The Good and Evil Serpent (165 page)

266
. Yet the Greek seems odd. It is obvious that the Hebrew text has the same prepositions before God and Moses, but the Greek translator chose two different prepositions. I would expect the Greek πρός to represent either
or
and Kaxà to translate
or possibly

267
. See A. Sperber,
The Pentateuch According to Onkelos
(Leiden, 1959) p. 258 and note
ad loc
.

268
. B. Grossfeld, trans.,
The Targum Onqelos to Leviticus and the Targum On-qelos to Numbers
(Edinburgh, 1988) p. 125.

269
. A. Diez Macho,
Neophyti 1: Tomo IV: Numeros
(Madrid, 1974) p. 193.

270
. M. McNamara, trans.,
Targum Neofiti 1: Numbers
(Edinburgh, 1995) p. 115.

271
. E.g., Clarke, trans.,
Targum Pseudo-Jonathan: Numbers
(Edinburgh, 1995) p. 247.

272
. Sakenfeld,
Journeying with God: A Commentary on the Book of Numbers
(Grand Rapids, 1995) p. 118.

273
. G. Garbini, “Le Serpent d’Airain et Moïse,”
ZAW
100 (1988) 264–67.

274
. Milgrom opines that the
seraph
was a “winged snake similar to the winged Egyptian uraeus (cobra).” Milgrom,
Numbers
, p. 174. Also see Milgrom, “The Copper Snake,”
Numbers
, pp. 459–60.

275
. See, e.g., O. Keel, “Schwache altestamentliche Ansätze,” in
Die Dämonen
, ed. A. Lange, H. Lichtenberger, and K. F. D. Römheld (Tübingen, 2003) p. 215.

276
.
; Philo,
Agr
. 108; F. H. Colson and G. H. Whitaker,
Philo
(LCL London, New York, 1930) p. 162.

277
. The brackets indicate words only implied in the ancient, cryptic, Hebrew.

278
. See K. Koenen, “Eherne Schlange und goldenes Kalb,”
ZAW
111 (1999) 353–72. Koenen rightly explains the attribution of Nechushtan to Moses as an etiological legend.

279
. See the insights of A. Chouraqui in
Au Désert: Nombres
(Paris, 1993) p. 239.

280
. Martin Luther used the copper serpent of Moses to make two points: the necessity of faith and the theological use of images. The uplifted serpent of Moses appeared frequently in the early Reformation, thanks to the artwork of Lucas Cranach the Elder. See D. L. Ehresmann, “The Brazen Serpent, a Reformation Motif in the Works of Lucas Cranach the Elder and his Workshop,”
Marsyas
13 (1966–1967) 32–47.

281
. See Frazer,
The Dying God
(London, 1911) pp. 84–85.

282
. McNamara,
Targum Neofiti 1: Numbers
, pp. 115–16.

283
. The Samaritan Pentateuch is considerably expansionistic, especially in Numbers; but for Num 21:4–9 there are no significant additions. See K.-R. Kim, “Studies in the Relationship Between the Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint” (PhD diss., Hebrew University, 1994) p. 205.

284
. McNamara,
Targum Neofiti 1: Numbers
, p. 115, note 8.

285
. It is no longer possible to assume with C. F. Keil that the serpent represents evil: “[H]eidnische Anschauung ist nicht nur dem Alten Testamente fremd … sondern steht auch mit der durch Gen. 3, 15 begründeten biblischen Anschauung von der Schlange, als Repräsentantin des Bösen, und ist aus der magischen Kunst der Schlangen-beschwörung geflossen, die das A. Testament als abgöttischen Greuel verabscheut.” Keil,
Biblischer Commentar über die Bücher Mose’s
(Leipzig, 1870) p. 297. Our knowledge of how indebted the authors of the biblical books were to surrounding and contemporary cults and myths no longer needs to be a source of embarrassment. Also, as we have seen, the Genesis account of the serpent cannot simply be interpreted as a symbol of evil.

286
. Milgrom,
Numbers
, p. 460.

287
. Joines, “The Bronze Serpent in the Israelite Cult,”
JBL
87 (1968) 251.

288
. T. Fretheim, “Life in the Wilderness,”
Di
17 (1978) 266–72; the quotation is on p. 270.

289
. Dillmann,
Numeri
, pp. 119–20.

290
. D. Flusser, “It Is Not a Serpent That Kills,” in
Judaism and the Origins of Christianity
(Jerusalem, 1988) pp. 543–51; the quotation is on p. 549.

291
. J. Scharbert correctly perceived that the copper serpent was not intended to convey magic: “Die Kupferschlange soll kein magisches Zaubermittel sein, sondern die darauf Blickenden daran erinnern, dass Jahwe Auflehnung bestraft, aber bei Umkehr auch wider verzeiht.” Scharbert,
Numeri
(Würzburg, 1992) p. 84.

292
. T. Fretheim, “Life in the Wilderness;” the quotation is on p. 270.

293
. Pliny,
Nat
. 29.21; For Latin text and English translation, see Pliny,
Natural History
, ed. and trans. W. H. S. Jones, vol. 8, pp. 228–29.

294
. See F. Valcanover,
Jacopo Tintoretto and the Scuola Grande of San Rocco
(Venice, 2002) pp. 42–43.

295
. On Deut 2:2–3, which is similar to 2 Kgs 18:4, see the reflections of B. M. Levinson,
Deuteronomy and the Hermeneutics of Legal Innovation
(New York, Oxford, 1997) p. 148.

296
. My translation is based on the one offered by M. Cogan and H. Tadmor,
II Kings
(Anchor Yale Bible; Garden City, N.Y., 1988; rpt. New Haven) p. 215.

297
. See B. O. Long,
2 Kings
(Grand Rapids, 1991) pp. 193–96. The introduction of Hezekiah follows the well-known Deuteronomistic sequence of summary, synchronism, and references to historical sources. See Gray,
I & II Kings
, p. 657.

298
. Long contends that “the Dtr writer suggests that the reader imagine Hezekiah as a consummate reformer who forged a new epoch in Judah’s history.” Long,
2 Kings
, p. 195.

299
. Montgomery,
The Books of Kings
, p. 481.

300
. Cogan and Tadmor,
II Kings
, p. 217.

301
. Graves and Patai,
Hebrew Myths
p. 32.

302
. I am grateful for discussion on Hezekiah’s reform with N. Freedman.

303
. See M. Weinfeld, “Cult Centralization in Israel in the Light of a Neo-Babylonian Analogy,”
JNES
23 (1964) 202–12, and the insights by Cogan and Tadmor,
II Kings
, pp. 218–19.

304
. Montgomery,
The Books of Kings
, p. 480.

305
. See Long,
2 Kings
, pp. 194–95.

306
. Cogan and Tadmor,
II Kings
, p. 217.

307
. F. M. Cross argues that the themes in the Books of Kings “belong properly to a Josianic edition of the Deuteronomistic history” (p. 279). See F. M. Cross,
Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic
(Cambridge, Mass., 1973) pp. 278–89. Cross does not discuss 2 Kgs 18:4 specifically. For a critical review of attempts to date sources, see S. W. Hol-loway, “Kings, Book of 1–2,” in
AYBD
4.69–83.

308
. See Long,
2 Kings
, pp. 194–96.

309
. There is no evidence, but it is conceivable that Manasseh, Hezekiah’s son and the King of Judah from c. 687 to 640 (or 642), in his attempt to revive the Canaan-ite religion in Jerusalem and the Temple, reintroduced a serpent cult. We are only told that Manasseh placed an image of Asherah in the Temple. It would be unwise to assume that Manasseh never reemployed serpent iconography. If he did, the serpent images are not the pulverized Nechushtan and similar objects banished by his father.

310
. See Isa 2:8, 17:8, 30:22, and 31:7.

311
. Joines,
JBL
87 (1968) 255.

312
. See H. Niehr,
Religionen in Israels Umwelt
(Würzburg, 1998) pp. 123–24, 129–32.

313
. Herodotus called Astarte “Aphrodite Ourania,” and in the late Hellenistic and Roman periods Astarte is Atargatis. See Niehr,
Religionen in Israels Umwelt
, p. 201.

314
. See the research and publications of the Ras Shamra Parallels Project. See, e.g., S. Rummel, ed.,
Rash Shamra Parallels III
(Rome, 1981).

315
. G. Hentschel imagines that the copper serpent was accepted into the Jerusalem cult: “In Israel hat man die kupferne Schlange zunächst auch akzeptiert und mit dem Jahwekult in Verbindung gebracht (Num 21:4–9).” G. Hentschel,
2 Könige
(Würzburg, 1985) p. 85, n. 7.

316
. The gold cobra found in the palace at Ekron (Tel Miqne) dates from the seventh century BCE. For a study of serpent realia found in controlled excavations, see Charlesworth,
Serpent Iconography and the Archaeology of the Land from Dan to Bethsheba
, in press.

317
. S. Koh, in 1994, could conclude that serpent iconography began to disappear “at the beginning of Iron Age I” in ancient Palestine. We now can extend the time down until the end of the Iron Age. See Koh, “An Archaeological Investigation of the Snake Cult in the Southern Levant: The Chalcolithic Period Through the Iron Age” (PhD diss., University of Chicago, 1994) p. 1 and Map 1.