The Divided Kingdom - Israel and Judah - Essay Example

?Insert Lesson 4 Question The distinctive judgements of the Deuteronomistic Historian about the religious failures of Israel and Judah were diseases, drought, famine, war and ultimate captivity by Assyrians (as is the case of Israel in 722 BC) and the Babylonian Empire (as is the case of Judah in 586 BC). In both Israel and Judah, the famine stemmed from the drought and the sieges by Assyrians (lasted three years) and Babylonians (lasted 15 years). In the run-up to the captivity, in both cases, the invaders cut off water supply, and severed external trade links and food supply. In Samaria which was the capital of Israel at the time, people fed on their children (2 Kings 6:25-30). According to Collins, for both Judah and Israel, the offences against God were: idol worship, religious syncretism, desecration of the temple with idols, a litany of social and economic injustices and moral decadence. All these problems persisted because of Israel and Judah’s failure to listen to God’s word which came through the prophets. Bad leadership may also have exacerbated this unfortunate state of affairs. All the kings of Israel were not faithful to YHWH, while the bad kings in Judah were Rehoboam (930-913 BC), Abijam (913-911 BC), Jehoram (848-841 BC), Ahaziah (841 BC), Queen Athaliah (841-835 BC), Uzziah (781-740 BC), Manasseh (697-642 BC), Amon (642-640 BC), Jehoahaz (609 BC), Jehoiakim (609-598 BC), Jehoiachin (598-597 BC), Zedekiah (597-586 BC). The good kings of Judah were Asa (11-870 BC), Jehoshaphat (870-848 BC), Jehoash (835-796 BC), Amaziah (796-781 BC), Jotham (740-736 BC), Hezekiah (716-687 BC) and Josiah (640-609 BC) (Collins, 75). Question 2: The history outlined in 1 and 2 Kings is a theological history rather than an accurate accounting of events because therein, the authors were interested in giving an explanation for the division of Israel into two; the reason for the captivity; and hope for the future, rather than an accurate blow-by-blow chronicles of events. The Deuteronomistic History clearly shows that both Judah and Israel succumbed to unfaithfulness to YHWH, and that total destruction of both empires was the appropriate punishment. Again, there are those who trace Deuteronomistic History back to the Babylonian Exile of 585 BC, as the place and time of authorship. The gravity behind this standpoint is that the authors of these books may have been written out of retrospection, and not at the time the actual events contained in Deuteronomistic History materialised. This is to the effect that writing from memory may not be as detailed as a writing which may have been composed at the actual time an incident happened. While this absence of much specific detail may accost the books in Deuteronomistic History, it is not to be misconstrued as to mean contradiction. Instead, details such as exact timeframes and more details concerning Judah are characteristically missing from Deuteronomistic History. Being in Babylon, the authorship behind the Deuteronomistic History may have written to explain the reason behind God’s people being in exile, in lieu of giving a blow-by-blow account on the details which built up, in the run-up to the Exile. In another wavelength, other theorists such as Thomas Romer, a French scholar, have come to see a distinct party of authors who may have had different views (Raymond, 130). 3: David and Solomon as Both Good and Evil Kings Both David and Solomon are remembered simultaneously as both good and evil kings because their regimes were marked with faithfulness and unfaithfulness to God. The good exploits David and Solomon exacted emanated from faithfulness to God, while their negative acts were are a result of their unfaithfulness to God. David’s goodness is exemplified in the fact that he is the only king, who presided over a united Israel, transported the Ark of the Covenant from Shiloh to Jerusalem, established Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, drove away Israel’s enemies from Jerusalem and Israel, extended mercy to Mephibosheth (the house of Saul), composed psalms to God and originated the idea and made plans for the building of the temple. All these exploits emanated from David’s love for God. For this, David is considered as a paragon of the kings of Judah. However, his failures (adultery with Bathsheba and the murder of Uriah) were the genesis of his instability. Solomon also begins well by being faithful to God, but finishes slovenly. His faithfulness to God is underscored by him building the temple to God and setting administrative guidelines for the priesthood. Solomon’s unfaithfulness and failures are underscored by rampant polygamy, wandering after many false gods and burning incense to them. These failures set Israel on a primrose path spiritually and led to Israel being divided into Israel and Judah. The idolatry that many of Solomon’s wives introduced in Israel set off a polytheistic trend and opened up the way to religious syncretism in both Judah and Israel. Lesson 4.2 Question 1: Relations between Elijah in the Northern Kingdom of Israel to the Religious Conflicts and To the Stories of Moses It is also interesting that both Moses and Elijah fast for 40 days and nights (Exodus 20:18 and I Kings 19:8) on Mount Sinai. Elijah’s case follows Jezebel’s threat on Elijah’s life. After fasting, both are spoken to by God and have God’s message. Moses has the Law and a covenant to give to his people while Elijah was to anoint Hazael and Jehu as kings and Elisha as prophet. They experience the manifestations of God’s powers (mighty winds and earthquakes). Both are fed miraculously by God: Moses and his people are fed manna and quails while Elijah is fed by ravens. Elijah’s story of religious conflict strongly resonates with that of Moses. In the first place, Moses’ religious conflict culminates into the establishment of the Sinaic covenant, while in Elijah’s case, the conflict leads into the renewal of the covenant. In the case of Moses, the religious conflict takes the form of people challenging his authority. God’s presence and glory manifests on Mount Sinai, God reads out all the words of the Decalogue, the Israelites agreed to keep all the injunctions, a bull is slaughtered and its blood sprinkled on an earthen altar and on the people of Israel. Israel becomes God’s people and YHWH, their God (Exodus 19). In Elijah’s case, all (including Ahab) are assembled at Mount Carmel. A challenge is made that sacrifices be made to Baal and YHWH, so that the deity who answers with fire is God. Baal fails while YHWH answers with fire from heaven. The renewal of the covenant is spoken of by Elijah’s act of restoring YHWH’s altar and having the people renew their commitment to YHWH, after and before the sacrifice, respectively (I Kings 18). After the establishment or renewal of the covenant, both execute God’s judgement by killing the idol worshippers (Exodus 32:26-28 and I Kings 18:40). Question 3: Different Themes of Amos and Hosea Both Isaiah are called to prophesy God’s message to the Northern kingdom in eighth century BC, when Jeroboam II is king over Israel. At this time, Israel is relatively stable as Jeroboam extended Israel’s borders. This stability was because Assyria was relatively unstable. Both prophets speak of a departure from God’s ways. To Amos, the departure is into a barrage of social injustices. To Hosea, the departure is into the unfaithfulness of idolatry. Thus, Hosea sees Israel as the unfaithful wife, while Amos, as people who have forsaken God’s laws. Because of the foregoing, both proclaim the coming judgement upon Israel. The contrast and similarity herein is that both Hosea and Amos see Israel as God’s people: the point of departure is that Hosea sees Israel as God’s wife (who is unfaithful). While Amos is from Judah, his message is for Israel. Hosea is from Israel and he prophesies to Israel. Amos also greatly devotes his prophecy against the neighbouring enemies of Israel in chapters 1 and 2. The same theme of judgement against the neighbouring enemies of Israel runs on up to chapter 7, but occurs sporadically and disjointedly. Unlike Amos, Hosea concentrates on Israel. Amos also prophesies of the coming restoration in 9:11. Hosea also speaks of God in act of judgement subjecting Israel to violence and judgement. However, just as Amos provides hope in his message of restoration, Hosea also mentions another aspect of the oncoming wilderness experience as a chance to an encounter between YHWH and His people. Lesson 4.3 Question 1: Reasons for multiple authorship in Isaiah There are some reasons which make some to see the oracles of three different prophets combined in the book of Isaiah, as shall be seen forthwith. Proto- or First Isaiah Isa. 1-39 In this portion, the author identifies somewhat with Judah’s aristocracy as can be seen in Isa 6:1-3, 5-8). Because of this, some have come to see Proto-Isaiah as being more political in nature. He is known as the Isaiah of Jerusalem and is deemed Hosea, Amos and Micah’s contemporary. This part covers chapters 1 to 39 of the Book of Isaiah, and is believed to have been written in 8th century BC. Deutero- or Second Isaiah Isa. 40-55 The second Isaiah is believed to have been written after the Babylonian exile and foretells the restoration of Jerusalem. This portion is believed to have been written in 6th century BC. Trito- or Third Isaiah Isa. 56-66 This part of Isaiah is attributed to another Isaiah who lived at the time of the restored Jerusalem, and is believed to have been written 6th century BC. As a side note and from personal observation, it is important to note that the crux of this dispute on single vs. multiple authorship of the Book Isaiah herein is faith. This is the case since those who dispute single authorship of Isaiah have a problem comprehending how Isaiah could speak of Cyrus 200 years beforehand and the exploits he would do, in light of Judah’s liberation. This means that this group does not believe in the (possible) reality of Isaiah being able to write down his prophecy concerning Cyrus, through divine inspiration. Question 2: Major Concerns of the Oracles of the Book of First Isaiah Some scholars believe that the first Isaiah (son of Amoz) is an identity separate from the author of Deutero and Trito Isaiah because of the themes that Proto-Isaiah emphasise. Proto-Isaiah is emphatic on the oncoming judgement (and restoration) of Judah. However, it is a fact that there are points of convergence between Proto-Isaiah at one end and Deutero and Trito Isaiah at the other end. Particularly, all the divisions speak of the restoration of Judah, Jerusalem and nations as can be seen in chapters 34 to 66. Nevertheless, from a general point of view, however one may want to compartmentalise the book into three, the themes of the oracles therein are uniformly distributed throughout the book. The major concerns in the Book of First Isaiah are the coming judgement which the LORD was to visit upon Judah as recompense, the call to repentance and holiness, Israel and Judah’s sins (particularly religious hypocrisy, idolatry, drunkenness, pride, trust in man or the arm of flesh instead of God), Judah being carried away into Babylonian Exile as the culmination of the people’s sin and God’s judgement, God’s message of reconciliation, forgiveness, consolation and hope and the message of God’s plan to bring salvation and blessings through the coming Messiah who is also to be the Redeemer. All these themes occur throughout the rest of the book, particularly Second Isaiah. A significant portion of the First Book of Isaiah is also devoted to the developments which were going on in Judah such as the siege that the Assyrians and later on, Babylon place on Judah, the destruction of allies such as Egypt in whom Judah had trusted for deliverance. Question 3: Major Concerns of the Oracles of the Book of Micah The book of Micah is dated back to 8th century BC and is attributed to Micah, a prophet from the village of Moresheth, which is in Judah. Micah’s prophecy comes against the backdrop of a strong influx of wealth, subsequent social injustices, a superficial form of peace, and a warped view of God into Israel. Israel and Judah become complacent and accomplices to class oppression, smug contentment towards God and decadent religious observances (6:7). In this light, God was raising up the Assyrians as an instrument of judgement that He would use to purge Israel’s waywardness. According to Parisien, some of the themes that are in the Book of Micah are: God breaking through the power of sin and giving man hope by speaking to man/ His people through: (I) man (1:1); judgement (4:9-10); words of encouragement (2:12-13; 4:1-5; and 4:6-8) and forgiveness (7:19-20); (II) God’s calling (chapters 1-2, 3-5 and 6-7); (III) absence of righteousness and the advent of evil; (IV) injustices; and (V) finally, God’s plans and purposes (Parisien, 121, 122). Concerning the judgement which is spoken of by Micah, no sinner is exempted. The judgement is to be exacted upon rulers, prophets and priests who have subjected the poor to injustice. In this light, Micah is clear that prophets who speak peaceably and declare war on the poor shall have no answers to their prophecies and their prophecies shall be disgraced (3:5-3:7). The aforementioned judgement is pervasive to the point that it is going to suffuse foreign relations, the individual and the North (Israel). For this, the first chapter is devoted to Babylonian Exile and the injustices it caused. The second chapter deals with the way injustice has ravaged the poor, as can be seen in 2:2 and 2:9. In the Book of Micah, God in His grace is interrupting a decadent society’s way of life. God destroys what is left and resolves to raise up His remnant of faithful, who would be loyal to God’s will and person. Those who resist the call to join with the remnant are to be cast into the great cauldron of judgement, together with the rest of the nations. This is the new thing God was doing. He was going to set up His promised kingdom and no force was going to stand in the way. Works Cited Collins, John. Introduction to the Hebrew Bible. New York/ London: Fortress Press, 2010. Print Parisien, P. Blood and Covenant: The Historical Consequences of the Contract with God. Ottawa/ NY: Trafford Publishing, 2010. Print Raymond, F. “In Conversation with Thomas Romer, the So-Called Deuteronomistic History: A Sociological, Historical and Literary Introduction.” Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, 9.19 (2005): 1203-1542. Print Read More