by VorJack
If you want to understand the history of Israel, look at a map. For some reason, God placed his chosen people on land in a very bad neighborhood. In ancient times, the kingdoms of Northern Israel and Judah were stuck between the three greatest world powers of the day: Egypt, Mesopotamia and the Hittite Empire. Israel was destined to have a turbulent life.
Israel’s position was a blessing and a curse. Blessing because they controlled the trade routes between the great empires. Curse, because those empires could crush them and take control. For most of its existence, Israel was a football passed around by the great empires.
Fall of the Bronze Age
Pullquote: It was probably the greatest collapse in the ancient world, and the greatest loss to civilization until the fall of Rome.
In the late 13th century, most of Canaan was under indirect Egyptian control through a number of vassal states. But then suddenly, the kingdom of Egypt was beset by a mixed group of raiders that the Egyptians called the “sea people.” Older enemies joined the attack, the Libyans from the west and the Nubians from the south. Egypt was weakened, broke apart, and lost control over their vassals in Canaan.
The Hittite Empire collapsed at about the same time, beset by the sea peoples as well as older, inland foes. In Mesopotamia, Assyria and Babylon face new threats in the form of the Aramaeans. All told, by the mid-twelfth century, the three great empires had been rolled back. It was probably the greatest collapse in the ancient world, and the greatest loss to civilization until the fall of Rome.
But it did create a window of opportunity in the Levant.
Not that the Canaanites had everything their own way. Some of the “sea people” who had attacked Egypt settled into towns along the southern coast of Canaan that had previously been under Egyptian control. These would become known as the Philistines, and they’d be the force that would inadvertently unify Canaan.
United Monarchy
Pullquote: Solomon came to power after the usual dynastic bloodbath, and he set about consolidating what his father had conquered.
The Philistines likely settled in and took some time to get established. Once that was done, it must have been time to expand. This expansion came at a cost to the current residents of Canaan, who at the time lived in small and separate kingdoms and cantons. Their lack of unity most likely made them easy pickings for the more aggressive Philistines.
So the Canaanites sensibly decided to unify and find a single figure to lead their military. Their choice was Saul, who was at least able to create a standing army. This didn’t translate into lasting military success, and Saul was usurped by David.
David was able to hold the Philistines in check, though he never defeated them completely. He was able to expand the empire and spread outside the borders that had originally held the tribes of Canaan. But he suffered domestic problems. Saul had been from the North, while David was a Southern boy. The more developed North didn’t take this well, and David violently suppressed Northern revolts.
Things didn’t improve for the next generation. Solomon came to power after the usual dynastic bloodbath, and he set about consolidating what his father had conquered. In doing so, he placed much of the tax burden on the North, treating it more like a conquered territory than part of a unified whole. Perhaps this disunity explains why the military fate of the country began to go downhill, as Solomon saw some of his father’s gains get retaken by their original owners.
It all came to a head after the death of Solomon. The larger, more prosperous north broke off. The Unified Monarchy ended.
Legacy
Pullquote: Roughly three generations – let’s call it 90 years – of rough unity beginning with Saul and ending with Solomon. Yet this is the golden age that a great deal of the Bible hearkens back to.
And that’s it, really. The great powers of Assyria and the Babylon returned, renewing their control over the area. Northern Israel went on to become a local power, but was eventually destroyed by the Assyrians. Little Judah – small and weak enough to be ignored – lasted a bit longer. Long enough, at any rate, to write down a lot of stories explaining how they got where they were.
Roughly three generations – let’s call it 90 years – of rough unity beginning with Saul and ending with Solomon. Yet this is the golden age that a great deal of the Bible hearkens back to. It gave rise to a lot of the concepts that would later be applied to Jesus: Davidic king, messiah/christ/”anointed one”, son of God.
The Fall of the Bronze Age created a power vacuum in the Levant that the tribes of Canaan were able to fill, for a while. The legacy of that brief period is with us every time we open the Bible.
good article and agreed!
Here’s something funny I thought some of you would appreciate :)
http://politifi.com/news/Atheists-Promise-to-Care-for-Pets-After-Rapture-191632.html
Atheists Promise to Care for Pets After Rapture
The concluding argumentation here is pretty thin on substance.
“It gave rise to a lot of the concepts that would later be applied to Jesus: Davidic king, messiah/christ/”anointed one”, son of God.”
Actually, Old Testament Scripture’s predictions of a coming Messiah, Christ and King had a lot to do with the first-century understanding and concern for these things.
‘The legacy of that brief period is with us every time we open the Bible’
True, but the question is the ‘why’ of it, why does scripture spend so much time on this brief period (David’s reign) in Israel’s long and illustrious history? And why did Saul precede David and Solomon follow him, what do these various ‘men’ represent? How are they significant to our own journey’s (believer or not)? What do the symbolize?
Three men, before/during/after the ‘ascension’ to the throne (of our lives). We will always be found in one of the three. There is much beauty, triumph and tragedy in this story (and our stories too). I could show you but I doubt any are seriously interested in seeing it, still all the very best.
> “what do these various ‘men’ represent?”
They represent historical despots who did truly horrible things, such as genocide, but who are never the less held up as great moral examples in the Bible.
They represent archetypal warlords, glorified for their ability to slaughter and conquer, justified by their adherence to a war god.
Respectfully, truthfully the light is exceedingly dim in unbelief TRJ. That’s what you think they represent, but that’s not the truth friend. The truth of their story (ours too) is much brighter, more descriptive and relevant to the eternal now in which we live.
Warlord? Immediately following the Exodus and miraculous deliverance of the children of Israel from the hand of Pharaoh and his army Moses praises God and calls him a ‘warrior’ (Exodus 15:3) but he is warring for us, for our deliverance from a bondage that we have for so long been enslaved to, are so acclimated to that we are unaware that we are even captive to it. Egypt represents the world, the faulty system, lower form of life and nature that fallen man is caught up in and God calls it a ‘house of bondage’ in Exodus 13:3. So he says in the NT ‘come out from among them (Egypt, the world and its ways) be ye separate (holy, consecrated unto Him) then I will be your God/Father and you will be my people’. We can be ‘translated’ from one kingdom to another as Peter describes.
David (one of those ‘despots’ as you called him who is actually a type and foreshadowing of Christ) said this about attempting to see in our own ‘light’, in Psalm 36;9 ‘in your light oh God we see light’. If we insist on seeing things our own way, in our own (dim) light we will never see aright, will never see in truth its impossible yet we stubbornly cling to our own (self-opposing and self-defeating ways) to the bitter end. All the best to you TRJ.
> ” If we insist on seeing things our own way, in our own (dim) light we will never see aright”
Indeed.
great article.
Good article, but you threw me a little by mentioning 13th century until I realised you meant BCE…
It’s postulated by a lot of Biblical scholars that a majority of the Old Testament, certainly the Torah, was written during the Babylonian captivity, as a way for the Israelite priests to maintain Jewish identity in the face of 3 generations of assimilation in Babylon. The rules and laws of feasts, circumcision, and dietary restrictions were to meant separate the Hebrews from their captors. The roughly 90 years of Israel’s “glory years” of Saul, David and Solomon were what the Jews hung on to, and still do.
Did the “messiah concept”, still a cornerstone of Orthodox belief, arise during this period also? Probably. But the Jewish messiah was not meant to be the Son of God (an impossible belief in Jewish religion), but “favored by God” to be a combination “priest/king” who would restore the old Kingdom of Israel (probably by force), and restore the religion to its priestly purity. A New David.
When Jesus was executed as a common criminal, he utterly failed to live up to messianic expectations…he was a total failure as a messiah, according to Jewish beliefs.
VorJack does an excellent job putting little Judah into the overall picture of a world of conflicting tribes and constant warfare over territory. Judaism is no different than any little tribe: warring and settling, and attempting to explain the unexplainable with stories of magic and divine favor. That it survived (barely) is a testament to the resilience of its people. But they’re really no more special than anyone else.
I would have liked some citations for this article. It has interesting ideas, but no sources behind it.
Most of it is pretty old information. But for what its worth, most of it comes from Prof. Robert L. Dise’s “Ancient Civilizations before Alexander” lectures and Prof. Bob Brier’s “History of Ancient Egypt” lectures, both via the Teaching Company. But I’m sure most of the information could be found in most decent textbooks these days.
After reading “The Bible Unearthed” By Finkelstien & Silberman ( http://www.amazon.ca/Bible-Unearthed-Archaeologys-Vision-Ancient/dp/0684869136/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1269059394&sr=8-1 ) one is left with the understanding that very little of the Biblical account of the glory days of David & Solomon is based on any real history. It appears from the archeological record that David’s Jerusalem was little more than a Chieftain’s Village at the time he was supposed to have lived. The Biblical records were probably written much later in the time of King Hezekiah and bear little relationship to the real history of the United Kingdom.
It makes a great story, but like the Gospels, several hundred years later, the fiction appears to have overwhelmed any of the residual facts.
-evan
Very interesting article. In a class I took on the Bible, the professor put forth a theory that the repeated conquests of Israel by pagan cultures (Egypt and Babylon in particular) caused the Jews to create the Mosaic Law (dietary restrictions, rules of uncleanness, etc). He mentioned this in lecture, and I developed it for my final paper. The argument goes as follows:
-The Egyptians/Babylonians were nature worshipers, emphasizing the cyclical nature of the natural order. “To everything there is a season,” that kind of thing. This arose out of the seasons, and cyclical flooding of major rivers that allowed these civilizations to prosper.
-They always conquered the Israelite peoples. Essentially, the Israelites’ “natural order” was really shitty: a cycle of conquest and enslavement. This is noted in the Bible– Jews were first slaves in Egypt, then captured by the Babylonians.
-To reject this horrible “natural order,” they rejected nature itself. Dietary restrictions, the uncleanliness of menstruation, etc all evidence the Israelite’s rejection of nature.
I argued that the rise of the Roman Empire eliminated this cycle for the Jewish peoples, thereby allowing Paul to rescind the Mosaic Law.
It’s an interesting theory at least. What do you all think?
How did one empire, the Roman Empire, rescind the Mosaic Law when other empires, the Egyptian and the Babylonian Empires, fostered them?
In a way it didn’t. One group stuck to the isolation imposed by following mosaic law and became what we know as modern Jews. Like in the other waves of takeover by other empires some have been absorbed into the dominant culture. Just a freak accident of history that had the emperor convert and turn an intermediate between Judaism and roman culture and turn this halfbreed into the state religion of the empire allowed what we now know as Christianity to survive. If that didn’t happen then the Jews who abandoned the isolation would have been completely absorbed by the roman culture just as the Jews of the northern kingdom of Israel have been absorbed by Assyria leaving nothing beside the myth of the lost 10 tribes.
Your partly right Jimmy. Israel’s history is condensed into three parts, is a continual cycle of sin, exile and restoration. This is also the believers cycle/story until he ‘grows up in Christ’ meaning he learns the lesson (and wisdom) of obedience ‘through the things he suffers’. Disobedience to God naturally brings one into captivity, into bondage whereas obedience (walking in the truth, that truth that sets us free) portends to life and liberty.
The whole of the story of the journey of the children of Israel from the Exodus out of Egypt, the subsequent (adventurous, dangerous) march through the Wilderness and on in to the ‘Promised Land’ is symbolic of the believers story and rightful inheritance, its a beautiful (and truthful) allegory, is our story too.
John,
I appreciate your love for the allegorical symbolism of the Exodus ( I once shared that too); but, the archeological evidence tells us that this story is nothing more than a legendary construct designed to buff up what was a far more mundane & rude beginning for the “Hebrew” tribe. (All the evidence points to the Israelites arising as a Canaanite hill people.)
After looking into the corroborative evidence for these events it does appear that this early history, like so much of the Pentateuch is nothing more than a pious fiction. It’s interesting to speculate as to how the ‘God of Truth’ uses fiction to further his goals for his people… Hmmm, maybe this God isn’t so truthful, or maybe he simply isn’t there & his supposed “Word” is a purely man-made entity. These issues should make you think – they did for me
-evan
You must be new here friend, I appreciate you, your journey. Searching for empirical ‘evidence’ in the natural as a validation of the spiritual is an exercise in futility my friend. This is man’s plight since the fall, he is ‘grounded’ to the realm of the senses, seeks for a (visible, tangible) ‘sign’ to believe.
These childlike allegories/stories will never appeal to the natural, adult/carnal mind, actually are intended to completely bypass man’s functional (and fallen) capacity for human reasoning instead cutting right to the (childlike) heart, that same aspect of our being that Christ said we would have to re-activate (as it was in the innocence, ie the garden) in order to ‘enter in’ to the present reality of the kingdom in the here and now.
Trust, childlike trust is the key that opens that divine door, we can’t enter via the natural mind, its a barrier, a hindrance to truth although we ‘think’ otherwise. Being all ‘grown up’, that’s our problem friend.
All the best
Thanks for your question Park.
The importance of the Roman conquest was not in the military victory of the Romans, but in the resulting peace. The pax Romana was an unprecedentedly long period of peace, and a relatively good time to be a Jew. This removal of the initial impetus behind creating the Law (the chaotic cycles of conquest) weakened the sway of the Law over the Israelite peoples.
In order to more fully elucidate my arguments, I’ve synthesized my final paper over on my blog. It’s much too long to put into a comment. (Moderators, let me know if this is against comment policy: I’m sorry if it is!)
Sorry John.
So if the Biblical History is found to have no basis in reality, & that history is simply not reliable, why on earth would you consider its pronouncements regarding unverifiable spiritual issues to have any authority or reliability?
Santa Claus has as much to recommend him. After all only those boys & girls with an open heart can receive his care and attention. (Those little boys & girls are soft & lovable but they have been lied to and they are deluded. It’s a comforting delusion but a delusion all the same.)
I’m sorry, but the spiritual world of which you speak is a fantasy based in wishful thinking and biblical brain-washing. Why would the God of Truth hide behind fictions and lies? Maybe because it’s just like the Santa Claus delusion; a man-made entity.
-evan
Or…I’ve simply journeyed long and far enough to discern the difference between realities, to no longer trust all that my (natural) eyes can see. Tell me Evan, can you ‘see’ the quantum world? How would you describe it to the 9th century man? It was nonetheless ‘real’ then right? Why did JC warn us not to ‘judge not by appearances’? Because the ‘truth’ is not (fully) expressed, can not be known by it (by our natural minds and reasoning’s) alone.
God doesn’t ‘hide’ behind anything, man is simply lost in himSELF and the lowered existence he finds himself tethered to, has lost sight of his (spiritual) origins and true Paternity. Your argument assumes the basis that what is visible IS reality, therein lies your error friend. All the best.
So you have chosen to accept this unverifiable perspective because it feels right or your mother taught you to believe it? Why exactly should someone believe in Jesus instead of Joseph Smith or RL Hubbard or maybe even Muhammed? Unless this, your god, has some sort of verifiable connection to the real world it ranks as little more than a delusionary fantasy.
The Biblical record stands as a testimony or record of how God in his wisdom intervened in human history or the physical world to direct his sinful and flawed people to a place where he could send the ultimate redeemer in his very own son – right?
One would expect an all-knowing all-powerful all-loving god to do a pretty good job of recording his deeds & making sure that there could be no debate about what happened. After all, look at the great effort made to preserve & promulgate the Biblical records to people around the world. The records are pretty important. The veracity of this record should be unassailable. Instead, we have this dubious collection of undated stories written by contradictory and anonymous authors describing events that on closer scrutiny left not a trace & appear to be complete fabrications. Even the ultimate act of all history; God’s sacrifice of his only son, has been so poorly documented that it is questionable that there ever was a real Galilean carpenter claiming to be the Son of God and matching the description of the Gospel Jesus. (After all, the Gospel of Mark was written as a Midrash and is merely OT scripture transported into 1st Century Palestine. The subsequent Gospel writers probably had copies of Mark and Josephus’ writings on their lap and sought to refine the stories for their own theological and political purposes. To assume or ascribe any sort of accuracy to these tales, (which BTW weren’t even recognized by other Christian writers until the mid-second century CE at the earliest), and consider them an accurate description of historical events would be laughable except for the fact that so many still do.)
Don’t you think that this most important event of all history warranted a little bit of quality documentation? A failed 5th Avenue advertising executive could have done a better job of this. But we are to believe that the all-powerful creator of the Cosmos couldn’t have done any better than this?
Anyways, what you attribute to a mysterious & clever god’s desire to be unknowable except by the elect, can also be interpreted as an indication of its non-historical character i.e. it could be a complete fabrication. How would you or anyone else discern the difference? If you assume the conclusion before you investigate the question, you will get to where you are John. If you actually weigh the evidence for belief in the Biblical records one comes away empty-handed – there is no corroborative evidence for most of these tales and they appear to be nothing more than pious fictions.
It would also appear that God has no place in his kingdom for people who value truth over loyalty to dogma. I used to be one of his followers but now that I see that he is merely a false and entirely human creation, he no longer commands my respect or loyalty.
This is not a god worthy of anyone’s allegiance.
-evan
Evan, you’ve approached ‘God’ and the gospel in the same manner you would a science project or a text book which virtually guarantees an eventual (embittered/disillusioned) departure in the same way many others here have experienced. I say this respectfully, sincerely not in any demeaning context since this medium is so limited, is often a poor conveyor of heartfelt intention.
You’ve attempted to ‘journey’ via an historical record. It’s not about a biblical ‘record’ or historical events but an indwelling, living life/nature/Seed, ie Christ within. There is also much ‘religious’ conditioning that comes through in your writings but the ‘religious’ leaders are the very ones Christ reserved his harshest rebukes for. Christ and ‘religion’ are at opposite ends of the spectrum. Religion is a terrible bondage, is a failed external behavior modification technique and demands from those enslaved to its merciless grip a thing they could never give in return, namely a transformed nature.
What’s the gospel really about Evan, do you know? Not yet you don’t, but you will.
I for one am happy to hear that you have wisely discarded all the religious trappings, was a liberating move indeed. Sometimes what seems like the end is really just the beginning. In the paradoxical ways of God life comes out of death. All the best sir.
John,
I don’t think this exchange is going anywhere. I also don’t think your position on this matter makes much sense but maybe we should leave it at that.
All the best to you & may we both never be content to think we have the truth in the bag & all sewn up.
-evan
Evan, it’s best to let John C’s inchoate ramblings be. He’s like that crazy uncle who shows up drunk to the family reunion. He rambles on about UFOs and government conspiracies and his third wife Emma who is trying to kill him with her mind…you just sit there, nod and smile until you get a chance to get away from his crazy ass.
Thanks Roger,
I shouldn’t have taken the bait & got dragged into this…I’ll shut up now & go talk to Aunt Emma.
-evan
May I recommend ‘People of the Sea: the Search for the Philistines’ by Prof. Amnon Ben Tor? The survival of Minoan artistic motives and fashions into Palestinian and Syrian cultures is a fascinating subject, but beware of pseudo-archaeologists trying to draw unsupportable conclusions from the physical evidence.
Prof. Robert L. Dise likes to say, “Goliath may have been the great-great-great grandson of Agamemnon.” I’ve heard him say it at least twice now, though I can tell he’s trying to be deliberately provocative. It’s intriguing, but I have no idea how likely it is.