Israelite

Music in Israelite Communities

by

In Israelite life, music was central to all that the people did. It is found not only in their worship, but also in their work, in their personal recreation, and in their military activities.

Genesis 4:21 mentions Jubal as the proto-musician. The distance, both stylistic and chronological, between him and the later music-making of the Jewish community, can only be a matter of speculation. The real importance of Jubal is in the attention given to music-making this far back in sacred history, and further, that such attention is focused on its natural appearance along with other human and cultural activities. Jubal’s brother, Jabal, was a cattle breeder; his half-brother Tubal-Cain, the first smith.

This is important, for music is first described in a functionally neutral sense. Jubal is the “father of all who play the harp and flute.” His music-making is not religiously caused or primarily associated with worship, nor is it necessarily an activity that, by contrast, bears only the association of any number of so-called secular activities. Even though Yahweh was to be worshiped in his sanctuary, the earth, and all its fullness was also his; and as human habitat, of which humanity was to be the steward, the world was to be an arena for praise. Accordingly, the use of music is as much an integral part of the gathering of harvest as the worship in the sanctuary. The uniqueness is that while harvest songs are sung, they are sung to the Lord of the harvest; while battle songs are sung, Yahweh is to win the battle.

Thus if there is one consistent stand concerning music in the Old Testament, it is that it is inseparable from all of life. Although in its earliest stages or as related to certain activities, it may have been little more than noise-making, music accompanied work, worship, merrymaking, and military activities (Gen. 31:27; Exod. 32:17–18; Num. 21:17; Judg. 11:34–35; Isa. 16:10; Jer. 48:33). Instances of music-making are connected with specific acts of God: the collapse of the walls of Jericho (Josh. 6:4–20), the enthronement of kings (1 Kings 1:39–40; 2 Kings 11:14; 2 Chron. 13:14; 20:28), music for the court (2 Sam. 19:35; Eccles. 2:8) and feasting (Isa. 5:12; 24:8–9), as well as for the restoration of prophetic gifts (2 Kings 3:15) and the soothing of personality disturbances (1 Sam. 16:14–23).

These latter two instances superficially seem to belong to the psycho-musical realm, or the blatantly magical. Along with the narrative in Joshua 6:4–20, in which the combination of trumpet sounds with people shouting precede the felling of Jericho’s walls, an immediate relation is seen by some biblical scholars between music and magic. It cannot be denied that this relationship is assumed in the myths and legends of the religious systems surrounding Judaism. Nor can it be denied that music and magic are linked in religious systems of primitive cultures everywhere. Furthermore, the more sophisticated Greek ethos, which granted intrinsic power to activities in the created order, still has overtones in much of today’s thinking regarding musical values.

In the earliest parts of Scripture, however, the created order is to be subject to human dominion, and it is good. Humankind is to be sovereign over it and not the reverse; the goodness of creation is a reflection of God’s handiwork, but it is a goodness not in the sense of inherently causing good; otherwise, it would be sovereign and the cultural mandate would be irrelevant. In addition, the fact that creation has been ravished by Satan does not mean that it has become intrinsically bad in the sense of causing immorality. Ultimately, the Judeo-Christian perspective maintains that humankind is wrong within itself and that until persons are made right they will place the blame for their condition outside themselves. Hence, they will assume that created things or activities have power over them and their activity, as is often the case with music. Consequently, the parallels that are drawn, in comparative religious studies, between Israelite religion and its contemporary systems are in fundamental error because fundamental perspectives are overlooked.

Israelite Worship from Solomon to the Exile

by

Although Solomon completed and dedicated the temple, the foreign influences and faulty civil policy that set in during his reign eventually led to the demise of the Israelite commonwealth.

David’s son and successor to the throne was Solomon. During his reign Solomon continued to focus on the cultic worship of the temple, adding to the edifice ornamentation of such glory and splendor that all who visited Israel marveled at its beauty. Solomon emphasized beautifying the temple not only because he was dedicated to the worship of Yahweh and desired to show his gratitude, but because he had also begun to be influenced by surrounding foreign powers. The temple and its ornamentation were a sign to foreigners of the wealth and cultural strength of Solomon’s court. Scripture attests to these foreign influences during the reign of Solomon. This accentuated the syncretistic tendency that the Israelites had been dealing with since they first covenanted to be the people of Yahweh. Solomon often allowed civil policy to dictate ecclesiastical practices. He married foreign wives in order to establish alliances. These wives brought their alien gods into his courts (1 Kings 11:1–8).

The foreign influences from within the country cumulatively resulted in disaster. The northern kingdom’s destruction (722 b.c.) and the demise of the southern kingdom, including Jerusalem and the temple (587 b.c.), were viewed by the postexilic writers in light of the corrupt worship practice that had infiltrated the practices ordained by Yahweh. The religion of Israel before the Exile is depicted as a headlong, spiraling decline leading to disaster. Ahab had allowed Jezebel’s Sidonian influences to foster idolatry and despotism (1 Kings 16:32). Intermarriages between Jezebel’s family and the southern kingdom continued to spread the destructive influences. The situation was so severe and irreversible that it necessitated the destruction of both kingdoms, the temple, and the city of Jerusalem to reestablish the pure remnant of Yahweh’s chosen. The essentials of worship had been lost.

The Word of God, prayer, praise, confession, and forgiveness had become empty rituals that had lost the inner meaning and therefore impeded access to Yahweh.

The Danger of Canaanite Religious Influence in the Old Testament

by

In Canaan Israelite worship incorporated elements from pagan worship, especially that of Ba‘al, and Israel went through periods of apostasy and reform.

Syncretism, the mixture of foreign elements with the Yahwism of Israelite worship, increasingly became a problem as the people of God moved from the wilderness to the Promised Land of Canaan. The religious procession to the land can also be seen as a military movement that collided with the cultures already existing in the area. Among other peoples, the Israelites encountered and settled near a Semitic people called the Canaanites. The Canaanite culture is thought to have existed in this area from perhaps as early as 3000 b.c. The Canaanite gods quickly became competitors for the loyalty and worship of the Israelites. The desert incident of the golden calf foreshadowed the problem of idolatry that would intensify during this period of settlement.

For the Old Testament writers the word idolatry meant veneration of an object other than the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Since Scripture records Canaanite cultic centers at all the major cities and towns, including Dan, Gilgal, Shechem, Bethel, Shiloh, and Jerusalem, the temptation of idolatry for the Israelites was great. The difficulty for God’s people was identifying what idolatry was. Syncretistic practices crept into the worship of the Israelites almost without their awareness. Scripture records examples of this pervasive and subtle cultural lure (Hos. 2:1–23).

One of the Canaanite deities was a god designated as Ba‘al (see 1 Kings 18:21). The Hebrew word ba‘al can mean “owner,” “master,” “lord,” or “husband.” Ba‘al’s power was over a particular locality. Thus Ba‘al was the deity of a settled people. As the Israelites moved into a more settled life-style, they confronted the beliefs of Ba‘al worship. The local ba’als were connected with the fertility cycles of human beings, animals, and agriculture. Ba‘al power was closely linked with nature, particularly the bringing of rain to Palestine’s parched landscape. The influence of the Ba‘al cult led to extreme forms of worship such as child sacrifice (Jer. 19:5) and ritual prostitution (Judg. 2:17; Jer. 7:9; Amos 2:7).

The origins of Ba‘al worship are uncertain, but evidence indicates that the Amorites brought their gods with them on their migration into Canaan in the second millennium b.c. Another Canaanite god, ’El, is mentioned as the original head of the Canaanite gods in the Ras Shamrah texts. ’El, however, was the distant source, the “father of years” in the pantheon description. Ba‘al symbolized the vigor and power behind the natural cycles of life-giving powers. Asherah became the feminine counterpart to Ba‘al by the time of the judges (Judg. 3:7).

Ba‘al was often depicted with some characteristics of a bull, which was the ancient symbol of strength and fertility. Ba‘al statues exhibit helmets with horns of a bull or picture the god as riding a bull. The statues show Ba‘al with a club in one hand, most likely representing thunder, and a spear with leaves in the other, depicting lightning and fertility.

Israelite worship was constantly threatened by the foreign aspects of Ba‘al worship that conflicted with Yahweh’s prescribed law. Syncretism was a serious issue for two major reasons. First, the Israelites settled in the land with the Canaanites and often intermarried with the Ba‘al worshipers. This brought the seductive elements of the cult closer, even into the Israelites’ homes. Second, the fact that Yahweh was viewed as the god of the wanderings posed a threat. The Ba‘al worshipers’ polytheistic background caused them to view the gods as having power along geographical lines. Since the Israelites were dependent on the land once they settled in Canaan, it might have seemed wise to pay homage to the god of that land, a feature recognized in David’s confession (1 Sam. 26:19) and Naaman’s request (2 Kings 5:17–19).

These syncretistic tendencies can be seen in Scripture (Judg. 3:5–7; 6:25–26). Many of the names in Scripture have elements of the Canaanite gods: Esh-baal, Meribaal (1 Chron. 8:33–34), and Beeliada (1 Chron. 14:7). It is difficult to know whether these usages directly refer to the Canaanite deity or whether the term was used in reference to the Lord Yahweh as owner and master. In time the syncretistic tendency became so blurred that the Israelites banned the use of Ba‘al in reference to the lordship of Yahweh.

The syncretistic tendency was particularly prominent in the northern kingdom, according to the scriptural authors. This area was more exposed to pagan elements and more agricultural than was the south. The north was therefore more susceptible to elements of the Ba‘al worship. In the northern kingdom the golden calves at Dan and Bethel horrified those who were seeking true worship of Yahweh. Even the southern kingdom eventually experienced the influence of Canaanite worship despite the reforms of Hezekiah and Josiah. Scripture indicates that even Jerusalem itself was influenced (2 Kings 21:7). One of the most blatant attempts at syncretism was a deliberate ploy by Queen Jezebel to make Ba‘al the official god of the land. Scripture states that only seven thousand Israelites resisted her to follow the true religion of Yahweh (1 Kings 19:18). Throughout the eighth century the prophets constantly reminded the people of the syncretistic danger on all sides. It seems that the people of Yahweh did not recognize the apostasy in which they were involved (Jer. 2:23; Hos. 2:16–17).