Sabaoth (sab′ay-oth), Lord of. See names of God in the Hebrew Bible.
sabbath (sab′uhth; Heb. shabbat, “to cease, desist”), the weekly day of rest and abstention from work enjoined upon the Israelites.
Origin: An etiological origin for the sabbath is supplied in Gen. 2:1–3, which speaks of God ceasing from the work of creation on the seventh day, blessing the day, and declaring it holy. The Bible also credits Moses with instituting specific sabbath laws (e.g., Exod. 16:22–30).
Scholars have looked for parallels between Hebrew sabbath observance and days of rest in other religions or cultures of the ancient Near East. Three similarities with Babylonian rites are intriguing, though they ultimately serve to point up the distinctiveness of Israel’s traditions. First, the Babylonian monthly calendar designated certain days on which normal activities of the king and certain professions were restricted. These days, known as “evil days,” were determined by the lunar cycle, corresponding with the quarters of the moon. The biblical sabbath, however, was ordained as a weekly institution with no relation whatsoever to the lunar cycle. Moreover, the somber nature of the Babylonian “evil days” stands in stark contrast to the joyous nature of the sabbath.
Second, in Babylonian culture, the full moon on the fifteenth of the month was known as shapattu, a term possibly related to sabbath. This day was described as a “day of pacifying the heart [of the god]” by certain ceremonies. Apart from the name, however, no significant similarities between this day and the Israelite sabbath have been recognized. Finally, the closest analogy between the biblical sabbath and Babylonian culture is the shared literary motif in Israelite and Babylonian creation stories of the god(s) resting after having created humans (see Enuma Elish 7.8, 34). Even here, however, the parallel is distant. The biblical God rests to signify that the work of creation is completed (nothing more needs to be done), while the Babylonian gods rest because, once humans were created to feed them, they no longer needed to labor to feed themselves.
Observance: The sabbath was a cornerstone of Israelite religious practice from earliest times. This can be seen from the consistent mention of the sabbath throughout all the strata of pentateuchal and extrapentateuchal sources, with the exception of wisdom literature. In the Pentateuch, sabbath observance is legislated repeatedly in general terms (Exod. 20:8–11; 23:12; 31:12–17; Lev. 23:3; Deut. 5:12–15), though the types of work prohibited are relatively limited; those mentioned include gathering food, plowing and reaping, kindling a fire, and chopping wood (Exod. 16:29–30; 34:21; 35:3; Num. 15:32–36). The positive specifications of sabbath observance include giving rest to one’s servants and animals (Exod. 20:10; 23:12; Deut. 5:14).
Outside the Pentateuch, evidence relating to the practical observance of the sabbath is not overabundant, but it is more extensive than that found for most laws. During the monarchic period (ca. 1050–587/6 BCE), the sabbath (as well as the New Moon) was marked by visits to prophet and temple (2 Kings 4:23; Isa. 1:13). Business activity came to a halt (Amos 8:5). The sabbath was a joyous day, much like the festivals (Hos. 2:13; Lam. 2:6). Its desecration was severely attacked by Jeremiah, who lashed out against those who carried burdens from their houses or through the gates of Jerusalem on the sabbath (17:19–27). During the period of postexilic restoration, Nehemiah enforced observance of the sabbath by locking the city gates of Jerusalem in order to prevent traders from selling their wares (Neh. 13:15–22). Contemporary documents from a Jewish colony in Elephantine, Egypt, likewise mention the sabbath, attesting to its recognition by Jews in the Dispersion (i.e., outside the land of Israel) in the fifth century BCE.
In addition to these features of popular observance of the sabbath, one can piece together a picture of sabbath observance in the temple. The pentateuchal prescriptions of additional sacrifices and changing of the bread of the Presence on the sabbath (Lev. 24:8; Num. 28:9–10) apparently reflect accepted practice (cf. Ezek. 45:17; 46:4–5; 1 Chron. 9:32; 23:31; 2 Chron. 2:3; 8:13; 31:3). The sacrificial service may have been accompanied by a special psalm (Ps. 92:1). There is also a somewhat cryptic reference to the changing of the royal guards at the temple on the sabbath (2 Kings 11:4–12).
Purpose: Two major rationales for sabbath observance are presented in the Pentateuch. The concept of the sabbath as a memorial to God’s resting from the work of creation is expressed in Gen. 2:1–3 and repeated in Exod. 20:11; 31:17. The last passage broadens the concept in defining the sabbath as “a sign forever between (God) and the people of Israel.” Although God had already sanctified the seventh day at the time of creation, God did not reveal its special status to humankind at large, but only to Israel. Thus, Israel’s observance of the sabbath underscored its special relationship with God. This rationale was emphasized by Priestly writers.
Along with the theological rationale, a distinctly humanistic approach is to be found in Exod. 23:12 and Deut. 5:14–15, both of which ground the observance of the sabbath on the need to give servants, strangers, and work animals an opportunity to rest. The added reminder in Deut. 5:15 of Israel’s experience in Egypt most likely intends to bolster the owner’s feeling of compassion for the weak and destitute (cf. 15:15; 16:12).
Sabbath observance took on an added significance with the prophets active shortly before and during the exilic period. Jeremiah attaches the very fate of Jerusalem to the observance of the sabbath, thereby expressing a radical new conception (17:19–27; cf. Neh. 13:17–18). Ezekiel subscribes to the same line of thought in equating the sabbath with all the other commandments (20:11–24). The prophecies in Isa. 56:2–7 and 58:13–14 likewise single out the sabbath as the primary commandment, observance of which will bring personal as well as national salvation. The mention of the sabbath in the Elephantine papyri and the appearance of the personal name Shabbetai, meaning “born on the sabbath” (Ezra 10:15), likewise attest to its importance in this period.
This unique prophetic idea may stem from the ever growing need for Israel to preserve its own identity in the face of a hostile pagan world. To this end, Ezekiel significantly draws from the Priestly formulation in describing the sabbath as a “sign” between God and Israel (20:12), though his stress on the national consequences of sabbath desecration represents a new application of the Priestly concept. Another explanation for the prominence of the sabbath in the exilic literature is the fact that observance of the sabbath was not dependent on the temple. Although some of the old sabbath practices, such as the additional sacrifices, became impossible with the destruction of the temple, the continued observance of the sabbath on the lay level ensured Israel’s steadfastness to its faith.
In addition to the weekly seventh day of rest, the term “sabbath” and its related form shabbaton occur in the Pentateuch with reference to festival days and to the “sabbatical” year, during which the land was to lie fallow (Lev. 16:31; 23:24, 32, 39; 25:2–6; 26:34, 35, 43). Each of these occasions shares the chief characteristic of the weekly sabbath, namely, the restriction of work. It has been suggested that the sabbath day and the sabbatical year express the belief that Israel’s time and land belong ultimately to God.
In the NT: Jesus appears to have respected and observed the sabbath, but he entered into disputes with the Pharisees over what was or was not permitted on the sabbath. One such dispute was raised by an incident in which his disciples plucked grain on the sabbath (Matt. 12:1–8; Mark 2:23–28); Jesus defends their action as appropriate, claiming that “The sabbath was made for humankind, and not humankind for the sabbath” (Mark 2:23), a perspective paralleled by Jewish traditions later included in the Talmud (“The sabbath is given to you; you are not to be delivered to the sabbath,” Yoma 85b). But then he also claimed, “The Son of Man is lord even of the sabbath” (Mark 2:28), implying that his legal interpretations were to be accepted on the authority of his person. Other sabbath controversies between Jesus and the Pharisees involved the question of healing on the sabbath (Matt. 12:9–14; Mark 3:1–6; Luke 6:1–11; 13:10–17; 14:1–6; John 5:9–18). Here, the basic points at issue would also have been matters of internal Jewish debate: questions of what constitutes work (Jesus merely speaks a word, without applying medicine, etc.) and whether such activity is justified if it allows the beneficiary to enjoy the sabbath as intended. In any case, Jesus is never presented as opposing sabbath observance as such. Indeed, Matt. 24:20 records his telling people to pray that the coming day of sacrilege will not happen in winter or on a sabbath, since they will have to flee to the mountains and travel would be restricted at either of those times.
In the early Christian community, observance of the sabbath seems to have given way to observance of what the Christians called the “Lord’s day” (Rev. 1:10; cf. Did. 14:1). This was the first day of the week (rather than the last), and a number of NT passages indicate that it was the special day for gatherings of the community for worship and fellowship (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:2); the first day of the week was probably chosen because it was the day on which Jesus was said to have risen from the dead (Matt. 28:1). Paul, furthermore, may have objected to Gentile Christians being required to adopt sabbath observance (Gal. 4:10). Indeed, the Letter to the Colossians instructs its readers that sabbath observance is not required (2:16). Thus, by the beginning of the second century, Christians appear to have transitioned from sabbath observance on Saturday to observance of the Lord’s day on Sunday.
Bibliography
Carson, D. A., ed. From Sabbath to Lord’s Day. Eerdmans, 1982.
Greenberg, Moshe. “Sabbath.” Encyclopaedia Judaica. Vol. 14. Pp. 557–62.
Porten, Bezalel. Archives from Elephantine. University of California Press, 1965. Pp. 122–33, 150, 173. D.A.G./J.H.T./M.A.P.
sabbath day’s journey, the distance one is allowed to walk on the sabbath. Work was to be suspended on the sabbath, and extensive walking was regarded as a form of work. Exod. 16:29 legislates, “Do not leave your place on the seventh day.” Num. 35:5 defines the levitical pasture lands as extending 2,000 cubits in each direction from the city center. Tannaitic law defined the sabbath day’s journey as 2,000 cubits. Acts 1:12 mentions that Jerusalem is a sabbath day’s journey from the Mount of Olives. The Zadokite Fragments among the Dead Sea Scrolls (Damascus Document) also counted 2,000 cubits from the city as a sabbath limit for walking after one’s animals. Boundary stones marking the sabbath limits (Heb. tekhum shabbat) of the city were found in the excavation of Gezer. See also sabbath.
L.H.S.
sabbatical (suh-bat′i-kuhl) year, the biblical prescription that every seventh year the land must lie uncultivated. This regulation is based on the assumption that the land does not actually belong to any one person to dispose of at will, but to God. Fruit that grows on its own in the sabbatical year is to be left for the poor and the wild animals (Exod. 23:10–11; Lev. 25:1–7). In addition, “every creditor shall remit the claim that is held against a neighbor” (Deut. 15:2). This remission of debts is designed to provide the means to correct social inequities.
The observance of the sabbatical year in Second Temple times (late fifth century BCE–70 CE) is attested in Neh. 10:32 and 1 Macc. 6:49, 53, and Julius Caesar confirmed the Jews’ exemption from taxes in the sabbatical year (Josephus Antiquities 14.202). See also jubilee.
L.H.S.
Sabta (sab′tuh; also Sabtah), a son of Cush (1 Chron. 1:9; Gen. 10:7) and a tribe in southwestern Arabia of uncertain location.
Sabtecha (sab′tuh-kuh), a son of Cush (Gen. 10:7; 1 Chron. 1:9) and a tribal locality in Arabia still unidentified.
Sachar (say′kahr).
1 One of David’s bodyguards, a Hararite (1 Chron. 11:35).
2 A levitical gatekeeper of Korahite descent (1 Chron. 26:4).
sackcloth, a dark-colored material of goat or camel hair used for making grain bags and garments. A garment of sackcloth was uncomfortable and was therefore worn by those in mourning. Jacob “put sackcloth upon his loins” when mourning for Joseph (Gen. 37:34). When national calamity threatened the destruction of the Jewish people in the book of Esther, the Jews lay in sackcloth and ashes, fasting, weeping, and lamenting (4:3). The use of sackcloth continued for a long time, as it is still mentioned in 1 Macc. 2:14, 3:47 and the NT (Matt. 11:21) as a sign of distress and repentance. See also mourning rites.
L.H.S.
sacrifice. The offering of animal sacrifices was central to worship in Israel until the end of the Second Temple period. Sacrifices were also a constituent part of most other religions in Canaan and the ancient Near East. Israel differed from many in its prohibition of human sacrifice (Deut. 18:10; 2 Kings 16:3; Ps. 106:37; Jer. 7:31), though that prohibition was not always followed (Judg. 11:30–40). The story of Abraham’s near sacrifice of Isaac in Gen. 22 may have served as an apologetic account to clarify that Israel’s nonperformance of human sacrifice did not stem from a lack of devotion or commitment, but was in keeping with the preferences of its merciful deity.
In general, sacrificial worship was modeled after the service given to human sovereigns; this was especially prominent in pagan religions. In these the deity’s image inhabited a palace (temple) and had servants (priests) who supplied food (offered sacrifices), washed and anointed and clothed the image, scented the air with incense, lit lamps at night, and guarded doors to the house. Worshipers brought offerings and tithes to the deity, said prayers, and bowed down, as one might act toward a king. Indeed the very purpose of human existence, in Mesopotamian thought, was to provide the gods with the necessities of life (this was why humans had been created).
Although Israelite worship shared many of these external forms, even to the point of calling sacrifices the “food of God” (e.g., Lev. 21:6), some of the underlying theological assumptions were quite different. As the prophets pointed out, God could not be worshiped through ritual alone. To honor God, it was necessary to obey God’s laws, the moral and ethical ones as well as ritual prescriptions. To appear before God with sacrifices while flouting God’s demands for justice was to insult God (cf. Isa. 1:11–17; Amos 5:21–22). Furthermore, God certainly did not need the sacrifices for food (Ps. 50:12–13); rather, sacrifice and other forms of worship were offered to honor God. Sacrifices were brought as gifts to God. The Hebrew term for cereal offering (minkhah), for instance, is used in other contexts to refer to a gift presented by one person to another (cf. Gen. 32:18, where Jacob offers a large “present” to Esau to win his favor); it is, however, also used for “tribute” paid by vassals or subjects to the superior, conquering power (e.g., 2 Sam. 8:2).
Historical Development: Actual sacrificial practices in Israel developed over time.
Ancestral Period: The practice of the ancestors was simple and informal; they had no priests or temples. Rather, the ancestors themselves offered burnt offerings at temporary altars they built themselves in the open (cf. Gen. 8:20; 12:7–8; 13:18; 22:13; 26:25). Jacob also worshiped by pouring a drink offering on a pillar he set up and by anointing it with oil (28:18; 35:14). In later periods this would probably have been considered idolatrous (Exod. 23:24; Deut. 7:5; 1 Kings 14:22–23).
Period of the Judges: During the time of the judges this type of worship continued to be practiced, but priests and temples were also known. Levites were considered the proper people to act as priests (Judg. 17:13), but individual Israelites continued to offer their own sacrifices on simple outdoor altars (6:24–27; 13:19). There was a shrine at Shiloh during this period, where the ark of God was kept until it was captured by the Philistines. The account in 1 Sam. 1–3 provides a glimpse of worship at this time. Families might go to the shrine for a yearly feast, where they would offer sacrifice, such as a peace offering, and pray, as Hannah did. The priests there took a portion of the meat, whatever “the fork brought up” (2:13–14). As in Leviticus the animal’s suet belonged to God. It was to be offered first, after which the priest could take his share. Eli’s sons were condemned for disregarding this rule and thereby slighting God (2:15–17).
First and Second Temple Times: Even after Solomon built the temple in Jerusalem and installed the ark there, the people continued to offer sacrifices at “high places” (local outdoor altars). After Solomon’s death (ca. 922 BCE), Jeroboam, king of Israel, built two shrines of his own at Bethel and Dan, for fear that the people, by worshiping in Jerusalem, would defect to the Davidic kings there (1 Kings 12:26–29). Jeroboam also appointed non-Levites as priests (12:31) and moved the Festival of Tabernacles to the eighth month (12:32–33). The books of Kings and Chronicles condemn both Jeroboam’s shrines and the high places as idolatrous (1 Kings 14:23; 15:14; 2 Kings 12:3; 14:4; 15:4; 2 Chron. 11:14–15; 15:17). These high places were often associated with idolatrous pillars and other pagan practices (1 Kings 14:23–24; 2 Kings 15:3–4), and Jeroboam’s shrines were condemned for the calf images he erected at them (1 Kings 12:31; 14:9). Under Josiah these high places were finally eradicated, and sacrificial worship was centralized at the Jerusalem temple (2 Kings 23:5–9), as prescribed in Deuteronomy. The people, however, continued to offer cereal offerings and incense privately, since there was no blood involved (cf. Jer. 41:4–5, where these offerings are brought to a ruined temple). This practice persisted even in Second Temple times.
As Described in Priestly Writings: Ideal sacrificial worship is described in the Priestly instructions (P) of Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers. Cattle, sheep, goats, doves, and pigeons were the only kinds of animals that could be offered, and vegetable offerings were wheat, barley, olive oil, wine, and frankincense. All offerings were salted (Lev. 2:13; cf. Ezek. 43:24). Sacrificial animals had to be unblemished; i.e., they could not be diseased or injured or castrated (see Lev. 22:17–25).
The most important part of any animal sacrifice was the manipulation of the blood at the altar. Whether it was dashed against its sides or smeared on its horns, this ritual act made the sacrifice valid; in fact, it distinguished sacrifice from mere slaughter. Leviticus requires that all animals eligible as offerings be sacrificed, rather than simply slaughtered (17:3–4). In addition, the animal’s suet (the hard fat on the entrails) and kidneys belonged to God and therefore had to be burned on the altar (3:16). Only a priest could perform these essential acts, since only he could officiate at the altar (3:5, 11). In exchange for his services, the priest received some portion of the sacrifice.
Burnt Offering: The burnt offering (Lev. 1) was the most common sacrifice. Appropriate for atonement or thanksgiving, its purpose, basically, was to win God’s favor. It was probably the oldest kind of sacrifice (it is mentioned throughout the Bible), and it played a major role in public worship (Num. 28–29) and rites of cleansing (Lev. 12:6, 8; 14:19, 22; 15:15, 30; 16:24). The animal offered normally had to be male (except for birds). The animal was entirely burned on the altar, except for the hide, which went to the priest (Lev. 7:8).
Peace Offering: The peace offering (Lev. 3) was brought when one wished to eat meat. It could be a bull or a cow, or a sheep or a goat (male or female). The officiating priest received the right thigh, while the animal’s breast was shared by all the priests (7:31–34). The person bringing the sacrifice received the rest of the animal, which had to be eaten within one or two days (7:15; 19:6–8).
The peace offering was further subdivided, according to purpose, into the thank offering, the freewill offering, and the votive offering (Lev. 7:11–18). Ps. 107 mentions four occasions for which a thank offering would be appropriate: successful passage through the desert, release from prison, recovery from a serious illness, or survival of a storm at sea. The votive offering was given to repay a vow (cf. 2 Sam. 15:7–8), while the freewill offering needed no special occasion. These offerings were distinguished ritually, in that the thank offering required different kinds of breads to accompany it (Lev. 7:12) and had to be eaten in one day, whereas the votive offering and the freewill offering could be left over one night and finished on the following day. Under no circumstances could a sacrifice be eaten after the second day (7:15–18).
The ordination offering was a special type of peace offering, the blood of which was used as part of the ritual for ordaining the high priest. Like the thank offering, the ordination offering had a bread accompaniment and had to be eaten on the same day that it was offered (Exod. 29:19–28, 31–34; Lev. 8:22–29, 31–32).
Sin Offering: The term “sin offering” is somewhat misleading. The purpose of this sacrifice (Lev. 4–5:13) was not to atone for any kind of sin, as the name seems to imply. Crimes against other people were dealt with by appropriate punishments that did not involve sacrifice, while deliberate crimes against God (done “with a high hand”) could not be sacrificially atoned for at all (Num. 15:30–31). Rather, the sin offering was used to cleanse the sanctuary of impurity. For this reason it was regularly offered at festivals (28:15, 22, 30; 29:5, 11, 16, 19). As a private offering, the sin offering (or, more properly, the purification offering) was brought when a person had unwittingly violated a prohibition (Lev. 4:2) or for rites of cleansing (12:6; 14:19, 22; 15:15, 30; 16:3, 5; Num. 6:14, 16), or for failure to cleanse oneself (Lev. 5:2–3), or to fulfill a vow (5:4), or to respond to a public adjuration (5:1). When both the sin offering and the burnt offering were to be offered, the sin offering always came first; the altar had to be cleansed before other sacrifices could be offered on it (cf. 9:7–21; 14:19).
The animals used for the private sin offering varied with the status of the offender. The high priest or community as a whole offered a bull; a ruler offered a male goat, while a layperson brought a female goat or a ewe. The ritual also varied. When the community (or the high priest, who represented it) had transgressed, the sanctuary itself was defiled; it was cleansed by sprinkling some of the bull’s blood in front of the sanctuary veil and smearing it on the horns of the incense altar (Lev. 4:5–7, 16–18). The bull’s meat could not be eaten, so it was burned outside the camp (4:12, 21). In the case of an individual, whether ruler or commoner, only the outer altar was defiled. It was cleansed by smearing the blood of the goat or ewe on the altar’s horns, and the priest received the meat of the animal. For those who were poor, there was a provision for a less costly sin offering (5:7–13; 12:8; 14:21–22).
Guilt Offering: The guilt offering (Lev. 5:14–6:7) was brought when one had desecrated some holy thing (5:14) or perjured oneself (6:2–5). Its purpose was the reparation of damages. The sacrifice consisted of a ram, offered in a manner similar to the peace offering (7:2–7); also necessary were the offerer’s confession of guilt and the repayment of damages, plus a 20 percent fine. The priest who offered it received the meat (7:7). Uniquely, this sacrifice could be paid for in money (5:18; cf. 2 Kings 12:16). It was always a private sacrifice.
In two special cases, cleansing a person healed of leprosy or a person whose Nazirite vow had been compromised through accidental contact with a corpse, the guilt offering was a male lamb (Lev. 14:12, 21; Num. 6:9, 12). For the cleansing of the person healed of leprosy, the blood of the guilt offering was applied to the person’s extremities as part of the cleansing ritual (Lev. 14:12–14, 25).
Cereal Offering: The cereal offering (Lev. 2) was a vegetable counterpart to the burnt offerings. It could be raw, in which case frankincense was added, or cooked in various ways (baked, boiled, fried), but it could not be leavened or sweetened (2:11). Oil was present whether the offering was cooked or raw. The flour used was usually wheat (semolina), but barley flour or parched grain could also be used (2:14). A poor person was allowed to substitute a cereal offering for an animal sin offering, and when this occurred, the flour was offered dry, without oil and incense (5:11; cf. also Num. 5:15). Only a handful of the cereal offering (together with all the incense, if present) was burned on the altar; the remainder went to the priest (Lev. 2:2–3; 6:14–16). The sole exception was the priest’s cereal offering; it was burned entirely since a priest could not profit from his own offering (6:23).
According to Num. 15 the burnt offering and the peace offering were normally accompanied by cereal offerings (mixed with oil) and drink offerings (wine libations). The amount of grain and wine depended on the type of animal being offered; the larger the species, the more grain and wine.
Temple Ritual: The daily ritual was as follows. Every morning, the ashes on the sacrificial altar were cleared off, the fire was stoked (Lev. 6:10–13), and the daily burnt offering, a yearling male lamb, plus its accompanying cereal and drink offerings, was offered (6:8–13; Exod. 29:38–42; Num. 28:3–8). The high priest, dressed in his priestly garments (Exod. 28:29, 30, 35, 38), entered the sanctuary, trimmed the oil lamps, and offered a specially formulated incense on the incense altar inside (Exod. 30:7–9, 34–36). Outside, he would offer a special cereal offering composed of wheat cakes cooked on a griddle (Lev. 6:19–23). In the evening, a second lamb was offered, and the high priest again entered the sanctuary to trim the oil lamps (24:1–4; cf. 1 Sam. 3:3) and burn incense. He would also offer the second half of the high-priestly cereal offering.
Such was the daily routine. Every sabbath day two additional lambs were offered, like the daily ones (Num. 28:9–10). Also, the high priest would replace the twelve loaves of bread (the bread of Presence), which were arranged in two rows on the table inside the sanctuary, with frankincense on top (Lev. 24:5–9; cf. 1 Sam. 21:1–6). At the beginning of each month (the new moon) and at all the festivals the priests blew trumpets (Num. 10:8, 10), and additional sacrifices were offered, both burnt offerings and a sin offering (which was always a male goat; see Num. 28–29). Festival days (or the beginning and end of weeklong festivals) were days of rest, like the sabbath (Lev. 23:7–8, 21, 24, 27, 35, 36).
On the Day of Atonement the people rested and fasted, and the high priest, wearing special garments for the occasion, performed the Day of Atonement ritual (Lev. 16), which cleansed the sanctuary of all impurity. It consisted of two sin offerings, one for the high priest and one for the people, whose blood was brought, not only into the sanctuary, but into the inner shrine itself, the Holy of Holies, where the ark of God was kept. The high priest entered the Holy of Holies only after placing a pan of burning incense inside, to make a screen of smoke between him and the ark (16:13). After cleansing the sanctuary, the priest laid his hands on a living goat and confessed the people’s sins, thereby transferring those sins to the goat, which was then sent away into the wilderness.
It is difficult to ascertain to what extent the rituals performed in Solomon’s temple corresponded to the instructions of the Pentateuch. For instance, there may have been only one daily burnt offering (cf. Ezek. 46:13–15) offered every morning, rather than two, with only a cereal offering presented in the evening (2 Kings 16:15; cf. Ezra 9:5; Ps. 141:2; Dan. 9:21; where the “evening sacrifice” is literally the evening cereal offering). In Second Temple times, the pentateuchal instructions were followed in detail in temple worship.
Donations: In addition to public and private sacrifices, offered at regular seasons or at will, the people donated a tenth portion of their produce to the sanctuary. According to P, this tithe was given to the Levites, in exchange for their work in guarding and transporting the tabernacle (Num. 18:21–24; cf. Deut. 14:22–29). The Levites themselves gave a tithe of their tithe to the priests (Num. 18:26). Furthermore, the priests received the first fruits of all produce, including a sheaf of grain at the beginning of the harvest and two loaves of leavened bread at its end (Lev. 23:10–11, 17; cf. Num. 18:11), the firstborn of all livestock (Num. 18:12–13, 15–17), and the first part of the processed produce (flour, wine, oil; cf. 15:17–21; 18:12).
People might also voluntarily donate items to the sanctuary, which would then belong to the priests. If persons or nonsacrificial animals were donated, only the monetary value was paid (Lev. 27:1–8). Land, tithes of vegetable produce, and nonsacrificial animals could also be redeemed from the sanctuary by the donor, by paying the value plus a 20 percent penalty (27:13, 19, 31).
Ritual Purity: Persons participating in sacrificial worship had to be ritually clean. Contact with a corpse (Num. 19) or animal carcass (Lev. 11:8, 24–25, 31, 39), sexual emissions (15), childbirth (12), and leprosy (13) all caused a person to become unclean in various degrees. An unclean person could not eat sacrificial meat (7:20), enter the sanctuary, or even handle tithes or other items belonging to God (12:4). Cleansing was effected by the passing of time accompanied by bathing and washing one’s clothes. Certain more severe states of impurity required additional rites of cleansing and might take several days to complete. Although one was excluded from worship, being unclean was not a crime. Failure to cleanse oneself after the period of impurity had passed, however, was sinful and necessitated bringing a sin offering (5:2–3), since (prolonged) impurity defiled the sanctuary (cf. 16:19; Num. 19:20).
To be eligible to officiate in the sanctuary, priests were required to be not only clean, but unblemished (Lev. 21:17–23). Furthermore, they could not officiate while drunk (10:9) or mourning (10:6). They had to be properly dressed (Exod. 28:40–43); and before officiating at either the altar or inside the sanctuary they were to wash their hands and feet (30:18–21; officiating priests did not wear shoes; cf. 3:5; Josh. 5:15).
Other Versions of Sacrificial Procedures: The book of Deuteronomy presents a slightly modified (though much less detailed) version of the system for sacrifices described in Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers. The principal difference lies in Deuteronomy’s insistence on a single sanctuary for the entire land of Israel to which all sacrifices were to be brought (cf. 12:5–14). As a result, Deuteronomy permits nonsacrificial slaughter of animals for meat (12:15; cf. Lev. 17:2–4), since for many Israelites the distance to the sanctuary would have been too great for them to travel whenever meat was to be eaten (12:20–21). There are also other differences in detail in Deuteronomy regarding the Passover (16:2; cf. Exod. 12:5; Deut. 16:7; cf. Exod. 12:9), tithes (Deut. 14:22–29; cf. Num. 18), firstborn animals (Deut. 15:19–23), and the priests’ share of sacrifices (18:2; cf. Lev. 7:31–32).
Sacrificial practice in Ezekiel’s visionary temple (Ezek. 40–48) also differs somewhat from the Priestly system. For instance, Ezekiel calls for a purification of the temple on the first and seventh days of the first month, presumably in preparation for the Passover (45:18–20; cf. v. 21). He also mentions only a single daily burnt offering sacrificed each morning (46:13–15). Ezekiel’s system was never actually put into effect, but it may reflect the thinking of certain priests of his time, since Ezekiel himself was a priest (1:3).
Early Christian Interpretation: The NT authors interpret the death of Christ as a sacrifice for sin (John 1:29; Rom. 3:24–25). This one sacrifice was deemed so perfect that no more sacrifices would ever be needed (Heb. 9:11–12, 24–26). Thus, although Christians retained the writings of the Hebrew Bible as scripture, the entire institution of temple, priesthood, sacrifice, and cleansing rituals became obsolete. Frequently, these were spiritualized: e.g., the community itself was a living temple of God, inhabited by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 6:19; cf. Eph. 2:21–22; 1 Pet. 2:9); all believers in Christ were deemed to be priests (1 Pet. 2:5, 9; Rev. 1:6; 5:10); and a life of service and self-denial was construed as sacrificial worship (Mark 8:34; Rom. 12:1–2). See also festivals, feasts, and fasts; priests; tabernacle; temple, the; temples.
S.R.
Sadducees (sad′joo-seez), a group in Judaism active from the second century BCE to the first century CE. The name may derive from a Hebrew word meaning “righteous ones” (tsaddiqim) or from the name of Zadok, the high priest under David (1 Kings 1:26). The Sadducees are mentioned in the writings of the Jewish historian Josephus, the NT, and rabbinic literature, but no consistent picture emerges. None of their own literature has survived.
According to Josephus: In the writings of Josephus the Sadducees are enumerated, along with the Pharisees and Essenes, as a Jewish philosophical school or way of life (Antiquities 10.277–81; 13.173, 294, 297; 18.16–17; 20.199; Jewish War 2.164–65). In contrast to the other two groups, the Sadducees are said to reject the immortality of the soul, to attribute all human activity to free will and none to fate (or providence), and to reject other traditions, especially those of the Pharisees. Josephus also says that the Sadducees were influential with only a few wealthy families and not with the general populace, which followed the Pharisees’ interpretation of the law. Josephus also describes the Sadducees as boorish in their social interaction; he indicates that they encouraged conflict with teachers rather than respect for them and were more stern than the Pharisees in recommending punishments for crimes. Apart from such references to attributes of the Sadducees, however, Josephus has little to say; he does not describe their origins, indicate how the party was organized, or summarize its actual teaching and agenda.
In the NT: The Gospels and the book of Acts mention the Sadducees occasionally, but no coherent picture emerges. The main point is simply that, like the Pharisees, they were opponents of Jesus. John the Baptist tells them to bear fruit worthy of repentance (Matt. 3:7), and Jesus warns his disciples to beware of their teaching (16:12). A few details, however, differentiate them from the Pharisees. They do not believe in life after death (Mark 12:18; Acts 23:8) or in angels and spirits (Acts 23:8). In the book of Acts, the Sadducees are active in the temple, associated with the priests (4:1; 5:17). They also serve as members of “the council,” which is probably to be identified with the Sanhedrin (23:6).
In Rabbinic Literature: In rabbinic literature the Sadducees are treated as opponents of the Pharisees and their heirs, the rabbis. The items on which they disagree with the Pharisees in the Mishnah and Tosefta include purity laws, civil law, temple ritual, and sabbath observance, all matters of great interest for the rabbis. The Babylonian Talmud also mentions their denial of resurrection. Some texts treat the Sadducees as heretics; in all cases they are set against the rabbinic interpretation of the tradition and used as foils for presenting that tradition.
In consideration of all of this data, many commentators have surmised that the Sadducees were mostly priests and probably wealthy or aristocratic community leaders who sat in the Sanhedrin, were hellenized (i.e., influenced by Greek culture), and interested in cultivating good relationships with the Romans and, in general, preserving the status quo. This common portrait, however, probably tends toward oversimplification. According to the book of Acts some members of the Sanhedrin were Pharisees (23:6–8), and according to Josephus some priests were also Pharisees; and many priests do not appear to have been associated with the Sadducees or the Pharisees. Thus, Sadducees cannot be identified as exclusively priestly, nor can the chief priests of the NT all be assumed to have been Sadducees. It must ultimately be acknowledged that all of the sources for information on the Sadducees are biased against them, so that an accurate picture of their beliefs and practices cannot be fully recovered.
The biblical story in which the Sadducees figure most prominently is one in which Sadducees present Jesus with a hypothetical scenario that, to their thinking, reveals the absurdity of belief in an afterlife. If a woman is married to seven different brothers (in keeping with the law for levirate marriage), whose wife will she be in the resurrection? Jesus says they are wrong, because they “know neither the scriptures nor the power of God.” The scenario they propose is not relevant because, in the resurrection people are like angels and “neither marry nor are given in marriage”; this has often been taken to mean that the spiritual bodies people possess in heaven will no longer be male or female, though it could simply mean that all perfected beings will be celibate. In any case, Jesus goes on to defend the notion of resurrection by pointing out that, in the episode of the burning bush, God used the present tense to say, “I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob,” implying that those long dead ancestors were still living in heaven (Mark 12:18–27; cf. Matt. 22:23–32; Luke 20:27–38). This story is presented as one in a series of challenges put to Jesus by religious authorities. Matt. 22:34 indicates that his answer “silenced the Sadducees,” and the Gospels of Mark and Luke both indicate that scribes (possibly Pharisees) were pleased with his comments (Mark 12:28; Luke 20:39). See also Essenes; Josephus; Pharisees; Zadok.
A.J.S./M.A.P.
saffron (Crocus sativus), the dried styles and stigmas of the crocus used as a flavoring and as a yellow coloring in foods and textiles (Song of Sol. 4:14). Highly valued, it was originally imported from the Far East.
saints, persons distinct because of their relationship to God. The only reference to saints in the Hebrew Bible in the NRSV occurs in Ps. 31:23 (“Love the LORD, all you his saints!”); here, the word translates a Hebrew term (khasid) expressive of covenant faithfulness. The same word also occurs in a number of other psalms, where the NRSV translates it “faithful ones” (30:4; 37:28; 149:9) or the “faithful” (85:8; 97:10; 148:14). A similar expression (‘am qaddish) is rendered “people of the holy ones” in Dan. 7:27; 8:24. In both of the latter cases, the faithful of Israel are in view, and their “sainthood” consists in the relationship they bear to God, who has destined them for righteousness and salvation (cf. Pss. 16:3; 132:9, 16).
The same associations are present in the NT, where “saints” always translates the Greek term for “holy ones” (hagioi) and where it refers to those whose relationship with God is maintained through faith in Jesus Christ (e.g., 1 Cor. 6:2). Thus, in Rom. 1:6–7, the phrases “called to belong to Jesus Christ,” “God’s beloved,” and “called to be saints” are virtually synonymous. In Acts and the Pauline Letters, the term most often refers to Christians who live in particular places, such as Jerusalem (e.g., Acts 9:13; Rom. 15:25, 26, 31), Lydda (Acts 9:32), and Corinth (e.g., 1 Cor. 1:2); occasionally, however, Paul gives it a broader reference (e.g., Rom. 16:2), which becomes the normal usage of later writers (e.g., Heb. 6:10; Jude 3). In Revelation, it is a frequent term for the Christian martyrs (e.g., 17:6). See also holiness; sanctification.
V.P.F.
Salamis (sal′uh-mis), a city on the eastern coast of Cyprus, which, according to Greek mythology, was founded at the end of the Trojan War. Named after the island of Salamis, the city developed around an excellent natural harbor, becoming the main port of Cyprus and a commercial center for the Roman Empire. After leaving Antioch and sailing from the port of Seleucia, Saul, Barnabas, and John Mark stopped in Salamis (Acts 13:1–5). See also Cyprus.
Salecah (sal′uh-kuh), a city of Og in Bashan (Deut. 3:10) captured by Israel and assigned to Gad (Josh. 12:5–6; 13:11; 1 Chron. 5:11). Modern Salkhad in the Jebel Druze in Syria is a likely identification.
Salem (say′luhm; Heb., “peace”), the locality over which Melchizedek was king (Gen. 14:18), frequently identified with Jerusalem. The latter identification is specifically made in Ps. 76:2, where Salem is used in parallelism with Zion as the dwelling place of God. Later writers, including Josephus, also connected Salem with Jerusalem, but some ancient writers identified it with other sites. In the Letter to the Hebrews, the author recalls that the root meaning of Salem is “peace” (7:2); thus, Melchizedek is identified as “king of peace.” See also Jerusalem; Melchizedek; peace; Zion.
Salim (say′lim), a place near Aenon, possibly in the Beth-shan Valley near the northern end of the Jordan River, where John was baptizing (John 3:23). See also Aenon.
Sallai (sal′i).
1 A postexilic Benjaminite resident in Jerusalem (Neh. 11:8).
2 A priest in Jerusalem under the high priest Joiakim, possibly of the family Sallu (Neh. 12:20; cf. 12:7).
Sallu (sal′oo).
1 A postexilic Benjaminite resident of Jerusalem (1 Chron. 9:7; Neh. 11:7).
2 A postexilic levitical family in Jerusalem (Neh. 12:7).
Salma (sal′muh).
1 The father of Boaz, also called Salmon (1 Chron. 2:11). See also Salmon.
2 A descendant of Judah and the father of Bethlehem (1 Chron. 2:51, 54).
Salmon (sal′muhn), a Judahite, the son of Nahshon and the father of Boaz (Ruth 4:20–21). He is also called Salma (1 Chron. 2:11) and Sala (Luke 3:32). Salmon was an ancestor of David and so, also, of Jesus (Ruth 4:22; Matt. 1:4–5; Luke 3:32). In Matthew’s Gospel, his wife’s name is given as Rahab (who is thus the mother of Boaz).
Salmone (sal-moh′nee), modern Cape Sidero at Ermoupolis (ancient Itanos) on the northeast extremity of Crete, site of a temple to Athena Salmonia. Paul sailed past here en route to Rome (Acts 27:7).
Salome (suh-loh′mee).
1 The daughter of Herodias who is mentioned, but not named, in the Gospels (Matt. 14:3–11; Mark 6:17–28). She danced at a banquet given by her uncle and stepfather Herod Antipas, who was so pleased that he offered to give her anything she desired. At the instigation of her mother, she requested the head of John the Baptist on a platter. Josephus, who does not recount this incident, gives the location of John’s imprisonment and death as the Herodian fortress of Machaerus; he also gives Salome’s name and says that she later married her uncle Herod Philip the tetrarch. See also Herod; Herodias; John the Baptist.
2 According to Mark 15:40 and 16:1, one of the Galilean women at Jesus’s crucifixion and later at the empty tomb. Comparison of Matt. 27:55–56 with Mark 15:40 leads to the plausible suggestion that Salome is to be identified with the woman who is also called “the mother of the sons of Zebedee,” i.e., the mother of James and John, two of Jesus’s most prominent disciples. This would also make her the wife of Zebedee, who appears to have been a moderately wealthy man, since he employed “hired men” and owned a boat (Mark 1:20).
Along with Mary Magdalene and “Mary the mother of James and Joses” Salome is said to have “provided for Jesus” when he was in Galilee. The latter reference may simply mean that she and the other women assisted with cooking and other domestic chores, but some interpreters have speculated that it might imply financial support; Luke 8:1–3 indicates that women provided for Jesus and his disciples “out of their resources,” and one of the women mentioned there (Joanna, the wife of Herod’s steward Chuza) may also have been part of an affluent family. It is possible, then, that Zebedee was a patron of Jesus’s ministry, and finances from the family’s fishing business were contributed to the work in which Zebedee’s own wife and sons took an active part. By contrast, it has been suggested that, since Zebedee himself does not interact with Jesus in any Gospel stories, his wife and sons may have left him to follow Jesus (cf. Mark 1:20), dividing the family in a manner that would exemplify the extreme costs of discipleship Jesus describes in Matt. 10:34–37.
In Matthew’s Gospel, Salome (identified as “the mother of James and John”) comes to Jesus, worships him, and then asks a favor of him: “Declare that these two sons of mine will sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your kingdom” (20:21). The same story is told in Mark 10:35–37, but there the sons make the request themselves (and even in Matthew, Jesus responds directly to James and John rather than to their mother). There is no indication that Salome’s request is out of line. Jesus merely indicates that he cannot grant her request, because the ones who are to fill the positions she wishes for her sons have already been chosen (Matt. 20:23). Jesus does query James and John as to whether they are prepared to drink his cup and be baptized with the baptism he must undergo (allusions to suffering and martyrdom), and he explains to all twelve disciples that “whoever wishes to be great among you must be your servant” (20:27), but he never rebukes Salome for wanting this for her sons or for making the request in the humble and worshipful manner that she does.
F.O.G./M.A.P.
Salome (suh-loh′mee) Alexandra (al′ig-zan′druh), the wife of the Hasmonean king Alexander Jannaeus. She ruled over the Jewish state from her husband’s death in 76 BCE until 67 BCE and, so, became the nation’s only legitimate queen (an earlier queen, Athaliah, had seized the throne of Judah and ruled for seven years, ca. 843/2–837 BCE, before being deposed). The Pharisees enjoyed considerable influence during her reign, which was a peaceful time for the Maccabean kingdom. At her death, her two sons, Hyrcanus II (who had served as high priest during his mother’s rule) and Aristobulus II, began a bitter struggle for the kingdom. See also Hasmoneans; Maccabees; queen.
salt. The preservative powers of salt made it a necessity in the ancient world, and seasoning properties made it most desirable. Job asks, “Can that which is tasteless be eaten without salt?” (6:6). Numerous references to the “Salt Sea” (Josh. 15:5; Deut. 3:17) and the Valley of Salt (2 Kings 14:7; 2 Chron. 25:11) clearly identify the Dead Sea area as the place where supplies of salt were procured. Salt could either be mined in the rock formations along the Dead Sea or obtained by letting water evaporate from pans. Once the salt was removed from sediment, it was rinsed, purified, and crushed until fine.
In Israelite worship, salt was used to season incense (Exod. 30:35), and all offerings had to be seasoned with salt (Lev. 2:13; Ezek. 43:24). Salt was also used in the making of a covenant (Num. 18:19; 2 Chron. 13:5). Because of its preservative properties, salt could be a metaphor for life and sustenance, but because nothing would grow in a field that had been salted (Judg. 9:45), it also became associated with the destruction of life (Deut. 29:23; Job. 39:6; Ps. 107:34; Jer. 17:6; Zeph. 2:9). Lot’s wife was turned into a pillar of salt (Gen. 19:26).
In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus calls the people who listen to him the “salt of the earth” (Matt. 5:13), and in Mark, he tells his disciples, “Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with one another” (9:50). Similarly, Col. 4:6 says, “Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt.” The precise connotation of having salt in one’s life, actions, or speech cannot be determined, but the general sense seems to have been cultivation of qualities that are appealing and valuable: good works in Matthew (cf. 5:16), peace in Mark, and graciousness in Colossians. By contrast, Jesus’s warning that “everyone will be salted with fire” (Mark 9:49) seems to use the figure in a negative vein, though just what it means to be “salted with fire” remains obscure.
S.R./M.A.P.
Salt, City of, a town assigned to the tribe of Judah (Josh. 15:62) in the wilderness and in association with En-gedi, along the Dead Sea. It is now identified as Khirbet Qumran, the location of the community that produced the Dead Sea Scrolls. See also Dead Sea Scrolls; Qumran, Khirbet.
Salt Sea. See Dead Sea.
Salt Valley, the valley where David (or Abishai) defeated the Edomites (2 Sam. 8:13; cf. 1 Chron. 18:12). Later, Amaziah defeated the same enemy in the Salt Valley, conquering Sela (2 Kings 14:7; 2 Chron. 25:11). Wadi el-Milk (Arabic, “salt”) in southern Judah carries its name today, but most scholars think the biblical Salt Valley was in Edom near the southern end of the Dead Sea.
saltwort. See mallow.
salvation, an important term in the Bible with a wide range of meaning. The primary word for salvation in the Hebrew Bible (yosha‘) has a root meaning of “broadening” or “enlarging” and can connote the creation of space in the community for life and conduct. More often than not, this is done with divine help, particularly in circumstances where God’s people face an adversary (e.g., Exod. 14:13–14, 30; 15:2; 1 Sam. 7:8; 2 Sam. 22:28; 1 Chron. 16:35; Neh. 9:27; Pss. 7:1; 17:7; 18:1–3; 54:1; 59:1–2; 106:43–48; 116:1–6; 118:5–14). God rescues and delivers people out of a situation of opposition and peril, placing them into a situation of recovered prosperity and well-being. This meaning of the term is expanded to include deliverance from other forms of conflict, particularly in matters of the people’s relationship to God. Such a field of reference draws on such concepts as “redemption,” “atonement,” “reconciliation,” “pardon,” and “expiation.” The goal of such deliverance is the establishment of God’s reign among God’s people and other nations of the world (e.g., Isa. 49:25–26; 52:6–10; 55:1–5; Jer. 31:31–34; Ezek. 36:22–32; 37:23–28).
In the NT, God’s intent to “save” or “rescue” (the meaning of the Greek root s–oz–o) is identified with the person and ministry of Jesus (e.g., Luke 19:10; also 14:16–24; 15:3–10; 18:10–14; Matt. 10:6–8; 15:22–28; 18:12–14; 21:28–32). The identification of God as Savior and Jesus as Savior become inextricably linked (e.g., Matt. 1:21; Luke 2:11; also John 4:42; Acts 5:31; 13:23; Phil. 3:20; 2 Tim. 1:10; Titus 1:4; 2:13; 3:6; 2 Pet. 1:1, 11; 2:20; 3:2, 18; 1 John 4:14). Specific traditions about Jesus record acts of delivering people from disease and demonic possession, bringing them to a condition of restored wholeness (e.g., Mark 1:40–45; 2:1–12; 5:1–20, 34; 10:52; Luke 7:50; 17:19; John 9; 12:3–7). In the Gospels and in Acts, the Greek word for “saved” is often used for such transformed situations, although the NRSV and other English Bibles often translate the word as “healed” or with similar language (e.g., in Luke 17:19, Jesus tells a person cleansed of leprosy, “Your faith has saved you”; NRSV: “Your faith has made you well”).
Still, for the NT writers, the death and resurrection of Jesus is the ultimate focal moment for salvation. Drawing on the sacrificial images and institutions of ancient Israel, these writers associate Jesus’s death with “atonement” (John 1:29, 36; 6:51; 1 Cor. 5:7; Heb. 9:24–26) and “reconciliation” (Rom. 5:1–11; 2 Cor. 5:18–20). It affects the whole cosmos (Rom. 8:19–23; Eph. 1:10; Col. 1:19–20), and his resurrection has present significance (Rom. 13:11–14; 1 Cor. 15:1–2), and it also points to future deliverance from impending judgment and wrath (1 Thess. 1:9–10; cf. Rom. 1:18–2:11; 5:9–11; Phil. 3:20; Titus 2:13). Thus, salvation involves life and well-being in the future kingdom of God (Luke 13:28–30; 22:29–30; 23:43; 1 Cor. 2:9–10; 11:26; 1 Thess. 4:16–17; Rev. 21:1–22:5). Some traditions stress the language of inheritance and the certainty of sharing the eternal life of Jesus’s resurrection (Rom. 8:12–17; 1 Thess. 5:9; Heb. 1:14; 5:9; 9:28; 1 Pet. 1:5, 9; also John 4:14; 7:37–38; 10:10). See also atonement; conversion; eschatology; eternal life; forgiveness; grace; Holy Spirit; justification; kingdom of God; pardon; reconciliation; redemption.
J.E.A.
Samaria (suh-mair′ee-uh), city of, the capital of the northern kingdom, Israel, for the greater part of the history of that independent state. Omri built the city in the early ninth century BCE and moved his administrative center there from Tirzah (1 Kings 16:24). It remained the capital until the demise of the kingdom in 721 BCE, when the city was taken by the Assyrians after a long siege (17:1–6, which credits Shalmaneser V with taking the city; cf. the Assyrian annals, in which credit is claimed by Shalmaneser’s successor, Sargon II). According to the folk etymology preserved in 16:24, the place-name (Heb. Shomron) was derived from Shemer, from whom Omri is said to have purchased the hill on which the city was built. The name was also used for the administrative district of which Samaria was the capital, and the gentilic form (Samaritan) was used for the residents of the area. Both usages came into vogue only after the Assyrian conquest, in line with the Assyrian practice of naming a province after its capital city.
The city was well situated defensively on a hill rising about 300 feet above the valleys on the north, west, and south, with a long, sloping ridge to the east. Strategically located beside major roadways, the city gave access to Jerusalem on the south, Megiddo and the Jezreel Valley on the north, the sea and coastal plain on the west, and Shechem and the Jordan Valley on the east. The city, however, lacked an adequate water supply. Thus, in addition to practical considerations, the building of the new capital was clearly a symbolic statement for Omri, expressing the dominance and power of his developing state.
In the Hebrew Bible: Samaria is mentioned frequently in the Hebrew Bible, as would be expected of the seat of political power and, from the perspective of biblical historians and the prophets, a source of corruption. In addition to chronicling events that took place in Samaria, the Deuteronomistic Historian reports that Ahab built an altar and temple for Baal in Samaria (1 Kings 16:32), a shrine later destroyed by Jehu in the reform that accompanied his coup d’état (ca. 843 BCE). The royal city of the north, Bethel, did not become a cultic pilgrimage center after the model of Jerusalem in the south. Bethel remained the “king’s sanctuary” (Amos. 7:13). The reference to “your calf, O Samaria” and “the calf of Samaria” in Hos. 8:4–6 is to the calf (or calves) of Bethel, venerated by the kings of Samaria, as is clear from the parallel oracle in Hos. 10:3–6 (Beth-aven in v. 5 [Heb., “house of falsehood”] is a term of contempt for Bethel). That Bethel was the site of pilgrimage and worship by the nobles of Samaria is seen also in the juxtaposition of oracles against Samaria and Bethel in Amos 4:1–3 and 4:4–5. But Samaria was not regarded as unique in its embrace of idolatry, being compared in this respect to both pagan cities and Jerusalem (Isa. 10:10–11; Ezek. 16:46–55; 23:1–49). Elsewhere in the prophetic oracles, the people of Samaria are condemned for their pride (Isa. 9:8–17), wickedness (Hos. 7:1–7), rebellion (Hos. 13:16), oppression and exploitation of the poor (Amos 3:9–12; 4:1–3), and the indolence and spiritual insensitivity engendered by their wealth (6:1–7).
Archaeological Evidence: The affluence of the people of Samaria so graphically portrayed by Amos 6:4–6 (“those who lie upon beds of ivory”) is revealed also in the material remains excavated at the site, including over five hundred ivory fragments used mostly as inlays for wooden paneling, furniture, boxes, and toilet articles. Extensive excavations reveal that the city was built in the ninth century BCE, although pottery from the Early Bronze period (3000–2000 BCE) also indicates earlier, informal settlements. Six periods from the ninth century to the Assyrian conquest have been distinguished and ascribed to the otherwise known activities of Omri, Ahab, Jehu, Jeroboam II, and the Assyrian conquerors.
During the Assyrian and Persian periods Samaria was the capital of the district of the same name. Following conquest by the Macedonians (332 BCE) the city was rebuilt as a Greek polis (city). It was destroyed by John Hyrcanus in 108 BCE and rebuilt magnificently by Herod the Great (ca. 30 BCE), who renamed it Sebaste in honor of Augustus (Gk. Sebastos). The Greek name is still preserved in the name of the modern Arab village, Sebastiyeh.
The Gospel of John records a journey of Jesus through Samaria and his conversation with a woman there; the text indicates that many believed in him “from that city,” which may refer to the city of Samaria (4:4–42). See also Samaria, district of; Samaritans.
Bibliography
Crowfoot, J. W. and G. M., and K. M. Kenyon. The Objects from Samaria. Palestine Exploration Fund, 1957.
Crowfoot, J. W., K. M. Kenyon, and E. L. Sukenik. The Buildings of Samaria. Palestine Exploration Fund, 1942.
Reisner, George A., C. S. Fisher, and D. G. Lyon. Harvard Excavations at Samaria. Harvard University Press, 1924.
J.D.P.
Samaria, district of, an area in the central hill country of Canaan, the natural borders of which were defined by the sea on the west, the Valley of Jezreel or Plain of Esdraelon on the north (with Mount Carmel to the west and Mount Gilboa to the east), the Jordan River on the east, and the Valley of Aijalon on the south. This was the region settled by the Joseph tribes, the half-tribe of Manasseh in the northern half and the tribe of Ephraim in the southern half (to the north and south of the twin mountains Gerizim and Ebal, respectively). Important cities of the region were Beth-shan, Bethel, Dothan, Megiddo, Taanach, Tirzah, and Samaria itself. The area was comparatively more fertile than the southern portion of Canaan in which the tribe of Judah and its family groups settled. Soil and rainfall were conducive to viticulture, the cultivation of fruit and olive trees, vegetable gardening, and wheat farming. It would appear that the use of the name “Samaria” for the region dates from the time of the Assyrian conquest (post–722/1 BCE), in line with the Assyrian practice of naming a province after its capital city.
In the Bible: References to Samaria in biblical literature predating the Assyrian conquest are to the city and not the political district (e.g., Amos 3:9, 12; 4:1; 6:1; 8:14; Hos. 8:6; 10:5–7; 13:16; Isa. 7:9; 8:4; 10:9–11; Mic. 1:5–6). But the later oracle of Jer. 31:5–6 is clearly a reference to the region (“the mountains of Samaria,” “the hill country of Ephraim”). The use of the term “Ephraim” for the region and its people was popular with the prophets both before and after the Assyrian conquest—especially the earlier prophets Hosea (about thirty-six times) and Isaiah (about twelve times), where the term is often synonymous with the kingdom of Israel, of which this region was the political and cultural heart. The Deuteronomistic Historian wrote after the time when this region came to be known as Samaria, and this is reflected in use of the term “cities of Samaria” in the account of the settlement of Mesopotamian colonists in the regions by the Assyrians (2 Kings 17:24–28). Still, biblical authors do not refer to the region or to the kingdom of Israel as Samaria, except for two anachronistic slips: one in 1 Kings 21:1, where Ahab is called king of Samaria, the other in 13:32, where “cities of Samaria” is truly an anachronism, inasmuch as the city of Samaria had not yet been built at that point in the narrative.
In addition to Samaria (Assyrian sa-me-ri-na), Assyrian texts also refer to the region as the land of the House of Omri (Assyrian bit hu-um-ri-a), a term used not only after the fall of that dynasty but also after the fall of that kingdom (722/1 BCE)
History: Following the Assyrian conquest, the character of the local population of Samaria was altered due to the loss of some native Israelites by deportation (2 Kings 17:6; Assyrian records indicate about twenty-seven thousand) and evacuation (many of the evacuees settled in Jerusalem, expanding that city to about four times its previous size) and by the concurrent settlement of foreign colonists in the region (17:24–41). This is said to have resulted in the paganization of the area, of which the judgment in 17:34–41 appears to be an overstatement (cf. Jer. 41:5).
During the time of Josiah (late seventh century BCE) attempts were made by Judah to bring Samaria under political and cultural domination, but this was short-lived. Following the destruction of Jerusalem (587/6 BCE), the Babylonians incorporated Jerusalem and the northern part of Judah into a province of Samaria, but the Persians later separated Jerusalem from Samaria and restored the Judean province. This accounts for the hostility of Sanballat, governor of Samaria, who with his allies, Tobiah of Ammon and Geshem of Arabia, harassed the rebuilders of the Jewish state (Neh. 2:9–20; 4:1–9; 6:1–14). Antipathy between Judah and Samaria was also abetted by the refusal of the leaders of the Jewish community to allow the Yahwists of Samaria to assist in the reconstruction of the Jerusalem temple (Ezra 4:8–24; 1 Esd. 5:64–73).
At the beginning of the Hellenistic period (325–63 BCE), a revolt against Macedonian rule broke out in Samaria and the local population was forced to flee. Samaria was rebuilt as a Hellenistic city, and the ancient city of Shechem was rebuilt by the disenfranchised Samaritans. It was this segment of the Samaritan people who built a temple to the Hebrew God on Mount Gerizim and whose descendants are encountered in the NT and the writings of the first-century historian Josephus as the “Samaritans.” During the Hasmonean period (ca. 166–63 BCE), both Samaria and Shechem were destroyed by John Hyrcanus and the territory passed to Judean control. But in 63 BCE Pompey assigned the area to the province of Syria. It was later granted to Herod the Great (30 BCE) and subsequently to Herod’s son Archelaus (4 BCE–6 CE). The Romans understood the cultural relationship between Judah and Samaria and did not divide the two into separate governances. Both were ruled by Roman prefects or procurators (and by Herod Agrippa, 41–44 CE) after Archelaus was deposed. In the NT, Samaria is mentioned as the region of the Samaritan religious community (Matt. 10:5; Luke 9:52; John 4:1–42), a territory of early evangelization (Acts 1:8; 8:4–25), the home of Simon Magus (8:9–24), and an area whose churches were supportive of the theological position of Paul (15:1–3). See also Samaria, city of; Samaritans.
J.D.P.
Samaritan, the Good. See Good Samaritan, parable of the.
Samaritan Pentateuch, a version of the first five books of the Bible preserved by Samaritans and written in Samaritan letters (i.e., in the Hebrew language, but with letters of the Samaritan alphabet). This version of the Pentateuch was apparently produced as a result of conflict between Samaritan and Jewish communities in the fifth century BCE. The Samaritans established their own place of worship at Shechem (now Nablus) and accepted the Pentateuch as their Bible. The Samaritan version of the Pentateuch differs from that preserved by the Hebrews in ways that highlight the significance of Mount Gerizim (rather than Sinai) and in other ways that support Samaritan beliefs. The Samaritan claim is that their version of the Pentateuch is original, while the Jewish version was redacted in a heretical fashion by Ezra after the exile.
Since the Samaritan Pentateuch was prepared long before the Hebrew text became standardized, scholars regard it as an important witness to the early form of the text, and not all of its variant readings would be ideologically motivated. Further, in some places, the reading of the Samaritan Pentateuch agrees with the reading of the Dead Sea Scrolls against the Hebrew Masoretic Text, and in numerous instances, it agrees with the LXX against the Masoretic Text. See also Samaritans.
Samaritans (suh-mair′uh-tuhnz).
1 In the Hebrew Bible, an ethnic term for the residents of the district of Samaria. The term appears only once in the account of the settlement of Mesopotamian colonists in the region by the Assyrians. According to 2 Kings 17:29, these foreign people made gods of their own, which they placed “in the shrines of the high places which the Samaritans had made.”
2 In the NT, members of a particular ethnoreligious community based in the area, living for the most part around Mount Gerizim (John 4:1–42), but residing also in their own villages throughout the region (Matt. 10:5; Luke 9:52). They might be encountered in villages neighboring on Samaria (Luke 17:11–19) or even on the roadway between Jerusalem and Jericho (10:29–37).
From these texts one learns that the Jews and Samaritans shared a common heritage (“our father Jacob,” John 4:12), but differed from one another radically with regard to the relative sanctity of Jerusalem/Zion and Mount Gerizim (4:20). They also had different legal traditions regarding the cleanliness of vessels and, in general, they avoided contact with one another (4:7–10). The negative attitude of the Jews toward the Samaritans is reflected in Jesus’s statement in Matt. 10:5, in which Samaritans are linked with Gentiles in contrast to “the house of Israel” (cf. Acts 1:8, in which Samaria occupies a median position between Jerusalem/Judea and the Gentile world; and John 8:48, in which the adversaries of Jesus refer to him contemptuously as “a Samaritan”—and demon-possessed as well). The itinerary of Jesus in Mark (10:1; it is followed in Matt. 19:1, but altered somewhat in Luke) seems to reflect a standard Jewish practice of avoiding Samaria in pilgrimages to Jerusalem.
Basically, the Jews regarded the Samaritans as “foreigners” (Luke 17:18; the Greek word allogen–es is the same term used in the Jerusalem temple inscription excluding non-Jews from the court of Israel). The historian Josephus relates that the Samaritans were excluded from the Jerusalem temple by formal edict, not because of nationality, but due to acts of mischief they allegedly perpetrated there. It was the alien nature of the Samaritans, as commonly perceived, that gave an ironic sting to the story of the grateful leper (17:11–19; only one out of ten returned to express thanks, and “he was a Samaritan”) and to the parable of the Good Samaritan (10:25–37; the Samaritan stranger was the good neighbor, not the priest or the Levite).
From the few references to Samaria and the Samaritans in the NT, one might be left with the impression that all of the residents of Samaria were members of this community. This is not so. There were, in fact, people of various cultural backgrounds living in the area. Nonetheless, the Samaritan community was quite large and included a Dispersion; there were Samaritan groups scattered along the Mediterranean coast (notably at Gaza and Caesarea), in Lebanon, in Egypt and Syria, and as far away as Byzantium, Thessalonica, Rome, and Babylon.
Religious Heritage: As a religious sect, the Samaritans were a strict, Torah-observant party with a resolute pride in their religious heritage. They maintained that they (and not the Jews!) were the bearers of the true faith of ancient Israel as expounded by Moses and as practiced at Mount Gerizim in ancient times. The name by which they called themselves, shamerim, meant “observers (of the Torah).” They understood themselves to be the descendants of the Joseph tribes of ancient Israel, just as Jews claimed to be descendants of the tribe of Judah. From the Samartian perspective, Judaism was a heresy, which they traced to the priest Eli, who established a rival sanctuary at Shiloh. The Samaritans accepted only the Pentatuech as scripture, since the other material preserved in the Hebrew Bible was regarded as apostate history. Furthermore, they possessed their own distinctive version of the Pentateuch, claiming that the Jews had edited their version to minimize the importance of Gerizim and to justify the building of a temple in Jerusalem. In particular, the Samaritans cited Ezra as having led the Jews astray, redacting their scriptures in heretical ways after the exile and introducing deviant legal and calendrical interpretations. As a priestly community at odds with Pharisaic interpretations, the Samaritans might be compared with the Sadducees of NT times, or with the Essenes, who are usually credited with having preserved the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran. Some studies of early Samaritan traditions reveal early Samaritanism as but one of a greater complex of disparate religious movements and ideologies within Judaism (broadly defined) prior to the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in 70 CE.
| NEW TESTAMENT REFERENCES TO SAMARITANS | |
| Matt. 10:5 | Jesus instructs his disciples not to take their ministry to any city of the Samaritans. |
| Luke 9:52–55 | Jesus rebukes his disciples after they want to call fire down from heaven to consume a Samaritan village that would not receive them. |
| Luke 10:30–37 | Jesus tells a parable about a Samaritan who demonstrates love for one’s neighbor. |
| Luke 17:11 | Jesus passes through Samaria on his way from Galilee to Jerusalem. |
| Luke 17:12–19 | Jesus heals ten lepers, and the only one who returns to give thanks is a Samaritan. |
| John 4:4–42 | Jesus converses with a Samaritan woman at a well; other Samaritans persuade him to stay with them for two days, and they acknowledge him as the Savior of the world. |
| John 8:48 | Some Jews accuse Jesus of being a Samaritan (after he has suggested that they are not the true children of Abraham). |
| Acts 1:8 | Jesus says his disciples are to be his witnesses “in Judea, in Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.” |
| Acts 8:5–25 | Many Samaritans, including Simon Magus, accept baptism from Philip the evangelist; Peter and John bring the gift of the Spirit to the Samaritan converts and preach the gospel to many Samaritan villages. |
| From Mark Allan Powell, Introducing the New Testament (courtesy, Baker Academic) | |
Origin: Most scholars have rejected the Samaritans’ claim to being the remnant of the Israelite people who had always worshiped the Hebrew God at Shechem. Indeed, they tend to be more inclined toward considering the claims of Samaritan detractors, notably Josephus, whose personal animus against the Samaritans was intense. Josephus claims that the Samaritans were descendants of the foreign colonists from Cutha mentioned in 2 Kings 17:24, an opinion shared by some rabbinic authorities who called the Samaritans kutim. They came to have an independent cultic life, Josephus says, as the result of a schism that occurred in the time of Sanballat (i.e., Sanballat II, not the contemporary of Nehemiah) and Alexander the Great (late fourth century BCE), when a temple was built on Mount Gerizim and staffed with renegade and disenfranchised priests from Jerusalem. This cult was corrupted by hellenization in the time of Antiochus IV (ca. 175 BCE, a date with which 2 Macc. 6:1 agrees) and later destroyed by John Hyrcanus in 128 BCE. Although there seems little doubt that the Samaritan sect of NT times (and of today) was derived from the Gerizim cultic establishment of the Hellenistic period and developed subsequently through Samaritan Torah teachers who produced their own redaction of the sacred text, the account of Josephus presents difficulties in the reconstruction of early Samaritan history (or prehistory). Because it is highly biased and denigrating in its intent, one must view with suspicion his claim that the Samaritan priestly caste derived its sacerdotal authority from the Zadokite line of the Jerusalem temple. Moreover, the story Josephus gives to explain the reason for the exodus of the priests from Jerusalem to Shechem—expulsion due to intermarriage with the family of Sanballat—is problematic (although not impossible). The story is remarkably similar to an earlier incident mentioned in Neh. 13:28–29. This has prompted some scholars to postulate a Samaritan schism as early as the Persian period (sixth century BCE), even though the Bible makes no reference to such and Josephus dates the alleged “schism” to the early Greek period (first century BCE). Ultimately, it seems appropriate to regard the Samaritans as a religious community that developed independently of the spiritual leadership of Jerusalem among a people who were, for cultural and historical reasons, alienated from the Jews and who, in time, found it impossible to maintain fraternal relations. See also Samaria, city of; Samaria, district of.
Bibliography
Anderson, Robert T., and Terry Giles. The Keepers: An Introduction to the History and Culture of the Samaritans. Hendrickson, 2002.
Chang, Choon Shik. The Samaritan Origin and Identity. Pai Chai University Publishers, 2004.
Coggins, R. J. Samaritans and Jews: The Origins of the Samaritans Reconsidered. Blackwell, 1975.
Montgomery, J. A. The Samaritans. Ktav, 1968.
Purvis, J. D. “The Samaritan Problem.” In Traditions in Transformation: Turning Points in Biblical Faith. Eisenbrauns, 1982. Pp. 323–50.
J.D.P.
Samgarnebo (sam′gahr-nee′boh), a Babylonian mentioned among Nebuchadnezzar II’s officials who took their seats in the Middle Gate of Jerusalem during the siege of 587 BCE (Jer. 39:3). The name Samgarnebo (Babylonian sin-magir) is a Babylonian title that can also be used to connote a district.
Samlah (sam′luh), a pre-Israelite king of Edom (Gen. 36:36; 1 Chron. 1:47).
Samos (say′mos), a mountainous island twenty-eight miles long and twelve and a half miles wide, located about a mile and a half from the western coast of Asia Minor, opposite Trogyllium. Greek settlers arrived on Samos ca. 1000 BCE. The Samian fleet was famous throughout various periods of history. In the third century BCE, the Ptolemies of Egypt used the island as a naval base. During the Maccabean period, there were apparently Jews living on the island (1 Macc. 15:23). In 129 BCE, Samos became part of the Roman province of Asia. Paul and his companions stopped at Samos prior to sailing for the city of Miletus during their final trip to Jerusalem (Acts 20:15).
M.K.M.
Samothrace (sam′uh-thrays), a mountainous island, elliptical in shape, in the northeastern extremity of the Aegean Sea, about twenty miles south of the mainland of Thrace. The rugged coastline leaves the island without a harbor. Before arriving at Neapolis on his second missionary journey, Paul’s ship dropped anchor off Samothrace (Acts 16:11).
Samson (sam′suhn), an early Israelite hero. The traditions about Samson depict him as a judge who assisted his tribe, the Danites, in their struggle against the Philistines. The stories present him as a Nazirite from birth, but his passion for foreign women compromised the Nazirite vow, which required him to refrain from cutting his hair and to avoid wine and any unclean food. The tales associate his extraordinary strength with the length of his hair, apparently because unshorn locks evinced faithfulness to that part of his vow, but they also attribute that strength to the spirit of God coming upon Samson in somewhat unpredictable ways (e.g., Judg. 14:19; 15:14). A religious spirit colors the Samson stories from first to last, despite their racy theme.
Samson is born to a previously infertile woman who is the wife of a Danite named Manoah (Judg. 13:1–25). An angel announces the impending birth to her and tells her that the boy is to be a Nazirite from birth. She shares the news with her husband, who requires the angel’s revelation to be repeated, asks various inappropriate questions, and requires reassurance from his (unnamed) wife that God is not going to kill them. The story is told with a touch of humor, presenting Samson’s father as slow-witted in comparison with Samson’s mother.
Samson’s life story is told with reference to his erotic involvement with three women. The first story (Judg. 14–15) is initiated when he deigns to marry an unnamed woman from Timnah, a few miles southeast of Beth-shemesh (located between Jerusalem and Ashdod). At their wedding festivities, he wagers sixty festal garments that the guests will not be able to tell him the meaning of this saying: “Out of the eater came something to eat. Out of the strong came something sweet” (14:14). He explains it to his wife (i.e., that he had killed a lion and bees made honey in its carcass), and she tells the meaning to some of the guests, when they threaten her. Enraged, Samson takes revenge on local Askelonites from whom he steals garments to cover his wager. Then the situation escalates when he returns to his home in Zorah to find that his bride has been given to his companion, the best man, under the mistaken assumption that he had abandoned her. Samson takes further revenge for this by catching three hundred foxes, setting fire to their tails, and releasing them in the grainfields. Angry Philistines retaliate by burning Samson’s bride and her father, whereupon Samson kills a large number of them. The Philistines now seek to capture him, intimidating the local tribe of Judah into assisting them. He allows himself to be bound by his countrymen, is turned over to the enemy, and then breaks the bonds and slays a thousand Philistines with the jawbone of an ass. Samson then composes a victory song and prays for water to quench his thirst. Appropriate names are given to the sites of battle and prayer: Hill of the Jawbone and Partridge Spring (14:1–15:20).
The second woman with whom Samson becomes entangled is a prostitute in the Philistine city of Gaza (located near the Mediterranean seacoast). According to the brief story in Judg. 16:1–3, the local residents learn that he is in town with her, and they surround her house, anticipating victory over an exhausted Samson. But he rises early and walks off with the doors of the city gate on his shoulders, depositing them some distance away on a hill opposite Hebron.
Samson’s downfall is related in Judg. 16:4–22 in a colorful story involving a third woman, a Philistine named Delilah, with whom he falls in love. The Philistines pressure Delilah to discover the secret of his strength and, though he tricks her with a wrong answer a couple of times, he finally divulges the truth; she then cuts off his hair while he sleeps and delivers him to the Philistines. They put out his eyes and set him to work grinding at a mill in Gaza. In due time they celebrate their good fortune with a victory song and make sport of Samson during a sacrifice to their god, Dagon. Resolving to get revenge once more, Samson asks to be situated by the two pillars holding up the house and prays for renewed strength just once more. God grants his wish and Samson pulls down the Philistine structure upon himself, killing a multitude of Philistines in this final act (16:4–31).
The traditions about Samson have been brought together with great skill; they probably circulated orally for some time before achieving written form. Various motifs combine to enhance their popularity: the infertile wife, terror accompanying a theophany, the powerful man helpless to resist the charms of a woman, the quest for a hidden source of power, loss of charisma, the heroic death wish. The stories also make use of many different literary forms, e.g., three prayers, three riddles, two etiologies (explanations for place-names), two victory songs, a birth story, and five accounts of heroic deeds. The stories reflect the period described in Judges, a period when tribal jealousies divided Israelites and when rivalry existed between the Philistine population and Israelite groups.
Bibliography
Crenshaw, James L. Samson: A Secret Betrayed, a Vow Ignored. John Knox, 1978.
J.L.C.
Samuel (sam′yoo-uhl), a prophet who ruled Israel at the end of the period of the judges and who anointed Israel’s first two kings. He is the dominant figure in the first few chapters of the first of the two books of the Bible that bear his name.
Samuel’s father, Elkanah, was an Ephraimite from the village of Ramathaim-zophim. Samuel’s mother, Hannah, was infertile, but prayed for a child during a visit to the shrine at Shiloh, promising to devote her son to the service of God (1 Sam. 1). The young Samuel, therefore, grew up in Shiloh under the tutelage of Eli, the chief priest. One night, he heard the voice of God calling his name, though he did not at first realize it was the LORD. After some prompting from Eli, he responded to the voice, “Speak, for your servant is listening” (3:10), and he was given his first oracle: a renunciation of the house of Eli, whose sons had corrupted the cult of the LORD (3:11–14; cf. 2:12–17). This marked the beginning of Samuel’s career as a prophet (3:19–4:1).
Samuel assumed national leadership after a disastrous battle in which the Israelites were routed by the Philistines (4). Having driven out the enemy and pacified the entire land (7:13–14), he began to make periodic visits to a circuit of cities where he passed judgment on cases brought before him (7:15–17). This pattern continued for most of Samuel’s life, but in his old age the men of Israel approached him to request a king (8). Though angered, he acted on God’s instructions and, after warning the people of the burdens a king would impose on them (8:11–18), he acceded to the request.
Samuel anointed Saul to be king during a private audience in Samuel’s hometown (9:1–10:16). Subsequently, however, he presided over a public ceremony in which Saul was chosen king by casting lots (10:17–27). After Saul’s victorious campaign against the Ammonites (11) the kingship was ratified in yet another ceremony conducted by Samuel (11:15). Then, in a final public appearance (12), the prophet admonished the people and their new king to obey the commands of God and promised to continue to act on their behalf.
Samuel was also the agent of Saul’s rejection as king. Because Saul did not carry out God’s instructions in the manner that Samuel had conveyed them to him, Samuel prophesied that Saul would be removed from office in favor of a new king (13:7–14; 15:10–29). Then God sent Samuel to Bethlehem, where he anointed David (16:1–13). In that account, Samuel reviews the sons of Jesse, but God rejects each of them, one by one, telling Samuel, “Do not look on his appearance or on the height of his stature . . . for the LORD does not see as mortals see; they look on the outward appearance, but the LORD looks on the heart” (16:11). Samuel must ask Jesse if he has any other sons and only then does he learn about the youngest, who is keeping the sheep. This is David, and Samuel anoints him to be king of Israel.
Although Samuel’s death is reported in 25:1, he makes one additional appearance in the biblical story. In chap. 28, Saul asks a medium to conjure up Samuel’s ghost, hoping to receive a favorable oracle regarding an upcoming battle with the Philistines. The ghost, however, reminds Saul of the divine rejection of his kingship and correctly predicts a Philistine victory in the battle.
All told, the biblical narrative presents Samuel as the last of the heroes of the premonarchic age and as the first of the prophets who would stand alongside the kings. In one sense, he is a transitional figure, the last of the judges and the first of the prophets. In 1 Sam. 7, he is presented as an ideal judge, a person in whom all types of authority—military, judicial, and sacerdotal—are combined. In subsequent chapters, after the reality of kingship has been acknowledged, Samuel becomes a paradigm for the prophetic office under the monarchy: a prophet who confirms or rejects kings, intercedes with God on Israel’s behalf, and guides the conscience of the people (cf. 1 Sam. 12:23). See also David; Eli; Hannah; king; prophet; Saul; Shiloh.
P.K.M.
Samuel, First and Second Books of, biblical writings that follow the book of Judges in the Tanakh (Jewish Bible) and the book of Ruth in the Christian OT; they are found in the Prophets, or Nevi’im, section of the Tanakh and are the third and fourth books of its Former Prophets subcollection. Originally, 1 and 2 Samuel were one book, but it was divided into two parts in the LXX, where the books of Samuel and Kings are divided into four books called 1 Kingdoms, 2 Kingdoms, 3 Kingdoms, and 4 Kingdoms. Tradition ascribed the authorship of the books of Samuel to the prophet Samuel, but in fact the author is anonymous; scholars view the books of Samuel as part of the Deuteronomistic History (Joshua–2 Kings), which presents the primary history of Israel from the conquest of Canaan to the Babylonian exile. First and Second Samuel trace that history from the birth of Samuel to the end of the reign of King David. The first book of Chronicles covers approximately the same period of time, but with attention focused on David’s role as patron of the temple in Jerusalem (chaps. 10–29).
Contents: The contents of the books of Samuel can be organized into three cycles of episodes revolving around the main characters Samuel, Saul, and David. Samuel exercises leadership in the mode of judge, prophet, and priest. He presides over the transition from charismatic to royal dynastic state leadership. Saul is the first royal figure; he comes from the tribe of Benjamin. He fails to establish a ruling dynasty, and Samuel anoints David to be a new king in his place; David is from the family of Jesse in Bethlehem of Judah.
Samuel’s birth is portrayed as a miracle; God enables previously infertile Hannah to conceive him. He distinguishes himself early on as a prophet in Shiloh, where Eli is the high priest and the ark of the covenant is kept in Israel’s central sanctuary (1 Sam. 1–3). The Philistines capture the ark of the covenant in battle, but later return it (4–6). They emerge at this time as Israel’s most dangerous foe. Samuel secures Israel from the Philistines for a time, but Israel still demands a king (7–8), thereby pitting a theocracatic form of state administration against a monarchic form. Samuel anoints Saul king (9–10), and Saul demonstrates his leadership by rescuing Jabesh-gilead (11). But then Saul breaks the rules of holy war, and Samuel removes Saul’s divine endorsement, though Saul still remains in office for a time (12–15). Meanwhile, Samuel anoints David king (16), and David demonstrates his leadership by defeating Goliath and the Philistines (17). This leads to an intense rivalry between Saul and David causing Saul to pursue David to kill him, yet David always eludes Saul’s grasp (18–27). Saul faces the Philistines in a final battle in which he and his sons die (28–31).
David, earlier designated king, takes office in Judah, and later all the tribes of Israel accept his authority (1–5). David establishes Jerusalem (formerly Jebus) as his capital and moves the ark of the covenant there (6). Nathan mediates God’s eternal endorsement of the Davidic line in the form of a covenant (7). David then defeats Israel’s enemies (8–10), but sins with Bathsheba, has her husband killed, and is punished for this (11–12). The punishment takes the form of deadly infighting among his sons as they position themselves in line for the throne (13–14). David’s son Absalom actually usurps the throne from his father for a time, but is then assassinated by Joab, David’s chief of staff (15–19). Then David consolidates his power and further builds his empire (20–24). The conclusion of the story of David and the transition to the reign of his son Solomon is told in 1 Kings 1–2.
Background: Standing behind the three cycles are stories and story collections that may originally have existed as separate works. Scholars identify an ark narrative (4:1–7:1) within the Samuel cycle that details the Philistine capture of the ark and its return to Israelite territory; the figure of Samuel is completely absent from this tale. They also identify a history of succession to the Davidic throne (2 Sam. 9–1 Kings 2), also called the court history of David. Further, the psalm that appears as 2 Sam. 22 is also Ps. 18 in the Psalter. Beginning in the nineteenth century scholars hypothesized two sources in Samuel based on how the monarchy was viewed. One source was highly critical of the people’s proposal for a king, reflected in Samuel’s speeches in 1 Sam. 8 and 12. A pro-monarchy source may be discerned in the material of 1 Sam. 9–11, which views Saul positively. Campbell and O’Brien propose that a Prophetic Record source (1 Sam. 1–2 Kings 10) formed the backbone of the Deuteronomistic History in Samuel and Kings; it features prophets, who represent the authority of God, as the ones who promote and demote kings within Israel.
The books of Samuel deal with the rise of kingship within Israel. They begin with a sketch of Samuel, a prophet and the last judge, who advocates the ideals of the age of the tribal federation, which was dominated by the ideology of theocracy. In this view God and only God could be imagined as the king of Israel. However, the Philistine wars proved that a stable tactical military leader who could organize the tribes for victory was needed. Although Samuel’s first choice for king, Saul, proved inadequate, his second choice, David, proved more effective. The Deuteronomistic Historian tells the story in such a way that the complex dimensions of this revolutionary institutional change are brought together. Kings are needed but they can be dangerous, because they are sometimes motivated by self-interest. GOD favored the tribe of Judah and endorsed its lineage of David by a divine covenant, going so far as to declare Davidic kings to be sons of God (2 Sam. 7:14). When these Davidic kings sinned, God would punish them, but not ultimately abandon them in the manner of Saul.
OUTLINE OF CONTENTS
1 and 2 Samuel
I. Samuel cycle (1 Sam. 1:1–12:25)
A. Samuel’s birth, dedication, and early career (1:1–4:1a)
B. Capture and return of the ark of the covenant (4:1b–7:1)
C. Samuel judges Israel (7:2–17)
D. Israel demands a king (8:1–22)
E. The ascent of Saul (9:1–11:15)
F. Samuel’s farewell (12:1–25)
II. Saul cycle (1 Sam. 13:1–31:13)
A. Saul’s disobedience and Samuel’s rejection (13:1–15:35)
B. The anointing of David (16:1–13)
C. David at the court of Saul (16:14–21:1)
D. David in the wilderness of Judah (21:2–26:25)
E. David in the service of the king of Gath (27:1–30:31)
F. The death of Saul and Jonathan (31:1–13)
III. David cycle (2 Sam. 1:1–24:25)
A. David’s rise to power (1:1–8:18)
B. Dynastic succession struggles (9:1–20:26)
C. David’s last days (21:1–24:25)
Interpretive Issues: The books of Samuel portray David in a complex way. He is the youngest of Jesse’s sons. He courageously defended Israel against the Philistines by defeating Goliath in single combat. He befriended Saul and remained loyal to him, serving at his court. He conquered Jebus and established it as Jerusalem, the “city of David,” and made it both the political and religious capital of the united kingdom of Israel. Yet he committed adultery and murder in the Bathsheba affair. And he was deceptive when he hid among the Philistines when Saul sought to kill him. This picture of David has given rise to various scholarly efforts to understand the text of Samuel as literature and to sort out legend and political propaganda from historical truth (see esp. Finkelstein and Silberstein, Halpern, and McKenzie).
The issue of the historicity of the kingdom of David has been raised at the archaeological level in reference to the city of Jerusalem. Very few remains have been found that are datable to the tenth century BCE, the century of David and Solomon. This suggests that Jerusalem may have been a very small village at that time, rather than the major administrative center of a united kingdom. On the other hand, an Aramaic inscription containing the phrase “house of David” was found at Tel Dan dating to the mid-800s BCE. This attests a ruling dynasty associated with the figure of David.
Influences: The Davidic covenant (2 Sam. 7) is the foundation of Israel’s messianic ideal of political leadership. It stipulates that God’s commitment to the line of David would be enduring. According to the Deuteronomistic writer of the books of Samuel, legitimate royal leadership could only come out of the line of David. The portrayal of David in this work introduces a complex notion of leadership that binds God and the king together in a covenant, but that also obligates the king to obedience to Torah. The revisionist history of 1 and 2 Chronicles idealized the figure of David in part by omitting the episodes that reflected negatively on him, including his intimidation of Nabal and subsequent marriage to Abigail, and his affair with Bathsheba and the subsequent murder of Uriah.
The NT Gospels of Matthew and Luke trace the lineage of Jesus of Nazareth through the line of David. The prayer of Hannah in 1 Sam. 2 becomes the prototype for the Magnificat of Mary (Luke 1:46–55).
David as poet and singer, boy-warrior who beheaded Goliath, and adulterous lover of Bathsheba became subjects for much artistic and literary imagination within the Western tradition. Sculptures by Michelangelo and Donatello especially idealize the youthful and heroic David.
Bibliography
Bandstra, Barry L. Reading the Old Testament: Introduction to the Hebrew Bible. 4th ed. Wadsworth, 2009.
Borgman, Paul. David, Saul, and God: Rediscovering an Ancient Story. Oxford University Press, 2008.
Campbell, Anthony F., and Mark A. O’Brien. Unfolding the Deuteronomistic History: Origins, Upgrades, Present Text. Fortress, 2000.
Finkelstein, Israel, and Neil A. Silberman. David and Solomon: In Search of the Bible’s Sacred Kings and the Roots of the Western Tradition. Free Press, 2006.
Halpern, Baruch. David’s Secret Demons: Messiah, Murderer, Traitor, King. Eerdmans, 2001.
McCarter, P. Kyle. 1 Samuel. Doubleday, 1980.
———. 2 Samuel. Doubleday, 1984.
McKenzie, Steven L. King David: A Biography. Oxford University Press, 2000.
B.B.
Sanballat (san-bal′at), the governor of Samaria in the latter half of the fifth century BCE and one of the chief opponents of Nehemiah’s plan to rebuild Jerusalem. Sanballat conspired with Tobiah, governor of Ammon, and Geshem, king of Kedar, to intimidate the Jews and interrupt the work (Neh. 2:10, 19). As the walls neared completion, Sanballat and Tobiah authorized raids on the city (4:1–2) and, accusing Nehemiah of planning a rebellion against Persian rule, they repeatedly summoned him to account for his actions (6:1–7).
Sanballat’s name was Babylonian (Sinuballit), but the names of his sons, Delaiah and Shelemiah (mentioned in the Elephantine papyri), incorporate “the LORD,” the divine name for the God of Israel (and Samaria). In Neh. 2:10 he is called “the Horonite,” i.e., a native of Beth-horon. The founder of a dynasty was also sometimes referred to in this way, and there is evidence that five of Sanballat’s descendants governed Samaria after him, including Sanballat II early in the fourth century and Sanballat III at the time of Alexander the Great. See also Ezra and Nehemiah, books of; Samaria, district of.
P.K.M.
sanctification, the concept of setting something apart for holy use or consecrating a place, person, or thing to God. In the Bible, sprinkling with blood and other sacred rites (Lev. 4:5–7, 16–18; Num. 19:9–22) serve to sanctify places, objects, and persons. The people must consecrate or sanctify themselves before they can approach God (Exod. 19:22–24). Sanctification is also associated with obedience to Torah (Lev. 22:31–32): the people are called to be holy, just as God is holy (19:2; 20:26). In postexilic times, the persistent sinfulness of the people led to the image of an eschatological purification of the people (Dan. 7:18–22; Ps. 34:10). God would “sanctify” them and in so doing sanctify the divine name, which had been profaned among the nations by Israel’s sinfulness. Ezek. 36:22–27 describes this process in three steps: first, the people are purified from their old sinfulness and idolatry by being sprinkled with clear water; second, the Lord gives them a “new heart” (cf. 11:19; Jer. 31:31–34); and, third, the Spirit of the Lord is put in the human heart. The result of this divine sanctification is a person freed from the “evil inclination” of the human heart and obedient to the will of God.
NT writers sometimes speak of the eschatological sanctification as in the future (Matt. 6:9), but they frequently describe it as something already accomplished for those with faith in Christ (2 Thess. 2:13). Christians, or their communities, are sanctified as temples of the Lord (1 Cor. 6:11, 20; Eph. 2:21; 1 Pet. 2:9). They have been made holy by anointing (1 Cor. 1:30; Eph. 5:26; 1 John 2:20). Jesus’s sacrificial death is said to sanctify Christians (Heb. 9:11–14; 10:10; John 17:19). Sanctification, however, is not a passive gift. Christians must live out their lives in a holiness that reflects what they have received (Rom. 6:19; 1 Thess. 4:3, 4:7; 1 Tim. 2:15; Heb. 12:14). See also holiness.
P.P.
sanctuary, a holy place where God is present. In the wilderness, this was the tent of meeting or the tabernacle; in the time of Solomon, it was the temple at Jerusalem. There were, however, degrees of holiness in the temple. A few steps up from the court was the holy place, which was separated from the court by a hanging curtain. Only priests were allowed in the holy place. A few more steps and a curtain separated the holy place from the Holy of Holies, where only the high priest was allowed. Sometimes the entire temple is called the sanctuary; at other times “sanctuary” means only the Holy of Holies. See also temple, the.
G.W.B.
sand. The vast deserts of the biblical lands and the long stretch of sandy coastal land along the Mediterranean Sea are sources for powerful metaphors in the Bible. The most frequent allusions are to the inestimable number of grains of sand. God promises to make Abraham’s “offspring as the sand of the sea, which cannot be counted because of their number” (Gen. 32:12); in Egypt, Joseph stores up grain “as the sand of the sea” (41:49). NT writers also use the metaphor of sand to symbolize great quantities (Rom. 9:27; Heb. 11:12). Elsewhere, the weight of sand is referenced (Prov. 27:3), and the shifting, unstable qualities of sand provide an image for one of Jesus’s parables: those who do not keep his words are like a foolish man who builds his house upon the sand, where wind and rain will cause it to collapse (Matt. 7:26).
S.R.
sandal, a shoe fastened to the foot with thongs or straps. See also shoes.
Sanhedrin (san-hee′druhn; Gk. synedrion). See council, the.
Sansannah (san-san′uh), a town in the Negev belonging to the tribe of Judah listed in Josh. 15:31. It has been identified by scholars as Khirbet esh-Shamsaniyat, about three miles northwest of Beer-sheba, in southern Judea.
Saph (saf), one of the four Philistines identified as “descendants of the giants” slain by David’s soldiers (2 Sam. 21:18; “Sippai,” 1 Chron. 20:4).
Sapphira (suh-fi′ruh), the wife of Ananias who, like him, died after misrepresenting a gift to the apostles (Acts 5:1–11). See also Ananias.
sapphire, a gem composed of corundum, blue in color. The references in Exod. 24:10; Ezek. 1:26; 10:1 may be to lapis lazuli. See also breastpiece; jewels, jewelry.
Sarah (sair′uh; Heb., “princess”).
1 Abraham’s wife, who shared his journey to the land promised to them by God and lived with him there. She is initially called Sarai, just as Abraham is initially called Abram, but in Gen. 17:15, God declares that she is henceforth to be called Sarah.
God promised Abram numerous descendants, to whom the land of Canaan would belong. For this promise to be fulfilled, his wife would have a necessary and crucial role. But no sooner is the divine promise given than Abram jeopardizes everything by going to Egypt, where he passes Sarai off as his sister, and she is taken into the harem of Pharaoh (Gen. 12). A similar story appears later in Gen. 20, where Sarah is taken by Abimelech, king of Gerar (cf. Gen. 26). In both cases, Abram/Abraham practices this deception for fear of being killed on account of Sarah (Gen. 12 stresses her great beauty).
Another obstacle to the fulfillment of the promise of numerous progeny is Sarah’s infertility (Gen. 11:30; 16:1). Her solution to this problem is to give her Egyptian slave Hagar to Abram, a custom according to which Hagar’s child would be considered to be Sarai’s (Gen. 16). The plan backfires when Hagar bears a son and subsequently regards Sarai with contempt. Asserting her superior status, Sarai deals harshly with Hagar, and Hagar flees to the desert, where God instructs her to return and submit to Sarai.
When Abram and Sarai are too old for childbearing, God reiterates the promise of offspring, changing their names and promising to bless them. Sarah is a variant of Sarai, both of which mean “princess,” but the change of names is symbolic, representing a special destiny: “She shall give rise to nations; kings of peoples shall come from her” (Gen. 17:16). Abraham’s reaction to this news is laughter (17:17). Sarah also laughs when she later overhears mysterious visitors informing Abraham that she will bear a son (18:1–15). Finally, in Gen. 21, the long-awaited heir is born and, appropriately, is named Isaac, meaning “laughter.” Sarah protects Isaac’s inheritance by having Hagar and her son, Ishmael, sent away. Though Abraham is displeased with this, God supports Sarah’s decision, instructing Abraham, “Whatever Sarah says to you, do as she tells you, for it is through Isaac that offspring shall be named for you” (21:12).
Sarah dies at age 127, and Abraham purchases the cave of Machpelah from the Hittites for her burial place. Later Abraham (Gen. 25:9–10), Isaac (35:27–29), Rebekah (49:31), Jacob (50:13), and Leah (49:31) are also buried there. After Sarah’s death, Abraham takes another wife, Keturah (25:1). Isaac is said to find comfort after his mother’s death by marrying Rebekah (24:67).
Sarah is mentioned in the NT in three passages that recall Abraham’s faith in God’s promise (Rom. 4:19; 9:9; Heb. 11:11). The author of 1 Peter presents her as a model of women who accept the authority of their husbands: “It was in this way long ago that the holy women who hoped in God used to adorn themselves by accepting the authority of their husbands. Thus Sarah obeyed Abraham and called him lord” (3:5–6). The most extended treatment of Sarah in the NT, however, comes in Gal 4:21–31, where she is not mentioned by name. In that text, Paul uses Sarah and Hagar as allegorical symbols for two covenants: Sarah (the free woman) stands for the covenant of promise experienced by those who have faith in Jesus Christ; she is contrasted with Hagar (the slave woman), who stands for those who know only the covenant of law at Sinai. See also Abimelech; Abraham; Hagar; Isaac; Ishmael.
2 The daughter of Raguel who, after many difficulties, became the wife of Tobias in the book of Tobit. Prior to marrying Tobias, she had been married to seven husbands, each of whom was killed by the demon Asmodeus before the marriage could be consummated. She was reproached by one of her father’s maids, who said, “You are the one who kills your husbands.” This prompted her to weep and pray for God to take her life. Her prayer was heard and the angel Raphael sent to assist her. Tobias, the son of Tobit, married Sarah and, with Raphael’s help, exorcised the demon from her. Thus, Sarah became Tobit’s daughter-in-law. See also Tobit, book of.
J.C.E.
Sarai (sair′i), a variant spelling of Sarah, the name of Abraham’s wife (Gen. 11:29–31; 12:5, 11, 17; 16:1–3, 5–6, 8; 17:15). Her name was changed by God to “Sarah” (17:15) at the time she received a divine blessing, as Abram’s name was changed to “Abraham” (17:5). See also Sarah.
sarcophagus. See burial.
Sardis (sahr′dis), the regional capital of Lydia in the province of Asia Minor and one of the seven churches addressed in Revelation (1:11; 3:1, 4). The city had been founded in 1200 BCE as capital of the kingdom of Lydia, which was conquered by the Persians in the sixth century BCE. After Alexander defeated the Persians (334 BCE), the city was independent for a brief time before becoming a provincial capital of the Seleucid Empire. After Roman occupation (189 BCE), Sardis was placed under the administration of Pergamum. In the first century CE, it was a thoroughly hellenized city that served as the center for emperor worship in the region. There was also an impressive temple to Artemis. Of the seven churches addressed in Revelation, Sardis receives some of the harshest rebukes: “You have a name of being alive, but you are dead” (3:1). But there are still a few persons in the church who have not “soiled their clothes,” and they are encouraged to persevere in their faithfulness (3:4).
P.P.
Sarepta (suh-rep′tuh; Heb., “smelting place”), a Phoenician city midway between Tyre and Sidon, where Elijah lodged with a widow during a famine and restored her son to life (1 Kings 17:8–24; cf. Luke 4:26). It is probably present-day Sarfend (Surafend). See also Zarephath.
Sargon II (sahr′gon; Akkadian, “the king is legitimate”), king of Assyria 722–705 BCE. Though mentioned by name only in Isa. 20:1, Sargon II has great significance for biblical history, as he was the king of Assyria responsible for the conquest of Samaria and deportation of Israelites in 720 BCE. Sargon II succeeded Shalmaneser V, apparently his brother, whose sudden death may have been due to court intrigue. Some have seen the very name of Sargon (“the king is legitimate”) as a hint that he was a usurper. In any case, the death of Shalmaneser V provoked massive disruptions in the empire, which took Sargon II two years to quell. His first year (721 BCE) focused on appeasing various groups at home, particularly those in the city of Asshur. In his second year (720 BCE), he attacked the two main rebellious clients: the Chaldean Marduk-apla-iddina II (biblical name: Merodach-baladan) and a Syro-Palestinian coalition led by the city of Hamath with Egyptian support (2 Kings 17:4). The battle against Merodach-baladan and his Elamite ally ended at the Mesopotamian city of Der, leaving Merodach-baladan as Babylonian king for the next decade. The battle against forces in the Levant, however, crushed all resistance (Isa. 10:9–11), even pushing the Egyptians back to their Sinai frontier at Raphia, which was destroyed. In the process, Israelite Samaria was retaken—it had joined the rebellion after an apparently earlier conquest by Shalmaneser V in 722 BCE (2 Kings 17:3–6)—and this time it was converted into an Assyrian province, and its population was largely deported and then replaced with peoples imported from other regions (an Assyrian tactic for dealing with conquered peoples). This action by Sargon II effectively marked the end of Israel as the northern kingdom (2 Kings 17). By contrast, Judah, the southern kingdom, was spared, having remained loyal to Assyria throughout.
These wars of 720 BCE, far from providing a permanent peace, set a pattern for the rest of Sargon II’s reign. He spent his remaining years continually fighting to maintain the empire. Thus, in the Levant, several additional, and successful, campaigns were undertaken: in 717 BCE, to conquer Carchemish (Isa. 10:9); in 716 BCE, to force Egypt and the Arabs to yield control of the trade routes (19:23); and in 713–711 BCE, to deal twice with rebellions led by the Philistine city of Ashdod. Judah, however, was again spared, because it refused to join Ashdod against Assyrian rule (Isa. 20).
In this same period, Sargon II was active in the north, against Urartu and its allies. He seriously weakened this old enemy of Assyria, even as he strengthened the Assyrian presence in southeastern Turkey, building on the base established by his earlier capture of Carchemish. With the Levant thus relatively stable, Sargon II returned, finally, in 710 BCE to Babylonia, intent on removing Merodach-baladan from power and making himself king of Babylonia, like his predecessors Tiglath-pileser III and Shalmaneser V. By 709 BCE, those goals were achieved, and by 707 BCE, Merodach-baladan’s capital had been destroyed, although the Chaldean himself remained safe with his ally, the Elamites.
Sargon II’s Babylonian triumph was acknowledged by kings far and wide, as was his completion in 706 BCE of a lavish new capital in the Assyrian heartland, where all his triumphs could be celebrated. The new city, Dur-Sharrukin (modern Khorsabad), was under Sargon II’s rule for barely a year, however, for in 705 BCE he lost his life against Tabal in southeastern Turkey, where trouble had stirred again. In the wake of Sargon’s shocking death (cf. perhaps Isa. 14:4–21), his successors abandoned Dur-Sharrukin as a royal residence, though they retained it as a headquarters for a provincial governor. See also Ashdod; Assyria, Empire of; Babylon; Samaria, district of.
P.B.M.
Sarid (sair′id), a town on the southern border of Zebulun (Josh. 19:10, 12), most likely modern Tell Shadud in the Esdraelon Plain about six miles north and slightly east of Megiddo.
Sarsechim (sahr′suh-kim), the name or title of one of the Babylonian princes who took Jerusalem (Jer. 39:3). If it is a title, it means “chief of slaves.”
Satan (say′tuhn; Heb., “adversary”). The figure of Satan is found in only three places in the Hebrew Bible and all of these are often thought to be postexilic in date (i.e., after 538 BCE): Job 1–2; Zech. 3:1–2; and 1 Chron. 21:1.
In the first two instances, Satan is depicted as a member of God’s court whose basic duty is to accuse human beings before God. He is not presented at this point as an enemy of God or as a leader of evil, demonic forces. In the third instance, Satan (or possibly a satan, “an adversary”) is said to incite David to take a census (1 Chron. 21:1). There is some question as to whether the word here refers to a specific personality (as indicated by the NRSV) or whether the point might be that David fell victim to some undefined “adversary,” such as the general human tendency toward evil; in the Hebrew text no definite article is used with the noun. In any case, the figure in 21:1 is not yet the embodiment of evil with whom the figure of Satan would come to be associated.
The idea of Satan evident in the NT writings developed during the Second Temple period, as is witnessed by some of the Hellenistic apocalyptic writings produced during that period. Probably under the influence of Persian ideology, Jewish thought embraced a more radical concept of dualism with regard to the created order—a dualism of good versus evil. There existed already the idea that God had a heavenly host, a group of messengers to carry out God’s work and orders. The Persians also believed in a ruler over the powers of evil, who had many servants in this realm known as demons. The Hebrews could easily understand and assimilate such thinking into their already existing ideas: if there are good spiritual beings (angels), there can also be evil spiritual beings (demons). Still, they had no immediate notion that one supernatural being would be the preeminent leader of these forces of evil. Thus, as the religious thinking of the Jewish people developed, several different names were used to designate the leader of forces hostile to God: the devil, Belial (also Beliar), Mastemah, Apollyon (meaning the “Destroyer”), Sammael, Asmodeus, and Beelzebul (also Beelzebub). Satan, however, came to be the most used designation, possibly because in the LXX the name Satan in the passages cited above was rendered as “the devil.” Another interesting development took place during this period—the figure of the devil or Satan came to be identified with “the serpent” of Gen. 3, allowing that story to be read in a different way than it had been before.
Satan and his cohorts came to represent the powers of evil in the universe, which, by Jesus’s time, were even referred to as the kingdom of Satan. Jesus says that he is plundering this kingdom when he drives out demons in a way that manifests the kingdom of God (Matt. 12:26, 28–29). The demons were considered to be the cause of sickness, both physical and mental, and of many calamities of nature (e.g., storms, earthquakes); in general, they were the forces responsible for much of human misery, and they were always opposed to God’s purposes and God’s people.
In the NT writings, Satan appears frequently, especially in the Gospels. The figure is also known by numerous other designations, among which are “devil” (e.g., Matt. 4:1), “tempter” (e.g., Matt. 4:3), “accuser” (e.g., Rev. 12:10), “ruler of demons” (e.g., Luke 11:15), “ruler of this world” (e.g., John 12:31) as well as some of the proper names listed above. One of the most interesting designations is “the evil one.” In fact, it is likely that in the Lord’s Prayer the petition traditionally rendered “deliver us from evil” would be better translated (as in the NRSV), “rescue us from the evil one” (Matt. 6:13b).
In the Gospels, Jesus confronts Satan before commencing his public ministry. Satan tests him with a series of challenges, and he proves that he is the faithful Son of God (Matt. 4:1–11; cf. Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus indicates that Peter’s denial of Jesus will constitute a similar trial, necessary because Satan demanded to have Peter in order to sift him like wheat (22:31). In his parable of the Sower, Jesus says that just as birds sometimes devour seed before it has a chance to grow, so Satan snatches the word that is sown in people before it can bear fruit (Mark 4:15). Elsewhere he refers to a woman who is crippled as having been “bound by Satan” (Luke 13:16). In Luke 10:18, Jesus says that he saw Satan fall like lightning, which explains why his disciples are able to drive out demons. Nevertheless, Satan would continue to harass believers in the life of the church, seeking to outwit them (2 Cor. 2:11) and tempting them to sin (1 Cor. 7:5). Sometimes, Satan successfully hinders Paul from carrying out his mission (1 Thess. 2:18). But, curiously, Satan can serve useful purposes; when wayward church members need discipline, they can be handed over to Satan for a time (1 Cor. 5:5; cf. 1 Tim. 1:20). Likewise, Paul refers to some physical affliction he suffers (his “thorn in the flesh”) as a messenger from Satan that God has deemed he should retain so as not to become too elated (2 Cor. 12:7).
Satan is said to operate through human beings as well as through demons. Jesus refers to Peter as one who speaks for Satan when Peter tries to dissuade him from going to the cross (Matt. 16:23; Mark 8:33). Satan enters into Judas when the latter sets out to betray Jesus (Luke 22:3; John 13:27). In the early church, Satan fills the heart of Ananias to lie to the Holy Spirit about selling his possessions and giving the money to the church (Acts 5:3). Paul says that Satan disguises himself as an angel of light and that his ministers disguise themselves as ministers of righteousness (2 Cor. 11:14–15).
It is also clearly affirmed that, no matter how powerful Satan may appear to be, his final overthrow by the power of God is certain (Rom. 16:20; Rev. 20:1–10). See also adversary; angel; apocalyptic literature; Baal-zebub; Belial, Beliar; demon; devil; eschatology; evil; fall, the; Lucifer.
J.M.E./M.A.P.
satrap (say′trap), a provincial governor among the Achaemenid Persians. The word, originally Persian and taken over by the Hebrews and Greeks, occurs in the Bible only in the plural (Esther 3:12; Dan. 3:2). According to Dan. 6:1, “It pleased Darius to set over the kingdom one hundred twenty satraps, stationed throughout the whole kingdom.”
Saul (sawl).
1 A Benjaminite from the mountain village of Gibeah who became Israel’s first king. According to biblical tradition Saul was divinely appointed in response to a popular demand for a king, but he was not long in favor with God, who rejected him for disobedience. He spent much of his reign in conflict with David, whom God had chosen as his successor.
The story of Saul’s selection as Israel’s first king is told in 1 Sam. 9–10, where Saul is introduced as the handsome and unusually tall son of a prominent Benjaminite named Kish. One day, while searching for some asses that belonged to his father, he entered a village in the Ephraimite hills to seek the assistance of the local seer. The man turned out to be the prophet Samuel, who anointed his surprised guest as prince, or king-designate, over Israel (1 Sam. 10:1). After this private ceremony Saul was selected in a public lottery and acclaimed king by the people (10:17–27). His kingship would be subsequently confirmed through his prowess as a military leader (cf. 14:47–48). He seems first to have achieved regional prominence by leading a successful march against Nahash, an Ammonite king who had laid siege to the fortress of Jabesh-gilead (1 Sam. 11). This victory won Saul a base of power extending beyond Benjamin and across the Jordan into Gilead. The summary of his wars in 14:47–48 also mentions campaigns against Moab, Edom, the Aramean state of Zobah, and Amalek (cf. 15). Israel’s primary enemy at this time, however, was Philistia. Although Saul never achieved any permanent advantage over the Philistines (cf. 14:52), he did enjoy some success against them, and his kingdom offered the Israelites an alternative to Philistine sovereignty. His son Jonathan attacked the Philistine garrison in Gibeah, provoking an open revolt (13:3–4). The result was a decisive Israelite victory at Michmash (14), and the Philistines were temporarily excluded from the central hill country. It is difficult to determine how much territory Saul actually controlled, but it is unlikely that his kingdom extended beyond the central hills and parts of Gilead. The incorporation of Judah and the outlying territories into Israel was probably the achievement of David.
The biblical account of the latter years of Saul’s reign (16:14–31:13) focuses mainly on David’s rise to power. Saul serves as a foil, the divinely rejected king (13:7–14; 15:1–35) in contrast to whom the chosen successor is eulogized. Saul brings David into his court at Gibeah as a musician (16:14–23) and warrior (17:1–58), but David soon surpasses the king in military prowess (cf. 18:6–7) and wins the loyalty of all Israel, including Saul’s eldest son, Jonathan (18:1–4), and his daughter Michal, who becomes David’s wife (18:20–27). Saul, now tormented by “an evil spirit from the LORD” (16:14), becomes increasingly obsessed with jealousy and suspicion. He determines to kill David, who is aided and protected by both Jonathan and Michal (19:1–1; 20:1–42). Saul persecutes David relentlessly, driving him into hiding in the desert and slaying eighty-five priests at Nob whom he suspects of having aided David. Still, David twice spares Saul’s life when he has the opportunity to kill him. These stories are told with a touch of humor at Saul’s expense. First, Saul goes into a cave to relieve himself, not knowing that David is hiding there, and David cuts off a piece of his cloak to display later as proof that he could have killed him (1 Sam. 24). Second, David sneaks into a camp where Saul is sleeping and takes a spear and water jar from his side to show him in the morning that, once again, he had opportunity to kill the king, but didn’t (1 Sam. 26).
After Saul abandons his quest to kill David, he seeks out a medium at Endor to summon the ghost of Samuel, hoping for a favorable oracle on the eve of a battle with the Philistines. Instead, Samuel prophesies defeat and death, which then come to pass. On Mount Gilboa, Saul watches as his army is decimated by the Philistines and his sons are killed in battle. Then he kills himself by falling on his own sword (1 Sam. 31:4, but cf. 2 Sam. 1:1–16), thus leaving the way open for David to come to the throne. David offers an eloquent lament over the deaths of Saul and Jonathan. The Philistines cut off Saul’s head and impale his body and the bodies of his sons on the walls of Beth-shan, but when the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead hear this, some men from the city travel all night to take the bodies down and burn and bury them (1 Sam. 31:8–13). For this, David says they will be forever blessed (2 Sam. 1:4–5).
The biblical account of Saul and of the origin of monarchy in Israel reflects a point of view that is suspicious of kingship. Still, the account seems to incorporate material from a tradition that had a more favorable regard for Saul and kingship in general. The presence of doublets (two accounts with a similar theme) offers a strong indication that the story as told in the Bible has been edited from more than one earlier account. The two stories of David sparing Saul’s life are one example of such a doublet. Another is the two (or actually three) accounts of Saul’s selection as king. The first (1 Sam. 9:1–26) presents Saul very favorably, as a folk hero who did not seek to be king, but accepted his divine selection by the prophet Samuel. In a second story that presents his public selection as king, Samuel openly warns the people that it is sinful for them to want a king (10:17–27). Finally, in what is presented as a renewal of Saul’s kingship, he appears as a warrior similar to the judges who delivered Israel in ways that obviated the need for a king (10:27b–11:15). Saul’s rejection as king is also told twice. In one account (13:7–14), Saul himself offers a sacrifice that Samuel was supposed to conduct; as a result, Samuel tells him he will have no dynasty (i.e., his sons will not rule after him). In a second account (15:1–35), Saul fails to exterminate the Amalekites according to the ban under which they have been placed by God; thus, Samuel tells him that he has been rejected as king.
Through the interweaving of these traditions, the office of king is shown to be subordinate to the divine will as mediated through the office of prophet. Readers are assured that Samuel supervised all the events that brought Saul to the throne—and also oversaw Samuel’s rejection and God’s choice of David in his place. See also Benjamin; David; Jonathan; king; Samuel.
2 The Jewish name of the NT apostle and missionary also known as Paul (Acts 7:58; 9:1). See Paul.
P.K.M./M.A.P.
savior, one who delivers from present or future danger or distress. The primary usage of the word “savior” in the Hebrew Bible is in reference to judges and other leaders raised up by God to bring deliverance to Israel in time of national crisis (e.g., 2 Kings 13:5; Neh. 9:27). The term is also used for God, who employed these human saviors as divine agents. In Isaiah, “Savior” became a recognized title for God (e.g., 43:3; 45:21; 49:26; 60:16) in connection with the deliverance of Israel during the return from the exile. David is also presented as calling God “my savior” in prayer (2 Sam. 22:3) and psalms of praise (Ps. 17:7).
In the NT, Mary refers to God as “my Savior” (Luke 1:47; cf. 1 Tim. 4:10; Titus 1:3; 2:10; 3:4), but most uses of the word in the NT refer to Jesus, who is said to have been born a savior in Luke 2:20 (cf. 1:69). The term also occurs once in Eph. 5:23, six times in Jude and 2 Peter (Jude 25; 2 Pet. 1:1, 11; 2:20; 3:2, 18), and twice in the Johannine writings in the unique phrase “savior of the world” (John 4:42; 1 John 4:14). It is found ten times in the Pastoral Letters (1 Tim. 1:1; 2:3; 4:10; 2 Tim. 1:10; Titus 1:3, 4; 2:10, 13; 3:4, 6). Sometimes, the word refers to Christ in his capacity as the end-time deliverer (Acts 5:31; 13:23; Phil. 3:20), but more often it is used to describe him as the one who brings present, personal benefits such as cleansing from sin.
In the Greco-Roman world the title “savior” was frequently used of gods as the source of present, material benefits such as health, peace, and prosperity. The combined title “god and savior,” or “god-savior,” was very common. The term also had political connotations. Ptolemy I was called “savior” in the same sense as that of another title, “benefactor” (cf. Luke 22:25). Beginning with Caesar Augustus, the Roman emperors also assumed the title “god and savior.” This imperial usage may offer an added reason for the early Christian use of this title: the true savior is not Caesar, but Christ (note the exact phrase “God and Savior” is applied to Jesus Christ in 1 Tim. 1:1; 2:3; Titus 2:13).
R.H.F./M.A.P.
scapegoat. See Atonement, Day of; Azazel.
scarlet, a bright red color associated with a dye extracted from an insect, the Caccus ilicis, and used for treating fabric and leather. The Hebrew for scarlet was shani or tola‘at, used separately or in combination; the latter’s basic meaning is “worm,” referring to the insect producing the color. In Isa. 1:18 the two Hebrew words are used in parallel: “scarlet” and “crimson,” in this case referring to the blood-red guilt of the sinner as opposed to whiteness of innocence. According to Matt. 27:28, Jesus was draped with a scarlet robe by soldiers mocking him as the “king of the Jews.” That the color was associated with royalty, or at least considered to be luxurious, accounts for the references in Revelation, where the whore of Babylon (symbolizing Rome) is dressed in scarlet and sits on a scarlet beast (17:3, 4); condemnation also comes upon wealthy merchants who have dealt in purple and scarlet and various fine gems (18:12, 16). See also red.
N.L.L./M.A.P.
scepter, a king’s elaborate ceremonial staff (Ps. 45:6). Originally a club that could also be used for digging (Num. 21:18), the scepter appeared frequently in ancient art and in the biblical writings as royal regalia with an established role in protocol (Amos 1:5, 8; Isa. 14:5; Esther 4:11; 5:2; 8:4). Israel in the wilderness period was the scepter (i.e., constituted the sovereignty) of God (Num. 24:17). Judah acquired similar status (Gen. 49:10; Ps. 60:7; Ezek. 19:11) as the origin of the Davidic king, the mighty scepter God sends forth from Zion. By metonymy, “scepter” might stand for any national sovereignty, e.g., Moab (Jer. 48:17) or Egypt (Zech. 10:11). The single NT reference to scepter (Heb. 1:8) is a variation of Ps. 45:6.
R.B.
Sceva (see′vuh), a Jewish high priest and the father of seven Jewish exorcists who attempted to imitate Paul’s use of the name of Jesus in their exorcising of evil spirits, according to Acts 19:11–20. This unauthorized use of the name had unanticipated negative consequences when, rather than exorcising a spirit, the exorcists themselves were overcome by the spirit-possessed man. The tale is told with a dose of ribald humor, as the seven men flee the house naked and wounded. The residents of Ephesus, both Jews and Greeks, are awestruck, and many become believers, confessing to their own previous reliance on magical practices. As a result, a number of magic books are collected and burned. The name Sceva does not appear in known lists of Jewish high priests of the era; the designation “high priest” is probably intended only to identify him as a locally prominent priest. See also divination; magic.
A.J.M./M.A.P.
1 Institutions for formal education. In antiquity many wealthy families provided tutors at home for their children, and all families passed on occupational skills, cultural information, and values to their children, but these wider educational processes must be distinguished from what took place in actual schools. The Bible does not mention formal educational institutions, but there is nevertheless some evidence of their existence and function.
Schooling in Ancient Israel: The existence of schools may be deduced from the activities of monarchs, officials, and priests and from Near Eastern parallels. The priests had to preside over a complex ritual, teach Israel’s traditions, and instruct the people who came to the temple, so it is highly likely that priests were trained at the temple. Even at an early date (twelfth century BCE), Samuel goes to Eli for an apprenticeship at Shiloh (1 Sam 1:24–28). In a later period Jehoshaphat is pictured as sending the Levites and priests to teach the book of the law in the cities (2 Chron. 17:7–9). The kings, nobles, and high officials of the complex state under the monarchy (1025–587 BCE) also needed training. When Solomon’s son Rehoboam became king, he consulted with the young men who had grown up with him (1 Kings 12:8–10), and one of Solomon’s enemies, Hadad, married an Egyptian and had his son Genubath raised in Pharaoh’s house among the sons of Pharaoh (11:20). The seventy sons of Ahab were raised by elders who were their guardians (2 Kings 10:6). Chronicles attributes to Jonathan, David’s uncle, and to Jehiel the care of the king’s sons. Though none of these texts speaks directly of an institutional school, they demonstrate the need for organized training of the leaders of Israel.
Israel’s position as an active participant in diplomacy and trade in the first millennium BCE demanded that the leaders and numerous officials and bureaucrats be educated to read, write, and carry on business according to law and accepted form. Israel’s calendar, taxes, and economics demanded a knowledge of mathematics, and the numerous traditions that were handed on demanded written records, even in a society that still had a strong oral base. In addition, the Bible often refers to writing, to the chronicles that lie behind the books of Kings, to the duty of reading the law yearly (Deut. 31:12–13), and to the duty of every householder to write the law on doorposts of the house (6:9). A good number of people, then, were assumed to be able to read and write: not only royal scribes (2 Kings 22:3), but also an anonymous boy selected apparently at random from among the people of Succoth (Judg. 8:14). Prophets (Elisha, Isaiah, Jeremiah) also had disciples who preserved their traditions orally and in writing; these schools of prophets may have been more like schools of thought and ways of life than institutional schools, but at some point literary training and activity took place. Finally, the Hebrew Bible itself bears witness to intense literary activity and reflection on previous written traditions from the exile (587/6 BCE) on.
Possible Methods of Instruction: Isa. 28:10 and 13 exhibit a pattern that may match memorization techniques like those that would have been used in schools; some interpreters have likewise claimed that the book of Proverbs was a school text. Archaeological discoveries in the Near East reveal that students learning how to write copied exercises (a calendar found at Gezer with the agricultural seasons on it may be a student’s exercise). More advanced students copied classics and documents such as letters and contracts. Students being trained for high office learned diplomacy, economics, and government. It is a reasonable hypothesis that fortified cities and regional capitals had either scribes or priests able to teach the young.
Ezra the scribe (fifth century BCE) was a high official of the Persian government charged to see that the law of God was known and observed. The book of Sirach (early second century BCE) has praise for the scribe who knows God’s law and is an adviser to rulers (38:24–39:11). Sir. 51:23 summons the uneducated to “lodge in the house of instruction”; this is probably a metaphorical invitation from Wisdom, but the metaphor itself depends upon familiarity with some sort of physical structure where formal education occurred. The Ptolemaic and Syriac empires, of which Israel was a part from 332 BCE, and the Roman Empire, which succeeded it in 63 BCE, were highly literate and had well-developed institutions for instruction of youth. It is likely, therefore, that Jews of this period were influenced by the cultural milieu and had comparable educational institutions. The community at Qumran, which had a strong priestly component and produced the Dead Sea Scrolls, was highly literate, and Josephus, who was a first-century priest, describes his education (but without mentioning actual schools he attended).
Schooling in the NT: In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus is portrayed as reading from scripture in the synagogue (4:16–20), but we have no evidence that Jesus ever wrote anything as part of his teaching. He is portrayed, rather, as an oral teacher par excellence. John 8:6 says that Jesus wrote on the ground as part of his interaction with the crowd that wished him to condemn an adulteress, but it does not say that he wrote letters or words. Paul wrote greetings in his own hand in his letters to his churches (e.g., Gal. 6:11–18; cf. Col. 4:18), and Acts says that he had been educated in Jerusalem at the feet of Gamaliel (22:3), but Paul does not describe the nature of his schooling. Still, the early Christian community quickly set its traditions in writing in a manner that assumes a fairly high degree of literacy. See also education; scribe; teaching.
2 Followers of a particular philosophy or lifestyle. In the Greco-Roman world, philosophical systems were often called “schools” (Gk. hairesis), since a philosopher would typically recruit disciples (students) and train them in a particular way of thinking marked by a particular way of life. Josephus refers to the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes as “schools,” perhaps to assist his Roman readers in understanding these Jewish groups on analogy with Greco-Roman schools of philosophy. Luke also does this in the book of Acts, though the NRSV translates hairesis in those references as “sect” (5:17; 15:5; 26:5). Those who do not hold to the Christian faith refer to the followers of Christ as a “school” (NRSV: “sect”) as well (24:5, 14; 28:22).
A.J.S.
scorpion, any arachnid of the order Scorpionida, of which a dozen species are known in the Near East, most of which are the yellow variety Buthus quinquestriatus. They are mainly nocturnal and carry a stinger at the end of the tail by which they paralyze food and defend themselves. They are symbols of desolate danger (Deut. 8:15), extremely severe treatment (1 Kings 12:11, 14; 2 Chron. 10:11, 14), the most hazardous surroundings (Ezek. 2:6), and excessive pain and torture (Rev. 9:3, 5, 10). They symbolize the powers of evil (Luke 10:19), and Jesus uses them as a symbol of the paternal mistreatment no caring father would offer to his child (Luke 11:12).
R.S.B.
scourge, whip or lash made of leather thongs attached to a handle (John 2:15). As a metaphor, it refers to any punishment (at the hands of enemies or natural disaster) visited on the people by God (Josh. 23:13; Isa. 10:26; 28:15, 18; Job 9:23).
The word often refers to the use of scourging to punish criminals. Legally, a “milder” form of flogging was used by magistrates as a warning to those responsible for disorder. Josephus (Jewish War 2.13.7) reports that authorities in Caesarea quelled rioting between Jews and Greeks by catching those responsible and punishing them “with stripes and bonds.” Paul says that he endured such punishment on several occasions (2 Cor. 11:24–25; Acts 16:22–25; 21:24). A more severe beating was administered in connection with other punishments. It could sometimes lead to the death of the condemned person. Livy reports that such lashing preceded crucifixion (History 22.13.9; 28.37.3). In Luke 23:14–22, Pilate suggests that Jesus be given the lighter beating as a warning. Mark 15:15 and Matt. 27:26 report that Jesus received the severe beating as one who had been condemned to death. See also cross; trial of Jesus.
P.P.
scribe, one trained in the formal art of reading and writing, usually with competence in some area such as law, economics, or the like. The word derives from the Latin root for “write” and translates Hebrew and Greek words with similar etymologies. In the ancient Near East the designation “scribe” covered a variety of offices from the local copiers of documents and contracts for ordinary people to government officials invested with serious responsibilities. Like the modern secretary, the scribe was generally concerned with written records, bureaucracy, and administration. Scribes were common to Egypt, Mesopotamia, Israel, and other countries of the Near East. The book of Proverbs contains international wisdom traditions that were developed by the scribal class in many countries.
In the Hebrew Bible, the scribe first appears as a muster officer (Judg. 5:14). In the monarchic period (eleventh–tenth centuries BCE) the scribe was a high cabinet officer concerned with finance, policy, and administration (2 Kings 22; Jer. 36:10). Jeremiah’s associate, Baruch, who recorded his words, was also a scribe (Jer. 36:32). In postexilic times (sixth century BCE), Ezra the scribe was sent by the Persian king to instruct and guide the inhabitants of Judea. He was both an official of the Persian Empire and knowledgeable of the laws and customs of Israel (Ezra 7). In the early second century BCE, Ben Sira praises the scribe for his learning and for his involvement in affairs of government (Sir. 38:24–39:11). In the Maccabean period (167–63 BCE) the learned Hasideans who sued Alcimus and Bacchides for peace (1 Macc. 7:12–13) and Eleazar, the prominent leader who was martyred (2 Macc. 6:18), are all called scribes, with the probable implication that they were learned in Mosaic law. The term does not seem to denote a group with particular beliefs or a set political program, but rather learned men of any party or persuasion.
In the NT scribes sometimes appear alone, but they are frequently associated with other Jewish groups. In Matthew and Luke the scribes are also paired with the Pharisees in questioning Jesus; the phrase “scribes and Pharisees” occurs eight times in Matthew (5:20; 12:38; 23:13, 15, 23, 25, 27, 29; cf. 15:1; 23:2). In Mark’s Gospel, the scribes typically appear in association with the high priests and elders (11:27), and the bulk of their appearances are in conjunction with the death of Jesus. Similarly, in the early chapters of Acts the scribes and elders are opponents of Christianity (4:5; 6:12). Thus the scribes are seen both as part of the leadership and also as a learned class. Two passages (Mark 2:16; Acts 23:9) use the phrase “scribes of the Pharisees,” indicating that scribes could belong to other groups within Judaism. Scribes are mentioned only once in John (“the scribes and the Pharisees,” 8:3) and, apart from 1 Cor. 1:20, they are not mentioned in the NT outside of the Gospels and Acts.
In almost all Gospel references they are opponents of Jesus, but Mark’s Gospel has a story in which a scribe agrees with Jesus and extrapolates on Jesus’s words in a manner that leads Jesus to tell him, “You are not far from the kingdom of God” (12:28–34). Matthew and Luke also tell of a scribe who wants to follow Jesus, but Jesus responds to him in a way that might imply he does not think the man has the commitment to bear the hardship such discipleship would require. He tells Jesus, “I will follow you wherever you go,” and Jesus responds, “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Matt. 8:19–20). In Matt. 13:52, Jesus refers to scribes who have been trained (literally “discipled”) for the kingdom of heaven. See also education; schools; teaching; town clerk.
A.J.S./M.A.P.
scripture (from the Lat., “writing”), a document or collection of documents containing material that is highly esteemed in a religious community accepting the document(s). Greeks, Romans, Persians, and Egyptians all preserved and valued written documents such as hymns, oracles, myths, and revelations. In Judaism and Christianity, the term “scripture” (Gk. tais graphais, lit., “the writings”) eventually came to be restricted to those writings included in an approved canon. Jesus refers many times to the scriptures, always invoking writings that are now found in the Christian OT (e.g., Matt. 21:42; 22:29; John 2:22; 7:38; 19:24). In several instances, Jesus speaks of the scriptures being fulfilled though his ministry (Luke 4:21; John 13:8; 17:12) and, especially, through his death on the cross (Matt. 26:54, 56; Mark 14:49; Luke 22:37; cf. Luke 24:27; John 5:39; 19:24, 28, 36–37; Act. 1:16). In the book of Acts, Christian missionaries are depicted as using the scriptures to present their claims about Jesus (8:32, 35; 17:2, 11; 18:24, 28). Paul quotes frequently from the scriptures, again citing texts that are now included in the Christian OT and almost always interpreting those passages in ways that point to Christ (Rom. 4:3; 9:17; 10:11; 11:2; Gal. 3:6; 4:30). Specifically, “Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, and . . . he was buried, and . . . raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:3–4). In Rom. 15:4, Paul affirms that “whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, so that by steadfastness and by the encouragement of the scriptures we might have hope.”
Jesus sometimes refers to the scriptures as the “word of God” (Matt. 15:6; Mark 7:13; John 10:35), and he declares that the scripture cannot be annulled (John 10:35). Timothy is told to attend to the public reading of scripture (1 Tim. 5:18) and is reminded, “All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness” (2 Tim. 3:16). In 2 Peter 3:16 Paul’s letters seem to be regarded as among the scriptures. See also canon; inspiration; New Testament; Old Testament; revelation.
L.W.C./M.A.P.
scroll (Heb. megillah), a roll of papyrus or specially prepared leather used for writing (see Jer. 36). Papyrus scrolls were imported from Egypt, where they had been manufactured since at least 3000 BCE. To make a papyrus scroll, evenly sized strips were cut from the pith of the papyrus plant and laid side by side horizontally and vertically, forming two layers that would become the front and back sides of the sheet. Water and pressure were applied to make the strips adhere. After drying, the sheets were rubbed smooth with shells or stones. Leather scrolls were made of sheep, goat, or calf skin that had been de-haired, scraped, washed, stretched on a frame, and dried. The hair side, on which the writing was done, was scraped smooth and rubbed with a pumice stone. Rectangles of prepared leather were stitched together to make a scroll. Vertical and horizontal guide lines were traced with a dry point and a straight edge. Black ink was made from carbon soot mixed with water and gum, red ink from red ocher or iron oxide. Although writing could be erased from papyrus with water (Num. 5:23), errors on leather had to be marked out or scraped off. Scribes wrote with pens made from rushes, frayed at the end, and from the Hellenistic period on (after 63 BCE), with pointed reed pens split at the end. Equipment was carried in a case tied to the scribe’s waist (Ezek. 9:2). Whether papyrus or leather scrolls were customarily used for writing biblical books in the preexilic period (prior to 587/6 BCE) is disputed, but at least by the Hellenistic period leather was the preferred material (e.g., the Dead Sea Scrolls). References to scrolls and writing in the Bible include Deut. 28:58; Josh. 1:8; Ps. 45:1; Isa. 8:1; Jer. 8:8; 25:13; Ezek. 2:9–10; Rev. 5:1. See also Dead Sea Scrolls; writing.
C.A.N.
sculpture, the art of carving or modeling in relief or in the round. The second commandment’s prohibition of graven (carved) images (Exod. 20:4) is thought to have inhibited development of this art among the Hebrews. The sculpture known to us from the Bible and from archaeology attests dependence on foreign (especially Phoenician) models and artisans, e.g., the carved cedar beams and panels of Solomon’s temple, with their motifs of palms, pomegranates, and cherubim, and the carved ivory inlays discovered in Samaria (cf. Amos 6:4). Most standing images were understood as idols representing foreign gods, including Aaron’s golden calf (Exod. 32) and Jeroboam’s calves (1 Kings 12:28–30), but the cherubim in the inner sanctuary of the temple (6:23–28) were a notable exception. The “sculptured stones” near Gilgal (Judg. 3:19, 26) may represent memorial stones or carved images in an open-air sanctuary (cf. Josh. 2:20). See also cherubim; idol; ivory; temple, the.
P.A.B.
Scythians (sith′ee-uhnz), a nomadic people from the Caucasus who threatened the Assyrian Empire and later the Persian Empire from the north. In the Bible they are called Ashkenaz (Gen. 10:3; 1 Chron. 1:6; Jer. 51:27). The fifth-century BCE Greek historian Herodotus describes an unsuccessful campaign by the Scythians against Egypt, in the course of which they looted a temple of Aphrodite in Ashkelon; on the basis of this account the Scythians have sometimes been identified as the unnamed enemy from the north in Jer. 1:14 (cf. Zeph. 1:10), but this is uncertain. The Scythians’ cruelty was proverbial in later antiquity (see 2 Macc. 4:47; 3 Macc. 7:5; 4 Macc. 10:7; and also perhaps Col. 3:11). See also Ashkenaz.
M.D.C.
Scythopolis (sith-op′uh-lis). See Beth-shan.
sea, a term (Heb. yam) denoting any large body of water, salt or fresh. In the Bible, “the sea” often designates the Mediterranean Sea. The “bronze sea,” sometimes also called simply “the sea,” was a great basin in the forecourt of the temple (2 Kings 25:13; Jer. 27:19).
seah (see′uh), a unit of measure for dry volume of uncertain size, probably about one-third of a bushel. It is translated simply as “measure” in the NRSV (Gen. 18:6; Matt. 13:33). See also weights and measures.
seal, a device by means of which ownership of objects or origin of documents could be designated. The term is used in two primary senses in the Bible, with secondary meanings developing from them through the use of metaphor. The primary references are to (1) an object, usually a small, semiprecious stone with writing cut into its surface, that makes an impression on clay or wax; and (2) the impression itself made by such an object.
Use and Manufacture: Seals were widely used throughout the ancient Near East from the fourth millennium BCE through the Roman period, because they provided both identification and prestige to the owner. The majority of seals from the biblical period identify the owner, and they often have a title and an emblem or engraved scene as well. Those persons who possessed seals were usually members of the upper classes and were often associated with the workings of government (see below). Their seals performed important functions in their professional activities.
Cylinder seals were popular in antiquity, though less so among Israelites and early Christians than among others. Such seals could be rolled by hand across wet clay in order to produce an intricate scene once the cylinder had made a complete revolution. Scenes of religious activities and depictions of deities or royalty could be executed easily in this fashion and then made public through the distribution of impressions.
The question of a seal’s manufacture is an intriguing one, especially because so many of them are quite small (oval in shape, some less than an inch long), yet possessed of exquisite design. Apparently copper and iron were used for drilling, sometimes with an abrasive glued to the implement. That diamonds were occasionally used is a recent conjecture, but the evidence is not conclusive. Water and olive oil were probable lubricants. The lapidary must have possessed keen hand–eye coordination, artistic talent, and the ability to write in reverse so that the impression made by the seal could be read correctly. Some seals were bored through at one end so that they might be fastened to a cord and worn around the neck (see Gen. 38:18). Others were set in a frame and used for rings or necklaces.
There are approximately sixty references to seals and sealing in the Bible. The contexts imply use of seals to render something secure against tampering (Jer. 32:10; Matt. 27:66), demonstrate authority (1 Kings 21:8; John 6:27), seal a letter (1 Kings 21:8; 1 Cor. 9:2), seal a covenant (Neh. 9:38), delegate authority (Esther 8:8; John 6:27), and seal documents (Isa. 8:16; Jer. 32:10; Rev. 5:1). Archaeological research suggests that seals were also used as amulets, heirlooms, gifts, temple or burial deposits, and as tools used to imprint pottery vessels.
The NT usually uses the terms “seal” and “sealing” in their primary senses (e.g., Rev. 5:1), but metaphorical use is made of the terms as well. Paul refers to the circumcision of Abraham as a “seal of the righteousness which he had by faith” (Rom. 4:11). Christians are “sealed with the promised Holy Spirit” (Eph. 1:13). Perhaps most striking of all is the reference in Heb. 1:3 to Christ as the “stamp” of God’s nature, where the single Greek word (charakt–er) refers to the impression made by a seal.
As Archaeological Evidence: Seals can be of great benefit to the reconstruction of past history and cultures. On numerous occasions Egyptian scarab seals (so named because they resemble the sacred beetle) or cartouches (name-rings used to produce seals) have been found in the Levant. Not only does this illustrate the cultural influence of Egypt in Canaan during the third and second millennia BCE, but a seal found by an archaeologist in a stratified deposit can be very helpful in dating the stratum. Excavations at Tel Lachish have uncovered a seal on one of the ancient gate systems bearing the name of Ramesses III (ca. 1183–1152 BCE). The gate is part of a stratum destroyed by fire. The destruction, therefore, is dated to the reign of Ramesses III and is taken by some scholars to be evidence of early Israelite incursion during the settlement of Canaan (Josh. 10:31–32).
Recently discovered clay bullae (hardened seal impressions) from the postexilic era (i.e., after late sixth century BCE) have shed additional light on an obscure period in biblical history. They have provided names with the title “governor” that supplement the meager evidence of the Bible for reconstructing the succession of leaders of the community. Furthermore, various impressions bear the stamp yehud, “Judah,” supporting the conclusion that Judah was administered as a separate province in the Persian Empire.
Over a thousand seal impressions on jars have been discovered dating to the late eighth and early seventh centuries BCE. These impressions have in common the inscription “to [belonging to] the king” (Heb. lmlk); a scarab figure with either two or four wings; and the name of one of four towns in Judah: Hebron, Ziph, Socoh, or an unknown location (Heb. mmsht). Recent investigation has dated these impressions to the reign of Hezekiah (ca. 715–687 BCE) and perhaps to his preparations for war with Assyria. The stamped jars were containers for commodities that may have come from taxation and/or royal landholdings.
Personal Seals: A number of personal seals have been discovered that may shed light on the structure of Israelite society in the preexilic period. They range in date from the ninth to the sixth centuries BCE, with the vast majority coming from the eighth and seventh centuries. Among the titles following the personal name are:
“Who is over the house,” probably a title synonymous with majordomo or royal steward. The office is known from several references in the Hebrew Bible.
“Scribe.” A recently discovered impression reads: “Barakiah son of Neriah the Scribe.” This name and title should be compared with that of Jeremiah’s faithful friend of the same name and title in Jer. 36:32 (“Baruch” and “Barakiah” are the shorter and longer forms, respectively, of the same name).
“Servant of the king.” A number of seals have been found with this title.
“Son of the king.” Several examples have been discovered.
“Daughter of the king.” Only one of these has been found, reading in Hebrew mah adanah. A beautiful lyre was engraved on the seal.
Bibliography
Gorelick, Leonard, and Elizabeth Williams-Forte. Ancient Seals and the Bible. Udena, 1983.
J.A.D.
Sea Peoples, the name given to a group of peoples, apparently from the Greek island of Crete, who began to invade the eastern coastlands of the Mediterranean Sea sometime around the thirteenth century BCE. Their attempt to invade Egypt was repulsed by Ramesses III (ca. 1190 BCE), a victory he commemorated on a monumental frieze. There, the Sea Peoples, called in Egyptian the Perasata (probably the source of the biblical term “Philistines,” which designates these people), are depicted as slender warriors wearing tasseled kilts and magnificent helmets. Their subsequent invasion of the plains of Canaan sometime later was more successful, and, since their invasion from the west coincided with the Israelites’ invasion from the east, a collision between the two groups was inevitable. That collision, which lasted for many years, is reflected in the conflicts between the Israelites and the Philistines recorded in the books of Judges and 1 and 2 Samuel. See also Amarna, Tell el-; Ashdod; Caphtor; Crete; Gaza; Philistines.
K.H.R.
season. There are only two seasons in the Levant, the dry (April–September) and the wet (October–March). The amount and duration of rainfall and the temperatures vary from year to year and place to place. Generally as one goes south or east, rainfall is lighter and the temperatures are warmer. In Hebrew or Greek no particular word designates season, but several words are used for specific periods of time described by such things as weather (the time of rain, Deut. 11:14, the time of heat, Ps. 32:4) or agricultural features (a time of threshing and sowing, Lev. 26:5; the time when a fig tree has fruit, Matt. 24:32) or annual festivals (the time of Unleavened Bread or Passover, Exod. 23:15; Luke 2:41; 22:1). In the Gezer Calendar, a schoolboy’s ditty written on a potsherd during the period of the early Israelite monarchy (tenth century BCE), the months of the year are described by agricultural activity: “His two months are olive harvest, His two months are planting grain, . . .” See also weather.
N.L.L.
seat, judgment. See judgment seat.
Seba (see′buh), Sabeans (suh-bee′uhnz), a place mentioned four times and a people mentioned three times in the biblical text. Job 1:15 identifies the destroyers of Job’s family as Sabeans. Isaiah sees the Sabeans as one of several nations God gave as a ransom for Israel (43:3); they were also a source of wealth (45:14), together with Egypt and Ethiopia. In Joel 3:8 they are described as a “nation far away,” in Joel’s threat that they will buy Phoenician and Philistine slaves from Judah. Gen. 10:7 catalogs Seba as a son of Cush, together with Havilah, Sabtah, Raamah, and Sabteca, as does 1 Chron. 1:9. Kings from Seba are mentioned together with those of Sheba and Tarshish as bringing tribute and gifts (Ps. 72:10) to Israel’s king. Their definition as a distant source of riches seems clear. The precise location is not evident from biblical sources.
From the evidence of archaeological work, it is clear that the Sabeans occupied the portion of southwest Arabia that is today the land of Yemen. It was comparatively well watered and fertile, but the resources were augmented by extensive irrigation facilities (as at Marib). The Sabeans’ location was also fortunate for trade development. They could capitalize on traffic in myrrh and frankincense through the land caravan route running north up the Hijaz, the coastal plain that lies at the eastern shore of the Red Sea. Their extensive trade in gold and precious stones was known to the biblical writers (see also Isa. 60:6; Jer. 6:20; Ezek. 27:22–23, where Sheba occurs as the Hebrew spelling of the South Arabic name Saba). Their territorial controls fluctuated, but included at times the port of Aden, where contacts with shipments of goods from India as well as Africa were made. Sabean ships ranged to Africa and India, contributing both to the variety of trade goods and to the wealth of the exchanges flowing into Sabean resources.
Although Sabean history is not well known, its Semitic inhabitants successfully developed caravan trade by the tenth century BCE, as evidenced by the visit of the queen of Sheba to Solomon (1 Kings 10:1–13; 2 Chron. 9:1–12). Sabean colonization apparently included parts of the adjacent Ethiopian coast. From the ninth to fifth centuries, Sabean kings numbered over twenty, from which archaeological evidence survives in the form of temples, dams, sluices for irrigation, bronze statues, and inscriptions. Saba weakened thereafter, but its successful defense against Rome’s initial efforts to subdue it led to importation of Hellenistic art and pottery soon locally imitated. See also Sheba; Sheba, queen of.
R.S.B.
Secacah (si-kay′kuh; Heb., “thicket, cover”), a city of Judah (Josh. 15:61), probably modern Khirbet es-Samrah, located about three miles southwest of Khirbet Qumran in the Valley of Achor.
Second Coming of Christ. See eschatology; Parousia.
second death, the death of the soul or spirit, the death of a resurrected person, or eternal damnation, referred to in the NT book of Revelation (2:11; 20:6, 14; 21:8). According to this book, all the dead will rise on the day of judgment. Then the wicked will be cast into the lake of fire to suffer their second death. In Matt. 10:28, Jesus alludes to God as one who has the power to destroy both soul and body. A Jewish text written in the second century BCE describes a chaotic wilderness in which fire blazes brightly. In this place the spirits of the wicked will be killed during the last days (1 Enoch 108:3–4). See also abyss; Hades; hell; punishment, everlasting.
A.Y.C.
Second Quarter, the western hill of Jerusalem, the part of the city in which Huldah the prophet lived (2 Kings 22:14; 2 Chron. 34:22). See also Huldah; Jerusalem.
sect, a term used six times in the NRSV to translate Greek hairesis when it refers to such Jewish parties as the Pharisees or Sadducees (Acts 5:17; 15:5; 26:5) or, indeed, to the nascent Christian movement (Acts 24:5, 14; 28:22). That same term is used in Greco-Roman literature to refer to philosophical schools. See also Essenes; Pharisees; Sadducees; schools.
A.J.S.
Secundus (si-koon′duhs), a Christian from Thessalonica who accompanied Paul from Macedonia on his last trip to Jerusalem (Acts 20:4–5). He probably helped Paul gather money for his contribution from the Gentile churches to the poor in Jerusalem (see 2 Cor. 8:23). See also collection for the saints.
seed.
1 The grain or ripened ovules of plants in contrast to stems, leaves, and flowers (Gen. 1:11, 12, 29; Deut. 11:10; 14:22). Jesus used seeds as examples in four of his parables: the Seed and Weeds (Matt. 13:24–30); the Sower (Matt. 13:3–9); the Seed Growing Secretly (Mark 4:26–29); and the Mustard Seed (Mark 4:30–32).
2 Human semen (Lev. 15:16–18; 22:4; Heb. 11:11).
3 Human offspring or descendants (Gen. 9:9; Lev. 22:4; Mark 12:19–22). In this sense, the term is particularly applied to the physical (Gen. 12:7; 17:7) and spiritual (Gal. 3:29; Rom. 4:11–12, 16) descendants of Abraham. Jesus Christ is also referred to as the seed of Abraham (Gal. 3:15–18) and of David (2 Tim. 2:8).
4 The divine nature implanted in believers (1 John 3:9; cf. 1 Pet. 1:23).
R.H.S.
seer (Heb. khozeh or ro’eh), a person who received divine messages in visions or dreams. Visionaries existed in Israel throughout its history and were found particularly in Judah, where they may have been connected with the royal court (2 Sam. 24:11; Amos 7:12; Mic. 3:7; Isa. 29:10; 30:10; 1 Chron. 21:9; 25:5; 29:29; 2 Chron. 9:29; 12:15; 19:2; 29:25, 30). The title “seer” is given especially to Samuel (1 Sam. 9:5–21). See also prophet.
Segub (see′guhb).
1 The youngest son of a Bethelite named Hiel. He died (possibly as a human sacrifice) when his father rebuilt the Jericho gates (1 Kings 16:34), fulfilling the word of Joshua (Josh. 6:26).
2 The son of Hezron and a daughter of Machir (1 Chron. 2:21, 22).
Seir (see′uhr; Heb., “hairy”).
1 The mountainous region southeast of the land of Canaan inhabited by the Edomites. Also called “Mount Seir,” the region may have encompassed, not only the mountains east of the Arabah (the Rift Valley), but also those on the west side. This is suggested by such passages as Num. 20:16, where Kadesh-barnea (modern Ain el Qudeirat) is said to be a town on the edge of Edom’s territory (cf. Num. 20:23; Deut. 1:44; 33:2; Judg. 5:4). The eastern highlands, built mainly of red Nubian sandstone, rise up to over 5,000 feet above sea level and receive enough rainfall for some cultivation and animal husbandry. Perhaps the most important physical advantage of Seir in ancient times was its location, positioned to control the trade routes from Arabia and the Red Sea. The two centers of power in the land were Bozrah and Teman, both of which guarded important caravan routes.
According to Deut. 2:22, the Horites (Hurrians) had inhabited Seir before they were driven out by the Edomites; these Horite groups are enumerated in Gen. 36:20–29. The Edomites, descendants of Jacob’s brother Esau, eventually established a kingdom in the region (36:9–19, 31–43; Josh. 24:4). The Israelites were denied passage through Seir by the Edomites on their journey from Kadesh-barnea to the plains of Moab (Num. 20:14–21; Deut. 2:1–8). The region continued to play a significant role in Israel’s history (cf. 2 Sam. 8:13–14; 2 Kings 14:7, 22).
2 A hill on the northern border of the tribe of Judah, located west of Jerusalem on the western slopes of the Judean highlands, between Kiriath-jearim (modern Deir el Azar) and Chesalon (modern Kesla; Josh. 15:10). Its exact identification is uncertain.
D.A.D.
Seirah (see′uh-ruh), the haven to which Ehud fled (Judg. 3:26). Its location and identity (whether it was a town, region, cave, or some other feature) are unknown.
Sela (see′luh; Heb., “crag”).
1 The fortress city of Edom (2 Kings 14:7), renamed Sela by King Amaziah of Judah. This Sela is modern Umm el-Bayyarah, just above Petra in south Transjordan.
2 An Amorite border town (Judg. 1:36) whose location is unknown.
3 An unidentified location mentioned in Isa. 16:1.
Selah (see′luh), a word of uncertain origin and meaning found in certain psalms (e.g., Pss. 3; 4; 52; 88; 143). It also appears in Hab. 3:3, 9, 13, verses that are part of a psalm preserved in that book. There has been much speculation about the meaning of this word—a musical notation, a pause in singing for narration, instructions for choral singers or instrumentalists—but there is no agreement among scholars as to which is to be preferred.
Seleucia (si-loo′shuh), the ancient port city of Antioch in Syria (modern Samandag, Turkey), founded by Seleucus I Nicator in 301 BCE, apparently on an older site called Pieria. In the mid-third century BCE, Ptolemy III Euergetes of Egypt took the city (“fortress” in Dan. 11:7), but it was regained by Antiochus III in 219 BCE. According to 1 Macc. 11:8, Ptolemy VI Philometor again captured Seleucia for Egypt in his coastal campaign of 146 BCE, but the city reverted to Seleucid control in 138 BCE. Granted the status of a free city by Pompey in 63 BCE, Seleucia remained so throughout NT times. According to Acts 13:4, Barnabas and Paul, accompanied by John Mark, sailed from Seleucia to Cyprus at the beginning of their first missionary journey (ca. 49 CE). Other references to voyages to and from Antioch probably imply embarkation and landing at Seleucia as well (14:26; 15:39). Other cities named Seleucia were in Cilicia, Mesopotamia, and Bashan. See also Antioch; Paul; Ptolemy; Seleucids.
C.H.M.
Seleucids (si-loo′sidz), a dynasty of Hellenistic kings that ruled an area including, at various times, Bactria, Persia, Babylonia, Syria, and southern Asia Minor. The name originates from Seleucus I Nicator, son of Antiochus, one of the generals of Alexander. In the struggle for power following Alexander’s death in 323 BCE, Seleucus was eventually successful in carrying out a series of moves that made him one of the most powerful of the Diadochi (“successor kings”). The rule of the Seleucid dynasty dates from 312 BCE, when Seleucus and Ptolemy I of Egypt joined to defeat Antigonus of Phrygia at the battle of Gaza, thus regaining for Seleucus the satrapy of Babylonia, earlier lost to Antigonus. At the battle of Ipsus in 301 BCE, Seleucus gained much of Asia Minor and Syria, but the area of the Levant, which Seleucus regarded as rightfully his, was appropriated by Ptolemy, his former ally. The struggle for this region was finally settled in 198 BCE, when Antiochus III (“the Great”) defeated the Egyptian general Scopus at the battle of Paneas, and Seleucid rule of Judea began.
Antiochus IV Epiphanes is the most important Seleucid ruler for biblical literature. His eleven-year reign was marked by an aggressive attempt to hellenize the Jews, an attempt that led to the Maccabean war and eventually to Jewish independence from Syria. The first two books of Maccabees reflect this struggle, detailing the offensive actions of Antiochus, who meddled in the appointment of high priests, forced Greek customs upon the Jews, looted the temple, defiled the altar, and cruelly persecuted the pious Jews who wished to observe their religious laws and customs (see 1 Macc. 1:10–62; 2 Macc. 4:7–7:42). The book of Daniel may also reflect the impact of Antiochus Epiphanes upon the Jews. Antiochus is usually identified as the “little horn” and the oppressor of the “holy ones of the Most High” referred to in 7:8, 20–27; 8:9–14, 23–25. The “abomination that makes desolate” of 11:31 is probably a reference to an altar to Zeus that Antiochus caused to be erected on the altar of the Jerusalem temple.
| THE SELEUCID DYNASTY | |
| Seleucus I Nicator | 312–281 BCE |
| Antiochus I Soter | 281–261 BCE |
| Antiochus II Theos | 261–246 BCE |
| Seleucus II Callinicus | 246–226 BCE |
| Seleucus III Soter (Ceraunus) | 226–223 BCE |
| Antiochus III (“The Great”) | 223–187 BCE |
| Seleucus IV Philopator | 187–175 BCE |
| Antiochus IV Epiphanes | 175–164 BCE |
| Antiochus V Eupator | 164–162 BCE |
| Demetrius I Soter | 162–150 BCE |
| Alexander Balas | 150–145 BCE |
| Demetrius II Nicator | 145–139 BCE |
| (Antiochus VI Epiphanes Dionysus | 145–142 BCE) |
| Antiochus VII Sidetes | 138–129 BCE |
| (Hereafter, much internal strife and frequently rival claimants.) | |
The latter years of the Seleucid dynasty saw much internal strife among princes and, eventually, a conquest of the weakened kingdom by Tigranes of Armenia (83–69 BCE). Eventually, the Romans put an end to Seleucid rule when Pompey made Syria a Roman province in 64 BCE.
The Seleucids founded Antioch in Syria as their capital as well as many other cities that were to become centers for the spread of Hellenism (e.g., Antioch of Pisidia, Apamea, Laodicea, Edessa, Beroea, Seleucia, and Dura-Europos). Hellenized Jews lived in these cities, in part due to the Seleucid practice of rewarding veterans with land in newly colonized areas (Jewish soldiers had fought in the army of Seleucus I, just as other Jews had fought with Ptolemy). See also Alexander; Antiochus; Daniel, book of; Maccabees; Maccabees, First Book of; Maccabees, Second Book of; Ptolemy; Seleucia.
F.O.G.
self-control. Although self-control (Gk. enkrateia) was deemed a prime virtue in Greek philosophical tradition, the concept is mentioned only rarely in the LXX and in the NT. The Roman procurator Felix was alarmed when Paul “argued about justice and self-control and future judgment” (Acts 24:25). Paul knew that it was difficult for Corinthian Christians to exercise self-control in sexual matters (1 Cor. 7:9). He compared himself with an athlete who “exercises self-control in all things” for the gospel’s sake (9:25). For Paul, self-control was not really a human achievement, but one of the manifold manifestations of the “fruit of the spirit” (Gal. 5:22–23). The Pastoral Letters maintain that “God did not give us a spirit of cowardice, but rather a spirit of power and of love and of self-discipline” (2 Tim. 1:7). In particular, a bishop must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard, but “a lover of goodness, prudent, upright, devout, and self-controlled” (Titus 1:7–8). Second Peter links self-control with such characteristics as faith, knowledge, and steadfastness (1:6).
J.F.J.
Semites (sem′its), a term used to describe various peoples of the Fertile Crescent in antiquity (i.e., Arabs, Arameans, Assyrians, Babylonians, Canaanites, Hebrews, and Phoenicians). The word denotes a modern categorization that originated in the eighteenth century CE among Western scholars to describe observable tendencies in language and culture within the peoples of the region from Persia in the east to Africa in the west. The term itself derives from the name Shem, one of Noah’s three sons born after the flood. In Gen. 10:21–31 there is a description of Shem’s descendants according to the names of nations known to the biblical writer(s). The whole of Gen. 10 has been called by scholars the “Table of Nations,” because it presents the then known world of nations in three categories, each tracing its lineage back to one of Noah’s three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth (10:1).
Linguists and philologists also use the term “Semitic” with regard to groups of languages. There is some disagreement among them concerning the interrelationships among the various Semitic languages, but there is general agreement on the following classifications. East Semitic includes various dialects of Assyrian and Babylonian. The term “Akkadian” is sometimes used as a reference to these languages, which were written in cuneiform, impressed on wet clay with a wedge-shaped pen. Northwest Semitic includes the various Aramaic and Canaanite dialects. Classical Hebrew, Moabite, and perhaps Ugaritic are some examples. South Semitic includes Arabic and Ethiopic. The advance of archaeological work in the past two centuries has made a number of texts written in these languages available to scholars for the first time. This has placed the study of classical Hebrew on firmer historical ground as far as its relationship to other ancient Semitic languages is concerned. The development of an alphabetic language and script among ancient Semites was transmitted by the Phoenicians to the Greek Isles, ultimately to influence many of the world’s most widely used languages, including English. Although many details of this transmission remain obscure, the contribution of the alphabet is one of the enduring legacies of Semitic culture.
Religion appears in great variety among the Semites as evidenced by surviving texts. Some scholars point to the early narratives in the book of Genesis concerning Israel’s ancestors as one illustration. Yet another example can be found in the texts discovered in Syria at the site called Ras-Shamra (ancient Ugarit). The institution of sacrifice was generally characteristic of Semitic religions.
J.A.D.
Senaah (suh-nay′uh), a city whose people are listed among those returning from exile in Babylon (Ezra 2:35; Neh. 7:38). It may be modern Khirbet ‘Auja el-Foqa, about three miles north of Jericho. Its location parallels its identification with Magdalsenna (Heb., “Tower of Sena’a”), a fortress that guarded the road from the Jordan Valley to Baal-hazor in earlier times.
Seneh (see′nuh), the name of one of two rocky crags flanking the pass at Michmash, which Jonathan used in approaching the Philistines (1 Sam. 14:4). Identity of the crags remains uncertain, but they are probably to be located in the Wadi es-Suweinit, about seven miles northeast of Jerusalem.
Senir (see′nuhr), the Amorite name for Mount Hermon, according to an editorial note in Deut. 3:9. In Ezek. 27:5, Senir supplied fir planking (and Lebanon, a cedar mast) for the metaphorical ship Tyre—here Senir probably designates the entire Anti-Lebanon mountain range. Hermon and Senir appear together, as separate parts of a whole, in Song of Sol. 4:8 and 1 Chron. 5:23. See also Hermon, Mount; Lebanon; Tyre.
Sennacherib (suh-nak′uh-rib), king of Assyria 705–681 BCE. He assumed the throne of the vast Assyrian Empire convulsed by uprisings on both its southern and western flanks following the death of his father, Sargon II. Babylon and its sometime ally Elam were perceived as the most immediate threat to his rule, so that Sennacherib undertook a two-year campaign (704–702 BCE) to restore Assyrian suzerainty over the south. In 701 BCE, he turned to the troubled west. Details of this military undertaking are known from two major sources: an Assyrian royal inscription about Sennacherib’s “third campaign” and the biblical book of 2 Kings (see 18:7–8 and 18:13–19:37). These sources complement each other and are in agreement as to the main outline of the rebellion and its suppression by the superior Assyrian forces, but only the biblical source reports the miraculous salvation of Jerusalem.
According to these two sources, King Hezekiah of Judah spearheaded an anti-Assyrian coalition of Phoenician, Philistine, and south Syrian states. Though there were several years to prepare for the inevitable Assyrian response—note the drilling of the Siloam tunnel in Jerusalem to supply water to the city in case of siege (2 Kings 20:20; 2 Chron. 32:3–4)—the coalition was no match for Sennacherib. The coastal cities succumbed quickly, so that the full brunt of reprisal was soon directed against Judah. An Egyptian relief force under the command of Tirhakah engaged Sennacherib at Eltekeh in the Judean Shephelah (cf. 2 Kings 18:21; 19:9), but it suffered heavy losses and withdrew.
During the attack upon Judah’s border fortresses, Sennacherib sent a negotiating team led by top Assyrian officers—their titles are recorded in 2 Kings 18:17 (Tartan, Rabsaris, Rabshakeh)—to solicit Hezekiah’s surrender. The counsel of the prophet Isaiah not to surrender strengthened Hezekiah’s determination to hold out (19:5–7). But “when all the fortified cities of Judah” had fallen to Sennacherib, Hezekiah capitulated. He agreed to pay a heavy indemnity of “three hundred talents of silver and thirty talents of gold” (18:14–16), which he sent to Nineveh with other valuables. Thus, the siege of Jerusalem was lifted and the city spared destruction. According to 2 Kings, that deliverance from destruction was due to the fact that an angel of the LORD killed eighty-five thousand Assyrian soldiers during the night (19:35). Nevertheless, the other territories of the kingdom of Judah were ceded to loyal Assyrian subjects, namely, the rulers of Ashdod, Ekron, Gaza, and Ashkelon, and Hezekiah resumed his former status as Assyrian vassal.
Sennacherib commemorated his victories in Judah with a wall relief in his palace at Nineveh depicting the attack and capture of Lachish. He maintains that he shut up Hezekiah in Jerusalem “like a bird in a cage” and offers this detailed account of his conquests: “I laid siege to 46 of his strong cities, walled forts and to the countless small villages in their vicinity, and conquered them. . . . I drove out 200,150 people, young and old, male and female, horses, mules, donkeys, camels, big and small cattle beyond counting and considered them booty.”
Assyrian historical inscriptions indicate that for the next twelve years, Babylonian affairs engaged Sennacherib’s attention. Other areas of the empire remained pacified, but at least three campaigns to Babylon were undertaken (700 BCE, 694–693 BCE, and 691–689 BCE).
Sennacherib designated his son Esar-haddon as his heir, even though the latter was not in the direct line of succession. Two of his other sons, Adrammelech and Sarezer, murdered their father and led an unsuccessful rebellion against Esar-haddon (2 Kings 19:37). See also Assyria, Empire of; Hezekiah.
M.C.
sentinel, a person stationed on a wall (2 Sam. 18:24; Song of Sol. 5:7) or in a watchtower (2 Chron. 20:24) whose task was to warn of approaching danger (Ezek. 33:2–6; cf. Ps. 127:1). Sentinels also guarded the fields and vineyards, especially during harvest season (Isa. 5:2; cf. Job 27:18). The term is often used in a figurative or symbolic sense, as the prophets identified themselves as sentinels for the house of Israel (e.g., Isa. 62:6; Ezek. 3:17; 33:7–9; Mic. 7:4). See also tower; vine; watchtower.
Sephar (see′fuhr), one of the limits of the territory inhabited by the family of Joktan (Gen. 10:30). It may be either a region, a boundary, or a town. The location remains uncertain, although most suggestions place it somewhere in southern Arabia.
Sepharad (sef′uh-rad), the residence of some exiles from Jerusalem mentioned in Obad. 20. It is identified with Sardis (modern Sart) in east central Turkey, the capital city of the ancient Lydian empire. Its standing as a major commercial center is reflected in the archaeological materials uncovered at this site, including a large Jewish synagogue from the later stages of settlement. See also Sardis.
Sepharvaim (sef′uhr-vay′im), a city from which the Assyrian government drew settlers to place in Israelite territory after Israel’s fall to Assyria ca. 722/1 BCE (2 Kings 17:24, 31). Later references to Sepharvaim as a city whose kings and gods are impotent (18:34; 19:33) may refer to the identical location, but that remains uncertain. A Sepharvaim is likewise mentioned in Isa. 36:19 and 37:13, but the information given there is insufficient for identification of its location.
Sepphoris (sef′uh-ris), a Jewish town in Lower Galilee, about three miles northwest of Nazareth. During the Hasmonean period (152–37 BCE), the town probably became the administrative center for the Galilean area. Sepphoris submitted to Herod the Great, but, after his death in 4 BCE, it was sacked by Varus. While tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, Herod Antipas rebuilt the city and resided there prior to making the city of Tiberias his capital. After the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE, Sepphoris was the seat of the Sanhedrin for a time before that body moved to Tiberias. There is no reference to Sepphoris in the Bible, but the inhabitants of nearby Nazareth certainly would have been acquainted with it. It was probably during the second century CE, during Hadrian’s reign, that the city’s name was changed to Diocaesarea, meaning “City of Zeus and the Emperor.”
Sepphoris became the focus of intense scrutiny in the last decades of the twentieth century, because it was believed that analysis of the area might reveal something about the milieu in which Jesus was raised. Since Sepphoris was a large city within walking distance of Nazareth (a small village), it seemed reasonable to assume that residents of Nazareth would have frequented Sepphoris and maybe even worked there. This might have been especially true of persons like Jesus and his father, Joseph, if their trade involved work associated with construction projects (cf. Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3, where the term tekt–on, translated “carpenter,” literally means “builder”). A prominent theory in the late twentieth century held that Jesus would have had frequent opportunities to encounter Greek philosophers and other attributes of Hellenistic thought during his trips to Sepphoris.
Initial excavations at the city seemed to bear this out. Much of the archaeological work in the 1970s and 1980s revealed extensive building projects. Besides paved, colonnaded streets and large buildings, a public theater was also excavated. Such discoveries did suggest Greek influence, but further work in the 1990s called this into question. Of particular interest was excavation in the domestic quarters, in which virtually no pig bones were found in strata that were prior to the Bar Kochba revolt, compared to the situation in the Late Roman and Byzantine periods, when pig bones came to represent 30 percent of the animal remains. This is taken to suggest that prior to the two Jewish revolts, the population of Sepphoris was overwhelmingly Jewish and observed Jewish laws and customs. Likewise, the prominence of stone vessels points to a Jewish population at Sepphoris prior to 70 CE (stone vessels were preferred by Jews because they cannot easily be made unclean; cf. John 2:6). Furthermore, coins minted at Sepphoris during the pre–70 BCE period do not depict the image of the Roman emperor or pagan deities (as was common in the coinage of this time). And the excavations have not uncovered any structures typically present in a Greco-Roman city (such as pagan temples, gymnasium, odeum, nymphaeum, or shrines and statues). It is only in remains attributable to the post–70 BCE period that pagan art and architecture begin to make their appearance.
M.K.M./M.A.P.
Septuagint (sep′too-uh-jint), the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible that was begun in the third century BCE in Alexandria, Egypt. “Septuagint” comes from the Greek word for “seventy” and refers to the tradition recounted in the Letter of Aristeas that seventy-two Jewish translators were brought to Egypt by Ptolemy II Philadelphus (285–246 BCE) to translate the Pentateuch. Why the number seventy-two was rounded off to seventy is uncertain, but it may have seemed appropriate, since seventy elders had accompanied Moses up the mountain to receive the law (Exod. 24:1, 9). The traditional abbreviation for the Septuagint is LXX (seventy in Roman numerals). The translations of the books differ in style, accuracy, and substance. Manuscripts of the LXX found among the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran indicate that revisions were constantly being made. In addition, Hebrew manuscripts found at Qumran differ from the standard Hebrew Masoretic Text, but agree with some of the Greek renderings in the LXX. Thus the LXX often witnesses to a Hebrew manuscript tradition different from and earlier than the Masoretic Text and, so, is valuable in solving textual difficulties. The LXX sometimes arranges material within a book in a different order and it occasionally evinces a shorter or longer version of a book. For example, Jeremiah is one-eighth shorter in the LXX than in the Masoretic Text and may derive from a Hebrew version earlier than the one presently in the Bible. The order of materials in Psalms and Proverbs differs from all extant Hebrew texts, and the book of Joshua contains numerous additions, omissions, and other changes. Several later Greek translations of the Hebrew Bible were also made (Aquila, Theodotion, Lucian) and parts of these have found their way into extant copies of the LXX.
The LXX was the biblical text from which the NT writers, who wrote in Greek, quoted most often. Moreover, the translation of Hebrew words into Greek resulted in Greek words taking on Hebraic meanings, a fact of great significance for the interpretation of the NT. For example, the Greek word for “grace” (charis) came to mean God’s benevolence (because it was used to translate Hebrew khesed), whereas in Greek literature prior to the LXX it had no particular religious significance, connoting only the human quality of kindness, charm, or pleasantness. See also Dead Sea Scrolls; Masorah.
A.J.S.
Serah (sihr′uh), a daughter descended from the Hebrew tribe of Asher (Gen. 46:17). Serah reportedly moved to Egypt. She is subsequently included in the census (Num. 26:46; 1 Chron. 7:30) of settlers in Canaan. This prominence spawned heroine status in later nonbiblical stories.
Seraiah (si-ray′yuh; Heb., probably “the LORD persists”), a name borne by twelve people in the Bible, but for seven of these no biographical data is provided (cf. 1 Chron. 4:13–14, 35; 6:14; Ezra 2:2; 7:1; Neh. 10:2; 11:11; 12:1, 12).
1 David’s scribe (2 Sam. 8:17); the same man’s name, however, is given as Sheva in 20:25, as Shavsha in 1 Chron. 18:16, and as Shisha in 1 Kings 4:3.
2 The chief priest who had the misfortune of witnessing the burning of the first temple in Jerusalem in 587 BCE before he was personally executed by Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings 25:18–21; Jer. 52:24–27). He is possibly the same person listed in 1 Chron. 6:14.
3 The son of Tankhumeth who survived the destruction of Jerusalem and brought his militia to swear allegiance to Gedaliah, the Judean governor installed by the Babylonians (2 Kings 25:23; Jer. 40:8).
4 The “quartermaster” who accompanied the defeated Judean king Zedekiah to Babylon, bearing with him the prophet Jeremiah’s written curse against that enemy kingdom (Jer. 51:59–64).
5 The son of Azriel, whom King Jehoiakim had earlier sent to arrest Jeremiah and his scribe, Baruch (Jer. 36:26).
W.S.T.
seraphim (ser′uh-fim; Heb., “fiery ones”), fiery beings of supernatural origin. Seraphim appear in Isaiah’s vision of God, where they are attendants or guardians before the divine throne, analogous to the cherubim (6:1–7). They praise God, calling “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of Hosts,” and one touches Isaiah’s lips with a hot coal from the altar, cleansing him from sin. Seraphim have six wings. Two cover their faces, two cover their feet (a euphemism for genitals), and the other two are used for flying. A flying seraph (Heb. saraph; NRSV: “serpent”) appears in Isa. 14:29 and 30:6 together with “adders” and “vipers.” The same Hebrew word (saraph) is used to describe the “fiery serpents” (NRSV: “poisonous serpents”) that afflicted Israel in the wilderness (Num. 21:6–9; Deut. 8:15). Thus, seraphim may have had a serpentine form and served, not only as guardians of the divine throne, but also as emissaries of divine judgment. See also cherubim.
M.A.S.
Serapis (si-rah′pis), the deity of a cult established by Ptolemy I (d. 383/2 BCE) to serve as a focal point for the Greek population in Egypt. The god was derived from Osor-Hapi, the deified Apis bull, and Osiris, the god of the underworld and consort of the goddess Isis. The cult mixed Egyptian and Greek features and was centered in Alexandria. The temple, called a Serapeum, contained a great cult statue with a gold head and jeweled eyes. Artistic representations of Serapis often present him with a head like Zeus. He is represented as ruler of the fertile earth and was thought, like Isis, to overrule fate. He was also a healing god known for curing blindness. As one of the many deities worshiped in the Roman Empire, Serapis would have been part of the “idolatry” denounced by Paul (Rom. 1:22–23; 1 Cor. 8, 10).
P.P.
Sergius Paulus. See Paulus, Sergius.
Sermon on the Mount, the traditional designation for a section of Matthew’s Gospel (chaps. 5–7) that presents the teaching of Jesus on matters of discipleship.
Nomenclature: The name “Sermon on the Mount” derives from Matt. 5:1, which indicates that Jesus delivered this teaching to his disciples on a mountain. It has been called this at least since the time of Augustine (354–430 CE), who wrote what is believed to be the first commentary on the Sermon on the Mount ca. 392–394 CE. About half of the material in the Sermon on the Mount finds parallel in a section of Luke’s Gospel in which Jesus instructs a multitude of people “on a level place” (6:17); this portion of Luke’s Gospel is accordingly called the Sermon on the Plain (6:20–49).
Contents and Theme: The Sermon on the Mount contains material that has been extremely influential on the Christian religion and on secular civilization in areas where Christianity has flourished. It is here that one finds the Beatitudes (5:3–12), the Golden Rule (7:12), and the Lord’s Prayer (6:9–13). Here Jesus speaks of the meek inheriting the earth (5:5) and identifies his followers as the “salt of the earth” (5:13). He urges people to “turn the other cheek” and to “go the second mile” (5:39, 41). He refers to “wolves in sheep’s clothing” (7:15), to “serving two masters” (6:24), to storing up “treasure in heaven” (6:20), and to “casting pearls before swine” (7:6). As presented in Matthew’s Gospel, the overall theme of the Sermon on the Mount is discipleship or response to the call of Jesus. The sermon follows Jesus’s announcement that “the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (4:17) and explains the implications of this announcement for those who repent and follow Jesus. It also provides a compendium of the commands of Jesus that missionaries will teach to their converts when they seek to fulfill the Great Commission given at the end of Matthew’s Gospel (28:16–20).
The Sermon on the Mount begins with the Beatitudes, which indicate for whom the advent of the kingdom will be a blessing, and then proceeds to describe the “greater righteousness” that is to mark followers of Jesus. These expectations are detailed with explicit contrast to traditional ethical teachings, including those that this Gospel attributes to the scribes and Pharisees. The sermon then turns to private religious duties (almsgiving, prayer, and fasting) and describes the proper attitude toward wealth and material things that characterizes those who seek God’s kingdom above all else. It continues with exhortations commending self-critical humility and trust in God and multiple warnings regarding laxity, false prophets, and evildoers. It concludes with a parable likening obedient and disobedient disciples to wise and foolish builders whose homes are built on rock or sand.
Setting and Audience: Matthew’s Gospel specifies the setting for the Sermon on the Mount as “the mountain” and the primary audience for these words as Jesus’s disciples (5:1). The reference to an unnamed mountain is ambiguous, and the precise geographical location that Matthew might have intended cannot be determined. It is likely, however, that readers are expected to regard this mountain as the same one to which the risen Jesus summons his disciples at the end of the Gospel to give what is called the Great Commission (28:16–20). Further, the location of his teaching on a mountain recalls the giving of the law to Moses in Exod. 19–31. Just as God gave the law to Moses, who then became the great teacher of Israel, so here Jesus gives divine commandments to his disciples, who will teach them to a church composed of people from all nations (16:18; 28:19–20).
The designation of Jesus’s disciples as the intended audience for the Sermon on the Mount indicates that the author of this Gospel understands the words that follow as primarily Christian teaching rather than as an exposition of moral behavior to be expected of or imposed upon the world at large. Baptized persons who want to be “made disciples” (28:19–20) will obey these commandments of Jesus, which call for a greater righteousness than is exhibited by people in general (5:20). At the conclusion of the sermon, however, readers suddenly learn that the words have also been overheard by the crowds, who were astounded at Jesus’s teaching, since he taught “as one who had authority, not as their scribes” (7:28–29). The point of the crowds’ astonishment is not simply that Jesus taught in an authoritative style, but that his teaching revealed him to be a person authorized to speak for God in a way that other religious teachers were not (cf. 8:5–13; 9:8; 10:1; 21:23–27; 28:18). In this way, Matthew seems to acknowledge that the Sermon on the Mount possesses an inherent wisdom capable of impressing or challenging those for whom it was not primarily intended. For Matthew’s community, “the crowds” may represent the unbelieving world in which their church is situated, those who have not experienced Jesus’s call, but who have heard snippets of his message. Although they do not know what to make of Jesus or his message, such people may be astonished at the authority evident in his words. Thus Matthew’s Gospel presents the Sermon on the Mount as teaching that is explicitly intended for the church, but it does so with an awareness that people outside the church might find these words stimulating as well.
OUTLINE OF CONTENTS
Sermon on the Mount
I. The setting (5:1–2)
II. The Beatitudes (5:3–12)
III. The new community (5:13–16)
IV. The abiding validity of the law (5:17–20)
V. On practicing righteousness toward others (5:21–48)
A. Murder (5:21–26)
B. Adultery (5:27–30)
C. Divorce (5:31–32)
D. Oaths (5:33–37)
E. Retribution (5:38–42)
F. Love of enemy (5:43–48)
VI. On practicing righteousness toward God (6:1–7:12)
A. Almsgiving (6:1–4)
B. Prayer (6:5–15)
C. Fasting (6:16–18)
D. Not laying up false treasure (6:19–24)
E. Not being anxious (6:25–34)
F. Not judging (7:1–5)
G. Not squandering what is precious (7:6)
H. Resting assured that God hears prayer (7:7–12)
VII. Concluding warnings and exhortations (7:13–27)
J.D.K.
Sources: Jesus is not likely to have preached the material found in Matt. 5–7 as a single sermon in the form that we now have it; rather, sayings of Jesus that Christians remembered or attributed to him were gathered and compiled in the format of a sermon. Since Matthew’s Gospel was composed about fifty years after the time of Jesus’s Galilean ministry, it is usually assumed that this material also underwent a process of redaction. Aramaic sayings of Jesus were translated into Greek and amended in ways that would serve the developing needs of the church. Scholars disagree in their estimates of how extensive this editing may have been.
Most scholars attribute the final composition of the Sermon on the Mount (as we now have it) to the author of Matthew’s Gospel, but they believe this evangelist already possessed a similar though less-developed sermon in the pre-Gospel material that is commonly called the Q source. The author of Luke’s Gospel is also thought to have had access to this source, so those parts of Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount that parallel Luke’s Sermon on the Plain are believed to represent material that both evangelists derived from Q. Following this logic, Q appears to have contained a sermon by Jesus that began with the Beatitudes and concluded with the parable of the Two Builders. Other material also occurs in the same sequence in both versions of Jesus’s sermon:
Beatitudes, 5:3–12 (Luke 6:20–23)
Love of enemies, 5:38–47 (Luke 6:27–36)
Judge not, 7:1–2 (Luke 6:37–38)
Speck and log, 7:3–5 (Luke 6:41–42)
Tree and its fruit, 7:16–20 (Luke 6:43–45)
Lord, Lord, 7:21 (Luke 6:46)
Parable of Builders, 7:24–27 (Luke 6:47–49)
The Golden Rule (Matt. 7:12; Luke 6:31) also occurs in both the Sermon on the Mount and the Sermon on the Plain, although its placement is slightly out of sequence. A common theory holds that Matthew constructed his Sermon on the Mount by inserting a lengthy central section (including all of Matt. 6) into the sermon that he found already formed in Q.
The matter is complicated by the fact that other parts of the Sermon on the Mount have parallels to material found elsewhere in Luke, including: Matt. 5:13–16 and Luke 14:34–35; Matt. 5:25–26 and Luke 12:57–59; Matt. 6:9–13 and Luke 11:2–4; Matt. 6:19–21 and Luke 12:33–34; Matt. 6:22–23 and Luke 11:34–36; Matt. 6:24 and Luke 16:13; Matt. 6:25–34 and Luke 12:22–31; Matt. 7:7–11 and Luke 11:9–13; Matt. 7:13–14 and Luke 13:23–24; Matt. 7:22–23 and Luke 13:26–27. Such passages are generally thought to derive from the Q source, though not necessarily from a single or coherent sermon of Jesus presented in Q.
All told, 62 of the 106 verses that make up the Sermon on the Mount have close parallels to material in Luke’s Gospel. A few additional verses have parallels in Mark’s Gospel (Matt. 5:31–32 and Mark 10:11–12; Matt. 6:14–15 and Mark 11:25–26); these could be items that Matthew took from Mark and integrated into the sermon material from Q. The rest of the Sermon on the Mount consists of material not found in the other Gospels (5:17–24, 27–30, 33–37, 48; 6:1–8, 16–18; 7:6, 15); this could be material derived from Q that Luke did not use, or it could be material that Matthew composed himself or took from unknown sources.
Finally, the attention of scholars is often drawn to passages in the Sermon on the Mount that parallel material found in various NT letters:
5:10 (1 Pet. 3:14)
5:11–12 (1 Pet. 4:13–14)
5:16 (1 Pet. 2:12)
5:31–32 (1 Cor. 7:10–11)
5:34–37 (James 5:12)
5:39 (Rom. 12:17; 1 Thess. 5:15; 1 Pet. 3:9)
5:44 (Rom. 12:14; 1 Cor. 4:12)
5:48 (1 Pet. 1:15)
6:19–20 (James 5:1–3)
6:25 (Phil. 4:6)
7:1–2 (Rom. 2:1–3; 14:10)
7:7 (James 1:5; 1 John 5:14–15)
7:16 (James 3:12)
7:21–27 (Rom. 2:13; James 1:22)
Such parallels are striking, because the authors of these letters are not thought to have had access to either Matthew’s Gospel or the Q source. The common suggestion, therefore, is that such sayings were attributed to Jesus via oral tradition in various sectors of the church.
This material allows for a spectrum of opinions regarding the composition of the Sermon on the Mount. On the one hand, virtually all of the material can be attributed to Q or to comparable pre-Gospel sources; in this case the contribution of the Matthean author may be regarded as modest, limited primarily to structural organization and the provision of a theological framework for primitive material that had been passed on to him. On the other hand, over a third of the Sermon on the Mount can be attributed to the evangelist himself or to late sources; in this case, the contribution of the Matthean author may be deemed considerable.
Interpretation: The Sermon on the Mount is understood in light of three interpretative contexts: the time and place of Jesus’s ministry, the developing era of the early church, and the literary composition of Matthew’s Gospel.
The Historical Jesus: Interpreters seek to determine the meaning that individual passages would have had for Jewish peasants in Galilee around 30 CE. They also compare the passages to other sayings of Jesus and try to relate the meaning of particular texts to what appear to have been prominent concerns articulated by Jesus. Such investigation usually involves consideration of whether the passage has undergone redactional development and, if so, whether a reasonable reconstruction of the original content can be sustained. A high degree of confidence has attended much of the Sermon on the Mount material in this regard, making it a focal point for study of the historical Jesus and his earliest followers. Such studies typically interpret the Sermon on the Mount within the context of Galilean Judaism, reading it more as a Jewish document than as a Christian one.
The Early Church: Interpreters seek to determine what various passages would have meant to followers of Jesus in the years between Easter and the composition of the Gospels. The Sermon is often viewed as a valuable resource for gaining access to Jewish-Christian material that may have circulated in the developing church around the same time as the Letters of Paul. Such studies often compare and contrast the views of Paul and the Sermon on the Mount in order to delineate the points of diversity and continuity between two early expressions of what would become the Christian religion.
The Gospel of Matthew: The most prominent approach to the Sermon on the Mount in modern scholarship has sought to interpret the material as a constitutive part of Matthew’s Gospel. Scholars emphasize connections between the Sermon on the Mount and other portions of Matthew’s Gospel, and they interpret the Sermon on the Mount in light of what appear to have been the theological priorities of this particular evangelist. The Sermon on the Mount is strategically placed in Matthew’s Gospel following Jesus’s announcement that the kingdom of heaven is near (4:17) and his initial calling of disciples to follow him and “fish for people” (4:18–22). Matthew had earlier established the credentials of Jesus as the Messiah of Israel (1:1, 16) and Son of God (2:15; 3:17). Born of a virgin, Jesus embodies the presence of God among God’s people (1:23) and is destined to save his people from their sins (1:21). As the one in whom God is well pleased (3:17), he triumphs over the devil’s temptations (4:1–11) and embarks on a public ministry of preaching, teaching, and healing (4:23) that fulfills the prophecies of scripture (4:14–16) and brings him the acclaim of multitudes (4:25). In short, the material in Matthew’s Gospel prior to the Sermon on the Mount focuses heavily on the identity and authority of Jesus; the effect of locating the Sermon on the Mount after such material is to accentuate the claim that these are the words of one who possesses divine authority surpassing what might be attributed to any other human being (7:28–29). Matthew’s readers are expected to hear and obey the words of Jesus presented in the Sermon on the Mount not simply because they are inherently sensible, but because they are spoken by Jesus the Messiah, the Son of God. See also Beatitudes; kingdom of God; Matthew, Gospel According to; Q.
Bibliography
Betz, Hans Dieter. The Sermon on the Mount. Fortress, 1995.
Carter, Warren. What Are They Saying About Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount? Paulist, 1994.
Guelich, Robert A. The Sermon on the Mount: A Foundation for Understanding. Word, 1982.
Powell, Mark Allan. “Sermon on the Mount.” In The New Interpreters’ Dictionary of the Bible, vol. 4. Abingdon, 2009.
M.A.P.
serpent. In the ancient world, there was general respect for, revulsion at, and fear of serpents, since many were assumed to be poisonous. The serpent thus came to be understood symbolically with both positive and negative connotations. In some ancient cultures, the serpent was associated with deity and was depicted in statues and paintings with various gods and goddesses. Serpents also played various roles in ancient mythological stories (e.g., the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh). Some even linked the serpent with the process of healing, as in the case of the Greek god Asclepius. In Canaanite religion, which the early Hebrew people encountered upon their arrival in the area, the serpent was associated with the fertility worship of Baal, since his consort Astarte (also known as Anath or Asherah) was often depicted with a serpent.
In the Bible, serpents usually have a negative connotation. In the story of Adam and Eve (Gen. 2:4–3:24), a serpent functions as a wise but crafty creation of God who leads the first humans into disobedience (note, however, that it is not until much later that the serpent in this story is identified with Satan or the devil). References to Leviathan and Rahab (e.g., Isa. 27:1; 51:9–10a; Pss. 74:14; 104:26; Job 26:12) are vestiges of an ancient Mesopotamian tradition that viewed a great sea serpent as a primordial foe of the gods. The same negative attitude toward serpents is evident in NT passages where religious leaders are called “a brood of vipers” by John the Baptist (Matt. 3:7; cf. Luke 3:7) and by Jesus (Matt. 12:34; 23:33).
In a few instances in the Bible, positive qualities are associated with serpents. First, they symbolize wisdom (Matt. 10:16; cf. Gen. 3:1). Further, Moses makes a bronze serpent in the wilderness that is believed to have healing properties (Num. 21:4–9; cf. John 3:14–15; note, however, that Hezekiah needs to destroy this bronze serpent later on, because it comes to be associated with idolatrous worship, 2 Kings 18:4).
In several passages, the ultimate victory of God and of God’s people over the evil of this age is depicted using serpent imagery. Jesus tells his disciples, “I give you authority to tread on snakes and scorpions” (Luke 10:19). In Revelation, victory over Satan is depicted by the binding of “that ancient serpent” for a thousand years (20:2–10). See also dragon; Leviathan; Nehushtan; Rahab.
J.M.E.