study of iron in Bible, by Pasi K Pohjala

by Pasi K Pohjala July 2013. Comparing some historical developments, these times after 950BC are in Palestine later times of their early Iron Age, times of Judges and developments towards monarchy begun by YEMENITE-ARAB KING SAUL THE FIRST MONARCH OF ISRAEL (Bible records that king Saul was of tribe of Benjamin, that is, king Saul was YEMENITE-ARAB (e.g. 1 Samuel 9 and 10:20ff). The monarchy in Israel was begun by the YEMENITE-ARAB king Saul, so the Bible tells. Ancient names of monarchs often referred to the deity of their realm, in Israel often thus names including –JAH or –JAHU. This is of course important information of main tenets of religion of certain ancient realm in the time of reign of certain monarch. But the name of Saul rather sounds including reference to deity –EL or –ELH; Readers thus may seriously contemplate what such reference might mean with regard to that king Saul was from YEMENITE ARABS there living in Palestine; Islam is religion of worship of Allah. After king Saul, the king David was anointed, recorded in 1 Samuel 16; importantly, David was son of Jesse of Bethlehem; 1 Sam 17:12 tells that David was the son of a certain Ephrathithe of Bethlehem in Judah whose name was Jesse (Tanakh) (and see also Judges 19 concerning Bethlehem). The areas of tribes of Benjamin and Judah are basically besides and thus ethnically much connected; e.g. Judges 3:15ff records victory by Benjaminite EHUD who made sword and gained victory- this history is of YEMENITE ARAB (Benjaminite) metalsmith EHUD. Important detail of manuscripts is also the name of JESSE, in consonantal text of Hebrew Bible written Jod, Sin and Jod. But during the progress of traditions, we should consider quite similar Hebrew name JSJ written with Jod, Samekh and Jod, and this name is in Manuscript traditions easily confounded with Jod, Mem, Jod or JMJ; and name BENJAMIN is written usually BNJMN, some times BNJMJN. Continuing such “Bibilical logic” we write son of JMJ with BNJMJ- and this is notoriously similar with Hebrew writing of name BNJMN or Benjamin. Shortly stated, currently we talk of king David son of JESSE of Bethlehem. But behind this name JESSE may well be original Hebrew consonants name JMJ (e.g. JEMMI, or “JEMNI”) written early with consonant Mem: thus early traditions can have known of David BEN-JEMMI or David BEN-JEMN, David of Yemenite group. But these consonants JMJ of this name could easily be early confounded with consonants JSJ written with Samekh letter and thus easily confounded with name JESSE. In early Manuscripts letters S Samekh and M Mem often thus are quite similarly written. And later editing may have concealed these remarkable questions by writing the JSJ name not with Samekh that is easily with Mem confounded, but with letter Sin that cannot be confounded with Mem; e.g. in the proceedings of Rabbinical tradition and much emphasising the ideal King David, there understandably can have been many reasons to conceal YEMENITE origins of such popular king David by writing such small editorial trick of change of S letter Sin to S letter Samekh. Such early editing process can well be great attempt to conceal that also the more popular king David was of ethnical YEMENITE origin, BEN-JEMENI. First king Saul was of YEMENITE origin, Benyemeni, and also his successor the popular and ideal king David, son of “JESSE” may well have been originally known as YEMENI, JMJ and BNJMJ. The third king of Israel is Solomon, son of David and his wife Bathsheba (e.g. 2 Samuel 12 and I Kings 1). Importantly, the name of Bathsheba means “daughter of SHEBA” and this emphasises that her origins are of “SHEBA”. And the 1 Kings 10 tells of the notorious history that QUEEN OF SHEBA visited king Solomon. This chapter in whole Bible is one especially descriptive of pomp, glory and overwhelming prosperity. We thus understand that actually we here are reading of events of the glorious and mystical kingdom of SHEBA. The kingdom of SHEBA is ancient glorious kingdom in Southern Arabia, that is, of the areas of YEMEN. Let us well remember that also regions of Mecca and Medina are “approximately there”, especially in ancient geography. But YEMENITES, or “those from Southern Arabia” are importantly represented among the “tribes” of Israel, or the “ethnic groups” of Israel: many important towns were of YEMENITES, or “Benjaminites”. Saul the first king of Israel was of YEMENITE ethnos, Benjaminite. And the ideal king David was son of “JESSE” that probably conceals that he actually was also BENJAMINITE, thus also king David probably was of YEMENI ethnos. King David was succeeded in the throne by king Solomon, the son of David with his wife BATHSHEBA, or Daughter of SHEBA. And 1 Kings 10 tells of visit of Queen of SHEBA to this king Solomon. Apparently we recognise here histories how the realm of ancient Arabic kingdom of SHEBA was establishing also near to Mediterranean coast stronghold in Judah-Israel, especially for securing trade routes to Mediterranean coast. Thus are quite understandable histories of YEMENITE settlement there and first Israelite king been Yemenite king Saul, probably also king David was of Yemeni ethnos. King Solomon was son of BATSHEBA “Daughter of SHEBA” and then Queen of SHEBA visited king Solomon. With these notices we have arrived to comprehending that early Israelite monarchy of Saul, David and Solomon was apparently local monarchy of important area belonging to realm of empire of ancient SHEBA. This interesting event in ancient Ephesus recorded in Acts 19 has understandably been discussed also in Bible commenting, and we now follow discussion of some prominent modern Biblical scholars, especially notice comments of Conzelmann and Pervo, whose Commentaries on Acts are published in the important Hermeneia series (Conzelmann’s Commentary of 1987 is English translation of his originally in German published Commentary of 1963, and in Hermeneia series is published the other Commentary on Book of Acts, written by Pervo). Conzelmann comments the important formulation in Acts 19:24 DEMETRIOS GAR TIS ONOMATI, ARGUROKOPOS, POIOON NAOUS ARGUROUS ARTEMIDOS with noticing the POIOON NAOUS meaning “who made shrines” (thus in the English translation of Hermeneia (1987) series of his original German commentary). He notices that a NEOOPOIOS (temple official) named Demetrius indeed is mentioned in an inscription from the first century; but he also emphasises that such NEOOPOIOS is title for temple official who belongs to the administrative staff of temple of Artemis, he is not one who produces and markets small souvenir temples. Conzelmann also notices that small souvenir miniature copies of temple of Artemis of Ephesus have not been found at Ephesus. Also Pervo discusses archaeological finds in interpreting meaning of these words in Acts 19 in his newer Commentary of Acts in the Hermeneia series. He reminds that quite well known are archaeological finds of images of this goddess in niche, made of terracotta, although not in silver; but Pervo more avoids detailed discussion concerning exact character of such NAOUS ARGUROUS ARTEMIDOS in stating that “probably, most such objects were niches with a statue of Artemis (NAISKOI), but the important point is less Luke’s accuracy than that, by saying “temples” (NAOI), he both evoked the speeches of Stephen and Paul (7:48; 17:21)” (p.491). This statement by Pervo somewhat describes the direction of discussions concerning these mentions of Artemis and temples of Artemis in Acts 19 in more recent times, tendency of more discussing terracotta miniature shrines of Artemis. Thus I Pasi K Pohjala am here really motivated to emphasise the evidence that indeed well known are pictures of Artemis on fore-end of ship in ancient Greek coins of Leukas and Smyrna and in Thessalian MAGNETS: well motivated thus BY ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE, here in Acts 19 in words POIOON NAOUS ARGUROUS ARTEMIDOS are noticed apparently STANDARDISED MAGNETS DECORATED WITH PICTURE OF GODDESS ARTEMIS ON FORE-HEAD OF SHIP, PRODUCED AND DISTRIBUTED TO SEAFARERS BY SILVERSMITHS OF EPHESUS AS PART OF CULT OF ARTEMIS. SPECIAL STUDY: Book of Judges Describes Early Arab Smiths Settled in Palestine The first Chapter of Book of Judges is important in comprehending early Yemenite settlements in Palestine. Early settlement patterns are importantly noticed in 1:21 that: The Benjaminites did not dispossess the Jebusite inhabitants of Jerusalem; so the Jebusites have dwelt with the Benjaminites in Jerusalem to this day (Tanakh translation of Judges 1:21) In the scholarly research concerning Benjaminites much is noticed the alliance of Benjamin and Ephraim and that descriptions of Ephraimite regions or Ephraimite hills may somewhat include regions of Benjaminites in somewhat vague Biblical descriptions. And descriptions of federation of Gibeonite cities in early histories of Benjamin are important (see e.g. J. Blenkinsopp’s Gibeon and Israel). Alas, in Palestine geography the important Jerusalem is somewhat south of regions specifically understood being Benjaminite region. This notice of Judges 1:21 concerning Benjaminite settlement in Jerusalem, among Jebusites, is thus especially important: this description emphasises that Benjaminites from old times have been settled in Jerusalem AND that in Jerusalem Benjaminites were living together with Jebusites. This description also suggests that in Jerusalem these Yemenites were actually quite strong and powerfully living with Jebusites. It is worth noticing that Judges 1:21 does in this description mention only Benjaminites living thus with Jebusites in Jerusalem; the Benjaminites apparently thus are special group- here are no other Israelite tribe noticed. Thus also Jerusalem in some meanings is of realm of Benjaminites, that is, ARABS (YEMENITES) have been powerfully settled in Jerusalem since ancient times, told in Judges 1, there living together with Jebusites. In the Judaean hill country Jerusalem was developing one important strategic stronghold and thus was apparently important for Arabic project (of Saban empire) of establishing settlements and forts western parts of their Oriental trade routes, in Palestine. From times ancient Yemenites (Arabs) have been thus settled in the important Palestinian fort Jerusalem, Judges 1:21 describing their settlement there with Jebusites. We have learnt now histories of the YEMENITE Arab smith EHUD who was skilled handiworker of YEMENITE artisan technology, described in Judges 3:15. Now Readers certainly much ponder if this EHUD may be connected with the famous Israelite tribe JEHUD (the Judah). For modern Readers names EHUD and Judah may sound really different, BUT in the Hebrew Bible these names are almost similarly written, there is written of JEHUD, that in modern renderings is the Judah. Apparently the names EHUD and JEHUD are almost similar, thus in the writings of Hebrew Bible! (NOW in this study I prefer to write name JEHUDA to emphasise this detail that is in current discussion of Yemenite Arab settlement of importance.) Worth contemplating in Hebrew Bible is e.g. the archaic Blessing of Jacob in Genesis 49, where the words for blessing of JEHUDA begin JHWDH ATH JWDWK AHJK JDK Name JEHUDA is here commented with AHJK (“your brother”) where the word ends with letter Kaf; but ending Kaf is in Hebrew writ easily confused with ending Dalet, and Jod is easily confused with letter Waw. Recognising these details we notice similarity of the AHJK with writing Hebrew letters AHWD, and this is REALLY notable for our current discussion!!!! And in Judges 1:9 is noticed that WAHR JRDW BNJ JHWDH LHLHM BKNYNJ and also here are members of JEHUD group compared with AHWD EHUD because AHR is in Hebrew Bible surprisingly similar with AHD, the Dalet and Resh being almost similar letters. This detail is in Hebrew Bible notoriously prominent in Judg 4:15 where is in Hebrew written of AHRJ…AHRJ…and YD AHD, so that this statement provides nice and fundamentally important comparison of AHR and AHD, even name AHD of EHUD (this is detail of Hebrew consonantal script, and is not at all based on any questions of meanings of this statement in 4:15). In these archaic poetries the name JEHUDA is apparently compared with name AHWD, the name of YEMENITE ARAB EHUD (the Judges 3:15 in Hebrew Bible writes the name EHUD with the consonants AHWD)! The Blessing of Jacob in Genesis 49 is archaic blessing of the Israelite tribes, and thus its details are important in discussions of old comprehension of Israelite tribes. And this apparent comparing name JEHUD with name EHUD of YEMENITE ARAB smith warrior is now specially important. Here we now also notice the important topic concerning name Israel. Currently everyone of course has numerous times heard the name Israel, we have comprehension of contemporary state of Israel, and various level of knowledge of history of Israel in ancient times. And all this is founded mostly on the Biblical name Israel that in Old Testament so numerous times occur; almost nothing in this world seems so clear and well comprehended as the very existence of Israel and some main tenets of history of Israel. Of course we have learnt also of Ismael, the first son of Abraham, but story of Ismael is currently less regarded. In the Old Testament histories, Genesis 16 describes birth of Ismael to Abraham, by Hagar; and current comprehensions usually then notice that Abram some time thereafter expulsed Hagar with Ismael, they stayed alive and prospered, but are thereafter absent from Biblical histories that consider histories of Isaac born by Sarah. For all Readers these names Israel and Ismael might appear similar; and this is indeed fundamentally important remark. Now we make very important notice that is well known to Readers of ancient Hebrew manuscripts and fragments written in Hebrew: THE LETTERS MEM AND RES ARE NOTORIOUSLY ALMOST SIMILARLY WRITTEN. The Mem letter written inside a word in Hebrew writ looks like a triangle (approximately an equilateral triangle), and the Res letter is in many writings much like triangle without the base. This is one typical notice of many ancient Hebrew writings: the Mem letter and Res letter are notoriously much similar! And Ismael has disappeared from Biblical history, merely Gen 16 describing birth and expulsion of the first son of Abraham; and in Biblical writings everywhere is considered Israel, the Jewish folk. But the names Israel and Ismael are almost the same, and the difference between these consists in letters Mem and Res that are almost similarly written in many ancient Hebrew writs. And the name ISMAEL can easily be changed into the name Israel simply by scratching the letter Mem so that the base of the equilateral triangle Mem disappears and the remaining letter then is the Res letter: thus is easily in ancient Hebrew writs the name ISMAEL changed into name ISRAEL. This is much similar in ancient Greek manuscripts where ISMAEL written in minuscules is easily changed to name ISRAEL with simple change of Greek letter M to letter R. Current Bible now everywhere reads Israel but after Gen 16 is silent of Ismael. But we recognise that in earlier times and in earlier manuscripts, many of the words that we now recognise as name Israel, in earlier Hebrew manuscripts can have been name ISMAEL written. We thus recognise that Ismael can have been written in many those statements of Old Testament that currently notice Israel! And earlier politico-religious situation of rejection of Ismael people and Ismaelites from community venerating Old Testament, can have motivated project of comprehensive editing of Hebrew Old Testament writings in such manner that the name Ismael almost completely was erased from the Old Testament, by the above described method of simple scratching of Mem letters of Ismael names, so that remaining name was the name Israel, with Res written. So heinously simply the history of Ismaelites and Ismael in Old Testament can have been erased, and forgotten! Thus we now summarise this in simple statement IN OLD TESTAMENT WHEREVER IS NOW THE NAME ISRAEL WRITTEN, THAT NAME IN EARLY WRITS CAN HAVE BEEN THE NAME ISMAEL, BECAUSE THE HEBREW MEM LETTER IS EASILY EDITED TO LETTER RES (appearing in name Israel). EARLY POLITICO-RELIGIOUS SITUATION CAN HAVE MOTIVATED SUCH ERASING OF MEMORIES OF ISMAEL AND ISMAELITES FROM PAGES OF HEBREW BIBLE (AND THIS ALSO REALISING PRACTICAL EXPULSION OF ISMAELITES FROM BIBLE-READING COMMUNITIES.) THIS IS UTTERLY SERIOUS. It is worth remembering that during the lengthy and eventful history of Jewish people the SHEMA, ISRAEL is the central in Jewish prayers and liturgy. Actually the centrally important comparison of letters Mem and Res appears in these words and thus notoriously importantly reminds of importance of comparison of Res and Mem letters, and thus also of the issue of Israel and Ismael. We shall see that in Book of Judges this Israel and Ismael is important detail in the histories of Gideon. We now more read the important archaic Judges 1, especially remembering the similarity of name JEHUD of that Israelite tribe, with the name EHUD of YEMENITE ARAB smith warrior, more described in Judges 3. The writings of Judges 1 importantly notices especially doings of JEHUD and BENJAMIN, but are more silent concerning doings of other tribes. We learn in Judges 1:10 WJLK JHWDH AL HKNYNJ HJWSB BHBRWN WSM HBRWN LPNJM QRJT ARBY Here is described that members of JEHUD group marched against Canaanites who dwelt in Hebron and here is emphasised that at those old times name of Hebron was “ARAB-CITY” (QIRYAT ARBA). Thus we learn that JEHUD conquered place in Hebron and that the city in those old times was known as “ARAB CITY”. Also this emphasises ancient traditions of comprehending JEHUD being Arabs, the important settlement of JEHUD in Hebron was known as “ARAB-CITY”. Logically it is easy to comprehend that also the remarkable EHUD smith of Judges 3:15 was YEMENITE ARAB and practised his artisan skills of YEMENITE ARAB technology. And in histories of Judges 1, this JEHUD has special prominence, this book beginning emphasising in 1:2 WJAMR JHWH JHWDH JYLH This statement thus here specially distinguishes JEHUD among tribes of Israel, in this historiography of Book of Judges. Thus we learn in Judges 1 that Benjamin group, YEMENITE ARABS, settled in Jerusalem permanently and lived there together with Jebusites (1:21) apparently thus securing Arab presence in that important Palestine fort, for securing Yemenite settling at Palestine beside Mediterranean coast, in western end of their Oriental trade routes. Thus is of special importance to read in Judges 1:18 description that JEHUD conquered AZZA (GAZA), ASHKELON and EQRON, these with their surrounding areas. This is short description but its meaning in reality is enormous: here is simply stated that JEHUD conquered the main harbours of Palestine, GAZA and ASHKELON. And EQRON is neighbour to ASHDOD. Here is described early military campaign of Yemenite Arabs in Palestine, apparently for securing trade route to Mediterranean coast of their Oriental trade; they settled in Jerusalem, Hebron, and conquered important harbours Gaza, Ashkelon and Eqron (maybe also Ashdod region). Readers find even in the recent scholarly consensus expressed in Anchor Bible Dictionary (art. Benjamin, Vol. 1) interesting indirect diplomatic formulation reminding that considerations of Yemen ARE important in reading traditions of Biblical Benjamin; the article discusses this detail in comparing birth narrative of Benjamin where name Ben-Oni was changed to Ben-Jamin, finding interesting comparison in descriptions of land of Yemen being “land of south” and Arabia Felix; thus Readers are actually implicit exhorted to contemplate relation of land of Yemen with notices of Benjamin, even if the article, understandably, refrains from discussing clearly possibility of finding in the name reference to land Yemen. We learn in the Book of Judges much important events in very old histories of Palestine, events mostly of Early Iron age in Palestine. Campaigns of GIDEON are in those histories very prominent. One important event also very descriptive of the ethnic situation occurs after GIDEON’s victorious campaign, and importantly in this history are names ISRAEL and ISMAEL interestingly compared. Thus we now study the already above stated important tenet that IN OLD TESTAMENT WHEREVER IS NOW THE NAME ISRAEL WRITTEN, THAT NAME IN EARLY WRITS CAN HAVE BEEN THE NAME ISMAEL, BECAUSE THE HEBREW MEM LETTER IS EASILY EDITED TO LETTER RES (appearing in name Israel). EARLY POLITICO-RELIGIOUS SITUATION CAN HAVE MOTIVATED SUCH ERASING OF MEMORIES OF ISMAEL AND ISMAELITES FROM PAGES OF HEBREW BIBLE (AND THIS ALSO REALISING PRACTICAL EXPULSION OF ISMAELITES FROM BIBLE-READING COMMUNITIES.) The events after victorious campaign of Gideon are described in Judges 8:22-24. There is noticed dialogue between Gideon and men of Israel, the 8:22 commences WJAMRW AJS JSRAL AL GDYWN Usually is BNJ JSRAL in Hebrew Bible written to designate “Israelites” generally, so that here noticed AJS JSRAL is notable formulation, apparently noticing special representatives of Israel who were thus debating with Gideon. Importantly, here is described situation of political character, so that language is more referring to circumstances of politics and institutions of society. Apparently here Israelite representants suggest to Gideon to become the king; language and descriptions reflect institutions of society. In this situation Gideon states importantly a request to those chiefs of Israel that each of them would give to Gideon one golden earring; they had golden earrings because they were Ishmaelites. Thus we come to consider the notoriously important question: who had those earrings because they were Ishmaelites? Is thus noticed those Midianites that Gideon had won- this is (understandably) emphasised in the Tanakh translation. But rather this text here describes these chiefs of Israel THEMSELVES: the Judges 8:24 notoriously states that Israelite chiefs had golden earrings because THEY THEMSELVES WERE ISHMAELITES! We thus understand the specially important description in Judges 8:22-24 that there are recognised the political entity Israel and that chiefs of that political entity were themselves ISHMAELITES. Apparently here is described political entity Israel and noticed that chiefs (and also the general population) of this political entity were ethnically of ISHMAELITE ethnicity. Here is mainly concerned the statement of Hebrew Bible that WTNW LJ AJS NZM SLLW KJ NZMJ ZHB LHM KJ JSMYALJM HM For the question concerning possessing the golden earrings central is the SLLW word. This word in Hebrew Bible generally describes wealth and possessions and thus does not indicate that those defeated Midyans were ISHMAELITES. Rather, here the Hebrew Bible writes of SLLW generally noticing the possessions and wealth of those chiefs of Israel themselves. The usual and apparently fundamentally important question in Bible reading is the question concerning “Who were the Israelites?” Considering these descriptions of campaigns of Gideon in Judges 6-8, we find the answer in THIS case, stated in Judges 8:22-24 that men belonging to the political entity Israel were themselves ISMAELITES, that is, ethnically these chiefs were Arabic. Thus the Book of Judges notoriously often describes ancient settlement and activities of Arabs in land of Palestine in those times of Early Palestinian Iron Age (Iron Age I). In the Book of Judges 6-8 we learn of ancient military campaign of Medina towards these Palestinian areas. Normally this is presented as campaign of MIDYAN to these regions, but understandable Readers easily comprehend that actually here is presented campaign by MEDINA forces, apparently in order to secure Mediterranean trade routes. And the Judges 6-8 present then how then local ISHMAELITE ARABS led by GIDEON, made resistance for such campaign. Apparently the rich iron ore finds in Midyan area were for ancient MEDINA important; the Midyan was famous in ancient world and in Bible for their rich iron finds. Importantly we consider description of Judg 6:1 that WJTNM JHWH BJD MDJN SBY SNJM Usually this is comprehended to describe that God delivered them to power of Midyan for seven years. Apparently, however, this statement refers to the empire of SABA! Rendering is thus And God delivered them to power of MEDINA (that is, SABA) for years! The Hebrew SBY is here usually rendered as referring to seven (similarly as in name Beersheba according to usual comprehension “seven-wells”). But apparently writer here notices the military rule of SABA empire, by MEDINA one of main cities of SABAN empire and allies. Thus is described in Judges 6:1-2 that God delivered them to power of MEDINA (that is, SABA) for years, and MEDINA ruled over region of Israel. The 6:3 (and 6:33) specifies that in this campaign participated forces of MEDINA, and Amaleq, and Eastern People (BNJ QDM), apparently forces of QEDAR people, and very important notice is that this campaign extended to the GAZA; indeed this describes ancient campaign to secure that important Mediterranean harbour GAZA, near to regions of Beersheba; and Hebrew Bible here describes that WJHNW YLJHM WJSHJTW AT JBWL HARZ YD BWAK YZH (Gaza) In this notice of WJSHJTW we probably hear reference to ancient furnace metalworking that was in Beersheba regions widely ancient practised, and the statement emphasises establishing connection with harbour GAZA. The ancient metalworking especially working iron is important in history of Midyan region, and here we recognise apparent traditions that these forces of MEDINA (SABA) did the metalworking practise also in these regions,up to GAZA harbour. Also is interesting 6:5 that KJ HM WMQNJHM JYLW WAHLJHM JBAW KDJ ARBH LRB WLHM WLGMLJHM AJN MSPR This notorious statement notices their METALWORKERS MQNJHM; they and their metalworkers came in large numbers, like Arabs of KEDAR, and the LOHEM smiths; and their carriages were innumerable. (Remember well that QJN in Arabic notices metalworkers and iron workers and this informs much of meaning of Biblical QJN word (see BDB 883)- for example, Judges 4:11 reminds that the father-in-law of MOSES, himself was of QJN group (HBR HQJNJ NPRD MQJN MBNJ HBB HTN MSH).) Interesting notice is also the 6:7 describing how these ISRAEL-ISMAELITES cried to JHWH concerning YL ADWT MDJN, but apparently is here noticed the EHUD of MEDINA (the Hebrew Dalet and Waw easily are confused with letter He), we motivated here read the name EHUT or EHUD of troops of MEDINA, apparently noticing leader or chief of the troops (cf. Arabic HUDA notices to lead and direct), quite similarly with the histories of YEMENITE SMITH EHUD who made sword and brought rescue to ISRAEL-ISMAELITES, described in Judges 3. Also AHD appears in divine promise to Gideon strengthening him to the campaign, the 6:16 emphasising AHJH YMK WHKJT AT MDJN KAJS AHD Also here the AHD appears, and in the context of Book of Judges we should remember the leader EHUD of Judges 3, and also here in Judges 6 described leader EHUD of MEDINA; thus this prophesy assigns

WHERE IS YOUR LOCAL JERUSALEM? IN OLD TESTAMENT “JERUSALEM” OFTEN IS NOUN FOR SAFE HAVENS AND SAFE HARBOURS, NOT NAME OF ONE CITY (VERRE ET BIBLE 15) A Biblical Study of Old Testament, By Pasi K. Pohjala , January 28, 2013 Studying Old Testament statements concerning Jerusalem we first specify precisely the topic of this study. Thus we first notice questions of orthography: in the Old Testament this name is almost always written as JRWSLM; only in few statements is the variant JRWSLJM written (thus in 1 Chron 3:5, 2 Chron 25:1, Esther 2:6 and Jer 26:18). In the Greek Septuagint translation is written of IEROUSALEEM, and Greek New Testament writes of HIEROSOLYMA. And in cuneiform equivalents is of URUSALIM and URUSALIMMU written. Especially important now is to notice ideas concerning etymology of this name; in the scholarly consensus, at least among Editors and Editorial Board of the TDOT, this question is now solved in favour of finding JRH word, stating “etymologically, the name may mean something like ‘foundation’ (JRH I yara) of the God Shalem. This would be a pre-Israelite name” (thus Editor Helmer Ringgren in Art. Jerusalem in TDOT VI). Everyone knows well that discussions concerning “Jerusalem” is of quite importance for Biblical religion, so that Scholars and Editorial Boards of thus important co-operations as TWAT (in English translation this is the TDOT) have discussed and pondered this question profoundly. Thus it is important to notice that the little older large Scholarly consensus result is reflected in BDB article of “Jerusalem” (BDB 436, the BDB is founded upon the work of Gesenius, translated by Robinson and thereafter developed noticing much progress of Scholarly discussions) where is concerning etymology listed possible derivation from JRH “foundation of peace” or “foundation of Shalem” but ALSO in the BDB concise article is noticed scholarly tradition of finding the derivation from RWS words: JRWS SLM “possession of peace” or “Salem’s possession”. Currently in the important TDOT dictionary now the scholarly consensus more prominently emphasises the derivation from JRH “founding”. And Marcus Jastrow does not make any special references to etymology of the name “Jerusalem” (Jastrow 595), but in this Dictionary the name Jerusalem is mentioned after JRWSH that means “conquest, taking possession” and “inheritance, heirloom”; and after “Jerusalem” the Dictionary writes of JRWTA “conqueror, heir” and “conquest, possession” (Jastrow 595); this suggests to the Readers more referring to RWS words. These now may here represent current more widely represented scholarly comprehensions of the etymological origination of the name Jerusalem, reflected in the widespread scholarly opinions as recorded in the TDOT, BDB and Jastrow’s Dictionary. Many of best current and past Biblical Scholars and many religious leaders have written extensive books and articles concerning Jerusalem: indeed, enormous number of books and articles in huge number of languages and religious groupings have been written concerning Jerusalem during hundreds of years, and even numerous are well researched bibliographies. Important question thus is to consider what the Jerusalem then may refer to. Usually of course is considered that Jerusalem refers to one city, the city that is capital of current Israel and that was founded in Israelite rule as the capital of Davidic kingdom. This study, however, studies mentions that strongly argue that often the Biblical mention of Jerusalem does not refer to ONE city (as usually is thought)- this study argues that in Bible many mentions of Jerusalem rather occur as general NOUN, the noun meaning safe harbours and safe havens and safe anchorages. For Readers might this comprehension sound quite surprising, regarding that the current city Jerusalem is inland in the mountainous Judaea and that no other major city with that name is currently known. How could thinkably Jerusalem be thus comprehended? But we find surprisingly easily important and even contemporary support for such argument. We should well remember that Old Testament does know actually quite much of realities of maritime trade and ancient seafaring, also according to the currently widely accepted translations (English RSV, NRSV, King James’ Bible and other modern translations in main European languages); world of seafaring and sailing is to some extent indeed known in Old Testament, according to widely accepted comprehensions. But Jerusalem? Let us first remember the ancient and important Mediterranean busy harbours Marseille and Barcelona. Everyone of course quite often in casual contexts talks also of these well known and busy cities. But studying their names surprisingly reveals these names as close parallels to name Jerusalem. Name Marseille includes the M-R-S, clearly possible noun formation of root R-S, and reference to EL (usual designation of God, also in Bible and Semitic traditions). Name Barcelona is currently really famous in whole world and especially amongst followers of top football; but attentive reading of name Barcelona reveals in this name interestingly R-S and SELN (that is actually really close parallel to SALEM or SELEM). Every Reader well knows something of Barcelona and Marseille and easily now finds these names as close parallels to name Jerusalem. And looking in southern Mediterranean coast, we find there still currently existing and also prospering harbour cities MERSA or cities whose name include this MERSA (thus in the Arabic-speaking coast of South Mediterranean coast). We of course remember that from times ancient, Phoenician sailors sailed across whole Mediterranean sea and established settlements also in Western Mediterranean areas, even in Spain. It is quite worth considering that the busy and prosperous harbour city of Athens of Greece is PIREAS, also in this name of thus important harbour is the R-S element found. Historically worth considering is also that Apostle Paul was native of Tarsus and missionary journeys of Apostle Paul in Eastern Mediterranean were to many important harbour cities of Eastern Mediterranean. Pauline Christianity of Gospel of Jesus was spreading in many ancient harbour cities of Eastern Mediterranean, and seriously worth emphasising is also that Bible knows the Joshua-Jesus as the Joshua Son of NUN –indeed, NUN is in Egyptian religion designation for the Waters, the Primeval Seas and Deeps. And in front of the harbour of ancient megalopolis Alexandria was the island PHAROS- and the lighthouse of PHAROS was considered as one miracles of ancient world. We remind the Readers also of that the Quran Sura HUD indeed notices MURSAHA as harbour. In reality of Catholic Europe, we remember that Order of St. John of Jerusalem, or the Hospitallers, was anciently indeed a major naval power in Mediterranean. Thus from many important and quite different religious traditions we find widely well known and surprisingly usual details that clearly suggest this comprehension that JERUSALEM is a NOUN for harbours. We have thus many details both modern and ancient that strongly suggest to seek clarification of “JERUSALEM” by seeing that “Jerusalem” was an ancient NOUN FOR HARBOURS and SAFE ANCHORAGES. It is thus quite worth to read with much consideration how the current TDOT writes of Jerusalem, there also stating “Although the installation of the ark and the building of the temple were acts of kings, the election (9) (footnote 9: H. Seebass BHR bachar TDOT II, 80f.) of Jerusalem as the site of God’s rest and presence was always understood as an act of God’s free will.” (TDOT VI, art “Jerusalem” by M. TSEVAT). This statement by M. TSEVAT- and certainly well in detail considered by the General Editor Helmer Ringgren, he wrote smaller part of that article- is truly notorious. In writing of Jerusalem, here M. Tsevat makes reference to article BHR written by H. Seebass; this is from M. Tsevat really clear reference to matters concerning “sea” because name Seebass translated from German includes reference to “sea” (der/die See) and the BHR refers to SEA when the Arabic usual noun for sea BAHAR is considered (this Arabic BAHAR word for seas is important also for considering many details of the important ancient Cabbalistic BAHIR; we seriously should remember that many ancient Jews were living in regions were Arabic was the usual language). And in this statement of the Jerusalem article in TDOT, the writer M. TSEVAT emphasises Jerusalem as the place where God rested- and this apparently alludes to idea that a harbour and an anchorage is place where ships are resting. Of course this writer M. Tsevat in writing the article keeps to the current comprehension that Jerusalem indeed refers to one city, that in current Palestine, but such very clear allusions to considering matters of sea and seafaring here in the TDOT article are truly thought-provoking! Considering Jeremiah 32:8 is also important, because there is JRSH word written (BDB 440 “possession, inheritance”, of JRS). In this statement the semantic field of JRSH is interesting for current study, here is written that BARZ Binjamin KJ LK MSPT HJRSH WLK HGALH QNH LK Here are letters JRSHWL written that is almost the name Jerusalem, or some orthographical variant of name Jerusalem (if we consider grammatically the name containing plural masc, this JRSHWLK would be, indeed, form of “your Jerusalem” with sg. 2 possessive K). This statement writes name Binjamin where reference to high seas JAM, JAMIM is heard; and the word GAL also notices reference to such Phoenician usual ships that in Greek were famously called GAULOS boats. Here this text writes of purchasing some area of land. NOW we importantly find that this well can have been in Book of Jeremiah 32 description of purchase of place for anchorage or small private harbour, or place for boat shed, reading JRSHWLK as “your Jerusalem”. Really, this semantic context very strongly writes concerning matters of sea, Binjamin and GAL or Gaulos boats. We apparently render: TRANSLATION: please, purchase in area near to sea (area of Binjamin) that small harbour place for you (HJRSHWLK), suitable for GAULOS boats; you have right (Mispat) for that. (translation of Pasi K Pohjala 2013). Details of semantic context here quite clearly specify that here concerned area is actually a small harbour area, so clearly words in this sentence describe matters of sea and seafaring. Thus is considered response to Hanamel son of Shallum (SLM) for QNH LK AT SDJ ASR BYNTWT Prophet Jeremiah is thus offered to purchase field that is in Anatot; it is worth noticing that really this name ANATOT includes reference YNJ that indeed refers to ships and boats (ANJH); and the name well may include reference to THOTH who had important role in Egyptian mythology concerning seafaring, e.g. by ruling winds. It is indeed comprehensible that here considered area HJRSHWLK located in Anatot was actually a small harbour, a nice place for anchorage. (This Jeremiah 32 occurs in such situation that “Jerusalem” was under siege by Babylonians, so that here is notorious word play: the city Jerusalem being under siege and thus dangerous, Jeremiah is encouraged to purchase his own “safe haven” HJRSHWLK). In this text of Jeremiah 32 we also can suppose much specific terminology: this text Jer 32 describes in great detail procedure of making purchase of area: the offer, negotiation, writing the document, sealing the document and taking witnesses, weighing silver for payment, giving the deed of purchase to his secretary Baruch in presence of witnesses, for being included properly in archives. This Jeremiah 32 is widely regarded to be one good detailed description of writing of official documents and documents of purchase and their archival: the terminology is concrete and well reflects official parlance in court of those times. Thus finding here word HJRSHWLK is apparently and clearly then officially used title or noun for “your harbour area” or “field for your landing-site”- we thus observe here that here is not merely described area as “possession” but specifically “harbour area” HJRSHWLK is here discussed. Importantly, the JRSH noun is also in Judges 21:17 written in discussion of matters concerning the tribe Benjamin. Here is written that WJAMRW JRST PLJTH LBNJMJN The PLT in Hebrew Bible notices escaping and being fugitive, so that JRST PLJTH can here well notice harbour place for fleeing or becoming refuge, especially appropriate because name Binjamin here is noticed, referring thus to JAMJM seas. The chapter Judges 21 describes a very difficult episode in history of the Twelve tribes; in the situation described in Judges 21 these words may refer to encouraging some Binjaminites to flee overseas via the JRST PLJTH harbour of fugitives. (We present merely as important speculation that the PLJTH here refers to Philisteans, famously reigning the rich Levantine coastal lands, usually under Egyptian rule, so that here JRST PLJTH could notice that Benjaminites shall reign some “PHILISTEAN HARBOUR”, historically well appropriate. Importantly, the following discussion of Blessing of Moses Deut 33 also presents MWRSH clearly as harbour in Philistean regions.) Apparently the name refers to some connection with seas; thus here may be heard some foundational myth why some ancient Israelites were seafarers and thus travelling around, when others were mostly settled in life of agriculture. This Chapter Judges 21 concludes the Book and is concluded noticing how people of different tribes journeyed to possessions of their tribes. Apparently was situation of seafarers different because they did not have special allotted land areas in their possession but rather practised their profession in sailing in seas; rather were the harbours and safe anchorages for sailors centrally important- and indeed, here in Judges 21:17 are noticed the JRST PLJTH where we encounter the JRSH apparently referring to harbours. Well worth mentioning is tradition of ancient poem in Deuteronomy 33:5 writing TWRH ZWH LNW MSH MWRST QHLT JYQB WJHJ BJSRWN (Jesurun) MLK BHTASP RASJ YM JHD SBTJ JSRAL Traditions of this very old poetry are really ancient and of such times that much precede foundation of Jerusalem capital for Davidic kingdom or times of Jebusites immediately preceding times of foundation of Jerusalem capital. Here in Deut 33 is written concerning Israel. Thus we more freely can trace this very old parlance of MWRST QHLT JYQB, in this statement this MWRST apparently is compared with the Jesurun, noticed that he reigned as king in Jesurun. What do we, then, find here? The Jesurun only seldom occurs in Hebrew Bible, mostly being “poetic name of Israel, designating it under its ideal character” (BDB 448). However, when we consider the almost similar name SHARON (SRWN) we consider area traditionally recognised as the very fertile lowland north of Joppa (ancient major harbour) (BDB 450). Considering the Jod as poetic variant of orthography, we find here reference to reigning king in that Sharon fertile lowlands near to Joppa, something that of course was historically important; and in THIS context of geographically discussing that area near to Joppa is obviously important to talk of HARBOUR, and indeed here is of MWRSH discussed! (This Deuteronomy 33 is the famous Blessing of Moses, in Old Testament formally placed in situation where Israel had arrived near to the borders of the Promised Land and had not yet started conquering that Land- especially, normal historiography regards that in those times the Mediterranean coastal land was inhabited by the powerful Philisteans whom Israelites for considerable times could not win in battlefield for the military superiority of Philisteans. More pondering such questions are special questions of early history of Israel. Who were, exactly, Israelites? Who were those “Philisteans” who reigned those enormously fertile coastal lands? Much of modern research of course does not regard the episodes of Exodus and subsequent episode of conquering the Promised Land even partially as historical descriptions but rather mostly as beautiful and ideologically important mythologies. NOW we merely STOP at noticing that certainly it is appropriate to consider reigning king in those specially fertile Levantine lands Sharon north of Joppa and in those coastal areas certainly is interesting to talk of a harbour- thus is here indeed noticed the MWRST place!! But it is certainly really important that in this ancient Blessing of Moses the MWRSH is actually connected to Mediterranean Levantine coastal region and that in conclusion of Book of Judges the JRSH is clearly discussing matters of seas and coasts, Benjaminites. Apparently in these ancient traditions the JRSH word is much more specific than merely “possession”, it more specifically designates area governed that was actually a good harbour area. We now consider some details in Isaiah 8. Recently the current Writer Pasi K. Pohjala has published more extensive commentary on Book of Joel in the increasingly popular and increasingly discussion generating Verre et Bible publication series, and in this Commentary were much discussed ancient developments of watering and irrigation technologies, arranging channels, conduits, dikes, and narrower irrigation channels; these were much developed from ancient times in Egyptian and Mesopotamian cultures, and in the Commentary of Book of Joel I presented that in Bible such irrigation agriculture is well known and surprisingly much in detail described. Now we notice in the current discussion the extensive description of different waters in Isaiah 8, there is written that “because that people has spurned the gently flowing waters of Siloam Assuredly, My Lord will bring up against them the mighty, massive waters of the Euphrates, the king of Assyria and all his multitude. It shall rise above all its channels, and flow over all its beds, and swirl through Judah like a flash flood reaching up to the neck” (Tanakh translation of Isaiah 8:5-8) In the Old Testament this is one vivid and in its tragic description, regrettably, quite realistic description of often prevailing circumstances in the countries where much dikes and channels were built- those somewhat often tended to break asunder and the following flooding and its devastation is well known in numerous ancient documents from those countries. Such flooding waters are quite violent waters, spreading around and bringing large devastation. Here Isaiah 8 importantly contrasts such waters with silent waters of Siloam. It is thus interesting that Siloam is thus clearly by Isaiah connected with peaceful water; we recognise that also waters in harbour behind the wharfs are such peaceful and calm waters, clearly in contrast with the roaring stormy waves in the high seas just beyond the piers built to protect the harbour (or the natural formations of that style that in the more ancient times were so centrally important for choosing suitable places for harbours and anchorage). Waters of Siloam are silent, calm; and Hebrew Bible states this MJ HSLH HHLKJM LAT and reading the name as Siloam is in Translations well supported. Here Isaiah emphasises that Siloam is place of such silent, calm waters. And in this Chapter Isaiah 8 is studied the remarkable name MAHER-SHALAL-HAZ-BAZ, this is also the name that Isaiah should give to his newborn son, thus emphasised in 8:3. We now remarkably notice that this name includes the MHRSLLH that is also apparent parallel to MURSA, MURSALA and MERSA MERSAHA nouns or a possible dialect variant or orthographical variant to these, thus referring to harbours, especially for including the SLH letters and the following writings specifying that the waters of SLH are calm and silent; and this name also parallels the name Jerusalem. The Siloam is of course usually in this context comprehended to denote the famous “tunnel of Siloam” that directed Gihon waters to Jerusalem; but in this context especially the remarkable name MAHER SHALAL HAZ BAZ being MHRSLLH alerts Readers to consider also matters of harbours whose waters also are silent. In this notorious name MAHER-SHALAL-HAZ-BAZ would thus be possibly referred to harbours whose waters are silent and calm. We now consider descriptions in Ezek 36:2 HAH WBMWT YWLM LMWRSH HJTH LNW We notice here