Showing posts with label geography. Show all posts
Showing posts with label geography. Show all posts

Monday, January 25, 2021

So many questions about Balaam

In Numbers 22-24 we first meet Balaam (or Bil'am, בלעם) son of Beor, a prophet hired by Balak king of Moab, to curse Israel. 

Amazingly, we know Balaam son of Beor also from extra-biblical material; the Deir 'Alla Plaster Inscriptions (Context of Scripture 2.27, Baruch A. Levine) writes about and translates the reconstructed fragments of an inscribed plaster wall from the 9th-8th century BC, slightly north of Moab in Ammonite territory. 

In those inscriptions he is a prophet who receives messages from the gods, providing a remarkable parallel to the biblical story. 

Balaam gets mentioned quite a lot in the Bible, which is surprising for a bit-player. His name comes up 60 times in the OT and a further three times in the NT. However, 51 of those 63 times are in Numbers 22-24, which is some impressive name repetition! He is mentioned again in Numbers 31, Deuteronomy 23, Joshua 13 and 24, Nehemiah 13 and Micah 6. The emphasis in the OT seems to be varied. 

He is also mentioned in the New Testament as an archetypal incitement to greed, in 2 Peter 2:15, Jude 11 and Revelation 2:14. 

In Deuteronomy 23, Joshua 24, Nehemiah 13 and Micah 6, God's determination to bless Israel despite human attempts to curse them. However in Joshua 13 the problem is his sinning through divination and being put to death as a cleansing of the land. 

Later on within Numbers (31) the Balaam/Balak saga is conflated with what becomes known as the Peor incident, in Numbers 25. In Numbers 31:15-18 Moses is upset that women who are not virgins, as well as boys, have been allowed to live in an attack on Midian. The reasoning is that the women who are not virgins are those who followed Balaam's advice to seduce Israelite men, which occurs in Numbers 25 but is not linked to Balaam in that place. 

That said, there are a few issues in Numbers 25 which are not clear, such as a plague which is stopped but is never explicitly said to begin (although 25:3a, "Yhwh's anger burned against Israel", may be an elliptical reference to the plague beginning). All this is to say the lack of a reference to Balaam is perhaps not that unexpected.


I do have some questions about Balaam, which are about 1) his location and 2) his patronym. 

Balaam of Pethor 

Numers 22:5, Balaam is at Pethor, his native land (NIV), that is the land of the children of his people (ASV), which is by "the river", i.e. the Euphrates. This description is filled out in Deuteronomy 23, as Pethor is further explained as in Aram Naharaim, or Aramea by the (two) rivers, which is identified as north-west Mesopotamia. You can see it right up the top of this map in red (made in Accordance Bible), while Beth Peor and Bezer are the names in red down the bottom, which are part of Moab, also in red below those towns. I've overlaid modern borders for some scale.




It doesn't take long to work out why people have problems with Pethor as Balaam's base and hometown. The plains of Moab, opposite Jericho either side of the Jordan River, are almost 600km away from each other as the crow flies, which is a long long way away. One might even suggest prohibitively far away to make sense in the story. If the details are correct, that Balak sent his messengers 600km to ask, and then they returned unsuccessful, and then they were sent back, whereupon he was willing to come with them (the talking donkey notwithstanding), then they have walked upwards of 2,500km in order to gain some support. The distances are staggering. 

Added to this is when Balak meets Balaam, he asks why he didn't come immediately in response to his "urgent summons" (22:37), which is laughable - the amount of time it would have taken to make two return trips of that distance would make haste or delay essentially negligible. 

It is of course possible that The River is a different river. The Nile could justifiably also be called The River, and the Jordan, for those in that area, could similarly be their The River. Further to this, it is always possible that Aram is Adam, a place attested to elsewhere in the Scriptures (such as in Josh 3:16, as well as a suggestion elsewhere in place of Aram), due to the easily confused pair of letters, the Hebrew daleth and resh, ד/ר. 

If Balaam was indeed from Adam, not Aram, and The River was the Jordan and not the Euphrates, then Balaam is slightly less exotic and the story becomes much less confusing, from that aspect at least. That would also fit more with the archaeological evidence discussed above. 

Balaam son of Beor or Bezer

The other issue I want to try to understand is why, in 2 Peter 2:15, Balaam is called the son of Bezer and not of Beor, as he is throughout the OT. Where has Peter got this from?

The patronymic, Beor, is written both plene and defectively within the same passage; that is, both בעור and בער. 

There were two things I immediately noticed upon hearing the name Beor. First off, there is a nice assonance between the three names in the passage: Beor, Balaam, Balak. This is nice, and a lovely coincidence (if it is that). Second, Beor sounds a lot like Peor, and apart from the B/P exchange, Peor is spelled the same as Beor (the plene spelling). 

I don't know what to make of that. Peor is clearly a real place in the Transjordan, known elsewhere as Beth Peor (not to be confused with another Peor within Canaan). 

If I had to guess, I would say Beor is how you spell Peor if you want it to rhyme with Balak and Balaam, so that Beor, rather than being a patronym, is a toponym. 

If this were the case, it could mean that 2 Peter preserves the name of Balaam's father, Bezer, so he is Balaam son of Bezer of Peor. 

However, it's not that easy. Bezer rhymes just as easily as does Beor, and you don't have to change anything. And Bezer is also a place, near to the plains of Moab (Deut 4:43; Josh 20:8; 21:36; 1 Chr 6:78; 8:78). 

So which place is his place? Is it Peor, Pethor, or Bezer? 

I think it's safest to go with what the OT has to say, rather than imagining that Peter has access to something that has escaped everyone else's notice for a millennium. This still doesn't explain how the patronym Bezer turns up in 2 Peter. 

The Greek behind it is Bosor, which is how the LXX consistently translates Bezer. However, it seems some scribes had some issues with that, as Vaticanus has Beor, and the original hand of Sinaiaticus combines Beor and Bosor into the horrific portmanteau Beorsor, which I take it is Beor + Bosor. UBS5 gives Bosor an A rating, suggesting that this is the most likely reading and that Siniaticus represents an attempt to correct the text.

There has been much work on 2 Peter and Jude's sources (very little of which I'm across), but I'm unaware of where the Bezer (Bosor) source may have come from, or why Peter didn't go with Beor (unless Sinaiaticus alone preserves the original text). 


Edit/update - I checked Norman Hillyer's UBC (1,2 Pet; Jude) and he suggests Βοσορ (Bezer) is a play on בשר (flesh); Peter then thinks Balaam is then a son of the flesh rather than being confused about who is father is. Why confuse us with the nearby town Bosor/Bezer I'm not sure. That said, the Greek has του, the genitive article, so it broadly means "belonging to", either as the son, or another type of belonging, as Hillyer suggests. 

Conclusion

All in all, there are a whole bunch of riddles associated with Balaam, son of Beor, of Pether. I don't know if I solved any of them, but I hope I have at least scratched the surface and edged towards some possible resolutions. 

Monday, September 28, 2020

Where is Cushan-Rishataim from?

In my previous post, I quoted Barry Webb's comical survey of origin suggestions for the foreign king who subjected Israel to slavery for eight years:

Cushan-rishathaim has been variously identified as a Babylonian Cassite (cf. Gen. 10:8), a Nubian, an Edomite, an Asiatic usurper in Egypt (Malamat), a Midianite (cf. Num. 12:1; Hab. 3:7), a chieftain of a tribe related to the Midianites who had migrated north and settled in Syria (Kaufmann), a surviving chieftain of the southern Judean hills (Boling), and, more recently, an Aramean adventurer from the great west bend of the upper Euphrates (Kitchen).

Barry G. Webb, The Book of Judges, New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012), 159.

As I've been working on it a bit more, I doesn't seem quite so intractable a problem. Let me tell you why.


We are told two things about this king's origin. First, at the beginning of the episode:

3:8b And he sold them into the hands of Cushan-Rishataim, king of Aram-Naharaim

And then at the end of the episode:

3:10d And Yhwh gave Cushan-Rishataim the king of Aram into his hand


It seems the main difficulties with describing him as an Aramean seems to be the spatial dislocation. Aram is north of Israel (roughly modern south-west Syria), while from chapter 1 we know that Othniel is in the south of Israel, linked to the tribe of Judah, and these are pretty-much as far away as can be.

However there are a couple of things worth noting. The first is the exceptional circumstances. In chapter 1 Othniel was called to step up in order to defeat a city and thereby to gain a wife. In chapter 3 however the Spirit is at work. We know from elsewhere that the Spirit may dislocate people (see the farcical episode in 1 Kings 18), so why not?!

The second thing worth noting is that, even if we don't know what Aram-Naharaim refers to (v8), we do know where Aram (v10) is. We also know what Naharaim means - it means "pair or rivers", with -aim the dual-form ending, and nahar meaning river. And we also know that in Aram there are two rivers, described by Naaman in 2 Kings 5:12:

Are not Abana and Pharpar, the rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? Couldn’t I wash in them and be cleansed?” So he turned and went off in a rage.

Now, I had a look on google maps and they're not readily apparent. You have to know what you're looking for and zoom in. A lot. They're two rivers which don't seem to come from or go anywhere - they just peter out as far as I can tell. Today they're called (respectively) the Barada and Awaj rivers, with the Barada flowing (when it does flow) through the heart of Damascus; the Awaj at its closest point is 13km or so south of the Barada. 

Image made using Accordance Bible Software.
Rivers are the thin blue lines with the red words describing them.
Abana is the more northern river, Pharpar the more southern.

The point is, in a desert landscape, despite their diminutive size, these two rivers would be pretty important, and one could understand why a king would be titled after his kingdom's not one but two water sources. That being said, one could also understand why this king might want to extend his kingdom to the more well-watered land south toward Lake Chinnereth (the Sea of Galilee).

So I don't know if I've solved a riddle, or simply added yet another to the long list of suggestions, but it seems like it makes sense. 


Update:

Here's a clearer image from research gate. It seems they come from springs and end up in lakes, which I assume fill and dry up, depending on the season. 



Thursday, September 21, 2017

Where John was baptising

John 1.28  This all happened at Bethany on the other side of the Jordan, where John was baptizing.

The introduction to John the baptiser in the narrative proper of John's Gospel situates us in a place with two descriptions.
  1. Bethany
  2. On the other side of the Jordan
However there is a problem with this. He is either in Bethany, or he is on the other side of the Jordan. We know from John 11.18 that Bethany is a couple of clicks away from Jerusalem (literally 15 stadia, which works out to 5km), and is on the same side of the Jordan.
So he could be there, except the rest of John 1-2 situates us in Galilee; he meets his first disciples by the sea of Galilee, he goes to a wedding in Galilee, he 'goes down' to Capernaum in Galilee and so on.
Furthermore, at the end of the 'Book of Signs' (the first half of John), Jesus is at the place where John had been baptising (10.40) and takes several days to walk to Bethany (11.17).
How do we solve all this?
D. A. Carson (The Gospel According to John, Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991, pp 146-7) suggests that John (the author) has deliberately misspelled a region in Israel's north-east called Batanea (Βετανια) as Bethany (Βηθανια). Batanea is in Galilee, it is across the Jordan, it is pretty wild, and it is several days walk from Bethany.
Currently this area is in the Golan Heights, an area of Syria occupied by Israel for the last couple of decades.

Arik Bridge over the Jordan River. Photo by Ilya Viten (Google Maps)
Why would he do this?
  1. The words sound quite similar - it's only two letters - 'ηθ' (ith) rather than 'ατ' (at).
  2. There's a nice symmetry to the book - the first half of the book begins and ends at Bethany/Batanea, with Jesus being recognised there at the beginning, and then performing his greatest sign at the end - the raising of Lazarus.
Andreas J. Köstenberger (John, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004, pp 65-66) explains further:
At Bethany in the (Galilean) north, John the Baptist confesses Jesus as “God’s lamb”; at Bethany in the (Judean) south, Jesus nears his crucifixion. 
In conclusion, it's possible, though not provable, that when John wrote about John baptising Bethany in Galilee on the other side of the Jordan, he was expecting his readers to know that he was discussing Batanea, but drawing a strong link to Bethany. As readers we should be drawing those links too - from the beginning to the end.