Ezechiel), son of Buzi, one of the most vigorous and impressive of the older Israelite thinkers.
But he conceives of him, on the other hand, as limited locally and morally - as having his special abode in the Jerusalem temple, or elsewhere in the midst of the Israelite people, and as dealing with other nations solely in the interests of Israel.
We do not know how the Egyptians were forced to abandon Jerusalem; but, at the time of the Israelite conquest, it was undoubtedly in the hands of the Jebusites, the native inhabitants of the country.
Other evidence allows us to link together the Kenites, Calebites and Danites in a tradition of some movement into Palestine, evidently quite distinct from the great invasion of Israelite tribes which predominates in the existing records.
The older records utilized by the Deuteronomic and later compilers indicate some common tradition which has found expression in these varying forms. Different religious standpoints are represented in the biblical writings, and it is now important to observe that the prophecies of Hosea unmistakably show another attitude to the Israelite priesthood.
4) gives another view of events in which both Elijah and Elisha were concerned, and the change is more vividly realized when it is found that even to Moses and Aaron, the traditional founders of Israelite religion and ritual, is ascribed an offence whereby they incurred Yahweh's wrath (Num.
Ihre Nachbarstamme (2906), pp. 82-89, 138; on the problems of early Israelite history, see SIMEON (end), JEWS, §§ 5, 8, and PALESTINE, History.
In this form the seventh day's rest was one of the few outward ordinances by which the Israelite could still show his fidelity to Yahweh and mark his separation from the heathen.
It sustained frequent sieges during the troubled history of the Israelite kingdom.
Of Syria assaulted it in the reign of Ahab, but was repulsed and obliged to allow the Israelite traders to establish a quarter in Damascus, as his predecessor Ben-Hadad I.
He was found by Pharaoh's daughter, and his (step-)sister Miriam contrived that he should be nursed by his mother; on growing up he killed an Egyptian who was oppressing an Israelite, and this becoming, known, he sought refuge in flight.
NAPHTALI, in the Bible, the name of an Israelite tribe, the "son" of Jacob by Bilhah, Rachel's maid, and the uterine brother of Dan (Gen.
For the view connecting Naphtali (perhaps a geographical rather than a tribal term), or rather its Israelite inhabitants, with the south see the full discussion by H.
It is therefore certain that belief in demons and magic spells prevailed in pre-Mosaic times' among the Israelite clans.
In other words, the ordinary Israelite worshipper of Yahweh was at this time far removed from monotheism, and still remained in the preliminary stage of henotheism, which regarded Yahweh as sole god of Israel and Israel's land, but at the same time recognized the existence and power of the deities of other lands and peoples.
Winckler, whose works depart from the somewhat narrow limits of purely " Israelite " histories, emphasize the necessity of observing the characteristics of Oriental thought and policy, and are invaluable for discriminating students.
The favourite name " Israel " with all its religious and national associations is somewhat ambiguous in an historical sketch, since, although it is used as opposed to Judah (a), it ultimately came to designate the true nucleus of the worshippers of the national god Yahweh as opposed to the Samaritans, the later inhabitants of Israelite territory (c).
Their names vary in origin and probably also in point of age, and where they represent fixed territorial limits, the districts so described were in some cases certainly peopled by groups of non-Israelite ancestry.
In Moses (q.v.) was seen the founder of Israel's religion and laws; in Aaron (q.v.) the prototype of the Israelite priesthood.
Stories of successful warfare and of temporary leaders (see Abimelech; Ehud; Gideon; Jephthah) form an introduction to the institution of the Israelite monarchy, an epoch of supreme importance in biblical history.
19 sqq.) over the death of two great Israelite heroes, Saul and Jonathan, knit together by mutual love, inseparable in life and death, whose unhappy end after a career of success was a national misfortune.
The writings are the result of a continued literary process, and the Israelite national history has come down to us through Judaean hands, with the result that much of it has been coloured by late Judaean feeling.
Israelite tradition had ascribed the conquest of Jerusalem, Hebron and other cities of Judah to the Ephraimite Joshua; Judaean tradition, on the other hand, relates the capture of the sacred city from a strange and hostile people (2 Sam.
Jeroboam, once one of Solomon's officers, became king over the north, and thus the history of the divided monarchy begins (about 930 B.C.) with the Israelite power on both sides of the Jordan and with Judah extending southwards from a point a few miles north of Jerusalem.
Many attempts have been made to present a satisfactory sketch of the early history and to do justice to (a) the patriarchal narratives, (b) the exodus from Egypt and the Israelite invasion, and (c) the rise of the monarchy.
Finally, the consciousness that the people as a religious body owed everything to the desert clans (b) (see § 5) subsequently leaves its mark upon (north) Israelite history (§ 14), but has not the profound significance which it has in the records of Judah and Jerusalem.
Without sufficient external and independent evidence wherewith to interpret in the light of history the internal features of the intricate narratives, any reconstruction would naturally be hazardous, and all attempts must invariably be considered in the light of the biblical evidence itself, the date of the Israelite exodus, and the external conditions.
Meanwhile the Israelite army was again besieging the Philistines at Gibbethon, and the recurrence of these conflicts points to a critical situation in a Danite locality in which Judah itself (although ignored by the writers), must have been vitally concerned.
In the last, we must recognize the Israelite Ahab.
This brief notice heralds the commencement of Hazael's attack upon Israelite territory east of the Jordan (2 Kings x.
The independent Israelite traditions which here become more numerous have points work of the prophets, and sometimes purely political records appear to have been used for the purpose (see ELIJA1-1; Elisha).
If the latter actually occurred, the hostility of the Israelite prophets is only to be expected.
A diversion of this kind may explain the Israelite victories; the subsequent withdrawal of Assyria may have afforded the occasion for retaliation.
It is taken, strangely enough, from an Israelite source, but the tone of the whole is quite dispassionate and objective.
So, on the one hand, the year of the disaster sees the death of the Israelite king, and Amaziah survives for fifteen years, while, on the other, twenty-seven years elapse between the battle and the accession of Uzziah, the next king of Judah.'
It is now known, also, that Ben-hadad and a small coalition were defeated by the king of Hamath; but the bearing of this upon Israelite history is uncertain.
[OLD Testament History Hamath and the quiescence of Assyria may have encouraged Israelite ambitions, but until more is known of the campaigns of Hadad-nirari and of Shalmaneser III.
It is naturally uncertain how far the traditions of David can be utilized; but they illustrate Judaean situations when they depict intrigues with Israelite officials, vassalage under Philistia, and friendly relations with Moab, or when they suggest how enmity between Israel and Ammon could be turned to useful account.
Various collections are preserved in the Old Testament; they are attributed to the time of Moses the lawgiver, who stands at the beginning of Israelite national and religious history.
Nevertheless, it implies that religion passed into a new stage through the influence of Moses, and to this we find a relatively less complete analogy in the specific north Israelite traditions of the age of Jehu.
The course of the dynasty of Jehu - the reforms, the disastrous Aramaean wars, and, at length, Yahweh's " arrow of victory " - constituted an epoch in the Israelite history, and it is regarded as such.3 The problem of the history of Yahwism depends essentially upon the view adopted as to the date and origin of the biblical details and their validity for the various historical and religious conditions they presuppose.
The Fall of the Israelite Monarchy.
The actual capture of the Israelite capital is claimed by Sargon (722), who removed 27,290 of its inhabitants and fifty chariots.
Sargon's statement is significant for the internal history; but unfortunately the biblical historians take no further interest in the fortunes of the northern kingdom after the fall of Samaria, and see in Judah the sole survivor of the Israelite tribes (see 2 Kings xvii.
Thenceforth they continued the worship of the Israelite Yahweh along with their own native cults (2 Kings xvii.
In the domestic circles of prophetic communities the part played by their great heads in history did not suffer in the telling, and it is probable that some part at least of the extant history of the Israelite kingdom passed through the hands of men whose interest lay in the pre-eminence of their seers and their beneficent deeds on behalf of these small communities.
It is a gratuitous assumption that the history of (north) Israel ceased with the fall of Samaria or that Judah then took over Israelite literature and inherited the old Israelite spirit: the question of the preservation of earlier writings is of historical importance.
14-26), and the evidence for the conclusion that traditions originally of (north) Israelite interest were taken over and adapted to the later standpoint of Judah and Jerusalem (viz.
The usual tendency has been to regard it in the light of the criticism of early Israelite history, which demands some reconstruction (§ 8), and to discern distinct tribal movements previous to the union of Judah and Israel under David.
The perplexing relation between the admittedly late compilations and the actual course of the early history becomes still more intricate when one observes such a feature as the late interest in the Israelite tribes.