baptism,temptation, and start of ministry.After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring tohim as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22).Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instantministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into thewilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11;Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that thetemptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Lukeidentify three specific temptations by the devil, though their orderfor the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesuswas tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine interventionafter jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’skingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation,quoting Scripture in response.

Matthewand Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum inGalilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13;Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirtyyears of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity orperhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of theLevites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning ofJesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples andthe sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).

Jesus’public ministry: chronology.Jesus’ ministry started in Galilee, probably around AD 27/28,and ended with his death around AD 30 in Jerusalem. The temple hadbeen forty-six years in construction (generally interpreted as thetemple itself and the wider temple complex) when Jesus drove out themoney changers (John 2:20). According to Josephus, the rebuilding andexpansion of the second temple had started in 20/19 BC, during theeighteenth year of Herod’s reign (Ant. 15.380). The ministry ofJohn the Baptist had commenced in the fifteenth year of Tiberius(Luke 3:1–2), who had become a coregent in AD 11/12. From thesedates of the start of the temple building and the correlation of thereign of Tiberius to John the Baptist’s ministry, the onset ofJesus’ ministry can probably be dated to AD 27/28.

TheGospel of John mentions three Passovers and another unnamed feast inJohn 5:1. The length of Jesus’ ministry thus extended overthree or four Passovers, equaling about three or three and a halfyears. Passover, which took place on the fifteenth of Nisan, came ona Friday in AD 30 and 33. The year of Jesus’ death wastherefore probably AD 30.

Jesus’ministry years may be divided broadly into his Galilean and hisJudean ministries. The Synoptic Gospels describe the ministry inGalilee from various angles but converge again as Jesus enters Judea.

Galileanministry.The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and aroundGalilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that thekingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment ofprophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ firstteaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30);the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for hiscalling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection andsuffering.

AllGospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in hisGalilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioningof the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers isrecorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministryis the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, inparticular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synopticsfocus on healings and exorcisms.

DuringJesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with hisidentity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority(Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family(3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner ofBeelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesustold parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growingkingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humblebeginnings (4:1–32).

TheSynoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful.No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority orability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized manydemons (Mark 5:1–13), raised the dead (Mark 5:35–42), fedfive thousand (Mark 6:30–44), and walked on water (Mark6:48–49).

Inthe later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew andtraveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are notwritten with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns toGalilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey toJerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fearresolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee,where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ discipleswith lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed thePharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents(7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demandinga sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, whoconfessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus didprovide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).

Jesuswithdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician womanrequested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sentonly to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans hadlong resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality thatallotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere“crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Eventhe dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,”Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-muteman in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’sconfession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The citywas the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.

Judeanministry.Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry ashe resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually ledto his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem intothree phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27).The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of thejourney. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, andthe demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem(Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45;Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journeytoward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvationand judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase ofthe journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are themain themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).

Socialconflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposteinteractions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel(Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomicfeathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who hadlittle value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16;Luke 18:15–17).

PassionWeek, death, and resurrection. Eachof the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with thecrowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Lukedescribes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during whichJesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).

InJerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17).Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because thewhole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “beganlooking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segmentof Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions(12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation(12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s owndestruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, JudasIscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’arrest (14:10–11).

Atthe Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a newcovenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29;Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned thedisciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and laterhe prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agonyand submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42;Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial,crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15;Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18).Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission bymaking disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8)and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return(Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).

TheIdentity of Jesus Christ

Variousaspects of Jesus’ identity are stressed in the four NT Gospels,depending on their target audiences. In the Gospels the witnesses toJesus’ ministry are portrayed as constantly questioning andexamining his identity (Matt. 11:2–5; 12:24; 26:63; 27:11; Mark3:22; 8:11; 11:28; 14:61; Luke 7:18–20; 11:15; 22:67, 70;23:39; John 7:20, 25–27; 18:37). Only beings of the spiritualrealm are certain of his divinity (Mark 1:34; 3:11; Luke 4:41). AtJesus’ baptism, God referred to him as his Son, whom he loved(Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Likewise, when Jesus wastransfigured in the presence of Peter, James, and John, a voiceaffirmed, “This is my Son, whom I love” (Matt. 17:5; Mark9:7). At the moment of his death, the questioning of Jesus’identity culminated in a confession by a Roman centurion and otherguards: “Surely he was the Son of God!” (Matt. 27:54; cf.Mark 15:39).

Miracleworker.In the first-century setting, folk healers and miracle workers werepart of the fabric of society. Jesus, however, performed signs andmiracles in order to demonstrate the authority of the kingdom of Godover various realms: disease, illness, the spiritual world, nature,and even future events. Especially in the Gospel of John, Jesus’signs and miracles are used to show his authority and thus hisidentity.

Nochallenge superseded Jesus’ authority. Among his ample miraclesand signs, he changed water into wine (John 2:7–9), calmed astorm in the sea (Matt. 8:23–27; Mark 4:35–39; Luke8:22–25), exorcized demons (Matt. 9:32–34; Mark 5:1–13;Luke 9:42–43), healed the sick (Mark 1:40–44), raised thedead (Matt. 9:23–25; Mark 5:35–42; Luke 7:1–16;8:49–54; John 11:17, 38–44), performed miraculousfeedings (Matt. 14:17–21; 15:34–38; Mark 6:30–44;8:5–9; Luke 9:10–17; John 6:8–13), and walked onwater (Matt. 14:25–26; Mark 6:48–49; John 6:19).

ThePharisees requested miracles as evidence of his authority (Mark8:11–12). Jesus refused, claiming that a wicked and adulterousgeneration asks for a miraculous sign (Matt. 12:38–39; 16:1–4).The only sign that he would give was the sign of Jonah—hisdeath and resurrection three days later—a personal sacrifice,taking upon himself the judgment of the world (Matt. 12:39–41).

Rabbi/teacher.Jesus’ teaching style was similar to other first-century rabbisor Pharisees (Mark 9:5; 10:51; John 1:38; 3:2). What distinguishedhim was that he spoke with great personal authority (Matt. 5:22, 28,32, 39, 44; Mark 1:22). Like other rabbis of his day, Jesus gathereddisciples. He called these men to observe his lifestyle and to joinhim in his ministry of teaching, healing, and exorcism (Matt. 10:1–4;Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16).

Jesusused a variety of teaching methods. He frequently spoke in parables(Matt. 6:24; 13:24–52; 18:10–14, 23–35;21:28–22:14; 24:32–36, 45–51; 25:14–30; Mark4:1–34; 12:1–12; 13:28–34; Luke 8:4–18;12:41–46; 13:18–21; 14:15–24; 15:1–16:15,19–31; 18:1–14; 19:11–27; 20:9–19; 21:29–33),used figures of speech (John 10:9), hyperbole (Matt. 19:24; Mark10:25; Luke 18:25), argumentation (Matt. 26:11), object lessons(Matt. 24:32), frequent repetition (Matt. 13:44–47; Luke13:18–21), practical examples, and personal guidance.

Majorthemes in Jesus’ teaching include the kingdom of God, the costof discipleship, internal righteousness, the end of the age, hisidentity, his mission, and his approaching death. In his teachings,observance of Torah was given new context and meaning because God’skingdom had “come near” (Matt. 3:2). Jesus had come tofulfill the law (Matt. 5:17).

Jesus’teaching ministry often took place amid social conflict. Theseconflicts were couched in so-called challenge-riposte interactions inwhich the honor status of those involved was at stake. Jesus usedthese interactions as teachable moments. When questioned, Jesus gavereplies that reveal omniscience or intimate knowledge of God’swill, especially in the Gospel of John. In the Synoptic Gospels,Jesus’ answers are both ethical and practical in nature. TheSynoptics portray Jesus as challenged repeatedly with accusations ofviolating customs specified in the Jewish law. Jesus’ answersto such accusations often echoed the essence of 1Sam. 15:22,“To obey is better than sacrifice,” phrased by Jesus as“I desire mercy, not sacrifice” (Matt. 9:13; 12:7). Anoverall “better than” ethic was common in Jesus’public teaching.

TheSermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7) contains a “better than”ethic in which internal obedience is better than mere outwardobedience. For example, Jesus said that anger without cause is equalto murder (Matt. 5:21–22), that looking at a woman lustfullyamounts to adultery (Matt. 5:28), and that instead of revengingwrongs one must reciprocate with love (Matt. 5:38–48). Jesusvalued compassion above traditions and customs, even those containedwithin the OT law. He desired internal obedience above the letter ofthe law.

Jesus’teachings found their authority in the reality of God’simminent kingdom (Matt. 3:2; 10:7; Mark 1:15; Luke 10:9),necessitating repentance (Matt. 3:2), belief (Mark 1:15), dependence(Matt. 18:3–5; Mark 10:15), and loyalty to a new community—thefamily of Jesus followers (Mark 3:34; 10:29–30). Jesus urged,“Seek first [God’s] kingdom and his righteousness”(Matt. 6:33). Preaching with such urgency was common among propheticteachers of the intertestamental period. Jesus, however, had his owngrounds for urgency. He held that God deeply valued all humans (Matt.10:31) and would bring judgment swiftly (Matt. 25:31–46).

Examplesof a “greater good” ethic in the Synoptics include theoccasions when Jesus ate with sinners (Mark 2:16–17). Jesusused an aphorism in response to accusations about his associationswith sinners, saying, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor,but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners”(Mark 2:17). He advocated harvesting and healing on the Sabbath (Mark2:23–28; 3:1–6), and when he was accused of breaking thelaw, he pointed to an OT exception (1Sam. 21:1–6) todeclare compassion appropriate for the Sabbath. Jesus also appliedthe “greater good” ethic in the case of divorce, sincewomen suffered the societal stigma of adultery and commonly becameoutcasts following divorce (Matt. 19:8–9; Mark 10:5–9).

Jesus’kingdom teachings were simultaneously spiritual, ethical, andeschatological in application. The teachings were aimed at internaltransformation (Matt. 5:3–9; 18:3; Mark 10:15) and spurring onlove (Matt. 5:44; 7:21). The Spirit of the Lord had called Jesus tobless the hurting ones as they aspired to a godly character. Jesustaught, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father isperfect” (Matt. 5:48), and “Be merciful, just as yourFather is merciful” (Luke 6:36). The “blessed” onesin Jesus’ teachings are poor of spirit, peace driven, mournful,and hungry for righteousness, consumed with emulating godlycharacter.

Somescholars believe that Jesus promoted an “interim ethic”for the kingdom, intended only for a short period prior to the end oftime. However, he was explicit regarding the longevity of histeachings: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words willnever pass away” (Matt. 24:35; Luke 16:17).

Messiah.The concept of an anointed one, a messiah, who would restore theglories of David’s kingdom and bring political stability wascommon in Jewish expectation. Both before and after the Babyloniancaptivity, many Jews longed for one who would bring peace andprotection. Israel’s prophets had spoken of a coming deliverer,one who would restore David’s kingdom and reign in justice andrighteousness (2Sam. 7:11–16; Isa. 9:1–7; 11:1–16;Jer. 23:5–6; 33:15–16; Ezek. 37:25; Dan. 2:44; Mic. 5:2;Zech. 9:9). Isaiah’s description of the servant (Isa. 53) whosesuffering healed the nation provided a slightly different angle ofexpectation in terms of a deliverer.

Jesus’authority and popularity as a miracle worker called up messianicimages in first-century Jewish minds. On several occasions hearerscalled him “Son of David,” hoping for the Messiah (Matt.12:23; 21:9). Simon Peter was the first follower who confessed Jesusas the Christ, the “Messiah” (Matt. 16:16; Mark 8:29). Inline with Isaiah’s model of the Suffering Servant, Jesusfocused not on political ends but rather on spiritual regenerationthrough his own sacrificial death (Mark 10:45).

Eschatologicalprophet.Many scholars claim that Jesus is best understood as a Jewishapocalypticist, an eschatological prophet who expected God tointervene in history, destroy the wicked, and bring in the kingdom ofGod. Central in this understanding are Jesus’ propheciesconcerning the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem (Matt. 24:1–2,15–22; Mark 13:1; Luke 21:5–24; John 2:19; Acts 6:14). Inaddition, it is noted that Jesus had twelve disciples, representativeof the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:2–28; Luke 22:23–30).Certain of Jesus’ parables, those with apocalyptic images ofcoming judgment, present Jesus as an eschatological prophet (Matt.24:45–25:30; Luke 12:41–46; 19:11–27).

SufferingSon of God.Jesus’ first recorded teaching in a synagogue in Nazareth wasparadigmatic (Luke 4:16–21). He attributed the reading, Isa.61:1–2, to his personal calling to serve, and in doing so herevealed a trajectory of suffering. The Gospel of Mark likewise aptlyportrays Jesus as the suffering Son of God. Jesus’ ownteachings incorporated his upcoming suffering (Mark 8:31; 9:12–13,31; 10:33–34). He summarized his mission by declaring, “TheSon of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give hislife as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). His earthly careerended with a trial in Jerusalem consisting of both Roman and Jewishcomponents (Matt. 26:57–68; 27:1–31; Mark 14:53–65;15:1–20; Luke 22:54–23:25; John 18:19–24;18:28–19:16). He was insulted, scourged, mocked, and crucified.

Jesus’suffering culminated in his humiliating death by crucifixion (Matt.27:33–50; Mark 15:22–37; Luke 23:33–46; John19:16–30). Crucifixion was a death of unimaginable horror,bringing shame and humiliation to the victim and his family. Anyonehanging on a tree was considered cursed (Deut. 21:23; Gal. 3:13).Thus, especially in a Jewish society, anyone associated with acrucified person bore the shame of following one who was executed asa lowly slave and left as a cursed corpse. The apostle Paul referredto this shame of the cross when he stated, “I am not ashamed ofthe gospel” (Rom. 1:16).

ExaltedLord.Jesus had prophesied that he would rise again (Matt. 16:21; 17:9, 23;20:19; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:34; Luke 9:22; 18:33; 24:7, 46).The testimony of the Synoptics is that the resurrection of JesusChrist indeed occurred on the third day, Christ having died on Friday(Mark 15:42–45; Luke 23:52–54; John 19:30–33) andrisen again on Sunday (Matt. 28:1–7; Mark 16:2–7; Luke24:1–7; John 20:1–16). The resurrected Jesus waswitnessed by the women (Matt. 28:8–9), the eleven disciples(Matt. 28:16–17; Luke 24:36–43), and travelers on theroad to Emmaus (Luke 24:31–32). According to Paul, he appearedto as many as five hundred others (1Cor. 15:6). He appeared inbodily form, spoke, showed his scars, and ate (Luke 24:39–43;John 20:27; Acts 1:4). After forty postresurrection days, Jesusascended into the heavenly realm (Acts 1:9).

Asmuch as Jesus’ death was the epitome of shame, his victory overdeath was his ultimate exaltation (Phil. 2:5–11). At Pentecost,Peter proclaimed that in the resurrection God fulfilled OT promises(Ps. 16:10) by raising his Son from the grave (Acts 2:30–31).Furthermore, Christ provided freedom from the law through hisresurrection (Rom. 5:13–14), God’s approval of his lifeand work (Phil. 2:8–9), and God’s designation of him asLord over all the earth, the living and the dead (Acts 17:30–31;Phil. 2:10; Heb. 1:3), and over all his enemies (Eph. 1:20–23).

Jesus’exaltation commenced the beginning of forgiveness and justification(Luke 24:46–47; Acts 13:30–39; Rom. 4:25) and hisintercession for the people of God (Rom. 8:34). His ascensionsignaled the coming of the Holy Spirit as comforter and teacher (John14:26; Acts 2:33) and was accompanied by the promise of his return inglory (Luke 24:51), at which time he will render judgment (Matt.19:28; 24:31; Rev. 20:11–15) and establish his eternal kingdom(1Cor. 15:24; 2Tim. 4:1; Rev. 11:15; 22:5).

Jesus’Purpose and Community

Inthe Gospel of Matthew, Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah, whopreaches the good news of the kingdom, urging people to repent(4:17–23). Repentance and belief allow one to enter thekingdom. The call into the kingdom is a call into a new covenant, onemade in Jesus’ blood (26:28).

Inthe prologue to the Gospel of Mark, the narrator reveals the identityof Jesus (1:1). Jesus is presented as the one who brings good tidingsof salvation (cf. Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1). The centrality of thegospel, the good news (Mark 1:14–15), is evident.

Lukelikewise presents the preaching of the good news as a main purpose ofJesus’ ministry (4:43). The content of this good news is thekingdom of God (4:43; 8:1; 16:16). When the disciples of John theBaptist asked Jesus if he was the one who was to come (7:20), Jesusanswered, “Go back and report to John what you have seen andheard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosyare cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good newsis proclaimed to the poor” (7:22). The kingdom of God, aspresented in Luke, brings freedom for the prisoners, recovery ofsight for the blind, and release for the oppressed (4:18). Jesus’healings and exorcisms announce the coming kingdom of God alreadypresent in the ministry of Jesus (4:40–44; 6:18–20;8:1–2; 9:2; 10:8–9).

Inthe Gospel of John, Jesus testifies to the good news by way of signsthroughout his ministry. These signs point to Jesus’ glory, hisidentity, and the significance of his ministry. Jesus is the Messiah,the Son of God, who offers eternal and abundant life. This abundantlife is lived out in community.

Inthe Gospel of John, the disciples of Jesus represent the community ofGod (17:21). The disciples did not belong to the world, but theycontinued to live in the world (17:14–16). Throughout hisministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a callto loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38;Luke 9:23–26), a call to the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50;Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock Iwill build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call tocommunity. Jesus’ presence as the head of the community wasreplaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).

Jesus’ministry continued in the community of Jesus’ followers, God’sfamily—the church. Entrance into the community was obtained byadopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and through theinitiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26;Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–62; John 1:12; 3:16;10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9).

TheQuests for the Historical Jesus

Thequest for the historical Jesus, or seeking who Jesus was from ahistorical perspective, is a modern phenomenon deemed necessary byscholars who claim that the NT Gospels were written long after Jesus’death and were heavily influenced by the post-Easter understanding ofthe church.

Thebeginning of this quest is often dated to 1770, when the lecturenotes of Hermann Samuel Reimarus were published posthumously.Reimarus had launched an inquiry into the identity of Jesus thatrejected as inauthentic all supernatural elements in the Gospels. Heconcluded that the disciples invented Jesus’ miracles,prophecies, ritualistic religion, and resurrection. Reimarus’sconclusions were not widely accepted, but they set off a flurry ofrationalistic research into the historical Jesus that continuedthroughout the nineteenth century. This became known as the “firstquest” for the historical Jesus.

In1906 German theologian Albert Schweit-zer published The Quest of theHistorical Jesus (German title: Von Reimarus zu Wrede: EineGeschichte der Leben-Jesu-Forschung), a scathing indictment of thefirst quest. Schweitzer’s work showed that nineteenth-centuryresearchers re-created Jesus in their own image, transforming thehistorical Jesus into a modern philanthropist preaching aninoffensive message of love and brotherhood. Schweitzer’sconclusions marked the beginning of the end for this first quest.Schweitzer himself concluded that the historical Jesus was aneschatological prophet whose purposes failed during his last days inJerusalem.

Withthe demise of the first quest, some NT scholars, such as RudolfBultmann, rejected any claim to being able to discover the historicalJesus. This trend continued until 1953, when some of Bultmann’sformer students launched what has come to be known as the “newquest” for the historical Jesus (1953–c. 1970). Thisquest created new interest in the historical Jesus but was stilldominated by the view that the portrait of Jesus in the Gospels islargely a creation of the church in a post-Easter setting.

Asthe rebuilding years of the post–World WarII era wanedand scholars started to reap academic fruit from major archaeologicalfinds such as the DSS, research on the historical Jesus moved on towhat has been called the “third quest.” This quest seeksespecially to research and understand Jesus in his social andcultural setting.

OldTestament

Phoeniciansand Philistines. Asa people whose ancestral territory lay in the landlocked andtimber-poor highlands of Ephraim and Judah, the Israelites ofbiblical times never achieved prominence in seafaring orshipbuilding. Instead, they relied for their maritime enterprises onalliances with their coastal neighbors, particularly the Phoenicianstates to the north of Israel, who excelled in seafaring and hadaccess to the abundant timber forests of Lebanon. The Phoenicians(the Punics of classical antiquity) were famous in antiquity fortheir seafaring. In biblical times, they traded heavily betweenSyria-Palestine and Egypt and also sailed throughout theMediterranean, establishing colonies as far away as Tunisia(Carthage) and Spain (Cadiz).

Anotherseagoing people prominent in the OT were the Philistines, whose baseof power was to the west of Judah, along the Mediterranean coast. TheBible associates the Philistines with the five cities of Ashdod,Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza. The Philistines were among the SeaPeoples, who came to the Levant from the Aegean beginning in thetwelfth century BC (Amos 9:7; Jer. 47:4).

Theperennial enmity between the Philistines and the Israelites precludedjoint maritime ventures of the sort shared by Israel and thePhoenicians, and the Bible does not describe Philistine maritimeactivities in any depth. Nevertheless, the seagoing nature of thePhilistines is reflected by the fact that their settlements remainedconfined to the coastal region. They never made a systematic attemptto take over the traditionally Israelite and Judahite highlands. Whenthey did venture into the Judean mountains, it was to assert amilitary and political presence among the agrarian Israelites andJudahites rather than to establish permanent settlements andPhilistine population centers. Twelfth-century BC reliefs at MedinetHabu (in the mortuary temple of RamessesIII) depict a navalbattle between the Sea Peoples and the Egyptians. The reliefs includepictures of Philistine ships and sailors.

Israeliteseafaring.One of the rare references to Israelite seafaring describes theDanites and the Asherites in connection with ships and harbors (Judg.5:17; see also Ezek. 27:19). Traditional Danite territory overlappedwith the area of Philistine settlement. Asherite territory overlappedsubstantially with Phoenician territory. It is possible that Judg.5:17 refers to the fact that the Danites and the Asherites worked inthe port cities serving Philistine and Phoenician shipping. Inanother passage, Zebulun is associated with ports (Gen. 49:13). It isnoteworthy that the Israelite coast between Jaffa and Dor (roughlybetween Philistia and Phoenicia) does not have an abundance ofnatural harbors. Later, Herod the Great would build the artificialharbor at Caesarea in the first century BC. The great expense of sucha project—including the construction of over 2,500 feet ofbreakwaters made of underwater concrete, mostly imported fromItaly—suggests the extent of the need for secure harbors inthis region.

Solomon’sfleet.The zenith of Israelite seafaring occurred during the reign ofSolomon. Solomon built a fleet of ships at “Ezion Geber, whichis near Elath in Edom, on the shore of the Red Sea” (1Kings9:26). The purpose of these ships was to bring back gold from Ophir(1Kings 9:28), possibly a location in the Arabian Peninsula, towhich a port on the Red Sea would have offered ready access. Thestory confirms the aforementioned dependence on the Phoenicians inthe area of seafaring: although the ships belonged to Solomon, “Hiram[the Phoenician king of Tyre] sent his men—sailors who knew thesea—to serve in the fleet with Solomon’s men”(1Kings 9:27). The timber for the ships would also have beenimported by Israel from Phoenicia (see 1Kings 9:11). Even atthe height of its power, Israel lacked the human resources to embarkon sea voyages independently of the Phoenicians.

Thesuccess of Solomon’s project, of course, depended not only onwarm relations with the Phoenicians but also on territorial controlof the historically Edomite lands between Judah and the Red Sea. Thisfavorable combination of conditions would come and go throughout thebiblical period, and with it, Israel’s modest presence on theseas. From the Phoenician point of view, cooperation with Israel wasan essential component of gaining access to a Red Sea port, and withit to the products of Arabia, the Horn of Africa, and India. ThePhoenicians, as expansive as their travel was in the Mediterranean,could never independently control the long overland route fromPhoenicia to the Red Sea, since it ran through the territory ofIsrael and Edom. Their best hope was a friendly and powerfulIsraelite ally. This explains the cordial relationship and why Hiramsent not only his sailors to serve Solomon but also craftsmen andsupplies for the construction of the temple (1Kings 5:10–12).Solomon and Hiram jointly operated “a fleet of trading ships”that would return to port every three years bringing “gold,silver, and ivory, and apes and baboons” (1Kings 10:22).

Jehoshaphat.In the mid-ninth century BC, King Jehoshaphat of Judah attempted torepeat Solomon’s feat of launching a fleet from Ezion Geber(1Kings 22:48–49; 2Chron. 20:35–37).According to both accounts, the ships were wrecked before they couldset sail. On several other points, however, the two versions of thestory disagree in ways that bear on questions of the political andeconomic conditions of Israelite seafaring.

Bythis time, Israel and Judah had split into separate kingdoms, withthe northern kingdom of Israel being geographically and politicallycloser to the Phoenicians. The powerful King Ahab of Israel,Jehoshaphat’s contemporary through much of his reign, marriedJezebel, the daughter of the Sidonian (Phoenician) king Ethbaal(1Kings 16:31). According to 1Kings, King Ahaziah ofIsrael (Ahab’s son) proposed to cooperate with Jehoshaphat bysending his own men on the voyage, much as Hiram had assisted Solomonin the previous century. Jehoshaphat rejected the suggestion,possibly indicating a bid for Judean autonomy in an era of northerndominance. According to 2Chronicles, however, Jehoshaphat didcooperate willingly with Ahaziah, and this was the reason that theships foundered in port: God punished the righteous Jehoshaphat fortoo close a relationship with his wicked northern counterpart. In1Kings 22:47 it is mentioned that at the time of Jehoshaphat’sventure there was no king in Edom. As noted, control of the overlandroute between Judah and the Red Sea was necessary for the success ofany voyage originating from Ezion Geber.

Howeverthe contradiction between 1Kings and 2Chroniclesregarding the involvement of Ahaziah is resolved, both versions ofthe story highlight the fact that the port at Ezion Geber commandedthe interest of the Judeans, the Israelites, and the Phoenicians, andits successful operation probably depended on the cooperation of allthree.

Shipsof Tarshish.Several biblical texts, including the stories of Solomon andJehoshaphat, mention “ships of Tarshish” (1Kings10:22 NIV mg.). In a number of contexts, such ships are associatedwith the transportation of metals and metal ores, including iron,lead, tin, gold, and silver (1Kings 10:22; Ezek. 27:12; Jer.10:9). The exact derivation of the term “ships of Tarshish”is uncertain, though it is clear from the descriptions of theircargoes that such ships could travel over long distances. As Ezekielobserves, “The ships of Tarshish serve as carriers for yourwares. You are filled with heavy cargo as you sail the sea. Youroarsmen take you out to the high seas” (Ezek. 27:25–26).

Inthe Table of Nations, Tarshish is listed as a descendant of Javan(Gen. 10:4), along with a number of other seafaring peoples of theeastern Mediterranean (“Javan” indicates the peoples ofthe Aegean and is linguistically equivalent to “Ionia”[see also Ezek. 27:12–22]). Some have suggested, then, that theships of Tarshish should be associated with Tarsus in southeasternTurkey, an area containing silver mines (also the birthplace of Paul[Acts 9:11]). Others have suggested the Phoenician colony ofTartessus in Spain, another metal-producing area. This locationfigures in the interpretation of the identification of thedestination of Jonah as Tarshish (Jon. 1:3): presumably, if he wereavoiding Nineveh and departing from Joppa, he would head towardSpain, in the exact opposite direction, rather than toward Tarsus inCilicia.

Inaddition to these two geographical options, some have attempted toexplain the expression “ships of Tarshish” as derivingfrom the Akkadian term for smelting or refining: perhaps the manyreferences to cargoes of metals indicate that the ships were used totransport metal ore to refining centers. Finally, one scholar hasproposed that the term is related to the Greek word tarsos,meaning “oar.”

Descriptionsof ships and seafaring.Ezekiel, in his lament concerning the Phoenician city of Tyre (Ezek.27), relates a number of details related to Phoenician seafaring. Thepicture largely confirms the descriptions of how Solomon built andmanned his fleet with the assistance of his Tyrian ally. Timber forthe construction of the ship came from Lebanon and Cyprus, amongother places (vv. 5–6). Sails were made from Egyptian linen(v.7), and as noted above, the oarsmen and sailors were fromthe Phoenician city-states (vv. 8–9). Ezekiel goes on to list alarge number of ports of call as well as a dazzling variety ofcargoes (vv. 12–24). Notably, Ezekiel has the Judahites and theIsraelites offering the products of their agrarian economy—“wheatfrom Minnith and confections, honey, olive oil and balm”(v.17)—thus filling out the picture of what theIsraelites gave in exchange for the precious metals and luxury itemsimported by their country from elsewhere.

In1999 archaeologists explored two eighth-century BC Phoenician shipsthat had sunk thirty miles west of Ashkelon. The ships, eachmeasuring about fifty feet in length, contained large cargoes of wineand were headed either for Egypt or for the Phoenician colonies inthe western Mediterranean.

Shipsand sailing figure prominently in the story of Jonah, who boarded aship bound for Tarshish (see discussion above) at Joppa on theMediterranean coast. In the story we see a number of features ofancient sea travel. Jonah paid a fare for his voyage (Jon. 1:3). Notonly the biblical author (see 1:4), but also the presumablynon-Israelite sailors, believed that the great storm was the doing ofa god, and that it could be calmed by appealing to that god(1:6)—although cargo was thrown overboard for good measure.When Paul was caught in a storm in the first century AD, the samestrategies were still in use (Acts 27:38). The religious habits ofancient sailors, particularly their reverence for the gods whocontrolled the stormy seas and thus held their lives in the balance,are illuminated by the discovery of stone anchors in several temples(presumably left by sailors as offerings), including at the portcities of Ugarit, Kition, and Byblos.

Psalm107:23–32 speaks of God’s care of sailors from anIsraelite perspective. In the psalm, those who “went out on thesea in ships,” the “merchants on the mighty waters”(i.e., the deep, open sea), witness firsthand the works of the God ofIsrael, which include both the raising and the quieting of the storm.This passage vividly expresses the terror of being caught in a stormand the great relief and gratitude felt by sailors who reached safehaven.

Noah’sArk

Accordingto the biblical account, Noah’s ark was 450 feet long, 75 feetwide, and 45 feet high (300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits [Gen.6:15]). It had three decks, a roof, and a window. By comparison, theship of Uta-napishti in the Epic of Gilgamesh is described as havingsix decks (and thus seven stories), edges of 180 feet (ten dozencubits) in each dimension, and occupying the space of an acre (arough approximation of the dimensions given). Both ships aredescribed as providing space for the builder’s family and everyliving creature. In the Atrahasis Epic, the boat is roofed, but itsdimensions are not given.

Becauseof the character of Gen. 6–8, it is inappropriate to drawconclusions from the story regarding shipbuilding in historicalantiquity. According to the specifications given in the biblicaltext, Noah’s ark would have been the largest wooden ship inhistory, equaled only by the United States schooner Wyoming,completed in 1909. While the overall length of the Wyoming was also450 feet, nearly 100 feet of length was accounted for in the fore andaft booms, so that the hull length was only 350 feet. Even with earlytwentieth-century shipbuilding technology, its extravagant lengthrendered the Wyoming unseaworthy, and the ship foundered in 1924. Thelargest documented wooden ships of antiquity include the GreekSyracusia(third century BC; 180 feet), described by Athenaeus; the Roman Isis(second century AD; 180 feet), described by Lucian; Caligula’s“Giant Ship” (first century AD; 341 feet), recovered inmodern times and possibly corresponding to a ship described by Plinythe Elder; and PtolemyIV’s Tessarakonteres (third centuryBC), reported by Plutarch to have been about 425 feet long. This lastship was not designed for cruising in open water.

NewTestament

Fishingin the Sea of Galilee. Severalof Jesus’ disciples worked as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee,and the Gospels document their use of small boats for fishing andtraveling across the sea. Fishing was done with nets thrown both fromboats and from the shore (Mark 1:16, 19). The boats used by fishermenon the Sea of Galilee may have been small enough to pull up onto thebeach (Luke 5:2), or to be nearly capsized by a large catch of fish(Luke 5:7) or by a violent storm (Mark 4:37). They were large enoughto transport several men and even to sleep in (Mark 4:38). Such boatscould be rowed or sailed; in Mark 6:48 the disciples had to resort torowing because of an unfavorable headwind. On one occasion, Jesusstood in a boat to preach to a crowd gathered on the shore (Mark4:1). The Sea of Galilee is about eight miles wide and thirteen mileslong. On several occasions, Jesus traveled by boat across the sea toavoid having to walk long distances around its circumference (e.g.,Matt. 9:1; 14:22; 15:39).

In1986 archaeologists recovered a fishing boat dating to the mid-firstcentury AD on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. The boat had beenscuttled near the shore and was preserved under mud. The “JesusBoat,” as it was dubbed, measures twenty-seven feet in lengthand has a beam seven and a half feet long. Numerous species of woodwere used in its construction and repairs throughout its useful life.While there is no evidence to link the boat to Jesus or hisdisciples, radiometric dating places it in the correct period, and itprovides a likely model of the type of boat portrayed in the Gospels.

Asecond source of information regarding ships and sailing in the NT isthe account in Acts of Paul’s many sea voyages. As in the caseof Jehoshaphat, the Tyrians, Jonah, and Jesus’ disciples, Paullearned firsthand the perils of seafaring in small wooden boats:among his many traumas, along with beatings and stonings, herecalled, “Three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and aday in the open sea” (2Cor. 11:25).

Paul’sjourneys.A survey of Paul’s sea travels on his four journeys gives someidea of the routes that could be taken by a paying traveler in theeastern Mediterranean and Aegean.

1.Paul’s first missionary journey included voyages from Seleuciain Syria to the port of Salamis in Cyprus (Acts 13:4) and from Cyprus(Paphos) to Perga on the southern coast of Asia Minor (13:13). Afterjourneying through the interior, Paul returned to Attalia, where heembarked for the return trip to Syria, presumably passing againthrough the port at Salamis (14:26).

2.The second missionary journey began not with a sea voyage but ratherwith a trek through the interior of Syria and Cilicia, illustratingthat although sea travel was by far a more rapid means of travel, theoverland routes were by no means impossible (Acts 15:39). Paul wouldrepeat this land route during his third journey (19:1). Sea travelwas fast, but when one had plenty of friends along the alternativeland route, a sea journey was considerably less enjoyable. It isduring the second journey that we have the first recorded accounts ofPaul sailing in the Aegean. From Troas in Asia Minor, he sailed theshort distance to Macedonia (16:11), putting in midway at the islandof Samothrace. Apparently, Paul traveled by sea down the coast fromBerea to Athens (17:14). At the conclusion of his second journey,Paul sailed from Corinth to Caesarea, with a stop at Ephesus(18:18–22). Not counting any intervening ports of call notmentioned in the text, this would be the longest single leg of seatravel so far mentioned.

3.The third missionary journey once more began with a long overlandtrip from Syria through Asia Minor; by this time, Paul had manyassociates along the way to visit. Again, he sailed in the Aegean,from Ephesus to Macedonia (Acts 20:1) and back (20:6). At one point,Paul opted to travel overland, from Troas to Assos, while hiscompanions sailed down the coast (20:13). Meeting up with them, hesailed on, hugging the coast of Asia Minor, then sailing south ofCyprus along an open-water route to Tyre. From Tyre, the ship againhugged the Palestinian coast, stopping in several ports before Pauldisembarked at Caesarea (21:7). Paul’s journeys illustrate thevariety of itineraries taken by ships. They were capable of sailingin deep water, but they would also hug the coast when there werereasons to make frequent stops.

4.Paul’s fourth journey, which he made in custody on his way to atrial before the emperor at Rome, was to be the most dangerous. Fromthe account in Acts we can glean a number of details of life at seain the first century AD. The ship bound for Italy was large, and itcarried 276 passengers and crew (Acts 27:6, 37), including soldiersand prisoners, at least one companion of a prisoner (Paul’sfriend Aristarchus [27:2]), a ship’s pilot, and the ship’sowner (27:11). Sailors used celestial navigation (27:20) and tooksoundings in shallow water (27:28). We see also that the ship’scourse could be determined by the direction of the prevailing winds:twice during the journey Paul’s ship was forced to sail to thelee of large islands (Cyprus and Crete)—a longer journey, butthe only option for a ship that was not rigged to sail close-hauled.

Whenextended periods of unfavorable weather were forecast, one option wassimply to put in at a port until conditions improved, preferably in aharbor that was in the lee of an island (Acts 27:12). We learnsomething of the measures that were taken in heavy weather, many ofwhich are still used in modern times: ropes were tied around the hullof the ship to prevent it from breaking up in rough seas (27:17), thelifeboat was brought onto the deck and made fast (27:17), sea anchorswere deployed to keep the bow of the ship oriented into the oncomingwaves (27:7), the rudder was lashed amidships (27:40), valuable cargoand gear were jettisoned (27:19, 38), and, as in the days of Jonah,sailors and passengers prayed for divine deliverance (27:29; see alsothe protective emblems in 28:11).

Whenall other means had been exhausted, a ship could be run aground on asandy beach (Acts 27:39), a measure that would have risked damage tothe boat but saved lives. In the case of Paul’s ship, thedecision to run aground ultimately resulted in the destruction of theship (27:41).

Metaphorsand illustrations.Several NT authors draw illustrations from the nautical world. Jameslikens the harmful power of evil speech to the rudder of a ship:although it is a small device, by it the pilot can control a greatship (James 3:4–5). Elsewhere, he compares the doubting of theunwise person to being lost at sea in a storm (James 1:6; cf. Eph.4:14). In 1Tim. 1:19 the loss of faith and good conscience islikened to a shipwreck. Hebrews 6:19 describes the assurance of God’sfaithfulness as an anchor for the soul.

An occupation or profession is the usual work or business inwhich a person engages for the sake of earning a living. In biblicaltimes, family or social standing most often determined occupation.This was particularly true for occupations tied to land, such asplanting crops and raising animals, since land in ancient Israel waspassed down within the tribe, normally from fathers to sons (Josh.14:9; Ezek. 46:18). Sometimes daughters also received a share in thefamily inheritance (Josh. 17:6). Most people gained their livelihoodfrom their family’s land, and those who did not have land hiredthemselves out to work for wages (Deut. 24:14). A son normallylearned his trade from his father (Gen. 47:3; 2Kings 4:18;Matt. 4:21) and continued in that occupation unless called into God’sservice (1Kings 19:19–21; Jer. 1:5; Matt. 4:22).

Cicero,writing around the time of the NT, considered occupations such as taxcollector, laborer, and fisherman to be vulgar. Conversely,professions such as teacher, doctor, and wholesale trader were morehonorable, with landowner being the most respectable and profitableprofession (Off. 1.42).

Agricultureand Farming

Farmingis the earliest recorded occupation in the Bible, as the first manwas called to work and keep the garden (Gen. 2:15). Even after theexile from Eden because of sin, Adam worked the ground for food, asdid Cain, his firstborn son (Gen. 3:17–18; 4:2). The openingchapters of the Bible establish a fundamental link between “man”(’adam) and the “ground” (’adamah). After theflood, Noah established himself as a “man of the soil”(’ish ha’adamah) by planting a vineyard (Gen. 9:20). KingUzziah “loved the soil” (’oheb ’adamah) andso employed people to work in his fields and vineyards (2Chron.26:10).

Goddemonstrated his covenant commitment to Isaac by blessing him with anincredible harvest (Gen. 26:12), and he promised to prosper Israel’sfarms if the people obeyed him (Deut. 28:4) and to curse the fruit oftheir ground if they disobeyed (Deut. 28:18). The OT ideal was foreveryone to live “under their own vine and under their own figtree” (1Kings 4:25; Mic. 4:4). According to Prov. 28:19,the diligent farmer would have abundant food.

Jesus’parables frequently employed agricultural imagery that would havebeen readily understandable in first-century Palestine, where manypeople were farmers (cf. Mark 4:1–9; 12:1–11) and someowned land (Acts 4:34). The people living around Jerusalem at thistime engaged in agriculture, soil cultivation, and cattle raising(Let. Aris. 107–112).

Herdingand Hunting

Herdinganimals is the second-oldest occupation recorded in Scripture (afterfarming), and raising flocks and herds continued to be one of themost common and important professions throughout biblical times. Abelis the first “keeper of sheep” in the Bible (Gen. 4:2NRSV). Several generations later, Jabal pioneered the nomadic herdinglifestyle (Gen. 4:20). The patriarchs were shepherds (Gen. 47:3), aswere Moses (Exod. 3:1), David (1Sam. 17:34), and many others inthe OT. Josephus acknowledged that “feeding of sheep was theemployment of our forefathers in the most ancient ages”(Ag.Ap. 1.91). While men typically worked as shepherds andherdsmen, the occupation was also open to women, such as Rachel,whose fathers owned sheep (Gen. 29:9). Shepherds were present atJesus’ birth (Luke 2:8–20), and Jesus’ teachingsuggests that shepherding was a common occupation in Palestine (cf.Matt. 18:12; John 10:1–30).

Manypeople in biblical times hunted, either for food, sport, orprotection. The first recorded hunter is Nimrod, “a mightyhunter before the Lord” (Gen. 10:9). Ishmael was “anexpert with the bow” (Gen. 21:20 NRSV), while Esau was “askillful hunter, a man of the open country” who brought backwild game for food (25:27–28). The name of Pokereth-Hazzebaim,included in the genealogy of Solomon’s servants in Ezra 2:57,reflects his occupation as a “gazelle catcher” (cf.1Kings 4:23).

Buildersand Craftsmen

Cainwas the first person in the Bible to build a city (Gen. 4:17), andhis descendant Tubal-Cain was the first metalworker (4:22). Nimrodbuilt a number of cities (10:11–12), and the beginning ofNimrod’s kingdom was Babel (10:10), where the people gatheredtogether to build a city with brick (11:3). Builders in Mesopotamiaused baked brick and asphalt, while Israelite builders usuallypreferred the more readily available stone and mortar. After Joseph’sdeath, Israel was conscripted into forced labor in Egypt, whichinvolved building cities of brick and mortar (Exod. 1:11).

Therole of craftsmen in the construction of the tabernacle wasparticularly significant. Bezalel and Oholiab were “skilledworkers and designers” empowered by God for work on thetabernacle (Exod. 35:35). They engaged in “all kinds ofcrafts,” including artistic metalworking, masonry, carpentry,and weaving (Exod. 31:4–5; 38:23).

Kingsin Israel often commissioned important building projects (1Kings12:25; 15:22; 16:24; 2Chron. 26:9; Josephus, J.W. 1.401–2).Carpenters and stonemasons worked on David’s palace (2Sam.5:11). Solomon conscripted laborers to build the temple and alsoemployed carriers, stonecutters, craftsmen, and foremen to supervisethe work (1Kings 5:13–18). After the Babylonian exile,many Israelites were involved in rebuilding the temple and the wallof Jerusalem, which had been destroyed (Ezra 3:8; Neh. 4:16–18).These projects, directed by Zerubbabel and Nehemiah, utilized masons,carpenters, and other workers (Ezra 3:7).

Jesusis referred to as a tektōn (Mark 6:3) and as the son of a tektōn(Matt. 13:55), with tektōn usually translated “carpenter”by English versions. However,recent scholarshiphas demonstrated that Jesus was likely a builder, not a carpenter inthe modern sense of the term. In the LXX, the word tektōntypically translates a Hebrew word, kharash, used broadly to refer tocraftsmen working with stone, wood, or metal.

Musicians

Thefirst musician recorded in Scripture is Jubal, “the father ofall who play the stringed instruments and pipes” (Gen. 4:21).Musicians performed a variety of roles in ancient society, as they dotoday. Singers and instrumentalists were employed to celebratefestive occasions, often to provide accompaniment for dancing (Gen.31:27; Luke 15:25), to soothe the sick or distressed (1Sam.16:16), and to express lamentation (Job 30:31).

Musiciansplayed an important role in leading God’s people in worship.The “director of music” is mentioned in the headings offifty-five psalms and Hab. 3:19. The most famous musician inScripture is David, “the singer of Israel’s psalms”(2Sam. 23:1 GW), who played the harp (1Sam. 16:18) andwrote or inspired at least seventy-three canonical psalms. Solomonwas also a notable songwriter and lover of music (1Kings 4:32).David appointed many Levites as singers and musicians to lead Israelin worship (1Chron. 15:16; 23:5). The musicians played lyres,harps, cymbals, and trumpets (2Chron. 5:12).

Government,Politics, and Military

Beforethe monarchy, there were no formal government offices. Under Moses, agroup of seventy elders in Israel served as leaders and officials,and these men were to carry out Moses’ decrees and judge thepeople on most matters (Exod. 18:20–22; Num. 11:16). AfterJoshua’s death, God raised up judges to rescue Israel fromforeign enemies and lead the people (Judg. 2:16) until the time ofSamuel, when Saul was made king (1Sam. 11:15).

Kingsin Israel employed various officials. In 2Sam. 8:16–18,Joab is listed first among David’s officials, which suggeststhat the military commander was second in authority after the king.Under Solomon, the leader of the army is called “commander inchief” (1Kings 4:4). The royal cabinet included a numberof key advisers, including the recorder, the secretary, and the“confidant” of the king (cf. 2Sam. 16:16). The OTdoes not specify the precise roles of these officials. The recorderwas among the highest governmental positions and served as a royalcounselor. In Hebrew, mazkir (“recorder”) is a cognatenoun to the verb zkr (“to remember”), which suggests thatthis official may have managed and preserved public records (2Kings18:18; Isa. 36:22). The main task of the king’s secretary orscribe (sop̱er)was to write down (sapar) official state documents (2Sam.8:17), and he advised the king and also provided financial oversight(2Kings 12:10). Recorders and secretaries apparently were welleducated and multilingual, as was the palace administrator (2Kings18:18, 26). Solomon’s officials included supervisors of thepalace and the forced labor, as well as governors who suppliedprovisions for the king’s household (1Kings 4:6–7).The OT mentions cupbearers in Israel’s government and in otheradministrations (Gen. 40:1; 1Kings 10:5; Neh. 1:11). Thecupbearer served as the royal wine taster; he protected the king frombeing poisoned and had direct access to the monarch.

Inthe Roman Empire, the emperor was absolute ruler (1Pet. 2:17),with the senate next in authority. Proconsuls held judicial andmilitary authority over larger provinces (Acts 18:12), prefects(governors) administered smaller provinces (Matt. 27:2), withtetrarchs over one-fourth of a province (Luke 3:1).

Christiansin NT times engaged in civil service. Erastus was a financial officerin Corinth (Rom. 16:23), and he may be the same Erastus commemoratedin an inscription from this period who held the office of aedile. Theproconsul Sergius Paulus (Acts 13:7); Manaen, a close friend of HerodAntipas (Acts 13:1); and members of Caesar’s household (Phil.4:22) were also Christian public leaders.

Tradeand Economics

Fromearliest times, people have exchanged goods and property. WhenAbraham purchased Ephron’s field, his silver was measured“according to the weight current among the merchants”(Gen. 23:16), which suggests that a recognized system of publictrading was in place during the time of the patriarchs. Traders ofcommodities such as spices traveled along caravan routes betweensouthern Arabia and Egypt, and these traders often acquired slavesalong the way (Gen. 37:28). Solomon employed royal merchants to buyand sell goods (1Kings 10:28).

Inthe first century, Jews were engaged broadly in economic life aslandowners, artisans, merchants, traders, bankers, and slaves.Several of Jesus’ disciples were fishermen (Matt. 4:18). Lukewas a physician, a well-educated and respectable professional (Col.4:14). Lydia was a dealer in purple cloth (Acts 16:14). Paul, Aquila,and Priscilla worked as tentmakers (Acts 18:3). In the Roman Empire,commerce and pagan religion often intermingled. Merchants oftenformed trade guilds, where membership sometimes required religiousand moral compromise. In Ephesus, silversmiths and craftsmen inrelated trades turned significant profit through their connectionswith the local Artemis cult (Acts 19:24–27).

Jesusfrequently spent time with tax collectors, such as Levi (also called“Matthew”) (Matt. 9:9; Mark 2:14). Tax collectors were adespised group because often they became wealthy by taking advantageof the Roman taxation system, which allowed them to charge commissionon taxes collected (Luke 19:2, 8). Jesus’ parable of thetalents references bankers who offered interest on deposits collected(Matt. 25:27), and Rev. 3:17–18 alludes to the fact thatLaodicea was a financial center with a significant banking system.

Servantsand Slaves

Inthe OT, ’ebed most often designates a slave or servant, whoseoccupation involves work (’abad ) as a subordinate. Someservants held very important positions in their master’shousehold (Gen. 24:2), while many others toiled in hard labor (Job7:2). Israelites were not to enslave their kinfolk, but they couldtake slaves from other nations. Fellow Israelites who became poorcould serve as hired workers, but they were to be released along withtheir children at the Jubilee because God had brought Israel out fromEgyptian slavery and they belonged to God as his servants (Lev.25:39–46).

Slavesin the Roman world were property like goods or cattle, possessed byanother (Dio Chrysostom, 2Serv. lib. 24). Unlike modern slaverypractices, race played no factor in the Roman institution of slavery.Slaves were kidnapped and sold in NT times (1Tim. 1:10; Rev.18:13), but the majority of slaves were so by birth. The mostprominent slave in the NT is Onesimus, for whom Paul intercedes withhis master, Philemon (Philem. 10, 16). Believing slaves were to obeytheir earthly masters “as slaves of Christ” (Eph. 6:5–6),but the NT stressed the equality of slave and free in Christ (Gal.3:28). Paul called himself a “servant [doulos] of Christ Jesus”(Rom. 1:1).

ReligiousService

MostIsraelites engaged in professional religious service were Levites(Num. 3:12), including Moses, Aaron, and the priests in Aaron’sline (Exod. 6:19–20; 35:19). The priests offered sacrifices toGod on behalf of the people (Heb. 5:1). Under the priests’direction, the Levites were charged with caring for the tabernacleand its furnishings (Num. 1:49; 1Chron. 23:32) and carrying theark of the covenant (1Chron. 15:2). They were set apart toserve in God’s presence (Deut. 18:7) and to lead the people inworship (2Chron. 5:12). Further, priests often played animportant advisory role to Israel’s kings (2Sam. 8:17;1Kings 4:5; 2Kings 12:2).

InIsrael, people went to seers and prophets to inquire of God (1Sam.9:9), for they received and communicated God’s word (2Sam.24:11; Jer. 37:6). Sometimes individuals are mentioned as prophets,and other times the prophets are discussed as an organized group(1Sam. 19:20; 1Kings 22:6).

TheNT references a number of ministerial offices (1Cor. 12:28;Eph. 4:11; 1Tim. 3:1–12). Not all ministers were paid,though teachers and preachers had a right to “receive theirliving from the gospel” (1Cor. 9:14–15; cf. 1Tim.5:17). Apostles were those sent out by Jesus as his representatives.The term apostolos refers particularly to the twelve apostles whowere with Jesus during his earthly ministry and who were witnesses ofhis resurrection (Acts 1:21–22). Paul referred to himself as anapostle (Gal. 1:1; 1Cor. 1:1), and he calls Epaph-ro-di-tus andothers “messengers” (apostoloi) in the churches (2Cor.8:23; Phil. 2:25). Prophets have the spiritual gift of prophecy andspeak to strengthen, encourage, and comfort the church (Acts 15:32;1Cor. 14:3). Overseers (also called “elders” or“pastors”) are qualified leaders who teach, shepherd, andexercise authority in the church (1Tim. 3:1; 1Pet. 5:2).Evangelists and missionaries proclaim the gospel and aim to winconverts to Christ (Acts 21:8; 2Tim. 4:5). Those ministers whoare faithful to the gospel deserve support (3John8).

An occupation or profession is the usual work or business inwhich a person engages for the sake of earning a living. In biblicaltimes, family or social standing most often determined occupation.This was particularly true for occupations tied to land, such asplanting crops and raising animals, since land in ancient Israel waspassed down within the tribe, normally from fathers to sons (Josh.14:9; Ezek. 46:18). Sometimes daughters also received a share in thefamily inheritance (Josh. 17:6). Most people gained their livelihoodfrom their family’s land, and those who did not have land hiredthemselves out to work for wages (Deut. 24:14). A son normallylearned his trade from his father (Gen. 47:3; 2Kings 4:18;Matt. 4:21) and continued in that occupation unless called into God’sservice (1Kings 19:19–21; Jer. 1:5; Matt. 4:22).

Cicero,writing around the time of the NT, considered occupations such as taxcollector, laborer, and fisherman to be vulgar. Conversely,professions such as teacher, doctor, and wholesale trader were morehonorable, with landowner being the most respectable and profitableprofession (Off. 1.42).

Agricultureand Farming

Farmingis the earliest recorded occupation in the Bible, as the first manwas called to work and keep the garden (Gen. 2:15). Even after theexile from Eden because of sin, Adam worked the ground for food, asdid Cain, his firstborn son (Gen. 3:17–18; 4:2). The openingchapters of the Bible establish a fundamental link between “man”(’adam) and the “ground” (’adamah). After theflood, Noah established himself as a “man of the soil”(’ish ha’adamah) by planting a vineyard (Gen. 9:20). KingUzziah “loved the soil” (’oheb ’adamah) andso employed people to work in his fields and vineyards (2Chron.26:10).

Goddemonstrated his covenant commitment to Isaac by blessing him with anincredible harvest (Gen. 26:12), and he promised to prosper Israel’sfarms if the people obeyed him (Deut. 28:4) and to curse the fruit oftheir ground if they disobeyed (Deut. 28:18). The OT ideal was foreveryone to live “under their own vine and under their own figtree” (1Kings 4:25; Mic. 4:4). According to Prov. 28:19,the diligent farmer would have abundant food.

Jesus’parables frequently employed agricultural imagery that would havebeen readily understandable in first-century Palestine, where manypeople were farmers (cf. Mark 4:1–9; 12:1–11) and someowned land (Acts 4:34). The people living around Jerusalem at thistime engaged in agriculture, soil cultivation, and cattle raising(Let. Aris. 107–112).

Herdingand Hunting

Herdinganimals is the second-oldest occupation recorded in Scripture (afterfarming), and raising flocks and herds continued to be one of themost common and important professions throughout biblical times. Abelis the first “keeper of sheep” in the Bible (Gen. 4:2NRSV). Several generations later, Jabal pioneered the nomadic herdinglifestyle (Gen. 4:20). The patriarchs were shepherds (Gen. 47:3), aswere Moses (Exod. 3:1), David (1Sam. 17:34), and many others inthe OT. Josephus acknowledged that “feeding of sheep was theemployment of our forefathers in the most ancient ages”(Ag.Ap. 1.91). While men typically worked as shepherds andherdsmen, the occupation was also open to women, such as Rachel,whose fathers owned sheep (Gen. 29:9). Shepherds were present atJesus’ birth (Luke 2:8–20), and Jesus’ teachingsuggests that shepherding was a common occupation in Palestine (cf.Matt. 18:12; John 10:1–30).

Manypeople in biblical times hunted, either for food, sport, orprotection. The first recorded hunter is Nimrod, “a mightyhunter before the Lord” (Gen. 10:9). Ishmael was “anexpert with the bow” (Gen. 21:20 NRSV), while Esau was “askillful hunter, a man of the open country” who brought backwild game for food (25:27–28). The name of Pokereth-Hazzebaim,included in the genealogy of Solomon’s servants in Ezra 2:57,reflects his occupation as a “gazelle catcher” (cf.1Kings 4:23).

Buildersand Craftsmen

Cainwas the first person in the Bible to build a city (Gen. 4:17), andhis descendant Tubal-Cain was the first metalworker (4:22). Nimrodbuilt a number of cities (10:11–12), and the beginning ofNimrod’s kingdom was Babel (10:10), where the people gatheredtogether to build a city with brick (11:3). Builders in Mesopotamiaused baked brick and asphalt, while Israelite builders usuallypreferred the more readily available stone and mortar. After Joseph’sdeath, Israel was conscripted into forced labor in Egypt, whichinvolved building cities of brick and mortar (Exod. 1:11).

Therole of craftsmen in the construction of the tabernacle wasparticularly significant. Bezalel and Oholiab were “skilledworkers and designers” empowered by God for work on thetabernacle (Exod. 35:35). They engaged in “all kinds ofcrafts,” including artistic metalworking, masonry, carpentry,and weaving (Exod. 31:4–5; 38:23).

Kingsin Israel often commissioned important building projects (1Kings12:25; 15:22; 16:24; 2Chron. 26:9; Josephus, J.W. 1.401–2).Carpenters and stonemasons worked on David’s palace (2Sam.5:11). Solomon conscripted laborers to build the temple and alsoemployed carriers, stonecutters, craftsmen, and foremen to supervisethe work (1Kings 5:13–18). After the Babylonian exile,many Israelites were involved in rebuilding the temple and the wallof Jerusalem, which had been destroyed (Ezra 3:8; Neh. 4:16–18).These projects, directed by Zerubbabel and Nehemiah, utilized masons,carpenters, and other workers (Ezra 3:7).

Jesusis referred to as a tektōn (Mark 6:3) and as the son of a tektōn(Matt. 13:55), with tektōn usually translated “carpenter”by English versions. However,recent scholarshiphas demonstrated that Jesus was likely a builder, not a carpenter inthe modern sense of the term. In the LXX, the word tektōntypically translates a Hebrew word, kharash, used broadly to refer tocraftsmen working with stone, wood, or metal.

Musicians

Thefirst musician recorded in Scripture is Jubal, “the father ofall who play the stringed instruments and pipes” (Gen. 4:21).Musicians performed a variety of roles in ancient society, as they dotoday. Singers and instrumentalists were employed to celebratefestive occasions, often to provide accompaniment for dancing (Gen.31:27; Luke 15:25), to soothe the sick or distressed (1Sam.16:16), and to express lamentation (Job 30:31).

Musiciansplayed an important role in leading God’s people in worship.The “director of music” is mentioned in the headings offifty-five psalms and Hab. 3:19. The most famous musician inScripture is David, “the singer of Israel’s psalms”(2Sam. 23:1 GW), who played the harp (1Sam. 16:18) andwrote or inspired at least seventy-three canonical psalms. Solomonwas also a notable songwriter and lover of music (1Kings 4:32).David appointed many Levites as singers and musicians to lead Israelin worship (1Chron. 15:16; 23:5). The musicians played lyres,harps, cymbals, and trumpets (2Chron. 5:12).

Government,Politics, and Military

Beforethe monarchy, there were no formal government offices. Under Moses, agroup of seventy elders in Israel served as leaders and officials,and these men were to carry out Moses’ decrees and judge thepeople on most matters (Exod. 18:20–22; Num. 11:16). AfterJoshua’s death, God raised up judges to rescue Israel fromforeign enemies and lead the people (Judg. 2:16) until the time ofSamuel, when Saul was made king (1Sam. 11:15).

Kingsin Israel employed various officials. In 2Sam. 8:16–18,Joab is listed first among David’s officials, which suggeststhat the military commander was second in authority after the king.Under Solomon, the leader of the army is called “commander inchief” (1Kings 4:4). The royal cabinet included a numberof key advisers, including the recorder, the secretary, and the“confidant” of the king (cf. 2Sam. 16:16). The OTdoes not specify the precise roles of these officials. The recorderwas among the highest governmental positions and served as a royalcounselor. In Hebrew, mazkir (“recorder”) is a cognatenoun to the verb zkr (“to remember”), which suggests thatthis official may have managed and preserved public records (2Kings18:18; Isa. 36:22). The main task of the king’s secretary orscribe (sop̱er)was to write down (sapar) official state documents (2Sam.8:17), and he advised the king and also provided financial oversight(2Kings 12:10). Recorders and secretaries apparently were welleducated and multilingual, as was the palace administrator (2Kings18:18, 26). Solomon’s officials included supervisors of thepalace and the forced labor, as well as governors who suppliedprovisions for the king’s household (1Kings 4:6–7).The OT mentions cupbearers in Israel’s government and in otheradministrations (Gen. 40:1; 1Kings 10:5; Neh. 1:11). Thecupbearer served as the royal wine taster; he protected the king frombeing poisoned and had direct access to the monarch.

Inthe Roman Empire, the emperor was absolute ruler (1Pet. 2:17),with the senate next in authority. Proconsuls held judicial andmilitary authority over larger provinces (Acts 18:12), prefects(governors) administered smaller provinces (Matt. 27:2), withtetrarchs over one-fourth of a province (Luke 3:1).

Christiansin NT times engaged in civil service. Erastus was a financial officerin Corinth (Rom. 16:23), and he may be the same Erastus commemoratedin an inscription from this period who held the office of aedile. Theproconsul Sergius Paulus (Acts 13:7); Manaen, a close friend of HerodAntipas (Acts 13:1); and members of Caesar’s household (Phil.4:22) were also Christian public leaders.

Tradeand Economics

Fromearliest times, people have exchanged goods and property. WhenAbraham purchased Ephron’s field, his silver was measured“according to the weight current among the merchants”(Gen. 23:16), which suggests that a recognized system of publictrading was in place during the time of the patriarchs. Traders ofcommodities such as spices traveled along caravan routes betweensouthern Arabia and Egypt, and these traders often acquired slavesalong the way (Gen. 37:28). Solomon employed royal merchants to buyand sell goods (1Kings 10:28).

Inthe first century, Jews were engaged broadly in economic life aslandowners, artisans, merchants, traders, bankers, and slaves.Several of Jesus’ disciples were fishermen (Matt. 4:18). Lukewas a physician, a well-educated and respectable professional (Col.4:14). Lydia was a dealer in purple cloth (Acts 16:14). Paul, Aquila,and Priscilla worked as tentmakers (Acts 18:3). In the Roman Empire,commerce and pagan religion often intermingled. Merchants oftenformed trade guilds, where membership sometimes required religiousand moral compromise. In Ephesus, silversmiths and craftsmen inrelated trades turned significant profit through their connectionswith the local Artemis cult (Acts 19:24–27).

Jesusfrequently spent time with tax collectors, such as Levi (also called“Matthew”) (Matt. 9:9; Mark 2:14). Tax collectors were adespised group because often they became wealthy by taking advantageof the Roman taxation system, which allowed them to charge commissionon taxes collected (Luke 19:2, 8). Jesus’ parable of thetalents references bankers who offered interest on deposits collected(Matt. 25:27), and Rev. 3:17–18 alludes to the fact thatLaodicea was a financial center with a significant banking system.

Servantsand Slaves

Inthe OT, ’ebed most often designates a slave or servant, whoseoccupation involves work (’abad ) as a subordinate. Someservants held very important positions in their master’shousehold (Gen. 24:2), while many others toiled in hard labor (Job7:2). Israelites were not to enslave their kinfolk, but they couldtake slaves from other nations. Fellow Israelites who became poorcould serve as hired workers, but they were to be released along withtheir children at the Jubilee because God had brought Israel out fromEgyptian slavery and they belonged to God as his servants (Lev.25:39–46).

Slavesin the Roman world were property like goods or cattle, possessed byanother (Dio Chrysostom, 2Serv. lib. 24). Unlike modern slaverypractices, race played no factor in the Roman institution of slavery.Slaves were kidnapped and sold in NT times (1Tim. 1:10; Rev.18:13), but the majority of slaves were so by birth. The mostprominent slave in the NT is Onesimus, for whom Paul intercedes withhis master, Philemon (Philem. 10, 16). Believing slaves were to obeytheir earthly masters “as slaves of Christ” (Eph. 6:5–6),but the NT stressed the equality of slave and free in Christ (Gal.3:28). Paul called himself a “servant [doulos] of Christ Jesus”(Rom. 1:1).

ReligiousService

MostIsraelites engaged in professional religious service were Levites(Num. 3:12), including Moses, Aaron, and the priests in Aaron’sline (Exod. 6:19–20; 35:19). The priests offered sacrifices toGod on behalf of the people (Heb. 5:1). Under the priests’direction, the Levites were charged with caring for the tabernacleand its furnishings (Num. 1:49; 1Chron. 23:32) and carrying theark of the covenant (1Chron. 15:2). They were set apart toserve in God’s presence (Deut. 18:7) and to lead the people inworship (2Chron. 5:12). Further, priests often played animportant advisory role to Israel’s kings (2Sam. 8:17;1Kings 4:5; 2Kings 12:2).

InIsrael, people went to seers and prophets to inquire of God (1Sam.9:9), for they received and communicated God’s word (2Sam.24:11; Jer. 37:6). Sometimes individuals are mentioned as prophets,and other times the prophets are discussed as an organized group(1Sam. 19:20; 1Kings 22:6).

TheNT references a number of ministerial offices (1Cor. 12:28;Eph. 4:11; 1Tim. 3:1–12). Not all ministers were paid,though teachers and preachers had a right to “receive theirliving from the gospel” (1Cor. 9:14–15; cf. 1Tim.5:17). Apostles were those sent out by Jesus as his representatives.The term apostolos refers particularly to the twelve apostles whowere with Jesus during his earthly ministry and who were witnesses ofhis resurrection (Acts 1:21–22). Paul referred to himself as anapostle (Gal. 1:1; 1Cor. 1:1), and he calls Epaph-ro-di-tus andothers “messengers” (apostoloi) in the churches (2Cor.8:23; Phil. 2:25). Prophets have the spiritual gift of prophecy andspeak to strengthen, encourage, and comfort the church (Acts 15:32;1Cor. 14:3). Overseers (also called “elders” or“pastors”) are qualified leaders who teach, shepherd, andexercise authority in the church (1Tim. 3:1; 1Pet. 5:2).Evangelists and missionaries proclaim the gospel and aim to winconverts to Christ (Acts 21:8; 2Tim. 4:5). Those ministers whoare faithful to the gospel deserve support (3John8).

An occupation or profession is the usual work or business inwhich a person engages for the sake of earning a living. In biblicaltimes, family or social standing most often determined occupation.This was particularly true for occupations tied to land, such asplanting crops and raising animals, since land in ancient Israel waspassed down within the tribe, normally from fathers to sons (Josh.14:9; Ezek. 46:18). Sometimes daughters also received a share in thefamily inheritance (Josh. 17:6). Most people gained their livelihoodfrom their family’s land, and those who did not have land hiredthemselves out to work for wages (Deut. 24:14). A son normallylearned his trade from his father (Gen. 47:3; 2Kings 4:18;Matt. 4:21) and continued in that occupation unless called into God’sservice (1Kings 19:19–21; Jer. 1:5; Matt. 4:22).

Cicero,writing around the time of the NT, considered occupations such as taxcollector, laborer, and fisherman to be vulgar. Conversely,professions such as teacher, doctor, and wholesale trader were morehonorable, with landowner being the most respectable and profitableprofession (Off. 1.42).

Agricultureand Farming

Farmingis the earliest recorded occupation in the Bible, as the first manwas called to work and keep the garden (Gen. 2:15). Even after theexile from Eden because of sin, Adam worked the ground for food, asdid Cain, his firstborn son (Gen. 3:17–18; 4:2). The openingchapters of the Bible establish a fundamental link between “man”(’adam) and the “ground” (’adamah). After theflood, Noah established himself as a “man of the soil”(’ish ha’adamah) by planting a vineyard (Gen. 9:20). KingUzziah “loved the soil” (’oheb ’adamah) andso employed people to work in his fields and vineyards (2Chron.26:10).

Goddemonstrated his covenant commitment to Isaac by blessing him with anincredible harvest (Gen. 26:12), and he promised to prosper Israel’sfarms if the people obeyed him (Deut. 28:4) and to curse the fruit oftheir ground if they disobeyed (Deut. 28:18). The OT ideal was foreveryone to live “under their own vine and under their own figtree” (1Kings 4:25; Mic. 4:4). According to Prov. 28:19,the diligent farmer would have abundant food.

Jesus’parables frequently employed agricultural imagery that would havebeen readily understandable in first-century Palestine, where manypeople were farmers (cf. Mark 4:1–9; 12:1–11) and someowned land (Acts 4:34). The people living around Jerusalem at thistime engaged in agriculture, soil cultivation, and cattle raising(Let. Aris. 107–112).

Herdingand Hunting

Herdinganimals is the second-oldest occupation recorded in Scripture (afterfarming), and raising flocks and herds continued to be one of themost common and important professions throughout biblical times. Abelis the first “keeper of sheep” in the Bible (Gen. 4:2NRSV). Several generations later, Jabal pioneered the nomadic herdinglifestyle (Gen. 4:20). The patriarchs were shepherds (Gen. 47:3), aswere Moses (Exod. 3:1), David (1Sam. 17:34), and many others inthe OT. Josephus acknowledged that “feeding of sheep was theemployment of our forefathers in the most ancient ages”(Ag.Ap. 1.91). While men typically worked as shepherds andherdsmen, the occupation was also open to women, such as Rachel,whose fathers owned sheep (Gen. 29:9). Shepherds were present atJesus’ birth (Luke 2:8–20), and Jesus’ teachingsuggests that shepherding was a common occupation in Palestine (cf.Matt. 18:12; John 10:1–30).

Manypeople in biblical times hunted, either for food, sport, orprotection. The first recorded hunter is Nimrod, “a mightyhunter before the Lord” (Gen. 10:9). Ishmael was “anexpert with the bow” (Gen. 21:20 NRSV), while Esau was “askillful hunter, a man of the open country” who brought backwild game for food (25:27–28). The name of Pokereth-Hazzebaim,included in the genealogy of Solomon’s servants in Ezra 2:57,reflects his occupation as a “gazelle catcher” (cf.1Kings 4:23).

Buildersand Craftsmen

Cainwas the first person in the Bible to build a city (Gen. 4:17), andhis descendant Tubal-Cain was the first metalworker (4:22). Nimrodbuilt a number of cities (10:11–12), and the beginning ofNimrod’s kingdom was Babel (10:10), where the people gatheredtogether to build a city with brick (11:3). Builders in Mesopotamiaused baked brick and asphalt, while Israelite builders usuallypreferred the more readily available stone and mortar. After Joseph’sdeath, Israel was conscripted into forced labor in Egypt, whichinvolved building cities of brick and mortar (Exod. 1:11).

Therole of craftsmen in the construction of the tabernacle wasparticularly significant. Bezalel and Oholiab were “skilledworkers and designers” empowered by God for work on thetabernacle (Exod. 35:35). They engaged in “all kinds ofcrafts,” including artistic metalworking, masonry, carpentry,and weaving (Exod. 31:4–5; 38:23).

Kingsin Israel often commissioned important building projects (1Kings12:25; 15:22; 16:24; 2Chron. 26:9; Josephus, J.W. 1.401–2).Carpenters and stonemasons worked on David’s palace (2Sam.5:11). Solomon conscripted laborers to build the temple and alsoemployed carriers, stonecutters, craftsmen, and foremen to supervisethe work (1Kings 5:13–18). After the Babylonian exile,many Israelites were involved in rebuilding the temple and the wallof Jerusalem, which had been destroyed (Ezra 3:8; Neh. 4:16–18).These projects, directed by Zerubbabel and Nehemiah, utilized masons,carpenters, and other workers (Ezra 3:7).

Jesusis referred to as a tektōn (Mark 6:3) and as the son of a tektōn(Matt. 13:55), with tektōn usually translated “carpenter”by English versions. However,recent scholarshiphas demonstrated that Jesus was likely a builder, not a carpenter inthe modern sense of the term. In the LXX, the word tektōntypically translates a Hebrew word, kharash, used broadly to refer tocraftsmen working with stone, wood, or metal.

Musicians

Thefirst musician recorded in Scripture is Jubal, “the father ofall who play the stringed instruments and pipes” (Gen. 4:21).Musicians performed a variety of roles in ancient society, as they dotoday. Singers and instrumentalists were employed to celebratefestive occasions, often to provide accompaniment for dancing (Gen.31:27; Luke 15:25), to soothe the sick or distressed (1Sam.16:16), and to express lamentation (Job 30:31).

Musiciansplayed an important role in leading God’s people in worship.The “director of music” is mentioned in the headings offifty-five psalms and Hab. 3:19. The most famous musician inScripture is David, “the singer of Israel’s psalms”(2Sam. 23:1 GW), who played the harp (1Sam. 16:18) andwrote or inspired at least seventy-three canonical psalms. Solomonwas also a notable songwriter and lover of music (1Kings 4:32).David appointed many Levites as singers and musicians to lead Israelin worship (1Chron. 15:16; 23:5). The musicians played lyres,harps, cymbals, and trumpets (2Chron. 5:12).

Government,Politics, and Military

Beforethe monarchy, there were no formal government offices. Under Moses, agroup of seventy elders in Israel served as leaders and officials,and these men were to carry out Moses’ decrees and judge thepeople on most matters (Exod. 18:20–22; Num. 11:16). AfterJoshua’s death, God raised up judges to rescue Israel fromforeign enemies and lead the people (Judg. 2:16) until the time ofSamuel, when Saul was made king (1Sam. 11:15).

Kingsin Israel employed various officials. In 2Sam. 8:16–18,Joab is listed first among David’s officials, which suggeststhat the military commander was second in authority after the king.Under Solomon, the leader of the army is called “commander inchief” (1Kings 4:4). The royal cabinet included a numberof key advisers, including the recorder, the secretary, and the“confidant” of the king (cf. 2Sam. 16:16). The OTdoes not specify the precise roles of these officials. The recorderwas among the highest governmental positions and served as a royalcounselor. In Hebrew, mazkir (“recorder”) is a cognatenoun to the verb zkr (“to remember”), which suggests thatthis official may have managed and preserved public records (2Kings18:18; Isa. 36:22). The main task of the king’s secretary orscribe (sop̱er)was to write down (sapar) official state documents (2Sam.8:17), and he advised the king and also provided financial oversight(2Kings 12:10). Recorders and secretaries apparently were welleducated and multilingual, as was the palace administrator (2Kings18:18, 26). Solomon’s officials included supervisors of thepalace and the forced labor, as well as governors who suppliedprovisions for the king’s household (1Kings 4:6–7).The OT mentions cupbearers in Israel’s government and in otheradministrations (Gen. 40:1; 1Kings 10:5; Neh. 1:11). Thecupbearer served as the royal wine taster; he protected the king frombeing poisoned and had direct access to the monarch.

Inthe Roman Empire, the emperor was absolute ruler (1Pet. 2:17),with the senate next in authority. Proconsuls held judicial andmilitary authority over larger provinces (Acts 18:12), prefects(governors) administered smaller provinces (Matt. 27:2), withtetrarchs over one-fourth of a province (Luke 3:1).

Christiansin NT times engaged in civil service. Erastus was a financial officerin Corinth (Rom. 16:23), and he may be the same Erastus commemoratedin an inscription from this period who held the office of aedile. Theproconsul Sergius Paulus (Acts 13:7); Manaen, a close friend of HerodAntipas (Acts 13:1); and members of Caesar’s household (Phil.4:22) were also Christian public leaders.

Tradeand Economics

Fromearliest times, people have exchanged goods and property. WhenAbraham purchased Ephron’s field, his silver was measured“according to the weight current among the merchants”(Gen. 23:16), which suggests that a recognized system of publictrading was in place during the time of the patriarchs. Traders ofcommodities such as spices traveled along caravan routes betweensouthern Arabia and Egypt, and these traders often acquired slavesalong the way (Gen. 37:28). Solomon employed royal merchants to buyand sell goods (1Kings 10:28).

Inthe first century, Jews were engaged broadly in economic life aslandowners, artisans, merchants, traders, bankers, and slaves.Several of Jesus’ disciples were fishermen (Matt. 4:18). Lukewas a physician, a well-educated and respectable professional (Col.4:14). Lydia was a dealer in purple cloth (Acts 16:14). Paul, Aquila,and Priscilla worked as tentmakers (Acts 18:3). In the Roman Empire,commerce and pagan religion often intermingled. Merchants oftenformed trade guilds, where membership sometimes required religiousand moral compromise. In Ephesus, silversmiths and craftsmen inrelated trades turned significant profit through their connectionswith the local Artemis cult (Acts 19:24–27).

Jesusfrequently spent time with tax collectors, such as Levi (also called“Matthew”) (Matt. 9:9; Mark 2:14). Tax collectors were adespised group because often they became wealthy by taking advantageof the Roman taxation system, which allowed them to charge commissionon taxes collected (Luke 19:2, 8). Jesus’ parable of thetalents references bankers who offered interest on deposits collected(Matt. 25:27), and Rev. 3:17–18 alludes to the fact thatLaodicea was a financial center with a significant banking system.

Servantsand Slaves

Inthe OT, ’ebed most often designates a slave or servant, whoseoccupation involves work (’abad ) as a subordinate. Someservants held very important positions in their master’shousehold (Gen. 24:2), while many others toiled in hard labor (Job7:2). Israelites were not to enslave their kinfolk, but they couldtake slaves from other nations. Fellow Israelites who became poorcould serve as hired workers, but they were to be released along withtheir children at the Jubilee because God had brought Israel out fromEgyptian slavery and they belonged to God as his servants (Lev.25:39–46).

Slavesin the Roman world were property like goods or cattle, possessed byanother (Dio Chrysostom, 2Serv. lib. 24). Unlike modern slaverypractices, race played no factor in the Roman institution of slavery.Slaves were kidnapped and sold in NT times (1Tim. 1:10; Rev.18:13), but the majority of slaves were so by birth. The mostprominent slave in the NT is Onesimus, for whom Paul intercedes withhis master, Philemon (Philem. 10, 16). Believing slaves were to obeytheir earthly masters “as slaves of Christ” (Eph. 6:5–6),but the NT stressed the equality of slave and free in Christ (Gal.3:28). Paul called himself a “servant [doulos] of Christ Jesus”(Rom. 1:1).

ReligiousService

MostIsraelites engaged in professional religious service were Levites(Num. 3:12), including Moses, Aaron, and the priests in Aaron’sline (Exod. 6:19–20; 35:19). The priests offered sacrifices toGod on behalf of the people (Heb. 5:1). Under the priests’direction, the Levites were charged with caring for the tabernacleand its furnishings (Num. 1:49; 1Chron. 23:32) and carrying theark of the covenant (1Chron. 15:2). They were set apart toserve in God’s presence (Deut. 18:7) and to lead the people inworship (2Chron. 5:12). Further, priests often played animportant advisory role to Israel’s kings (2Sam. 8:17;1Kings 4:5; 2Kings 12:2).

InIsrael, people went to seers and prophets to inquire of God (1Sam.9:9), for they received and communicated God’s word (2Sam.24:11; Jer. 37:6). Sometimes individuals are mentioned as prophets,and other times the prophets are discussed as an organized group(1Sam. 19:20; 1Kings 22:6).

TheNT references a number of ministerial offices (1Cor. 12:28;Eph. 4:11; 1Tim. 3:1–12). Not all ministers were paid,though teachers and preachers had a right to “receive theirliving from the gospel” (1Cor. 9:14–15; cf. 1Tim.5:17). Apostles were those sent out by Jesus as his representatives.The term apostolos refers particularly to the twelve apostles whowere with Jesus during his earthly ministry and who were witnesses ofhis resurrection (Acts 1:21–22). Paul referred to himself as anapostle (Gal. 1:1; 1Cor. 1:1), and he calls Epaph-ro-di-tus andothers “messengers” (apostoloi) in the churches (2Cor.8:23; Phil. 2:25). Prophets have the spiritual gift of prophecy andspeak to strengthen, encourage, and comfort the church (Acts 15:32;1Cor. 14:3). Overseers (also called “elders” or“pastors”) are qualified leaders who teach, shepherd, andexercise authority in the church (1Tim. 3:1; 1Pet. 5:2).Evangelists and missionaries proclaim the gospel and aim to winconverts to Christ (Acts 21:8; 2Tim. 4:5). Those ministers whoare faithful to the gospel deserve support (3John8).

OldTestament

Phoeniciansand Philistines. Asa people whose ancestral territory lay in the landlocked andtimber-poor highlands of Ephraim and Judah, the Israelites ofbiblical times never achieved prominence in seafaring orshipbuilding. Instead, they relied for their maritime enterprises onalliances with their coastal neighbors, particularly the Phoenicianstates to the north of Israel, who excelled in seafaring and hadaccess to the abundant timber forests of Lebanon. The Phoenicians(the Punics of classical antiquity) were famous in antiquity fortheir seafaring. In biblical times, they traded heavily betweenSyria-Palestine and Egypt and also sailed throughout theMediterranean, establishing colonies as far away as Tunisia(Carthage) and Spain (Cadiz).

Anotherseagoing people prominent in the OT were the Philistines, whose baseof power was to the west of Judah, along the Mediterranean coast. TheBible associates the Philistines with the five cities of Ashdod,Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza. The Philistines were among the SeaPeoples, who came to the Levant from the Aegean beginning in thetwelfth century BC (Amos 9:7; Jer. 47:4).

Theperennial enmity between the Philistines and the Israelites precludedjoint maritime ventures of the sort shared by Israel and thePhoenicians, and the Bible does not describe Philistine maritimeactivities in any depth. Nevertheless, the seagoing nature of thePhilistines is reflected by the fact that their settlements remainedconfined to the coastal region. They never made a systematic attemptto take over the traditionally Israelite and Judahite highlands. Whenthey did venture into the Judean mountains, it was to assert amilitary and political presence among the agrarian Israelites andJudahites rather than to establish permanent settlements andPhilistine population centers. Twelfth-century BC reliefs at MedinetHabu (in the mortuary temple of RamessesIII) depict a navalbattle between the Sea Peoples and the Egyptians. The reliefs includepictures of Philistine ships and sailors.

Israeliteseafaring.One of the rare references to Israelite seafaring describes theDanites and the Asherites in connection with ships and harbors (Judg.5:17; see also Ezek. 27:19). Traditional Danite territory overlappedwith the area of Philistine settlement. Asherite territory overlappedsubstantially with Phoenician territory. It is possible that Judg.5:17 refers to the fact that the Danites and the Asherites worked inthe port cities serving Philistine and Phoenician shipping. Inanother passage, Zebulun is associated with ports (Gen. 49:13). It isnoteworthy that the Israelite coast between Jaffa and Dor (roughlybetween Philistia and Phoenicia) does not have an abundance ofnatural harbors. Later, Herod the Great would build the artificialharbor at Caesarea in the first century BC. The great expense of sucha project—including the construction of over 2,500 feet ofbreakwaters made of underwater concrete, mostly imported fromItaly—suggests the extent of the need for secure harbors inthis region.

Solomon’sfleet.The zenith of Israelite seafaring occurred during the reign ofSolomon. Solomon built a fleet of ships at “Ezion Geber, whichis near Elath in Edom, on the shore of the Red Sea” (1Kings9:26). The purpose of these ships was to bring back gold from Ophir(1Kings 9:28), possibly a location in the Arabian Peninsula, towhich a port on the Red Sea would have offered ready access. Thestory confirms the aforementioned dependence on the Phoenicians inthe area of seafaring: although the ships belonged to Solomon, “Hiram[the Phoenician king of Tyre] sent his men—sailors who knew thesea—to serve in the fleet with Solomon’s men”(1Kings 9:27). The timber for the ships would also have beenimported by Israel from Phoenicia (see 1Kings 9:11). Even atthe height of its power, Israel lacked the human resources to embarkon sea voyages independently of the Phoenicians.

Thesuccess of Solomon’s project, of course, depended not only onwarm relations with the Phoenicians but also on territorial controlof the historically Edomite lands between Judah and the Red Sea. Thisfavorable combination of conditions would come and go throughout thebiblical period, and with it, Israel’s modest presence on theseas. From the Phoenician point of view, cooperation with Israel wasan essential component of gaining access to a Red Sea port, and withit to the products of Arabia, the Horn of Africa, and India. ThePhoenicians, as expansive as their travel was in the Mediterranean,could never independently control the long overland route fromPhoenicia to the Red Sea, since it ran through the territory ofIsrael and Edom. Their best hope was a friendly and powerfulIsraelite ally. This explains the cordial relationship and why Hiramsent not only his sailors to serve Solomon but also craftsmen andsupplies for the construction of the temple (1Kings 5:10–12).Solomon and Hiram jointly operated “a fleet of trading ships”that would return to port every three years bringing “gold,silver, and ivory, and apes and baboons” (1Kings 10:22).

Jehoshaphat.In the mid-ninth century BC, King Jehoshaphat of Judah attempted torepeat Solomon’s feat of launching a fleet from Ezion Geber(1Kings 22:48–49; 2Chron. 20:35–37).According to both accounts, the ships were wrecked before they couldset sail. On several other points, however, the two versions of thestory disagree in ways that bear on questions of the political andeconomic conditions of Israelite seafaring.

Bythis time, Israel and Judah had split into separate kingdoms, withthe northern kingdom of Israel being geographically and politicallycloser to the Phoenicians. The powerful King Ahab of Israel,Jehoshaphat’s contemporary through much of his reign, marriedJezebel, the daughter of the Sidonian (Phoenician) king Ethbaal(1Kings 16:31). According to 1Kings, King Ahaziah ofIsrael (Ahab’s son) proposed to cooperate with Jehoshaphat bysending his own men on the voyage, much as Hiram had assisted Solomonin the previous century. Jehoshaphat rejected the suggestion,possibly indicating a bid for Judean autonomy in an era of northerndominance. According to 2Chronicles, however, Jehoshaphat didcooperate willingly with Ahaziah, and this was the reason that theships foundered in port: God punished the righteous Jehoshaphat fortoo close a relationship with his wicked northern counterpart. In1Kings 22:47 it is mentioned that at the time of Jehoshaphat’sventure there was no king in Edom. As noted, control of the overlandroute between Judah and the Red Sea was necessary for the success ofany voyage originating from Ezion Geber.

Howeverthe contradiction between 1Kings and 2Chroniclesregarding the involvement of Ahaziah is resolved, both versions ofthe story highlight the fact that the port at Ezion Geber commandedthe interest of the Judeans, the Israelites, and the Phoenicians, andits successful operation probably depended on the cooperation of allthree.

Shipsof Tarshish.Several biblical texts, including the stories of Solomon andJehoshaphat, mention “ships of Tarshish” (1Kings10:22 NIV mg.). In a number of contexts, such ships are associatedwith the transportation of metals and metal ores, including iron,lead, tin, gold, and silver (1Kings 10:22; Ezek. 27:12; Jer.10:9). The exact derivation of the term “ships of Tarshish”is uncertain, though it is clear from the descriptions of theircargoes that such ships could travel over long distances. As Ezekielobserves, “The ships of Tarshish serve as carriers for yourwares. You are filled with heavy cargo as you sail the sea. Youroarsmen take you out to the high seas” (Ezek. 27:25–26).

Inthe Table of Nations, Tarshish is listed as a descendant of Javan(Gen. 10:4), along with a number of other seafaring peoples of theeastern Mediterranean (“Javan” indicates the peoples ofthe Aegean and is linguistically equivalent to “Ionia”[see also Ezek. 27:12–22]). Some have suggested, then, that theships of Tarshish should be associated with Tarsus in southeasternTurkey, an area containing silver mines (also the birthplace of Paul[Acts 9:11]). Others have suggested the Phoenician colony ofTartessus in Spain, another metal-producing area. This locationfigures in the interpretation of the identification of thedestination of Jonah as Tarshish (Jon. 1:3): presumably, if he wereavoiding Nineveh and departing from Joppa, he would head towardSpain, in the exact opposite direction, rather than toward Tarsus inCilicia.

Inaddition to these two geographical options, some have attempted toexplain the expression “ships of Tarshish” as derivingfrom the Akkadian term for smelting or refining: perhaps the manyreferences to cargoes of metals indicate that the ships were used totransport metal ore to refining centers. Finally, one scholar hasproposed that the term is related to the Greek word tarsos,meaning “oar.”

Descriptionsof ships and seafaring.Ezekiel, in his lament concerning the Phoenician city of Tyre (Ezek.27), relates a number of details related to Phoenician seafaring. Thepicture largely confirms the descriptions of how Solomon built andmanned his fleet with the assistance of his Tyrian ally. Timber forthe construction of the ship came from Lebanon and Cyprus, amongother places (vv. 5–6). Sails were made from Egyptian linen(v.7), and as noted above, the oarsmen and sailors were fromthe Phoenician city-states (vv. 8–9). Ezekiel goes on to list alarge number of ports of call as well as a dazzling variety ofcargoes (vv. 12–24). Notably, Ezekiel has the Judahites and theIsraelites offering the products of their agrarian economy—“wheatfrom Minnith and confections, honey, olive oil and balm”(v.17)—thus filling out the picture of what theIsraelites gave in exchange for the precious metals and luxury itemsimported by their country from elsewhere.

In1999 archaeologists explored two eighth-century BC Phoenician shipsthat had sunk thirty miles west of Ashkelon. The ships, eachmeasuring about fifty feet in length, contained large cargoes of wineand were headed either for Egypt or for the Phoenician colonies inthe western Mediterranean.

Shipsand sailing figure prominently in the story of Jonah, who boarded aship bound for Tarshish (see discussion above) at Joppa on theMediterranean coast. In the story we see a number of features ofancient sea travel. Jonah paid a fare for his voyage (Jon. 1:3). Notonly the biblical author (see 1:4), but also the presumablynon-Israelite sailors, believed that the great storm was the doing ofa god, and that it could be calmed by appealing to that god(1:6)—although cargo was thrown overboard for good measure.When Paul was caught in a storm in the first century AD, the samestrategies were still in use (Acts 27:38). The religious habits ofancient sailors, particularly their reverence for the gods whocontrolled the stormy seas and thus held their lives in the balance,are illuminated by the discovery of stone anchors in several temples(presumably left by sailors as offerings), including at the portcities of Ugarit, Kition, and Byblos.

Psalm107:23–32 speaks of God’s care of sailors from anIsraelite perspective. In the psalm, those who “went out on thesea in ships,” the “merchants on the mighty waters”(i.e., the deep, open sea), witness firsthand the works of the God ofIsrael, which include both the raising and the quieting of the storm.This passage vividly expresses the terror of being caught in a stormand the great relief and gratitude felt by sailors who reached safehaven.

Noah’sArk

Accordingto the biblical account, Noah’s ark was 450 feet long, 75 feetwide, and 45 feet high (300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits [Gen.6:15]). It had three decks, a roof, and a window. By comparison, theship of Uta-napishti in the Epic of Gilgamesh is described as havingsix decks (and thus seven stories), edges of 180 feet (ten dozencubits) in each dimension, and occupying the space of an acre (arough approximation of the dimensions given). Both ships aredescribed as providing space for the builder’s family and everyliving creature. In the Atrahasis Epic, the boat is roofed, but itsdimensions are not given.

Becauseof the character of Gen. 6–8, it is inappropriate to drawconclusions from the story regarding shipbuilding in historicalantiquity. According to the specifications given in the biblicaltext, Noah’s ark would have been the largest wooden ship inhistory, equaled only by the United States schooner Wyoming,completed in 1909. While the overall length of the Wyoming was also450 feet, nearly 100 feet of length was accounted for in the fore andaft booms, so that the hull length was only 350 feet. Even with earlytwentieth-century shipbuilding technology, its extravagant lengthrendered the Wyoming unseaworthy, and the ship foundered in 1924. Thelargest documented wooden ships of antiquity include the GreekSyracusia(third century BC; 180 feet), described by Athenaeus; the Roman Isis(second century AD; 180 feet), described by Lucian; Caligula’s“Giant Ship” (first century AD; 341 feet), recovered inmodern times and possibly corresponding to a ship described by Plinythe Elder; and PtolemyIV’s Tessarakonteres (third centuryBC), reported by Plutarch to have been about 425 feet long. This lastship was not designed for cruising in open water.

NewTestament

Fishingin the Sea of Galilee. Severalof Jesus’ disciples worked as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee,and the Gospels document their use of small boats for fishing andtraveling across the sea. Fishing was done with nets thrown both fromboats and from the shore (Mark 1:16, 19). The boats used by fishermenon the Sea of Galilee may have been small enough to pull up onto thebeach (Luke 5:2), or to be nearly capsized by a large catch of fish(Luke 5:7) or by a violent storm (Mark 4:37). They were large enoughto transport several men and even to sleep in (Mark 4:38). Such boatscould be rowed or sailed; in Mark 6:48 the disciples had to resort torowing because of an unfavorable headwind. On one occasion, Jesusstood in a boat to preach to a crowd gathered on the shore (Mark4:1). The Sea of Galilee is about eight miles wide and thirteen mileslong. On several occasions, Jesus traveled by boat across the sea toavoid having to walk long distances around its circumference (e.g.,Matt. 9:1; 14:22; 15:39).

In1986 archaeologists recovered a fishing boat dating to the mid-firstcentury AD on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. The boat had beenscuttled near the shore and was preserved under mud. The “JesusBoat,” as it was dubbed, measures twenty-seven feet in lengthand has a beam seven and a half feet long. Numerous species of woodwere used in its construction and repairs throughout its useful life.While there is no evidence to link the boat to Jesus or hisdisciples, radiometric dating places it in the correct period, and itprovides a likely model of the type of boat portrayed in the Gospels.

Asecond source of information regarding ships and sailing in the NT isthe account in Acts of Paul’s many sea voyages. As in the caseof Jehoshaphat, the Tyrians, Jonah, and Jesus’ disciples, Paullearned firsthand the perils of seafaring in small wooden boats:among his many traumas, along with beatings and stonings, herecalled, “Three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and aday in the open sea” (2Cor. 11:25).

Paul’sjourneys.A survey of Paul’s sea travels on his four journeys gives someidea of the routes that could be taken by a paying traveler in theeastern Mediterranean and Aegean.

1.Paul’s first missionary journey included voyages from Seleuciain Syria to the port of Salamis in Cyprus (Acts 13:4) and from Cyprus(Paphos) to Perga on the southern coast of Asia Minor (13:13). Afterjourneying through the interior, Paul returned to Attalia, where heembarked for the return trip to Syria, presumably passing againthrough the port at Salamis (14:26).

2.The second missionary journey began not with a sea voyage but ratherwith a trek through the interior of Syria and Cilicia, illustratingthat although sea travel was by far a more rapid means of travel, theoverland routes were by no means impossible (Acts 15:39). Paul wouldrepeat this land route during his third journey (19:1). Sea travelwas fast, but when one had plenty of friends along the alternativeland route, a sea journey was considerably less enjoyable. It isduring the second journey that we have the first recorded accounts ofPaul sailing in the Aegean. From Troas in Asia Minor, he sailed theshort distance to Macedonia (16:11), putting in midway at the islandof Samothrace. Apparently, Paul traveled by sea down the coast fromBerea to Athens (17:14). At the conclusion of his second journey,Paul sailed from Corinth to Caesarea, with a stop at Ephesus(18:18–22). Not counting any intervening ports of call notmentioned in the text, this would be the longest single leg of seatravel so far mentioned.

3.The third missionary journey once more began with a long overlandtrip from Syria through Asia Minor; by this time, Paul had manyassociates along the way to visit. Again, he sailed in the Aegean,from Ephesus to Macedonia (Acts 20:1) and back (20:6). At one point,Paul opted to travel overland, from Troas to Assos, while hiscompanions sailed down the coast (20:13). Meeting up with them, hesailed on, hugging the coast of Asia Minor, then sailing south ofCyprus along an open-water route to Tyre. From Tyre, the ship againhugged the Palestinian coast, stopping in several ports before Pauldisembarked at Caesarea (21:7). Paul’s journeys illustrate thevariety of itineraries taken by ships. They were capable of sailingin deep water, but they would also hug the coast when there werereasons to make frequent stops.

4.Paul’s fourth journey, which he made in custody on his way to atrial before the emperor at Rome, was to be the most dangerous. Fromthe account in Acts we can glean a number of details of life at seain the first century AD. The ship bound for Italy was large, and itcarried 276 passengers and crew (Acts 27:6, 37), including soldiersand prisoners, at least one companion of a prisoner (Paul’sfriend Aristarchus [27:2]), a ship’s pilot, and the ship’sowner (27:11). Sailors used celestial navigation (27:20) and tooksoundings in shallow water (27:28). We see also that the ship’scourse could be determined by the direction of the prevailing winds:twice during the journey Paul’s ship was forced to sail to thelee of large islands (Cyprus and Crete)—a longer journey, butthe only option for a ship that was not rigged to sail close-hauled.

Whenextended periods of unfavorable weather were forecast, one option wassimply to put in at a port until conditions improved, preferably in aharbor that was in the lee of an island (Acts 27:12). We learnsomething of the measures that were taken in heavy weather, many ofwhich are still used in modern times: ropes were tied around the hullof the ship to prevent it from breaking up in rough seas (27:17), thelifeboat was brought onto the deck and made fast (27:17), sea anchorswere deployed to keep the bow of the ship oriented into the oncomingwaves (27:7), the rudder was lashed amidships (27:40), valuable cargoand gear were jettisoned (27:19, 38), and, as in the days of Jonah,sailors and passengers prayed for divine deliverance (27:29; see alsothe protective emblems in 28:11).

Whenall other means had been exhausted, a ship could be run aground on asandy beach (Acts 27:39), a measure that would have risked damage tothe boat but saved lives. In the case of Paul’s ship, thedecision to run aground ultimately resulted in the destruction of theship (27:41).

Metaphorsand illustrations.Several NT authors draw illustrations from the nautical world. Jameslikens the harmful power of evil speech to the rudder of a ship:although it is a small device, by it the pilot can control a greatship (James 3:4–5). Elsewhere, he compares the doubting of theunwise person to being lost at sea in a storm (James 1:6; cf. Eph.4:14). In 1Tim. 1:19 the loss of faith and good conscience islikened to a shipwreck. Hebrews 6:19 describes the assurance of God’sfaithfulness as an anchor for the soul.

OldTestament

Phoeniciansand Philistines. Asa people whose ancestral territory lay in the landlocked andtimber-poor highlands of Ephraim and Judah, the Israelites ofbiblical times never achieved prominence in seafaring orshipbuilding. Instead, they relied for their maritime enterprises onalliances with their coastal neighbors, particularly the Phoenicianstates to the north of Israel, who excelled in seafaring and hadaccess to the abundant timber forests of Lebanon. The Phoenicians(the Punics of classical antiquity) were famous in antiquity fortheir seafaring. In biblical times, they traded heavily betweenSyria-Palestine and Egypt and also sailed throughout theMediterranean, establishing colonies as far away as Tunisia(Carthage) and Spain (Cadiz).

Anotherseagoing people prominent in the OT were the Philistines, whose baseof power was to the west of Judah, along the Mediterranean coast. TheBible associates the Philistines with the five cities of Ashdod,Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza. The Philistines were among the SeaPeoples, who came to the Levant from the Aegean beginning in thetwelfth century BC (Amos 9:7; Jer. 47:4).

Theperennial enmity between the Philistines and the Israelites precludedjoint maritime ventures of the sort shared by Israel and thePhoenicians, and the Bible does not describe Philistine maritimeactivities in any depth. Nevertheless, the seagoing nature of thePhilistines is reflected by the fact that their settlements remainedconfined to the coastal region. They never made a systematic attemptto take over the traditionally Israelite and Judahite highlands. Whenthey did venture into the Judean mountains, it was to assert amilitary and political presence among the agrarian Israelites andJudahites rather than to establish permanent settlements andPhilistine population centers. Twelfth-century BC reliefs at MedinetHabu (in the mortuary temple of RamessesIII) depict a navalbattle between the Sea Peoples and the Egyptians. The reliefs includepictures of Philistine ships and sailors.

Israeliteseafaring.One of the rare references to Israelite seafaring describes theDanites and the Asherites in connection with ships and harbors (Judg.5:17; see also Ezek. 27:19). Traditional Danite territory overlappedwith the area of Philistine settlement. Asherite territory overlappedsubstantially with Phoenician territory. It is possible that Judg.5:17 refers to the fact that the Danites and the Asherites worked inthe port cities serving Philistine and Phoenician shipping. Inanother passage, Zebulun is associated with ports (Gen. 49:13). It isnoteworthy that the Israelite coast between Jaffa and Dor (roughlybetween Philistia and Phoenicia) does not have an abundance ofnatural harbors. Later, Herod the Great would build the artificialharbor at Caesarea in the first century BC. The great expense of sucha project—including the construction of over 2,500 feet ofbreakwaters made of underwater concrete, mostly imported fromItaly—suggests the extent of the need for secure harbors inthis region.

Solomon’sfleet.The zenith of Israelite seafaring occurred during the reign ofSolomon. Solomon built a fleet of ships at “Ezion Geber, whichis near Elath in Edom, on the shore of the Red Sea” (1Kings9:26). The purpose of these ships was to bring back gold from Ophir(1Kings 9:28), possibly a location in the Arabian Peninsula, towhich a port on the Red Sea would have offered ready access. Thestory confirms the aforementioned dependence on the Phoenicians inthe area of seafaring: although the ships belonged to Solomon, “Hiram[the Phoenician king of Tyre] sent his men—sailors who knew thesea—to serve in the fleet with Solomon’s men”(1Kings 9:27). The timber for the ships would also have beenimported by Israel from Phoenicia (see 1Kings 9:11). Even atthe height of its power, Israel lacked the human resources to embarkon sea voyages independently of the Phoenicians.

Thesuccess of Solomon’s project, of course, depended not only onwarm relations with the Phoenicians but also on territorial controlof the historically Edomite lands between Judah and the Red Sea. Thisfavorable combination of conditions would come and go throughout thebiblical period, and with it, Israel’s modest presence on theseas. From the Phoenician point of view, cooperation with Israel wasan essential component of gaining access to a Red Sea port, and withit to the products of Arabia, the Horn of Africa, and India. ThePhoenicians, as expansive as their travel was in the Mediterranean,could never independently control the long overland route fromPhoenicia to the Red Sea, since it ran through the territory ofIsrael and Edom. Their best hope was a friendly and powerfulIsraelite ally. This explains the cordial relationship and why Hiramsent not only his sailors to serve Solomon but also craftsmen andsupplies for the construction of the temple (1Kings 5:10–12).Solomon and Hiram jointly operated “a fleet of trading ships”that would return to port every three years bringing “gold,silver, and ivory, and apes and baboons” (1Kings 10:22).

Jehoshaphat.In the mid-ninth century BC, King Jehoshaphat of Judah attempted torepeat Solomon’s feat of launching a fleet from Ezion Geber(1Kings 22:48–49; 2Chron. 20:35–37).According to both accounts, the ships were wrecked before they couldset sail. On several other points, however, the two versions of thestory disagree in ways that bear on questions of the political andeconomic conditions of Israelite seafaring.

Bythis time, Israel and Judah had split into separate kingdoms, withthe northern kingdom of Israel being geographically and politicallycloser to the Phoenicians. The powerful King Ahab of Israel,Jehoshaphat’s contemporary through much of his reign, marriedJezebel, the daughter of the Sidonian (Phoenician) king Ethbaal(1Kings 16:31). According to 1Kings, King Ahaziah ofIsrael (Ahab’s son) proposed to cooperate with Jehoshaphat bysending his own men on the voyage, much as Hiram had assisted Solomonin the previous century. Jehoshaphat rejected the suggestion,possibly indicating a bid for Judean autonomy in an era of northerndominance. According to 2Chronicles, however, Jehoshaphat didcooperate willingly with Ahaziah, and this was the reason that theships foundered in port: God punished the righteous Jehoshaphat fortoo close a relationship with his wicked northern counterpart. In1Kings 22:47 it is mentioned that at the time of Jehoshaphat’sventure there was no king in Edom. As noted, control of the overlandroute between Judah and the Red Sea was necessary for the success ofany voyage originating from Ezion Geber.

Howeverthe contradiction between 1Kings and 2Chroniclesregarding the involvement of Ahaziah is resolved, both versions ofthe story highlight the fact that the port at Ezion Geber commandedthe interest of the Judeans, the Israelites, and the Phoenicians, andits successful operation probably depended on the cooperation of allthree.

Shipsof Tarshish.Several biblical texts, including the stories of Solomon andJehoshaphat, mention “ships of Tarshish” (1Kings10:22 NIV mg.). In a number of contexts, such ships are associatedwith the transportation of metals and metal ores, including iron,lead, tin, gold, and silver (1Kings 10:22; Ezek. 27:12; Jer.10:9). The exact derivation of the term “ships of Tarshish”is uncertain, though it is clear from the descriptions of theircargoes that such ships could travel over long distances. As Ezekielobserves, “The ships of Tarshish serve as carriers for yourwares. You are filled with heavy cargo as you sail the sea. Youroarsmen take you out to the high seas” (Ezek. 27:25–26).

Inthe Table of Nations, Tarshish is listed as a descendant of Javan(Gen. 10:4), along with a number of other seafaring peoples of theeastern Mediterranean (“Javan” indicates the peoples ofthe Aegean and is linguistically equivalent to “Ionia”[see also Ezek. 27:12–22]). Some have suggested, then, that theships of Tarshish should be associated with Tarsus in southeasternTurkey, an area containing silver mines (also the birthplace of Paul[Acts 9:11]). Others have suggested the Phoenician colony ofTartessus in Spain, another metal-producing area. This locationfigures in the interpretation of the identification of thedestination of Jonah as Tarshish (Jon. 1:3): presumably, if he wereavoiding Nineveh and departing from Joppa, he would head towardSpain, in the exact opposite direction, rather than toward Tarsus inCilicia.

Inaddition to these two geographical options, some have attempted toexplain the expression “ships of Tarshish” as derivingfrom the Akkadian term for smelting or refining: perhaps the manyreferences to cargoes of metals indicate that the ships were used totransport metal ore to refining centers. Finally, one scholar hasproposed that the term is related to the Greek word tarsos,meaning “oar.”

Descriptionsof ships and seafaring.Ezekiel, in his lament concerning the Phoenician city of Tyre (Ezek.27), relates a number of details related to Phoenician seafaring. Thepicture largely confirms the descriptions of how Solomon built andmanned his fleet with the assistance of his Tyrian ally. Timber forthe construction of the ship came from Lebanon and Cyprus, amongother places (vv. 5–6). Sails were made from Egyptian linen(v.7), and as noted above, the oarsmen and sailors were fromthe Phoenician city-states (vv. 8–9). Ezekiel goes on to list alarge number of ports of call as well as a dazzling variety ofcargoes (vv. 12–24). Notably, Ezekiel has the Judahites and theIsraelites offering the products of their agrarian economy—“wheatfrom Minnith and confections, honey, olive oil and balm”(v.17)—thus filling out the picture of what theIsraelites gave in exchange for the precious metals and luxury itemsimported by their country from elsewhere.

In1999 archaeologists explored two eighth-century BC Phoenician shipsthat had sunk thirty miles west of Ashkelon. The ships, eachmeasuring about fifty feet in length, contained large cargoes of wineand were headed either for Egypt or for the Phoenician colonies inthe western Mediterranean.

Shipsand sailing figure prominently in the story of Jonah, who boarded aship bound for Tarshish (see discussion above) at Joppa on theMediterranean coast. In the story we see a number of features ofancient sea travel. Jonah paid a fare for his voyage (Jon. 1:3). Notonly the biblical author (see 1:4), but also the presumablynon-Israelite sailors, believed that the great storm was the doing ofa god, and that it could be calmed by appealing to that god(1:6)—although cargo was thrown overboard for good measure.When Paul was caught in a storm in the first century AD, the samestrategies were still in use (Acts 27:38). The religious habits ofancient sailors, particularly their reverence for the gods whocontrolled the stormy seas and thus held their lives in the balance,are illuminated by the discovery of stone anchors in several temples(presumably left by sailors as offerings), including at the portcities of Ugarit, Kition, and Byblos.

Psalm107:23–32 speaks of God’s care of sailors from anIsraelite perspective. In the psalm, those who “went out on thesea in ships,” the “merchants on the mighty waters”(i.e., the deep, open sea), witness firsthand the works of the God ofIsrael, which include both the raising and the quieting of the storm.This passage vividly expresses the terror of being caught in a stormand the great relief and gratitude felt by sailors who reached safehaven.

Noah’sArk

Accordingto the biblical account, Noah’s ark was 450 feet long, 75 feetwide, and 45 feet high (300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits [Gen.6:15]). It had three decks, a roof, and a window. By comparison, theship of Uta-napishti in the Epic of Gilgamesh is described as havingsix decks (and thus seven stories), edges of 180 feet (ten dozencubits) in each dimension, and occupying the space of an acre (arough approximation of the dimensions given). Both ships aredescribed as providing space for the builder’s family and everyliving creature. In the Atrahasis Epic, the boat is roofed, but itsdimensions are not given.

Becauseof the character of Gen. 6–8, it is inappropriate to drawconclusions from the story regarding shipbuilding in historicalantiquity. According to the specifications given in the biblicaltext, Noah’s ark would have been the largest wooden ship inhistory, equaled only by the United States schooner Wyoming,completed in 1909. While the overall length of the Wyoming was also450 feet, nearly 100 feet of length was accounted for in the fore andaft booms, so that the hull length was only 350 feet. Even with earlytwentieth-century shipbuilding technology, its extravagant lengthrendered the Wyoming unseaworthy, and the ship foundered in 1924. Thelargest documented wooden ships of antiquity include the GreekSyracusia(third century BC; 180 feet), described by Athenaeus; the Roman Isis(second century AD; 180 feet), described by Lucian; Caligula’s“Giant Ship” (first century AD; 341 feet), recovered inmodern times and possibly corresponding to a ship described by Plinythe Elder; and PtolemyIV’s Tessarakonteres (third centuryBC), reported by Plutarch to have been about 425 feet long. This lastship was not designed for cruising in open water.

NewTestament

Fishingin the Sea of Galilee. Severalof Jesus’ disciples worked as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee,and the Gospels document their use of small boats for fishing andtraveling across the sea. Fishing was done with nets thrown both fromboats and from the shore (Mark 1:16, 19). The boats used by fishermenon the Sea of Galilee may have been small enough to pull up onto thebeach (Luke 5:2), or to be nearly capsized by a large catch of fish(Luke 5:7) or by a violent storm (Mark 4:37). They were large enoughto transport several men and even to sleep in (Mark 4:38). Such boatscould be rowed or sailed; in Mark 6:48 the disciples had to resort torowing because of an unfavorable headwind. On one occasion, Jesusstood in a boat to preach to a crowd gathered on the shore (Mark4:1). The Sea of Galilee is about eight miles wide and thirteen mileslong. On several occasions, Jesus traveled by boat across the sea toavoid having to walk long distances around its circumference (e.g.,Matt. 9:1; 14:22; 15:39).

In1986 archaeologists recovered a fishing boat dating to the mid-firstcentury AD on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. The boat had beenscuttled near the shore and was preserved under mud. The “JesusBoat,” as it was dubbed, measures twenty-seven feet in lengthand has a beam seven and a half feet long. Numerous species of woodwere used in its construction and repairs throughout its useful life.While there is no evidence to link the boat to Jesus or hisdisciples, radiometric dating places it in the correct period, and itprovides a likely model of the type of boat portrayed in the Gospels.

Asecond source of information regarding ships and sailing in the NT isthe account in Acts of Paul’s many sea voyages. As in the caseof Jehoshaphat, the Tyrians, Jonah, and Jesus’ disciples, Paullearned firsthand the perils of seafaring in small wooden boats:among his many traumas, along with beatings and stonings, herecalled, “Three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and aday in the open sea” (2Cor. 11:25).

Paul’sjourneys.A survey of Paul’s sea travels on his four journeys gives someidea of the routes that could be taken by a paying traveler in theeastern Mediterranean and Aegean.

1.Paul’s first missionary journey included voyages from Seleuciain Syria to the port of Salamis in Cyprus (Acts 13:4) and from Cyprus(Paphos) to Perga on the southern coast of Asia Minor (13:13). Afterjourneying through the interior, Paul returned to Attalia, where heembarked for the return trip to Syria, presumably passing againthrough the port at Salamis (14:26).

2.The second missionary journey began not with a sea voyage but ratherwith a trek through the interior of Syria and Cilicia, illustratingthat although sea travel was by far a more rapid means of travel, theoverland routes were by no means impossible (Acts 15:39). Paul wouldrepeat this land route during his third journey (19:1). Sea travelwas fast, but when one had plenty of friends along the alternativeland route, a sea journey was considerably less enjoyable. It isduring the second journey that we have the first recorded accounts ofPaul sailing in the Aegean. From Troas in Asia Minor, he sailed theshort distance to Macedonia (16:11), putting in midway at the islandof Samothrace. Apparently, Paul traveled by sea down the coast fromBerea to Athens (17:14). At the conclusion of his second journey,Paul sailed from Corinth to Caesarea, with a stop at Ephesus(18:18–22). Not counting any intervening ports of call notmentioned in the text, this would be the longest single leg of seatravel so far mentioned.

3.The third missionary journey once more began with a long overlandtrip from Syria through Asia Minor; by this time, Paul had manyassociates along the way to visit. Again, he sailed in the Aegean,from Ephesus to Macedonia (Acts 20:1) and back (20:6). At one point,Paul opted to travel overland, from Troas to Assos, while hiscompanions sailed down the coast (20:13). Meeting up with them, hesailed on, hugging the coast of Asia Minor, then sailing south ofCyprus along an open-water route to Tyre. From Tyre, the ship againhugged the Palestinian coast, stopping in several ports before Pauldisembarked at Caesarea (21:7). Paul’s journeys illustrate thevariety of itineraries taken by ships. They were capable of sailingin deep water, but they would also hug the coast when there werereasons to make frequent stops.

4.Paul’s fourth journey, which he made in custody on his way to atrial before the emperor at Rome, was to be the most dangerous. Fromthe account in Acts we can glean a number of details of life at seain the first century AD. The ship bound for Italy was large, and itcarried 276 passengers and crew (Acts 27:6, 37), including soldiersand prisoners, at least one companion of a prisoner (Paul’sfriend Aristarchus [27:2]), a ship’s pilot, and the ship’sowner (27:11). Sailors used celestial navigation (27:20) and tooksoundings in shallow water (27:28). We see also that the ship’scourse could be determined by the direction of the prevailing winds:twice during the journey Paul’s ship was forced to sail to thelee of large islands (Cyprus and Crete)—a longer journey, butthe only option for a ship that was not rigged to sail close-hauled.

Whenextended periods of unfavorable weather were forecast, one option wassimply to put in at a port until conditions improved, preferably in aharbor that was in the lee of an island (Acts 27:12). We learnsomething of the measures that were taken in heavy weather, many ofwhich are still used in modern times: ropes were tied around the hullof the ship to prevent it from breaking up in rough seas (27:17), thelifeboat was brought onto the deck and made fast (27:17), sea anchorswere deployed to keep the bow of the ship oriented into the oncomingwaves (27:7), the rudder was lashed amidships (27:40), valuable cargoand gear were jettisoned (27:19, 38), and, as in the days of Jonah,sailors and passengers prayed for divine deliverance (27:29; see alsothe protective emblems in 28:11).

Whenall other means had been exhausted, a ship could be run aground on asandy beach (Acts 27:39), a measure that would have risked damage tothe boat but saved lives. In the case of Paul’s ship, thedecision to run aground ultimately resulted in the destruction of theship (27:41).

Metaphorsand illustrations.Several NT authors draw illustrations from the nautical world. Jameslikens the harmful power of evil speech to the rudder of a ship:although it is a small device, by it the pilot can control a greatship (James 3:4–5). Elsewhere, he compares the doubting of theunwise person to being lost at sea in a storm (James 1:6; cf. Eph.4:14). In 1Tim. 1:19 the loss of faith and good conscience islikened to a shipwreck. Hebrews 6:19 describes the assurance of God’sfaithfulness as an anchor for the soul.

OldTestament

Phoeniciansand Philistines. Asa people whose ancestral territory lay in the landlocked andtimber-poor highlands of Ephraim and Judah, the Israelites ofbiblical times never achieved prominence in seafaring orshipbuilding. Instead, they relied for their maritime enterprises onalliances with their coastal neighbors, particularly the Phoenicianstates to the north of Israel, who excelled in seafaring and hadaccess to the abundant timber forests of Lebanon. The Phoenicians(the Punics of classical antiquity) were famous in antiquity fortheir seafaring. In biblical times, they traded heavily betweenSyria-Palestine and Egypt and also sailed throughout theMediterranean, establishing colonies as far away as Tunisia(Carthage) and Spain (Cadiz).

Anotherseagoing people prominent in the OT were the Philistines, whose baseof power was to the west of Judah, along the Mediterranean coast. TheBible associates the Philistines with the five cities of Ashdod,Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza. The Philistines were among the SeaPeoples, who came to the Levant from the Aegean beginning in thetwelfth century BC (Amos 9:7; Jer. 47:4).

Theperennial enmity between the Philistines and the Israelites precludedjoint maritime ventures of the sort shared by Israel and thePhoenicians, and the Bible does not describe Philistine maritimeactivities in any depth. Nevertheless, the seagoing nature of thePhilistines is reflected by the fact that their settlements remainedconfined to the coastal region. They never made a systematic attemptto take over the traditionally Israelite and Judahite highlands. Whenthey did venture into the Judean mountains, it was to assert amilitary and political presence among the agrarian Israelites andJudahites rather than to establish permanent settlements andPhilistine population centers. Twelfth-century BC reliefs at MedinetHabu (in the mortuary temple of RamessesIII) depict a navalbattle between the Sea Peoples and the Egyptians. The reliefs includepictures of Philistine ships and sailors.

Israeliteseafaring.One of the rare references to Israelite seafaring describes theDanites and the Asherites in connection with ships and harbors (Judg.5:17; see also Ezek. 27:19). Traditional Danite territory overlappedwith the area of Philistine settlement. Asherite territory overlappedsubstantially with Phoenician territory. It is possible that Judg.5:17 refers to the fact that the Danites and the Asherites worked inthe port cities serving Philistine and Phoenician shipping. Inanother passage, Zebulun is associated with ports (Gen. 49:13). It isnoteworthy that the Israelite coast between Jaffa and Dor (roughlybetween Philistia and Phoenicia) does not have an abundance ofnatural harbors. Later, Herod the Great would build the artificialharbor at Caesarea in the first century BC. The great expense of sucha project—including the construction of over 2,500 feet ofbreakwaters made of underwater concrete, mostly imported fromItaly—suggests the extent of the need for secure harbors inthis region.

Solomon’sfleet.The zenith of Israelite seafaring occurred during the reign ofSolomon. Solomon built a fleet of ships at “Ezion Geber, whichis near Elath in Edom, on the shore of the Red Sea” (1Kings9:26). The purpose of these ships was to bring back gold from Ophir(1Kings 9:28), possibly a location in the Arabian Peninsula, towhich a port on the Red Sea would have offered ready access. Thestory confirms the aforementioned dependence on the Phoenicians inthe area of seafaring: although the ships belonged to Solomon, “Hiram[the Phoenician king of Tyre] sent his men—sailors who knew thesea—to serve in the fleet with Solomon’s men”(1Kings 9:27). The timber for the ships would also have beenimported by Israel from Phoenicia (see 1Kings 9:11). Even atthe height of its power, Israel lacked the human resources to embarkon sea voyages independently of the Phoenicians.

Thesuccess of Solomon’s project, of course, depended not only onwarm relations with the Phoenicians but also on territorial controlof the historically Edomite lands between Judah and the Red Sea. Thisfavorable combination of conditions would come and go throughout thebiblical period, and with it, Israel’s modest presence on theseas. From the Phoenician point of view, cooperation with Israel wasan essential component of gaining access to a Red Sea port, and withit to the products of Arabia, the Horn of Africa, and India. ThePhoenicians, as expansive as their travel was in the Mediterranean,could never independently control the long overland route fromPhoenicia to the Red Sea, since it ran through the territory ofIsrael and Edom. Their best hope was a friendly and powerfulIsraelite ally. This explains the cordial relationship and why Hiramsent not only his sailors to serve Solomon but also craftsmen andsupplies for the construction of the temple (1Kings 5:10–12).Solomon and Hiram jointly operated “a fleet of trading ships”that would return to port every three years bringing “gold,silver, and ivory, and apes and baboons” (1Kings 10:22).

Jehoshaphat.In the mid-ninth century BC, King Jehoshaphat of Judah attempted torepeat Solomon’s feat of launching a fleet from Ezion Geber(1Kings 22:48–49; 2Chron. 20:35–37).According to both accounts, the ships were wrecked before they couldset sail. On several other points, however, the two versions of thestory disagree in ways that bear on questions of the political andeconomic conditions of Israelite seafaring.

Bythis time, Israel and Judah had split into separate kingdoms, withthe northern kingdom of Israel being geographically and politicallycloser to the Phoenicians. The powerful King Ahab of Israel,Jehoshaphat’s contemporary through much of his reign, marriedJezebel, the daughter of the Sidonian (Phoenician) king Ethbaal(1Kings 16:31). According to 1Kings, King Ahaziah ofIsrael (Ahab’s son) proposed to cooperate with Jehoshaphat bysending his own men on the voyage, much as Hiram had assisted Solomonin the previous century. Jehoshaphat rejected the suggestion,possibly indicating a bid for Judean autonomy in an era of northerndominance. According to 2Chronicles, however, Jehoshaphat didcooperate willingly with Ahaziah, and this was the reason that theships foundered in port: God punished the righteous Jehoshaphat fortoo close a relationship with his wicked northern counterpart. In1Kings 22:47 it is mentioned that at the time of Jehoshaphat’sventure there was no king in Edom. As noted, control of the overlandroute between Judah and the Red Sea was necessary for the success ofany voyage originating from Ezion Geber.

Howeverthe contradiction between 1Kings and 2Chroniclesregarding the involvement of Ahaziah is resolved, both versions ofthe story highlight the fact that the port at Ezion Geber commandedthe interest of the Judeans, the Israelites, and the Phoenicians, andits successful operation probably depended on the cooperation of allthree.

Shipsof Tarshish.Several biblical texts, including the stories of Solomon andJehoshaphat, mention “ships of Tarshish” (1Kings10:22 NIV mg.). In a number of contexts, such ships are associatedwith the transportation of metals and metal ores, including iron,lead, tin, gold, and silver (1Kings 10:22; Ezek. 27:12; Jer.10:9). The exact derivation of the term “ships of Tarshish”is uncertain, though it is clear from the descriptions of theircargoes that such ships could travel over long distances. As Ezekielobserves, “The ships of Tarshish serve as carriers for yourwares. You are filled with heavy cargo as you sail the sea. Youroarsmen take you out to the high seas” (Ezek. 27:25–26).

Inthe Table of Nations, Tarshish is listed as a descendant of Javan(Gen. 10:4), along with a number of other seafaring peoples of theeastern Mediterranean (“Javan” indicates the peoples ofthe Aegean and is linguistically equivalent to “Ionia”[see also Ezek. 27:12–22]). Some have suggested, then, that theships of Tarshish should be associated with Tarsus in southeasternTurkey, an area containing silver mines (also the birthplace of Paul[Acts 9:11]). Others have suggested the Phoenician colony ofTartessus in Spain, another metal-producing area. This locationfigures in the interpretation of the identification of thedestination of Jonah as Tarshish (Jon. 1:3): presumably, if he wereavoiding Nineveh and departing from Joppa, he would head towardSpain, in the exact opposite direction, rather than toward Tarsus inCilicia.

Inaddition to these two geographical options, some have attempted toexplain the expression “ships of Tarshish” as derivingfrom the Akkadian term for smelting or refining: perhaps the manyreferences to cargoes of metals indicate that the ships were used totransport metal ore to refining centers. Finally, one scholar hasproposed that the term is related to the Greek word tarsos,meaning “oar.”

Descriptionsof ships and seafaring.Ezekiel, in his lament concerning the Phoenician city of Tyre (Ezek.27), relates a number of details related to Phoenician seafaring. Thepicture largely confirms the descriptions of how Solomon built andmanned his fleet with the assistance of his Tyrian ally. Timber forthe construction of the ship came from Lebanon and Cyprus, amongother places (vv. 5–6). Sails were made from Egyptian linen(v.7), and as noted above, the oarsmen and sailors were fromthe Phoenician city-states (vv. 8–9). Ezekiel goes on to list alarge number of ports of call as well as a dazzling variety ofcargoes (vv. 12–24). Notably, Ezekiel has the Judahites and theIsraelites offering the products of their agrarian economy—“wheatfrom Minnith and confections, honey, olive oil and balm”(v.17)—thus filling out the picture of what theIsraelites gave in exchange for the precious metals and luxury itemsimported by their country from elsewhere.

In1999 archaeologists explored two eighth-century BC Phoenician shipsthat had sunk thirty miles west of Ashkelon. The ships, eachmeasuring about fifty feet in length, contained large cargoes of wineand were headed either for Egypt or for the Phoenician colonies inthe western Mediterranean.

Shipsand sailing figure prominently in the story of Jonah, who boarded aship bound for Tarshish (see discussion above) at Joppa on theMediterranean coast. In the story we see a number of features ofancient sea travel. Jonah paid a fare for his voyage (Jon. 1:3). Notonly the biblical author (see 1:4), but also the presumablynon-Israelite sailors, believed that the great storm was the doing ofa god, and that it could be calmed by appealing to that god(1:6)—although cargo was thrown overboard for good measure.When Paul was caught in a storm in the first century AD, the samestrategies were still in use (Acts 27:38). The religious habits ofancient sailors, particularly their reverence for the gods whocontrolled the stormy seas and thus held their lives in the balance,are illuminated by the discovery of stone anchors in several temples(presumably left by sailors as offerings), including at the portcities of Ugarit, Kition, and Byblos.

Psalm107:23–32 speaks of God’s care of sailors from anIsraelite perspective. In the psalm, those who “went out on thesea in ships,” the “merchants on the mighty waters”(i.e., the deep, open sea), witness firsthand the works of the God ofIsrael, which include both the raising and the quieting of the storm.This passage vividly expresses the terror of being caught in a stormand the great relief and gratitude felt by sailors who reached safehaven.

Noah’sArk

Accordingto the biblical account, Noah’s ark was 450 feet long, 75 feetwide, and 45 feet high (300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits [Gen.6:15]). It had three decks, a roof, and a window. By comparison, theship of Uta-napishti in the Epic of Gilgamesh is described as havingsix decks (and thus seven stories), edges of 180 feet (ten dozencubits) in each dimension, and occupying the space of an acre (arough approximation of the dimensions given). Both ships aredescribed as providing space for the builder’s family and everyliving creature. In the Atrahasis Epic, the boat is roofed, but itsdimensions are not given.

Becauseof the character of Gen. 6–8, it is inappropriate to drawconclusions from the story regarding shipbuilding in historicalantiquity. According to the specifications given in the biblicaltext, Noah’s ark would have been the largest wooden ship inhistory, equaled only by the United States schooner Wyoming,completed in 1909. While the overall length of the Wyoming was also450 feet, nearly 100 feet of length was accounted for in the fore andaft booms, so that the hull length was only 350 feet. Even with earlytwentieth-century shipbuilding technology, its extravagant lengthrendered the Wyoming unseaworthy, and the ship foundered in 1924. Thelargest documented wooden ships of antiquity include the GreekSyracusia(third century BC; 180 feet), described by Athenaeus; the Roman Isis(second century AD; 180 feet), described by Lucian; Caligula’s“Giant Ship” (first century AD; 341 feet), recovered inmodern times and possibly corresponding to a ship described by Plinythe Elder; and PtolemyIV’s Tessarakonteres (third centuryBC), reported by Plutarch to have been about 425 feet long. This lastship was not designed for cruising in open water.

NewTestament

Fishingin the Sea of Galilee. Severalof Jesus’ disciples worked as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee,and the Gospels document their use of small boats for fishing andtraveling across the sea. Fishing was done with nets thrown both fromboats and from the shore (Mark 1:16, 19). The boats used by fishermenon the Sea of Galilee may have been small enough to pull up onto thebeach (Luke 5:2), or to be nearly capsized by a large catch of fish(Luke 5:7) or by a violent storm (Mark 4:37). They were large enoughto transport several men and even to sleep in (Mark 4:38). Such boatscould be rowed or sailed; in Mark 6:48 the disciples had to resort torowing because of an unfavorable headwind. On one occasion, Jesusstood in a boat to preach to a crowd gathered on the shore (Mark4:1). The Sea of Galilee is about eight miles wide and thirteen mileslong. On several occasions, Jesus traveled by boat across the sea toavoid having to walk long distances around its circumference (e.g.,Matt. 9:1; 14:22; 15:39).

In1986 archaeologists recovered a fishing boat dating to the mid-firstcentury AD on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. The boat had beenscuttled near the shore and was preserved under mud. The “JesusBoat,” as it was dubbed, measures twenty-seven feet in lengthand has a beam seven and a half feet long. Numerous species of woodwere used in its construction and repairs throughout its useful life.While there is no evidence to link the boat to Jesus or hisdisciples, radiometric dating places it in the correct period, and itprovides a likely model of the type of boat portrayed in the Gospels.

Asecond source of information regarding ships and sailing in the NT isthe account in Acts of Paul’s many sea voyages. As in the caseof Jehoshaphat, the Tyrians, Jonah, and Jesus’ disciples, Paullearned firsthand the perils of seafaring in small wooden boats:among his many traumas, along with beatings and stonings, herecalled, “Three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and aday in the open sea” (2Cor. 11:25).

Paul’sjourneys.A survey of Paul’s sea travels on his four journeys gives someidea of the routes that could be taken by a paying traveler in theeastern Mediterranean and Aegean.

1.Paul’s first missionary journey included voyages from Seleuciain Syria to the port of Salamis in Cyprus (Acts 13:4) and from Cyprus(Paphos) to Perga on the southern coast of Asia Minor (13:13). Afterjourneying through the interior, Paul returned to Attalia, where heembarked for the return trip to Syria, presumably passing againthrough the port at Salamis (14:26).

2.The second missionary journey began not with a sea voyage but ratherwith a trek through the interior of Syria and Cilicia, illustratingthat although sea travel was by far a more rapid means of travel, theoverland routes were by no means impossible (Acts 15:39). Paul wouldrepeat this land route during his third journey (19:1). Sea travelwas fast, but when one had plenty of friends along the alternativeland route, a sea journey was considerably less enjoyable. It isduring the second journey that we have the first recorded accounts ofPaul sailing in the Aegean. From Troas in Asia Minor, he sailed theshort distance to Macedonia (16:11), putting in midway at the islandof Samothrace. Apparently, Paul traveled by sea down the coast fromBerea to Athens (17:14). At the conclusion of his second journey,Paul sailed from Corinth to Caesarea, with a stop at Ephesus(18:18–22). Not counting any intervening ports of call notmentioned in the text, this would be the longest single leg of seatravel so far mentioned.

3.The third missionary journey once more began with a long overlandtrip from Syria through Asia Minor; by this time, Paul had manyassociates along the way to visit. Again, he sailed in the Aegean,from Ephesus to Macedonia (Acts 20:1) and back (20:6). At one point,Paul opted to travel overland, from Troas to Assos, while hiscompanions sailed down the coast (20:13). Meeting up with them, hesailed on, hugging the coast of Asia Minor, then sailing south ofCyprus along an open-water route to Tyre. From Tyre, the ship againhugged the Palestinian coast, stopping in several ports before Pauldisembarked at Caesarea (21:7). Paul’s journeys illustrate thevariety of itineraries taken by ships. They were capable of sailingin deep water, but they would also hug the coast when there werereasons to make frequent stops.

4.Paul’s fourth journey, which he made in custody on his way to atrial before the emperor at Rome, was to be the most dangerous. Fromthe account in Acts we can glean a number of details of life at seain the first century AD. The ship bound for Italy was large, and itcarried 276 passengers and crew (Acts 27:6, 37), including soldiersand prisoners, at least one companion of a prisoner (Paul’sfriend Aristarchus [27:2]), a ship’s pilot, and the ship’sowner (27:11). Sailors used celestial navigation (27:20) and tooksoundings in shallow water (27:28). We see also that the ship’scourse could be determined by the direction of the prevailing winds:twice during the journey Paul’s ship was forced to sail to thelee of large islands (Cyprus and Crete)—a longer journey, butthe only option for a ship that was not rigged to sail close-hauled.

Whenextended periods of unfavorable weather were forecast, one option wassimply to put in at a port until conditions improved, preferably in aharbor that was in the lee of an island (Acts 27:12). We learnsomething of the measures that were taken in heavy weather, many ofwhich are still used in modern times: ropes were tied around the hullof the ship to prevent it from breaking up in rough seas (27:17), thelifeboat was brought onto the deck and made fast (27:17), sea anchorswere deployed to keep the bow of the ship oriented into the oncomingwaves (27:7), the rudder was lashed amidships (27:40), valuable cargoand gear were jettisoned (27:19, 38), and, as in the days of Jonah,sailors and passengers prayed for divine deliverance (27:29; see alsothe protective emblems in 28:11).

Whenall other means had been exhausted, a ship could be run aground on asandy beach (Acts 27:39), a measure that would have risked damage tothe boat but saved lives. In the case of Paul’s ship, thedecision to run aground ultimately resulted in the destruction of theship (27:41).

Metaphorsand illustrations.Several NT authors draw illustrations from the nautical world. Jameslikens the harmful power of evil speech to the rudder of a ship:although it is a small device, by it the pilot can control a greatship (James 3:4–5). Elsewhere, he compares the doubting of theunwise person to being lost at sea in a storm (James 1:6; cf. Eph.4:14). In 1Tim. 1:19 the loss of faith and good conscience islikened to a shipwreck. Hebrews 6:19 describes the assurance of God’sfaithfulness as an anchor for the soul.

OldTestament

Phoeniciansand Philistines. Asa people whose ancestral territory lay in the landlocked andtimber-poor highlands of Ephraim and Judah, the Israelites ofbiblical times never achieved prominence in seafaring orshipbuilding. Instead, they relied for their maritime enterprises onalliances with their coastal neighbors, particularly the Phoenicianstates to the north of Israel, who excelled in seafaring and hadaccess to the abundant timber forests of Lebanon. The Phoenicians(the Punics of classical antiquity) were famous in antiquity fortheir seafaring. In biblical times, they traded heavily betweenSyria-Palestine and Egypt and also sailed throughout theMediterranean, establishing colonies as far away as Tunisia(Carthage) and Spain (Cadiz).

Anotherseagoing people prominent in the OT were the Philistines, whose baseof power was to the west of Judah, along the Mediterranean coast. TheBible associates the Philistines with the five cities of Ashdod,Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza. The Philistines were among the SeaPeoples, who came to the Levant from the Aegean beginning in thetwelfth century BC (Amos 9:7; Jer. 47:4).

Theperennial enmity between the Philistines and the Israelites precludedjoint maritime ventures of the sort shared by Israel and thePhoenicians, and the Bible does not describe Philistine maritimeactivities in any depth. Nevertheless, the seagoing nature of thePhilistines is reflected by the fact that their settlements remainedconfined to the coastal region. They never made a systematic attemptto take over the traditionally Israelite and Judahite highlands. Whenthey did venture into the Judean mountains, it was to assert amilitary and political presence among the agrarian Israelites andJudahites rather than to establish permanent settlements andPhilistine population centers. Twelfth-century BC reliefs at MedinetHabu (in the mortuary temple of RamessesIII) depict a navalbattle between the Sea Peoples and the Egyptians. The reliefs includepictures of Philistine ships and sailors.

Israeliteseafaring.One of the rare references to Israelite seafaring describes theDanites and the Asherites in connection with ships and harbors (Judg.5:17; see also Ezek. 27:19). Traditional Danite territory overlappedwith the area of Philistine settlement. Asherite territory overlappedsubstantially with Phoenician territory. It is possible that Judg.5:17 refers to the fact that the Danites and the Asherites worked inthe port cities serving Philistine and Phoenician shipping. Inanother passage, Zebulun is associated with ports (Gen. 49:13). It isnoteworthy that the Israelite coast between Jaffa and Dor (roughlybetween Philistia and Phoenicia) does not have an abundance ofnatural harbors. Later, Herod the Great would build the artificialharbor at Caesarea in the first century BC. The great expense of sucha project—including the construction of over 2,500 feet ofbreakwaters made of underwater concrete, mostly imported fromItaly—suggests the extent of the need for secure harbors inthis region.

Solomon’sfleet.The zenith of Israelite seafaring occurred during the reign ofSolomon. Solomon built a fleet of ships at “Ezion Geber, whichis near Elath in Edom, on the shore of the Red Sea” (1Kings9:26). The purpose of these ships was to bring back gold from Ophir(1Kings 9:28), possibly a location in the Arabian Peninsula, towhich a port on the Red Sea would have offered ready access. Thestory confirms the aforementioned dependence on the Phoenicians inthe area of seafaring: although the ships belonged to Solomon, “Hiram[the Phoenician king of Tyre] sent his men—sailors who knew thesea—to serve in the fleet with Solomon’s men”(1Kings 9:27). The timber for the ships would also have beenimported by Israel from Phoenicia (see 1Kings 9:11). Even atthe height of its power, Israel lacked the human resources to embarkon sea voyages independently of the Phoenicians.

Thesuccess of Solomon’s project, of course, depended not only onwarm relations with the Phoenicians but also on territorial controlof the historically Edomite lands between Judah and the Red Sea. Thisfavorable combination of conditions would come and go throughout thebiblical period, and with it, Israel’s modest presence on theseas. From the Phoenician point of view, cooperation with Israel wasan essential component of gaining access to a Red Sea port, and withit to the products of Arabia, the Horn of Africa, and India. ThePhoenicians, as expansive as their travel was in the Mediterranean,could never independently control the long overland route fromPhoenicia to the Red Sea, since it ran through the territory ofIsrael and Edom. Their best hope was a friendly and powerfulIsraelite ally. This explains the cordial relationship and why Hiramsent not only his sailors to serve Solomon but also craftsmen andsupplies for the construction of the temple (1Kings 5:10–12).Solomon and Hiram jointly operated “a fleet of trading ships”that would return to port every three years bringing “gold,silver, and ivory, and apes and baboons” (1Kings 10:22).

Jehoshaphat.In the mid-ninth century BC, King Jehoshaphat of Judah attempted torepeat Solomon’s feat of launching a fleet from Ezion Geber(1Kings 22:48–49; 2Chron. 20:35–37).According to both accounts, the ships were wrecked before they couldset sail. On several other points, however, the two versions of thestory disagree in ways that bear on questions of the political andeconomic conditions of Israelite seafaring.

Bythis time, Israel and Judah had split into separate kingdoms, withthe northern kingdom of Israel being geographically and politicallycloser to the Phoenicians. The powerful King Ahab of Israel,Jehoshaphat’s contemporary through much of his reign, marriedJezebel, the daughter of the Sidonian (Phoenician) king Ethbaal(1Kings 16:31). According to 1Kings, King Ahaziah ofIsrael (Ahab’s son) proposed to cooperate with Jehoshaphat bysending his own men on the voyage, much as Hiram had assisted Solomonin the previous century. Jehoshaphat rejected the suggestion,possibly indicating a bid for Judean autonomy in an era of northerndominance. According to 2Chronicles, however, Jehoshaphat didcooperate willingly with Ahaziah, and this was the reason that theships foundered in port: God punished the righteous Jehoshaphat fortoo close a relationship with his wicked northern counterpart. In1Kings 22:47 it is mentioned that at the time of Jehoshaphat’sventure there was no king in Edom. As noted, control of the overlandroute between Judah and the Red Sea was necessary for the success ofany voyage originating from Ezion Geber.

Howeverthe contradiction between 1Kings and 2Chroniclesregarding the involvement of Ahaziah is resolved, both versions ofthe story highlight the fact that the port at Ezion Geber commandedthe interest of the Judeans, the Israelites, and the Phoenicians, andits successful operation probably depended on the cooperation of allthree.

Shipsof Tarshish.Several biblical texts, including the stories of Solomon andJehoshaphat, mention “ships of Tarshish” (1Kings10:22 NIV mg.). In a number of contexts, such ships are associatedwith the transportation of metals and metal ores, including iron,lead, tin, gold, and silver (1Kings 10:22; Ezek. 27:12; Jer.10:9). The exact derivation of the term “ships of Tarshish”is uncertain, though it is clear from the descriptions of theircargoes that such ships could travel over long distances. As Ezekielobserves, “The ships of Tarshish serve as carriers for yourwares. You are filled with heavy cargo as you sail the sea. Youroarsmen take you out to the high seas” (Ezek. 27:25–26).

Inthe Table of Nations, Tarshish is listed as a descendant of Javan(Gen. 10:4), along with a number of other seafaring peoples of theeastern Mediterranean (“Javan” indicates the peoples ofthe Aegean and is linguistically equivalent to “Ionia”[see also Ezek. 27:12–22]). Some have suggested, then, that theships of Tarshish should be associated with Tarsus in southeasternTurkey, an area containing silver mines (also the birthplace of Paul[Acts 9:11]). Others have suggested the Phoenician colony ofTartessus in Spain, another metal-producing area. This locationfigures in the interpretation of the identification of thedestination of Jonah as Tarshish (Jon. 1:3): presumably, if he wereavoiding Nineveh and departing from Joppa, he would head towardSpain, in the exact opposite direction, rather than toward Tarsus inCilicia.

Inaddition to these two geographical options, some have attempted toexplain the expression “ships of Tarshish” as derivingfrom the Akkadian term for smelting or refining: perhaps the manyreferences to cargoes of metals indicate that the ships were used totransport metal ore to refining centers. Finally, one scholar hasproposed that the term is related to the Greek word tarsos,meaning “oar.”

Descriptionsof ships and seafaring.Ezekiel, in his lament concerning the Phoenician city of Tyre (Ezek.27), relates a number of details related to Phoenician seafaring. Thepicture largely confirms the descriptions of how Solomon built andmanned his fleet with the assistance of his Tyrian ally. Timber forthe construction of the ship came from Lebanon and Cyprus, amongother places (vv. 5–6). Sails were made from Egyptian linen(v.7), and as noted above, the oarsmen and sailors were fromthe Phoenician city-states (vv. 8–9). Ezekiel goes on to list alarge number of ports of call as well as a dazzling variety ofcargoes (vv. 12–24). Notably, Ezekiel has the Judahites and theIsraelites offering the products of their agrarian economy—“wheatfrom Minnith and confections, honey, olive oil and balm”(v.17)—thus filling out the picture of what theIsraelites gave in exchange for the precious metals and luxury itemsimported by their country from elsewhere.

In1999 archaeologists explored two eighth-century BC Phoenician shipsthat had sunk thirty miles west of Ashkelon. The ships, eachmeasuring about fifty feet in length, contained large cargoes of wineand were headed either for Egypt or for the Phoenician colonies inthe western Mediterranean.

Shipsand sailing figure prominently in the story of Jonah, who boarded aship bound for Tarshish (see discussion above) at Joppa on theMediterranean coast. In the story we see a number of features ofancient sea travel. Jonah paid a fare for his voyage (Jon. 1:3). Notonly the biblical author (see 1:4), but also the presumablynon-Israelite sailors, believed that the great storm was the doing ofa god, and that it could be calmed by appealing to that god(1:6)—although cargo was thrown overboard for good measure.When Paul was caught in a storm in the first century AD, the samestrategies were still in use (Acts 27:38). The religious habits ofancient sailors, particularly their reverence for the gods whocontrolled the stormy seas and thus held their lives in the balance,are illuminated by the discovery of stone anchors in several temples(presumably left by sailors as offerings), including at the portcities of Ugarit, Kition, and Byblos.

Psalm107:23–32 speaks of God’s care of sailors from anIsraelite perspective. In the psalm, those who “went out on thesea in ships,” the “merchants on the mighty waters”(i.e., the deep, open sea), witness firsthand the works of the God ofIsrael, which include both the raising and the quieting of the storm.This passage vividly expresses the terror of being caught in a stormand the great relief and gratitude felt by sailors who reached safehaven.

Noah’sArk

Accordingto the biblical account, Noah’s ark was 450 feet long, 75 feetwide, and 45 feet high (300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits [Gen.6:15]). It had three decks, a roof, and a window. By comparison, theship of Uta-napishti in the Epic of Gilgamesh is described as havingsix decks (and thus seven stories), edges of 180 feet (ten dozencubits) in each dimension, and occupying the space of an acre (arough approximation of the dimensions given). Both ships aredescribed as providing space for the builder’s family and everyliving creature. In the Atrahasis Epic, the boat is roofed, but itsdimensions are not given.

Becauseof the character of Gen. 6–8, it is inappropriate to drawconclusions from the story regarding shipbuilding in historicalantiquity. According to the specifications given in the biblicaltext, Noah’s ark would have been the largest wooden ship inhistory, equaled only by the United States schooner Wyoming,completed in 1909. While the overall length of the Wyoming was also450 feet, nearly 100 feet of length was accounted for in the fore andaft booms, so that the hull length was only 350 feet. Even with earlytwentieth-century shipbuilding technology, its extravagant lengthrendered the Wyoming unseaworthy, and the ship foundered in 1924. Thelargest documented wooden ships of antiquity include the GreekSyracusia(third century BC; 180 feet), described by Athenaeus; the Roman Isis(second century AD; 180 feet), described by Lucian; Caligula’s“Giant Ship” (first century AD; 341 feet), recovered inmodern times and possibly corresponding to a ship described by Plinythe Elder; and PtolemyIV’s Tessarakonteres (third centuryBC), reported by Plutarch to have been about 425 feet long. This lastship was not designed for cruising in open water.

NewTestament

Fishingin the Sea of Galilee. Severalof Jesus’ disciples worked as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee,and the Gospels document their use of small boats for fishing andtraveling across the sea. Fishing was done with nets thrown both fromboats and from the shore (Mark 1:16, 19). The boats used by fishermenon the Sea of Galilee may have been small enough to pull up onto thebeach (Luke 5:2), or to be nearly capsized by a large catch of fish(Luke 5:7) or by a violent storm (Mark 4:37). They were large enoughto transport several men and even to sleep in (Mark 4:38). Such boatscould be rowed or sailed; in Mark 6:48 the disciples had to resort torowing because of an unfavorable headwind. On one occasion, Jesusstood in a boat to preach to a crowd gathered on the shore (Mark4:1). The Sea of Galilee is about eight miles wide and thirteen mileslong. On several occasions, Jesus traveled by boat across the sea toavoid having to walk long distances around its circumference (e.g.,Matt. 9:1; 14:22; 15:39).

In1986 archaeologists recovered a fishing boat dating to the mid-firstcentury AD on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. The boat had beenscuttled near the shore and was preserved under mud. The “JesusBoat,” as it was dubbed, measures twenty-seven feet in lengthand has a beam seven and a half feet long. Numerous species of woodwere used in its construction and repairs throughout its useful life.While there is no evidence to link the boat to Jesus or hisdisciples, radiometric dating places it in the correct period, and itprovides a likely model of the type of boat portrayed in the Gospels.

Asecond source of information regarding ships and sailing in the NT isthe account in Acts of Paul’s many sea voyages. As in the caseof Jehoshaphat, the Tyrians, Jonah, and Jesus’ disciples, Paullearned firsthand the perils of seafaring in small wooden boats:among his many traumas, along with beatings and stonings, herecalled, “Three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and aday in the open sea” (2Cor. 11:25).

Paul’sjourneys.A survey of Paul’s sea travels on his four journeys gives someidea of the routes that could be taken by a paying traveler in theeastern Mediterranean and Aegean.

1.Paul’s first missionary journey included voyages from Seleuciain Syria to the port of Salamis in Cyprus (Acts 13:4) and from Cyprus(Paphos) to Perga on the southern coast of Asia Minor (13:13). Afterjourneying through the interior, Paul returned to Attalia, where heembarked for the return trip to Syria, presumably passing againthrough the port at Salamis (14:26).

2.The second missionary journey began not with a sea voyage but ratherwith a trek through the interior of Syria and Cilicia, illustratingthat although sea travel was by far a more rapid means of travel, theoverland routes were by no means impossible (Acts 15:39). Paul wouldrepeat this land route during his third journey (19:1). Sea travelwas fast, but when one had plenty of friends along the alternativeland route, a sea journey was considerably less enjoyable. It isduring the second journey that we have the first recorded accounts ofPaul sailing in the Aegean. From Troas in Asia Minor, he sailed theshort distance to Macedonia (16:11), putting in midway at the islandof Samothrace. Apparently, Paul traveled by sea down the coast fromBerea to Athens (17:14). At the conclusion of his second journey,Paul sailed from Corinth to Caesarea, with a stop at Ephesus(18:18–22). Not counting any intervening ports of call notmentioned in the text, this would be the longest single leg of seatravel so far mentioned.

3.The third missionary journey once more began with a long overlandtrip from Syria through Asia Minor; by this time, Paul had manyassociates along the way to visit. Again, he sailed in the Aegean,from Ephesus to Macedonia (Acts 20:1) and back (20:6). At one point,Paul opted to travel overland, from Troas to Assos, while hiscompanions sailed down the coast (20:13). Meeting up with them, hesailed on, hugging the coast of Asia Minor, then sailing south ofCyprus along an open-water route to Tyre. From Tyre, the ship againhugged the Palestinian coast, stopping in several ports before Pauldisembarked at Caesarea (21:7). Paul’s journeys illustrate thevariety of itineraries taken by ships. They were capable of sailingin deep water, but they would also hug the coast when there werereasons to make frequent stops.

4.Paul’s fourth journey, which he made in custody on his way to atrial before the emperor at Rome, was to be the most dangerous. Fromthe account in Acts we can glean a number of details of life at seain the first century AD. The ship bound for Italy was large, and itcarried 276 passengers and crew (Acts 27:6, 37), including soldiersand prisoners, at least one companion of a prisoner (Paul’sfriend Aristarchus [27:2]), a ship’s pilot, and the ship’sowner (27:11). Sailors used celestial navigation (27:20) and tooksoundings in shallow water (27:28). We see also that the ship’scourse could be determined by the direction of the prevailing winds:twice during the journey Paul’s ship was forced to sail to thelee of large islands (Cyprus and Crete)—a longer journey, butthe only option for a ship that was not rigged to sail close-hauled.

Whenextended periods of unfavorable weather were forecast, one option wassimply to put in at a port until conditions improved, preferably in aharbor that was in the lee of an island (Acts 27:12). We learnsomething of the measures that were taken in heavy weather, many ofwhich are still used in modern times: ropes were tied around the hullof the ship to prevent it from breaking up in rough seas (27:17), thelifeboat was brought onto the deck and made fast (27:17), sea anchorswere deployed to keep the bow of the ship oriented into the oncomingwaves (27:7), the rudder was lashed amidships (27:40), valuable cargoand gear were jettisoned (27:19, 38), and, as in the days of Jonah,sailors and passengers prayed for divine deliverance (27:29; see alsothe protective emblems in 28:11).

Whenall other means had been exhausted, a ship could be run aground on asandy beach (Acts 27:39), a measure that would have risked damage tothe boat but saved lives. In the case of Paul’s ship, thedecision to run aground ultimately resulted in the destruction of theship (27:41).

Metaphorsand illustrations.Several NT authors draw illustrations from the nautical world. Jameslikens the harmful power of evil speech to the rudder of a ship:although it is a small device, by it the pilot can control a greatship (James 3:4–5). Elsewhere, he compares the doubting of theunwise person to being lost at sea in a storm (James 1:6; cf. Eph.4:14). In 1Tim. 1:19 the loss of faith and good conscience islikened to a shipwreck. Hebrews 6:19 describes the assurance of God’sfaithfulness as an anchor for the soul.

OldTestament

Phoeniciansand Philistines. Asa people whose ancestral territory lay in the landlocked andtimber-poor highlands of Ephraim and Judah, the Israelites ofbiblical times never achieved prominence in seafaring orshipbuilding. Instead, they relied for their maritime enterprises onalliances with their coastal neighbors, particularly the Phoenicianstates to the north of Israel, who excelled in seafaring and hadaccess to the abundant timber forests of Lebanon. The Phoenicians(the Punics of classical antiquity) were famous in antiquity fortheir seafaring. In biblical times, they traded heavily betweenSyria-Palestine and Egypt and also sailed throughout theMediterranean, establishing colonies as far away as Tunisia(Carthage) and Spain (Cadiz).

Anotherseagoing people prominent in the OT were the Philistines, whose baseof power was to the west of Judah, along the Mediterranean coast. TheBible associates the Philistines with the five cities of Ashdod,Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza. The Philistines were among the SeaPeoples, who came to the Levant from the Aegean beginning in thetwelfth century BC (Amos 9:7; Jer. 47:4).

Theperennial enmity between the Philistines and the Israelites precludedjoint maritime ventures of the sort shared by Israel and thePhoenicians, and the Bible does not describe Philistine maritimeactivities in any depth. Nevertheless, the seagoing nature of thePhilistines is reflected by the fact that their settlements remainedconfined to the coastal region. They never made a systematic attemptto take over the traditionally Israelite and Judahite highlands. Whenthey did venture into the Judean mountains, it was to assert amilitary and political presence among the agrarian Israelites andJudahites rather than to establish permanent settlements andPhilistine population centers. Twelfth-century BC reliefs at MedinetHabu (in the mortuary temple of RamessesIII) depict a navalbattle between the Sea Peoples and the Egyptians. The reliefs includepictures of Philistine ships and sailors.

Israeliteseafaring.One of the rare references to Israelite seafaring describes theDanites and the Asherites in connection with ships and harbors (Judg.5:17; see also Ezek. 27:19). Traditional Danite territory overlappedwith the area of Philistine settlement. Asherite territory overlappedsubstantially with Phoenician territory. It is possible that Judg.5:17 refers to the fact that the Danites and the Asherites worked inthe port cities serving Philistine and Phoenician shipping. Inanother passage, Zebulun is associated with ports (Gen. 49:13). It isnoteworthy that the Israelite coast between Jaffa and Dor (roughlybetween Philistia and Phoenicia) does not have an abundance ofnatural harbors. Later, Herod the Great would build the artificialharbor at Caesarea in the first century BC. The great expense of sucha project—including the construction of over 2,500 feet ofbreakwaters made of underwater concrete, mostly imported fromItaly—suggests the extent of the need for secure harbors inthis region.

Solomon’sfleet.The zenith of Israelite seafaring occurred during the reign ofSolomon. Solomon built a fleet of ships at “Ezion Geber, whichis near Elath in Edom, on the shore of the Red Sea” (1Kings9:26). The purpose of these ships was to bring back gold from Ophir(1Kings 9:28), possibly a location in the Arabian Peninsula, towhich a port on the Red Sea would have offered ready access. Thestory confirms the aforementioned dependence on the Phoenicians inthe area of seafaring: although the ships belonged to Solomon, “Hiram[the Phoenician king of Tyre] sent his men—sailors who knew thesea—to serve in the fleet with Solomon’s men”(1Kings 9:27). The timber for the ships would also have beenimported by Israel from Phoenicia (see 1Kings 9:11). Even atthe height of its power, Israel lacked the human resources to embarkon sea voyages independently of the Phoenicians.

Thesuccess of Solomon’s project, of course, depended not only onwarm relations with the Phoenicians but also on territorial controlof the historically Edomite lands between Judah and the Red Sea. Thisfavorable combination of conditions would come and go throughout thebiblical period, and with it, Israel’s modest presence on theseas. From the Phoenician point of view, cooperation with Israel wasan essential component of gaining access to a Red Sea port, and withit to the products of Arabia, the Horn of Africa, and India. ThePhoenicians, as expansive as their travel was in the Mediterranean,could never independently control the long overland route fromPhoenicia to the Red Sea, since it ran through the territory ofIsrael and Edom. Their best hope was a friendly and powerfulIsraelite ally. This explains the cordial relationship and why Hiramsent not only his sailors to serve Solomon but also craftsmen andsupplies for the construction of the temple (1Kings 5:10–12).Solomon and Hiram jointly operated “a fleet of trading ships”that would return to port every three years bringing “gold,silver, and ivory, and apes and baboons” (1Kings 10:22).

Jehoshaphat.In the mid-ninth century BC, King Jehoshaphat of Judah attempted torepeat Solomon’s feat of launching a fleet from Ezion Geber(1Kings 22:48–49; 2Chron. 20:35–37).According to both accounts, the ships were wrecked before they couldset sail. On several other points, however, the two versions of thestory disagree in ways that bear on questions of the political andeconomic conditions of Israelite seafaring.

Bythis time, Israel and Judah had split into separate kingdoms, withthe northern kingdom of Israel being geographically and politicallycloser to the Phoenicians. The powerful King Ahab of Israel,Jehoshaphat’s contemporary through much of his reign, marriedJezebel, the daughter of the Sidonian (Phoenician) king Ethbaal(1Kings 16:31). According to 1Kings, King Ahaziah ofIsrael (Ahab’s son) proposed to cooperate with Jehoshaphat bysending his own men on the voyage, much as Hiram had assisted Solomonin the previous century. Jehoshaphat rejected the suggestion,possibly indicating a bid for Judean autonomy in an era of northerndominance. According to 2Chronicles, however, Jehoshaphat didcooperate willingly with Ahaziah, and this was the reason that theships foundered in port: God punished the righteous Jehoshaphat fortoo close a relationship with his wicked northern counterpart. In1Kings 22:47 it is mentioned that at the time of Jehoshaphat’sventure there was no king in Edom. As noted, control of the overlandroute between Judah and the Red Sea was necessary for the success ofany voyage originating from Ezion Geber.

Howeverthe contradiction between 1Kings and 2Chroniclesregarding the involvement of Ahaziah is resolved, both versions ofthe story highlight the fact that the port at Ezion Geber commandedthe interest of the Judeans, the Israelites, and the Phoenicians, andits successful operation probably depended on the cooperation of allthree.

Shipsof Tarshish.Several biblical texts, including the stories of Solomon andJehoshaphat, mention “ships of Tarshish” (1Kings10:22 NIV mg.). In a number of contexts, such ships are associatedwith the transportation of metals and metal ores, including iron,lead, tin, gold, and silver (1Kings 10:22; Ezek. 27:12; Jer.10:9). The exact derivation of the term “ships of Tarshish”is uncertain, though it is clear from the descriptions of theircargoes that such ships could travel over long distances. As Ezekielobserves, “The ships of Tarshish serve as carriers for yourwares. You are filled with heavy cargo as you sail the sea. Youroarsmen take you out to the high seas” (Ezek. 27:25–26).

Inthe Table of Nations, Tarshish is listed as a descendant of Javan(Gen. 10:4), along with a number of other seafaring peoples of theeastern Mediterranean (“Javan” indicates the peoples ofthe Aegean and is linguistically equivalent to “Ionia”[see also Ezek. 27:12–22]). Some have suggested, then, that theships of Tarshish should be associated with Tarsus in southeasternTurkey, an area containing silver mines (also the birthplace of Paul[Acts 9:11]). Others have suggested the Phoenician colony ofTartessus in Spain, another metal-producing area. This locationfigures in the interpretation of the identification of thedestination of Jonah as Tarshish (Jon. 1:3): presumably, if he wereavoiding Nineveh and departing from Joppa, he would head towardSpain, in the exact opposite direction, rather than toward Tarsus inCilicia.

Inaddition to these two geographical options, some have attempted toexplain the expression “ships of Tarshish” as derivingfrom the Akkadian term for smelting or refining: perhaps the manyreferences to cargoes of metals indicate that the ships were used totransport metal ore to refining centers. Finally, one scholar hasproposed that the term is related to the Greek word tarsos,meaning “oar.”

Descriptionsof ships and seafaring.Ezekiel, in his lament concerning the Phoenician city of Tyre (Ezek.27), relates a number of details related to Phoenician seafaring. Thepicture largely confirms the descriptions of how Solomon built andmanned his fleet with the assistance of his Tyrian ally. Timber forthe construction of the ship came from Lebanon and Cyprus, amongother places (vv. 5–6). Sails were made from Egyptian linen(v.7), and as noted above, the oarsmen and sailors were fromthe Phoenician city-states (vv. 8–9). Ezekiel goes on to list alarge number of ports of call as well as a dazzling variety ofcargoes (vv. 12–24). Notably, Ezekiel has the Judahites and theIsraelites offering the products of their agrarian economy—“wheatfrom Minnith and confections, honey, olive oil and balm”(v.17)—thus filling out the picture of what theIsraelites gave in exchange for the precious metals and luxury itemsimported by their country from elsewhere.

In1999 archaeologists explored two eighth-century BC Phoenician shipsthat had sunk thirty miles west of Ashkelon. The ships, eachmeasuring about fifty feet in length, contained large cargoes of wineand were headed either for Egypt or for the Phoenician colonies inthe western Mediterranean.

Shipsand sailing figure prominently in the story of Jonah, who boarded aship bound for Tarshish (see discussion above) at Joppa on theMediterranean coast. In the story we see a number of features ofancient sea travel. Jonah paid a fare for his voyage (Jon. 1:3). Notonly the biblical author (see 1:4), but also the presumablynon-Israelite sailors, believed that the great storm was the doing ofa god, and that it could be calmed by appealing to that god(1:6)—although cargo was thrown overboard for good measure.When Paul was caught in a storm in the first century AD, the samestrategies were still in use (Acts 27:38). The religious habits ofancient sailors, particularly their reverence for the gods whocontrolled the stormy seas and thus held their lives in the balance,are illuminated by the discovery of stone anchors in several temples(presumably left by sailors as offerings), including at the portcities of Ugarit, Kition, and Byblos.

Psalm107:23–32 speaks of God’s care of sailors from anIsraelite perspective. In the psalm, those who “went out on thesea in ships,” the “merchants on the mighty waters”(i.e., the deep, open sea), witness firsthand the works of the God ofIsrael, which include both the raising and the quieting of the storm.This passage vividly expresses the terror of being caught in a stormand the great relief and gratitude felt by sailors who reached safehaven.

Noah’sArk

Accordingto the biblical account, Noah’s ark was 450 feet long, 75 feetwide, and 45 feet high (300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits [Gen.6:15]). It had three decks, a roof, and a window. By comparison, theship of Uta-napishti in the Epic of Gilgamesh is described as havingsix decks (and thus seven stories), edges of 180 feet (ten dozencubits) in each dimension, and occupying the space of an acre (arough approximation of the dimensions given). Both ships aredescribed as providing space for the builder’s family and everyliving creature. In the Atrahasis Epic, the boat is roofed, but itsdimensions are not given.

Becauseof the character of Gen. 6–8, it is inappropriate to drawconclusions from the story regarding shipbuilding in historicalantiquity. According to the specifications given in the biblicaltext, Noah’s ark would have been the largest wooden ship inhistory, equaled only by the United States schooner Wyoming,completed in 1909. While the overall length of the Wyoming was also450 feet, nearly 100 feet of length was accounted for in the fore andaft booms, so that the hull length was only 350 feet. Even with earlytwentieth-century shipbuilding technology, its extravagant lengthrendered the Wyoming unseaworthy, and the ship foundered in 1924. Thelargest documented wooden ships of antiquity include the GreekSyracusia(third century BC; 180 feet), described by Athenaeus; the Roman Isis(second century AD; 180 feet), described by Lucian; Caligula’s“Giant Ship” (first century AD; 341 feet), recovered inmodern times and possibly corresponding to a ship described by Plinythe Elder; and PtolemyIV’s Tessarakonteres (third centuryBC), reported by Plutarch to have been about 425 feet long. This lastship was not designed for cruising in open water.

NewTestament

Fishingin the Sea of Galilee. Severalof Jesus’ disciples worked as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee,and the Gospels document their use of small boats for fishing andtraveling across the sea. Fishing was done with nets thrown both fromboats and from the shore (Mark 1:16, 19). The boats used by fishermenon the Sea of Galilee may have been small enough to pull up onto thebeach (Luke 5:2), or to be nearly capsized by a large catch of fish(Luke 5:7) or by a violent storm (Mark 4:37). They were large enoughto transport several men and even to sleep in (Mark 4:38). Such boatscould be rowed or sailed; in Mark 6:48 the disciples had to resort torowing because of an unfavorable headwind. On one occasion, Jesusstood in a boat to preach to a crowd gathered on the shore (Mark4:1). The Sea of Galilee is about eight miles wide and thirteen mileslong. On several occasions, Jesus traveled by boat across the sea toavoid having to walk long distances around its circumference (e.g.,Matt. 9:1; 14:22; 15:39).

In1986 archaeologists recovered a fishing boat dating to the mid-firstcentury AD on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. The boat had beenscuttled near the shore and was preserved under mud. The “JesusBoat,” as it was dubbed, measures twenty-seven feet in lengthand has a beam seven and a half feet long. Numerous species of woodwere used in its construction and repairs throughout its useful life.While there is no evidence to link the boat to Jesus or hisdisciples, radiometric dating places it in the correct period, and itprovides a likely model of the type of boat portrayed in the Gospels.

Asecond source of information regarding ships and sailing in the NT isthe account in Acts of Paul’s many sea voyages. As in the caseof Jehoshaphat, the Tyrians, Jonah, and Jesus’ disciples, Paullearned firsthand the perils of seafaring in small wooden boats:among his many traumas, along with beatings and stonings, herecalled, “Three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and aday in the open sea” (2Cor. 11:25).

Paul’sjourneys.A survey of Paul’s sea travels on his four journeys gives someidea of the routes that could be taken by a paying traveler in theeastern Mediterranean and Aegean.

1.Paul’s first missionary journey included voyages from Seleuciain Syria to the port of Salamis in Cyprus (Acts 13:4) and from Cyprus(Paphos) to Perga on the southern coast of Asia Minor (13:13). Afterjourneying through the interior, Paul returned to Attalia, where heembarked for the return trip to Syria, presumably passing againthrough the port at Salamis (14:26).

2.The second missionary journey began not with a sea voyage but ratherwith a trek through the interior of Syria and Cilicia, illustratingthat although sea travel was by far a more rapid means of travel, theoverland routes were by no means impossible (Acts 15:39). Paul wouldrepeat this land route during his third journey (19:1). Sea travelwas fast, but when one had plenty of friends along the alternativeland route, a sea journey was considerably less enjoyable. It isduring the second journey that we have the first recorded accounts ofPaul sailing in the Aegean. From Troas in Asia Minor, he sailed theshort distance to Macedonia (16:11), putting in midway at the islandof Samothrace. Apparently, Paul traveled by sea down the coast fromBerea to Athens (17:14). At the conclusion of his second journey,Paul sailed from Corinth to Caesarea, with a stop at Ephesus(18:18–22). Not counting any intervening ports of call notmentioned in the text, this would be the longest single leg of seatravel so far mentioned.

3.The third missionary journey once more began with a long overlandtrip from Syria through Asia Minor; by this time, Paul had manyassociates along the way to visit. Again, he sailed in the Aegean,from Ephesus to Macedonia (Acts 20:1) and back (20:6). At one point,Paul opted to travel overland, from Troas to Assos, while hiscompanions sailed down the coast (20:13). Meeting up with them, hesailed on, hugging the coast of Asia Minor, then sailing south ofCyprus along an open-water route to Tyre. From Tyre, the ship againhugged the Palestinian coast, stopping in several ports before Pauldisembarked at Caesarea (21:7). Paul’s journeys illustrate thevariety of itineraries taken by ships. They were capable of sailingin deep water, but they would also hug the coast when there werereasons to make frequent stops.

4.Paul’s fourth journey, which he made in custody on his way to atrial before the emperor at Rome, was to be the most dangerous. Fromthe account in Acts we can glean a number of details of life at seain the first century AD. The ship bound for Italy was large, and itcarried 276 passengers and crew (Acts 27:6, 37), including soldiersand prisoners, at least one companion of a prisoner (Paul’sfriend Aristarchus [27:2]), a ship’s pilot, and the ship’sowner (27:11). Sailors used celestial navigation (27:20) and tooksoundings in shallow water (27:28). We see also that the ship’scourse could be determined by the direction of the prevailing winds:twice during the journey Paul’s ship was forced to sail to thelee of large islands (Cyprus and Crete)—a longer journey, butthe only option for a ship that was not rigged to sail close-hauled.

Whenextended periods of unfavorable weather were forecast, one option wassimply to put in at a port until conditions improved, preferably in aharbor that was in the lee of an island (Acts 27:12). We learnsomething of the measures that were taken in heavy weather, many ofwhich are still used in modern times: ropes were tied around the hullof the ship to prevent it from breaking up in rough seas (27:17), thelifeboat was brought onto the deck and made fast (27:17), sea anchorswere deployed to keep the bow of the ship oriented into the oncomingwaves (27:7), the rudder was lashed amidships (27:40), valuable cargoand gear were jettisoned (27:19, 38), and, as in the days of Jonah,sailors and passengers prayed for divine deliverance (27:29; see alsothe protective emblems in 28:11).

Whenall other means had been exhausted, a ship could be run aground on asandy beach (Acts 27:39), a measure that would have risked damage tothe boat but saved lives. In the case of Paul’s ship, thedecision to run aground ultimately resulted in the destruction of theship (27:41).

Metaphorsand illustrations.Several NT authors draw illustrations from the nautical world. Jameslikens the harmful power of evil speech to the rudder of a ship:although it is a small device, by it the pilot can control a greatship (James 3:4–5). Elsewhere, he compares the doubting of theunwise person to being lost at sea in a storm (James 1:6; cf. Eph.4:14). In 1Tim. 1:19 the loss of faith and good conscience islikened to a shipwreck. Hebrews 6:19 describes the assurance of God’sfaithfulness as an anchor for the soul.

OldTestament

Phoeniciansand Philistines. Asa people whose ancestral territory lay in the landlocked andtimber-poor highlands of Ephraim and Judah, the Israelites ofbiblical times never achieved prominence in seafaring orshipbuilding. Instead, they relied for their maritime enterprises onalliances with their coastal neighbors, particularly the Phoenicianstates to the north of Israel, who excelled in seafaring and hadaccess to the abundant timber forests of Lebanon. The Phoenicians(the Punics of classical antiquity) were famous in antiquity fortheir seafaring. In biblical times, they traded heavily betweenSyria-Palestine and Egypt and also sailed throughout theMediterranean, establishing colonies as far away as Tunisia(Carthage) and Spain (Cadiz).

Anotherseagoing people prominent in the OT were the Philistines, whose baseof power was to the west of Judah, along the Mediterranean coast. TheBible associates the Philistines with the five cities of Ashdod,Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza. The Philistines were among the SeaPeoples, who came to the Levant from the Aegean beginning in thetwelfth century BC (Amos 9:7; Jer. 47:4).

Theperennial enmity between the Philistines and the Israelites precludedjoint maritime ventures of the sort shared by Israel and thePhoenicians, and the Bible does not describe Philistine maritimeactivities in any depth. Nevertheless, the seagoing nature of thePhilistines is reflected by the fact that their settlements remainedconfined to the coastal region. They never made a systematic attemptto take over the traditionally Israelite and Judahite highlands. Whenthey did venture into the Judean mountains, it was to assert amilitary and political presence among the agrarian Israelites andJudahites rather than to establish permanent settlements andPhilistine population centers. Twelfth-century BC reliefs at MedinetHabu (in the mortuary temple of RamessesIII) depict a navalbattle between the Sea Peoples and the Egyptians. The reliefs includepictures of Philistine ships and sailors.

Israeliteseafaring.One of the rare references to Israelite seafaring describes theDanites and the Asherites in connection with ships and harbors (Judg.5:17; see also Ezek. 27:19). Traditional Danite territory overlappedwith the area of Philistine settlement. Asherite territory overlappedsubstantially with Phoenician territory. It is possible that Judg.5:17 refers to the fact that the Danites and the Asherites worked inthe port cities serving Philistine and Phoenician shipping. Inanother passage, Zebulun is associated with ports (Gen. 49:13). It isnoteworthy that the Israelite coast between Jaffa and Dor (roughlybetween Philistia and Phoenicia) does not have an abundance ofnatural harbors. Later, Herod the Great would build the artificialharbor at Caesarea in the first century BC. The great expense of sucha project—including the construction of over 2,500 feet ofbreakwaters made of underwater concrete, mostly imported fromItaly—suggests the extent of the need for secure harbors inthis region.

Solomon’sfleet.The zenith of Israelite seafaring occurred during the reign ofSolomon. Solomon built a fleet of ships at “Ezion Geber, whichis near Elath in Edom, on the shore of the Red Sea” (1Kings9:26). The purpose of these ships was to bring back gold from Ophir(1Kings 9:28), possibly a location in the Arabian Peninsula, towhich a port on the Red Sea would have offered ready access. Thestory confirms the aforementioned dependence on the Phoenicians inthe area of seafaring: although the ships belonged to Solomon, “Hiram[the Phoenician king of Tyre] sent his men—sailors who knew thesea—to serve in the fleet with Solomon’s men”(1Kings 9:27). The timber for the ships would also have beenimported by Israel from Phoenicia (see 1Kings 9:11). Even atthe height of its power, Israel lacked the human resources to embarkon sea voyages independently of the Phoenicians.

Thesuccess of Solomon’s project, of course, depended not only onwarm relations with the Phoenicians but also on territorial controlof the historically Edomite lands between Judah and the Red Sea. Thisfavorable combination of conditions would come and go throughout thebiblical period, and with it, Israel’s modest presence on theseas. From the Phoenician point of view, cooperation with Israel wasan essential component of gaining access to a Red Sea port, and withit to the products of Arabia, the Horn of Africa, and India. ThePhoenicians, as expansive as their travel was in the Mediterranean,could never independently control the long overland route fromPhoenicia to the Red Sea, since it ran through the territory ofIsrael and Edom. Their best hope was a friendly and powerfulIsraelite ally. This explains the cordial relationship and why Hiramsent not only his sailors to serve Solomon but also craftsmen andsupplies for the construction of the temple (1Kings 5:10–12).Solomon and Hiram jointly operated “a fleet of trading ships”that would return to port every three years bringing “gold,silver, and ivory, and apes and baboons” (1Kings 10:22).

Jehoshaphat.In the mid-ninth century BC, King Jehoshaphat of Judah attempted torepeat Solomon’s feat of launching a fleet from Ezion Geber(1Kings 22:48–49; 2Chron. 20:35–37).According to both accounts, the ships were wrecked before they couldset sail. On several other points, however, the two versions of thestory disagree in ways that bear on questions of the political andeconomic conditions of Israelite seafaring.

Bythis time, Israel and Judah had split into separate kingdoms, withthe northern kingdom of Israel being geographically and politicallycloser to the Phoenicians. The powerful King Ahab of Israel,Jehoshaphat’s contemporary through much of his reign, marriedJezebel, the daughter of the Sidonian (Phoenician) king Ethbaal(1Kings 16:31). According to 1Kings, King Ahaziah ofIsrael (Ahab’s son) proposed to cooperate with Jehoshaphat bysending his own men on the voyage, much as Hiram had assisted Solomonin the previous century. Jehoshaphat rejected the suggestion,possibly indicating a bid for Judean autonomy in an era of northerndominance. According to 2Chronicles, however, Jehoshaphat didcooperate willingly with Ahaziah, and this was the reason that theships foundered in port: God punished the righteous Jehoshaphat fortoo close a relationship with his wicked northern counterpart. In1Kings 22:47 it is mentioned that at the time of Jehoshaphat’sventure there was no king in Edom. As noted, control of the overlandroute between Judah and the Red Sea was necessary for the success ofany voyage originating from Ezion Geber.

Howeverthe contradiction between 1Kings and 2Chroniclesregarding the involvement of Ahaziah is resolved, both versions ofthe story highlight the fact that the port at Ezion Geber commandedthe interest of the Judeans, the Israelites, and the Phoenicians, andits successful operation probably depended on the cooperation of allthree.

Shipsof Tarshish.Several biblical texts, including the stories of Solomon andJehoshaphat, mention “ships of Tarshish” (1Kings10:22 NIV mg.). In a number of contexts, such ships are associatedwith the transportation of metals and metal ores, including iron,lead, tin, gold, and silver (1Kings 10:22; Ezek. 27:12; Jer.10:9). The exact derivation of the term “ships of Tarshish”is uncertain, though it is clear from the descriptions of theircargoes that such ships could travel over long distances. As Ezekielobserves, “The ships of Tarshish serve as carriers for yourwares. You are filled with heavy cargo as you sail the sea. Youroarsmen take you out to the high seas” (Ezek. 27:25–26).

Inthe Table of Nations, Tarshish is listed as a descendant of Javan(Gen. 10:4), along with a number of other seafaring peoples of theeastern Mediterranean (“Javan” indicates the peoples ofthe Aegean and is linguistically equivalent to “Ionia”[see also Ezek. 27:12–22]). Some have suggested, then, that theships of Tarshish should be associated with Tarsus in southeasternTurkey, an area containing silver mines (also the birthplace of Paul[Acts 9:11]). Others have suggested the Phoenician colony ofTartessus in Spain, another metal-producing area. This locationfigures in the interpretation of the identification of thedestination of Jonah as Tarshish (Jon. 1:3): presumably, if he wereavoiding Nineveh and departing from Joppa, he would head towardSpain, in the exact opposite direction, rather than toward Tarsus inCilicia.

Inaddition to these two geographical options, some have attempted toexplain the expression “ships of Tarshish” as derivingfrom the Akkadian term for smelting or refining: perhaps the manyreferences to cargoes of metals indicate that the ships were used totransport metal ore to refining centers. Finally, one scholar hasproposed that the term is related to the Greek word tarsos,meaning “oar.”

Descriptionsof ships and seafaring.Ezekiel, in his lament concerning the Phoenician city of Tyre (Ezek.27), relates a number of details related to Phoenician seafaring. Thepicture largely confirms the descriptions of how Solomon built andmanned his fleet with the assistance of his Tyrian ally. Timber forthe construction of the ship came from Lebanon and Cyprus, amongother places (vv. 5–6). Sails were made from Egyptian linen(v.7), and as noted above, the oarsmen and sailors were fromthe Phoenician city-states (vv. 8–9). Ezekiel goes on to list alarge number of ports of call as well as a dazzling variety ofcargoes (vv. 12–24). Notably, Ezekiel has the Judahites and theIsraelites offering the products of their agrarian economy—“wheatfrom Minnith and confections, honey, olive oil and balm”(v.17)—thus filling out the picture of what theIsraelites gave in exchange for the precious metals and luxury itemsimported by their country from elsewhere.

In1999 archaeologists explored two eighth-century BC Phoenician shipsthat had sunk thirty miles west of Ashkelon. The ships, eachmeasuring about fifty feet in length, contained large cargoes of wineand were headed either for Egypt or for the Phoenician colonies inthe western Mediterranean.

Shipsand sailing figure prominently in the story of Jonah, who boarded aship bound for Tarshish (see discussion above) at Joppa on theMediterranean coast. In the story we see a number of features ofancient sea travel. Jonah paid a fare for his voyage (Jon. 1:3). Notonly the biblical author (see 1:4), but also the presumablynon-Israelite sailors, believed that the great storm was the doing ofa god, and that it could be calmed by appealing to that god(1:6)—although cargo was thrown overboard for good measure.When Paul was caught in a storm in the first century AD, the samestrategies were still in use (Acts 27:38). The religious habits ofancient sailors, particularly their reverence for the gods whocontrolled the stormy seas and thus held their lives in the balance,are illuminated by the discovery of stone anchors in several temples(presumably left by sailors as offerings), including at the portcities of Ugarit, Kition, and Byblos.

Psalm107:23–32 speaks of God’s care of sailors from anIsraelite perspective. In the psalm, those who “went out on thesea in ships,” the “merchants on the mighty waters”(i.e., the deep, open sea), witness firsthand the works of the God ofIsrael, which include both the raising and the quieting of the storm.This passage vividly expresses the terror of being caught in a stormand the great relief and gratitude felt by sailors who reached safehaven.

Noah’sArk

Accordingto the biblical account, Noah’s ark was 450 feet long, 75 feetwide, and 45 feet high (300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits [Gen.6:15]). It had three decks, a roof, and a window. By comparison, theship of Uta-napishti in the Epic of Gilgamesh is described as havingsix decks (and thus seven stories), edges of 180 feet (ten dozencubits) in each dimension, and occupying the space of an acre (arough approximation of the dimensions given). Both ships aredescribed as providing space for the builder’s family and everyliving creature. In the Atrahasis Epic, the boat is roofed, but itsdimensions are not given.

Becauseof the character of Gen. 6–8, it is inappropriate to drawconclusions from the story regarding shipbuilding in historicalantiquity. According to the specifications given in the biblicaltext, Noah’s ark would have been the largest wooden ship inhistory, equaled only by the United States schooner Wyoming,completed in 1909. While the overall length of the Wyoming was also450 feet, nearly 100 feet of length was accounted for in the fore andaft booms, so that the hull length was only 350 feet. Even with earlytwentieth-century shipbuilding technology, its extravagant lengthrendered the Wyoming unseaworthy, and the ship foundered in 1924. Thelargest documented wooden ships of antiquity include the GreekSyracusia(third century BC; 180 feet), described by Athenaeus; the Roman Isis(second century AD; 180 feet), described by Lucian; Caligula’s“Giant Ship” (first century AD; 341 feet), recovered inmodern times and possibly corresponding to a ship described by Plinythe Elder; and PtolemyIV’s Tessarakonteres (third centuryBC), reported by Plutarch to have been about 425 feet long. This lastship was not designed for cruising in open water.

NewTestament

Fishingin the Sea of Galilee. Severalof Jesus’ disciples worked as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee,and the Gospels document their use of small boats for fishing andtraveling across the sea. Fishing was done with nets thrown both fromboats and from the shore (Mark 1:16, 19). The boats used by fishermenon the Sea of Galilee may have been small enough to pull up onto thebeach (Luke 5:2), or to be nearly capsized by a large catch of fish(Luke 5:7) or by a violent storm (Mark 4:37). They were large enoughto transport several men and even to sleep in (Mark 4:38). Such boatscould be rowed or sailed; in Mark 6:48 the disciples had to resort torowing because of an unfavorable headwind. On one occasion, Jesusstood in a boat to preach to a crowd gathered on the shore (Mark4:1). The Sea of Galilee is about eight miles wide and thirteen mileslong. On several occasions, Jesus traveled by boat across the sea toavoid having to walk long distances around its circumference (e.g.,Matt. 9:1; 14:22; 15:39).

In1986 archaeologists recovered a fishing boat dating to the mid-firstcentury AD on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. The boat had beenscuttled near the shore and was preserved under mud. The “JesusBoat,” as it was dubbed, measures twenty-seven feet in lengthand has a beam seven and a half feet long. Numerous species of woodwere used in its construction and repairs throughout its useful life.While there is no evidence to link the boat to Jesus or hisdisciples, radiometric dating places it in the correct period, and itprovides a likely model of the type of boat portrayed in the Gospels.

Asecond source of information regarding ships and sailing in the NT isthe account in Acts of Paul’s many sea voyages. As in the caseof Jehoshaphat, the Tyrians, Jonah, and Jesus’ disciples, Paullearned firsthand the perils of seafaring in small wooden boats:among his many traumas, along with beatings and stonings, herecalled, “Three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and aday in the open sea” (2Cor. 11:25).

Paul’sjourneys.A survey of Paul’s sea travels on his four journeys gives someidea of the routes that could be taken by a paying traveler in theeastern Mediterranean and Aegean.

1.Paul’s first missionary journey included voyages from Seleuciain Syria to the port of Salamis in Cyprus (Acts 13:4) and from Cyprus(Paphos) to Perga on the southern coast of Asia Minor (13:13). Afterjourneying through the interior, Paul returned to Attalia, where heembarked for the return trip to Syria, presumably passing againthrough the port at Salamis (14:26).

2.The second missionary journey began not with a sea voyage but ratherwith a trek through the interior of Syria and Cilicia, illustratingthat although sea travel was by far a more rapid means of travel, theoverland routes were by no means impossible (Acts 15:39). Paul wouldrepeat this land route during his third journey (19:1). Sea travelwas fast, but when one had plenty of friends along the alternativeland route, a sea journey was considerably less enjoyable. It isduring the second journey that we have the first recorded accounts ofPaul sailing in the Aegean. From Troas in Asia Minor, he sailed theshort distance to Macedonia (16:11), putting in midway at the islandof Samothrace. Apparently, Paul traveled by sea down the coast fromBerea to Athens (17:14). At the conclusion of his second journey,Paul sailed from Corinth to Caesarea, with a stop at Ephesus(18:18–22). Not counting any intervening ports of call notmentioned in the text, this would be the longest single leg of seatravel so far mentioned.

3.The third missionary journey once more began with a long overlandtrip from Syria through Asia Minor; by this time, Paul had manyassociates along the way to visit. Again, he sailed in the Aegean,from Ephesus to Macedonia (Acts 20:1) and back (20:6). At one point,Paul opted to travel overland, from Troas to Assos, while hiscompanions sailed down the coast (20:13). Meeting up with them, hesailed on, hugging the coast of Asia Minor, then sailing south ofCyprus along an open-water route to Tyre. From Tyre, the ship againhugged the Palestinian coast, stopping in several ports before Pauldisembarked at Caesarea (21:7). Paul’s journeys illustrate thevariety of itineraries taken by ships. They were capable of sailingin deep water, but they would also hug the coast when there werereasons to make frequent stops.

4.Paul’s fourth journey, which he made in custody on his way to atrial before the emperor at Rome, was to be the most dangerous. Fromthe account in Acts we can glean a number of details of life at seain the first century AD. The ship bound for Italy was large, and itcarried 276 passengers and crew (Acts 27:6, 37), including soldiersand prisoners, at least one companion of a prisoner (Paul’sfriend Aristarchus [27:2]), a ship’s pilot, and the ship’sowner (27:11). Sailors used celestial navigation (27:20) and tooksoundings in shallow water (27:28). We see also that the ship’scourse could be determined by the direction of the prevailing winds:twice during the journey Paul’s ship was forced to sail to thelee of large islands (Cyprus and Crete)—a longer journey, butthe only option for a ship that was not rigged to sail close-hauled.

Whenextended periods of unfavorable weather were forecast, one option wassimply to put in at a port until conditions improved, preferably in aharbor that was in the lee of an island (Acts 27:12). We learnsomething of the measures that were taken in heavy weather, many ofwhich are still used in modern times: ropes were tied around the hullof the ship to prevent it from breaking up in rough seas (27:17), thelifeboat was brought onto the deck and made fast (27:17), sea anchorswere deployed to keep the bow of the ship oriented into the oncomingwaves (27:7), the rudder was lashed amidships (27:40), valuable cargoand gear were jettisoned (27:19, 38), and, as in the days of Jonah,sailors and passengers prayed for divine deliverance (27:29; see alsothe protective emblems in 28:11).

Whenall other means had been exhausted, a ship could be run aground on asandy beach (Acts 27:39), a measure that would have risked damage tothe boat but saved lives. In the case of Paul’s ship, thedecision to run aground ultimately resulted in the destruction of theship (27:41).

Metaphorsand illustrations.Several NT authors draw illustrations from the nautical world. Jameslikens the harmful power of evil speech to the rudder of a ship:although it is a small device, by it the pilot can control a greatship (James 3:4–5). Elsewhere, he compares the doubting of theunwise person to being lost at sea in a storm (James 1:6; cf. Eph.4:14). In 1Tim. 1:19 the loss of faith and good conscience islikened to a shipwreck. Hebrews 6:19 describes the assurance of God’sfaithfulness as an anchor for the soul.

In NT studies, “Synoptic” refers to the Gospelsof Matthew, Mark, and Luke, which, due to their similarities, can becompared side by side (synoptic= seeing together). Althoughcoined earlier, the term “Synoptic” did not become thecommonly used reference to the first three Gospels until thenineteenth century.

Synopticalcomparisons reveal texts that are similar in wording (e.g., Matt.19:13–18// Mark 10:13–16// Luke 18:15–17),order (e.g., Matt. 12:46–13:58// Mark 3:31–6:6a//Luke 8:19–56), and parenthetical material (e.g., Matt. 9:6//Mark 2:10// Luke 5:20). Most interestingly, the Synoptics agreein their quotation of the OT even when they differ from the Hebrew OTtext itself (compare Matt. 3:3// Mark 1:3// Luke 3:4 toIsa. 40:3). Beyond such similarities, significant differences prevailthat raise difficult questions. How, for example, could Mark escapeany reference to the Sermon on the Mount (including the Lord’sPrayer), which holds such a prominent position in Matthew?

Relationshipsamong the three Gospels.Due to these and other factors, multiple theories on the SynopticGospels’ relationship to one another have arisen. Yet none havefound universal acceptance. Historically, based primarily onAugustine’s claim, the church affirmed Matthew as the firstGospel, with Mark as his abridgment and Luke as employing both. TheGerman text critic J.J. Griesbach developed this thesis ofMatthean priority in his 1774 Synopsis, arguing that Luke was thefirst to use Matthew, and Mark was drawing from both. The GriesbachHypothesis continues to have advocates.

Matthewcovers the substance of 97.2percent of Mark’s 661 verses,while 88.4percent reappear in Luke. Although such statisticscould be explained as Mark’s combination and abbreviation ofMatthew and Luke, in fact Matthew generally shortens Mark where theycover the same material. In search of explanations that bettervalidate the evidence, NT scholars proposed the Two SourceHypothesis, arguing that Mark wrote first, and that Matthew and Lukedrew from Mark and from another, unknown source (which scholars call“Q,” from German Quelle, meaning “source”).H.J. Holzmann gave significant credence to this theory in 1863,and after B.H. Streeter’s persuasive publication in 1924it became the leading theory. Rather than the reverse, it seemseasier to understand Matthew and Luke as expansions of Mark’snarrative, just as evidence suggests that they “cleaned up”Mark’s poorer Greek and more difficult readings. Furthermore,although Matthew and Luke often disagree with each other bothverbally and in their order of events, they rarely agree with oneanother against Mark. This suggests that in the triple tradition(passages in all three Synoptic Gospels), Matthew and Luke are notborrowing from each other but are independently using Mark.

Thesuggestion of the unknown source Q (which could be either written ororal) proved necessary to make sense of the significant agreementsbetween Matthew and Luke in material not covered by Mark. Streetersuggested further that the material that was unique to Matthew andLuke respectively came from sources designated as “M” and“L.”

Althoughthe Two Source Hypothesis remains the working theory preferred bymost scholars, others claim that the issue is far from unresolved. Toreconstruct the precise development of the Synoptic Gospels hasproven extremely difficult. Each Gospel may have been influenced by avariety of sources. Rather than being well defined, the processlikely was fluid, bringing together commonly known and acceptedmemorizations of specific Jesus sayings, repeated retellings ofspecific sequences of events (shorter and longer) that had turnedinto strings of established tradition among early churches, writtenrecords made by disciples such as Matthew, oral preaching of apostlessuch as Peter, accounts possibly from Mary the mother of Jesus (cf.Luke 2:19), and other things.

Mark’sGospel has historically been considered a written condensation ofPeter’s preaching, but as C.H. Dodd showed in his 1936Apostolic Preaching and Its Developments, Mark shaped his Gospelaccording to a common apostolic pattern observable in the speeches inActs. Except for a few parables and the action-filled apocalypse inchapter 13, Mark’s Gospel consists almost exclusively ofdescriptive narrative that delineates the power and purpose of Jesus,the Son of God. Mark is kerygma, preaching about Jesus. Q, or thematerial common to Matthew and Luke absent in Mark, consists almostexclusively of teaching material, Jesus sayings.It is didachē, teaching from Jesus.

Distinctivesof each Gospel.Griesbach’s “synoptic” approach of placing thesethree Gospels side by side for comparison has prompted new scholarlyapproaches such as redaction criticism and has provided beginningstudents with a helpful way to recognize specific emphases of eachGospel. As noted above, Mark is a fast-paced narrative (“immediately”occurs nine times in chap. 1 alone) with vivid picturesque detail(e.g., 14:51–52). Matthew writes for a Jewish audience. Heweaves his narrative around five major teaching discourses (chaps.5–7; 10; 13; 18; 24–25) while highlighting Jesus’relationship to Abraham (chap. 1), his mission to “the lostsheep of Israel” (chaps. 10; 15), and his birth and death asthe “King of the Jews” (chaps. 2; 27) and using theJewish expression “kingdom of heaven.” Luke, whileportraying the comprehensive scope of Jesus’ mission byrelating Jesus directly to Adam and God (3:38) and placing the eventsin secular history (chap. 2), reveals a special interest in thedowntrodden (women, poor, children, Samaritans), prayer (nineprayers), the Holy Spirit, and joyfulness.

An occupation or profession is the usual work or business inwhich a person engages for the sake of earning a living. In biblicaltimes, family or social standing most often determined occupation.This was particularly true for occupations tied to land, such asplanting crops and raising animals, since land in ancient Israel waspassed down within the tribe, normally from fathers to sons (Josh.14:9; Ezek. 46:18). Sometimes daughters also received a share in thefamily inheritance (Josh. 17:6). Most people gained their livelihoodfrom their family’s land, and those who did not have land hiredthemselves out to work for wages (Deut. 24:14). A son normallylearned his trade from his father (Gen. 47:3; 2Kings 4:18;Matt. 4:21) and continued in that occupation unless called into God’sservice (1Kings 19:19–21; Jer. 1:5; Matt. 4:22).

Cicero,writing around the time of the NT, considered occupations such as taxcollector, laborer, and fisherman to be vulgar. Conversely,professions such as teacher, doctor, and wholesale trader were morehonorable, with landowner being the most respectable and profitableprofession (Off. 1.42).

Agricultureand Farming

Farmingis the earliest recorded occupation in the Bible, as the first manwas called to work and keep the garden (Gen. 2:15). Even after theexile from Eden because of sin, Adam worked the ground for food, asdid Cain, his firstborn son (Gen. 3:17–18; 4:2). The openingchapters of the Bible establish a fundamental link between “man”(’adam) and the “ground” (’adamah). After theflood, Noah established himself as a “man of the soil”(’ish ha’adamah) by planting a vineyard (Gen. 9:20). KingUzziah “loved the soil” (’oheb ’adamah) andso employed people to work in his fields and vineyards (2Chron.26:10).

Goddemonstrated his covenant commitment to Isaac by blessing him with anincredible harvest (Gen. 26:12), and he promised to prosper Israel’sfarms if the people obeyed him (Deut. 28:4) and to curse the fruit oftheir ground if they disobeyed (Deut. 28:18). The OT ideal was foreveryone to live “under their own vine and under their own figtree” (1Kings 4:25; Mic. 4:4). According to Prov. 28:19,the diligent farmer would have abundant food.

Jesus’parables frequently employed agricultural imagery that would havebeen readily understandable in first-century Palestine, where manypeople were farmers (cf. Mark 4:1–9; 12:1–11) and someowned land (Acts 4:34). The people living around Jerusalem at thistime engaged in agriculture, soil cultivation, and cattle raising(Let. Aris. 107–112).

Herdingand Hunting

Herdinganimals is the second-oldest occupation recorded in Scripture (afterfarming), and raising flocks and herds continued to be one of themost common and important professions throughout biblical times. Abelis the first “keeper of sheep” in the Bible (Gen. 4:2NRSV). Several generations later, Jabal pioneered the nomadic herdinglifestyle (Gen. 4:20). The patriarchs were shepherds (Gen. 47:3), aswere Moses (Exod. 3:1), David (1Sam. 17:34), and many others inthe OT. Josephus acknowledged that “feeding of sheep was theemployment of our forefathers in the most ancient ages”(Ag.Ap. 1.91). While men typically worked as shepherds andherdsmen, the occupation was also open to women, such as Rachel,whose fathers owned sheep (Gen. 29:9). Shepherds were present atJesus’ birth (Luke 2:8–20), and Jesus’ teachingsuggests that shepherding was a common occupation in Palestine (cf.Matt. 18:12; John 10:1–30).

Manypeople in biblical times hunted, either for food, sport, orprotection. The first recorded hunter is Nimrod, “a mightyhunter before the Lord” (Gen. 10:9). Ishmael was “anexpert with the bow” (Gen. 21:20 NRSV), while Esau was “askillful hunter, a man of the open country” who brought backwild game for food (25:27–28). The name of Pokereth-Hazzebaim,included in the genealogy of Solomon’s servants in Ezra 2:57,reflects his occupation as a “gazelle catcher” (cf.1Kings 4:23).

Buildersand Craftsmen

Cainwas the first person in the Bible to build a city (Gen. 4:17), andhis descendant Tubal-Cain was the first metalworker (4:22). Nimrodbuilt a number of cities (10:11–12), and the beginning ofNimrod’s kingdom was Babel (10:10), where the people gatheredtogether to build a city with brick (11:3). Builders in Mesopotamiaused baked brick and asphalt, while Israelite builders usuallypreferred the more readily available stone and mortar. After Joseph’sdeath, Israel was conscripted into forced labor in Egypt, whichinvolved building cities of brick and mortar (Exod. 1:11).

Therole of craftsmen in the construction of the tabernacle wasparticularly significant. Bezalel and Oholiab were “skilledworkers and designers” empowered by God for work on thetabernacle (Exod. 35:35). They engaged in “all kinds ofcrafts,” including artistic metalworking, masonry, carpentry,and weaving (Exod. 31:4–5; 38:23).

Kingsin Israel often commissioned important building projects (1Kings12:25; 15:22; 16:24; 2Chron. 26:9; Josephus, J.W. 1.401–2).Carpenters and stonemasons worked on David’s palace (2Sam.5:11). Solomon conscripted laborers to build the temple and alsoemployed carriers, stonecutters, craftsmen, and foremen to supervisethe work (1Kings 5:13–18). After the Babylonian exile,many Israelites were involved in rebuilding the temple and the wallof Jerusalem, which had been destroyed (Ezra 3:8; Neh. 4:16–18).These projects, directed by Zerubbabel and Nehemiah, utilized masons,carpenters, and other workers (Ezra 3:7).

Jesusis referred to as a tektōn (Mark 6:3) and as the son of a tektōn(Matt. 13:55), with tektōn usually translated “carpenter”by English versions. However,recent scholarshiphas demonstrated that Jesus was likely a builder, not a carpenter inthe modern sense of the term. In the LXX, the word tektōntypically translates a Hebrew word, kharash, used broadly to refer tocraftsmen working with stone, wood, or metal.

Musicians

Thefirst musician recorded in Scripture is Jubal, “the father ofall who play the stringed instruments and pipes” (Gen. 4:21).Musicians performed a variety of roles in ancient society, as they dotoday. Singers and instrumentalists were employed to celebratefestive occasions, often to provide accompaniment for dancing (Gen.31:27; Luke 15:25), to soothe the sick or distressed (1Sam.16:16), and to express lamentation (Job 30:31).

Musiciansplayed an important role in leading God’s people in worship.The “director of music” is mentioned in the headings offifty-five psalms and Hab. 3:19. The most famous musician inScripture is David, “the singer of Israel’s psalms”(2Sam. 23:1 GW), who played the harp (1Sam. 16:18) andwrote or inspired at least seventy-three canonical psalms. Solomonwas also a notable songwriter and lover of music (1Kings 4:32).David appointed many Levites as singers and musicians to lead Israelin worship (1Chron. 15:16; 23:5). The musicians played lyres,harps, cymbals, and trumpets (2Chron. 5:12).

Government,Politics, and Military

Beforethe monarchy, there were no formal government offices. Under Moses, agroup of seventy elders in Israel served as leaders and officials,and these men were to carry out Moses’ decrees and judge thepeople on most matters (Exod. 18:20–22; Num. 11:16). AfterJoshua’s death, God raised up judges to rescue Israel fromforeign enemies and lead the people (Judg. 2:16) until the time ofSamuel, when Saul was made king (1Sam. 11:15).

Kingsin Israel employed various officials. In 2Sam. 8:16–18,Joab is listed first among David’s officials, which suggeststhat the military commander was second in authority after the king.Under Solomon, the leader of the army is called “commander inchief” (1Kings 4:4). The royal cabinet included a numberof key advisers, including the recorder, the secretary, and the“confidant” of the king (cf. 2Sam. 16:16). The OTdoes not specify the precise roles of these officials. The recorderwas among the highest governmental positions and served as a royalcounselor. In Hebrew, mazkir (“recorder”) is a cognatenoun to the verb zkr (“to remember”), which suggests thatthis official may have managed and preserved public records (2Kings18:18; Isa. 36:22). The main task of the king’s secretary orscribe (sop̱er)was to write down (sapar) official state documents (2Sam.8:17), and he advised the king and also provided financial oversight(2Kings 12:10). Recorders and secretaries apparently were welleducated and multilingual, as was the palace administrator (2Kings18:18, 26). Solomon’s officials included supervisors of thepalace and the forced labor, as well as governors who suppliedprovisions for the king’s household (1Kings 4:6–7).The OT mentions cupbearers in Israel’s government and in otheradministrations (Gen. 40:1; 1Kings 10:5; Neh. 1:11). Thecupbearer served as the royal wine taster; he protected the king frombeing poisoned and had direct access to the monarch.

Inthe Roman Empire, the emperor was absolute ruler (1Pet. 2:17),with the senate next in authority. Proconsuls held judicial andmilitary authority over larger provinces (Acts 18:12), prefects(governors) administered smaller provinces (Matt. 27:2), withtetrarchs over one-fourth of a province (Luke 3:1).

Christiansin NT times engaged in civil service. Erastus was a financial officerin Corinth (Rom. 16:23), and he may be the same Erastus commemoratedin an inscription from this period who held the office of aedile. Theproconsul Sergius Paulus (Acts 13:7); Manaen, a close friend of HerodAntipas (Acts 13:1); and members of Caesar’s household (Phil.4:22) were also Christian public leaders.

Tradeand Economics

Fromearliest times, people have exchanged goods and property. WhenAbraham purchased Ephron’s field, his silver was measured“according to the weight current among the merchants”(Gen. 23:16), which suggests that a recognized system of publictrading was in place during the time of the patriarchs. Traders ofcommodities such as spices traveled along caravan routes betweensouthern Arabia and Egypt, and these traders often acquired slavesalong the way (Gen. 37:28). Solomon employed royal merchants to buyand sell goods (1Kings 10:28).

Inthe first century, Jews were engaged broadly in economic life aslandowners, artisans, merchants, traders, bankers, and slaves.Several of Jesus’ disciples were fishermen (Matt. 4:18). Lukewas a physician, a well-educated and respectable professional (Col.4:14). Lydia was a dealer in purple cloth (Acts 16:14). Paul, Aquila,and Priscilla worked as tentmakers (Acts 18:3). In the Roman Empire,commerce and pagan religion often intermingled. Merchants oftenformed trade guilds, where membership sometimes required religiousand moral compromise. In Ephesus, silversmiths and craftsmen inrelated trades turned significant profit through their connectionswith the local Artemis cult (Acts 19:24–27).

Jesusfrequently spent time with tax collectors, such as Levi (also called“Matthew”) (Matt. 9:9; Mark 2:14). Tax collectors were adespised group because often they became wealthy by taking advantageof the Roman taxation system, which allowed them to charge commissionon taxes collected (Luke 19:2, 8). Jesus’ parable of thetalents references bankers who offered interest on deposits collected(Matt. 25:27), and Rev. 3:17–18 alludes to the fact thatLaodicea was a financial center with a significant banking system.

Servantsand Slaves

Inthe OT, ’ebed most often designates a slave or servant, whoseoccupation involves work (’abad ) as a subordinate. Someservants held very important positions in their master’shousehold (Gen. 24:2), while many others toiled in hard labor (Job7:2). Israelites were not to enslave their kinfolk, but they couldtake slaves from other nations. Fellow Israelites who became poorcould serve as hired workers, but they were to be released along withtheir children at the Jubilee because God had brought Israel out fromEgyptian slavery and they belonged to God as his servants (Lev.25:39–46).

Slavesin the Roman world were property like goods or cattle, possessed byanother (Dio Chrysostom, 2Serv. lib. 24). Unlike modern slaverypractices, race played no factor in the Roman institution of slavery.Slaves were kidnapped and sold in NT times (1Tim. 1:10; Rev.18:13), but the majority of slaves were so by birth. The mostprominent slave in the NT is Onesimus, for whom Paul intercedes withhis master, Philemon (Philem. 10, 16). Believing slaves were to obeytheir earthly masters “as slaves of Christ” (Eph. 6:5–6),but the NT stressed the equality of slave and free in Christ (Gal.3:28). Paul called himself a “servant [doulos] of Christ Jesus”(Rom. 1:1).

ReligiousService

MostIsraelites engaged in professional religious service were Levites(Num. 3:12), including Moses, Aaron, and the priests in Aaron’sline (Exod. 6:19–20; 35:19). The priests offered sacrifices toGod on behalf of the people (Heb. 5:1). Under the priests’direction, the Levites were charged with caring for the tabernacleand its furnishings (Num. 1:49; 1Chron. 23:32) and carrying theark of the covenant (1Chron. 15:2). They were set apart toserve in God’s presence (Deut. 18:7) and to lead the people inworship (2Chron. 5:12). Further, priests often played animportant advisory role to Israel’s kings (2Sam. 8:17;1Kings 4:5; 2Kings 12:2).

InIsrael, people went to seers and prophets to inquire of God (1Sam.9:9), for they received and communicated God’s word (2Sam.24:11; Jer. 37:6). Sometimes individuals are mentioned as prophets,and other times the prophets are discussed as an organized group(1Sam. 19:20; 1Kings 22:6).

TheNT references a number of ministerial offices (1Cor. 12:28;Eph. 4:11; 1Tim. 3:1–12). Not all ministers were paid,though teachers and preachers had a right to “receive theirliving from the gospel” (1Cor. 9:14–15; cf. 1Tim.5:17). Apostles were those sent out by Jesus as his representatives.The term apostolos refers particularly to the twelve apostles whowere with Jesus during his earthly ministry and who were witnesses ofhis resurrection (Acts 1:21–22). Paul referred to himself as anapostle (Gal. 1:1; 1Cor. 1:1), and he calls Epaph-ro-di-tus andothers “messengers” (apostoloi) in the churches (2Cor.8:23; Phil. 2:25). Prophets have the spiritual gift of prophecy andspeak to strengthen, encourage, and comfort the church (Acts 15:32;1Cor. 14:3). Overseers (also called “elders” or“pastors”) are qualified leaders who teach, shepherd, andexercise authority in the church (1Tim. 3:1; 1Pet. 5:2).Evangelists and missionaries proclaim the gospel and aim to winconverts to Christ (Acts 21:8; 2Tim. 4:5). Those ministers whoare faithful to the gospel deserve support (3John8).