The Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible, Volume 5: Revised Full-Color Edition

By Merrill C. Tenney

Revised edition. Volume 5 of 5. The Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible has been a classic Bible study resource for more than thirty years. Now thoroughly revised, this new five-volume edition provides up-to-date entries based on the latest scholarship. Beautiful full-color pictures supplement the text, which includes new articles in addition to thorough updates and improvements of existing topics. Different viewpoints of scholarship permit a wellrounded perspective on significant issues relating to doctrines, themes, and biblical interpretation. The goal remains the same: to provide pastors, teachers, students, and devoted Bible readers a comprehensive and reliable library of information. • More than 5,000 pages of vital information on Bible lands and people • More than 7,500 articles alphabetically arranged for easy reference • Hundreds of full-color and black-and-white illustrations, charts, and graphs • 32 pages of full-color maps and hundreds of black-and-white outline maps for ready reference • Scholarly articles ranging across the entire spectrum of theological and biblical topics, backed by the most current body of archaeological research • 238 contributors from around the world

• Language: English
• Publisher: Zondervan
• Release date: Aug 10, 2010
• ISBN: 9780310877004

Merrill C. Tenney

Merrill C. Tenney was professor of theological studies and dean of the Graduate school of Theology at Wheaton College, where he taught from 1944 to 1982. In addition to teaching New Testament and Greek, he was the general editor of the Zondervan Pictorial Bible Dictionary, served on the original translation team for the New American Standard Bible, and wrote several books. Tenney was an advocate of fundamentalism and a second president of the Evangelical Theological Society. He was born in Massachusetts and received his education from Nyack Missionary Training Institute, Gordon College of Theology and Missions, Boston University, and Harvard University. He and his wife Helen and two sons.  

Book preview

Q

image2

A late tradition regards this mountain, called Quarantania, as the site of Jesus’ temptation.

Q. The symbol used to designate a hypothetical source of sayings of Jesus and other discursive materials found in Matthew and Luke but not in Mark (or John). This abbreviation is thought to be derived from the German word for source, Quelle. According to the Two-Source Theory of gospel origins, both Matthew and Luke used the Gospel of Mark for their basic narrative framework, and both also had access to a collection of dominical sayings (Q) that apparently was unknown to Mark. For many scholars, Q was a written document (possibly composed in Aramaic originally), and some have spent considerable effort trying to reconstruct it (see J. M. Robinson et al., eds., The Critical Edition of Q [2000]; R. Valantasis, The New Q: A Fresh Translation with Commentary [2005]). For others, Q refers to a body of oral tradition. Still others use the abbreviation simply as a convenient way of referring to the material that is shared by Matthew and Luke but missing in Mark. Finally, some writers strongly deny the validity of this concept (e.g., M. Goodacre, The Case against Q: Studies in Markan Priority and the Synoptic Problem [2002]). See GOSPELS III.B.

Qadesh. See KADESH ON THE ORONTES.

Qere kuh-ray’ ( image 3 , either impv. [read!] or, more prob., pass. ptc. [what is read] of Aram. image 4 H10637 to call, read). This term is applied to Hebrew or Aramaic readings preferred by the Masoretes over the written, consonantal text of the OT. They are either corrections or variant changes placed in the margin by the SCRIBES. Rules prohibited changing the authoritative, consonantal text; but the Masoretes sometimes attached the vowels of a preferred reading to the unchanged consonants (called the KETIB, what is written) and then indicated the appropriate consonants of the amended word in the margin. More than 1,300 such marginal notes are said to be found in the MT. See TEXT AND MANUSCRIPTS (OT) VI.

L. J. WOOD

qesitah kes’i-tah See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES IV.I.

Qoheleth koh-hel’ith. See ECCLESIASTES, BOOK OF.

qoph kohf ( image 5 H7761, monkey). The nineteenth letter of the Hebrew ALPHABET ( image 6 ), with a numerical value of 100. It was one of several emphatic consonants, the exact pronunciation of which is uncertain. The sound may have been similar to that of the consonant k, but articulated toward the back of the mouth, near the soft palate (as in Arabic).

Quadratus, Apology of kwahd’ruh-tuhs (Kodratos). One of the earliest Christian apologies. It was presented to Emperor HADRIAN at a time when Christians were being persecuted, possibly in ASIA MINOR in A.D. 123 – 124 or 129 (or in ATHENS in 125 or 128 – 129). The only part of the text preserved is a brief quotation of about fifty words in EUSEBIUS (Eccl. Hist. 4.3.2), which states that some persons whom Christ had healed or raised from the dead survived to Quadratus’s own time.

P. WOOLLEY

quail. Although the origin of the Hebrew term śĕlāw H8513 is uncertain, there is full agreement that it refers to the quail, and no other bird fits the biblical texts (Exod. 16:13; Num. 11:31 – 32; Ps. 105:40). These require (a) a clean bird and (b) one that passed in great numbers. This miraculous supply to the traveling Israelites is mentioned on two specific occasions; first in the Desert of Sin, in the SW of the SINAI Peninsula, some six weeks after leaving Egypt (see SIN, WILDERNESS OF); second at KIBROTH HATTAAVAH, not far away, a year later. This is another example of natural resources being used by God, the miraculous element being in the precise timing of the supply. Although such concentrated flocks may have been exceptional, the quail must have passed across the Sinai area twice a year, and it is reasonable to assume that they were taken and eaten more or less regularly.

Quail are almost the smallest game birds and the only ones that truly migrate. The best known is the common quail (Coturnix coturnix or C. communis) of Europe and Asia. It is only seven inches long, mottled brown and much like a miniature partridge. Like many of its relatives, it is more often heard than seen, the call being made as much by night as by day. These birds breed over most of Europe and in W Asia. In autumn they migrate toward N Africa, many of them crossing the route of the exodus, and do so again on their return journey in spring. There is some difficulty about the translation of Num. 11:31. The KJV renders, two cubits high upon the face of the earth, implying that they were piled to that height (similarly NRSV and other versions); the NIV says that the wind brought the quail down to about three feet above the ground, which is preferable (suggesting that they were flying close to the ground).

Although strong fliers over short distances, quail need help from the wind for long migration flights, and the narrative says that they came in with the wind. An unfavorable change of wind can bring them to the ground and make them easy prey for humans. Various estimates have been made about the numbers taken in these incidents, and one researcher has suggested that the Israelites killed some nine million. This could be a gross overestimate, but there is recent evidence that such a figure is not entirely fanciful. Heavy exploitation of migratory quail took place throughout the 19th cent. and well into the 20th. For many years, Egypt exported over two million a year; in 1920, a peak of three million was reached. This was far more than the quail population could stand, and mass migration soon ceased. (See A. Parmelee, All the Birds of the Bible [1959], 76; O. L. Austin, Birds of the World [1961], 95; FFB, 66 – 67.)

G. S. CANSDALE

Quarantania kwah’ruhn-tay’nee-uh. Also Quar-antana. The name given by Christians to a high mountain near JERICHO where, according to a late tradition, Jesus was tempted by Satan (Matt.4:8 – 10).

image7

A late tradition regards this mountain as the site of Jesus’ temptation.

The name alludes to the forty days of the TEMPTATION OF CHRIST; in Arabic it is known as Jebel Kuruntul. (See McClintock-Strong, Cyclopedia, 8:835.)

quarry. An excavation made by removing stone for building purposes. This term is used by the KJV twice to render pĕsîlîm (pl. of pāsîl H7178) in a difficult passage (Jdg. 3:19, 26). The Hebrew word elsewhere refers to an image carved for religious purposes (Deut. 7:5 et al.), thus the NIV here translates idols, but some think such a reference makes little sense in the context. The NRSV renders it sculptured stones, whereas the NJPS treats it as a place name, Pesilim (for other interpretations, see HALOT, 3:948 – 49). Modern versions use quarry occasionally to render other Hebrew terms, such as the phrase maqqebet bôr (lit., the excavation of the pit, Isa. 51:1). See also SHEBARIM.

Stone quarries abound in Palestine (see STONE). Suitable ROCK is plentiful. The limestone used is easily worked and hardens when exposed to air. Stones yet in their quarries, only partially extracted, illustrate methods used in biblical days. A narrow-bladed pick was used to cut around the sides of the projected stone. The cut was wide enough only for the workman’s arm and pick. Sometimes wedges, inserted in pre-cut holes in a line, were driven deep with a heavy hammer to split the rock. Other times wooden strips were inserted in pre-cut cracks and then made to swell with water. Once loose, the stone was moved with crowbars and then transported by sledges or rollers. The largest stones, weighing several hundred tons each, have been found at BAALBEK. They were moved from a quarry nearly one mile distant. (See G. A. Reisner et al., Harvard Excavations at Samaria, 2 vols. [1924], 1:37 – 38, 96ff.; J. Simons, The Geographical and Topographical Texts of the Old Testament [1959], 271, 287.)

L. J. WOOD

quart. See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES III.C.

Quarter, Second (New). See SECOND DISTRICT.

quartermaster. This term, referring to an army officer responsible for the subsistence of a group of soldiers, is used by the NRSV and other versions to render the expression śar mĕnûhâ (lit., chief of resting; cf. KJV, a quiet prince), which occurs only once ( Jer. 51:59; NIV, staff officer).

Quartus kwor’tuhs ( image8 G3181, from Latin Quartus, fourth). An early Christian who sent greetings to the Christians in Rome (Rom. 16:23). PAUL refers to him as "our [lit., the] brother, and some have speculated that Quartus was the physical brother of a previously mentioned individual in the list. Most scholars believe that the expression is simply equivalent to Brother Quartus," indicating spiritual kinship, though it is possible that he was an associate of the apostle.

image9

Ancient Jerusalem quarry.

quaternion kwah-tuhr’nee-uhn. See SQUAD.

queen. Of the several Hebrew words that can be translated queen, malkâ H4893 (fem. of melek H4889, king) is the most common. It is the term used for the QUEEN OF SHEBA (1 Ki. 10:1 et al.), for VASHTI and ESTHER (Esth. 1:9; 2:22; et al.), and for the wife of the Babylonian monarch BELSHAZ-ZAR (Dan. 5:10). The plural form occurs in one passage (Cant. 6:8 – 9; with regard to the form mĕleket H4906, see QUEEN OF HEAVEN). The second most common word for queen, gĕbîrâ H1485 (lit., mighty woman, mistress, fem. of gĕbîr H1484, lord, master), is used of TAHPENES, Pharaoh’s wife (1 Ki. 11:19); of MAACAH, the queen mother of King ASA (1 Ki. 15:13; 2 Chr. 15:16); of JEZEBEL (2 Ki. 10:13); and of NEHUSHTA, the mother of JEHOIACHIN ( Jer. 29:2; cf. 2 Ki. 24:8). The rare form šēgal H8712 (royal consort) occurs twice (Neh. 2:6; Ps. 45:9 [NIV, royal bride]). Finally, the term śārâ H8576 (woman of nobility, princess) is appropriately rendered queen in at least one passage (Isa. 49:23; cf. also Lam. 1:1 NIV). In the NT, the Greek word basilissa G999 is applied to the Queen of the South (i.e., of Sheba, Matt. 12:42; Lk. 11:31) and to the Ethiopian queen, CANDACE (Acts 8:27); the title is also assumed by the prostitute Babylon (Rev. 18:7).

The only ruling queen the Hebrews ever had was ATHALIAH, who had been queen mother until her son AHAZIAH died; she reigned for seven years, until JEHOIADA the priest overthrew her (2 Ki. 11:1 – 20). The wives of the Hebrew kings were understood to be queens. Two of them are noted for the rights they assumed: MICHAL, daughter of SAUL, mocked and defied her husband, King DAVID (2 Sam. 6:20 – 23); JEZEBEL, wife of AHAB, has been memorialized as ELIJAH’s persecutor (1 Ki. 19:1 – 3).

The queen mother was generally the widow of the former king and mother of the reigning one. Certain obligations devolved upon her and she received appropriate respect. SOLOMON bowed to his mother, BATHSHEBA (1 Ki. 2:19). ASA, however, removed his heretical mother, MAACAH, for unbecoming religious behavior (1 Ki. 15:13). It is also worthy of note that in Judah at least the name of the king’s mother always received mention in the record of his coming to the throne (e.g., 2 Ki. 12:1). (See N.-E. A. Andreasen, The Role of the Queen Mother in Israelite Society, CBQ 45 [1983]: 179 – 94.)

R. L. ALDEN

Queen of Heaven. An object of Jewish worship in the time of JEREMIAH. Most of the information regarding this cult comes from outside the Bible. The only biblical clues available are in Jer. 7:18 and 44:17 – 19, 25. The former passage states, The children gather wood, the fathers light the fire, and the women knead the dough and make cakes of bread for the Queen of Heaven. It is generally agreed that the cakes were made in the shape of a human being. Many such fragments have been found in clay, usually with accented female features. In Jer. 44:17 it is recorded that the people intended to burn incense to the Queen of Heaven and…pour out drink offerings to her…in the towns of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem.

The problem is compounded by the use of the unusual MT form of the word queen, mĕleket H4906. Some consider this an erroneous writing of the normal malkâ H4893. Others have understood it to be mĕle)ket, construct form of mĕlā)kâ H4856,work, handiwork (cf. Jer. 7:18 LXX, tē stratia tou ouranou, to the army of heaven; the Aram. Tg. reads here to the stars of heaven).

image10

Some consider Ashtoreth, a well-known Canaanite fertility deity, to be the Queen of Heaven who according to Jeremiah was worshiped on rooftops.

It is well accepted that this was a borrowed deity. Several of Israel’s neighbors had consorts for their male deities—goddesses and a queen of heaven. In ASSYRIA, the goddess ISHTAR was called the lady of heaven, whereas in the literature from UGARIT she is queen of heaven. The Canaanite Astarte, or ASHTORETH, was a well-known FERTILITY goddess. This seems to be the domain of the Queen of Heaven mentioned in Jer. 44, since the people were rejoicing in her for their general welfare and freedom from famine. The people of Ugarit also had ANATH, a kind of mother goddess. This name appears in the texts from ELEPHANTINE, Egypt, where Anat-Yaho is represented as the consort of Yaho (Yahweh). Perhaps this was a recurrence of the Queen of Heaven cult against which Jeremiah preached. (See E. O. James, The Cult of the Mother Goddess [1959]; The Ancient Gods [1960], 77–106; S. M. Olyan in UF 19 [1987]: 161–74; S. Ackerman in Gender and Difference in Ancient Israel, ed. P. L. Day [1989], 109 – 24; ABD, 5:586–88; DDD, 678 – 79.)

R. L.ALDEN

queen of Sheba. A ruler from the old Arab state of SHEBA who visited King SOLOMON ostensibly to test him with hard questions only to discover that his wisdom surpassed all that she had heard (1 Ki. 10:1 – 13; 2 Chr. 9:1-12). There may have been trade motives in the visit as well. Her camels brought spices, gold, and precious stones (1 Ki. 10:2, 10). What Solomon gave in return is not specified, although it seems clear that he gave her some commodities (v. 13). Trading was an important facet of Solomon’s activities, and the Red Sea and Arabian peninsula came within the ambit of his interest. Indeed, he had a port on the Red Sea at EZION GEBER (1 Ki. 9:26 – 28; 10:11-12,22-29). Specific reference is made in 10:15 to the gold which he obtained from merchants and traders and from all the Arabian kings and the governors of the land. Hence a visit from an Arab queen would not be inconceivable.

The ancient kingdom of Saba, the S Arabic name of the old SABEAN state, lay in the SW corner of the Arabian peninsula, roughly the area of modern Yemen. The state and its people, the Sabeans, are referred to often in the OT (Job 6:19; Ps. 72:10, 15; Isa. 60:6; Jer. 6:20; Ezek. 27:22 – 23; 38:13). Important excavations conducted during 1951 – 52 in Marib, the old capital, have given a remarkable insight into the Sabean civilization. Its origins are unknown, but there is some evidence that it may have been occupied by Semites who migrated S in the middle of the 2nd millennium. By the 10th cent. B.C. there was a flourishing kingdom in the region, and a diplomatic and trade mission led by a queen to the kingdom of Solomon some 1,500 mi. to the N was possibly part of a total policy of commercial expansion. Assyrian inscriptions from the 8th and 7th centuries B.C. mention several queens and this suggests a matrilineal system of succession.

The tradition that the Abyssinian royal line is descended from Solomon and the queen of Sheba is difficult to prove (or disprove!). ETHIOPIA was probably colonized from S Arabia by the Sabeans. Arabic legends give many details about the queen who married Solomon, and JOSEPHUS linked the queen of Sheba with Ethiopia (Ant. 2.10.2; 7.6.5–6). (See W. Phillips, Sheba’s BuriedCity [1955]; G. W. Van Beek in The Bible and the Ancient Near East: Essays in Honor of W. F. Albright, ed. G. E. Wright [1961], 229 – 48; K. A. Kitchen in The Age of Solomon: Scholarship at the Turn of the Millennium, ed. L. K. Hardy [1997], 126 – 53.)

image11

The land of Sheba.

J. ARTHUR THOMPSON

Questions of Bartholomew. See BARTHOLOMEW, GOSPEL (QUESTIONS) OF.

quest of the historical Jesus. See BIBLICAL CRITICISM V.E; JESUS CHRIST III.G.

quick, quicken. The adjective quick in modern usage refers most often to speed, but the KJV translators used it in its older sense, alive: …and they go down quick into the pit (Num. 16:30); Then they had swallowed us up quick (Ps. 124:3); …who shall judge the quick and the dead (2 Tim. 4:1); For the word of God is quick, and powerful (Heb. 4:12). Similarly, the verb quicken is used in the KJV with the meaning revive, make alive; although this sense is still found in modern usage, current English versions prefer different renderings (e.g., in Ps. 119:50 the KJV has thy word hath quickened me, but the NRSV, your promise gives me life, and the NIV, Your promise preserves my life). The verb is found in contexts that speak of REGENERATION (e.g., Eph. 2:1) and RESURRECTION (e.g., Rom. 4:17). Note, however, that the KJV often uses the adverb quickly in the sense with speed (Gen. 18:6 et al.).

quicksands. This term is used by the KJV to render Greek Syrtis G5358, which refers to an area of the Libyan coast known for its shifting sandbars (Acts 27:17). See SYRTIS.

Quintus Memmius. See MEMMIUS, QUINTUS.

Quirinius kwi-rin’ee-uhs ( image 12 G3256, some MSS K image 13 , a more precise representation of the Latin Quirinius). KJV Cyrenius (a transliteration of the Greek without reference to the Latin form). Publius Sulpicius Quirinius was what the Romans called a new man: like Cicero, he came to office and held a consulship (12 B.C.) and provincial governorships without the aid and advantage of a family tradition in politics or administration. TACITUS (Annals 3.48) devoted a brief chapter to Quirinius when he recorded his death in A.D. 21. He wrote:

About the same time he [Tiberius] desired of the senate that the decease of Sulpicius Quirinius might be celebrated by a public funeral. Quirinius was born at Lanuvium, a municipal town, and was nowise related to the ancient patrician family of the Sulpicii; but being a brave soldier, was for his active services rewarded with the consulship under Augustus, and soon after with a triumph, for driving the Homonadenses out of their strongholds in Cilicia; next, when the young Caius Caesar was sent to settle the affairs of Armenia, Quirinius was appointed his principal adviser, and at the same time had paid court to Tiberius, then in his retirement at Rhodes. This the emperor represented now to the senate; he extolled the kind offices of Quirinius, and branded Marcus Lollius as the author of the perverse behavior of Caius Caesar to himself, and of all the tensions between them. But the memory of Quirin-ius was not agreeable to the rest of the senate, by reason of the danger he brought upon Lepida, as I have before related, and his sordid meanness and overbearing conduct in the latter part of his life.

Quirinius was a notable soldier, with a desert campaign to his credit in CYRENE, which along with CRETE he ruled as PROCONSUL about 15 B.C. Between 12 and 2 B.C. he was engaged on a pacification project in PISIDIA against the mountaineers, whom Tacitus, in the passage quoted above, described inaccurately as Cilician. Dates are vague, and for biblical scholars these are tangled with the problem of the date of the nativity. A fair statement might run as follows: The first census, which took place "while Quirinius was governor [i.e., imperial legate] of Syria" (Lk. 2:2), could not have been the one to which GAMALIEL referred, as reported in Acts 5:37. That registration was in A.D. 6 or 7. It therefore follows, given the customary fourteen-year census cycle, that the previous enrollment was in 8 or 7 B.C.; hence the problem. LUKE is clearly claiming that Quirinius conducted an earlier census in Palestine distinct from the one to which he makes reference in his second book.

Consideration of this problem can begin with the assumption that Luke was a competent historian, careful of his facts, and not prone to unverified statements. His work generally supports such a reputation. Reference, therefore, to an earlier census taken by Quirinius in Palestine must be taken seriously. To assume such a census, while complete proof is lacking, requires no distortion of known historical facts. Luke’s claim is consistent with an extraordinary command for Quirinius in the E, between one and two decades prior to his regular governorship of SYRIA. It was established Roman practice, going far back into Republican history, to appoint able officers to posts of special authority to deal with a local situation beyond the power or ability of the official within whose proper sphere it lay. AUGUSTUS was notably wary of placing too much power in the hands of the governors of those provinces that called for large military forces, and he often demonstrated a preference for special commissioners directly responsible to himself for the resolution of problems of extraordinary complexity.

According to Ronald Syme (Roman Revolution [1939], 755), Quirinius was busy on the frontier problems of the Pisidian highlands between 12 and 2 B.C., though this is not to say that the subjugation of the Homonadenses, mentioned by Tacitus, required ten years of continuous campaigning. It does appear, however, that Quirinius was strategically placed for a piece of special work in the E in the middle years of this decade. It does no violence to Luke’s language, or to the known facts of history, if Quirinius was especially commissioned at this time to supervise the Palestine census. Luke could not know that so much evidence would disappear with the lapse of time—that historians would wonder why he spoke of Quirinius as governor of Syria, when it was common knowledge that Quin-tilius Varus occupied that important post.

Quintilius Varus, who was governor of Syria from 7 to 4 B.C., was a man for whom Augustus may justifiably have entertained no great regard. Augustus, above all, was an able judge of men, and it was Quintilius Varus who, in A.D. 9, reprehensibly lost three legions in the Teutoburger forest in Germany, one of the most shocking disasters to Roman arms in the century. Assuming that Augustus had some misgivings over the ability of Varus to handle an explosive situation, it is easy to see a reason for a special intrusion, under other direction, in the affairs of Varus’s province.

A reasonable reconstruction might assume that Varus came to Syria in 7 B.C., an untried man. The census was due in Palestine in 8 or 7 B.C., and it could well be that Augustus ordered Quirinius, who had just successfully dealt with the problem of the Pisidian highlanders, to undertake the delicate task. HEROD had recently lost the favor of the emperor and may have been temporizing about the taking of the census, a process that always enraged the difficult Jews. Quirinius’s intervention, the requisite organization, and the preparation for the census, could easily have postponed the actual date of registration to the end of 5 B.C., a reasonable date. (The matter is argued at length in E. M. Blaiklock, The Century of the New Testament [1962], appendix 4. For the view that the reference to a census under Quirinius is not historical, see R. E. Brown, The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in Matthew and Luke [1977], 547 – 56. For a discussion of several other proposed solutions, see D. L. Bock, Luke, 2 vols, BECNT [1994 – 96], 1:903 – 9.)

The picture emerges of a notable Roman, distinguished for his career of faithful service to Augustus, and perhaps for that reason earning the unpopularity at which Tacitus twice glanced. It is possible to observe his rise. Quirinius’s first wife was Appia Claudia, no undistinguished name. His second wife was Aemilia Lepida, a descendant of Sulla and Pompey, and destined bride of the young L. Caesar, untimely dead. He grew old, says Syme, in envied opulence, the prey of designing society ladies (Roman Revolution, 381). He was shrewd enough to pay discreet court to TIBERIUS, in exile at Rhodes, and lost nothing by such wisdom when Tiberius, in default of other heirs, succeeded Augustus. He left no heirs himself.

E. M. BLAIKLOCK

quiver. A case for holding and carrying arrows (Heb. tĕlî H9437). It was generally made of LEATHER and slung over the shoulder of the hunter or soldier. ESAU the hunter carried one (Gen. 27:3); two passages use the same Hebrew word in connection with WAR equipment (e.g., Job 39:23; Isa. 22:6). The other four occurrences of the word are metaphorical. One of them speaks of a man’s family as the quiver and his children as the arrows (Ps. 127:5). The prophet, pictured as an arrow, is said to be concealed in God’s quiver (Isa. 49:2). Because a killer uses his arrows, Jeremiah likens the empty quiver to an open tomb (Jer. 5:16); he also says of God’s afflictions, "He pierced my heart with arrows [lit., sons] from his quiver" (Lam. 3:13). A different Hebrew word, ĕleṭ H8949, should perhaps be rendered quiver in some passages (e.g., Jer. 51:1; cf. NRSV and NJPS), but this term is of uncertain meaning and probably means shield (KJV and NIV; see the discussion in HALOT, 4:1522 – 23).

image14

This Assyrian relief (c. 700 B.C.) depicts a quiver case held by a soldier.

R. L. ALDEN

Qumran koom’rahn. Khirbet Qumran is a site near the NW shore of the DEAD SEA where the Wadi Qumran flows from the Judean hills into the Dead Sea. Though long known to travelers, the site was not excavated until the discovery of the DEAD SEA SCROLLS in neighboring caves from 1947 onward drew attention to it. The excavations were carried out in 1951 and 1953 – 56 under the direction of R. de Vaux and G. L. Harding. The site, which stands on a plateau about half a mile from the shore, consists of a complex of buildings and an associated cemetery. The earliest building there dates from the 8th – 7th cent. B.C. and is probably to be connected with King UZZIAH (2 Chr. 26:10); the area possibly should be identified with the City of Salt ( Josh. 15:62; but see SALT, CITY OF).

The site was deserted for some centuries after this settlement and there was no sign of activity until the 2nd cent. B.C., when the ancient building was modified and used by a small group of settlers (Level Ia), but the most flourishing period (Ib) followed in about 110 B.C. when, with an enlarged population, the complex was provided with an elaborate water system, a pottery, smithy, laundry, bakery, mill, kitchens, refectory, and assembly halls.

image15

The site of Qumran with the Dead Sea and the mountains of Moab in the background. (View to the E.)

This phase ended about 30 B.C. following a fire; a few years later there was an earthquake, and the site remained virtually uninhabited until 4 B.C., when it was reconstructed by new settlers (Level II) much on the lines of Ib; it remained in occupation until its destruction by the Romans in A.D. 68 during the First Jewish Revolt. It was fortified (III) and continued as a Roman post until the end of the century. The site again was used as a center by the rebels during the Second Jewish Revolt (A.D. 132 – 135), but no serious rebuilding was again undertaken. See WARS, JEWISH.

The surrounding caves in which were found the DSS contained pottery contemporary with Levels Ib and II. Many of the scrolls had been copied at Khirbet Qumran (a scriptorium was found in Level II), and probably were deposited in the caves in A.D. 68 when the Roman conquest was imminent. The identity of the community is uncertain, but most scholars would now connect them with the ESSENES. (See J. T. Milik, Ten Years of Discovery in the Wilderness of Judaea [1959], 45 – 56; J. Finegan, Light from the Ancient Past: The Archaeological Background of Judaism and Christianity, 2nd ed. [1959], 273 – 76; R. de Vaux, Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls [1973]; P. R. Davies, Qumran [1982]; J. Magness, The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls [2002]; K. Galor et al., eds., Qumran: The Site of the Dead Sea Scrolls [2006]; ABD, 5:590 – 94; NEAEHL, 4:1235 – 41.)

T. C. MITCHELL

quotations in the New Testament. The form and content of citations in the NT will be treated under the following headings:

Numbers and kinds

Textual affinities

The style of OT quotations

The purposes for which the OT is quoted

Quotations from sources other than the OT

I. Numbers and kinds. Most of the quotations in the NT are drawn from the OT. The bulk of these occur in the Synoptic Gospels, the epistles of Paul, Hebrews, and Revelation. How many there are depends largely on the number of allusive OT quotations counted—and that is a delicate matter. The number of explicit OT quotations has been variously estimated in the range of 150 – 300, allusive quotations over 1,000. Revelation contains numerous allusive quotations, but none which are explicit.

The explicit quotations of the OT are easy to identify; quotation formulas often introduce them. Allusive quotations are clauses, phrases, and sometimes single words that may easily escape notice. For example, the unattentive reader might well miss that the words from the cloud at Jesus’ TRANSFIGURATION (Matt. 17:5) came from three separate passages in the OT: This is my Son [Ps. 2:7]…; with him I am well pleased [Isa. 42:1]. Listen to him [Deut. 18:15]! More easily overlooked is Matthew’s changing the description of Joseph of Ari-mathea (see JOSEPH #13) as a prominent member of the Council in Mk. 15:43 to a rich man (Matt. 27:57) to conform with a prediction by Isaiah that the Suffering Servant would have "his grave…with a rich man in his death" (Isa. 53:9 RSV).

There is the possibility that some coincidences of wording between the OT and the NT are fortuitous, as is probable in the narratives of the flights to Egypt by JEROBOAM I (1 Ki. 11:40) and the Holy Family (Matt. 2:13 – 15). In most instances, however, there is justification in seeing conscious allusions, for Jewish education was steeped in OT lore. Because of rote memory, many of the rabbis were living concordances. The DEAD SEA SCROLLS have shown that an author’s weaving OT phraseology into his own words was a common literary practice in NT times.

image16

A page from the book of Leviticus in the Septuagint (Tischendorf’s ed., 1875). The authors of the NT frequently used a form of this Greek version when quoting the OT.

II. Textual affinities. In quoting the OT, the NT writers occasionally transliterate the original Hebrew (or Aramaic); cf. Immanuel (Matt. 1:23), and Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani (Mk. 15:34). Usually they follow the text of the LXX, frequently even when it differs from the MT. The NT may disagree, however, with the LXX throughout an entire quotation or only in parts of a quotation. Sometimes the disagreement with the LXX will show agreement with the MT, the TARGUMS, the Syriac version (Peshitta; see VERSIONS OF THE BIBLE, ANCIENT III.C), the Greek version attributed to Theodotion (see SEPTUAGINT IV.C), and variant readings in Hebrew MSS, the DSS, rabbinical tradition, and JOSEPHUS—and sometimes complete independence from any known OT textual tradition. Often combinations of different textual traditions occur within a single OT quotation. It is especially well known that this phenomenon characterizes the so-called formula-citations in Matthew, introduced by a statement such as this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet (Matt. 1:21 et al.).

The mixed text probably should not be attributed to inaccurate citation by memory (as is often stated). That is made unlikely by the numerous agreements with various textual traditions and by agreement among different NT writers against all others (Matt. 11:10; Mk. 1:2; Lk. 7:27 [these three citing Mal. 3:1]; Rom. 9:33 and 1 Pet. 2:6 [citing Isa. 28:16]; see J. Scott, Principles of New Testament Quotation [1877], 93).

Scholars have put forward a number of hypotheses to account for the aberrant text of numerous OT quotations in the NT. J. R. Harris argued that the NT writers used a Testimony Book, that is, a catena or series of OT proof texts (Testimonies, 2 vols. [1916 – 20]). Many of the textual variants are then traceable to such a book, as are also recurring combinations of OT passages, supposed mis-ascriptions, and the known Testimony Book of Cyprian, an early church father. Support for the hypothesis comes from the catena of messianic texts discovered in Qumran Cave 4 (See J. M. Allegro in JBL 75 [1956]: 186; 77 [1958]: 350). Doubtless, early Christian evangelists and teachers drew on a common stock (oral and/or written) of favorite OT proof texts for tenets of the Christian faith. But there is little reason to think that a Testimony Book par excellence or any number of them are the reason for the frequent failure of NT writers to follow the LXX. One reason for not thinking so is that a number of the aberrant quotations do not convey the idea of messianic FULFILLMENT, and probably did not, therefore, stem from a catena of Christian proof texts.

According to Paul Kahle, the non-LXX elements in NT quotations of the OT reflect written Greek targums widely used before the church adopted the LXX as its standard version of the OT (The Cairo Geniza, 2nd ed. [1959], 209 – 64). The mass of variant readings in MSS of the LXX—variants that Kahle uses along with the aberrant text of OT quotations in the NT to prove the existence of Greek targums—present a discernible pattern of development from an archetype, not a hodgepodge of unrelated variants from independent Greek targums. Furthermore, the DSS have shown that many of the variants in the Septuagintal MSS were the result of progressive assimilation to the Hebrew text of the OT, not the result of amalgamation of differing Greek targums utilized by NT writers.

Krister Stendahl proposes that Matthew emanates from a Qumran-like school that practiced PESHER (interpretative) selection and adaptation of known variant readings in the quoted OT texts (The School of St. Matthew and Its Use of the Old Testament [1954]; cf. the treatment of the OT text in the DSS, especially the Habakkuk Commentary). This hypothesis, however, labors under two basic weaknesses: (1) the DSS have shown that in NT times the OT text contained mixed readings that later became isolated in separate streams of textual tradition, so that the variants in OT quotations may be due to the mixed OT text used by NT and Qumran writers rather than to deliberate selection and adaptation by them; (2) an aberrant text is frequently an OT quotation where no hermeneutical motive for changing the LXX (or MT) is apparent. The same objections militate against the view of Barnabas Lindars that the aberrant text of many OT quotations in the NT stems from reworking of the texts according to apologetic needs as the church confronted Judaism (New Testament Apologetic: The Doctrinal Significance of the Old Testament Quotations [1961]).

In the synoptics, only the explicit quotations of the OT in the Markan tradition are purely Sep-tuagintal (or nearly so). On the other hand, some of Matthew’s formula citations are wholly or partly Septuagintal as well as non-Septuagintal, showing affinities with the MT, the Aramaic targums, etc. This same sort of willy-nilly mixture occurs in the other OT quotations, including those that are allusive. It would appear, then, that the explicit quotations in the Markan tradition were conformed to the LXX because they stood out and because their grammatical independence in context subjected them to easy assimilation, and that the mixed text in other OT quotations stems partially from the mixed state of the OT text in NT times and partially from the Jewish practice of free translation in targumizing. Agreeing to the mixture of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek textual traditions in many NT quotations of the OT is the archaeological evidence that these three languages were commonly used in 1st-cent. Palestine (see R. H. Gundry, The Use of the Old Testament in St. Matthew’s Gospel [1967], 172 – 78; id. in JBL 83 [1964], 404ff.). Divergences from the LXX in OT quotations outside the synoptics (as in John and the Pauline epistles) are likewise best explained as the result of loose, ad hoc renderings in the targumic style (cf. E. D. Freed, Old Testament Quotations in the Gospel of John [1965]; E. E. Ellis, Paul’s Use of the Old Testament [1957]—although both of these writers find more interpretative changes of the OT text than the present writer is inclined to see; and Ellis hypothesizes that Christian prophets engaged in oracular adaptations).

III. The style of OT quotations. The formulas by which explicit quotations are introduced are varied. It is [or stands] written emphasizes the permanent validity of the OT REVELATION. That it might be fulfilled points up the consummation of the OT revelation in NT events. The OT passage may be attributed to the human author (Isaiah says) or to God himself (God/the Lord says, the Holy Spirit says). Other formulas are the Scripture says, the law says, the prophet says, it says, and numerous variations. These introductory formulas exhibit the highest possible concept of OT INSPIRATION on the part of Jesus and the NT writers. Not only does God often appear as the author of Scripture; the identification is so close that sometimes the Scripture is personified. At the same time the references to Moses, David, Isaiah, and others show recognition of the human element.

Notice should be made of the ḥaraz method, that is, quoting from two or three sections of the Hebrew OT canon (e.g., Rom. 11:8 – 10 from Isa. 29:10; Deut. 29:4 [MT v. 3]; and Ps. 69:22 – 23 [LXX 68:23 – 24]) or, less formally, chain-quoting different passages from the same section (e.g., Rom. 9:25 – 29 from Hos. 2:23 [MT v. 25]; 1:10 [MT 2:1]; and Isa. 10:22 – 23). Some combinations of quotations seem also to rest on key words. Outstanding are the quotations about the stone in Rom. 9:33 (Isa. 8:14; 28:16) and 1 Pet. 2:6 – 8 (Isa. 28:16; Ps. 118:22; Isa. 8:14).

Problems of ascription arise. For example, the quotation in Matt. 27:9 concerning the thirty pieces of silver comes from Zech. 11:13, but it is ascribed to Jeremiah. All sorts of explanations are offered; but probably it is taken for granted that the reader will see the relationship to Zechariah, so that attention is called to easily missed parallels in Jer. 19, such as the allusions to a potter and field (cf. the analogy of 2 Chr. 36:21 in relation to Lev. 26:34 – 35 and Jer. 25:12; 29:10). In other instances a quotation lacks ascription in the NT and it may be difficult to determine its source; notorious examples include Matt. 2:23 (He will be called a Nazarene); Jn. 7:38 (…streams of living water will flow from within him); and Eph. 5:14 (Wake up, O sleeper…).

The NT writers often quoted an OT text without indicating the source. The ancients had no feelings about plagiarism in such a practice. Nor did they sharply distinguish between direct and indirect quotations. To weave interpretative phraseology into a quotation (making it inexact) was not to disregard its sacredness, but to honor that sacredness by treating the text as supremely important for interpretation and application. By the same token, it does not really matter that the text of the quotation differed somewhat from that of the Hebrew OT. It is the meaning that counts. Only if the point of the quotation may rest on a change of text does a serious problem arise. That is a matter of judgment in each claimed instance. For an example, see the commentaries on Heb. 10:5 (a body you prepared for me versus my ears you have pierced, Ps. 40:6).

It frequently is charged that the NT writers misinterpreted the OT text. Many times, however, they point to TYPOLOGY in the OT passage without meaning to deny the original meaning in its historical setting. Beyond that, scholars are dealing with matters of judgment—and each place where it is claimed that misinterpretation has occurred has to be considered separately. For example, does PAUL’s argument that the singular "seed [or offspring] in God’s promise to ABRAHAM (and to thy seed, Gen. 13:15 KJV) must refer to one person, Christ, wrongly overlook the use of seed, offspring as a collective singular? Hardly, for the context of the quotation shows that Paul is thinking of Christ as a collective singular—the corporate Christ, or Jesus Christ plus all those united to him by faith (note the conclusion of the argument, Gal. 3:29). Or does Paul’s use of Hab. 2:4 (The righteous shall live [have eternal life] by faith [trust in Christ]—Rom. 1:17 ASV) violate an original meaning, The righteous shall physically survive by virtue of their fidelity to Yahweh? Again, one must answer negatively, for the verb to live in Hab. 2:4 carries the full meaning, to enjoy divine favor," and fidelity to God is rooted in trust. Indeed, the OT passage seems to contrast the arrogant self-confidence of the wicked with the patient trust of the righteous, so that trust is the primary connotation rather than (or at least arising out of ) fidelity.

Concerning the OT quotations in the Gospels, it is also charged that Christian desire to find fulfilled prophecies has resulted in the warping and creation of tradition about Jesus to fit OT texts. Against such a view are the facts that Christians failed to exploit many OT passages easily susceptible to the motif of fulfillment and that many of those they did exploit were not, so far as one can tell, messianically interpreted in Judaism at that time. Some of the quotations are so out of the way that it is doubtful a Christian writer would have thought to create a corresponding tradition about Jesus. Or the tradition is so realistic that derivation from the OT is unlikely. Not even among the DSS, where the desire to find fulfillment was so strong that the OT text is tortuously treated, does one meet creation of tradition to fit prophecy. For these and other reasons, one is to accept the priority and trustworthiness of the tradition concerning Jesus, and view the attached OT texts as later accretions rather than sources.

IV. The purposes for which the OT is quoted.

The motif of fulfillment in OT quotations is very strong. Quotations that fall under the category of fulfillment have to do with both direct predictions of future events and typological significance beyond the intention of the OT writers. The main motifs of these quotations in the NT are as follows: Jesus acts as Yahweh himself. He is the foretold Messianic King, the Isaianic Servant of Yahweh, and the Danielic Son of man. He culminates the prophetic line, the succession of OT righteous sufferers, and the Davidic dynasty. He reverses the work of ADAM, fulfills the divine promise to ABRAHAM, and recapitulates the history of Israel.

The priesthood of MELCHIZEDEK and AARON both prefigure (the latter sometimes contrastingly) the priesthood of Christ. The paschal lamb and other sacrifices represented the sacrificial, redemptive death of Jesus, and also Christian service. Jesus is life-giving bread like the manna, the rock source of living water, the serpent lifted up in the wilderness, and the tabernacle-temple abode of God among his people.

JOHN THE BAPTIST was the predicted prophetic forerunner. Jesus inaugurated the foretold eschato-logical period of salvation and the new covenant. JUDAS ISCARIOT fulfilled the role of the wicked opponents of OT righteous sufferers. The church is (or individual Christians are) the new creation, the spiritual seed of Abraham by incorporation into Christ, the new Israel, and the new temple. The Mosaic law prefigured grace both positively and negatively. Noah’s flood stands for the last judgment and for Christian baptism. The passage through the Reed (Red) Sea and circumcision also picture baptism. Jerusalem stands for the celestial city. Entrance into Canaan prefigures the entrance of Christians into spiritual rest. Proclamation of the gospel to all men fulfills the promise to Abraham and prophetic predictions of universal salvation. That OT quotations fall under a limited set of recognizable themes sharply contrasts with the piecemeal treatment of the OT text in the DSS and rabbinical writings. The early Christians must have learned their OT hermeneutics from Jesus himself (cf. Lk. 24:27, 32).

Underlying the fulfillment quotations is the concept of Heilsgeschichte (salvation-history). God directs history according to his redemptive purpose. He reveals what he will do through his prophets. Their predictive word has a potency to bring about its own fulfillment, for it comes from the Lord of history. Thus, when the fulfillment takes place, confirmation results. Confirmation also comes when, looking back, one sees predictive symbolism in the pattern of OT events, persons, and institutions—that is, typology—not within the purview of the OT writers, but divinely intended.

One must not think that the early Christians searched haphazardly through the OT for any proof text for fulfillment that they could find. In his book According to the Scriptures (1952), C. H. Dodd showed that most of the NT quotation material relating to Jesus and the church comes from fairly restricted text plots in the OT. These he outlined as follows:

(1) Apocalyptic-Eschatological Scriptures—Joel 2 – 3; Zech. 9 – 14; Dan. 7 (primary); Mal. 3:1 – 6; Dan. 12 (supplementary).

(2) Scriptures of the New Israel—Hos. 1 – 14; Isa. 6:1—9:7; 11:1 – 10; 28:16; 40:1 – 11; Jer. 31:10 – 34 (primary); Isa. 29:9 – 14; Jer. 7:1 – 15; Hab. 1 – 2 (supplementary).

QUOTATIONS FROM AND REFERENCES TO ISAIAH 53 IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

(3) Scriptures of the Servant of the Lord and the Righteous Sufferer—Isa. 42:1—44:5; 49:1 – 13; 50:4 – 11; 52:13—53:12; 61; Pss. 69; 22; 31; 38; 88; 34; 118; 41; 42 – 43; 80 (primary); Isa. 58; 6 – 10 (supplementary).

(4) Unclassified Scriptures—Pss. 8; 110; 2; Gen. 12:3; 22:18; Deut. 18:15, 19 (primary); Pss. 132; 16; 2 Sam. 7:13, 14; Isa. 55:3; Amos 9:11 – 12 (supplementary).

To the above may be added Exod. 1 – 4; 24; 34; Num. 23 – 24; 2 Ki. 1; Ps. 78; Dan. 2; the last part of Dan. 11 (to go with ch. 12, which Dodd cites); Isa. 13; 34 – 35; and the last chapters of Isaiah generally beyond the limits of Dodd’s text-plots; Mic. 4 – 5; 7; Zech. 1 – 6; and the rest of Malachi (beyond Mal. 3:6). Since the church recognized these OT passages as specially relevant to the new dispensation, an individual quotation became a pointer to the text-plot as a whole.

Sometimes the OT may be quoted only for the purpose of literary allusion; but usually, if not always, closer examination will discover a deeper rationale, such as fulfillment. In other usages, the OT quotation becomes the basis of comment (as in Jesus’ teaching on marriage and divorce—Mk. 10:2 – 9 and parallels), sometimes in an argumentative setting (as in Jesus’ debate with the Sadducees over resurrection—12:18 – 27 and parallels). Or the OT may be quoted prescriptively (cf. the repetition of nine out of the TEN COMMANDMENTS in scattered passages throughout the NT).

V. Quotations from sources other than the OT. Apart from OT quotations in the NT, Matthew and Luke quote Mark and perhaps Q and other sources (cf. Lk. 1:1 – 4 and see GOSPELS III.B). Quotations of Jesus’ sayings appear (usually very allusively) in the epistles. Paul quoted an otherwise unrecorded saying (agraphon) of Jesus in Acts 20:35: It is more blessed to give than to receive. See AGRAPHA. In Acts, Luke quotes a number of early Christian sermons and speeches. Of course, the evangelists quote large amounts of the teaching of Jesus—not always verbatim. The difference in the style of Jesus’ speech in John and in the synoptics is to be explained by at least three considerations: (1) in the process of translation from Aramaic and Hebrew into Greek, John’s own Greek style imposed itself more heavily than that of the synoptists; (2) John paraphrased more than the synoptists; (3) John deliberately preserved a strand of tradition not prominent in the synoptics—but that Jesus did speak in the Johannine style is proved by Matt. 11:25 – 27 and Lk. 10:21, 22.

Prayers are quoted in the NT: Matt. 6:9 – 13; Lk. 11:2 – 4 (the Lord’s Prayer); Acts 4:24 – 30 (a persecution prayer in the early church); and 1 Cor. 16:22 (if MARANATHA is to be understood as an imperative form, Our Lord, Come!; cf. Rev. 22:20). So also are early Christian hymns, confessional creeds, and other traditional material: Lk. 1:46 – 55, 68 – 79; 2:14, 29 – 32; Jn. 1:1 – 14; Rom. 1:3 – 4; 4:24, 25; 10:9; 1 Cor. 11:23 – 26; 12:3; 15:3 – 5; Eph. 5:14; Phil. 2:5 – 11; Col. 1:15 – 20; 1 Tim. 3:16; 1 Pet. 3:18 – 22; Rev. 4:8, 11; 5:9 – 10. The above references are only representative. Some are less certain than others because of the difficulty in distinguishing quotations from the authors’ own compositions. In particular, E. G. Selwyn proposes heavy quotation in 1 Peter and other epistles of such sources as liturgical hymns and creedal forms, a persecution fragment containing exhortations, catechetical documents, and verba Christi, thus accounting for the many similarities among the NT epistles (The First Epistle of St. Peter [1958]; see further R. P. Martin, Worship in the Early Church [1964], chs. 3 – 5 and literature there cited). There remains the possibility that Paul quoted his own earlier writings and that other epistolary writers quoted Paul. Jude extensively quoted 2 Peter, or vice versa (see the commentaries and introductions).

Lists of household duties and catalogues of virtues and vices in the epistles may be adaptive quotations of similar material in Jewish and/or Hellenistic ethical codes. There are possible quotations from or allusions to apocryphal books, as in Matt. 11:28 – 30 (Sir. 51:23 – 27); Rom. 2:4 (Wisd. 11:23); Heb. 1:1 – 3 (Wisd. 7:25 – 27); Heb. 11:35 – 37 (2 Macc. 6 – 7). Jude quotes from the pseudepigraphal 1 En. 1:9 (Jude 14 – 15) and apparently from a now lost part of the Assumption of Moses (Jude 9). Many of the phrases in Revelation have been attributed to extracanonical Jewish apocryphal literature (see, e.g., R. H. Charles, The Book of Enoch [1912], xcv-iff.). Material that appears in the pagan writers Epimenides, Aratus, Cleanthes, Callimachus, and Menander is quoted in Acts 17:28; 1 Cor. 15:33; and Tit. 1:12. Finally, Paul appears to quote slogans of his opponents in passages such as 1 Cor. 6:12; 8:1; and 2 Cor. 10:10.

(In addition to the titles mentioned in the body of this article, see D. M. Turpie, The Old Testament in the New [1868]; C. Taylor, The Gospel in the Law [1869]; D. M. Turpie, The New Testament View of the Old [1872]; C. H. Toy, Quotations in the New Testament [1884]; F. Johnson, The Quotations of the New Testament from the Old [1896]; O. Michel, Paulus und seine Bibel [1929]; C. H. Dodd, The Old Testament in the New [1952]; J. Doeve, Jewish Hermeneutics in the Synoptic Gospels and Acts [1954]; R. V. G. Tasker, The Old Testament in the New Testament, 2nd ed. [1954]; E. E. Ellis, Paul’s Use of the Old Testament [1957]; S. Kistemaker, The Psalm Citations in the Epistle to the Hebrews [1961]; D.-A. Koch, Die Schrift als Zeuge des Evangeliums: Untersuchungen zur Verwendung und zum Verständnis der Schrift bei Paulus [1986]; D. A. Carson and H. G. M. Williamson, eds., It Is Written: Scripture Citing Scripture: Essays in Honour of Barnabas Lindars, SSF [1988]; R. B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul [1989]; C. D. Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture: Citation Technique in the Pauline Epistles and Contemporary Literature [1992]; A. Obermann, Die christologische Erfüllung der Schrift im Johannesevangelium: Eine Untersuchung zur johanneischen Hermeneutik anhand der Schriftzitate [1996]; R. E. Ciampa, The Presence and Function of Scripture in Galatians 1 and 2 [1998]; F. Wilk, Die Bedeutung des Jesajabuches für Paulus [1998]; S. Moyise, The Old Testament in the New: An Introduction [2001]; J. R. Wagner, Heralds of the Good News: Isaiah and Paul in Concert in the Letter to the Romans [2003]; C. D. Stanley, Arguing with Scripture: The Rhetoric of Quotations in the Letters of Paul [2004]; J. P. Heil, The Rhetorical Role of Scripture in 1 Corinthians [2005]; G. K. Beale and D. A. Car son, eds., Commentary on the Old Testament in the New Testament [2007].)

R. H. GUNDRY

R

image17

Aerial view of the city of Rome (looking W).

Ra rah. See RE.

Raamah ray’uh-mah ( image 18 H8311 and image 19 H8309 [1 Chr. 1:9], derivation uncertain). Son of CUSH, grandson of HAM, and father of SHEBA and DEDAN (Gen. 10:7; 1 Chr. 1:9). Raamah thus appears as the eponymous ancestor of a tribe in ARABIA. The traders of both Raamah and Sheba brought to the markets of TYRE their best of all kinds of spices, precious stones, and gold (Ezek. 27:22). Its location has not yet been fixed. On the basis of the SEPTUAGINT rendering, Regma (Ragma in Ezekiel), many have identified it with a city of that name mentioned by Ptolemy (Geogr. 6.7.14) and located in E Arabia on the Persian Gulf, but this location is problematic. Others believe that Raamah is the same as Ragmat(um), an ancient city in the oasis of Najran mentioned in S Arabian inscriptions (cf. HALOT, 3:1268; ABD, 5:597), though it is objected that Old South Arabic g does not correspond to Hebrew (ayin (cf. ISBE rev. [1979 – 88], 4:27). The suggested equivalence between biblical Raamah and the Rhammanitōn mentioned by Strabo (Geogr. 16.4.24) is rejected by some. (Note further W. F. Albright, Dedan, in Geschichte und Altes Testament [1953], 1 – 12.) See also NATION II.A.3.

B. K. WALTKE

Raamiah ray’uh-mi’uh ( image 20 H8313, perhaps Yahweh has thundered or [born during] a thunderstorm). An Israelite mentioned among leading individuals who returned from Babylon with ZERUBBABEL (Neh. 7:7; called Reelaiah in Ezra 2:2 and Resaiah in 1 Esd. 5:8 [KJV, Reesaias]).

Raamses ray-am’seez. See RAMESES.

Rabbah (Ammon) rab’uh ( image 21 H8051, great [city]). The capital city of AMMON, also known as Rabbath-Ammon (cf. Heb. rabbat bĕnê(ammôn, lit., Rabbath of the sons of Ammon, i.e., Rabbah of the Ammonites, Deut. 3:11; Ezek. 21:20). Its modern name is Amman, the capital of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. Rabbah seems to be the only Ammonite city that is mentioned by name in the Bible. It is located about 23 mi. E of the JORDAN River and lies at the headwaters of the Wadi Amman, which soon becomes the JABBOK River. This very strong spring on the edge of the desert was the reason for the city’s existence. Ammon, or a fortified sector within it, was called the city of waters (2 Sam. 12:27 KJV; NIV, its water supply; see P. K. McCarter, Jr., II Samuel, AB 9 [1984], 312).

I. Bible History. In the first reference to Rabbah (Deut. 3:11), the city is cited as the permanent location of the famous iron bed of OG, king of BASHAN. This bed, possibly a sarcophagus, has been an enigma to scholars, since Og ruled at the beginning of the Iron Age, when this metal was uniquely valuable (see IRON). Within the territory of GAD, the city of AROER is located to the E of Rabbah (Josh. 13:25). The next reference to the capital of the Ammonites details the siege of that city by the Israelites under the direction of JOAB, along with the interwoven episode of DAVID and BATHSHEBA (2 Sam. 11:1—12:31). Joab captured the section of the city located around the springs, but he waited for King David himself to capture the citadel section on the steep hill above the springs (12:27 – 31; 1 Chr. 20:1 – 3). The city was a rich prize and its captured population was put to the corvée or public works battalion. This demonstrates that David anticipated his son SOLOMON when the latter rebuilt JERUSALEM. David, like Solomon, needed many laborers whom he secured from his prisoners of war. Later, when David was fleeing from his son ABSALOM, he came to MAHANAIM and was aided by some friends, among whom was the son of NAHASH, the king of Rabbah (2 Sam. 17:27 – 29). Apparently David had established a new dynasty on the Ammonite throne after he captured the capital.

By the time of the prophet AMOS, the city was again an independent capital of the Ammonite kingdom, which was expanding its boundaries up into GILEAD. Because of the unusually brutal ruthlessness of this military conquest, Amos predicted the destruction of Rabbah (Amos 1:13 – 14). In JEREMIAH’s day the Ammonites were again conquering the same territory of Gilead, and the prophet predicted the city’s destruction (Jer. 49:1–). EZEKIEL made two prophecies against the Ammonites. He predicted that the king of BABYLON would capture Rabbah in the same campaign that would see the destruction of Jerusalem (Ezek. 21:20). The capital of the Ammonites, however, was not to meet its annihilation on this occasion; it would come later at the hands of the Arabs of the desert (25:1 – 7). It was Rabbah’s control over these desert tribes of the Wadi Sirhan, who traded also with the Arabs, that had made Rabbah wealthy throughout many years. Ezekiel predicted that the Ammonite kingdom would return to desert pasture land through military conquest by the same desert tribes.

image22

Reviews for The Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible, Volume 5

[jenniferrobb · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Has questions and explanations included.