House(s) of Israel

<body topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0> <table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0><tr> <td valign="top" height=35 BGCOLOR="#000099" TEXT="#F7F7FF"> <div> <B>House(s</B><B>)</B><B> of Israel</B></div> <div>                                                   </div> <div> </div> </td> </tr><tr> <td valign="top" height=445 BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" TEXT="#080000"> <bR> <div> An Introduction to the Set-subset Concept of the Bible</div> <bR> <div> The term 'house of Israel' is used 152 times in 146 verses of the King James Bible. An amazing 83 of these occurrences, just under 55%, are in the book of Ezekiel.</div> <bR> <div> What is the 'house of Israel'? Who does it refer to? Does it ever refer to the 'house of Judah? This article therefore answers these questions with an emphasis on the history of this people.</div> <bR> <div> With the knowledge of who is being addressed by the term 'house of Israel' we are better able to understand the Book of Ezekiel and its message for today.</div> <bR> <div> But there is more. The 'house of Israel' is a good simple example of the 'set-subset relationship' of the Bible. Understanding how the 'house of Israel' is a 'set-subset relationship' is an aid in understanding more complex set-subset relationships. But first <I>just what do you mean 'house of Israel</I>'?</div> <bR> <div> <B>GENESIS OF A NATION</B></div> <bR> <div> Abraham had a grandson named Jacob who later had his named changed by God to Israel. The story of Jacob/Israel is found in Genesis where it takes up almost 25% of this first book of the Bible.</div> <bR> <div> Jacob had twelve sons from his two wives and their concubines. Jacob's first wife was named Leah who bore him six sons - Reuben, Levi, Simeon, <B>JUDAH</B>, Issachar, and Zebulun. While his second wife Rachel bore him two sons - <B>JOSEPH</B> and Benjamin. The highlighted sons play pivotal roles in the ongoing future of these peoples, as we shall see.</div> <bR> <div> Jacob's twelve sons and their descendants were to become one nation. The first hint of this reality is found when the sons of Jacob heard that Shechem the son of Hamor had raped their sister: </div> <bR> <div> "...and the men were grieved and very angry, because he had done a disgraceful thing in Israel by lying with Jacob's daughter, a thing which ought not to be done" (Genesis 34:7b).</div> <bR> <div> John H. Sailhamer points out that:</div> <bR> <div> "...<<I>bysr'l</I>>...can mean "in Israel" or "against Israel" (BDB, p.89, II.4.a). In the first instance Israel would refer to a people, whereas in the second Israel would refer to the individual. Since the individual is called Jacob in this section,...<<I>bysr'l</I>>...likely refers to the people. From the perspective of the narrative, <B>the sons of Jacob are already being thought of as a people</B>." <FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Georgia" ><B>1</B></FONT></div> <bR> <div> The sons of Jacob/Israel were to become the fathers of twelve tribes, bearing their names, who make up the nation of Jacob/Israel.</div> <bR> <div> It was in Egypt that the twelve families of the sons of Jacob/Israel grew into a nation, fulfilling the promise of God to Jacob:</div> <bR> <div> "...do not fear to go down to Egypt; for <B>I will make of you a great nation</B> there" (Genesis 46:3).</div> <bR> <div> It is in Egypt that we find 'Israel', for the first time, used to describe the nation:</div> <bR> <div> "So <B>Israel</B> dwelt in the land of Egypt, in the country of Goshen; and they had possessions there and grew and multiplied exceedingly" (Genesis 47:27). </div> <bR> <div> The nation of Israel was not to remain in Egypt for they were to receive the land of Canaan, the Promised Land, as their national territory:</div> <bR> <div> "Also I give to you <Abraham: Jacob/Israel's grandfather> and your descendants after you the land in which you are a stranger, all the land of Canaan, as an everlasting possession; and I will be their God (Genesis 17:8); ...the land which the Lord will give you, just as He promised..." (Exodus 12:25). </div> <bR> <div> In relation to this future reality we find the first occurrence of 'Jacob' used, in a synonymous parallelism with Israel, for the twelve-tribe nation. Jacob told his sons what would befall the tribes descended from them "in the latter days" - in days to come with predominate emphasis on the end-time. Concerning the descendants of Simeon and Levi, Jacob said that God would: </div> <bR> <div> "...divide them <B>in</B> Jacob,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> And scatter them <B>in</B> Israel"</div> <div> (Genesis 49:7).</div> <bR> <div> From the above information we see that Jacob/Israel, is the patriarch who gave his name to the nation that descended from him through his twelve sons.</div> <bR> <div> <B>HOUSE OF ISRAEL</B></div> <bR> <div> "<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FF0000" FACE="Verdana" ><B>And you shall be to Me ... a holy nation</B></FONT>" (Exodus 19:6).</div> <bR> <div> God eventually brought the nation of Israel out of Egyptian slavery to the Promised Land. At the beginning of this journey we find the first use of the term 'house of Israel'.</div> <bR> <div> The people of Israel on their journey from Egypt to the mountain in the desert of Sinai complained about the lack of food (Exodus 16:3). To alleviate this situation God rained down bread from heaven. In the morning, after the dew had lifted from the ground there remained 'a small round substance, as fine as frost' (Exodus 16:14). The people's reaction:</div> <bR> <div> "So when the <B>children of Israel</B> saw it, they said to one another, "What is it? (Hebrew: <I>man hu</I> <FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Georgia" ><B>2</B></FONT>). For they did not know what it was" (Exodus 16:15).</div> <bR> <div> Therefore:</div> <bR> <div> "... <B>the house of Israel</B> called its name Manna (Literally: What? <FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Georgia" ><B>3</B></FONT>)" (Exodus 16:31).</div> <bR> <div> Here we have the term 'house of Israel' applied to the 'children of Israel' (Exodus 16:1), the twelve-tribe <B>nation</B> of Israel that had just come out of Egypt. These terms are therefore synonymous; as is the term 'house of Jacob' which is seen from the synonymous parallelism [where the phrases are parallel in thought] in Exodus 19:3: </div> <bR> <div> "Thus you shall <B>say to the house of Jacob</B>, and</div> <div> <B>                              tell the children of Israel</B>"</div> <bR> <div> Walter C. Kaiser Jr comments:</div> <bR> <div> "A twofold title is used for the people of God (v.3): "house of Jacob" (a reminder of their humble beginnings... and "the people of Israel" (a statement as to what <B>they had become: a nation</B>)" (Expositor's Bible Commentary, p.415, note on Exodus 19:3).</div> <bR> <div> The NIV Bible has 'people' instead of 'children' as in the NKJ quoted.</div> <bR> <div> The nation descended from the patriarch Jacob/Israel may be referred to by the titles 'house of Jacob' and 'house of Israel'.</div> <bR> <div> Eventually after 40 years of wandering in the wilderness, a punishment for disobeying God, the twelve-tribe house of Jacob/Israel established itself in the Promised Land.</div> <bR> <div> <B>DIVISION</B></div> <bR> <div> "The house of Israel: There are fourteen occurrences of this expression before the division of the nation into two kingdoms" (E.W Bullinger, <I>Companion Bible</I>, note on Exodus 16:31).</div> <bR> <div> Early in its history a division began to emerge in the twelve-tribe nation. This division at first appears to have pitted the tribe of Judah, and most likely Simeon, against the other tribes who were led by the tribes of Joseph.</div> <bR> <div> The beginning of this split may be traced back as far as the patriarch Jacob himself. Jacob loved his second wife Rachel, more than his first wife Leah. Joseph, the son born to the beloved Rachel after her long bareness, was Jacob's favourite (Genesis 37:3). The other sons of Jacob were therefore envious of their brother. This was aggravated by two similar dreams of Joseph. In relating his first dream to his brothers, Joseph said:</div> <bR> <div> "There we were, binding sheaves in the field. Then behold, my sheaf arose and also stood upright: and indeed your sheaves stood all around and bowed down to my sheaf" (Genesis 37:7).</div> <bR> <div> This brought an angry response:</div> <bR> <div> "And his brothers said to him, "Shall you indeed reign over us? Or shall you indeed have dominion over us?" So they hated him even more for his dreams and for his words" (Genesis 37:8).</div> <bR> <div> Later Joseph's brothers conspired to kill him but in a compromise, suggested by Judah, he was sold into Egyptian slavery. Joseph eventually became second only to Pharaoh, and his brothers did bow before him.</div> <bR> <div> As we saw earlier Jacob on his death-bed blessed his sons prophesying what the future held for their tribes. It is in these blessings we find an unusual reversal, which may have early on contributed to the division in the nation.</div> <bR> <div> Jacob said in his blessing on Judah, who through the default of his older full-brothers, was the pre-eminent son of Leah, that:</div> <bR> <div> "Judah, you are he whom your brothers shall praise;...<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> Your father's children shall bow down before you...<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> The sceptre shall not depart from Judah..." (Genesis 49:8,10).</div> <bR> <div> John H. Sailhamer points out that:</div> <bR> <div> "It is difficult not to see in this an intentional allusion to the dream of Joseph (37:10) in which his fathers sons would come to bow down before him. In other words, what was to happen to Joseph - and did, in fact, happen in the course of the narrative (e.g., 42:6) - has been picked up by way of this image and transferred to the future of the house of Judah. What had happened to Joseph is portrayed as a picture of what would happen to Judah "in days to come"..." <FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Georgia" ><B>4</B></FONT></div> <bR> <div> Were the other brothers/tribes jealous of Judah's favoured position? Earlier Judah had taken the lead, and obtained the support of the disaffected brothers, to sell Joseph instead of killing him. Now it seems that the Joseph tribes will provide the leadership for the other tribes against the tribe of Judah.</div> <bR> <div> There were added incentives and disincentives for the other tribes to align with the Joseph tribes. A major incentive was the rich 'birthright' blessings bestowed on the Joseph tribes.</div> <bR> <div> In Jacob's prophetic blessing on his sons we saw that Judah was to obtain the sceptre. This eventual reality is expressed in 1 Chronicles 5:1-2:</div> <bR> <div> "Now the sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel - he was indeed the firstborn, but because he defiled his father's bed, his birthright was given to the sons of Joseph, the son of Israel...; yet Judah prevailed over his brothers, and from him came a ruler, although the birthright was Joseph's..."</div> <bR> <div> The questions that may be asked here are:</div> <bR> <div> (1) Did the sceptre originally go hand in hand with the passing on of the birthright?</div> <bR> <div> (2) Did the sceptre or the position of being the leading tribe belong to Joseph, and, in the similar case of Reuben lose their 'position' through disobedience, but still retaining the birthright blessing?</div> <bR> <div> (3) Why, if Judah was to receive the sceptre, did God choose the first king from the tribe of Benjamin?</div> <bR> <div> In a theoretical answer to these questions, there may be a hint from the bestowing of the birthright/blessing on Jacob by his father Isaac. This blessing, which seems to have confirmed the birthright, was placed on Jacob solely. This blessing stated:</div> <bR> <div> "Therefore may God give you of the dew of heaven,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> Of the dew of heaven,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> Of the fatness of the earth,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> and plenty of grain and wine.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> Let people serve you,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> And nations bow down before you.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> Be master over your brethren,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> And let your mother's sons bow down before you..."</div> <div> (Genesis 27:28-29).</div> <bR> <div> This blessing comprised of two parts - great wealth and rulership - was bestowed on one person, Jacob, though the fulfilment of this blessing was on the tribes of Joseph and Judah respectively. Rulership was expressed in Jacob's blessing on Judah: </div> <bR> <div> "Judah, you are he whom your brothers shall praise;...<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> Your father's children shall bow down before you...<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> The sceptre shall not depart from Judah..." </div> <div> (Genesis 49:8,10).</div> <bR> <div> while 'great wealth' was expressed in Moses' blessing on the tribes of Joseph:<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <bR> <div> "Blessed of the Lord is his land,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> With the precious things of heaven, with the dew,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> And the deep lying beneath,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> With the precious fruits of the sun,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> With the precious produce of the months,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> With the best things of the ancient mountains,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> With the precious things of the everlasting hills,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> With the precious things of the earth and its fullness,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> And the favor of Him who dwelt in the bush.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> Let the blessing come on the head of Joseph,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> And on the crown of the head of him who was separate </div> <div> from his brothers" (Deuteronomy 33:13-16).</div> <bR> <div> Before Judah received the sceptre this tribe played a not insignificant role in the development of the nation. We have already seen this typed in the example of the patriarch Judah in selling Joseph and then followed by his leading role in the events of the second grain-obtaining journey to Egypt. The later situation involved careful negotiating with Joseph (Genesis 43:3; 44:13-34) - an indication of the future. </div> <bR> <div> When the nation of Israel was on the march the tribe of Judah led the vanguard (Numbers 2:9). They were the first tribe to receive their allotment west of the Jordan river. At this stage they were the most numerous of the tribes and their territory was in excess of what their numbers warranted. Shortly after the death of Joshua they were in the forefront of the tribal revenge on the people of Benjamin and they provided the first Judge.</div> <bR> <div> It appears that from around this time the tribe of Judah had less and less to do with the other tribes. From what is called the Song of Deborah, a commemorative song of the defeat of Jabin/Sisera it seems that the northern-tribes were acting on their own. Various tribes are commended for taking part in the battle (Judges 5:14-15a, 18) while those tribes not immediately affected (Judges 5:15b-17) were chided. With no mention of Judah and Simeon it seems that they were not expected to help out their northern brothers. H.L. Ellison comments:</div> <bR> <div> "As a result when Judah became tributary to the Philistines (Jdg.15:11), he appears not to have appealed to the other tribes, nor do they seem to be concerned." <FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Georgia" ><B>5</B></FONT></div> <bR> <div> The separation of Judah from the northern tribes was accentuated by the division of the land of Canaan. Judah received the southern section on the west side of the Jordan, while the other tribal divisions on this side were in the central and northern regions of the land. H.L. Ellison opined that: </div> <bR> <div> "The failure to maintain a hold on Jerusalem (Jdg.1:8,21), combined with the existence of the semi-independent Gibeonite tetrapolis (Jos.9; 2Sa.21:1-2), created a psychological frontier between Judah and the central tribes..." <FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Georgia" ><B>6</B></FONT></div> <bR> <div> From the circumstantial evidence, though not expressed directly, it seems that there were two defacto houses within the nation of Israel at an early stage of their history.</div> <bR> <div> [The typology of the situation in the time of the Judges reflects the prevailing relationship between heaven and earth. The house of Judah represents God's direct administrative heaven, the Jebusites of Jerusalem with the Gibeonites represent Satan and his demons in the 'heavenly earth' and the house of Israel looks to the physical earth. David, in the time of the Monarchy, pictures Christ overthrowing Satan and subjecting the demons and bringing unity between heaven and earth - David bringing the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem represents Christ bringing God into a right relationship with mankind].</div> <bR> <div> <B>LEADERSHIP</B></div> <bR> <div> After Judah received her tribal inheritance the Joseph tribes received theirs west of the Jordan river. Along with receiving the choicest land, the one only place for worship for the nation was set up at Shiloh in the territory of Ephraim:</div> <bR> <div> "Now the whole congregation of the children of Israel assembled together at Shiloh, and set up the tabernacle of meeting there. And the land was subdued before them" (Joshua 18:1).</div> <bR> <div> For most, if not for all, of the time of the Judges Shiloh was the central place of worship for the nation. Having the sanctuary in their territory gave legitimacy to the tribes of Joseph as the leading ones in the nation. Earlier Jacob's blessing on Joseph in Genesis 49:26 was that he would be "separate from his brothers" (Lit: 'for the prince of leader his brethren' <FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Georgia" ><B>7</B></FONT>). It seems that in this privileged position they should have provided strong leadership, and set a good example, for the other tribes in following God.</div> <bR> <div> But they didn't and they lost their leading role in the twelve-tribe nation of Israel. The Psalmist provides the indictment:</div> <bR> <div> "The children of Ephraim, being armed and carrying bows, </div> <div> Turned back in the day of battle.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> They did not keep the covenant of God;<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> They refused to walk in His law,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> And forgot His works<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> And his wonders that He had shown them"</div> <div> (Psalm 78:9-11).</div> <bR> <div> The Life Application Bible notes: </div> <bR> <div> "There is no other biblical record of Ephraim's soldiers turning back from battle, so this is probably a metaphor referring to Ephraim's failure to provide strong leadership during those years." <FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Georgia" ><B>8</B></FONT></div> <bR> <div> This concept parallels verses 56-57:</div> <bR> <div> "Yet they tested and provoked the Most High God,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> And did not keep His testimonies,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> But turned back and acted unfaithfully like their fathers;<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> They were turned aside like a deceitful bow"</div> <bR> <div> Yet "the Psalmist may also be thinking of the Philistine incursion and victory over Israel at Ebenezer, which resulted in the loss of the ark (1 Samuel 4:1-11)." <FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Georgia" ><B>9</B></FONT></div> <bR> <div> The children of Ephraim, in Psalm 78:9, may refer to the children of the tribes of Joseph in particular and also through a synecdoche (where the part is put for the whole) to all the northern tribes in general. It may be that with Judah's relative isolation in the south and its openness to the desert it may have been less influenced by the concepts of the nature-religion of the Canaanites. <FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Georgia" ><B>10</B></FONT></div> <bR> <div> In Ezekiel 4 we find that the sin of the 'house of Israel' is 390 years and is separate from the house of Judah. If the 390 days is to be counted backwards from 722 or c.670 (cp. Isaiah 7:8), then this may tie in with the sin of the northern tribes of Israel.</div> <bR> <div> God was so furious with the tribes of Joseph for their turning aside from His way that:</div> <bR> <div> "He forsook the tabernacle of Shiloh...<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> Moreover He rejected the tent of Joseph,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> But chose the tribe of Judah,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> Mount Zion which He loved"</div> <div> (Psalm 78:60, 67-68).</div> <bR> <div> It is most likely, in the primary sense, that Joseph is rejected from the leading role in Israel, but, in a secondary sense, where Joseph may apply to the northern tribes, it may look beyond the future rejection of Benjamin, to the election of the house of Judah to the leading position in the nation.</div> <bR> <div> As referred to earlier, in the war between Israel and the Philistines the ark of God was taken from Shiloh to the battlefield and was captured by the enemy. When the ark was eventually returned to Israel it did not return to Shiloh but sojourned in Kiriath-Jearim, a town on the boundary between Judah and Benjamin.</div> <bR> <div> Shiloh may have been destroyed during this conflict with the Philistines and this would have been a physical deterrent to the ark's return to the town in keeping with God's design. Lambert.T Dolphin noted that:</div> <bR> <div> "Although not recorded in Scripture, Shiloh's violent destruction, accompanied by a great fire, is attested by the findings of archaeological excavations at the site. The destruction of Shiloh is referred to by Ps.78:60 and Jer.7:12-14; 26:6. Jeremiah's "temple sermon" (ch.7) warns that the city of Jerusalem will also be destroyed because of the same sort of wickedness that had caused Yahweh to destroy Shiloh some six hundred years earlier." <FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Georgia" ><B>11</B></FONT> </div> <bR> <div> With the rejection of Joseph by God and Israel's rejection of God through wanting a king like the nations around them, God chose the first king, Saul, from the tribe of Benjamin. Why did the first king come from Benjamin and not from Judah, who in Jacob's blessing, was to receive the sceptre?</div> <bR> <div> As suggested earlier it may have been that the sceptre went hand in hand with the birthright. The birthright went to Joseph the favourite son of Jacob. With the rejection of Joseph from the position of the leading tribe the next in line would have been Benjamin, Joseph only other brother. With the sin and subsequent rejection of Saul and the tribe of Benjamin the next in line would have been Judah. The first three sons of Jacob, Reuben, Simeon and Levi, by his first wife Leah, had earlier disqualified themselves from that leading role in Israel. Judah, then, being next in line had prevailed over his brothers and obtained the sceptre. Well, that's the theory. (In the typology of the relationship between Saul and David, Saul is a type of Satan and David is a type of Christ).</div> <bR> <div> The reality of the division of the two houses within the one nation seems to be generally recognised by the time of the Saul.</div> <bR> <div> At the beginning of the Israelite monarchy, when king Saul mustered an army to fight the Ammonites, a distinction is made between the contingent of Israel from Judah: </div> <bR> <div> "When he [Saul] numbered them in Bezek, the children of Israel were three hundred thousand, and the men of Judah thirty thousand" (1 Samuel 11:8).</div> <bR> <div> This reality is seen later when God chided David over his adultery with Bathsheba, and murder of her husband, when He said, through the prophet Nathan, that:</div> <bR> <div> "I gave you your master's house and your master's wives into your keeping, and gave you the <B>house of Israel and Judah</B>..." (2 Samuel 12:8).</div> <bR> <div> The house of Judah up to this stage is the tribe of Judah and probably included the tribe of Simeon. <B>From this we see that the 'house of Israel' refers to the northern tribes</B>.</div> <bR> <div> After Saul's death this growing split was perpetuated by David's being crowned as king in Hebron over Judah (2 Sam 2:4).</div> <bR> <div> "A Alt is probably correct in maintaining ('The Formation of the Israelite State in Palestine', in <I>Essays on Old Testament History and Religion</I>, 1966, pp.216ff.) that the crowning of David as king over 'all Israel' (2 Sam 5:1-5) made him king of a dual kingdom in which Judah kept its separate identity" (H.L. Ellision, "Judah", NBD, p.628).</div> <bR> <div> David, it appears, was king over Judah seven years and six months (2 Samuel 2:11), prior to ruling over the United Kingdom. It seems that the tribe of Benjamin, under Abner's direction, was the royal house of Israel, at least for the last two years of David's separate reign over the house of Judah.</div> <bR> <div> Later in the reign of David, his son Absalom led a coup against his father and David had to flee Jerusalem, the capital of Israel. David sought refuge in the fortified city of Mahanaim in Gilead, on the east of the Jordan river. Absalom with "all the men of Israel" (2 Samuel 17:24) pursued David across the Jordan. In the ensuring battle Absalom was killed.</div> <bR> <div> Despite the victory David did not return to Jerusalem immediately, but waited to be invited back. It is in the events surrounding the return of David to Jerusalem we see once again the division between the house of Israel and Judah causing problems.</div> <bR> <div> At this time there was a dispute in the northern ten-tribes of Israel in which one side accused the other of not being interested in bringing David back. While the north was debating David had to appeal, as a result of their inaction, "to the elders of Judah to take the initiative in restoring him to the throne in Jerusalem... This appeal produced the desired result, but it also led to the arousal of tribal jealousies..." <FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Georgia" ><B>12</B></FONT></div> <bR> <div> The men of Israel complained to David that the men of Judah "might as well have kidnapped David and his men to keep as many as possible of the men of Israel from sharing the privilege of accompanying the king westward to Gilgal." <FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Georgia" ><B>13</B></FONT></div> <bR> <div> The men of Judah defended their position on the fact that David was their "close relative". But Israel rejected this explanation with the reason that:</div> <bR> <div> "We have ten shares in the king; therefore we also have more right to David than you..." (2 Samuel 24:43).</div> <bR> <div> The reference to "ten shares" looks forward to the yet future permanent division of Israel (1 Kings 11:29-39). As does the account of the temporary rebellion that follows this confrontation.</div> <bR> <div> Sheba, a Benjamite, in rallying the men of Israel to secede from the union, sounded the trumpet and shouted:</div> <bR> <div> "We have no share in David, </div> <div> Nor do we have inheritance in the son of Jesse;<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> Every man to his tents, <B>O Israel</B>!" </div> <div> (2 Samuel 20:1).</div> <bR> <div> This declaration is "practically identical" <FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Georgia" ><B>14</B></FONT> to the answer that David's grandson, Rehoboam received when the northern tribes quitted the union for good: </div> <bR> <div> "What share have we in David?<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> We have no inheritance in the son of Jesse.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> To your tents, <B>O Israel</B>!<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Georgia" > </FONT></div> <div> Now, see to your own house, O David!" </div> <div> (1 Kings 12:16).</div> <bR> <div> After the death of David's son Solomon, the 'united kingdom' split into two nations. Rehoboam of the house of David, now only king of Judah wanted to reverse the situation:</div> <bR> <div> "And when Rehoboam came to Jerusalem, he assembled all <B>the house of Judah</B> with the tribe of Benjamin...to fight against <B>the house of Israel</B>, that he might restore the kingdom to Rehoboam the son of Israel" (1 Kings 12:22).</div> <bR> <div> But God told the house of Judah not to attempt to reunite the kingdom as this division was from Him. These two subset-house are still separate to this day. But in the near-future the:</div> <bR> <div> "Lord GOD...will make them one nation in the land... they shall no longer be two nations, nor shall they be divided into two kingdoms again" (Ezekiel 37:21-22).</div> <bR> <div> With the division of the 'united kingdom' the southern kingdom or house of Judah from then on comprised basically the tribal areas of Judah and a part of Benjamin with the Levites leaving their cities in the northern 'house of Israel' to join with them. It appears that from this time on the tribe of Simeon is associated with the northern kingdom. Benjamin who had been with the northern tribes is now with the house of Judah. J. Barton Payne suspects that:</div> <bR> <div> "...after the division of Solomon's kingdom in 930 B.C., elements of Simeon either moved to the north or at least adopted its religious practices - (cf. the inclusion of Beersheba <FW: Beersheba is listed as a city of Judah (Josh 15:28); while it is listed as part of the inheritance of the tribe of Simeon in Joshua 19:2, cp. 1 Chron 4:28> along with the shrines of Ephraim that are condemned in Amos 5:5) - so they are counted with the northern tribes (2 Chronicles 15:9; 34:6...)" <FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Georgia" ><B>15</B></FONT></div> <bR> <div> The 'house of Israel', in the north, existed as a nation for over two hundred years, while the 'house of Judah' continued in the south for another hundred years or so after them.</div> <bR> <div> Their rather short independent national existence was due to their return to the iniquities of there forefathers, this resulted in, as God would later reminded Jeremiah that:</div> <bR> <div> "...<B>the house of Israel and the house of Judah</B> have broken My covenant which I made with their fathers" (Jeremiah 11:10).</div> <bR> <div> Part of the curse for breaking the covenant was national captivity and deportation (Deuteronomy 28:64).</div> <bR> <div> So just prior to the removal of the northern kingdom and the subsequent invasion of the land of Judah by the Assyrians, which resulted in a major deportation of the latter, God said to Isaiah, to bring about the curse, that he would be:</div> <bR> <div> "...a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> <B>To both the houses of Israel</B>" (Isaiah 8:14).</div> <bR> <div> The two houses of Israel, as the context implies, are the 'house of Israel', in the north, and the 'house of Judah', in the south. These two separate geo-political entities are descended from the patriarch Jacob/Israel. The implication, then, is that Judah is 'a' house of Israel; and if it is 'a' house of Israel it is appropriate to address it as such, as we shall see.</div> <bR> <div> In 722 BC the northern house of Israel went into Assyrian captivity and the people virtually disappeared from recorded history.</div> <bR> <div> With the rise to prominence of Nebuchadnezzar and the Neo-Babylonian empire, the house of Judah/Israel was in trouble for its unfaithfulness.</div> <bR> <div> In 605 Nebuchadnezzar invaded Judah. This was the first of three Babylonian invasions of Judah over the next twenty years. With each invasion captives were taken back to Babylon. The other two invasions occurred in 597 and 586 B.C. <FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Georgia" ><B>16</B></FONT> The second invasion brings us to the book of Ezekiel.</div> <bR> <div> <B>THE BOOK OF EZEKIEL AND THE HOUSE OF JUDAH/ISRAEL</B></div> <bR> <div> Jehoiachin was king in Jerusalem when Nebuchadnezzar besieged and took the city the second time. Jehoiachin and the cream of the nation were taken into Babylonian captivity (2Kings 24:13-16), along with Ezekiel. Jehoiachin was replaced with the vassal prince Zedekiah who reigned in Jerusalem from 597 to 586 BC.</div> <bR> <div> Ezekiel began his ministry in Babylon on July 31, 593 BC in the fifth year of the captivity of Jehoiachin (Ezekiel 1:1-3) and in the fifth year of the reign of Zedekiah in Jerusalem. "Jehoiachin's captivity and Zedekiah's accession coincide in time." <FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Georgia" ><B>17</B></FONT></div> <bR> <div> The people of the house of Judah under the Babylonian empire up and till the third captivity, were in two separate locations - Babylon and the land of Judah. </div> <bR> <div> <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Verdana" >(In looking at the prophecies in this book we are aided by the "clear chronological sequence" </FONT><B>1</B><B>8</B><FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Verdana" > that Ezekiel's provides. The chronology reinforces who is being addressed in the immediate context. See end-notes on dating system.</FONT></div> <bR> <div> <B>EZEKIEL'S AUDIENCE</B></div> <bR> <div> "I send thee to the children of Israel, to a rebellious nation <Hebrew: nations <FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Georgia" ><B>19</B></FONT>> that hath rebelled against Me" (Ezekiel 2:3).</div> <bR> <div> From this verse the interpretation is that Ezekiel's message is directed to and is relevant for the end-time descendants of the nations of Israel.</div> <bR> <div> "...get thee to them of the captivity... speak unto them, and tell them, Thus saith the Lord God;..." (Ezekiel 3:10-11). </div> <bR> <div> But from the above verse the interpretation is that Ezekiel's message was also directed to and was relevant for the house of Judah/Israel in captivity in Babylonia.</div> <bR> <div> The rest of this article looks at two specific prophecies that were relevant and applicable to Ezekiel's immediate audience. [This section does not deal with the telescopic nature of prophecy and how it is relevant to the near-future and far-future audiences].</div> <bR> <div> <B>EZEKIEL 8</B></div> <bR> <div> "And it came to pass in the sixth year, in the sixth month, on the first day of the month... and the Spirit lifted me up between earth and heaven, and brought me in visions of God to Jerusalem to the door of the north gate of the inner <I>court</I> [of the temple]" (Ezekiel 8:1).</div> <bR> <div> In August/September 592 BC, when Zedekiah was vassal king in Jerusalem, six years or so before the destruction of the city, Ezekiel was transported in vision to the temple in Jerusalem.</div> <bR> <div> God revealed to Ezekiel, in scene after scene, how the people had embraced idolatry and wickedness. God asked Ezekiel if he saw:</div> <bR> <div> "...the great abominations that <B>the house of Israel</B> commits here, <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FF0000" FACE="Georgia" ><B>to make Me go far away from my sanctuary</B></FONT>" (v.6).</div> <bR> <div> Then God told Ezekiel to go into the inner court to see the wicked abominations that were taking place there:</div> <bR> <div> "So I went in and saw, and there - every sort of creeping thing, abominable beasts, and all the idols of <B>the house of Israel</B>, portrayed all around on the walls. And there stood before them seventy men of the elders of the house of Israel..." (verses 10-11). </div> <bR> <div> Then he said to me, </div> <bR> <div> "Son of man, have you seen what <B>the elders of the house of Israel</B> do in the dark, every man in the room of his idols?..." (verse 15).</div> <bR> <div> After showing Ezekiel the abominations that the house of Israel were committing in the temple Ezekiel was asked:</div> <bR> <div> "Have you seen this, o son of man? Is it a trivial thing to <B>the house of Judah</B> to commit the abominations which they commit here?..." (verse 17).</div> <bR> <div> In this verse the 'house of Israel' is identified as the house of Judah. Ezekiel was viewing what was happening in Jerusalem during the reign of Zedekiah. The vision's immediate thrust was to make known, to those in the Jehoiachin's captivity, the cause of the yet future judgment on Jerusalem.</div> <bR> <div> This 'house of Israel' was not the ten-tribe house of Israel which had been basically removed, by the Assyrians, from their land over a hundred years before.</div> <bR> <div> The northern kingdom did not have jurisdiction over Jerusalem. Only once had they captured Jerusalem. Joash (798-782 BC) of Israel defeated Amaziah of Judah, plundered the temple and palace and then returned to Samaria (2 Kings 14:12-14).</div> <bR> <div> The sins committed in Jerusalem were committed by the house of Judah. In Ezekiel 8 three times the abominations were said to be committed by those of the house of Israel but the fourth and final time the abominations are said to be committed by the "house of Judah".</div> <bR> <div> The terms "house of Israel" and "house of Judah" are used interchangeably for the southern kingdom. The term "house of Judah" is not used for the ten-tribe house of Israel.</div> <bR> <div> The term 'house of Israel' is used of Judah as a political entity that came from the patriarch Jacob/Israel. The use of this ancestral title is a reminder of who they really were, their true position, privileges and obligations. <FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Georgia" ><B>20</B></FONT><FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <bR> <div> <B>EZEKIEL 24</B></div> <bR> <div> "Again in the ninth year, in the tenth month, on the tenth day of the month, the word of the Lord came to me, saying, "Son of man, write down the name of the day, this very day - the king of Babylon started his siege against Jerusalem this very day. And utter a parable to the rebellious house, and say to them, 'Thus says the Lord GOD:..." (Ezekiel 24:1-3).</div> <bR> <div> On January 15, 588 BC, in the nine year of Jehoiachin's captivity and Zedekiah's reign, on the very day that Nebuchadnezzar laid seize to Jerusalem Ezekiel was directed to tell the rebellious house, that is, the captives of Judah in Babylon, a parable. The parable depicted the cleansing of Jerusalem through the destruction of the city.</div> <bR> <div> Up until now Ezekiel had proclaimed God's coming judgment on Jerusalem and Judah for the sin committed during the reign of Zedekiah. Now it was beginning to take place.</div> <bR> <div> The exiles in Babylon during their captivity would have looked forward to an eventual return to Jerusalem and Judah. Jerusalem was therefore at "the centre of their interests and hopes" <FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Georgia" ><B>21</B></FONT> but now that hope was to be taken away from them.</div> <bR> <div> After the giving of the parable God told Ezekiel that his wife ("the desire of your eyes") would die and he was commanded not to grieve for her:</div> <bR> <div> "Son of man, behold I take away from you the desire of your eyes with one stroke; yet you shall neither mourn nor weep..." (verse 16).</div> <bR> <div> This prompted the people of the captivity to ask Ezekiel the significance behind his uncustomary reaction to his wife's death: </div> <bR> <div> "And the people said to me, "Will you not tell us what these things signify to us, and that you behave so?"" (verse 19).</div> <bR> <div> Ezekiel then gave God's answer to their inquiry:</div> <bR> <div> "Then I answered them, "The word of the Lord came to me, saying, 'Speak to<B> the house of Israel,</B> "Thus says the Lord God:..." (verse 21a).</div> <bR> <div> God here refers to the captives of Judah as the house of Israel. The experience of Ezekiel at the death of his wife was to be the experience of the captives of Judah/Israel to the news of the destruction of Jerusalem [which was to fall just over two years and half years later] in 586 BC:</div> <bR> <div> "Behold, <B>I will profane my sanctuary</B>, your arrogant boast, the desire of your eyes, the delight of your soul; and the sons and daughters whom you left behind shall fall by the sword. And you shall do as I have done..." (verses 21b-22a).</div> <bR> <div> Ezekiel was to be a sign to the house of Judah/Israel. The captives of Judah would do as Ezekiel had done when they heard the news that Jerusalem had been destroyed and their sons and daughters had been killed in the process.</div> <bR> <div> The context of Ezekiel 24 interprets that the "house of Israel" in this chapter refers to the captives of Judah in Babylon.</div> <bR> <div> When we take Ezekiel 8 and 24, and it is not limited to these chapters, we believe that the term "house of Israel" is used by God to refer to those of the house of Judah in Jerusalem under Zedekiah and to those of the house of Judah in the Babylonian captivity. Judah being one of the two houses descended from the patriarch Jacob/Israel (cp. Isaiah 8:14).</div> <bR> <div> <B>CONCLUSION</B></div> <bR> <div> The term 'house of Israel' is therefore applied to three different geo-political entities:</div> <bR> <div> (1) The twelve-tribe nation descended from the patriarch Jacob,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <bR> <div> (2) A ten-tribe national division of (1); and<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <bR> <div> (3) the 'house of Judah', the other division of (1).</div> <bR> <div> These three geo-political entities may be compared to the <I>set-subset relationship</I>.The twelve-tribe nation would then be the 'set' with the northern and southern kingdoms of Israel the 'subsets'. The set and subsets may go by the same name but are distinct entities - the context generally provides the means to determine which 'house of Israel' is being addressed.</div> <bR> <div> <B>POINTS OF REFERENCE</B></div> <bR> <div> # Bible verses quoted are from the New Kings James Version (NKJV), Tyndale 1993.</div> <bR> <div> # Dating is taken from <I>Ezekiel</I> - Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries and <I>Ezekiel</I> - Expositor's Bible Commentary. Tyndale and Expositor's are basically in the ball-park on most dates. But Tyndale prefers 587 B.C. for the fall of Jerusalem, based on an emendation to Ezekiel 33:21 of the 'twelfth year' to the 'eleventh year'. The Expositor's, which is followed in this article, accepts the MT as it stands, and has the fall of Jerusalem in 586 B.C. </div> <bR> <div> # Tyndale has this note: "These dates are based on the tables given in R.A. Parker and W.H. Dubbberstein, <I>Babylonian Chronology</I>, 626 BC - Ad 75 (1956), p.26. They must not be taken too dogmatically because they assume questions on which there is more than one interpretation. For instance, we can not be sure whether Ezekiel followed a calendar which ran from autumn to autumn or from spring to spring. The dates given assume that we are dealing with a vernal calendar" (John B. Taylor, <I>Ezekiel</I>, p.36).</div> <bR> <div> # Added information, to quotes from sources, by Future Watch are in <>. This is to distinguish them from any added notes in [ ] by the author's being quoted.</div> <bR> <div> <B>NOTES</B></div> <bR> <div> (1) John H. Sailhamer, <I>Expositor's Bible Commentary</I>, Zondervan, 1990, Vol.2, p.216 - note Genesis<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> 34:7.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> (2) Walter C. Kaiser, Jr. <I>Expositor's Bible Commentary</I>, Zondervan, 1990, Vol.2, p.404 - note on<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> Exodus 16:15.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> (3) Dr. Bruce B. Barton, General editor, <I>Life Application Bible</I>, Tyndale, 1993, p.111 - note on Exodus<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> 16:31.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> (4) John H. Sailhamer, <I>Expositor's Bible Commentary</I>, Zondervan, 1990, Vol.2, p.276 - note on<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> Genesis 49:8-12.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> (5) H.L. Ellison, <I>New Bible Dictionary</I>, 2nd edition, Tyndale, 1984, art. "Judah", p.628.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> (6) H.L. Ellison, <I>New Bible Dictionary</I>, ibid.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> (7) Jay P. Green Sr, General editor, <I>The Interlinear Bible</I>, 2nd edition, Hendrickson, 1986 - Genesis<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> 49:26 </div> <div> (8) Dr. Bruce B. Barton, General editor, <I>Life Application Bible</I>, Tyndale, 1993, p.867 - note on Ps.78:9.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> (9) Willem A. VanGemeren, <I>Expositor's Bible Commentary</I>, Zondervan, 1991, Vol.5, p.507 - note on<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> Psalm 78:9.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> (10) H.L. Ellison, <I>New Bible Dictionary</I>, ibid., p.629.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> (11) L.T. Dolphin, <I>The International Bible Encyclopedia</I>, Eerdmans, 1988, art. "Shiloh", Vol.4, p.478. </div> <div> (12) Kenneth Barker, General editor, <I>The NIV Study Bible</I>, Zondervan, 1985 - note on Samuel 19:11.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> (13) Ronald F. Youngblood, <I>Expositor's Bible Commentary</I>, Zondervan, 1992, Vol.3, p.1039 - note on 2 Samuel 19:40-43.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> (14) Ronald F. Youngblood, <I>Expositor's Bible Commentary</I>, ibid. - note on 2 Samuel 20:1-2.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> (15) J. Barton Payne, <I>Expositor's Bible Commentary</I>, Zondervan, 1988, Vol.4, p.343 - note on 1<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> Chronicles 4:24-43.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> (16) Dr. Bruce B. Barton, General editor, <I>Life Application Bible</I>, Tyndale, 1993 - note on 2 Kings 24:1.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> (17) A.R. Fausset, <I>Jamison, Fausset and Brown - A Commentary</I>, Eerdmans, 1993, Vol.2, p.203 -<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> note on Ezekiel 1:1.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> (18) John Taylor, <I>Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries</I>, Inter-Varsity Press, 1987, p.15 - note in the<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> introduction to Ezekiel.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> (19) E.W. Bullinger, <I>Companion Bible</I>, Zondervan, 1986, p.1108 - note on Ezekiel 2:3.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> (20) J.A. Motyer, <I>The Bible Speaks Today</I>, Inter-Varsity Press, 1990, p.86 - note on Amos 3:9-15.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> (21) John B Taylor, <I>Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries</I>, Inter-Varsity Press, 1987, p.2 - note in the<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Verdana" > </FONT></div> <div> introduction to Ezekiel.</div> <bR> <div> Copyright 1998, Update 1999 - Future Watch</div> <bR> <DIV ALIGN="LEFT"></DIV> <div> <A HREF="id12_m.htm" TITLE="House(s) of Israel">Top of Page</A>                       <A HREF="index.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Future Watch">Home Page</A></div> <bR> </td> </tr></table></body>