BIBLICAL Horizons, No. 40
August, 1992
Copyright 1992, Biblical Horizons
1 Kings 17, which abruptly introduces Elijah into the history of the northern kingdom, is a carefully constructed literary unit. In its basic structure, it follows a clear exodus-return pattern. Like Jacob and his sons, Elijah was driven out of the land by a famine (vv. 1-4). In exile, Elijah received food from ravens and then from a Gentile widow, just as Israel was given the fruitful land of Goshen. In a Passover scene, he raised the widow’s son from the dead (vv. 8-24). Finally, in the middle of a week of years (cf. Lk. 4:25), Elijah returned to the land to carry out the ban against the prophets of Baal (1 Ki. 18).
Several of the details of chapter 17 indicate other dimensions of this pattern. First, the Lord directed Elijah to move to the east of the Jordan (1 Ki. 17:3, 5). This connects his exodus with the exile of Adam, Eve, and Cain from Eden (Gen. 3:24; 4:16), and with the geographical symbolism of the tabernacle (Nu. 3:38). Elijah was not driven out of the sanctuary-land by his own sin, however, but because of the sins of Ahab and Jezebel. Elijah’s exile east of the land also points forward prophetically to Israel’s capture and exile in Babylon.
While camping at the brook Cherith, Elijah was fed bread and meat by ravens (1 Ki. 17:4, 6). Ravens were unclean birds (Lev. 11:15), symbolizing the nations surrounding Israel. The connection between the ravens and the Gentile nations is strengthened by the parallel between the ravens and the widow of Zarephath. In verse 4, the Lord says, "I have commanded the ravens to provide for you," while in verse 9, he says "I have commanded a widow there to provide for you." The fact that Elijah was fed by ravens was a sign that, in exile, he would be sustained by Gentiles. Later, Israel would also be sustained by Gentiles while in exile (cf. 2 Ki. 25:27-30).
The fact that the ravens fed the Lord’s prophet "morning and evening" may be a reference to the daily sacrifices of the tabernacle and temple, which included meat and bread and were sacrificed morning and evening (Nu. 28:1-8). As the Lord’s representative, Elijah received the tribute of the Gentiles. Similarly, the widow’s bread was sacrificial in two senses: first because she fed the Lord’s prophet, and second because she gave in spite of her great poverty. Even in exile, the Lord’s prophet received honor.
The fact that Elijah was aided by a widow points in several directions. It is, first of all, significant that the widow was a Gentile. The prophet of the Lord, the bearer of the life-giving Word, was rejected by Israel, and went to bring God’s blessing to the Gentiles. Jesus later said that Elijah’s ministry to the widow of Zarephath was a prophetic type of the rejection of the Messiah by the citizens of His home town and of the Messiah’s turning to the Gentiles (Lk. 4:25-26).
The widow, moreover, lived in the territory of Sidon. In context, her self-sacrificial generosity toward Elijah was a foil to the murderous rage of the other woman of Sidon, Jezebel (1 Ki. 16:31; 19:2). The Sidonian queen in the land sought to kill the prophet, while the poor Sidonian widow offered him food and drink. Again, there is a sharp contrast between the spiritual condition of the nation of Israel and the receptiveness of the Gentiles.
The fact that the woman of Zarephath was a widow is likewise significant. In part, her widowhood heightens the contrast with Jezebel: Widows and queens are a opposite poles of the social scale (cf. Rev. 18:7). Ironically, it is the vulnerable widow, not the wealthy queen, who provides for the prophet.
Moreover, Israel is several times depicted as a widow (Is. 54:4-8; Lam. 1:1). This image should be understood against the background of Israel’s covenant marriage with the Lord. Because of Israel’s prostitution, the Lord abandoned her. Deprived of the love and protection of her husband, she was left mourning. In the book of Ruth, Naomi embodied the widowhood of Israel during the time of the judges, a widowhood that is turned into rejoicing by the kinsman-redeemer Boaz.
Given this background, what is the significance of Elijah’s being sent to a Gentile widow? When Israel prostituted herself with Baal and Asherah (1 Ki. 16:28-34), her Husband threatened to abandon her, to leave her a "widow" and to seek another bride among the Gentiles. This warning was prophetically symbolized in the activities of Elijah. The Divine Husband’s command to the prophet-husband to leave the land symbolized His threat to abandon the apostate nation. (Later, in Ezekiel 8-11, we see the Lord Himself abandon the land and temple.) The Lord’s plan to find a faithful bride was imaged in Elijah’s relation to the widow of Zarephath. Elijah was a husband to the Sidonian widow. He provided for her (1 Ki. 17:13-16), and gave her a son (vv. 17-23). In a sense, all Gentile nations were widows; they had not entered into a marriage covenant with the Lord, and were without God in the world. But Elijah’s activities foretold of a day when the Gentiles would join together with the remnant of faithful Jews in the one Bride of the Lord.
Finally, the circumstances of Elijah’s first meeting with the widow are significant. Several of the details of the text point to a judicial context. Elijah met the widow at the gates of the city, a placing of testing and judgment (v. 10). She was gathering sticks to stoke up a fire (vv. 10, 12), which James B. Jordan has shown is a symbol of enthronement and judicial authority (Sabbath Breaking and the Death Penalty). At the gates, Elijah put the widow to the test: She must trust the word of the Lord, and refrain from eating until she has first fed the Lord’s prophet. Elijah implicitly warned, "If you eat bread before honoring the Lord’s prophet, you will indeed eat and die."
Unlike Eve, who ate before she was permitted to do so, the widow of Zarephath obeyed the word of her "husband" (v. 15), kept the fast, and received as her reward an abundant provision of food in the midst of famine. She was preparing to stoke a fire for herself and her son, and then eat and die. Elijah offered an alternative: First stoke a fire and offer bread to the Lord, and then He will provide for all your needs. By giving honor to a prophet, the widow received a prophet’s reward.
BIBLICAL Horizons, No. 40
August, 1992
Copyright 1992, Biblical Horizons
(continued from Biblical Horizons No. 39)
Why the Lamb?
But why the lamb? We have seen that the bull was the offering for the sins of priests, especially as they represented the nation before God in His house. Wasn’t Christ the greatest of all men? Wasn’t He the Great High Priest? Should He not rather be symbolized by the bull?
Why didn’t God choose the bull as the primary sacrifice, and them have the lamb for lesser offenders, and the birds for the least? Why didn’t Abel offer a bull? Why wasn’t it a bull that was substituted for Isaac? Why not a bull at Passover? Why isn’t Jesus called the Bull of God?
This is a subtle question, and its answer has two parts. First, since all the sacrificial animals pointed to Christ, we must say that Christ is indeed the sacrificial Bull of God, the Heifer of God, the Turtledove of God, etc. But primarily He is the Lamb of God.
Second, and here is what I believe to be the reason for the centrality of the lamb, Christ represented us as in Adam. Consider Adam’s estate. Adam was not a poor man, so he would not have been represented by a turtledove or a pigeon. Nor, on the other hand, had Adam grown in age and wisdom and been granted rule over people. He was not an "elder." Thus, he would not have been represented by a he-goat. Finally, Adam, though a priest, was not a high priest. He did not represent a nation before God; there was as yet no nation to represent. He was a raw youth, only a day old, when he sinned. Thus, he had not grown to be a bull. He was still a lamb.
The Garden of Eden was equivalent to the courtyard of the Tabernacle. Citizens of Israel had access to the courtyard to offer rams. Only priests had access to the living room in the Tabernacle, and only the high priest had access to the throne room. In the Garden, no house had yet been built, and thus Adam had not yet ascended to the status of special priesthood. He did not yet have bull status. He sinned in his youth, while still at the status of the ram.
Remember that the lamb is one year old (Num. 28:3, 9, 11, etc). It is not fully mature. The bull is also one year old, before it enters puberty and becomes mature (and ornery). The sacrifice of a young animal represents the cutting off of sin in its youth. God had allowed sin to mature into a ripe fullness before the flood, but after the flood He promised to cut it off in its youth (Gen. 8:21). Thus, as soon as Ham sinned, God cut him off, and as soon as the priestly Shemites (Joktanites) sinned at Babel, God cut them off (Gen. 9:24; 10:25-30; 11:2).
By dealing with sin while man is in his youth, God opens up the future for a development of the true kingdom and culture. The sinner is restored through the sacrifice of a one year old animal; thus, after a year of sin, he can move forward in grace. To use another common Biblical analogy, judgment comes on the third day, so that the kingdom can develop to the seventh day. Never again will sin develop all the way to the seventh day. (There are scores of transforming events in the Bible that happen on the third day, in the third month, in the third year, or at the third hour. Passover, coming at the point of transition between the 14th and 15th days of the first month, inaugurates the third week of the year.)
Analogous to this, man’s sin is dealt with when he is a lamb. He is an ordinary soul, as Leviticus 4:27 puts it. By dealing with sin at that point, God makes it possible for men to grow up and become civil leaders (he-goats) and ecclesiastical leaders (bulls).
Jesus dies as a citizen, not as a civil or ecclesiastical leader; as a lamb, not as a goat or bull. He dies in His youth, at the age of 33. It is His third decade and the third year of it. He dies at Passover, the beginning of the third week, and He is raised on the third day. By being the Lamb, Jesus gives us a new start as the New Adam. He has ascended to heaven, where He leads the nations as Elder, the Goat of God, and heads the nations as the High Priest, the Bull of God. In union with Him, we can grow to become goats and bulls also; yet as the Dove and Pigeon of God, He is present with the poorest of His children. All this is possible because He is, first and foremost, the Lamb of God.
Additional Notes
1. The Spirit comes as a dove. This indicates to me that the Kingdom of God begins among the "poor" of the earth, not usually among the mighty. It grows to embrace goats and bulls, but in the New Testament we do not find many priests (bulls) or the leaders of Israel and Rome (goats) forming the foundation of the kingdom. Perhaps the larger meaning of this is that it is the poor in spirit, the doves and pigeons of God, who have the kingdom of heaven, as the first beatitude says (Mt. 5:3). Only those who see themselves as poor doves will look up to the Lamb. The bulls and goats of this world must assume the posture of poor doves and pigeons in order to recognize Him.
2. As God’s Ram of Reparation, Jesus dealt with Adam’s high-handed trespass against God and with our deep-seated sinful natures. It is interesting that of all the sacrifices, only the ram of reparation may sometimes be offered in the form of silver instead of as a living animal (Lev. 5:15, 18; 6:6; corrected translation). I believe that this was established by God so that no one in Israel, realizing that the ram of reparation was the foundational sacrifice, would believe that the blood of a mere ram would ever suffice. The offering was symbolic and typological, and the conversion of the ram into money pointed to the fact that it was inadequate to take away transgressions. It forced the student of Leviticus to realize that only the coming Ram of God, the Greater Isaac, would take away transgressions and cleanse the conscience.
3. Why silver and not gold? In the symbolic system, gold is most precious and bronze least precious. Silver is in the middle, the same place as the ram between bull and bird. It seems to me that this is what establishes the connection. (On this system of values, see Jordan, From Glory to Glory: Degrees of Value in the Sanctuary, pub. by Biblical Horizons .)
BIBLICAL Horizons, No. 40
August, 1992
Copyright 1992, Biblical Horizons
I met Bob Dwelle on the first of June, 1980. We had just arrived in Tyler, Texas, from Philadelphia, and I was to organize and oversee Geneva Divinity School. Bob Dwelle and his family were moving to Tyler from Dallas, and Bob helped me unload our moving van. I did not know then that this quiet, friendly man would become one of my best friends.
Bob Dwelle died suddenly of a heart attack last spring. During the funeral, his pastor commented that he knew perhaps a dozen people who counted Bob as their best friend. Bob Dwelle was one of the most beloved people I have ever known.
Bob had moved to Tyler in 1980 to take over management of a pawn shop, and also to become, as soon as possible, an elder at Westminster Presbyterian Church. At first glance, a pawn shop may seem a strange business for an elder to be involved in, but for Bob it meant that he would have an opportunity to meet and help poor people.
A few years later I also became an elder at Westminster Presbyterian, and I can testify that of the four of us who served as elders, Bob was the one who was most pastoral and helpful to people. He devoted hours and hours of his time taking the children of a widow on camping and fishing trips. He found work for young men in the church who didn’t have it, and as a very skilled painter and wallpaper hanger, he trained a dozen or so other men in those skills. There are many men in Dallas and Tyler who can always fall back on these basic skills thanks to Bob Dwelle.
The Dwelle home was always open; sometimes it seemed like Grand Central Station. Rare was the Lord’s Day when Bob and Lynn Dwelle did not have some member of the church for Sunday dinner.
Bob loved to cook, and had a French cookbook whose recipes he was mastering. He also loved to party, within the bounds set by Scripture. He had a true delight in the diversity of people and in the wonders of God’s world. He enjoyed reading theology and Christian science fiction and fantasy. Naturally, one of his favorite movies was Babette’s Feast. In these respects he set a healthy, Biblical example to many families within the congregation.
In the church, it was Bob Dwelle who organized numerous camping trips for the men and boys, and sometimes girls, of the congregation (and other kids as well). After going it alone for a few years, Bob finally joined up with the Boy Scouts, and became one of the most respected Scout leaders in the Tyler area. Bob was also active in anti-abortion campaigns in Tyler, and for years was a leading figure on the board of the local Christian Action Council’s Unwed Mother’s Home.
The pawn shop job did not last forever, and Bob tried several other things for a few years, but Bob Dwelle was never really happy unless he was helping people. He felt that he had finally found a niche when he began training as a paramedic, but God had other plans, and Bob never finished that particular course.
In his twelve years in Tyler, Bob Dwelle became one of the most influential men in the evangelical Christian community. At his funeral people from many churches packed the church to overflowing. They came from all over Texas and from other states as well. His death leaves a hole that it will take more than one good man to fill.
Bob is survived by his wife Lynn, whom some of you know as the Executive Secretary of the Institute for Christian Economics in Tyler, Texas, and by three sons and a daughter. No better epitaph for Bob Dwelle can be provided than the one spoken by his youngest son, Dabney, to his mother a few weeks after Bob’s death. Dabney pointed out that Bob loved babies–his face always beamed when he had a chance to baptize one–and Dabney pointed out that because of all the abortions, heaven is currently full of babies. "I guess God knew that Dad would be a good person to have up there helping out," said Dabney. I guess so, too.
Bob Dwelle will be sorely missed.
Jim Jordan
Biblical Chronology
Vol. 4, No. 8
August, 1992
Copyright © James B. Jordan 1992
by James B. Jordan
This newsletter summarizes everything that has been written and argued in Biblical Chronology to date. Back issues of Biblical Chronology can be obtained either from the Institute for Christian Economics (Box 8000, Tyler, TX 75711), or from Biblical Horizons (Box 1096, Niceville, FL 32588). A donation is required to cover expenses.
The Bible is filled with chronological information. Some would dismiss the idea that this chronological information can and should be systematized. We have to say, however, that if the scattered information about the tri-unity of God can and should be systematized, then there is no good reason to refuse to systematize any other information in the Bible, including chronological information (BC 1:1). The Church, until recently, has always accepted the chronology of the Bible (BC 1:2 & 2:1).
Problems With Previous Efforts
Since the late 19th century, the prevailing opinion in evangelical scholarship is that there are gaps in the chronology of the Old Testament. We saw that there is no foundation in the text of the Bible for this notion. The Bible provides no gaps, and clearly intends to provide an accurate chronology from the date of creation to the destruction of Jerusalem (BC 2:2).
Theologically, the chronology is tied to the Old Covenant in this way: The Old Covenant was characterized by a heaven, an earth, and a priest-king. The old heavens were calendrically regulated by the sun and moon, according to Genesis 1:14. The old earth had a geographically central sanctuary, according to Genesis 2. The old priest-king was genealogically descended from and related to the first Adam. These three aspects of the first creation continued until they were judicially transformed at the resurrection of Christ, and the vestiges of these three aspects were eliminated in A.D. 70. Sacred time, sacred space, and sacred personage were transformed in Christ into new modes. The chronology of the Old Testament is the chronology of the first Adam. In the new age of the gospel, the chronology exists in union with Christ. The new earth (assembly of people), the new heavens (calendar of liturgical events) and the new priest-kings are determined on a new principle (BC 1:3).
Earlier works delineating Old Covenant chronology have been flawed in several ways, and this is why a new attempt has been required.
1. Martin Anstey’s Romance of Bible Chronology, also published as Chronology of the Old Testament, though by far the best and most valuable (yea, indispensable) work on the subject, is marred by his use of "spiritual years" to account for the reigns of the judges, which he erroneously thinks ruled in series. Anstey is also committed to certain dispensationalistic oddities common to late-19th century evangelicals (not the province only of the followers of Darby or Scofield) (BC 2:2).
2. Philip Mauro’s Wonders of Bible Chronology is a summary of Anstey’s work, without the dispensationalism. Mauro continues to promote the idea of "spiritual years" during the period of the Judges, however (BC 2:2).
3. The work of E.W. Faulstich is interesting and challenging at some points, but Faulstich is naively committed to the notion that there have been absolutely no changes whatsoever in the rotation and revolution of the earth during the last 6000 years, an idea completely at variance with known facts. The earth-moon system does undergo slight accelerations and decelerations in motion due to tidal and other forces. Faulstich’s commitment to questionable ancient eclipse data and his reliance on computer dating methods force the data of history into a procrustean mold. Additionally, Faulstich repeatedly plays havoc with Biblical statements in order to make them square with his computer chronology and his unique and bizarre prophetic and numerological schema (BC 2:1, 5, & 7).
4. As concerns the period of the kings of Israel and Judah, Edwin R. Thiele’s Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings (various editions) has been very influential in evangelical circles, but is more a curiosity than anything else. Thiele’s system is prima facie incredible, and is tied to an erroneous interpretation of data from ancient Assyria. O.T. Allis long ago pointed out the errors here (BC 2:9, 10; 4:1, 2, & 3).
5. Finally, C.G. Ozanne’s The First 7000 Years, while containing a valuable critique of Thiele, is marred by extreme schematizing and another curious prophetic scheme (BC 2:5 & 6).
One of the sadder aspects of almost all previous chronological work, I found, is that author after author is committed to some kind of date-setting approach to the second coming of Christ. There is a general failure to understand that the chronological principle is tied to the Old Covenant genealogical principle, the history of the first man.
I will be so bold as to write here that detailed prophetic predictions are also part and parcel of the Old Covenant order, in that they are always phrased in terms of the old heavens and earth, and in terms of the chronological principles. The New Testament predictions that are detailed all have to do, I am convinced, with the events leading down to A.D. 70. (This includes, I believe, not only the book of Revelation but also the predictions concerning Israel in Romans 11; for more information write to Biblical Horizons , Box 1096, Niceville, FL 32488). The predictions concerning the final return of Christ are stated in very general terms.
General Findings and Tentative Positions
Since Biblical Chronology has involved me in a progressive study over three years, there are errors in earlier essays that have been corrected in later ones. The following tentative conclusions reflect my latest findings:
1. Genesis 1 must be taken as six normal days; there is no gap between Genesis 1:1 & 2; and there are no gaps in the chronology of Genesis 5. This puts the Flood in the year Anno Mundi (year of the world) 1656 (BC 2:3 & 3:6).
2. There are no gaps in the chronology of Genesis 11, and a comparison of Genesis 11:26 with Acts 7:4 puts the birth of Abram in A.M. 2008 (BC 2:4, 5, & 6).
3. Exodus 12:40-41 says that Israel was in Egypt 430 years, and a careful study of Genesis, together with Numbers 26:59 and Galatians 3:17 reveals that the Egyptian domination began with Abram’s first descent into Egypt (Genesis 12). The exodus from Egypt came in A.M. 2513 (BC 2:7).
4. 1 Kings 6:1 states that the fourth year of Solomon was the 480th year after the exodus from Egypt. In this year, A.M. 2993, the foundations of the Temple were laid. The Temple was completed seven years later, A.M. 3000 (1 Kings 6:38). If we add up the years of the judges in the book of Judges, we come up with more than 480 years, but a careful reading of Judges shows which judges ruled coterminously (BC 2:8; 3:7 & 8).
5. A careful study of the chronology of the kings of Israel and Judah yielded the following results. First, the definitive "Adamic chronology" is tied to the Temple-maintaining kings of Judah. Second, the destruction of Jerusalem came in A.M. 3425 (or thereabouts) (BC 3:9 – 4:7). Third, current Bible Dictionaries and Encyclopedias err in the way they attempt to reconcile Biblical chronology with the Assyrian King Lists (BC 4:1-3).
6. Daniel 9:24-27 speaks of two prophetic periods for the people of God, focussing on the coming of the last Adam. The first, 49 years in length, carries through the reign of good emperor Darius, who is also the Artaxerxes of Ezra-Nehemiah, and probably also the Ahasuerus of Esther (BC 3:2-5).
7. Daniel’s 70 weeks should be seen as weeks of years, and should be taken literally. They must start with the decree of Cyrus in A.M. 3474 (or thereabouts). The chronology of the time between Cyrus and Christ that has been used in the Church for centuries is based on the very questionable chronology of Ptolemy. There are many reasons to question it, and good reasons to favor taking Daniel 9’s chronology literally (BC 2:1, 11 & 12; 3:1).
8. The chronology carries us to the crucifixion of Jesus Christ mid-way through the 70th week of Daniel 9:24-27, which is A.M. 3960. If this happened in A.D. 30, the destruction of the Temple and of Jerusalem, which was in A.D. 70, happened in A.M. 4000 (BC 4:7).
Whither Biblical Chronology?
The next few issues of this newsletter will deal with New Testament chronology and perhaps a couple of extra details from the Old Testament. Then, if the newsletter continues, I shall summarizes various revisionist approaches that are currently in the wind, which will be of interest to those who wish to pursue this topic further.
What is needed beyond this is for a number of scholars (perhaps graduate students) who have studied the ancient Near East in detail and who have access to the relevant material, to integrate Biblical chronology with what is known of ancient history. This is not my field, and even if it were, I have access to nothing here in Niceville, Florida. If such a project interests you, however, I ask that you write me c/o Biblical Horizons , Box 1096, Niceville, FL 32588. Our long-term goal must be the production of an ancient history text that is true to the Bible and useable in Christian schools and Christian home schools.
