It’s surprising how many nations contain a north-south divide, or at least a contrast. Differences of geography, natural resources, climate, neighbors, and history can unite to create significantly different types of people. My childhood home included one southern and one northern parent, but the differences that appeared at home were mild compared to the good-natured teasing that flowed when I visited cousins who lived across the north-south divide.

The ancient Israelites experienced such a divided country for most of their history, with Judah (called "the hill country of Judah" in Joshua 21:11) isolated in the austere and secluded south, contrasted with Samaria (often designated in the Old Testament as Mount Ephraim) in the open, accessible, and connected north. The visitor would immediately notice the contrast in travel, with treacherous mountain tracks in the south that contrasted with generous northern roads. In Old Testament times chariots were therefore common in the north, but rare in the south, and the seasoned traveler would have no trouble grasping the significance of both parts of Yahweh’s prophecy through Zechariah (9:10): "I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem."

Agriculture and trade characterized the more fertile north, which had easy access to markets, from the south, where subsistence farmers scratched a meager living from plots of hilly ground, leaving little surplus to trade and few passersby to whom it could be sold.

Even speech distinguished the regions, with clear dialect differences in Old Testament Hebrew, followed later by differences in Aramaic during the New Testament era, which meant the northern accent of Jesus and his disciples made them stand out as outsiders in Jerusalem.

In short, the more cosmopolitan (if the term can be applied to a small nation without a single large city!), worldly wise, and prosperous northerners would have shared even less with isolated, mountain-based, tradition-preserving southern "brothers" than do suburbanites and rural mountain people in the same nation today, linked as they are by modern travel and communication.

With these contrasts in mind, one can better understand why the northerners were united with their southern Judahite "brothers" (a polite Old Testament designation used to conceal a significant cultural gap) for only a small slice of their history during the illustrious reigns of David and Solomon. Shortly after Solomon’s death the united kingdom fell apart with spectacular suddenness, summarized by the cry of the northerners: "we have no portion in David, no share in the son of Jesse! To your tents, O Israel!" (1 Kings 12:16). The resulting political division was sadly marked by recurring civil war, sometimes lasting for a generation or more.

Religion was divisive, with contrasting views on how to worship Yahweh. On one hand, northerners seemed more ecumenical and eclectic, ready to absorb local customs into their worship of Yahweh. Southern worship, on the other hand, was marked by the region’s greater cultural isolation, which allowed it to resist local "contamination" for a longer period.

The north-south religious divide came to its sharpest focus over the issue of the location of the temple. Upon their entry into Canaan, the Hebrews set up their portable worship tent in Shiloh in Mount Ephraim, near the center of the country. Other centers of worship are mentioned, including Gilgal, Dan, and Bethel. Significantly, all these are located in the north. Only King David’s uniting power brought the tent of worship south to the newly occupied Jebusite city of Jerusalem, David’s chosen capital city for the newly united kingdom. After a short period of unity during which Solomon constructed the temple, the issue of the national center of administration and worship cropped up afresh when the northern ten tribes withdrew from the united monarchy.

Old Testament chroniclers, whose chapters are the focus of Sabbath School lessons this quarter, repeatedly cite as the cardinal sin of Jeroboam, first king of the north, his attempts to relocate the center of worship away from Jerusalem and back to the north during his twenty-year reign, circa 920–900 B.C.E. (See especially 1 Kings 13:33, 34; 14:9, 16; 15:30, 34; 16:26.) This contentious issue arose in such an acute form because Israelite worship, like most systems of worship, operated with the understanding that the tent, and especially its most holy compartment, constituted sacred space, thus forging a bond between proper worship and proper location that is difficult for Christians, whose faith lacks the concept of one ultimately sacred earthly space, to comprehend fully.

Thus, a worship crisis accompanied the disintegration of the united monarchy as both states sought to secure sacred space within their respective territories. Israel to the north had history, precedent, and tradition on its side, whereas Judah to the south had the newly emerged, charismatic Davidic dynasty to bolster its claim for the sacredness of Jerusalem’s Mount Zion.

Is it significant for the ancient debate that Elijah, who appeared on the scene with such sudden drama in this week’s lesson chapters, never addressed the issue of the proper place of worship? Is it significant that his only recorded act of worship took place at the great confrontation between Baal and Yahweh worship on Mount Carmel, which was just about as far north from Jerusalem as a Hebrew could travel without leaving Hebrew territory?

The issue of the proper location for true worship remained unresolved throughout the Old Testament era, with archaeological evidence for several Hebrew worship sites, sometimes even with their own priesthood, scattered through Hebrew territory and even beyond. The issue continued to smolder into the New Testament era, achieving its clearest expression in the dialogue between Jesus and the Samaritan woman.

Significantly, this was the only episode in the ministry of Jesus to take place in the old northern territory of Israel. For Jesus, it was only a stopover on the way from Galilee to Jerusalem. The woman’s question indicated the currency of the ancient debate: "our ancestors worshiped on this mountain; you say that Jerusalem is the place where people must worship" (John 4:20). Same debate. Same geography. Same divided people of God. Same gridlock.

Jesus cut through the tangle by declaring, in effect, that sacred space would cease to be important for true worship of God. "Neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem" (4:21) was his reply. Rather, the human heart would become the new sacred ground where the sanctifying, transforming presence of God would be established, and where true worship would be offered.

EMAIL THIS ARTICLE